ABSTRACT THE EFFECTS OF COMMUNICATIVE APPROACH ON LEARNERS FOREIGN LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY LEVELS BY USING THE NEEDS ANALYSIS IN ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES CLASSES Çağda Kıvanç Çağanağa European University of Lefke cagda4@yahoo.com BIODATA Çağda Kıvanç Çağanağa worked as a Lecturer in English Preparatory School of European University of Lefke between 1997-2005. Since 2005, she has taught in the department of English Language Teaching in the same University. She has two master degrees; one on ELT and one on International Relations. She is currently doing her Phd in the faculty of education at Girne American University. She had various administrative duties in EUL. She has publications on ESP, Teacher training, and educational psychology. Copyright by Informascope. Material published and so copyrighted may not be published elsewhere without the written permission of IOJET. Çağanağa, Ç. K. (2014). The effects of communicative approach on learners foreign language proficiency levels by using the needs analysis in English for specific purposes classes. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET),1(2). 91-107. http://iojet.org/index.php/IOJET/article/view/26/48 International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 2014,1(2), 91-107 91 THE EFFECTS OF COMMUNICATIVE APPROACH ON LEARNERS FOREIGN LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY LEVELS BY USING THE NEEDS ANALYSIS IN ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES CLASSES Çağda Kıvanç Çağanağa cagda4@yahoo.com Abstract The purpose of this study is to analyze the Effects of Communicative Approach on learners foreign language proficiency levels by using the needs analysis in English for Specific Purposes in faculty first year classes. The population of the present study includes 160 students who study in the first year faculty English program of English Preparatory School of European University of Lefke. Subjects of the study were selected randomly. Demographic characteristics of the subjects are the students’ field of study, age, gender, students’ native language, foreign language level of the students, the frequency of students’ use of English for work or studies and their knowledge about the field. Three different data collection method was used in this study. As a way of data collection that can be used in the study of needs analysis, questionnaires and interviews were used. For students questionnaire and for teachers interviews were used. For the second step of the study, Cambridge proficiency test which was developed by Cambridge University Press in accordance with the Council of Europe was applied as a pretest and posttest. The research data were analyzed by using the SPSS statistical package program. At the end of the study, the students reported a positive opinion on all aspects of the ESP program which was re-designed and applied differently. Students’ proficiency level improved based on the approach and teaching program. 1. Introduction In the age of knowledge, the importance of communication is increasing day by day in such a world which has become like a small village. It can be said that because communication gains so much attention, teaching techniques and objectives change accordingly. This change made educators do lessons based on communication. As a result, schools which adapt and renew themselves to this process can produce the appropriate outputs. The most learned and taught language in Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus is English as a foreign language. It is a foreign language in Turkey as well. Since students do not use this language in their daily lives, the purpose of language teaching can be “specific” not “general”. In other words, it can be said that students learn the language for a particular purpose based on their needs. In Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus students study at least a foreign language from primary school level to higher education. However, it is observed that there is a lack of using the language for communicative purposes. In our country, it is believed that in foreign language teaching grammar based lessons are taught widespread and there is no emphasis on communication. Therefore, because foreign language is not taught as a language of science in higher education institutions, the biggest obstacle that the students face is the type of foreign language that they are trying to learn. Another remarkable point is about the definitions of the levels in foreign language education. Each level is defined clearly in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. In addition to the levels, Çağanağa 92 language competence is also broken down into separate components. Since this study was on the basis of the criteria mentioned in the table below, it must be examined in the study carefully. Table 1. Language Levels in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (Council of Europe, 2001) A Basic User B Independent User C Proficient User A1 Beginner A1 Beginner B1 Threshold level B2 Intermediate C1 Effective Operant Proficiency C2 Competent Teaching English for Specific Purposes (ESP) is defined in different ways by different authors. For example, Demircan (1990, p.216) defines ESP as a specific verbal expression which depends on science, technology, profession, etc. of lexical, structural, and functional language of communication. English for Specific Purposes is a teaching program which is designed by taking into account the special needs of a particular group of students while designing the course content and the objectives (Richards & Schmidth, 2010, p.198). English for Specific Purposes is characterized by the general contents of the students’ field of specialization. In ESP the contents of the activities adapt to the needs of the student. In the course design, teaching-learning activity focuses on the students mainly. In other words, ESP is applied through a student-centered approach. In this approach, students’ needs - why they would like to learn English and what kind of English they will use are determined. This information is used as a guide while preparing a course content which is appropriate to the special interests and needs of the students. Teachers or institutions can design the course materials based on the learners’ aims of learning English. It is clear that ESP is an approach in English language teaching which is a way of learning specifically. Although the differences between general and special-purpose language lessons begin to develop and gain a new meaning, the special-purpose language teaching is not a new phenomenon emerged in recent years. Even in ancient times, people who worked especially in trade, used to have a little foreign language to use during the buying and selling of goods. Even today we come across with speaking guides written for this purpose. For example, the Daily Phrases Dictionary (2005) published by Alpha Publishing House serves this purpose. Teaching English for Specific Purposes take part in literature as a separate concept coincides with the years of the Second World War. American and British soldiers’ necessity of learning a Far East language in the Second World War in the Pacific required for a specific area of language learning. These soldiers urgently needed Japanese for “listening” skills (Strevens, 1977). This led to lay the foundations of a special-purpose language teaching. Students begin an ESP course with three expectations; 1. Cultural / Educational 2. Personal / Individual 3. Academic / Professional (Gatehouse, 2004). With the first two, there is a close relationship with students’ background knowledge, how he sees himself as a student, expectancy about what he will learn in an ESP course, and his hopefulness and pessimism about the ESP course. The last expectancy is related to the type of ESP. These series of expectations (either academic or professional) can be reported prior if a needs analysis is done. English for Occupational Purposes (EOP) and English for Academic Purposes (EAP) that develop depending on students’ motivation, position, and status which International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 2014,1(2), 91-107 93 cause them to learn English are kinds of English for Specific Purposes. Kennedy and Bolitho (1984) suggest more types of ESP according to the needs of scientists and technology experts. This type is known as English for Science and Technology. These are as follows: 1.1 English for Occupational Purposes-EOP Professional English is for students who would like to learn English as part of their business or profession (Kennedy & Bolitho, 1984, p.4). Depending on the courses which are taught before, after, or during the training period, the content will be changed. The content of an English program which is designed for people who have both practical skills, theoretical knowledge, and secretarial information is different from the content of the program which is for secretaries who need to use English in his/her career. 1.2 English for Academic Purposes Academic English is usually taught to the students who need English for their occupation in their own educational institutions. Language is taught in the period when the student specializes in a particular area (during training) or would like to specialize (training ahead) in the specific disciplines, depending on the level of further education. In an English course not only the language but also the learning skills such as listening lessons, note-taking, report writing, or reading textbooks will be the content of an English course. In such a case, mostly the aims and methods of English language teaching do not match the requirements of the science and technology departments. While the department of English language teaching focuses on the spoken English and the structure of the language, English for science and technology require fast and efficient reading skills. However, in such cases, in terms of the provision of access to information in textbooks, periodicals and journals, reports, and abstracts, it is better to understand what the role of English is in its simplest form (Mackay & Mountford, 1978, p.7). ESP that was defined as a special approach of English language teaching has its own unique characteristics. These features are related to the course design, implementation of ESP and the role of the teacher in ESP classes. The main problems in the design of the ESP course are on the relationship between the activities and the language itself. Munby (1978) states that if the student learns the language to use effectively in real situations, sub skills are supposed to improve. Course designers need to have more information about how these skills are acquired. If a course designer prefers to ignore them, s/he will face with some serious consequences. Mackay and Mountford (1978) proposed that there are four different effective factors in the course design: (1) sociological, (2) linguistic, (3) psychological, and (4) pedagogical. 1. Sociological factors The sociological factors that are related to the student’s character and the language learning needs of him/her are important information for both the ESP teacher and the course designer. In this regard, specific information about age, previous experience about the target language and the student’s area of expertise, and his/her success in this field can be obtained by standard sampling techniques and a questionnaire which was designed carefully. Similarly, information about the needs of the students and the areas of language use should be obtained (Mackay & Mountford, 1978, pp.7-8). 2. Linguistic factors This factor is related to the type of the descriptive characteristics which are relevant to the language that the people from different fields use it. The identification of the content of the Çağanağa 94 language which will be used for a special purpose depends on the definition of the characteristics of the language that should be used by the students. Such definitions cannot be done by bringing the selected reading passages together. However, these definitions can be used to focus on the materials’ characteristic features such as identification, description, classfication, inference, and syntax of the communicative structures. 3. Psychological factors According to the opinion of the students, in language learning communicative approach should be used. This approach highlights the importance of students’ contribution to the organization and interpretation of the discourse along with problem solving. The teacher helps students to understand how scientific communication (and professional) handles the tasks with the use of what they already know about the organization of scientific discourse and how scientific processing occurs. 4. Pedagogic factors We can design the educational process by getting clear information on which language skills need to be developed. Traditionally language skills are taught separately. However, this is not enough to identify the students’ needs. Specific tasks which need specific skills should be listed. For example, make a summary of technical papers, listen to the radio broadcasts, take an active role in oral seminars, write a report based on the experimental procedures, to read instructional material in order to support the information learned in the language and so on. Having information about the needs of the students in their area of expertise and knowledge, enables the course designer to limit the use of language structures in the area of communicative language with its linguistic elements and restricts oral or written mode. Course materials which will be arranged according to the specific requirements will shape the teaching materials as educational. While preparing course materials for ESP there are three factors that should be considered: 1- The content of the students’ needs 2- Student centered learning and teaching 3- Material adaptation and development 1. The content of students’ needs To design and give an effective English lesson, the teacher and the course designer should explore applications of the course. For this reason, this case includes the information- gathering process based on the subsequent processes that are syllabus design, writing materials, classroom instruction and assessment procedures. As stated earlier, a student comes to an ESP class with at least three expectations: Cultural-educational, personal and private, and academic / professional. Course designer or teacher must recognize these different expectations while defining the needs of the students. Basically there are two kinds of methods that vary from general to specific and theoretical to practical to collect the necessary information about the students: (1) a questionnaire filled in by the student or the teacher, or (2) a structured interview. If a survey is to be used, a teacher or a course designer must decide on what sort of information he needs to collect based on what he wants to find out (Mackay & Mountford, 1978, p.21). In this line, we need to consider the questions that Hutchinson and Waters (2010) suggested: • Why do the students have to learn? • Who will be included in this process? International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 2014,1(2), 91-107 95 • Not only the students but also everyone who is interested will take place in this process: teachers, supporters, inspectors, and so on. • Where does learning take place? • What are the facilities of the place of the course? • What are the restrictions? • When will learning take place? • How much time can be used during the learning process? • How is this time arranged? If a structured interview is going to be used, the structure and the purpose of it are done in a similar format with the questionnaire. The difference is that the questionnaire is not filled in by the person who provides the information. Instead the one who does the research asks the questions to the people directly by considering their needs. Compared to the survey, there are at least three advantages of a structured interview. Firstly, because the questions are asked by the one who asks the questions, there will be no unanswered questions unlike other studies. Secondly, the researcher can clarify the questions in case of misunderstandings. Thirdly, the researcher can address other areas of interest in the process of question and answer session while collecting information (Mackay & Mountford, 1978, p.22). The above-mentioned theories revealed that we need to consider students’ characteristics, the importance of learning English, and perspectives on teaching-learning in designing an English course. These factors can be explained by the students by means of research methods. As Widdowson (1990) stated “if we can determine why a group of students need to learn specific things in a language, the content can be designed used to meet their needs.” Consequently, the principles of an ESP course will be carried out fully. In other words, “Tell me why you need to learn English and I will tell you what kind of English you need to learn” (Hutchinson & Waters, 2010). 2. Student-Centered teaching and learning Concepts of student-centered teaching and learning are complementary to each other. ‘Student-centered teaching’ is a learning process which takes into account the students’ interests, desires, skills and teaching experiences and aims to make them active in this process. On the other hand ‘student-centered learning’ takes into account the individual characteristics of students who have scientific thinking skills, learnt how to learn, can reach the information and use it, have the ability to communicate, accepted universal values, can use technology effectively, are productive and self-realized at every stage of learning. It is also a restructuring way of ensuring student participation fully (Ministry of Education, 2003). Nowadays, individual differences have been studied in the context of student-centered language teaching in foreign language acquisition (Benson & Goa, 2008). Individual differences are factors which affect language acquisition internally, biologically or psychologically. These qualities are divided into two and they are: • Innate characteristics: gender, age, ability to learn a language, personality, and learning styles. • Acquired characteristics: attitudes, motivation, beliefs and strategy use. ESP is primarily concerned with learning. However, throughout its development, because of its emphasis on what people learn (language-based approach), it has shown little concern Çağanağa 96 to the question of how they learn it. Although this will be helpful to describe the objectives of the course, if the desired effect is to be obtained, it is better to consider the principles of learning ESP. For this reason, a learning-based approach is proposed for ESP. A learning- centered approach has its own specific techniques as follows: • Techniques that take into account students’ own needs, style, and goals. • Some techniques that leave the control to the students (e.g. group work or strategy training). • Curricula that define the objectives of the course in advance with students’ opinions and thoughts. • Techniques that reveal the creativity and innovation skills. • The techniques that develop students’ competence, self-esteem, and values (Brown, 1994). Students have different needs and interests which have significant impacts on the effectiveness of their learning and motivation. In a learning-centered approach, methodology cannot be applied to the content or the teaching program. For this reason, the teaching program which affects the entire course and demonstrates the methodological ideas should be used more actively (Hutchinson & Water, 2010). To achieve this aim, throughout the teaching-learning process, teachers should put emphasis on “active learning” and “student talking time”. As Silberman (1996) points out teachers should provide opportunities to the students to stimulate or practice what they have learned. These techniques are as follows: • Team Building: Creates a collaborative work environment among students to make them more active in classes. • Simultaneous evaluation: The aim of this evaluation is getting information about students’ behavior, knowledge and experience. • Participation in the learning process: This technique can encourage students to participate in the lesson at the beginning of the course. • Class discussion: Teachers provide opportunities to the students to talk about and discuss the information that is not clear for them. • Asking questions: Students would like teachers to give more understandable explanations. • Co-operative learning: Tasks are distributed to the members of small groups. • Independent learning: Learning activities are performed individually. • Emotional Learning: Activities which help students to evaluate their values, feelings, and behaviors are important. • Skills development: Teachers provide opportunities to the students to develop their skills. 3. Materials adaptation and development Hutchinson and Waters (2010) suggested four models for materials adaptation and development in ESP. The collection of oral and written materials which may be used in lessons are called ‘input’. Firstly, this raw material is evaluated in terms of its content and examined in order to find out how it can be used for communicative purposes. This process is called ‘content concentration’. Secondly, the materials chosen to be used are studied from a linguistic viewpoint. The evaluation of whether they are suitable for the students’ language International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 2014,1(2), 91-107 97 level or not is called ‘concentration on language’. The relevancy of teaching materials is evaluated in such a way that they allow students to fulfill a communicative task for the last time in terms of their content and language. These materials become communicative teaching tools that can be used in classes. This activity is arranged in a way that students practice the foreign language purposefully. Students’ language requirements vary according to their field of study. Needs analysis allow us to identify the needs of a specific language. What can be done for students from various occupational fields who would like to learn the language for different purposes? The Council of Europe developed new applications and concepts to solve this problem. Students were “average Europeans” who had different purposes for learning a language and their ages, interests, occupations, ethnic origins and socio-economic status’s varied from each other. To prepare an appropriate program for all these students, a flexible framework was drawn. For this purpose, two solutions were developed: unit / credit application and the concept of a common framework (Johnson, 2003). Council of Europe determined common interests for all students. For different professions there are common “core” functions. These are not associated with the fields of individuals. They are general functions of social life such as greetings, introducing yourself, inviting, requesting information, and so on. In the system of Council of Europe, there is a unit/credit system that includes common units to reflect each level that students may choose based on their specific objectives (Johnson, 2003). One of the curricula that is recommended to be used in English for Specific Purposes is consensus. This curriculum that requires the help of a linguist require students to agree on the content of what they are going to learn (Demircan, 1990). In such curricula that require both the linguist and the student active, the teacher is only a part in all of the available resources provided to them. In this type of curriculum which claims the linguists to compile the resources, the teacher is only an example of the target language. The linguist-teacher-student trio was used by the U.S. Army during World War II, and later it formed the foundation of the Audio-Lingual Method. Linguists lead students on their demands of the learning content and are supposed to do face to face interviews (Yalden, 1991). In the curriculum of consensus students are expected to practice the language at high level (Yalden, 1991). Not only using the language correctly but also gaining the ability to use it for specific communicative purposes is important. The ability to communicate is the essence of these principles for languages (Bagaric, 2007). For this reason, in this research communicative approach was applied. During 1970s, the communicative approach period begins. In the history of foreign language teaching in the 1970s, communicative approach completes the entire area with sociology, psychology, linguistics, and pragmatics. The principle which says language is a means of communication is the starting point of the communicative approach. The primary function of a language is both interaction and communication. Language consists of functional and communicative elements as well as grammatical elements (Demirel, 2003, p.42). In communicative language teaching, the teacher and student roles are different from the traditional ones. Student-centered teaching takes the place of teacher-centered teaching in this approach. There are two fundamental roles of the teacher: the first role is making the various activities and texts easier in the communication process for all participants. The second one is acting as an independent participant in groups in the teaching-learning process. The teacher is tolerant to the errors, but Çağanağa 98 whenever an error occurs the teacher corrects it by saying the correct version (Demirel, 2003, p.43). The Study In this study, pre-test and post-test were used in control groups. Experimental designs aim to explore cause and effect relationships between variables. The main reason for using this method is determining the effectiveness of any ‘thing’ (a new method of learning or a new program, etc.) (Büyüköztürk, 2007). In this study, before starting the process, control and experimental groups were formed; English for Specific Purposes (ESP) was taught in the experimental groups and the control group had general English courses. Experimental designs aim to determine the cause-and-effect relationships directly under the control of the researcher. It also focuses on the observation of the desired data (Karasar, 2006). The data to be gathered is newly created in these studies. They are not formed for another reason. Data Collection Three different data collection methods were used in this study. In the first step of data collection, questionnaires and interviews were used in the needs analysis process. Questionnaires were applied to the students, interviews were done with the faculty members. One of the most important reasons for starting the study with a needs analysis is that the most important component of preparing a syllabus is determining the needs of the learners as shown in the previous sections. Curriculum is not only a document. Arrangement of the components of what we plan to teach in a certain way is the point. A curriculum designer may face with serious problems in this regard: the target students (in this study, students in the department of Architecture and Health Management) learn the target language with limitations depending on the level of the whole. The target student group that was researched in this study are the students who studied English within the 2011-2012 academic year in the departments of Health Management and Architecture at European University of Lefke. These students register according to the laws and regulations of the Republic of Turkey Higher Education Council (YÖK) and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus Higher Education, Equivalency and Accreditation Agency (YÖDAK). Subjects of the study are a mixed group of boys and girls mostly at the age of 17- 25 from Turkey, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, Nigeria and Bangladesh. According to the principles of needs analysis the first group which we need to describe their needs and learning objectives are the students (Demircan, 1990, p.264). Because of this reason, to determine the students’ needs a needs analysis is primarily prepared and performed. For the second step of the study pre-test and post-test were developed by adapting Cambridge Proficiency Test which was developed by Cambridge University Press in accordance with the criteria of Council of Europe. Cambridge Proficiency Exam consists of 5 sections; reading, writing, use of English, listening and speaking. Each section carries 20%. Pre-test – post-test were applied at the beginning and at the end of the semester. The results were calculated bearing in mind the scores of the groups and gender variables. Analysis of the Data Students responded to the needs analysis questionnaire starting from the first option (a) as encoded 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and they were transferred to the software package program “Statistical Package for Social Science -’’ Statistical Program for Social Sciences (SPSS 13) for their frequency (f) and percentage (%) distributions. They were calculated and interpreted in International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 2014,1(2), 91-107 99 statistical data tables. The sample of the study was divided into two groups as experimental and control groups. Students from the departments of Health Management and Architecture form the experimental group and Pre-school Teaching and Guidance and Psychological Counseling form the control group. The control group has been chosen randomly because in these groups English for Specific Purposes is not taught. In these departments students are taught general English. Before starting the study ‘Cambridge Proficiency Exam’ was given as a pre-test. Cambridge Proficiency Test which was developed by Cambridge University Press and was prepared in accordance with the criteria of Council of Europe was applied to each of the four groups at the beginning of the semester and the test results were evaluated through Microsoft Excel and Statistical package program SPSS for Windows 13 to obtain the success level. For data analysis arithmetic mean, standard deviation, and frequency of ‘t-test’ were applied because associated t-test can be used for two things that are associated with each other in experimental studies and surveys. Pattern of related measures are: a) repeated measurements of the same subjects, or b) when paired samples are measured. In order to improve the level of foreign language learners’ proficiency level implementing an English for Specific Purposes curriculum can be given as an example to these research types. The first step of the research was applying a needs analysis which was based on Hutchinson and Waters’ (2010) criteria. It aims to find out the answers of the questions why, how, what, who, where and when in the light of the learning needs of the students. In the criteria there are 15 items to be answered about the views on the content and the language program. Some of the questions focus on whom, where, how and when to use English. Findings In this section, the data that were collected from students through surveys and interviews will be analyzed and the pre-test/post-test results will be shown in the tables. Table 2. Demographic Characteristics of Students Students Areas of Expertise n % Architecture 40 25 Health Management 40 25 Pre School Teaching 40 25 Psychological Counseling and Guidance 40 25 Age N % 17-19 79 49.4 20-22 46 28.7 23-25 25 15.6 26 and above 10 6.3 Gender F % Female 79 49.4 Male 81 50.6 Mother Tongue of Learners f % Turkish 155 96.9 English 5 3.1 Students’ language level n % Elementary 20 12.5 Pre-intermediate 28 17.5 Intermediate 63 39.4 Çağanağa 100 Upper Intermediate 33 20.6 Advanced 16 10 Frequency of use of English for work or work of students n % Yes, a lot 36 22.5 Sometimes 78 48.7 Not a lot 32 20 No 14 8.8 Field Knowledge f % A lot 40 25.0 Basic 3 1.9 Not a lot 117 73.1 49.4% (n=79), 6.3 % (n=10), 28.7% (n=46), 15.6 % (n=25) of the participants were aged between 20-22, 17-19, 23-25, 26 and above, respectively, as shown in Table 2, 46.9 % (n=75), 26.2 % (n=42), 14.4 % (n=23) and 12.5 % (n=20) of the students study in the fields of Architecture, Health Management, Pre-school Teaching and Guidance and Psychological Counseling. The students’ foreign language level vary from beginner to advanced level. 12.5 % (n=20), 17.5 % (n=28), 39.4 % (n=63), 20,6 % (n=33) and 10.0 % (n=16) of the students are at the beginner , pre-intermediate, intermediate, upper-intermediate and advanced level, respectively. As shown in Table 2, 22.5 % (n=36), 48.7 (n=78), 20.0 % (n=32) and 8.8 % (n=14) of the students ranged their use of frequency as “yes, very much”, “sometimes”, “not much”, and “no”, respectively. Getting into the habit of using the target language in the classroom or outside it is a very difficult and time consuming process. Gaining this habit which is often a necessity in the classroom atmosphere affects students’ achievement and motivation especially in foreign language learning in the classroom. As can be seen in Table 2, 96.9% of the students’ mother tongue is Turkish. Therefore this may reduce the amount of the usage of the target language in the classroom. 73.1% of the students think that they do not have the skills and knowledge about their field of study and the profession. Based on these results, it is assumed that the students did not have English lessons prior to their degree level in their secondary schools. Doing a pre-test and a post-test was the second step of the study. During the analysis process, variance analysis which is suitable for repeated measures of the data for two or more groups was used and the lowest significance level was accepted as α = .05 (Kirk, 1982 cit. Richards & Rodgers, 2001). International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 2014,1(2), 91-107 101 Table 3. Total Scores of the Students According to Their Age Groups As can be seen in Table 3 pre-test and post-test scores of students between the ages of 17- 19 and 26 years and above (p = 0.001, p <0.01) are meaningfully lower than the students who are 20-22 (p: 0.001; p>0.01). Total pre-test scores of the students in other age groups show a statistically significant difference (p> 0.05) (Table 3). In this study, students who are 20-22 and 26 years and above got high mean scores from “Cambridge Proficiency Exam” that was associated with their levels of English language (Table 3). The difference between the pre-test scores of the students from Guidance and Psychological Counseling and Architecture departments was significant (p> 0.01) (Table 4) Table 4. Pre-test – Post-test Scores of the Students According to Their Fields of Study No significant differences were found in total pre-test scores of the students who use English very often are lower than the students who do not use it (p = 0.002, p <0.01). Total pre-test scores of the students who use English sometimes are lower than the students who do not use it a lot (p: 0.050, p <0.05), and a significant difference was found. Total post-test 59 73 68 73 87 95 94 95 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 AGE GROUPS 17-19 20-22 23-35 26-ABOVE PRE-TEST POST-TEST 70 74 70 66 95 95 95 95 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 PRE-SCHOOL ARCHITECTURE HEALTH MANAGEMENT PSYCH. GUIDANCE & COUNCELLING PRE-TEST POST-TEST Çağanağa 102 scores of the students who use English very often are lower than the students who use English sometimes and the difference was significant (p: 0.010, p <0.05) (Table 5). Table 5. Pre-test - Post-test Scores of the Students’ English Language According to the Frequency of Usage It is taken into consideration that students from the department of Health Management receive higher scores than the students of Architecture due to the course materials which are colorful and based on the communicative activities. They also fulfill the needs of the learners. Table 6. Pre-test - Post-test Scores of the Experimental and the Control Group Paired Sampled t-test, p<0.01 General Features of the Program Ort ± SD t- Test p Ready to use material 16.13±4.01 17.776 0.001** Pre-test score 21.74±1.63 Post test score Use of materials prepared by the researcher 23.40±4.49 21.157 0.001** Pre-test score 30.50±3.18 Post test score Teaching of English for Specific Purposes 10.61±2.78 17.188 0.001** Pre-test score 14.49±1.20 Post test score Basic English Language Teaching 8.56±1.91 5.135 0.001** Pre-test score 9.34±1.31 Post test score The use of the Communicative Approach in Teaching 3.40±1.97 20.636 0.001** Pre-test score 6.98±1.34 Post test score Use of the Traditional Approach in Teaching 9.75±2.48 10.861 0.001** Pre-test score 12.06±1.26 Post test score 71 67 76 78 95 92 97 95 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 SOMETIMES YES, VERY MUCH NOT MUCH NO PRE-TEST POST-TEST International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 2014,1(2), 91-107 103 The pre-test total scores of the Health Management students is higher than the students of the department of Architecture that had prepared materials compiled by the researcher and the pre-test scores of the students of the department of Health Management which is one of the control groups are also statistically significant (p> 0.05). According to the average total scores of the pre-test scores of the students of Health Management and Architecture (71.87± 10.31), the increase (30.908) in the average total score of the post-test (95.05±6.32) were statistically significant (p<0.01). Table 7. Comparison of the Pre-test Mean Scores of Control and Experimental Groups GROUP N x Ss Significance Experimental Group 80 65.62 7.77 t= -.973 p>0.05 Control Group 80 66.71 6.28 When students’ groups were compared with their pre-test scores, the mean score of the students in the experimental group was 65.62± 7.77 while the average score of students in the control group was 66.71±6.28 as shown in table 7 and this difference was not statistically significant (t = - .973, p> 0.05). This result indicates that the teaching method (English for Specific Purposes) is not an effective factor on the foreign language level of the students in the experimental group (Architecture and Health Administration). This proves the first hypothesis of the study (Hypothesis 1: English for Specific Purposes- ESP students’ mean scores were higher than the scores of the general English students.) It is found that in foreign language teaching, having English for Specific Purposes lessons do not have any effects on improving students’ language levels. Table 8. Within-Group Comparison of Experimental and Control Group Students’ Pre-test and Post-test Mean Scores Pre- test Post- test Group n x Ss n x Ss Significance Experimental Group 80 65.91 7.46 80 77.02 6.83 t=-11.873<0.001 Control Group 80 66.42 6.68 80 65.98 8.06 t=.440>0.05 Within the group comparison pre-test and post-test scores of the experimental and control groups were shown in Table 8. Pre-test scores of the students in the experimental group is 65.91 ± 7.46 while the average post-test scores is 77.02 ± 6.83. The difference between the mean scores of the pre-test and post-test was statistically significant (t = - 11 873, p <0.001) in the experimental group while it is not significant in the control group (t = .440, p> 0.05). It is thought that using the communicative approach in teaching English for Specific Purposes in the experimental group resulted in improving students’ language level. With this way of teaching, specific information that enables communicative structures to be used easily was provided to the students as well as making them concentrate on specific speaking structures. Littlewood (2009) emphasized the importance of social interaction activities in the development of students’ communicative skills (Richards & Rodgers, 2001). Communicative structures which are mentioned above can be found in this kind of content. The findings which are about how to use the language are similar in both studies. In this case, it might be said that using social interaction activities in ESP lessons may develop students’ communication skills. The difference between the pre-test – post-test mean scores of the Çağanağa 104 control group was not found statistically significant due to the fact that the curriculum of this group did not include any English for Specific Purposes courses. Table 9. Comparison of the Post-test Mean Scores of Experimental and Control Groups Group n x Ss Significance Experimental Group 80 77.02 6.8 t=9.338 p<0.001 Control Group 80 65.98 38.06 Post-test mean score of the experimental group is 77.02 ± 6.83, while it is 65.98 ± 8.06 in the control group. The difference between the post-test mean scores of the experimental and control groups was statistically at an advanced level. It was found statistically significant in favor of the experimental group (t = 9338 p <0.001) (Table 9). It is thought that the teaching style (using communicative approach in English for Specific Purposes) led to this result in the experimental group. With this result the second hypothesis has been confirmed (Hypothesis II: Students’ level of English can be improved by using communicative approach in teaching English for Specific Purposes). The difference between the pre-test and post-test mean scores of the students of the experimental group was significantly higher (p <0.001) due to the fact that in order to improve communicative skills in foreign language teaching ESP lessons may be effective. However, it was found that pre-test and post-test scores of the students in the control group did not differ (P> 0.05) (Table 9). Table 10. Independent Samples T-Test Results According to the Gender Variable Group n x Ss sd t p Male 43 22.36 3.999 Posttest 28 .681 .502 Female 37 23.60 .894 As shown in Table 10, there are no significant differences between students considering their gender (boys and girls) in the control group. Table 11. Independent Samples T-Test Results of the Students in the Experimental Group According to the Gender Variable Group n x Ss Sd T p Male 58 25.71 2.710 Posttest 28 .824 -413 Female 22 25.00 1.683 When the post-test scores were analyzed there was not a significant difference in the experimental group according to the gender variable. The difference between the average scores of male and female students (X difference = 0.71) is very low and the score does not indicate a significant difference. Conclusion Preparing a curriculum based on the findings of needs analysis in an English for Specific Purposes course may be useful in many aspects for both teachers and students and it may lead to restructuring, assessing the traditional methods, and reviewing the curriculum, assessment and evaluation activities. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 2014,1(2), 91-107 105 Within the scope of this research, the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages which was examined by many language teachers, researchers, testing officers and program development specialists was used in determining students’ language levels. It was also useful at both institutional and individual level. It also lit the way for determining students’ language proficiency level through communicative approach in ESP. The following results were found in the present study: 1. It was seen that applying communicative approach in ESP lessons caused students to become more successful at proficiency level (See Table 4). 2. It was found that the pre-test and post-test mean scores of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) students (experimental group) were statistically significant at the advanced level (See Table 4). 3. When pre-test scores of the students in the control and experimental groups were compared, it was found that doing English for Specific Purposes lessons in foreign language teaching have no effect on improving students’ language levels (See Table 5). 4. The scores of the students in the experimental group were not changed by gender (See Table 9). The results obtained from this research may provide an important contribution to the courses offered in English in the faculties of universities. For the student-centered educational environment, especially in the design of a curriculum, it may offer both the teacher and the students a lot. Teachers or program designers should give particular importance to students’ needs to make them gain the targeted skills in a short time. One of the results of the study was the positive effect of using the communicative approach on their level of language proficiency. As can be seen from the findings of the study, students become successful in the teaching environment in which they are located in the center. Therefore, this causes a positive effect on achievement as was expected before. As a result, when an ESP course is compared with the traditional methods, it can be said that a program which is designed in accordance with the needs analysis and the assessment and evaluation of student-centered methods makes the course more effective and enriched due to its effect on achieving the targets. Suggestions This section includes the suggestions about a language program which should be prepared based on the results of the needs analysis in English for Specific Purposes classes. This study may also be useful while designing a syllabus. Accordingly, recommendations for the in-class applications can be designed through the use of needs analysis. 1. According to the results of the needs analysis, when a designed program was applied, bear in mind the objectives of the program. Students should be actively involved in the process continuously to fulfill the requirements of the program. 2. The teacher must find students’ learning styles through questionnaires and tests and while designing a curriculum, methods and approaches should be determined accordingly. For example, for visual learners word cards can be prepared, word cards or posters can be hung up on the walls. 3. As part of the student-centered approach students do not only learn in the class. The learning process itself continues outside the classroom too. Therefore, the teacher should inform the students about the resources or give them homework or assignments. Çağanağa 106 Therefore, teachers should inform students about the resources or encourage them to use the real materials used in the target language through giving homework. Students can benefit from newspapers / magazines, read books, reset the input devices of his/her mobile phone or computer, or use the calendar in the target language, and so on. 4. According to the results of the study, to ensure students to be able to communicate in a foreign language, learning strategies of the learners should be identified and the course should be designed accordingly. 5. When the necessary conditions are provided at the undergraduate level, having English for Specific Purposes lessons will be useful for both academicians and students. Time and resources should not be ignored by the academicians and ESP classes should be formed according to the results of the placement tests. (This is especially useful to minimize the number of introverted students. In this way students will see that they are capable of achieving many things.) As a result, it can be said that needs analysis and student centered teaching are very important in foreign language learning and teaching. At the very beginning of the program, students’ choices and interests should be determined and the ESP curriculum should be designed accordingly. Students should be encouraged for lifelong learning and should be aware of the importance of communication in foreign language. Learning a foreign language is not only knowing the rules of it, instead it is being able to communicate and interact with it throughout his life in an active way. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 2014,1(2), 91-107 107 References Bagaric, V. (2007). Defining Communicative Competence. Metodika, 94-103. Benson, P., & Goa, X. (2008). Individual Variation and Language Learning Strategies. In S. Hurd, & T. Lewis, Language Learning Strategies in Independent Settings (pp. 25-40). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nd ed.). New York: Addison-Wesley Longman. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Veri Analizi El Kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık. Demircan, Ö. (1990). Yabancı Dil Öğretim Yöntemleri. İstanbul: Ekin Eğitim-Yayıncılık. Demirel, Ö. (2003). Avrupa Birliğinin Dil Politikası ve Türkiye. Littera, 249-258. Europe, C. O. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, Learning, Teaching, Assesment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gatehouse, Kristen. (2004). Key Issues in English for Specific Purposes (ESP). Curriculum Development. http://iteslj.org/Articles/Gatehouse-ESP.html Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (2010). English for specific purposes: A learning-centred approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Johnson, K. (2003). Designing teaching tasks. Palgrave: MacMillan Education. Karasar, N. (2006). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık. Kennedy, C. & Bolitho, R. (1984). English for specific purposes. London: Macmillan. Littlewood, W. (2009). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mackay, R., & Mountford, A. J. (1978). English for specific puposes. London: Longman. Meb, T. (2003). ÖBBS 2002 durum belirleme raporu. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Basımevi. Munby, J. (1978). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Richards, J. C., & Schmidth, T. (2001). Dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Cambridge: Pearson. Silberman, M. (1996). Active learning: 101 strategies to teach any subject. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Spears, R. A., Birner, B., & Kleinder, S. (2005). Günlük ifadeler sözlüğü. İstanbul: Alfa Yayınları. Strevens, P. (1977). Special-purpose language learning: A perspective. E.T.I.C./ The British Council, Language Teaching and Linguistics: Abstracts, 185-203. Widdowson, H. (1990). Aspects of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. White, R. V. (1988). The ELT curriculum: Design, innovation and management. Oxford: Blackwell. Yalden, J. (1991). Principles of course design for language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.