Needs analysis in language teaching
R. West
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800007527
1994-01-01
Language Teaching
Abstract:There have been several surveys of approaches to needs analysis in foreign-language teaching (James, 1974; Jordan, 1977; Chambers, 1980; Cunningsworth, 1983; Brindley, 1989; Riddell, 1991; van Hest & Oud-de Glas, 1990; Robinson, 1991; Jordan, forthcoming). During the period of 20 years covered by these surveys, both the focus and scope of needs analysis have changed. The dominant focus of early needs analysis was occupational/EOP, but this later changed to academic language/EAP (for the origin of the terms EOP and EAP, see T.Johns, 1981: 16). More recently the focus has shifted again to include general language learning. The scope of needs analysis up to and including Munby (1978) was syllabus specification derived from target-situation needs, but the scope has since been broadened to include areas specifically excluded by Munby practicalities and constraints, teaching methods and learning strategies, and, recently, materials selection. This evolution can be summarised by characterising each of three stages in the development of needs analysis, and to hint at the future by suggesting a fourth stage (see table below). Much of the later work in needs analysis is either not widely known or (Richards, 1984, cited by Nunan 1988 a: 17) it is still assumed that curriculum development in language teaching should concentrate on language syllabuses to the exclusion of broader aspects such as needs analysis, methodology and evaluation. It therefore seems appropriate to survey the field of needs analysis in a broad context. This survey concentrates on work relating to English (for a survey of recent work in other European languages, see van Hest & Oud-de Glas, 1990).
Education,Psychology,Linguistics