HANOI UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES ********

MA THESIS PROPOSAL
Student's name Institution Speciality Course Proposed Title : Pham Thi Thu : Academy of Finance : English : 15 : An evaluation of ESP materials for the second and third year students at Academy of Finance.

I. Statement of problem
Academy of Finance (AOF) is one of the biggest universities in Vietnam. Every year, there are about 3000 students distributed in 10 faculties. They study in many different specific courses such as: Accounting, Banking, Finance, Business Management and so on. Those students are taught about 40 subjects including compulsory and elective subjects depending on the specific purpose of each faculty. Of all those 40 subjects, English is one of the compulsory subjects in the curriculum for students at AOF. English course for students at AOF is divided into two stages with a total of 270 periods. The first stage including the first and the second semesters consists of 150 periods of the General English (GE). The textbook is used in the first stage is Business Basics. In the second stage, the students have 120 periods of English for specific purposes (ESP). The ESP material which had been used for many years was English for Finance and Accounting. Since 2008 the new in-house ESP material English for finance has been officially used as the core material for the second and third year students. This material contains 40 units. Among those, more than a half of units are taken from the old ESP material. The units are arranged according to topics: economics, money and banking, finance, accounting and auditing, financial analysis, marketing and international trade. Each unit is organized by a set pattern of components: Reading; comprehension/ interpretation; language focus; word study; vocabulary.

However, due to the birth of some new faculties and changes in the training objective of some faculties, this material had to be produced quickly to meet deadlines for photocopy and for classroom use. So after one year of teaching, English teachers of foreign language department as well as the researcher who were appointed to teach this material for the first time have realized some weaknesses in this material. Firstly, a lot of units are taken again from the old material so the information in some reading texts is out of date because economic and business events change everyday. Secondly, each unit seems to be overloaded in terms of time. In fact, one unit is taught in 3 periods so it is not enough to cover all the teaching items as required. Thirdly, this material concentrates much on grammar and vocabulary. Each unit has only one answering question exercise. As a result the students do not have enough chances to practice skimming, scanning skills and other techniques of reading. Fourthly, according to the aim of the course given in the syllabus, this material lacks of translation exercises in order to help students consolidate new specialist words they have learned as well as practice translating skill. For the reasons above, the researcher is encouraged to undertake this study entitled An evaluation of ESP materials for the second and third year students at AOF with the attention to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the material as well as to find whether it can meet the objectives of the course in term of the audience, the aims, the content and the method mentioned in the ESP syllabus.

II. Previous research

Being considered as an important aspect in language teaching and learning, materials evaluation has been given a great deal of attention. The works of Willian (1983), Cunningsworth (1984), Hutchinson and Waters (1987), Sheldon (1988), Mc Donough and Shaw (1993), Littlejohn (1996), Ur (1996), Ellis (1997) or Davies (2000) have provided teachers- evaluators with the theoretical frameworks of materials evaluation. These works served as previous guides to numerous materials evaluation studies. II.1. Foreign studies on materials evaluation In 2001, the study on material evaluation carried out at Bilkent University School of English Language (BUSEL) by Akin and Guceri is considered the most remarkable study. The main aims of the materials evaluation were to identify whether the designs of the materials were suitable for a task- based syllabus, for the learners as well as for the course objectives. A number of students and teachers at BUSEL (14 teachers and 500 students) were asked to give feedback on the material

layout, student motivation/ interest/ usefulness, variety of tasks and activities and the relation between materials and course objectives. In their study, they used data collection tools such as: questionnaires, interviews, and observations.. It can not be denied that the study is of great importance for the researchers reference. Also Akin and Guceri (2001) provided a systematically designed method for materials evaluation. Another study was conducted by Ayman (cited in Figen, 2002). Ayman did a research on materials evaluation at Bilkent University (BU) with the purpose of finding the perceptions of both students and teachers of a textbook which is based on EAP and designed for upper- intermediate level students at BU. This evaluation was based on criteria such as content, organization of content, level, language, activities, supporting resources etc. The study was conducted at micro level and aims to assess the overall effectiveness of the particular textbook after the implementation of it. Both teachers and students took part in the study. The data collection instruments used for this evaluation were questionnaires and interviews. Based on the findings from the study, the researcher gave some suggestions for improving the effectiveness of the materials. II.2. Vietnamese studies on materials evaluation Along with foreign studies on materials evaluation, this field of research has been attracting the attention of researchers at some Universities in Vietnam. Of all the studies, the study of Tran Thi Thu Nga (2005) is an example. In her own thesis, she recommended criteria for the adaptation of the English material for the first and second year marine students at Nha Trang Navy Academy. The study was based on Hutchinson and Waters model with four criteria such as audience, aims, content and methodology. The instruments she used to collect data are document analysis and questionnaire. The results showed that the material generally satisfied the requirements of the course. However the materials still revealed several weaknesses that need modification. The biggest mismatch of the material in relation to the course requirements is the inappropriate design of the reading component. As a result, she gave recommendations to improve the materials. Another example is a micro evaluation of Market Leader pre- intermediate for second year students at Hanoi University of Business and technology (HUBT) by Tran Thi Thu Cuc (2007). The purpose of her study was to evaluate the Case Study Task of the book Market Leader Pre- intermediate for Business and Management students with regard to its relevance to the task objectives, its level of difficulty and its motivation to the students at HUBT. To collect sufficient information for the

study, the researcher employed the combination of three methods: questionnaire, interview and observation. After collecting and analyzing information, she concluded that many aspects in the task under evaluation met the objective of improving the students speaking skills of the task. However, there have been some aspects that have not worked well such as the level of difficulty of the task to the students, unsuitable time allocation, especially the objective of improving the students writing skills had not met. To conclude, those above studies are very helpful in providing the researcher with general views on the study of materials evaluation. They also provide the researcher some of the basic steps and principles to follow when writing a thesis on materials evaluation. The most popular data collection tools including document analysis, questionnaires, and interviews were combined to seek the information related to the effectiveness of the material in use or its suitability to the course aims. However, it is also found that those studies had been carried out in definitely different contexts and on different types of textbooks or materials, they might have adopted different approaches to evaluation. Those approaches seem to work well in their contexts but can not be applied exactly into our specific situation.

III. Aims
The main aims of this material evaluation is to identify whether the designs of the materials are suitable for an ESP syllabus, for the learners as well as for the course objectives in terms of audience, aims, content, methodology to the course. The researcher hopes that the findings of the study will partly help to decide whether to use this material again in the future or not and what changes to be made to improve the effectiveness of the material for future use. Research questions The purpose of the study is to find the answers to the following general research questions: 1. To what extent does the material meet the requirements of the course in terms of audience, aims, content and methodology? This question can be subdivided into the following specific ones: Is the existing material suitable to the students level of English? Does the material match up with the aims of the course? Is the material appropriate to the content requirements of the course? Is the material appropriate to the methodology requirements of the course? 2. What should be done to improve the material?

IV. Methodology
IV.1. Models for materials evaluation There are different models for materials evaluation suggested by different authors in the literature. The popular models are the ones proposed by Hutchinson and Waters (1987), Littlejohn (1996) and Ellis (1997). IV.1.1. Evaluation model by Hutchinson and Waters (1987): Hutchinson and Waters (1987) define materials evaluation as a master of judging the fitness of something for a particular purpose (p 96). In this view, they divide the materials evaluation process into four major steps. The first one is to define the criteria which the evaluation is based on. The second one is to determine the subjective analysis. The third one is to determine the objective analysis and the last one is to compare the findings with the materials requirements to evaluate the match between the materials and the requirements of the course. The whole set of materials evaluation process is presented in the following diagram.

Define Criteria On what bases will you judge materials? Which criteria will be more important?

Subjective Analysis What realizations of the criteria do you want in your course?

Objective Analysis How does the material being evaluated realize the criteria?

Matching How far does the material match your needs?

Figure1: Hutchinson and Waters materials evaluation model (1987)

Based on the above four- stage model, Hutchinson and Waters (1987) present a detailed checklist of criteria for both subjective and objective analysis, which covers the four basic areas: Audience, Aims, Content and Methodology. (Appendix 1) IV.1.2. Evaluation model by Littlejohn (1996) Littlejohn (1996) suggests a preliminary framework for materials analysis and evaluation as follows: Analysis of the target situation of use The cultural context The institution The course (proposed aims, content, methodology, and means of evaluation) The teachers The learners Materials analysis From analysis: 1. What is their explicit nature? 2. What is required of users? 3. What is implied by their use? To description: Aspects of design Aspects of publication

Match and evaluation How appropriate are the aspects of design and the aspects of publication to the target situation of use? Action Adopt the materials Reject the materials Supplement the materials Make the materials a critical object Figure 2: Framework for materials evaluation (1996) According to framework, there are four different stages for materials evaluation. Firstly, the materials are described and analyzed in detail in order to expose their internal nature and, at the same time, make the analysts subjective interpretation more easily visible. Then the nature of the situation in which the materials would be used and the requirements placed on the materials are also analyzed and described independently. The next stage, matching and evaluation, helps the evaluator to figure out precisely which aspects of the materials are appropriate or inappropriate and why. In the action stage, what can be done to improve the materials is recommended for the evaluators option. Among four stages for materials evaluation, Littlejohn especially places an emphasis on the stage of material analysis. IV.1.3. Evaluation model by Ellis (1997) (A micro- evaluation) A micro- evaluation is the evaluation of one of particular teaching tasks, which the evaluator has a special interest in (Ellis, 1997). In this model, a detailed empirical evaluation and evaluating tasks

in language teaching are focused on. The aim of the model is to identify the match between task planned and task in use. According to Ellis, some dimensions used for macro- evaluation such as approach, purpose, focus, scope, evaluator, types of information can be applied in micro- evaluation process. The steps involved in the evaluation model suggested by Ellis (1997) are: 1. Choosing a task to follow; 2. Describing the task which requires the specification of the content of a task in terms of input, procedures, language activities, and outcome; 3. Planning the evaluation with reference to the dimensions above; 4. Collecting information (before the task is used, while it is being used and / or on completion of the task) about how the task was performed, what learning took place as a result of performing the task, and teachers and learners opinions about the task; 5. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the information collected; 6. Reaching conclusions relating to what has been discovered as a result of the evaluation of the task, and making recommendations for future teaching; 7. Writing the report. In summary, the above review of some different evaluation models proposed by different authors would help the researcher make a clear comparison between those models in order to select the most appropriate one for this study. Certainly, which model to choose depends upon the evaluators purposes. Among all models above, the model suggested by Hutchinson and Waters (1987) presents the most logical and clearest procedure for materials evaluation. It is composed of subjective analysis and objective analysis. The subjective analysis identifies the course requirements for the materials. Meanwhile, the objective analysis investigates the realization of the course requirements. Matching step compares the findings from the analytical work in order to determine how far the materials satisfy the prescribed objectives of a course. The most distinguishing point in the model is the clear-cut description of the stages and criteria which are presented more systematically than Elliss working model and more simply than Littlejohns framework. It can help evaluators to know exactly what must be done to analyze the materials in comparison with the course requirements. Therefore, in order to determine whether the existing material is suitable for the students at Academy of Finance, the evaluation model of Hutchinson and Waters is suitable for this study. IV.2. Data collection instruments A combination of the three main data collection instruments: document analysis, questionnaires for students and interviews for teachers will be used to collect data. The reason for the use of this combination is that one method can be related to another one to provide a clearer insight into different levels of analysis (Jick, 1979). Furthermore, the result of one

method can help to develop or inform another method (Greene, Carecelli & Graham, 1989). From three sources: Document analysis, questionnaire and interview, the researcher can collect the information on how the task objectives are met, what areas of difficulty the students may have, the level of motivation of the task. IV.2.1. Document analysis In this study, with a view to examine the material currently used at AOF in relation to the course requirements, much attention is paid to the analysis of the syllabus and the material itself. These analyses were based on Hutchinson and Waters criteria on material evaluation (1987). IV.2.1.1. Syllabus analysis: The syllabus analysis aims to review the course objectives as well as its requirements for the material. This analysis is based on the already defined criteria including aims, content, and methodology. The sub-criteria are specified as follow: Aims of the course Content: + language points + language skill + text types + topics Methodology: + kinds of tasks/ exercises + teaching-learning techniques IV.2.1.2. Material analysis: The material being evaluated will be developed from the syllabus design. The material analysis aims to examine how the material realizes the criteria of the syllabus analysis. It follows the following order: Aims of the material The treatment of the material content + language points + language skills + text types + topics The methodology implied in the material + types of tasks/ exercises + teaching- learning techniques

IV.2.2. Questionnaires: Questionnaires aim to seek more evidence from students opinions about the level of appropriateness of the aims, content and methodology of the material in comparison with the courses objectives and students English level. IV.2.3. Interviews The data from the interviews will supplement the data collected from the document analysis and questionnaires to achieve a full and detailed evaluation of the material. The interview questions aim to find out the methodology implied in the syllabus. IV.3.Data collection procedure As mentioned above, the data will be collected in this study are from three sources: document analysis, questionnaires and interviews. First, the ESP syllabus is analyzed according to selected criteria. The analysis aims to find out what will be taught in the ESP course, and the objectives as well as the requirements of the course in terms of aims, contents and methodology for the teaching materials. Right after finishing the syllabus analysis, the researcher will conduct the material analysis. The material itself will be analyzed objectively basing on the four defined criteria proposed by Hutchinson and Waters (1987) to give detailed description of what actually are there in the material so that comparison can be made between the present material and the required one. The analytical results, in addition to the questionnaire results, will be discussed to point out the strengths and weaknesses of the material. Subsequently, the Questionnaire will be distributed to 90 K45 students who have just finished the ESP course. Every five students will be chosen at random from different classes of different departments. Before completing the questionnaire, the students will be asked to read through all the questions to find out whether they have any difficulties in understanding and answering the questions. The researcher is in charge of giving clear explanation to make sure that students understand all questions. After receiving clear guidelines about how to fulfill the questionnaire, students will complete it at home and give it back to the researcher four days later. After doing questionnaire with students, nine English teachers of Foreign Language Department at Academy of Finance will be invited to take part in the interview. First of all, these teachers will be invited to the Departments office to inform the purposes of the interview and what the results will be used for. And then they will also be given the copies of the questions to make sure that they will have well preparation before interviews. Finally a semi-structured interview will be carried out on the arranged day with nine English teachers. During the interview, the interviewees will be asked mainly the questions already given to them. However, further questions can be asked to follow up responses in case their answers are not clear and detailed enough. To create a friendly and open

manner, the researcher will take note on the answers of the interviewees in stead of using recording equipment.

V. Subjects
V.1. The teachers Nine English teachers of Foreign Language Department will be chosen to take part in the interview aged from 32 to over 45. Seven are female and two are male. Some of them participated in designing the material. Most of the teachers have at least ten years of experience in teaching English. Moreover, they are qualified teachers who were appointed to teach this new ESP material for the first time. V.2. The students At our Academy, in order to be convenient for management, all students were allocated into English classes as well as other subjects randomly according to a criterion: the students in each English class are in the same major faculty. They come from different cities and provinces so their level of English is certainly different. English is a compulsory subject for all students of all faculties. The participants for this study are 90 non- English major students of different classes of K45 from different departments at AOF. Five students of 18 classes from different departments are chosen as participants of the study at random. They consist of 54 females and 36 males. At the same time of this study, these K45 students have already finished their English learning period including General English (GE) and ESP course. In this study they are assumed to have the same level of English when they all finished their English learning period at AOF.

VI. Setting
The study is conducted at AOF where the researcher is teaching English. As mentioned in Methodology, in this study, along with documents analysis, questionnaires and interviews are also used as important data collection tools. The Questionnaire is distributed to 90 K45 students of AOF and collected at this Academy after 4 days. The process of semi-structure interview is also carried out with nine English teachers of Foreign Language Department at English Departments office on the arranged day.

VII. The significance of the study

Practically, this study is carried out with the hope that the findings of this research will be very useful for all the people concerned including the researcher, the teachers, the syllabus designers as well as the students. The results of this research will provide an insight into the constructive

adoption of the current material which is being used for second and third year students at AOF so they will contribute to the improvement of the quality of the material. In addition, the findings reflect the weaknesses and strengths of the material in use, so that the Foreign Language Department will have scientific evidence to make necessary changes for the improvement of the material for future use. Theoretically, the research will make a partly contribution to the field of materials evaluation. To another extent, the researcher hopes that the study will encourage an extension of evaluation studies on other teaching materials used at our Academy in order to improve the teaching and learning quality as no prior research in this aspect has been carried out at AOF so far.

VIII. Proposed schedule

01- 02/2010 - 03-04/ 2010 04-06/2010 : Handing in the final draft of the thesis. : Completing Chapter I + II : Collecting, coding and analyzing data Complete Chapter III and IV and Conclusion Proposed supervisor: MA Nguyen Thi Nhu Hoa

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1. Background to the study 1.2. Aims of the study and research questions 1.3. Scope of the study

1.4. Significance of the study 1.5. Outline of the thesis CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. ESP MATERIALS 2.1.1. A brief overview of ESP 2.1.2. The role of ESP 2.1.3. ESP materials 2.2. Materials evaluation 2.2.1. Roles of materials 2.2.2. Definition of materials evaluation 2.2.3. Reasons for materials evaluation 2.2.4. Types of materials evaluation 2.2.5. Principles for materials evaluation 2.2.6. Materials evaluation models 2.2.7. Criteria for materials evaluation 2.3. Materials evaluators 2.3.1. Materials evaluation by outsiders 2.3.2. Materials evaluation by insiders 2.4. Previous materials evaluation studies CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 3.1. Rationale 3.2. Research questions 3.3. Data collection instruments 3.3.1. Document analysis 3.3.2. Questionnaires 3.3.3. Interviews 3.4. Subjects of the study 3.4.1. The students 3.4.2. The teachers 3.5. Setting of the study 3.6. Data collection procedure CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1. The appropriateness of the material to the students level of English 4.1.1. Document analysis 4.1.2. Teachers questionnaire & interviews 4.1.3. Students questionnaire 4.1.4. Discussion 4.2. The appropriateness of the material to the aims of the course 4.2.1. Document analysis 4.2.2. Teachers questionnaire & interviews 4.2.3. Students questionnaire 4.2.4. Discussion 4.3. The appropriateness of the material to the contents requirement of the course 4.3.1. Document analysis 4.3.2. Teachers questionnaire & interviews 4.3.3. Students questionnaire 4.3.4. Discussion 4.4. The appropriateness of the material to the methodology requirement of the course 4.4.1. Document analysis 4.4.2. Teachers questionnaire & interviews

4.4.3. Students questionnaire 4.4.4. Discussion 4.5. The interest of the material 4.5.1. Document analysis 4.5.2. Teachers questionnaire & interviews 4.5.3. Students questionnaire 4.5.4. Discussion 4.6. Time allocation 4.6.1. Document analysis 4.6.2. Teachers questionnaire & interviews 4.6.3. Students questionnaire 4.6.4. Discussion 4.7. Summary of major findings CHAPTER 5: RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION 5.1. Recommendations 5.1.1. Language content 5.1.2. Methodology 5.2. Limitations and suggestions for further studies 5.3. Conclusion REFERENCES APPENDIXES

References

Akin, A.R.,& Gucceri, M. (2001). A macro materials evaluation. For better or for worse. http://www3.oup.co.uk/eltj/hdb/volume51/issue01/510036 Cunningsworth, A. (1984). Evaluating and Selecting EFL teaching Materials. London: Heinemann Educational Books. Davies, P. (2000). Success in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (1997). The Empirical Evaluation of Language Teaching Materials. ELT Journal, Vol.51.No.1.pp 36-42.

Figen, K. (2002). Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the ESP Reading Materials for 215 English for Law Course at the English Language School of Basken University. Retrieved November, 2002 from the Worldwide Web. Greene, J.C., Caracelili, V.J & Graham, W.F. (1989). Toward a Conceptual Framework. for Mixed Method Education Design. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11/3. Hutchinson, T. & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning centre approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jick, T.D. (1979). Mixing Qualitive and Quantitative Methods. Triangulation in Action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24. Littlejohn, A. (1998). The analysis of language teaching Materials: Inside the Trojan Horse. In B. Tomlinson, (Ed), Materials Development in language teaching (pp.190-216). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lynch. (1996). Language Program Evaluation. Practice- Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press. May, T. (2001). Social Research: Issues Methods and Process. Buckingham: Open University Press. Robinson, P.C. (1991). ESP today: A practitioners Guide. London: Prentice Hall. Sheldon, L.E. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT journal, 42/4, 237246. Tran Thi Thu Cuc. (2007). A micro evaluation of Market Leader pre- intermediate for second year students at Hanoi University of Business and technology. Unpublished MA. Thesis. Tran Thi Thu Nga. (2005). An evaluation of the English material for the first and second year marine students at Nha Trang Navy Academy. Unpublished MA. Thesis. Wallace, M.J. (1998). Action Research for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. William, D. (1983). Developing criteria for textbook evaluation. ELT journal, 37/3, 251255.