Key Issues in English
for Specific Purposes
(ESP) Curriculum
Development
Kristen Gatehouse
khoey [at] khae-service.com
www.khae-service.com
Based on insights gained from
developing the curriculum for
Language Preparation for
Employment in the Health Sciences
and a review of the literature on
ESP, this paper is intended to offer
theoretical support for ESL
instructors developing ESP curricula
for ESL contexts.
Background Information and
Statement of Purpose
In late 1999, I was asked to develop
a content-based curriculum for a
ten-week course for a select group of
immigrants living in Ottawa, Canada.
The course was held at Algonquin
College of Applied Arts and
Technology and was funded by the
Language for Employment Related
Needs Project (LERN). The curriculum
consisted of two distinct phases:
language delivery and employment
awareness. Although the
employment awareness phase
(independently developed and
delivered by Local Agencies Serving
Immigrants) was an integral
component of the program, the focus
of this paper is on insights gained
from the language-delivery phase.
Dudley Evans and St. John (1998)
identify five key roles for the ESP
practitioner:
teacher
course designer and materials
provider
collaborator
researcher
evaluator.
It is the role of ESP practitioner as
course designer and materials
provider that this paper addresses.
The premise of this paper is based
on David Nunan's observations
about the teacher as a curriculum
developer.
It seems fairly obvious that if
teachers are to be the ones
responsible for developing the
curriculum, they need the time, the
skills and the support to do so.
Support may include curriculum
models and guidelines · and may
include support from individuals
acting in a curriculum advisory
position. The provision of such
support cannot be removed and
must not be seen in isolation, from
the curriculum (Nunan, 1987, p. 75).
Nunan recognized that issues of
time, skills and support are key for
teachers faced with the very real
task of developing curricula. The
intent of this paper is to provide the
ESL instructor as ESP course
designer and materials provider with
theoretical support. This paper
begins with a discussion of the
origins of ESP. Some key notions
about ESP are then addressed:
absolute and variable characteristics
types of ESP
characteristics of ESP courses
the meaning of the word 'special' in
ESP
Key issues in ESP curriculum design
are suggested: a) abilities required
for successful communication in
occupational settings; b)content
language aquisition versus general
language aquisition; c)
heterogeneous versus homogenous
learner group; and d) materials
development.
The Origins of ESP
Certainly, a great deal about the
origins of ESP could be written.
Notably, there are three reasons
common to the emergence of all ESP:
the demands of a Brave New World,
a revolution in linguistics, and focus
on the learner (Hutchinson &
Waters, 1987).
Hutchinson and Waters (1987) note
that two key historical periods
breathed life into ESP. First, the end
of the Second World War brought
with it an " ... age of enormous and
unprecedented expansion in
scientific, technical and economic
activity on an international scale ·
for various reasons, most notably the
economic power of the United States
in the post-war world, the role [of
international language] fell to
English" (p. 6). Second, the Oil Crisis
of the early 1970s resulted in
Western money and knowledge
flowing into the oil-rich countries.
The language of this knowledge
became English.
The general effect of all this
development was to exert pressure
on the language teaching profession
to deliver the required goods.
Whereas English had previously
decided its own destiny, it now
became subject to the wishes, needs
and demands of people other than
language teachers (Hutchinson &
Waters, 1987, p.7).
The second key reason cited as
having a tremendous impact on the
emergence of ESP was a revolution in
linguistics. Whereas traditional
linguists set out to describe the
features of language, revolutionary
pioneers in linguistics began to
focus on the ways in which language
is used in real communication.
Hutchinson and Waters (1987) point
out that one significant discovery
was in the ways that spoken and
written English vary. In other words,
given the particular context in which
English is used, the variant of
English will change. This idea was
taken one step farther. If language
in different situations varies, then
tailoring language instruction to
meet the needs of learners in
specific contexts is also possible.
Hence, in the late 1960s and the
early 1970s there were many
attempts to describe English for
Science and Technology (EST).
Hutchinson and Waters (1987)
identify Ewer and Latorre, Swales,
Selinker and Trimble as a few of the
prominent descriptive EST pioneers.
The final reason Hutchinson and
Waters (1987) cite as having
influenced the emergence of ESP has
less to do with linguistics and
everything to do psychology. Rather
than simply focus on the method of
language delivery, more attention
was given to the ways in which
learners acquire language and the
differences in the ways language is
acquired. Learners were seen to
employ different learning strategies,
use different skills, enter with
different learning schemata, and be
motivated by different needs and
interests. Therefore, focus on the
learners' needs became equally
paramount as the methods employed
to disseminate linguistic knowledge.
Designing specific courses to better
meet these individual needs was a
natural extension of this thinking. To
this day, the catchword in ESL circles
is learner-centered or learning-
centered.
Key Notions About ESP
In this discussion, four key notions
will be discussed. They are as
follows: a) the distinctions between
the absolute and variable
characteristics of ESP, b) types of
ESP, c) characteristics of ESP courses,
and d) the meaning of the word
'special' in ESP.
Absolute and Variable
Characteristics of ESP
Ten years later, theorists Dudley-
Evans and St John (1998) modified
Strevens' original definition of ESP to
form their own. Let us begin with
Strevens. He defined ESP by
identifying its absolute and variable
characteristics. Strevens' (1988)
definition makes a distinction
between four absolute and two
variable characteristics:
I. Absolute characteristics:
ESP consists of English language
teaching which is:
designed to meet specified needs of
the learner;
related in content (i.e. in its themes
and topics) to particular disciplines,
occupations and activities;
centred on the language appropriate
to those activities in syntax, lexis,
discourse, semantics, etc., and
analysis of this discourse;
in contrast with General English.
II. Variable characteristics:
ESP may be, but is not necessarily:
restricted as to the language skills to
be learned (e.g. reading only);
not taught according to any pre-
ordained methodology (pp.1-2).
Anthony (1997) notes that there has
been considerable recent debate
about what ESP means despite the
fact that it is an approach which has
been widely used over the last three
decades. At a 1997 Japan Conference
on ESP, Dudley-Evans offered a
modified definition. The revised
definition he and St. John postulate
is as follows:
I. Absolute Characteristics
ESP is defined to meet specific
needs of the learner;
ESP makes use of the underlying
methodology and activities of the
discipline it serves;
ESP is centred on the language
(grammar, lexis, register), skills,
discourse and genres appropriate to
these activities.
II. Variable Characteristics
ESP may be related to or designed
for specific disciplines;
ESP may use, in specific teaching
situations, a different methodology
from that of general English;
ESP is likely to be designed for adult
learners, either at a tertiary level
institution or in a professional work
situation. It could, however, be for
learners at secondary school level;
ESP is generally designed for
intermediate or advanced students;
Most ESP courses assume some basic
knowledge of the language system,
but it can be used with beginners
(1998, pp. 4-5).
Dudley-Evans and St. John have
removed the absolute characteristic
that 'ESP is in contrast with General
English' and added more variable
characteristics. They assert that ESP
is not necessarily related to a
specific discipline. Furthermore, ESP
is likely to be used with adult
learners although it could be used
with young adults in a secondary
school setting.
As for a broader definition of ESP,
Hutchinson and Waters (1987)
theorize, "ESP is an approach to
language teaching in which all
decisions as to content and method
are based on the learner's reason
for learning" (p. 19). Anthony (1997)
notes that, it is not clear where ESP
courses end and general English
courses begin; numerous non-
specialist ESL instructors use an ESP
approach in that their syllabi are
based on analysis of learner needs
and their own personal specialist
knowledge of using English for real
communication.
Types of ESP
David Carter (1983) identifies three
types of ESP:
English as a restricted language
English for Academic and
Occupational Purposes
English with specific topics.
The language used by air traffic
controllers or by waiters are
examples of English as a restricted
language. Mackay and Mountford
(1978) clearly illustrate the
difference between restricted
language and language with this
statement:
... the language of international air-
traffic control could be regarded as
'special', in the sense that the
repertoire required by the controller
is strictly limited and can be
accurately determined situationally,
as might be the linguistic needs of a
dining-room waiter or air-hostess.
However, such restricted repertoires
are not languages, just as a tourist
phrase book is not grammar.
Knowing a restricted 'language'
would not allow the speaker to
communicate effectively in novel
situation, or in contexts outside the
vocational environment (pp. 4-5).
The second type of ESP identified by
Carter (1983) is English for Academic
and Occupational Purposes. In the
'Tree of ELT' (Hutchinson & Waters,
1987), ESP is broken down into three
branches: a) English for Science and
Technology (EST), b) English for
Business and Economics (EBE), and
c) English for Social Studies (ESS).
Each of these subject areas is
further divided into two branches:
English for Academic Purposes (EAP)
and English for Occupational
Purposes (EOP). An example of EOP
for the EST branch is 'English for
Technicians' whereas an example of
EAP for the EST branch is 'English
for Medical Studies'.
Hutchinson and Waters (1987) do
note that there is not a clear-cut
distinction between EAP and EOP: "·
people can work and study
simultaneously; it is also likely that
in many cases the language learnt
for immediate use in a study
environment will be used later when
the student takes up, or returns to,
a job" (p. 16). Perhaps this explains
Carter's rationale for categorizing
EAP and EOP under the same type of
ESP. It appears that Carter is
implying that the end purpose of
both EAP and EOP are one in the
same: employment. However, despite
the end purpose being identical, the
means taken to achieve the end is
very different indeed. I contend that
EAP and EOP are different in terms of
focus on Cummins' (1979) notions of
cognitive academic proficiency versus
basic interpersonal skills. This is
examined in further detail below.
The third and final type of ESP
identified by Carter (1983) is English
with specific topics. Carter notes
that it is only here where emphasis
shifts from purpose to topic. This
type of ESP is uniquely concerned
with anticipated future English
needs of, for example, scientists
requiring English for postgraduate
reading studies, attending
conferences or working in foreign
institutions. However, I argue that
this is not a separate type of ESP.
Rather it is an integral component of
ESP courses or programs which focus
on situational language. This
situational language has been
determined based on the
interpretation of results from needs
analysis of authentic language used
in target workplace settings.
Characteristics of ESP Courses
The characteristics of ESP courses
identified by Carter (1983) are
discussed here. He states that there
are three features common to ESP
courses: a) authentic material, b)
purpose-related orientation, and c)
self-direction.
If we revisit Dudley-Evans' (1997)
claim that ESP should be offered at
an intermediate or advanced level,
use of authentic learning materials
is entirely feasible. Closer
examination of ESP materials will
follow; suffice it to say at this
juncture that use of authentic
content materials, modified or
unmodified in form, are indeed a
feature of ESP, particularly in self-
directed study and research tasks.
For Language Preparation for
Employment in the Health Sciences,
a large component of the student
evaluation was based on an
independent study assignment in
which the learners were required to
investigate and present an area of
interest. The students were
encouraged to conduct research
using a variety of different resources,
including the Internet.
Purpose-related orientation refers to
the simulation of communicative
tasks required of the target setting.
Carter (1983) cites student
simulation of a conference, involving
the preparation of papers, reading,
notetaking, and writing. At
Algonquin College, English for
business courses have involved
students in the design and
presentation of a unique business
venture, including market research,
pamphlets and logo creation. The
students have presented all final
products to invited ESL classes
during a poster presentation
session. For our health science
program, students attended a
seminar on improving your listening
skills. They practiced listening skills,
such as listening with empathy, and
then employed their newly acquired
skills during a fieldtrip to a local
community centre where they were
partnered up with English-speaking
residents.
Finally, self-direction is
characteristic of ESP courses in that
the " ... point of including self-
direction ... is that ESP is concerned
with turning learners into
users" (Carter, 1983, p. 134). In
order for self-direction to occur, the
learners must have a certain degree
of freedom to decide when, what,
and how they will study. Carter
(1983) also adds that there must be
a systematic attempt by teachers to
teach the learners how to learn by
teaching them about learning
strategies. Is it necessary, though, to
teach high-ability learners such as
those enrolled in the health science
program about learning strategies? I
argue that it is not. Rather, what is
essential for these learners is
learning how to access information
in a new culture.
The Meaning of the Word 'Special'
in ESP
One simple clarification will be made
here: special language and
specialized aim are two entirely
different notions. It was Perren
(1974) who noted that confusion
arises over these two notions. If we
revisit Mackay and Mountford's
restricted repertoire, we can better
understand the idea of a special
language. Mackay and Mountford
(1978) state:
The only practical way in which we
can understand the notion of special
language is as a restricted repertoire
of words and expressions selected
from the whole language because
that restricted repertoire covers
every requirement within a well-
defined context, task or vocation (p.
4).
On the other hand, a specialized
aim refers to the purpose for which
learners learn a language, not the
nature of the language they learn
(Mackay & Mountford, 1978).
Consequently, the focus of the word
'special' in ESP ought to be on the
purpose for which learners learn and
not on the specific jargon or
registers they learn.
Key Issues in ESP Curriculum
Design
In this section, key issues in ESP
curriculum design for ESL contexts
are examined. The issues explored
here are a product of my
professional experience developing
the curriculum for Language
Preparation for Employment in the
Health Sciences. This experience has
been supported with a review of the
literature on ESP.
Abilities Required for Successful
Communication in Occupational
Settings
Cummins (1979) theorized a
dichotomy between basic
interpersonal communication skills
(BICS) and cognitive academic
language proficiency (CALP). The
former refers to the language skills
used in the everyday informal
language used with friends, family
and co-workers. The latter refers to a
language proficiency required to
make sense of and use academic
language. Situations in which
individuals use BICS are
characterized by contexts that
provide relatively easy access to
meaning. However, CALP use occurs
in contexts that offer fewer
contextual clues.
After having developed and taught
the curriculum for Language
Preparation for Employment in the
Health Sciences, I have reached the
conclusion that there are three
abilities necessary for successful
communication in a professional
target setting. I have added a third
skill or ability to Cummins' theory in
order to complete the ESP picture.
The first ability required in order to
successfully communicate in an
occupational setting is the ability to
use the particular jargon
characteristic of that specific
occupational context. The second is
the ability to use a more generalized
set of academic skills, such as
conducting research and responding
to memoranda. With the health
science group, this was largely
related to understanding a new
culture. The third is the ability to
use the language of everyday
informal talk to communicate
effectively, regardless of occupational
context. Examples of this include
chatting over coffee with a colleague
or responding to an informal email
message.
The task for the ESP developer is to
ensure that all three of these
abilities are integrated into and
integrated in the curriculum. This is
a difficult task due to the incredible
amount of research required. Close
collaboration between content
experts and the curriculum
developer was not possible during
the development stages for the
health science curriculum. In
retrospect, the experience and
knowledge of health science faculty
would have lessened the workload in
this area tremendously. Fortunately,
there does exist a wealth of
information on academic and general
language skills. The trick involved in
the interweaving process is to
develop a model that best integrates
the restricted repertoire with the
academic and general for the
learners in question.
In the case of Language Preparation
for Employment in the Health
Sciences, there were so many
possible potential future
occupational settings to research
and I had to cope with limited
development time. I simply opted to
identify academic skills that were
transferable to most health science
occupational settings. This required
an inventory of all possible health
science occupations, identification of
the past occupational experiences of
the learners in the pilot program,
and identification of academic
language skills. All of this
information was then cross-
referenced with the general
language objectives for the
identified group of learners.
It is my opinion that because ESP
requires comprehensive needs
analysis and because the learning-
centred curriculum is not static, it is
impossible to expect that the
developer be in a position to identify
the perfect balance of the abilities
noted above for any particular group
of learners. In reality, a large part of
this responsibility is that of the
instructors; it is the instructors who
are in the best position to identify
changing learner needs and who are
in the best position to ensure that
all students receive a balanced diet
of language.
Content Language Acquisition
Versus General Language
Acquisition
When I first received the proposal
for the health science pilot program,
the ratio of content to language
instruction had already been
identified: 2 hours of content lecture
for every 23 hours of language/
content instruction. Given this
starting point, one of the central
questions that needed to be
answered was how much time would
be devoted to vocabulary and
content knowledge acquisition, as
opposed to the time spent
developing general and academic
language skills.
Although a tentative balance was
drafted prior to classroom delivery,
the balance shifted on a daily basis.
In the end, it was determined by
both instructors that more time
need be allotted for pure content
and more time need be created for
team-taught activities. The final
weekly breakdown of 25 hours
consisted of the following:
8 hours of Integrated Language
Learning (ESL instructor)
6 hours of Health Science Lectures
(content instructor)
4 hours of Workplace Communication
(jointly facilitated)
3 hours of Medical terminology
(content instructor)
2 hours of Pathophysiology (content
instructor)
2 hours of Applied Computer Skills
(ESL instructor)
The first thing that is apparent from
this breakdown, is that time devoted
to developing general language and
academic skills far outweighs the
time devoted to the acquisition of
content knowledge. However, it was
recommended that the content
instructor be present for a
considerable more amount of time; it
was observed that there was such an
overlap between content knowledge,
academic proficiency, and general
language that we could better
interweave many of the activities as
a team.
The learners indicated that they
desired more opportunity to interact
with the content instructor, in
addition to attending the old-style
lecture format. Indeed, both
instructors noted that the students
were highly motivated to attend the
content lectures and yet additional
support from the ESL instructor was
required because, in order to meet
the learners' needs, we could not
teach the restricted repertoire in
isolation. What is more, it was
highly unreasonable to assume that
the content instructor would take on
the role of ESL instructor.
Finally, it was observed that the
majority of the students with post-
secondary training in the health
sciences possessed a basic
knowledge of Greco-Latino
terminology. Consequently, we
determined that less time would be
devoted to learning terminology in
order to follow the content lectures.
Most of the students could already
recognize meaning, but not produce
it. It was determined that more time
should be allotted for work on
pronunciation and learning the
spelling of health science
terminology. Moreover, much more
time would be spent on
communication for the workplace; in
this way, they students would be
afforded ample opportunity to
integrate and practice the restricted
repertoire acquired in content
lectures and the everyday language
acquired in the language classes.
Heterogeneous Learner Group
Versus Homogeneous Learner
Group
There are a number of variables
which characterize a heterogeneous
learner group. I argue that
variations in language level, prior
education and work experience can
be accommodated only to a certain
extent. Minimum entrance standards
must be established in the areas of
language level, motivation, and prior
education and experience. Most
importantly, these standards must
be strictly enforced at the time of
placement.
Due to the limited time frame for
the development of the health
science pilot program curriculum
and the fact that the program was
scheduled to begin in the middle of
the academic term, the minimum
general language entrance
requirement was dropped from high
to low intermediate in order to
generate a large enough pool of
suitable candidates. Although no pre
or post-test was to be administered
by evaluation team, I was required
to recruit twice the number of
students to be admitted to the
program: 20 students would be in
the pilot group and 20 would be in
the control group. In the end, 16
students formed each group. The
result was that there were some
genuinely intermediate students
mixed in with a majority of high
intermediate, and a few advanced
students.
Based on observations of a four-week
English for Business course, Yogman
and Kaylani (1996) conclude that
there appears to be a minimum
proficiency level that is required for
students to participate in
predominately content-related
activities. This supports my finding
that those students who were
struggling to catch up with general
language proficiency simply found
the content activities to be
overwhelming.
One student in the health science
program commented that she had to
learn both the language and the
content at the time. This particular
student was at such a disadvantage
because, whereas the other students
were doctors and dentists, she had
no prior education or work
experience in health science.
Another student was an experienced
doctor, but possessed a very low
level of language proficiency. Either
case would have been frustrating for
anyone. One strategy we began to
employ was to have the intermediate
students focus on developing their
listening skills during the content
lecture. Those students without the
background knowledge, who
possessed the language skills, were
to ask for clarification from their
peers or instructors. The advanced
students were encouraged to record
as much detail as possible, carry out
supplemental reading that pertained
to the lecture topics and to assist
their peers whenever possible.
Materials Development
Do ESP textbooks really exist? This is
central question Johns (1990)
addresses. One of the core dilemmas
he presents is that "ESP teachers
find themselves in a situation where
they are expected to produce a
course that exactly matches the
needs of a group of learners, but are
expected to do so with no, or very
limited, preparation time" (Johns,
1990, p. 91).
In the real world, many ESL
instructors/ESP developers are not
provided with ample time for needs
analysis, materials research and
materials development. There are
many texts which claim to meet the
needs of ESP courses. Johns (1990)
comments that no one ESP text can
live up to its name. He suggests that
the only real solution is that a
resource bank of pooled materials be
made available to all ESP instructors
(Johns, 1990). The only difference
between this resource bank and the
one that is available in every
educational setting -- teachers' filing
cabinets -- is that this one is to
include cross-indexed doable,
workable content-based (amongst
other) resources.
It is my experience that this
suggestion is not doable. If teachers
are so pressed for time, will they
have the time to submit and cross-
index resources? Rather, I believe
that there is value in all texts -
some more than others. Familiarizing
oneself with useful instructional
materials is part of growing as a
teacher, regardless of the nature of
purpose for learning. Given that ESP
is an approach and not a subject to
be taught, curricular materials will
unavoidably be pieced together,
some borrowed and others designed
specially. Resources will include
authentic materials, ESL materials,
ESP materials, and teacher-generated
materials.
Note that an excellent point of
departure for novice ESP curriculum
developers is with lists of ESL
publishers which have been made
publicly available on-line. Browsing
publishers' sites takes a few
minutes, review copies can be
requested immediately and copies
can be sent express.
Concluding Remarks
This paper has discussed the origins
of ESP, addressed key notions about
ESP and examined issues in ESP
curriculum design. The content of
the paper was determined by a need
identified based on my professional
experience as an ESL instructor
designing and delivering the
content-based language program -
Language Preparation for
Employment in the Health Sciences.
These issues, where possible, have
been supported by current and
pertinent academic literature. It is
my sincerest hope that these
observations will lend insight into
the challenges facing the ESL
instructor acting as ESP curriculum
developer.
Selected References
Anderson, R., & Ausubel, D. (Eds.).
(1965). Readings in the Psychology
of Cognition. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.
Anthony, L. (1997). ESP: What does
it mean? ON CUE. http://
interserver.miyazaki-med.ac.jp/~cue/
pc/anthony.htm Retreived April 6,
2000, from the World Wide Web.
Betts, G. (1985). Autonomous
Learner Model for the gifted and
talented . Greeley, CO: Autonomous
Learning Publications and
Specialists. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 268
708)
Carver, D. (1983). Some propositions
about ESP. The ESP Journal, 2,
131-137.
Crandall, J. (Ed.). (1987). ESL
through content-area instruction:
Mathematics, science, social studies.
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall
Regents.
Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/
academic language proficiency,
linguistic interdependence, the
optimum age question and some
other matters. Working Papers on
Bilingualism, 19, 121-129.
Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M.
(1998). Developments in ESP: A
multi-disciplinary approach.
Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Echevarria, J., & Graves, A. (1998).
Sheltered content instruction:
Teaching English-language learners
with diverse abilities. Boston: Allyn
and Bacon.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind:
The theory of multiple intelligences.
New York, NY: Basic Books.
Huang, S., & Shanmao, C. (1996).
Self-efficacy of English as a second
language learner: An example of
four learners . Bloomington, IN:
Language Education Department,
School of Education, Indiana
University. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 396
536)
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987).
English for Specific Purposes: A
learning-centered approach.
Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Johns, A., & Dudley-Evans, T. (1991).
English for Specific Purposes:
International in scope, specific in
purpose. TESOL Quarterly, 25,
297-314.
Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1975).
Learning together and alone:
Cooperation, competition and
individualization . Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Johnson, R. (Ed.). (1989). The second
language curriculum. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Jones, G. (1990). ESP textbooks: Do
they really exist? English for Specific
Purposes, 9 , 89-93.
Lomperis, A. (1998). Best practices in
EOP/EPP: Steps in providing a
program. http://my.voyager.net/
azure/programI.html Retreived May
8, 2001, from the World Wide Web.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and
practice in second language
acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.
Mackay, R., & Mountford, A. (Eds.).
(1978). English for Specific
Purposes: A case study approach.
London: Longman.
Mackay, R., & Palmer, J. (Eds.).
(1981). Languages for Specific
Purposes: Program design and
evaluation . London: Newbury House.
McDonough, J. (1984). ESP in
perspective: A practical guide.
London: Collins ELT.
Nunan, D. (1987). The teacher as
curriculum developer: An
investigation of curriculum
processes within the Adult Migrant
Education Program . South Australia:
National Curriculum Resource
Centre.
Nunan, D. (Ed.). (1992).
Collaborative language learning and
teaching . New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Perren, G. (1974). Forward in
Teaching languages to adults for
special purposes. CILT Reports and
Papers, 11, London: CILT.
Rogers, C. (1983). Freedom to learn
for the 80's . Columbus, OH: Charles
Merrill.
Sagliano, M., Stewart, T., & Sagliano,
J. (1998). Professional training to
develop content-based instruction in
higher education. TESL Canada
Journal, 16 , 36-51.
Selinker, L., Tarone, E., & Hanzeli, V.
(Eds.). (1981). English for Academic
and Technical Purposes: Studies in
honor of Louis Trimble. London:
Newbury House.
Strevens, P. (1988). ESP after twenty
years: A re-appraisal. In M. Tickoo
(Ed.), ESP: State of the Art (pp.
1-13). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional
Centre.
Stryker, S., & Leaver, B. (Eds.).
(1997). Content-based instruction in
foreign language education: Models
and methods . Washington, D.C.:
Georgetown University Press.
Taylor, C. (1986). Cultivating
simultaneous student growth in both
multiple creative talents and
knowledge. In J.S. Renzulli (Ed.),
Systems and models for developing
programs for the gifted and
talented (pp. 307-351). Mansfield
Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
VanPatten, B., & Lee, J. (1990).
Second language acquisition -
Foreign language learning . Avon:
Multilingual Matters.
Yogman, J., & Kaylani, C. (1996). ESP
program design for mixed level
students. English for Specific
Purposes, 15, 311-24.
The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. VII,
No. 10, October 2001
http://iteslj.org/
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Gatehouse-
ESP.html