This is a sample from a similar assessment. It is not the same assessment.

It is not a
model, you should not copy the structure or the contents. It will help you to
understand the standard of a Distinction level.

Critical Review

Needs analysis (NA) emerged in the 1960’s as a result of the systematic approach
to developing curriculum in English for specific purposes (ESP) teaching programs
(Richards, 2001). Poorbehzadi and Songhori (2016) posit that in any language-
learning program the analysis of the learners’ needs is critical for deciding content,
resources, teaching and learning processes, and assessments. Similarly, Richards
(2001) suggests that a comprehensive educational program must be based on an
analysis of its learners’ needs.

Since its introduction, linguists and researchers have struggled to agree on a

definition of NA (Kahng, 2006). In part, this conflict is caused by the diversity and
difficulty of defining language needs (Poorbehzadi & Songhori, 2016). NA refers to
the process involved in collecting information that will be analysed and applied to the
development of a curriculum that will satisfy the learning needs of an individual or
group of learners (Li, 2014). In 1978 Munby created his sociolinguistic model, which
is considered the original NA model (Poorbehzadi & Songhori, 2016). Munby’s
model seeks to identify the learner’s communicative needs in their target situation
and then incorporate those identified needs into the course curriculum (Roghaye &
Nasser, 2014). Criticisms of Munby’s model include, that it collects information
about the learner without input from the learner, and that it is impractical, inflexible
and unreasonably complex (West, 1994; Hutchinson & Waters, 1987). Despite its
impracticalities and difficulties, Munby’s works is still considered to be
comprehensible, and for this reasons most alternative NA approaches contain
elements of Munby’s model.

Later, Berwick (1989) and Brindley (1989) pioneered their learner-centred

approaches for identifying language learners’ needs. They theorised that learners’
needs can be viewed from different angles and can be identified in three ways
(Roghaye & Nasser, 2014). Firstly, needs can be either perceived or felt. Perceived
needs being needs identified by an expert, while felt needs are needs identified by
the learner (Berwick, 1989). Secondly, needs can be either product- or process-
orientated interpretations. Product-oriented interpretations focus on identifying the
learners’ communicative needs in their target situation, and then incorporating those
identified needs into the course curriculum (Brindley, 1989). While process-oriented
interpretations focus on how the learners respond to their current learning situation
(Roghaye & Nasser, 2014). NA from a process-oriented interpretation identifies and
analyses a significantly larger set of variables, including the learners’ background;
10422523

cognitive psychological factors, including learning styles and strategies; social-

emotional psychological factors, including motivations, wants, expectations,
personality and attitudes; and sociocultural factors (Kahng, 2006; Brindley, 1989).
Thirdly, needs can be classified as either objective or subjective. Objective needs
are derived from factual information concerning learners, including their current
language abilities and use of language in real life (Brindley, 1989). Subjective needs,
however, are derived from learners in the learning situation, including the learners’
expectations and reasons for attending the language-learning program (Brindley,
1989). A criticism of the learner-centred approach is that the title suggests the
learning is entirely determined by the learner, and is therefore not a truly learner-
centred approach (Hutchinson & Waters, 1987).

In recent years the task-based approach to NA has gained popularity with its detailed
inquiry into the types of tasks learners need to be able to perform and the language
linked to those tasks (Long, 2005). Task-based NA goes further than simply
identifying the types of tasks the learners may need. Task-based NA considers, the
content and objectives of tasks; the steps generally required to perform tasks; the
cognitive and communicative process required to perform tasks; and the language
requirements to achieve tasks (Malicka, Guerrero & Norris, 2017). Tasks under this
approach are focused, with set procedures that call on a range of cognitive and
communicative processes, and a clear end product (Long, 2005). Information that is
collected and analysed using a task-based NA then informs the task-based
language-learning program. Similar to all NA models, the difficulty remains as to how
the information derived from the NA should be applied to designing the content,
resources, teaching and learning processes, and assessments (Malicka, Guerrero &
Norris, 2017).

Ultimately there is no definitive NA approach or model that will successful identify

and analyse all English as an additional language (EAL) learners’ needs. Different
NA approaches and models meet the different needs of learners.

Justification of Design

My NA combines a variety of best practices from the various complimentary NA

approaches. In particular, my NA was influenced by elements of Berwick and
Brindley’s learner-centred approaches and Long’s task-based approach to NA. I
designed my NA to collect information from a range of sources using a variety of
methods, including a structured and unstructured interview; self-ratings; a short
teacher interview; an impromptu writing activity; an observed impromptu speaking

10422523

and reading activity; and samples of recent EAL classwork (see Appendix A). My
intention in collecting a range of information, from a variety of sources and using a
variety of methods, was to triangulate my sources and methods. By triangulating my
sources I sought to produce more detailed and accurate results about my learner’s
needs, which I could then use to support my recommendations that satisfy those
needs (Serafini, Lake & Long, 2015; Brindley, 1989; Richards, 2001).

I designed my NA to focus primarily on felt needs, process-oriented interpretations

and subjective needs. Adopting best practice, I commenced my interview with a
range of open questions that were designed to make the learner, James, feel
comfortable, including questions about his life in Australia and his hobbies (Serafini,
Lake & Long, 2015). My subsequent open questions were designed to obtain
information about James’ background, including his language background, his
motivations, attitudes and personality. The bulk of my questions were then a mixture
of open and closed questions intended to obtain information about James’ target EAL
situation; current EAL abilities; learning styles and strategies; strengths and
weaknesses; learning priorities; and expectations (Kahng, 2006; Brindley, 1989). In
obtaining information about James’ reading, writing, speaking and listening skills I
attempted to use language that was appropriate to James’s level and age, and to
include resources that were appropriate and engaging.

Learner Profile and Needs

Background

James is currently studying five year twelve Australia Tertiary Admission Rank
subjects including Accounting, Economics, Maths, EAL and Chinese as a first
language (CFL). James’ favourite subject is Accounting and his least favourite is
CFL. James’ country of origin is Hong Kong, which is a Special Administrative
Region of the People’s Republic of China. He therefore identifies Cantonese as his
first language, not Mandarin which is the language of CFL. James began learning
English when he was ten years old through English language movies with Chinese
subtitles. Six years ago James started studying English in Hong Kong. James
moved to Australia in 2016 to pursue an English education. When he first arrived in
Australia James spent six months at an English language school before commencing
his studies at Mount Lawley Senior High School in January 2017. James can speak
three languages, Cantonese, English and Mandarin; and can write in Chinese and
English. James considers himself to be a happy and positive person, and according

10422523

to his EAL teacher, James is a pleasant and accomplished student. James appears
to be quietly confident and very modest about his English speaking abilities.

Motivation and learning preferences

James is motivated to learn English by his aspiration to one-day work for his father’s
business. James’ father owns a bike bag manufacturing business that exports its
products internationally. James believes that his English language skills will be
beneficial to his father and his business. James is also motivated by his desire to go
to university in Australia to study Accounting. These reasons, and James’ attitude
generally, suggest he is intrinsically motivated to improve his English language skills.
James prefers to learn English through movies, which can be used as authentic
materials to assist students in acquiring language. James’ second preference for
learning English is through talking with his EAL friends.

Alignment to CERF Levels

Using the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) levels
I consider James’ overall writing production to be aligned at a B2 level. James is
able to successfully express information and views in his writing, and understand the
views of others. During our interview James was asked to write an impromptu
professional letter to a fictional client of his father’s manufacturing business. In
reviewing the letter I have identified that James has some issues with genre,
grammar, verb tenses, punctuation and vocabulary that need further development.
However, overall the letter conveyed a clear message and contained some
descriptive, informative and persuasive devices. James’ writing skills, vocabulary
range and coherence were identified to be a B2 level, and his grammatical accuracy
and orthographical control at a B1 level. James’ overall listening comprehension, as
assessed during the two interviews, aligns at a C1 level. James understands well
enough to follow extended speech on abstract and complex topics beyond his own
field, and rarely needs to confirm details.

During the second interview, James read aloud a short extract of a newspaper article
that was selected for him based on his identified hobbies. James was able to read
this article with a large degree of independence, although he had a few difficulties
with low frequency idioms and names. A review of James’ work from his EAL
lessons also indicates that he is capable of reading and understanding a large array
of written materials, and has a broad active reading vocabulary. James is generally
able to identify the key information and content from written materials. In relation to
James’ reading compression he is aligned at a B2 level. My NA indicates James’

10422523

speaking competency is likely at a B2 level. James interacted during the two

interviews with a degree of fluency and spontaneity that made interacting with him
mostly easy and unstrained. James was able to clearly express the significance of
events and experiences, and provide examples in support of his positions.

Recommendations

My NA has identified that James needs to further develop his reading and writing
skills in his EAL lessons. In particular, his grammar and vocabulary which the NA
has identified as areas for improvement. I would start by getting James to read a
larger variety of genres; this should increase his vocabulary and help him to identify
good grammar habits. James had never drafted a formal letter before, which is
something he will likely do for his father’s business in the future. By reading a
number of formal letters, emails and documents James should develop a deeper
understanding of the writing structures and language features required to produce
formal correspondence. Similarly, by reading other genres, James should develop
an understanding of the different disciplines of writing. Following the expansion of
James’ reading I would discuss with James what he identified as the common
characteristics and text structure of formal documents. He would then authentically
practice these techniques. For example, drafting a cover letter to apply for university
and future job applications. For self-learning James needs to be afforded an
opportunity to plan and redraft his work, obtain and implement peer feedback, and
revise his work. I would then use correction codes to identify common issues or
issues that affect the meaningfulness of the text. As James repeats this process I
would then focus on the morphosyntaxical issues and cohesiveness and coherence
within and between paragraphs. James would also benefit from some lessons on
persuasive devices such as modality words and emotive words.

Reflection

It is well established among academics of language teaching programs that NA is a

prerequisite to the design of any language-learning program (Richterich & Chancerel,
1987; Brindley, 1989; Richards, 2001). Consequently, it is essential I am capable of
effectively performing my own NA. During my review of the NA literature I often
found myself confused and overwhelmed by the plethora of models, approaches,
definitions and philosophies. However, I believe my persistence at working through a
small portion of the literature will greatly benefit my future teaching, whether in an
EAL classroom or a humanities and social sciences classroom. I am cognisant that
my understanding of the in-depth details and nuances of the various NA approaches

10422523

is still infantile and needs nurturing. In my future practice as a teacher I intend to trial
a combination of the learner-centred approach (Berwick, 1989; Brindley, 1989) and
the task-based approach (Long, 2005) to NA. While theoretically I feel comfortable
with the NA approaches, practically I still feel uncertain in my ability to correctly
identify where a learner is placed on the EAL/D Learning Progression. I suspect I will
not feel comfortable with this process until I have more exposure to profiling the
needs of learners and aligning these with the EAL/D Learning Progression.

2000 (excluding citations)

10422523

REFERENCE LIST
Berwick, R. (1989). Needs assessment in language programming: From theory to
practice. In Johnson, R. K. (Ed), The second language curriculum (pp.48-62).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brindley, G. (1989). The role of needs analysis in adult ESL programme design. In
Johnson, R. K. (Ed), The second language curriculum (pp. 63-78). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Brown, J.D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to

program development. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.

Hutchinson, T. & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-

centered approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kahng, J. (2006). Needs analysis of 6th-9th graders at an English writing Camp:

English Writing Proficiency and Needs on English Writing. English Teaching, 61(3),
59-82.

Li, J. (2014). Needs analysis: An effective way in business English curriculum design.
Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(9), 1869-1874.

Long, M. H. (2005a). Methodological issues in learner needs analysis. In M. H. Long

(Ed.), Second language needs analysis (pp.19-76). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Malicka, A., Gilabert Guerrero, R. & Norris, J. (2017). From needs analysis to task
design: Insights from an English for specific purposes context. Language Teaching
Research, (201707). doi:10.1177/1362168817714278

Poorbehzadi, A., & Songhori, M. (2016). Analysis of language needs of English

literature majors: A non-native context study. Journal of Language Teaching and
Research, 7(6), 1210-1210.

Richards, J. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Richterich, R. and Chancerel, J.J. (1987). Identifying the needs of adults learning
foreign language. Oxford: Prentice Hall.

Roghaye, K. & Nasser, R. (2014). A needs analysis approach to the evaluation of

Iranian third-Grade high school English textbook. Sage Open, 4(3), 27-46.

Serafini, E. J., Lake, J. B., & Long, M. H. (2015). Needs analysis for specialized
learner populations: Essential methodological improvements. English for Specific
Purposes, 40, 11-26.

West R. (1994). Needs analysis in language teaching. Language Teaching, 27(1), 1-

19.