CHAPTER 1

CONCEPT OF ESP
A. PENDAHULUAN 1

1) CPMK 1: Mampu menjelaskan konsep mengenai Concept, History and

Evolution of ESP
2) Chapter 1 berisi materi untuk 1 pertemuan dengan pembahasan dan tugas
mandiri serta kelompok mengenai Definition and Characteristics of ESP
3) Setiap pertemuan dilaksanakan selama 3 sks dengan waktu 50 menit untuk
satu sks. Jadi untuk satu kali pertemuan terdiri dari 3 sks dengan 150 menit
waktu yang tersedia. Rinciannya adalah; 60 menit tatap muka
synchronous/asynchrounous. Kemudian, 40 menit tugas mandiri dan 50
menit tugas kelompok

B. PENYAJIAN MATERI

1) What is ESP?

From the outset, the term ESP was a source of contention with many
arguments as to what exactly was ESP? Even today there is a large amount of on-going
debate as to how to specify what exactly ESP constitutes (Belcher, 2006, Dudley-
Evan & St. John, 1998, Anthony, 1997). Moreover, as general English courses become
increasingly specialized and learner centered with many courses using needs analysis,
it is getting harder to describe what ESP is and what “General English” is.
According to Strevens (1977) “ESP concerns the emergence of a number
of activities, movements and subjects that are carried out predominantly (though)
not exclusively in English across the world)” (p. 57). It looks at the purpose for which
the student needs to learn English, i.e. for occupational or for study purposes. ESP is a
term that refers to teaching or studying English for a particular career (like law,
medicine) or for business in general.
 The fact that learners know specifically why they are learning a language is a
great advantage on both sides of the process. The learners are therefore motivated,
and this enables the teacher to meet learners’ needs and expectations more easily.
Learner and the way of learning (“acquiring language”) are considered to be the
main factors in the whole process. Hutchinson and Waters (1992) emphasize ESP to
be an approach and not a product which means language learning not language use is
highlighted. They draw attention to a learning- centred approach “in which all
decisions as to content and method are based on the learner´s reason for learning” (p.
19).
Coffey (1985) observes that ESP is “a quick and economical use of the English
language to pursue a course of academic study (EAP) or effectiveness in paid
employment (EOP)” (p.79). Lorenzo (2005) reminds us that ESP “concentrates more on
language in context than on teaching grammar and language structures” (p. 1) He also
points out that as ESP is usually delivered to adult students, frequently in a work
related setting (EOP), that motivation to learn is higher than in usual ESL (English as
a Second Language) contexts. Carter (1983) believes that self-direction is important in
the sense that an ESP course is concerned with turning learners into users of the
language.

2) The Relationship between English for Specific Purposes (ESP) and

English Language Teaching (ELT)

Now that you know what ESP is, let us examine ESP as a branch of ELT.
Robinson (1989) describes ESP as a type of English Language Teaching (ELT) and
defines it as: “Goal- oriented language learning” (p. 398). This means a student has
a specific goal that is going to be attained. Coffey (1985) sees ESP as a major part of
communicative language teaching in general. Umera-Okeke (2005, p. 4) adapting
Hutchinson and Waters (1987) ELT Tree traced the relationship between ELT and
ESP. She establishes that the general purpose of language teaching was initially as a
result of learning and communication which was later narrowed to ELT. English
was taught as a Mother Tongue (EMT), a Foreign Language (EFL) or a Second
Language (ESL). It was ESL and EFL as branches of ELT that later gave rise to ESP
and GE. This is as illustrated in The ELT Diagram below.

Fig 1: The ELT Diagram (Source: Umera-Okeke, 2005:4)

The diagram illustrates that ESP is an approach to language teaching. This is a

similar conclusion to that made by Hutchinson and Waters (1987) who state that,
“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). It is not a matter of
teaching specialized varieties of English; not a matter of science words and grammar
for scientists; not different from any other kind of language teaching but concerns
what people do with the language and the range of knowledge and abilities that
enable them to do it (Hutchinson & Waters, 1981). This definition is as against seeing
ESP as a product, that is, there is no particular kind of language or methodology nor
does it consists of a particular type of reading material. It is rather an approach to
language learning based on learner’s need (Why does the learner need to learn a
foreign language?).

From everything said, it can be s e e n that some of the qualities of ESP as

one of the ELT branches include that:

1. ESP has specific needs.

2. ESP has content related materials.
3. ESP is centered on particular language function, skills (listening,
speaking, writing, and reading); English components (grammar,
pronunciation, vocabulary) or activities.
4. ESP is learner-centered.
5. ESP is perceived as relevant by the learners.

3) Characteristics of ESP

We have established the relationship between ESP and ELT. Now you will be
informed about some characteristics of ESP. ESP is seen as an approach by Hutchinson
and Waters (1987). They suggest that ESP does not concern a particular language,
teaching methodology or material. If you want to understand ESP, they suggest that
you find out exactly why a person needs to learn a foreign language. Your need for
learning English can be for study purposes or for work purposes. However, it is the
definition of needs that is the starting point for decisions which determine the
language to be taught.
Strevens (1988) makes a distinction between absolute characteristics and
variable characteristics of ESP. The absolute characteristics are that ESP courses are:

1. designed to meet the specific needs of the learner;

2. related in content to particular disciplines or occupations;
3. centred on language specific to those disciplines or occupations;
4. in contrast to General English.

The variable characteristics are that courses may:

1. be restricted in the skills to be learned;
2. not be taught according to a particular methodology.
 Robinson (1991) also suggests two absolute criteria for defining ESP courses.
The first is that ESP program are normally goal-oriented. The second is that they
derive from a needs analysis. The needs analysis will state as accurately as possible
what the learners will have to do when speaking the language.Two divisions of
the characteristics of ESP are outlined by Dudley-Evans and St. John (1998):
some absolute and some variable to resolve arguments about what ESP is. This
followed on from the earlier work by Strevens (1988). These characteristics include:

Absolute
Characteristics
1. ESP is defined to meet specific needs of the learners.
2. ESP makes use of underlying methodology and activities of the discipline it
serves.
3.ESP is centred on the language appropriate to these activities in terms of
grammar, lexis, register, study skills, discourse and genre.

Variable
Characteristics

1. ESP may be related to or designed for specific disciplines.

2. ESP may use, in specific teaching situations, a different methodology from
that of General English.
3. 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.
4. ESP is generally designed for intermediate or advanced students.
5. Most ESP courses assume some basic knowledge of the language systems (p.4).

This description helps to clarify to a certain degree what an ESP course

constitutes and what it does not constitute. Dudley-Evans and St. John have
removed the absolute characteristics 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 and that it is likely to be used with adult learners
although it could be used with young adults in a secondary school setting. ESP
should be viewed as an “approach” to teaching, or what Dudley-Evans describes as
an “attitude of mind.”
Other characteristics are that ESP courses are generally limited to a certain
time period, and that they are taught to adults in classes that are homogeneous in
terms of the work or study that participants are doing. However, Hutchinson and
Waters (1987, 1992) do not emphasize any concrete limits of students’ level or age;
they emphasize learners’ individual needs and specialist knowledge of using
English for specific purposes. Although there exist several aims and different
purposes why learning English, the way of learning may be the same. They
state: “Though the content of learning may vary there is no reason to suppose that
the processes of learning should be any different for the ESP learner than for the
General English learner” (p.18). They add that ESP methodology “could just as well
have been used in the learning of any kind of English” (p. 18). Perhaps one of
the main distinguishing characteristics is that certain but by no means all ESP
(especially EOP) courses are carried out for a group of workers from one area of
work.
There are a number of other characteristics of ESP that several authors have
put forward. Belcher (2006), states that “ESP assumes that the problems are unique
to specific learners in specific contexts and thus must be carefully delineated and
addressed with tailored to fit instruction” (p. 135). Mohan (1986) adds that ESP
courses focus on preparing learners “for chosen communicative environments” (p.
15).
Learner’s purpose is also stated by Graham and Beardsley (1986) and
learning centeredness (Carter, 1983; Hutchinson & Waters, 1987) as integral parts of
ESP. Thus it could be argued that ESP, from the outset, focused on learner centred
teaching, a situation that was certainly not true of traditional general English
courses. As stated above however, this situation has changed dramatically in recent
years.
 Lorenzo (2005) reminds us that ESP “concentrates more on language in
context than on teaching grammar and language structures” (p. 1). I would agree
with him, but would argue that grammar still plays an important and necessary
part in an ESP course. He also points out that as ESP is usually delivered to adult
students, frequently in a work related setting (EOP), that motivation to learn is
higher than is usual in English as Second Language (ESL) contexts. Carter
(1983) believes that self-direction is important in the sense that an ESP course is
concerned with turning learners into users of the language. Thus ESP played an
integral role in communicative language teaching.
To sum up, there are three features common to ESP: (a) authentic materials,
(b) purpose- related orientation, and (c) self-direction. These features are indeed
useful in attempting to formulate one’s own understanding of ESP. Revisiting
Dudley-Evans' (1997) claim that ESP should be offered at an intermediate or
advanced level, one would conclude that the use of authentic learning materials is
entirely feasible. The use of authentic content materials, modified or unmodified
in form, is indeed a feature of ESP, particularly in self-directed study and research
tasks. Purpose-related orientation, on the other hand, refers to the simulation of
communicative tasks required of the target setting, for example, student simulation
of a conference, involving the preparation of papers, reading, note taking, and
writing. 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. 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. There must also be a
systematic attempt by teachers to teach the learners how to learn by teaching them
about learning strategies (Hutchinson &Waters, 1987; Dudley-Evans, 1987 &1998;
Shohamy, 1995; Douglas, 2000).
4) The Basic Conceptions/Principles of ESP

At this point, you should note that there are five conceptions considered
to be the foundations, essential features or basic principles of ESP. Swale (1990) uses
the term “enduring conceptions” to refer to them. These five conceptions are:
authenticity, research- base, language/text, need and learning/methodology. These
five conceptions originate from both the real world (the “target situation” of the
ESP) and ESP pedagogy. It is therefore crucial to discuss each of them in an
attempt to survey the development and directions of ESP. As a matter of fact, each of
the conceptions will identify a focus-based approach to ESP and serves as a
contribution to the concept of ESP itself.
a) Authenticity
The earliest concept to emerge from the development of ESP was that of
authenticity. The first generation of ESP materials that appeared in the mid-1960s took
skills as their principal means of selection (Close, 1992). The underlying concept is that
ESP teachers would need to establish the skills priorities of students in order to
develop appropriate ESP teaching materials. As Close argues, the conception of
authenticity was central to the approach taken to the reading skill.
As earlier discussed, the main objective of ESP is usually developing
communicative competence. This could only be achieved through an adoption of
authentic materials that serve the needs of learners in different fields such as
aviation, business, technology, etc. Some courses prepare learners for various
academic programs. Others prepare learners for work in the fields such as law,
medicine, engineering, etc. The problem that frequently arises with such ESP courses is
the teachers' dependence on published textbooks available. These textbooks rarely
include authentic materials in their design. A trained teacher should, therefore, resort
to supplementary material that compensate for the lack of authenticity in textbooks.
Skills-based approaches to ESP have enlarged the conception of authenticity in
two principal ways. First, authenticity of text was broadened as to include texts other
than the ones that are in textbooks, and, at the same time, was narrowed in the sense
that in each skill a distinction is made between different types of texts generated by
a given skill. Reading, for example, may be sub-divided into reading reports,
reading technical journals, reading instruction manuals, etc. Secondly, the
conception of authenticity was enlarged to include authenticity of task. In effect, this
meant designing tasks requiring students to process texts as they would in the real
world. In other words, ESP learners were required to use ESP materials which
employed the same skills and strategies as would be required in the target situation
(Morrow, 1980).

b) Research Base

Halliday, McIntosh and Strevens (1964) were the first scholars who point to
the importance of and the need for a research base for ESP set out in one of the earliest
discussions of ESP. This was a call for a programme of research into ESP registers
which was taken up by several early ESP materials writers such as Herbert (1965) or
Ewer and Latorre (1969), who analyzed large corpora of specialist texts in order to
establish the statistical contours of different registers. The principal limitation of this
approach was not its research base but its conception of text as register, restricting the
analysis to the word and sentence levels as register was invariably defined in these
terms. The procedure adopted for the analysis was twofold. The main structural
words and non-structural vocabulary were identified by visual scanning. For the main
sentence patterns, a small representative-sample count was made.

c) Language/Text

In the 1990s, there were a number of ESP projects which were triggered by
concerns over international safety and security. The first of these was SEASPEAK. It
was a practical project in applied linguistics and language of engineering.
According to Strevens and Johnson (1983), SEASPEAK, which was published in
1987-1988, was the establishment, for the first time, of international maritime English.
They explain that other ESP projects were published later as a result of the success of
the first project. These projects included AIRSPEAK (1988) and POLICESPEAK (1994).
Each of these projects involved a substantial research phase with linguists and
technical specialists cooperating. The NEWSPEAK research shared the large-scale base
of the register-analysis approach but the principal advance was that it was now
applied to a more sophisticated, four-level concept of text: purposes of maritime
communication, operational routines, topics of maritime communication, and
discourse procedures. Although register analysis remains small-scale and restricted to
native-speaker encounters, later research demonstrated the gap between ESP materials
designers' intuitions about language and the language actually used in ESP
situations (Williams, 1988; Mason, 1989; Lynch & Anderson, 1991; Jones, 1990).
The reaction against register analysis in the early 1970s concentrated on the
communicative values of discourse rather than the lexical and grammatical
properties of register. The approach was clearly set out by two of its principal
advocates, Allen and Widdowson (1974). They specifically argued that one might
usefully distinguish two kinds of ability which an English course at ESP level should
aim at developing. The first is the ability to recognize how sentences are used in the
performance of acts of communication, or the ability to understand the rhetorical
functioning of language in use. The second is the ability to recognize and
manipulate the formal devices which are used to combine sentences to create
continuous passages of prose. One might say that the first has to do with rhetorical
coherence of discourse, the second with the grammatical cohesion of text.
In practice, however, the discourse-analysis approach tended to concentrate on
how sentences are used in the performance of acts of communication and to generate
materials based on functions. The main shortcoming of the approach was that its
treatment remained fragmentary, identifying the functional units of which discourse
was composed at sentence/utterance level but offering limited guidance on how
functions and sentences/utterances fit together to form text.
As an offspring of discourse analysis, the genre-analysis approach seeks to
see text as a whole rather than as a collection of isolated units. According to Johnson
(1995), this is achieved by seeking to identify the overall pattern of the text through a
series of phases or 'moves'. The major difference between discourse analysis and genre
analysis is that, while discourse analysis identifies the functional components of text,
genre analysis enables the material writer to sequence these functions into a series to
capture the overall structure of such texts. The limitation of genre analysis has been a
disappointing lack of application of research to pedagogy. There are few examples of
teaching materials based on genre-analysis research.

5) Learning Needs

Another basic conception of ESP and one that has been addressed
frequently is learning needs. This should not be a surprise for each and every
specific domain would impose its own needs, and it goes without saying that the
needs required for a specific field and the methodology for serving these needs
on the ground do not work with another field which would defiantly dictate its
own requirements. All language teaching must be designed for the "specific
learning and language use purposes of identified groups of students" (Mackay &
Mountford, 1978, p. 6). Thus, a systematic analysis of these specific learning needs
and language-use purposes (communication needs) is a pre-requisite for making
the content of a language program relevant to the learners' needs.
The definition of purposes is essentially a decision that should lead to a
situation where ESP assumes a valued place in the school/university curriculum,
particularly if the target population (learners who will be taught ESP) are aware of
the ways in which this component of the language teaching program is likely to
help them achieve immediate learning needs and potential professional needs.
Such definition should also yield a more systematic approach, among teachers, to
syllabus design, methodology of teaching and assessment practices. A general
approach that is oriented towards integrating language and the content of students'
disciplines of specialization is likely to produce course content and a methodology
of teaching that emphasize the needs of learners and that provide ample
opportunities to use the language in meaningful situations.
 A question, in the context of needs assessment that is often asked with
respect to ESP, concerns who should be involved in the definition of such needs.
Obviously, the teachers themselves are the most concerned in this process. But, for
the definition of needs to be as reliable as necessary, it is essential that both the
learners and their potential employers are given an opportunity to state their own
views in the matter. In this way, we may talk about "real" perceived needs.
However, the problem that exists in Nigeria is that there is not yet a realization,
neither by institutions nor by learners, of the importance of such a definition and
assessment of needs. This is evident in the fact that such analyses are rare, and, if
conducted, they are not taken seriously by both parties (i.e. institutions and
learners). One reason for this carelessness could be cultural. Compared to the West,
people in Nigeria are not used to articulating what they want; if they ever know
what they really want. The result would be designing syllabuses and
methodologies based on teachers' or employers' intuitions that do not directly
address the real needs of the learners. If I may ask, how many people have ever
interviewed you on your reason(s) for wanting to study English?
If you want to conduct a needs analysis you must first answer the following
crucial question: “Will the students use English at university or in their jobs after
graduation?” If the answer is no, then ESP is not a reasonable option for the
university’s English language program. The university will have to justify its
existence and improve the program through other means. If the answer is yes,
however, then ESP is probably the most intelligent option for the university
curriculum. Other such questions are: What language skills will be required
(reading, writing, listening, speaking)? What are the significant characteristics
of the language in these situations (lexicon, grammar, spoken scripts, written texts,
other characteristics)? What extra linguistic knowledge of academia, specific
disciplines, specific vocations, or specific professions is required for successful
English usage in these areas? You begin with these basic questions so as to survey
what will be needed.
 Needs analysis was firmly established in the mid-1970s as course designers
came to see learners' purposes rather than specialist language as the driving force
behind ESP. Early instruments, notably Munby’s (1978) model, establishes needs by
investigating the target situation for which learners were being prepared.
Munby’s model clearly establishes the place of needs as central to ESP, indeed the
necessary starting point in materials or course design. However, his model has been
widely criticized for two apparently conflicting reasons: (i) its over-fullness in
design, and (ii) what it fails to take into account (that is, socio-political
considerations, logistical considerations, administrative considerations, psycho-
pedagogic, and methodological considerations).
To counter the shortcomings of target-situation needs analysis, various
forms of pedagogic needs have been identified to give more information about the
learner and the educational environment. These forms of needs analysis should be
seen as complementing target-situation needs analysis and each other, rather
than being alternatives. They include deficiency analysis, strategy analysis, and
means analysis.
Deficiency analysis gives us information about what the learners' learning
needs are (i.e., which of their target-situation needs they lack or feel they lack). This
view of needs analysis gains momentum when we consider that the question of
priorities is ignored by standard needs analysis. In discussing learners'
perceptions of their needs, deficiency analysis takes into account lacks and wants,
as well as objective needs of the learners (Allwright, 1982).
Strategy analysis seeks to establish how the learners wish to learn rather
than what they need to learn. By investigating learners' preferred learning styles
and strategies, strategy analysis provides a picture of the learner's conception of
learning. Means analysis, on the other hand, investigates precisely those
considerations that Munby excluded. These relate to the educational environment
in which the ESP course is to take place (Swales, 1989).
 6) Learning/Methodology
As a result of the attention given to strategy analysis, a new generation of
ESP materials was founded. This new generation of materials is based on
conceptions of language or conception of need. The concern was with language
learning rather than language use. It was no longer simply assumed that
describing and exemplifying what people do with language would enable
someone to learn it. A truly valid approach to ESP would be based on an
understanding of the processes of language learning. Hutchinson and Waters
(1987) refer to this approach as the learning-centered approach and stress the
importance of a lively, interesting and relevant teaching/learning style in ESP
materials. In the context of a language program that emphasizes the needs of the
learners, anything but a learner/learning-centered syllabus and methodology is
bound to create contradictions that will negatively affect students' perceptions
of the program. As advocated in the literature on communicative language
teaching, content and teaching-learning procedures must take into account the
interests and concerns of the learners, as well as the socio-economic and cultural
context in which the language program is to be implemented.
A syllabus normally refers to "what is to be learnt with some indication of
the order in which the items should be learnt" and "the interpretations that it is
put to" (Hutchinson & Waters, 1987, p. 81). In this case, the main orientation of
such a syllabus is determined by the needs of the learners as discussed above, with
an indication of how the content may be most effectively used to cater for these
needs. As mentioned earlier, and in conformity with the interdisciplinary
approach advocated for an ESP program, the syllabus will also incorporate
aspects of the students' discipline of study, which will reinforce their motivation
and the usefulness of the language to be learnt.
"Learner-learning centered", "task-based", "activity-based" and "problem-
solving" are all attributes which are generally associated with an effective
communicative-oriented approach. And, as may be deduced from the recent
literature on ESP, this orientation is characteristic of special purpose language
teaching in general and ESP in particular. Such an approach aims, among other
things, at helping learners develop the skills associated with language learning, as
well as skills related to their own discipline of study.
However, in order for an ESP program to be successful, it would not be
sufficient to identify learners’ needs, and create syllabuses and adopt
methodologies that serve these needs; these are not the whole picture. One very
important issue in the context of ESP is program assessment. Assessment involves
an evaluation of the learners' ability to communicate effectively using the target
language, as well as their ability to participate fully in the target discourse
communities which have been initially defined as relevant to their needs. The
formative purpose of such assessment is reflected in the possibility for the
learners to use it as feedback on how they can improve their performance, and for
the teacher on how he or she can adapt his or her teaching to better fit with the
needs of the learners.
Finally, an ESP program that aims to meet the ever-changing needs of the
learners will include an on-going system of evaluation, aiming to provide
information on how the program itself can be improved through the introduction of
changes that are deemed necessary.

7) CONCLUSION

The expansion of demand for English to suit particular needs and the
development of linguistics and educational psychology have given rise to the
growth of ESP. In ESP, Students approach the study of English through a field
that is already known and relevant to them. This means that they are able to use
what they learn in the ESP classroom right away in their work and studies. ESP is
therefore seen as a recent trend in ELT, which started in the 1960s to take care of
English language needs of individuals. Teaching language in general, and English,
in particular, is no longer just a matter of application that serves all needs
through any kind of syllabus and methodology. Rather, it is a regulated application
that deals with each situation or given discipline independent of the other. And
unless language teachers are trained enough to handle such situations and realize
the idiosyncrasies of ESP, fruitful outcomes would never be reached.

LATIHAN
Tugas Mandiri

- Explain at least three definitions explain the term ESP!

- Explain the characteristic of ESP based on your own understanding!
- How can you describe ESP in relation to ELT?
- ESP is an approach, not a product. Explain!

REFERENCES
Anthony, L. (1997). ESP: What does it mean? ON CUE.
http://interserver.miyazaki- med.ac.jp/~cue/pc/anthony.htm Retrieved April
6, 2000, from the World Wide Web
Allen, J. P. B., & Widdowson, H. G. (1974). Teaching the communicative use of
English.
International Review of Applied Linguistics. XII(I).
Allwright, R. L. (1982). Perceiving and pursuing learners’ needs. In M. Geddes, & G.
Coffey, B. (1984). ESP-English for specific purposes. Language teaching, 17(1).
Belcher, D. (2006). English for specific purposes: Teaching to perceived needs and
imagined futures in worlds of work, study and everyday life. TESOL
Quarterly, 40(1), 133-156.
Carter, D. (1983). Some propositions about ESP. The ESP Journal, 2, 131-137.
Close, R. A. (1992). A teachers’ grammar: The central problem of English. Hove:
Language Teaching Publications.
Coffey, B. (1985). ESP: English for specific purposes. In V. Kinsella, (Ed.),
Cambridge Language Surveys 3. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Douglas, D. (2000). Assessing language for specific purposes. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Dudley-Evans, T., (Ed.), (1987). Gender analysis. ELT Journal, Vol.1, p.1.
Dudley-Evans, T. (1998). An Overview of ESP in the 1990s. Paper presented at
The Japan
Conference on English for Specific Purposes, Fukushima.
Dudley-Evans, T., & St. John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes:
A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Ewer, J. R. & Latorre, G. (1969). A course in basic scientific English. London, Longman.
Graham, J. G. & Beardsley, R. S. (1986). English for specific purposes: Content
language, and communication in a pharmacy course model. TESOL Quarterly,
20(2), 227-245.
Halliday, M. A. K., McIntosch, A., & Strevens, P. (1964). The linguistic
science and language teaching. London: Longman.
Herbert , A. J.(1965). The structure of technical English. London: Longman.
Hutchinson, T., Waters, A., (1981) Performance and competence in English for
specific purposes. Applied Linguistics (pp. 56-69). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Hutchinson, T. & Waters, A. (1987 & 1992). English for specific purposes: A
learning- centered approach. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
International Teacher Training Organization. EFL teaching terminology and
glossary.” 17
Nov. 2005. Retrieved on June 28,
2010 from http://www.teflcertificatecourses.com/tefl-
articles/eflteachingterminology.html
Johns, A., & Dudley-Evans, T. (1991). English for specific purposes: international in
scope, specific in purpose. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 297-314.
Johnson, K. (1995). Language teaching and skill learning. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Jones, G. M. (1990). ESP textbooks: Do they really exist? English for Specific
Purposes, 9(1), 89-93.
Lorenzo, F. (2005). Teaching English for specific purposes. UsingEnglish.com.
Retrieved March 2, 2009 from
http://www.usingenglish.com/teachers/articles/teaching-english- forspecific-
purposes-esp.html
Lynch, T., & Anderson, B. (1991). Study speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. Mackay, R., & Mountford, A. (Eds.). (1978). English for specific
purposes. London: Longman.
Mason, D. (1989). An examination of authentic dialogues for use in the ESP
classroom. English for Specific Purposes, 8(1), 85-92
Mohan, B. A. (1986). Language and content. Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley.
Morrow, K. (1980). Skills for reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Munby, J. (1978). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. Robinson, P. (1980). ESP: The current position. Oxford, Pergamon.
Robinson, Pauline C, & Hywel Coleman (1989). Working with
Language: A Multidisciplinary Consideration of Language Use in Work
 Contexts. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Accessed May 9, 2010 from
http://books.google.com/books?lr=&q=Hywel+Coleman&btnG=Search+Bo
oks&as_b rr=0
Robinson, P., (1991). ESP today: a practitioner's guide. Herfordshire: Prentice Hall.
Shohamy, E. (1995). Performance assessment in language testing. Annual
Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 188-211.
Strevens, P. (1977). Special purpose language learning: A perspective. Language
Teaching and Linguistic Abstracts, 10, 145-163.
Strevens, P. (1988). ESP after twenty years: a re-appraisal. In M. Tickoo (Ed.), ESP:
State of the Art. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
Strevens, P., & Johnson, E. (1983). SEASPEAK: A project in applied linguistics,
language engineering, and eventually ESP for sailors. English for Specific
Purposes, 2(2), 123-
29.
Swales, (1985). Episodes in ESP. Oxford: Pergamon Institute of English.Swales, J. M.
(1989). Service English program design and opportunity cost. In Johnson (Ed.),
The second language curriculum (pp. 79-90).
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Umera-Okeke, N. P. (2005). An introduction to English for Specific Purposes (ESP).
Awka, Nigeria: Fab Educational Books.
Waters, M., & Waters, A. (1992). Study skills and study competence: Getting the
priorities right. ELT Journal, 46(3), 264-73.
Williams, M. (1988). Language taught for meetings and language used in
meetings: Is there anything in common? Applied Linguistics, 9(1), 45-58.