Luận văn thạc sĩ VNU ULIS using competence based approach in the development of a writing course for engineers at vietnam atomic energy institute

Rationale

In the industrialized world, a great number of graduates, engineers and businessmen, who are expecting to gain more advanced knowledge and open access to the world, notably need English competences Among English competences that working learners seek training, achievement of English writing proficiency assumes an enormous importance in fitting the heavy literacy demands of their employers Not only is it hard to imagine modern workplaces without English essays, commercial emails, reports, case studies and journal articles but writing is also a key feature for writers to demonstrate their understanding of subjects and their experiences

Nevertheless, these kinds of experiences are extremely challenging to students and may be especially frightening to those writing in a second language This is not only because different languages seem to have different ways of organizing ideas and structuring arguments but because students‟ prior writing experiences in the school, college or university do not prepare them for the literacy expectations of their professional workplace That is one of reasons why for the last decades, the matter of educational contents corresponding to future job demands has become an essential issue in educational reforms all over the world

Due to widespread concern about the quality of students‟ learning process, in particular, fluency in the conventions of writing in English at work, Competence – Based Approach originated in response to increase calls for learning outcomes upon course completion The approach focuses on assisting students towards writing competence in particular target genres so as to be more responsive to professions‟ needs; in other words, familarizing them with writing English for Occupational Purposes (EOP) (Auerbach, 1986)

As a result, writing course designers are supposed not simply to develop the content of teaching writing generally but to recognise particular kinds of writing which are valued and expected in one certain professional context In details, EOP practitioners need to make considerable use of the findings such as the literacy demands to determine what is to be learned and to organise instruction around the genres that learners need and the social contexts in which they will operate

In the social context of Vietnam, one recent upsurge attempts in acquiring English competence involves in human resource of nuclear field, when the network of nuclear programs has spread in various regions of the world and Vietnam is considering the introduction of Nuclear Power as part of its national energy strategy

Related to this strategy, Vietnam Atomic Energy Institute (VAEI), Ministry of Science and Technology is national research institute whose responsibility is to train and develop man power in the field of atomic energy – the field encompassing a plenty of international scientific studies and technological materials Hence, building and maintaining the availability of research workforce, who are competent in written English, has been one of the most critical challenges of VAEI

Meanwhile, the same issue as above-mentioned, “the abyss existing between the goals of the academic and the professional world” inevitably exists at VAEI (Dominguez and Rokowski, 2002) In particular, because of a discrepancy between the university English language curriculum and requirements for jobs, almost all graduates working here have deficiency of written English competences As a consequence, much concern of both themselves and their employers has been given to the adequate outcomes of their written works in English to effectively serve the occupational demands in a research institute

Strong needs of working learners, high demands of occupation and great expectation of leaders reveal there is a call for study of designing an EOP writing course at VAEI This course with workplace orientation should be developed using competence-based approach so that the learning outcomes can meet future staffing requirements of the nuclear organization In this case, based on understanding of VAEI context, learners‟ needs and employers‟ requirements analysis, course designers are to explore the target genres, determine the specificity of writing competences covered within the course, and then build up course guides and schedules Notably, there have been no attempts in investigating this issue before It is, hence, of principal importance to research the matter intensively at this Institute

The aforementioned reasons have given rise to the development a writing course in this study, in which competence-based approach is selected Hopefully, the researcher would make the contribution to complete an in-depth investigation of needed competence in English written communication for engineers to shed some light in the area where resources are limited.

Aims of study

As discussed earlier, the present study aims to develop an English writing course regarding to professional preparation for VAEI staff The course is similar to a workplace-oriented language program since its main goal is to enable the learners to use written English at work

The first objective of the research is to interview human resources managers and conduct a survey among engineers to identify and analyze their English writing needs and expectation The second, the paper aims to design the course guide, including the description, learning objectives, contents, activities, materials, assessment and testing Accordingly, the course would be developed based on the needs analysis Finally, experts were invited to validate and evaluate the course in order that necessary adjustments can be done according to their suggestions.

Research questions

In order to achieve the above-mentioned aims, the following research questions are raised in the study:

1 What are the components of a writing course using competence-based approach for engineers at VAEI?

2 What are the teaching experts‟ opinions of the developed need-based competence-based writing course?

Scope of study

The development of a EOP writing course using competence - based approach is such a broad topic that it can not be wholly discussed within the framework of this paper Thus, this minor thesis is restricted in touching upon the theory and application of Competence – Based Approach in English Language Teaching, particularly in a workplace – oriented writing course, the theory and realization of English writing competences in Literature Review Then it attempts to investigate the foremost needs of targeted learners group and leaders‟ typical requirements for their staff‟s English writing competences VAEI has 09 subsidiaries across the country but the survey of the study was merely conducted among the participants currently working in Hanoi due to the limited time Also, the syllabus was designed with the most important learning activities, so that the framework can be flexibly used and adapted by the Institute later.

Methods of study

This study employed qualitative and quantitative research methods in order to have a more detailed and comprehensive picture about what is investigated To take the first place, an occupational needs analysis was conducted Due to time and resources limitation, the first step was to utilize semi-structured interviews with 03 managers in nuclear field Then a survey questionaire was delivered to 50 engineers at VAEI The results summarized and analyzed in quantitative statistics are the basis for the first draft of course design

Qualitative research method was further conducted by interviewing 03 experienced English teaching experts who are all specialists in the course development Then the researcher analyzed the experts' opinion about the quality of the developed course, their recommendations for adaptation and adjustment under the light of Competence – Based Approach.

Design of study

This study is composed of three following parts:

Part A: Introduction presents the background, aims, research questions, methods, scope, and the design of the study

Part B: Literature Review is organized around two chapters as follows, which conceptualize the framework of the study through the discussion of issues and ideas on theories of developing a writing course using competence-based approach

Chapter 1 – An overview of the Competence-Based Approach Chapter 2 – Theoretical Issues on Writing Course

Part C: Methodology presents the context, the methodology used in this study including the context, the subject, the data collection instruments, data collection procedure, and data analysis

Part D: Findings and Discussions consists of a comprehensive analysis of the data and a discussion on the findings of this study

Part E: Conclusion offers a summary of the findings, recommendations, limitations, and future directions for further study.

An Overview of the Competence-Based Approach

Definition of Competence and Competency

The aim of CBA is to make students more competent through the acquisition of competencies and the further development of the newly acquired or already held competencies (Kouwenhoven, 2003) Therefore, “competence” and “competency” are often considered as important concepts in this approach Based on various definitions and dimensions, these two concepts can be clarified in the literature

Kouwenhaven (2003) defines this term as ''the capacity to accomplish „up to standard‟ the key occupational tasks that characterize a profession'' In like manner, Field and Drysdale (1991) refers to competence as output – the ability to perform in work roles or jobs at a desired level or to a certain standard in employment On the other hand, Kirchner et al (1997) claimed competence is the possession and use of certain attributes such as knowledges, skills and attitudes or competence as input

Accordingly, there is an unskeptical difference from one view to another Some views see it as a a broad and general concept which is doing with occupational tasks; however, others consider it as a narrow concept which focuses on the routine work activity In spite of the varied definitions, all of them emphasize the fact that competence is both a physical and an intellectual ability to reach satisfactory or superior performance in key occupational tasks through repeated experiences

Regarding competency, there is the shortage of definition in an integrated way, leading to confusion between terms such as competence, competency, competencies, and competences For example, the New Oxford Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary

(2005) defines competence as “the ability to do something well‟‟ (p 294) Oxford further states that competence and competency are synonymous as competences and competencies This view is also shared by Burke (1989), who said that these terms are often used interchangeably

Attempts by researchers, such as Kouwenhoven (2003), a comprehensive definition of competency can be further clarified in a model from which, competency is seen as “the ability to process various inputs in an intentional way” In other words, Kouwenhoven, from his part, coined the term as the capability to choose and apply an integrated combination of knowledge, skills and attitudes with the intention to realise a specific task in a certain context From this definition, it can be inferred that competency consists of a set of components which are skills, abilities, and knowledge and the competencies as a collection of competency By the same token,

Blakemore (2008) described competency as the result from breaking down a job or role into a particular and observable skills that are needed to do it well All these definitions enable us to have a clear idea about the concept 'competency' which involves being good at doing something particular in specific conditions.

Approaches in course designing

The approaches in course designing, which have been characterized by the pedagogical tendencies, have been profuse and varied More and more different trends have been evolved and formulated mainly in terms of diverse teaching methods, each of which has attempted to find more effective and efficient ways of teaching and learning Hence, the aim of this part is precisely to review such merits and shortcomings of recent approaches to general course designing This effort will help to shed the light into the core of each selected approach, then determine which aspects of CBA can be considered to outweigh others when facing workplace settings or less academic situations in this “post-communicative era” (Molina et al., 2005)

According to Reilly (1988), the skill-based approach (SBA) drew its theoretical roots from behavioral psychology and structural linguistics One of its principles is

“the whole is equal to the sum of all its parts” In accordance with this, advocates view the course content following SBA involves a collection of particular and seperated skills that may play a role in bridging skill gaps Each skill is divided into subskills, which are gradually taught in a predetermined sequence through direct explanation, modeling and repetition Within it, specific subject matter teaching is carried out through the focus on a concrete academic skill area The mastery of these skills are constantly measured using discrete – point tests before learning a new one

Thus, it is claimed that this approach can not only be easily implemented but enable the learners to acquire skills easier and satisfy their needs to some extent

Nonetheless, Anderson (1984) warns against the course design in which isolated skills are taught due to the fact that the brains can not store bits of information for a long time Additionally, the passive role of students and narrow skill – based instructions are said to lead to underdevelopment of independent learning skills and competences

The second noteworthy approach which is linked with the previously examined model according to which it can be organised is content-based instruction (CBI) It has been widely used in a variety of different settings such as ESP, EOP since the 1980s with the integration of targeted knowledge instruction and instruction in the content areas The focus is thus on the substance or meaning of the content that is being taught Its advocates claim that it leads to more successful program outcomes than alternative language teaching approaches Critics say that most language teachers have been trained to teach language as a skill rather than a content subject For the student, they may feel confused, overwhelmed, or even frustrated They may also have limited time to achieve an adequate academic level Also, assessment is made more difficult, as both subject matter and language skills need to be taken into account In spite of these possible problems, all in all, CBI is currently considered “one of the most promising present and future trends in language teaching and learning”

(Fernández and Sánchez, 2001, p.129) As Richards and Rodgers (2001, p 220) put it,

“we can expect to see CBI continue as one of the leading curricular approaches in language teaching”

Within the broader model, CBI is advocated by designing courses through theme-based approach (TBA) In ELT, it differs from traditional language instruction in that the language structures/items to be covered in a syllabus are determined by the theme or topic For learners, TBA teaches language use; creates a low anxiety environment for using the language; provides a language-rich classroom environment by focusing on many aspects of a particular topic; offers opportunities for students to make connections between what they know and what they are learning; and finally, presents a variety of content-related activities through which learning can be accomplished (Enright, 1988) In line with this, the theme or topic runs through everything that happens in the classroom and acts as a connecting thread for pupils and teachers; hence, effective theme-based instruction is extremely demanding for course designers in both planning and in implementation Knowledge of a wide repertoire of activity types and resources is needed to plan for learners of all abilities to be stretched and learning all the time (Bahtiar, 2012) In short, according to TBA, there is a real potential for effective language learning take place, because the pupils and teachers open up the language classroom by bringing in the world outside and linking into children‟s real interests and enthusiasms

The next-to–last instructional approach which is spawned by Comunicative Approach is the Functional-Notional approach (FNA) White (1988, p 75) explains its main focus is on the concepts such as “time, space, movement, cause and effect” and

“the intentional or purposive use of language” that learners need to communicate about However, it is argued by Widdowson (1979) that FNA provides limited communication that could be achieved only in certain settings; consequently, learners are incapable of interacting in different situations as they do not know how to use the language From my perspective it is an effective syllabus that could make a strong contribution to learners communication ability On the contrary, it seems that it is not always feasible to utilise it in designing courses because of the varities in institutions, societies, cultures, teachers and learners Also, although teaching situation is suitable it may be difficult to organise a fruitful content for a FNA syllabus as learner needs vary To sum up, the syllabus under FNA could be seen as an ideal way of teaching purposeful communication as long as all suitable circumstances are implemented

It is high time to explore the last approach, competence-based approach (CBA) which has gained growing interest from course developers The term “backward design” has been used to describe this approach in which the starting point is a specification of learning outputs and to use these as the basis for developing instructional processes and input (Richard, 2010)

1.2.3.1 The application and features of CBA in course designing

Many researchers shared the common thought that CBA focuses on the outcome and competences acquired rather than on inputs to learning in the development of training programs (Richards and Rodgers, 2001) Thereupon, the competences that should be developed by the end of the education programme is the criterion for arranging the course More pariticularly, competences that are needed by a competent professional are supposed to determine the underlying attributes in terms of knowledges and skills included in designed courses using competence-based approach

In this sense, the competences or a set of competences must be clearly defined, measurable, and related to the knowledge or skills needed for future endeavors, such as additional education or employment Also, according to Kouwenhoven (2003), knowledges and skills determined by competences are “domain specific” For each domain, a set of subdomains elaborate the specific competences that a student must demonstrate

One more essential feature is CBA addresses what learners are expected to do with what they learn By all means, CBA is learner-centered and the individual worker is central Based on his “competence status” or already acquired competences, the competences are defined that still have to be acquired and developed Another key point of a learner – centered approach in CBA is continuous feedback on the formation and development of their competences and the use of appropriately designed materials with competence (Chinh, 2012)

That is to say, the course arrangement and how to convey knowledge in CBA support the development of competences Moreover, the acquisition of knowledge takes place in the context of professional application Thus, the trend to competency – based development became a policy strategy in many countries during the 1990s as they strove to restructure their vocational education systems, including Australia, the

US, the UK and many European countries Biemans et al (2004) suggested that the basis of this popularity lies in the belief that competence course design will help bridge the gap between education and the labour market, facilitating the transition from school to work This preparation for work is also seen as having the benefit of fostering learning to learn skills that will make employees and citizens more flexible and change – responsive (Lans et al 2004; van der Klink and Boon 2002)

As a conclusion, the present society requires professionals to be able to face condidently and expertly dynamics, knowledge intensity and new situations Hence, learning in a professional context become more important and general academic course design is becoming more professional oriented In this perspective, CBA could be an appropriate choice This requires fundamental changes in course design, including course designer’s recognition about working learners and industry needs, the course context, the roles of students and teachers

1.2.3.2 The application of CBA in English Language Teaching (ELT)

This final noteworthy approach has of late entered the language teaching panorama Wong (2008) stated that CBA emerged in the 1970s in the US At that time, teaching English as a second or foreign language became an important matter because of the urgent need for practical English for people in many parts of the world rather than academic English language acquired in school All the circumstances led to the widely adopted applications of the CBA principles into adult English as Second Language (ESL) programs called Competence- Based Language Teaching (CBLT) (Auerbach, 1986)

Theoretical Issues on Writing Course

Nature of writing

Writing as one of the four major language skills plays a vital role in the teaching and learning process because of the several advantages it provides Like the other skills, it may be considered as a skill that can help learners to achieve proficiency in the foreign language Bashyal (2009) claimed in his paper that writing uses visual symbols (or graphic symbols) to represent the sounds used in speaking or to express what the author intends to tell He added it is a productive skill which involves better organisation of meaning and also more accuracy of form than speaking Likewise,

Dornan & Dawe (2005, p 1) defined ''writing is a concentrated form of thinking'' This means that the writer requires a full concentration during his writing in order to produce a readable and meaningful text

From these definitions, it can be seen that writing effectively is a tough task that even many native speakers of English never totally master Thus, for non-native learners, the ability to express their ideas in written form in a second language and to do so with reasonable accuracy and coherence is “no mean achievement” (Celce-Murcia & McMcintosh, 1979).

English writing competence in theory and in reality

Because of the hard nature of writing, language scholars around the world have dedicated great efforts to describe and categorise its relevant competences Four basically underpinned English writing competences defined by Hymes (1979) and Canale & Swain (1980) is “grammatical competence”, “socio-linguistic competence‟;

“discourse competence‟ and “strategic competence” The first one refers to the knowledge of a finite system of rules that enables an ideal language user in a homogenous speech community to generate and understand an infinite variety of sentences (Fatemi, 2008) He said writing and grammar are “inextricably intertwined” owing to good writing derives its excellence from faultless grammar

Secondly, Bashyal (2009) claimed a good piece of writing is not only grammatically accurate but logical and correct in word choice, spelling and punctuation A written text must also maintain cohesion and coherence by providing good reasons and evidences for opinions to clarify or to persuade the readers There is quite often no physical presence of the readers – but only an assumed audience The readers cannot ask questions so the writer must anticipate possible questions and explain them (Ur, 2008, pp 160-161) What is more, having the awareness of the social rules of a language, the formality, directness, politeness, non verbal behaviors and cultural references is included in this competence, namely “socio-linguistic”

Equally important, to be able to write in a second language (L2) effectively, writers need to learn its orthography, morphology, lexicon, syntax, as well as the discourse and rhetorical conventions In other words, “discource competence” must be taken into account For instance, among the competencies that learners need to attain to achieve proficiency in L2 writing are the ability to produce lengthy texts that have appropriate metadiscourse features such as exemplifiers, connectives, hedges and varied and sophisticated vocabulary and syntactic structures (Buckwalter & Lo, 2002;

Grant & Ginther, 2000), to employ different patterns of overall text organization, for example, description, narration, argument, and to incorporate others‟ ideas and texts in their own writing effectively (Cumming, 2001)

Last but not least, Cumming (2001) sees learning L2 writing as the acquisition of successful writing strategies or attainment of “strategic competence” From this perspective, learning L2 writing is seen as the acquisition of both macro strategies such as planning, drafting and revising, and micro strategies such as attending to content and form concurrently and automatic searches for words and syntax It should be noted here that knowledge of L2 linguistic and discourse aspects, the type of knowledge that tends to be above emphasized, affects these processes Thus, knowledge of these L2 linguistic and textual aspects allows writers to use their linguistic resources more fluently and to plan, draft, and revise more effectively (Chenowith & Hayes, 2001; Cumming, 2001)

2.2.2 Realization of English writing competence

Inspired by the above line of inquiry, and in order to design the contents for the targeted course in this study, the present part proceeds to give a second thought to the application of theoretical writing competence into practice, most visible from the writing constructs in large scale tests In this line, the tradition of using rating scales in writing assessment is investigated

In the first place, one of the best alternatives may well be the widely approved writing assessment rubric, namely IELTS (International English Language Testing

System) Profile Band Descriptors for Academic and General Training Writing

Module The IELTS writing test is used as an example of a large scale high stake test in measuring test-takers‟ English language communicative competence In IELTS profile band descriptors, writing pieces are required to be assessed from three aspects including: “communicative quality”, “arguments, ideas & evidence and vocabulary & sentence structure”, which almost cover the three competences, suggested beforehand

Besides IELTS, as applied to the second-language arena, the Test of English as

Foreign Language (TOEFL) writing of Educational Testing Service (ETS, USA) is designed to target a range of proficiency such as lexical and syntactic standards of

English and the effectiveness with which the examinee organizes, develops, and expresses ideas in writing (ETS, 2004) That is recognized as “socio-linguistic” competence Except for that, the context of the TOEFL suggests a stricking attention to writing as "discourse competence,” that takes place within a context, accomplishes a particular purpose, and is appropriately shaped for its intended audience (Hamp-Lyons

& Kroll, 1997) On the other hand, using correct grammar, vocabulary, spelling and punctuation is highly required in TOEFL writing pieces

As can be inferred from the pictorial representation above, IELTS and TOEFL writing descriptors have put different weight of emphasis on a variety of examinees‟ writing competences For more example in the categories of the scale, the Cambridge

ESOL (English for Speakers of Other Languages) Common Scale for Writing (CSW) as a wellknown descriptor of writing proficiency levels would be examined to reveal any implicit assumptions and/or hidden values involved (Hawkey & Barker, 2004)

In Cambridge ESOL exams, writing involves multiple competences including vocabulary and grammatical knowledge, phonological control, knowledge of discourse, and pragmatic awareness (Hamp-Lyons and Kroll, 1997) Ramshaw (2010) also shared his view with that writing ability is regarded as a “linguistic, cognitive, social and cultural phenomenon” that takes place in a “specific context” and for a

“particular purpose” Furthermore, writing tasks set as part of the tests are currently scored by rating degree of task fulfilment and evidence of target language control according to criteria such as communicative effectiveness, register, organisation, linguistic range and accuracy (Hawkey & Barker 2004) Apparently, it is necessary for candidates to achieve a satisfactory level in organising and structuring their response coherently and offering relevant information which addresses the requirements of the task

It is impossible not to mention the The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) as a key guidance for course designers in shaping the course contents CEFR describes language learners‟ ability of speaking, reading, listening and writing at six reference levels ranging from the basic user stage to the proficient user stage, levels A1 to C2

In terms of writing, the CEFR provides „illustrative descriptors‟ and these are presented as a series of scales with Can Do statements from levels A1 to C2 These scales can be used for writing syllabus designers, coursebook publishers and writing test providers worldwide, including Cambridge ESOL, seek to align their exams to the CEFR for reasons of transparency and coherence It can be seen from the descriptors, users/learners bring to bear their capacities as detailed above for the realisation of written communicative competence, in narrow sense, including linguistic competences, sociolinguistic competences and pragmatic competences (Council of Europe, p.108)

For linguistic competences in writing, CEFR clearly distinguished them into lexical competence, grammatical competence, semantic competence, orthographic competence Lexical and grammar competences are similar to competences that were aforementioned Adding to that, CEFR writing referes to semantic competence which deals with the “learner‟s awareness and control of the organisation of meaning”

Context of the study

Writing, which was once considered the domain of the elite and well-educated, has become an essential tool for people of all walks of life in today‟s global community (Weigle, p.2) As our current world has entered the era of international communication and advanced technology, it has been widely recognized that writing plays a vital role not only in conveying information, but also in transforming knowledge to create new knowledge (Chelli & Hassina, 2010) It is thus of central importance to both students in academic, second and foreign language programmes and to people who are studying and working in technical fields throughout the world

Unexceptionally, engineers at Vietnam Atomic Energy Institute need to be equipped with adequate writing ability so that they can communicate technical information clearly to the external world on at least a basic level Written documents which are to be communicated may include text such as trip reports, proposals, status reports, meeting minutes, reports documenting site visits (Crawforth, 2012)

Additionally, they may consist of calculations, plots and figures like lab reports, progress reports, user manuals and journal articles In fact, poor written English prevents engineers from reaching their full potential at professional level or going to further study They are aware of their own difficulty in writing but their attempts to improve their writing skill are often thwarted by its complex nature and the gap between their own and their tutors‟ understanding the criteria for writing assessment (Pushpalatha, 2012)

Pushpalatha added, the recent emphasis on the acquisition of professional skills has put more urgency to the need of teaching writing skills within specialist subject areas In today‟s fast-paced and information-driven world, engineering executives want engineers who can write clearly, concisely and comprehensively It helps to save significant time, prevent misunderstanding and improve results An engineer with well developed written communication skills will be successful in his or her career In such context, consciousness of an English writing course for engineers, particularly in nuclear field are highly raised on these days

However, there have not been any attempts at VAEI or any educational institutions in Vietnam designing such a writing course which focus on English writing outcomes to satisfy engineers‟ needs in contributing to their professional recognition and career prospect Hence, this paper can be considered as the first trial to develop the writing course which serves to foster learners‟ English writing competences at workplace That is to say, the demand and contraints of particular context call for competence-based approach to fit in and enable learners to build targeted competences.

The study

As discussed earlier, the present study aims to develop an English writing course which is similar to a workplace – oriented language program to improve English written competences of the learners at VAEI context Thus, the first research question is regarding to survey human resources managers and working learners, identifying their needs in learning written English Based on the needs analysis, the course designer is supposed to recognize the essential and context-dependent writing competences, relevant knowledge and skills for engineers at VAEI Based on the specification, course designer is to build needs-based writing course, determining course objectives, contents, and materials which is potentially delivered to VAEI learners for targeted competences accomplishment Henceforth, the second research question aims to make exploration into a group of teaching experts‟ opinions of the developed need-based writing course pilot using competence-based approach for appropriate modification Experts were invited to validate and evaluate the course in order that necessary adjustments can be done according to their suggestions

The first research subjects are learners who are taking part in the course In addition, learners‟ needs are influenced by the environment where they are working, particularly by their employers‟ requirements of English writing competence

Accordingly, in this study, to ensure the objectiveness and representative samples, a survey questionaire is delivered to 50 engineers at VAEI whose entry level is considered equivalent to at least B1 and a semi-structured interview with 03 leaders from different institutes and centers which are developing nuclear research and applications They include Vietnam Atomic Energy Institute (VAEI); Vietnam Atomic Energy Agency, Nuclear Training Center They are all PhDs in nuclear engineering and have experienced in writing articles for international journals

Graves (1996) added that course designing includes needs analysis which is conducted among not only learners but also among others who are related to or affected by the course, such as lecturers or pedagogical experts and employers For example, lecturers who will be in charge of teaching the course can make a good contribution of the knowledge that need to be acquired by learners because it helps to establish the course content As no teachers at the Institute are available, 03 lecturers with English Teaching and course designing experience from different faculies were invited to comment on the course initially developed by the researcher based on the students‟ needs Their critical comments and practical recommendations can help to enhance the procedure of course designing as well as course content

Data collection instruments which are emloyed in this research are composed of a survey questionaire and a semi-structure interview protocol

According to Gillham (2000), survey questionaire is the first and foremost instrument to usefully collect data in large scale Not only does it help to save significant time, efforts and finance but also bring about good effects in gathering comments from a group of population Provided that the survey questionaire should be well designed, processing and analysing the data become faster and easier compared to other research instruments Another characteristic that makes it dominant over others is flexibility, which allows its users to approach various subjects under a variety of situations

For this research, the survey questionaire (see Appendix 1) is the most appropriate instrument to gather information from 50 learners because of the large amount of information collected from participants Moreover, the information processing after gathered from questionaires are supposed to be less complicated

This intrument, one questionnaire with 14 questions, functions as the source to answer the first research question concerning students‟ needs of English writing course In order to make sure that the participants can understand correctly the content of the questionnaire, the questionnaire items are presented in Vietnamese as well

Explanation is elicited where necessary These 14 questions have tightly responded to five main elements that were mentioned in outcome-based course development in Literature Review, including course objectives, contents, teaching and learning methods, assessment and materials

With regards to course objectives, in the first three questions, students were asked about learning tasks, skills and CEFR level of language proficiency that they were expected to achieve at the end of the course These questions aim at investigating students‟ needs of knowledge, skills and targeted level of English upon the writing course completion Questioning about such issues as the necessity of language skill supporting writing and English outcomes from the course were essential to meet one of course objectives, enhancing students‟ written communicative language competences According to the recent upsurge requirement of English competent workforce involving in research and development of atomic energy field, when VAEI is generating it as part of the national energy strategy, obtaining certain written English proficiency level has become a fundamental pre-requisite for engineers at VAEI

Two next questions in the questionaire identified students‟ needs about the course contents, in particular, the written genres which were supposed to be tough documents to handle and need to be taken into consideration through learning process

The aim of these questions is to find out the most appropriate and helpful contents for working learners so as to build up the targeted writing course The questions were designed as the lists of written genres and also included the open answers for students to share their own views

The sixth and seventh questions aimed to shed the light into the students‟ needs of different assessment in the course Accordingly, they are asked about their views and needs of selected-response tests and written essay tasks, designed by teachers or standardized tests, self and peer assessment, weekly and final assessment

Next, the questions on learning and teaching methods are the focus of the questionaire for students Apparently, this study emphasized the development of a new course with competence-based approach which is learner-centered and outcome-based

The questions regarding to teachers‟ lesson sequence, students‟ self-study willingness, teachers and learners‟ roles in class were considered as significantly important The obtained information were helpful in the new course design, particularly it determined how teachers‟ guidance is delivered to students in doing tasks to achieve the targeted competences of the course

The last question in the questionaire was relevant to the course materials which are importantly responding to the course content In the writing course, there is no doubt that the materials are close – knit to the writing genres and documents The question was designed in lists of options, thus, students could not only demonstrate their needs of the given materials but fill with others which were not included in the list but claimed to be beneficial to them

Students’ needs and employers’ requirements analysis

The questionaire was distributed to 50 engineers – potential students of the writing course; yet, 37 participants, which accounts for 74%, answered all sections and returned them on time The questions in the questionaires are responsively analyzed as follows

For Question 1 “What tasks do you expect to acquire from an English Writing Course for engineers at VAEI?”, the data was displayed in Figure 1

Figure 1 Tasks expected in thewriting course

As it can be seen, two tasks “Controlling grammatical mistakes” and “Writing a journal article” are ranked as “Very important” by the highest percentage of respondents - nearly 70% and “important but not essestial” by approximately 20%

Hence, these tasks can be considered as the most important to potential students of the course In the second position are the tasks “Writing formal emails in English”,

“Solving word choice problems” and “Writing journal abstracts” with the rate of about

50 – 60% Meanwhile, only the minority of students, from 0% to 5%, selected the option “not important” for all the listed tasks On the other hand, the least important to students are supposed to be “Analyzing critically previous work when writing for international journals” and “Describing diagrams, tables, charts and other graphical tools” (above 20% claim them “very important”)

For Question 2 “Which language major skills do you need support in learning English Writing?”, the responses was illustrated by Figure 2 It shows listening is by far the most significant skill that students need to be supported in the writing course with “very important” in the majority (95%) cases This result suggests the language used in teaching process should be flexible between English and Vietnamese for both students‟ improvement in listening and their knowledge acquisition On the contrary, less than 40% concerned the reading skill This obtained figure is rather lower from the expected result in which reading should have been the most necessary to be supported in approaching easier a productive skill as writing However, the discrepancy can probably reveal a strong possiblity that they will have a few difficulties in reading during the course

Figure 2 Major skills needed to support Figure 3 Aim at CEFR level of language proficiency

For Question 3 “Which CEFR level of language proficiency do you aim to achieve at the end of the course?” the answers rate has been demonstrated in Figure 3 above The expectants to achieve B2 level in Common European Framework Reference (CEFR) upon the end of the course are the most frequent (> 40%) Besides, nearly one-fourth of respondants reported B1 is their target and 7 students surveyed determined to reach C1 and C2 This result indicates that the CEFR level of language proficiency which learners tend to aim at is the range between B1 to B2

4.1.1.2 Section 2: Students’ needs about course contents

Question 4 is “What genres of written documents would you like to learn about in the course?” The illustration of the data in Figure 4 shows the top three genres of documents of respondents‟ interest are journal articles, emails and research papers, all of which are popular types that engineers have to deal with at their workplace Thus, the reason for their occupying about 70 – 80% responses of “very important” and

“important but not essentially” is fully understood Meanwhile, the percentage of reporters who chose reports and user manuals as their favourite is marginally smaller – approximately one – third

Figure 4 Genres of written documents needed to learn

Figure 5 Genres of written documents with difficulty

Additionally, across six categories, meeting minutes seems to draw the least attention by the ratio of close to 0.1; in contrast, electronic emails are the only exception being regared as “not important” by a relatively low of 8% In short, the kinds of documents which occupied the first place of students‟ expectation tend to be emails, journal articles and research papers

Figure 5 clearly shows the data for Question 5 “Do you have difficulties in studying the genres of written documents?” Apparently, the difficulties students predict to have in learning different genres of documents are rather similar, range from above 10% to less than 30%, except for journal aticles and research paper “Research paper” is at the top of the list with almost exactly twice as many replies supposing it is

“very important” as in “Eletronic emails” In the second place on a scale of difficulty,

“journal articles” is claimed “very important” by slightly more than half of responses

Meanwhile, the genre causing by far the least arduousness is “meeting minutes” with significantly fewer students choosing “not important” (around 3-4 participants) In general, those who were surveyed tend to concern the most about research paper and journal articles, which reveals that there is a clear correlation between this concern and the documents of interest analysed above

4.1.1.3 Students’ needs about feedback and assessment

For Question 6 “What types of feedback would you like to get in the course?”, Figure 6 reveals the data

Figure 6 Type of feedback expected in the course

There was highly noticeable expectation in direct correction (underlining and correcting errors) with the support of nearly all participants, from “may be important” to “very important” “Both comments in the margin and end notes” is the second most common choice of 60% potential learners of the course who suggested “very important” Just under half of responses would like to get oral feedback from teachers

The least important/effective way – “Errors counted at the end” is likely predicted with only a tenth supposing it very important, whereas the number of opponents tripled

Likewise, feedback by using correction code is barely considered as “very important” by above 10% students

Question 7 asks how important these types of assessment are Figure 7 demonstrates the relatively equal importance of seven given assessment types according to students‟ views All the types are thought to be “very important” by more or less 40% people surveyed The most striking type, “Teacher assessment” gets almost all support as “important/very important” and only insignificant 1% response of

“may be important” Rather similar is “final assessment” without any percentage of

“not important” Accordingly, it seems to be a reflection of the fact that two just- mentioned types of assessment are the most reliable to the students

Figure 7 The importance of assessment types

Figure 8 The effectiveness of assessment types

From Figure 8 related to Question 8 “What is the effectiveness of these types of assignments for learning?”, it is obviously recorded there is a marked difference among the effectiveness levels of the given assignments types for learning However,

“final assessment” and “teacher assessment” remained highly appreciated in terms of the effectiveness they may bring In this case, they reach two highest levels with 65% and 60% collected answers choosing “very effective” respectively The third highest level of “very effective” chosen by a half of responses is “Standardized tests outside the institute” The assessment type that seems to be the least important is peer and self- assessment with a fifth students claiming it “very effective” and more than a third of them supposing it “may be effective”

4.1.1.4 Students’ needs about teaching and learning methods

For Question 9, “Which types of teaching methods would be appropriate for engineers in a writing course?” the data was presented in Figure 9 below

When answering on the appropriateness of teaching methods for the writing course, the students thought that the least suitable method is “Teachers‟ lecture-based” with only 6 of them choosing the "very appropriate" and some student even ticking

“not appropriate” In their view, the most important is the combination of two methods “Teachers‟ lecture-based” and “Student-centred activities/tasks” with 70%

"very appropriate" and nearly 30% "quite appropriate"

Figure 9 The appropriate teaching methods

Figure 10 The students‟ willingness for self- study

For Question 10 “To what extent are you ready to self-study at home?”, the responses ratio was shown in Figure 10 above Every student is ready to self-study at home 16% students thought they “may be ready” for self-study Meanwhile, the large percentage of them are “ready”, which constitutes more than 80% of those surveyed, more than 16% of whom chose “very ready”

Interview results of the 1st course draft – Editting the 1st course content

4.2.1.1 The appropriateness of the course objectives to students’ language proficiency

According to the first draft of course guide, the objectives of the course

“Writing course using competence-based approach for engineers” are based on CEFR B2+ Description and put emphasis on upgrading students‟ writing competences such as linguistic, pragmatic, strategic, orthographic control, sociolinguistic competences from B1 towards B2+ The ultimate outcome of students upon completing the course is emails, reports, and the project of journal article written by them

To this question, most interviewees expressed their worries about the students‟ current language proficiency level which is not sufficient for them to obtain the final goal of the course (Interview 1) Accordingly, the fourth interviewee doubted that B2 description cover merely essay writing, and does not encompass the lattermost course outcome – writing journal articles In other words, the course “aim” is too “high” at present (Interview 3) Likewise, the second expert claimed that the course loads comprising three different genres are too heavy and bulky She added each genre requires varied writing competences and sub-skills For instance, only one genre writing such as journal article certainly take a long duration of teaching and learning abstract, introduction, results, etc Meanwhile, students definitely need to have developed their paragraphs and essay writing, even skillfully completed IELTS task 1 and task 2 already In short, the course aim should be mainly determined by the current situation of VAEI learners‟s “needs and lack”, instead of the leaders‟ expectation as a focal point It is thought that in many cases, the requirements of managers are unreachable, “unfeasible” (Interview 2)

Due to the above reasons, some adjustments were vigorously recommended by all experts Firstly, the fourth one suggested adjusting the objectives into less complicated ones such as essay writing and merely “touching journal article writing”, not focusing on completing the whole journal article In another case, if the course aim remains unchanged, the prequisite of students‟ entry level should be B2 according to CEFR because only with B2 or higher level, students can deal with comprehensively reading documents of their subject matter; as a result, they will be able to use the

“input” to apply in their writing (Interview 1) Simultaneously, in terms of target competence description, it is necessary to be more simplified, more apparent by

“picking words” which can clarify and specify how to measure and where to realize the competences, instead of making use of the “ambiguous” words such as “good”

(Interview 2) On the other hand, some stated objectives appear relevant to “oral production” and “oral interaction” A case in point is “express themselves clearly what they want to say in professional life” hence, their wording should be reconsidered and paraphrased to be more corresponding to written competences (Interview 3)

4.2.1.2 The completeness of the course content and materials

All the interviewed experts supposed that the designed course content covers relatively adequate targets towards B2 writing, even far more and heavier than B2, whereas the duration of 160 hours of face-to-face learning is only 20 weeks There is much concern that the density of inclass learning may lead to working learners‟ pressure and ineffectiveness and time shortage for self-study (Interview 3) By the same token, the fourth expert added that time for self-study should be at least equal to class time, even double and clearly stated in course description Thus, together with lowering the course aim as mentioned in 4.2.1.1., it would be better to lessen the whole class duration as well as reduce weekly inclass time, for example, 4 hours per week for face-to-face learning and 8 hours per week for self-study

In addition, it was thought that the content should be condensed There is no need to spend much time teaching different kinds of paragraphs but “teaching the sub- skills” to write a paragraph skillfully such as writing topic sentence, supporting sentence, paraphrasing (Interview 1 and 2) Subsequently, the next focused content should be essay types which are in need and frequently written in students‟ real work such as "cause and effect, problem-solution, advantage-disadvantages, argumentative.” Those types are all believed to “match academic writing” and should be adapted to the course aim with “nuclear vocabulary input” (Interview 1)

Ultimately, the course give students the “orientation” and “approaching” to writing each part of a journal article as an essay (Interview 4)

To support the course content, a list of core and supplementary materials were thoroughly examined and picked; hence, they are all highly appreciated by experts

However, more clarification is needed about “which page and chapter of materials” are used for each week, “what to do with the extra reading” and how it is “relevant” to the course (Interview 3) The reading may be taken advantage as the “input” provided to students for writing and widening their lexical repertoire of subject matter nuclear

4.2.1.3 The coherence of course schedule and assessment scheme to the course objectives

The most remarkable point in most interviews is the design of course schedule in form of table, which makes it much clearer to the readers and examiners than just listing (Interview 1, 3, 4) Nevertheless, there are a number of comments about the input of contructed syllabus

Firstly, due to the spreading and continual 20 week frame with heavy workloads, the second and fourth interviewees strongly recommended that the course should be divided into two separate but integrated “modules”, in which first module is about “from paragraph to essay” and the second module is “from essay to journal articles” The time allotment for module 1 should be to thoroughly envisage and tend to be more than module 2 so that working learners can develop well-grounded knowledge, skills and competences in the first module before approaching higher objectives in the second one Besides, they thought that in each module, two more columns, “content”, “activities” should be added and “extra reading” will be replaced with “homework” In contrast, there should not include “writing a formal email” due to the communicative feature of emails which had better to be considered in another course (Interview 2) Obviously, the division, addition, omission and replacement were expected to make a great contribution to the schedule‟ coherence

Secondly, “the input” of the schedule needs to be reconsidered and rearranged

For instance, the lesson “reviewing essentials of essay structure” takes place in week 1- several weeks before “sentence, clause, basic paragraph structure”, which is unreasonable teaching sequence Another case in point is the bullets in the column

“objectives”, some of which were supposed to inadequately demonstrate the column aim such as “vocabulary intensifying through extra reading materials” (Interview 3)

The input of weekly “inclass activities” under the light of competence-based approach also needs to be specified (Interview 2 & 4)

Thirdly, about final assessement, the tasks were said to lack clarity and appropriateness to students‟ language proficiency level (Interview 3) In particular, the

“length and requirements” of essay tasks are reaching C1 description according to CEFR, whereas the ultimate goal of the course is B2+ The exercises and portfolio are confusing with no details of which exercises mentioned and which paragraphs or essays expected in the portfolio package Also, there is little information about the mid-term and final test such as format, assessment guide As a result, plans of final assessment were suggested, for example, a “timed essay writing test” in class at the end of module 1 and a “final project – an article” submission for module 2 (Interview

4) Additionally, the second expert notified that marking scheme for essay based on competence approach is highly evaluated owing to its comlexity, but its details should be delivered to students and interpreted by them at the beginning of the course for their preparation and attempts in reaching the highest

On the other hand, during the study process, how to feedback was mostly concerned One of the common types in writing is “peer check”; however it may be ignored if working learners are not interested in it and limited in language proficiency and peer check skills On the contrary, teacher‟s feedback plays a vital role in supporting students, thus, „a guide or form of feedback” should be included in course guide to illustrate teacher‟s help (Interview 1)

4.2.1.4 The integration of teaching methods, teachers and students’ roles

All experts proposed the teaching methods according to competence-based or

“performance-based approach” that is concerned about not only what students know but what they are able to do as result of classroom instruction It assumes that students learn information and perform essential skills when they are given sufficient time and support Teachers at all levels, have the responsibility for devising instructional procedures through which their students achieve desired learning outcomes In short, the methods is claimed to focus on students “demonstrating what they have learned”, thus teaching requires “realistic and authentic class activities” Yet, the interviewees also noted about “training teachers” of the course not only in terms of subject matter, but also how to give instruction and feedback, how to implement authentic class activities so as to encourage all students to attain these goals

4.2.1.5 The success probability of course implementation

The number of positive views on successful course implementation is relatively large The first reason is the facilitation of VAEI managers and the “high and urgent demand of learners at VAEI” for writing competence in occupational context, regardless of the course‟ difficulty and pressure Furthermore, the “prequisite proficiency level of students” for joining the course is at least B1 before Module 1 and beginning B2 before Module 2 (Interview 2,3) It can be seen that the entry level of learners is rather high, thus they are expected to be “active” and “hardworking” in English language The time allotment after thorough consideration of “reducing class time density” is promising in providing students with “sufficient time” to absorb the instructions and acquire the competence to be active and independent users of language writing (Interview 1,4)

4.2.2 Decisions on editting the 1 st course guide

After analyzing the interview data, some decisions have been made towards revising the targeted writing course

Reflection on research process

The present study aims at investigating two fundamental issues, including the needs of human resource managers and engineers at VAEI for a writing course using competence-based approach and the teaching experts‟ opinions of the developed need- based writing course Based on these, a writing course guide was drafted, evaluated and revised into the most feasible one for application at VAEI

To back at, the paper includes a theoretical part which devoted into two chapters The first chapter is about an overview of the Competency-Based Approach and the second one is about theoretical issues in teaching writing under the light of this approach In addition, the practical part represents VAEI working learners‟ questionnaire This questionnaire plays a vital role in this research study since it shed light exactly on what they currently lack, what their language difficulties are and what they desire to learn in a writing course Furthermore, the semi-structured interview for employers at VAEI about their needs and requirements of their engineers‟s writing competences was conducted Its result was analyzed and stated in the Findings, which is the answer to the first research question

Correspondingly, the result analysis demonstrates clear interpretation of the input information about the needs of students and those of people connected to the course, particularly of the managers The responses mostly involves in three noticeable and common points that needs considering while designing the course Initially, the targeted writing competences that students aimed and were required to obtain the most were controlling the grammatical mistakes, widening wide range of nuclear vocabulary and writing a journal article of their subject matter Secondly, the level of language proficiency that the majority of students needed to achieve at the end of the course was minimum B2 level according to CEFR Among different genres of written documents, the most difficult that were predicted for working leaners was research paper in form of a journal article for publishing

With attention to details and the attainment of the course‟s goals, the first draft of course guide was specifically constructed and encompassed the fundamental features of a course such as writing objectives, targeted competences, weekly schedule, materials and assessment scheme This stage of Design and Development took a great deal of time to search, select, analyze, classify and build up the components of the course under CBA The toughest job was supposed to be its outcomes which were needed to be performed by the aimed language writing competences such as linguistic, pragmatic, soio-linguistic, strategic and orthographic control Each competence was clarified by the details of how to realize it in learners‟ writing performance, in other words, in form of “Can Do Statement” adapted from B2 writing description of CEFR In addition, the wording of “Can Do Statement” was taken much consideration to avoid ambiguity it might bring about to the users

After the first draft was shaped, another practical part conducted was a semi- structured interview for ULIS teaching experts‟ evaluation and recommendations about the drafted course The results of the interview was also identified and illustrated in the Findings, which is regarded as the answer to the second research question In this line, a number of comments were collected but there are three mostly mentioned points It was skeptical that the initial course aim of writing a complete journal article for publishing was too high and sounded unreachable for students who are supposed to hold B1 proficiency level Therefore, it needs to be moderated to feasible objectives such as writing from paragraph to essay and then from essay to touching each part of a journal article Secondly, it was necessary for the input of weekly schedule to be selected, added and rearranged to ensure the coherence of modules and content such as seperating weekly writing objectives, activities, materials and homework As a consequence, the time allotment was asked to be reconsidered Last but not least, the assessment scheme was highly appreciated but still required to get more details and appropriateness of assessment tasks for each module Based on those evaluation date, the revision involving making needed changes has been decided and formed the editted course guide.

Recommendations

On the basis of the comments and ideas of people related to the course such as students, employers and teaching experts, several recommendations for designing a competence-based writing course are figured out

Firstly, to conclude the students‟ lack of language profiency in terms of writing competence and determine their current level, it would be better to implement a writing test at VAEI for those who desire to pursue the future course This test result will be used to consider whether learners have prequisite conditions to take part in the course or not

Secondly, with the working learners who pass the entry test and attend the course, it is essential for VAEI to produce course policy which is integrated with learners‟ benefits at workplace For instance, in case learners achieve the ultimate course goal, they deserve being sent abroad for conferences, seminar, or further training This type of policy may create the motivation, inspiration and even commitment to the students while participating the course

Thirdly, VAEI and ULIS may establish and intensify the cooperation in terms of training a limited number of teachers who can be experts in writing teaching as well as master in nuclear field Those who are selected should be thoroughly examined about their speciality to become English for Nuclear Purposes teachers

Fourthly, once the course is implemented in reality, it is of great significance to obtain frequent feedback from learners and teachers, determine the training needs for appropriate and updated training policy, and meet the needs of relevant parties.

Limitations and suggestions for further study

In the process of the thesis writing, there are a number of limitations that should be pointed out as below

In the first place, the students‟ needs investigation, to some extent, couldnot figure out the comprehensive picture The first reason is that VAEI is a technical support organization, comprising 09 facilities across the country, meanwhile, the questionaires was delivered merely to its subsidiaries in Hanoi The second, the surveyed engineers who were interested in and desired to pursue a writing course mostly belong to the young and newly recruited group Another mature and old group rarely join any English course held at VAEI because of psychological factors such as shyness, unwillingness Consequently, the sample of 37 working learners who completely responded to the questionaires was in small size In short, the investigation could not cover all needs of all potential students at VAEI

Secondly, developing a writing course under CBA is a really tough job with so many steps and designed contents, thus it is inevitable that the editted course guide still includes some existing prolems For instance, only one marking scheme is used throughout all assessment tasks for two modules The designed writing activities may be improved for more creativeness and inspiration in practice The form of teacher‟s feedback can be upgraded to be more effectively employed That is to say, the implementation and assessment of the course need a furher study in the future

1 Auerbach, E R (1986), “Competency-Based ESL: One Step Forward or Two Steps Back”, TESOL Quarterly, 20 (3), pp 411-429

2 Anderson, G S (1984), A Whole Language Approach to Reading, Lanham, MS:

3 Bahtiar, K (2012), Theme-based Teaching and Learning for Young Learners

Teaching and Learning the Language, [Online] Tarira Language Institute

4 Biemans, H., Nieuwenhuis, L., Poell, R., Mulder, M., & Wesselink, R (2004),

“Competence-Based VET in the Netherlands: Background and Pitfalls”, Journal of

5 Bashyal, G P (2009), “A Model for Teaching Writing”, Journal of NELTA, 14 (1-

6 Brown, K & Hood, S (1998), Writing Matter: Writing Skills and Strategies for Students of English, UK: Cambridge University Press

7 Burke, J W (1989), Competency based education and training BPCC Weatons

8 Canale, M & Swain, M (1989), Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to Second Language Teaching and Testing, Applied Linguistics, Oxford University

9 Cao, L (2012), A Feasibility Study of Task – Based Teaching of College English Writing in Chinese EFL Context, Canadian Center of Science and Education

10 Celcia, M & McMcintosh, M (1979), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign

Language, New York: US Department of States

11 Chelli, S & Hassina, N (2010), The Effects of a Writing Approach Fitting the Competency-Based Approach and the LMD System National seminar: EFL Course Design and Implementation within the LMD System University of Biskra

12 Chenoweth, N., & Hayes, J.R (2001), “Fluency in Writing: Generating Text in L1 and L2”, Written Communication, 1 (18), pp 80-98

13 Chinh, C D (2012), Teaching on Competency – Based Approach at Technical Education Universities, Phylosophy Doctor Thesis, Vietnam National Library

14 Council of Europe (1997), Common European Framework Of Reference For Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment, Strasbourg, Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_EN.pdf

15 Council of Europe (2001), Using the CEFR: Principles of Good Practice,

16 Council of Europe (2015), ESOL Examinations, University of Cambridge.

17 Cohen, D & Crabtree, B (2006), Qualitative Research Guidelines Project Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Retrieved November 1, 2011, from http://www.qualres.org/index.html

18 Crawford, M (2012), How Engineers Can Improve Technical Writing, ASME.org, Retrieved from https://www.asme.org/career-education/articles/business- writing/how-engineers-can-improve-technical-writing

19 Cumming, A (2001), “Learning To Write In A Second Language: Two Decades

Of Research”, International Journal of English Studies, 1(2), pp 1-23

20 Dick, W & Carey, L (1996), The Systematic Design Of Instruction (4 th Ed.), New

21 Dornan, E A & Dawe, C W (2004), A Guide To Writing, Thinking, Grammar, And Research (7th Ed.), New York: Pearson Longman

22 Enright, M K., & Quinlan, T (2010), “Complementing Human Judgment Of Essays Written By English Language Learners With E-Rater® Scoring”, Language

23 Enright, D S & McCloskey, M L (1988), Integrating English, Newbury House Publishers

24 ETS (2004), Ibt/Next Generation TOEFL Test Integrated/Independent Writing Rubrics (Scoring Standards, Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, Retrieved from http://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/TOEFL/pdf/Writing_Rubrics.pdf

25 Fatemi, M A (2008), The Relationship Between Writing Competence, Language Proficiency And Grammatical Errors In The Writing Of Iranian TEFL Sophomore,

26 Fernández, D & Sánchez, G (2001), “Content-based Second Language Teaching”,

Present and Future Trends in TEFL, Almería: Universidad de Almería

27 Field, L & Drysdale, D (1991) Training For Competence: A Handbook For Trainers And Teachers London: Kogan Page

28 Findley, C A & Nathan, L A (1980) “Functional Language Objectives and Competency-Based ESL Curricumlum”, Tesol Quarterly, 14 (2), pp 221-231

29 Gillham, B (2000), The Research Interview, London and New York, Continuum

30 Graves, K (1996), Teachers as Course Developers, New York, USA: Cambridge University Press

31 Gregg, J & Steinberg, E.R (1985), Cognitive in applied Education, Oxford:

32 Greer, M (1996), The project mangager‟s partner: A step-by-step guide to project management, Amherst, MA: HRD Press

33 Gustafson, K L & Branch, R M (2002) Survey of Instructional Development Models, New York: Eric Clearing House on Information & Technology

34 Hamp-Lyons, L & Kroll, B (1997), Writing: Composition, Community, and Assessment Educational Testing Service Princeton, New Jersey RM-96-5

35 Hawkey, R & Barker, F (2004), “Developing A Common Scale For The Assessment Of Writing”, Assessing Writing 9, pp 122-159

36 Hyland, K (2002), Teaching And Researching Writing, New York: Longman

37 Hyland, T (1992), “NVQ's And The Reform Of Vocational Education And Training”, Journal of the National Association for Staff Development, 26, pp 29 -

38 Hymes, D H (1979), The Communicative Approach to Language Teaching,

39 Kemp, J., Morrison, G., & Ross, S (1998), Designing Effective Instruction (2 nd Ed.), New York: Merill

40 Kirchner, P., Vilsteren, P V., Hummel, H & Wigman, M (1997), “The Design Of

A Study Environment For Acquiring Academic And Professional Competence”,

41 Kouwenhoven, W (2003), Competence-Based Curriculum Development In Higher

Education: A Globalised Concept, The Netherlands: VU University Amsterdam

42 Kouwenhoven, W (2003), Designing For Competence: Towards A Competence- Based Curriculum For The Faculty Of Education Of The Eduardo Mondlane University, Doctoral dissertation, Enschede: Twente University

43 Lans, T., Wesselink, R., Biemans, H & Mulder, M.R (2004), “Work-Related Life- Long Learning For Entrepreneurs In The Agri-Food Sector”, International Journal of Training and Development, 8, pp 72–88

44 Leki, I., Cumming, A., & Silva, T (2008), A Synthesis of Research on Second Language Writing, London: Routledge

45 Lillis, T (2001), Student Writing: Access, Regulation, Desire, London: Routledge

46 Matsuda, P, K (2003), “Second Language Writing In The Twentieth Century: A Situated Historical Perspective”, In Barbara Kroll (Ed), Exploring The Dynamics

Of Second Language Writing New York: Cambridge University

47 Molina, G T., Caủado, M L P & Agullú, G L (2005), Current Approaches And

Teaching Methods Bilingual Programmes, Granada : TEFL in Secondary Education, Editorial Universidad de Granada

48 Nunan, D (2007), “Standard-based approaches to the evaluation of ESL instruction”, International Handbook of English Language Teaching, 15, pp 421-

49 Peregoy, S F & Boyle, O F (2008), Reading, Writing And Learning In ESL – A

Resource Book For Teaching K-12 English Learners (5th Ed.), Boston: Pearson

50 Pushpalatha, S (2012), Effective Writing Skills For Engineering Students

Department Of GEBH, Sree Vidyanikethan Engineering College

51 Ramshaw, G (2010), Cambridge ESOL Expert Group Report for Award Seeking Admission to the UCAS TARIFF, University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations Certificate of Proficiency in English (CPE) and Certificate in Advanced English (CAE) Grade A

52 Reilly, T (1988), Approaches to Foreign Language Syllabus Design, s.l.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics, Center for Applied Linguistics

53 Richards, J C & Rodgers, T (2001), Approaches And Methods In Language Teaching, New York: Cambridge University Press

54 Richards, Jack C (2001), Curriculum development in language teaching, UK:

55 Richards, J C (2010), Curriculum Approaches in Language Teaching: Forward,

Central, and Backward Design, University of Sydney, Australia

56 Steele, V., (2004), Product And Process Writing, Retrieved on 10 Mac 2013 from http://www teachingenglish.english.org.uk/think/write/approac hes.html

57 Taylor, L & Jones, N (2006), Cambridge ESOL Exams and the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR), Cambridge ESOL Research Notes

58 Tribble, C (1996), Writing, New York: Oxford University Press

59 Ur, P (2008), A Course in Language Teaching, London : CUP

60 Weigle, S C (2002), Assessing Writing, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

61 Weigle, S C (2007), “Teaching Writing Teachers About Assessment”, Journal of

Second Language Writing, 16, USA: Elsevier Inc, pp.194 - 209

62 White, R W (1988), The ELT curriculum, Oxford: Basil Blackwell

63 Widdowson, H J (1979), Teaching Language as Communication, Oxford

64 William, G S (1977), Competency Based Education: A Bandwagon in Search of a

65 Wong, R M H (2008), “Competency-based English Teaching and Learning:

Investigating PRe-service Teacher of Chinese's Learning Expreriences”, Porta Linguarum, 9, pp 179-198

APPENDICES APPENDIX 1: SURVEY QUESTIONAIRES VAEI ENGINEERS’ NEEDS FOR AN ENGLISH WRITING COURSE

This survey questionnaire is designed for my research into the needs of engineers at VAEI for a writing course using the competence-based approach The course focuses on developing students‟ English writing competence to meet the requirements at workplace Your assistance and honest answers in completing the survey is highly appreciated All the information provided by you is solely for the study purpose and course design purposes, and your confidentiality is ensured Thank you very much for your corporation!

Please select an answer to indicate your opinion in the following questions

1: not important/effective 3: important but not essential/effective 2: may be important/effective 4: very important/very effective

Section 1: Students’ needs about the course objectives

1 What tasks do you expect to acquire from an English Writing Course for engineers at VINATOM? a Writing formal emails in English 1 2 3 4 b Building and connecting sentences in a paragraph 1 2 3 4 c Developing paragraph structure (the principle of unity, methods of development, devices for coherence, types, transitions and topic sentences)

1 2 3 4 d Writing essays: analytical, descriptive, expository, persuasive 1 2 3 4 e Developing an essay through outlines and early drafts to final revisions and proofreading

1 2 3 4 f Employing diagrams, tables, charts and other graphical tools 1 2 3 4 g Writing a journal article 1 2 3 4 h Analyzing critically previous work when writing for international journals

1 2 3 4 i Using references in sciences and engineering 1 2 3 4 j Writing introduction sections 1 2 3 4 k Describing data: results, discussion and conclusion sections 1 2 3 4 l Writing journal and conference abstracts 1 2 3 4 m Solving word choice problems 1 2 3 4 n Others (please specify)………

2 Which language major skills do you need support in learning English Writing?

From least to most support a Reading 1 2 3 4 b Listening 1 2 3 4 c Speaking 1 2 3 4

3 Which CEFR level of language proficiency do you aim to achieve at the end of the course? Please tick a B2 b C1 c C2

Section 2: Students’ needs about course contents

4 What genres of written documents would you like to learn about in the course? a Reports 1 2 3 4 b Meeting minutes 1 2 3 4 c Articles 1 2 3 4 d User manuals 1 2 3 4 e Electronic mail messages and memos 1 2 3 4 f Research papers 1 2 3 4 g Others (please specify)………

5 Do you have difficulties in studying the genres of written documents? From fewest to most difficulties a Reports 1 2 3 4 b Meeting minutes 1 2 3 4 c Articles 1 2 3 4 d User manuals 1 2 3 4 e Electronic mail messages and memos 1 2 3 4 f Research papers 1 2 3 4 g Others (please specify)………

Section 3: Students’ needs about feedback and assessment

6 What types of feedback would you like to get in the course? a Written comments in the margin 1 2 3 4 b End notes (written comments at the end) 1 2 3 4 c Both comments in the margin and end notes 1 2 3 4 d Oral response 1 2 3 4 e Correction code 1 2 3 4 f Multiple trait scoring (rubrics) 1 2 3 4 g Direct correction (underlining and correcting errors) 1 2 3 4 h Error location (underlining errors without correction) 1 2 3 4 i Errors counted at the end 1 2 3 4 j Others (please specify)………

7 How important are these types of assessment? 1 2 3 4 a Selected-response tests 1 2 3 4 b Performances (essay, tasks and portfolios) 1 2 3 4 c Standardized tests by others outside the institute 1 2 3 4 d Self and peer-assessment 1 2 3 4 e Teacher assessment 1 2 3 4 f Individual assignments 1 2 3 4 g Pair and group assignments 1 2 3 4 h Weekly assignments 1 2 3 4 i Final assessment 1 2 3 4

8 What is the effectiveness of these types of assignments for learning? a Selected-response tests 1 2 3 4 b Performances (essays, tasks and portfolios) 1 2 3 4 c Standardized tests by others outside the institute 1 2 3 4 d Self and peer-assessment 1 2 3 4 e Teacher assessment 1 2 3 4 f Individual assignment 1 2 3 4 g Pair and group assignment 1 2 3 4 h Weekly assignments 1 2 3 4 i Final assessment 1 2 3 4

Section 4: Students’ needs about teaching and learning methods

9 Which types of teaching methods would be appropriate for engineers in a writing course? a Teachers‟ lecture-based 1 2 3 4 b Student-centred activities/tasks 1 2 3 4 c A combination of both a and b 1 2 3 4

10 To what extent are you ready to self-study at home? (From not ready to ready)

11 What is the most appropriate proportion of class time/self-study time?

12 Please indicate the effectiveness of the following lesson sequence a Present - practice- production b Pretask – task (planning, report, analysis) - practice

13 What are the students‟ roles in the course?

1 2 3 4 c Knowledge contributors 1 2 3 4 d Activity organizers 1 2 3 4 e Collaborators with peers and teachers 1 2 3 4

14 What are the teachers‟ roles in the course? a Lecturers/Transferrers of knowledge 1 2 3 4 b Activity organizers 1 2 3 4 c Activity facilitator/supporters 1 2 3 4 d Knowledge providers 1 2 3 4

Section 5: Students’ needs about materials

15 What types of materials should be included in a writing course a Course books (1 or 2) 1 2 3 4 b Internet materials 1 2 3 4 c Supplementaries 1 2 3 4 d Self-collected materials 1 2 3 4 e Materials from class members 1 2 3 4

Thank you for your participation!

KHẢO SÁT NHU CẦU HỌC VIẾT TIẾNG ANH CỦA

KỸ SƯ CÔNG TÁC TẠI VINATOM

Bản điều tra khảo sát này được thiết kế phục vụ cho nghiên cứu của tôi đối với nhu cầu của các kỹ sư đang công tác tại VINATOM về một khóa học viết tiếng anh sử dụng cách tiếp cận dựa trên năng lực Khóa học tập trung phát triển năng lực viết tiếng Anh nhằm đáp ứng các yêu cầu tại cơ quan công tác và phục vụ nhu cầu của chính các bạn học viên tương lai Sự trợ giúp và những câu trả lời thành thật của các bạn trong việc hoàn thành bản khảo sát này luôn được đánh giá cao và rất hữu ích cho việc nghiên cứu, phát triển khóa học viết sắp tới Toàn bộ thông tin được các bạn cung cấp chỉ phục vụ cho mục đích nghiên cứu, thiết kế khóa học và được bảo mật Cảm ơn bạn rất nhiều vì đã hợp tác!

Chuyên ngành của bạn là gì? Tích vào ô dưới đây!

Lựa chọn một câu trả lời cho biết ý kiến của bạn trong những câu hỏi sau

1: không quan trọng/ hiệu quả 3: quan trọng nhưng không quá cần thiết/hiệu quả

2: có thể quan trọng/hiệu quả 4: rất quan trọng/rất hiệu quả

Nhu cầu của học viên về mục tiêu khóa học

1 Bạn mong muốn đạt được mục tiêu nào sau khóa học Viết tiếng Anh cho kỹ sư tại VINATOM? a Kiểm soát lỗi sai ngữ pháp 1 2 3 4 b Giải quyết các vấn đề lựa chọn từ ngữ 1 2 3 4 c Phát triển cấu trúc đoạn văn (viết và liên kết câu trong một đoạn văn, viết chuyển ý, viết các thể loại đoạn văn khác nhau )

1 2 3 4 d Phát triển một bài luận thông qua dàn ý ban đầu 1 2 3 4 e Viết luận: luận phân tích, miêu tả, giải thích, thuyết phục có dẫn chứng

1 2 3 4 f Viết email giao dịch (formal) bằng tiếng Anh 1 2 3 4 g Mô tả sơ đồ, bảng biểu, biểu đồ và các công cụ đồ họa khác 1 2 3 4 h Viết bài báo khoa học 1 2 3 4 i Dùng tư duy phê phán để phân tích các ấn phẩm có sẵn làm cơ sở lý luận cho việc viết bài cho tạp chí quốc tế