Analysis Of Engineering Students Problems In Speaking English Language Essay

compend Of function Students Problems In Speaking incline Language EssayThe documental of the study was to investigate the incline language occupations in terms of disquisition and piece of write skills of design students at a adept university in Malaysia ground on the perceptions of students and side language lecturers. The study was conducted within the framework of necessitate psychoanalysis as dowry of the larger curriculum re imagine usage in the effort to redesign English language courses that meet the require of the stakeholders. A 15-item scruplenaire was formulated and distributed to 612 engineering students and 36 English language lecturers of the technical university. The findings of the abide by indicated that there is a battle amongst students and lecturers perceptions of students problems in dissertation and theme. Based on the findings of the study relevant recommendations were made to assist in the decision qualification process of the curriculu m check up on exercise.KEYWORDSLanguage problems, Speaking, Writing, broadcast review, English for Specific Purposes, Needs analysisINTRODUCTIONOne of the recommendations mentioned consistently in research projects commissioned by the Malayan Ministry of Higher make growment is the need for a comprehensive review of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) programmes of Malaysian universities (Morshidi et al., 2008 Isarji et al., 2008). The recommendation is in direct response to the nations concern for the declining standard of English among Malaysian university students and graduates and the need to meet the expectations of the stakeholders. The research project inform that base on s hollows in the English Proficiency Test (EPT) and perceptions of stemma leaders, government officials and academic staff, Malaysian university students, in general, were considered limited users of English in the productive skills namely, writing and oral presentation (Isarji et al., 2008).The liter ature on ESP, college graduates, and employability reveals a arguing of problems faced by university students in terms of writing and discourse much(prenominal) as writing reports, memos, proposals, formal letters, instructions, manuals, summaries, technical jargons, and use grammatically crystallize sentences, participating in discussions, communicating with people, telephone conversations, everyday conversation, oral presentation, and negotiations (Horowitz, 1986 Basturkmen and Al-Huneidi, 1996 Ferris and Tagg, 1996 Hyland, 1997 Sullivan and Girginer, 2002 Abdul Aziz, 2004 Siti Hanim and Ismie Roha, 2005 Isarji et al., 2008) and groom et al., 2008).This study was conducted within the framework of unavoidably assessment as part of the larger curriculum review exercise in the effort to redesign English language courses, especially in terms of speech production and writing skills of engineering students that meet the needs of the stakeholders. The research questions were as f ollows1. What are the problems of engineering students in writing and speaking?2. What are the problems of engineering students in writing and speaking from the lecturers point of view?3. Is there a difference between the perceptions of students and lecturers?METHODOLOGYThis study utilized a survey based on a four-point Likert scale. The items in the survey were developed based on sub-skills in the productive skills. Six items were included in the survey in fix up to capture the perceptions of students writing sub-skills while ten items were to capture the perceptions of students speaking sub-skills. The survey was distributed to engineering students and English language lecturers of a technical university in Malaysia. A total of 612 students and 36 English language lecturers responded to the survey. Responses to the survey were prevail overed to descriptive analysis using the SPSS software version 12. In the analysis, the responses based on comply and Strongly Agree categories were combined in order to capture the engagement to each statement.FINDINGSThe findings are presented based on the three research questions. A summary of the findings based on students and lecturers performance are reported distributively for both skills (speaking and writing skills). The summary of results is based on percentages of responses according to covenant to the statements in the questionnaires.The first research question is as followsRQ1 What are the problems of engineering students in writing and speaking?According to move into 1, on the average, much than half of the students reported that they had difficulties in writing. The most problematic writing sub-skill was writing grammatically correct sentences (71%), followed by choosing suitable spoken communication (66%), as considerably as developing and organizing their writing (56.5%). The writing sub-skill with the least problem as reported by the students was linking sentences in a paragraph (46.8%), followed by recite correctly (47.7%), and corporate trust paragraphs in an essay (47.7%).Figure 1 Engineering students perceptions of their problems in writingFigure 2 Engineering students perceptions of their problems in speakingIn terms of engineering students perceptions of their problems in speaking, the data tabulated in Figure 2 shows that they had problems using grammatically correct language (73.3%), speaking fluently (72%), using varied vocabulary and expressions (67.8%) as well as speaking confidently in English (60.5%). The students, on the other hand, perceived to check fewer problems with participating in discussion (44.3%). communicating with people (44.6%), making suggestions and supporting their views (49.5), and speaking clearly and loudly (49.8%).The second research question asked,RQ2 What are the problems of engineering students in writing and speaking from the lecturers point of view?Figure 3 Lecturers perceptions of engineering students problems in writingFigure 4 Lectur ers perceptions of engineering students problems in speakingThe lecturers reported that the students had problems with all the sub-skills of speaking (Figure 3). The biggest problem was choosing suitable words (94.5%), followed by writing grammatically correct sentences (94.4%), and combining paragraphs in an essay (80.6%).As remote as speaking is concerned, the lecturers reported that the students had problems with all speaking sub-skills (Figure 4). The top three problems reported were using grammatically correct language (94.4%), using varied vocabulary and expressions (91.6%) and speaking fluently (86.1%).The third research question is as followsRQ3 Is there a difference between the perceptions of students and lecturers?The independent sample t-test conducted indicates that there is a hearty difference (p0.05) between the perceptions of students and lecturers of students problems in writing and speaking in all the items (see vermiform appendix 1). This shows that overall, the manner the students perceive their problems in writing and speaking differ from the way their English language lecturers perceive the students problems. The results also show that the mean of the lecturers ratings on all the items were consistently higher than of the students ratings of their own speaking and writing problems. In a separate analysis, on the average, 56.2% of the students perceived writing as a problem as compared to the views of the lecturers on the same issue, which is 82.4%. Similarly, 58% of the students perceived speaking as a problem in contrast to the views of the lecturers, which is 80.2%.DISCUSSIONSThis study is a small component of a larger curriculum review exercise. The findings of the study, in general, suggest that both students and English language lecturers were in agreement that the students hadproblems in writing and speakingspecific writing problems in choosing suitable words and writing grammatically correct sentences andspecific speaking proble ms in using grammatically correct language, using varied vocabulary and expressions, and speaking fluently.not only that both lecturers and students concurred that students had problems in writing and speaking, there is a earthshaking difference between how students and lecturers perceived students problems. The lecturers tended to be more critical of the students problems in writing and speaking than the students themselves. One may not be far fetch to conjecture that the reason for the perceptions to be significantly different mayhap is due to the tenacity of most English language lecturers to accentuate the immenseness of attaining a minimum threshold level in order to come after in an English medium university in contrast to the lackadaisical mental attitude of many Malaysian students towards English. The findings of this study are consistent with the literature on the perceptions Malaysian university lecturers and students of students attitudes towards English in general (I sarji et al., 2008).The findings of the study also come through realistic recommendations pertaining to curriculum review exercise. Firstly, in addition to the teaching of listening, speaking, interpreting and writing, there is a need to include grammar as an important core competence of language acquirement. The grammar component, however, needs to be taught in context quite of in isolation not only to ensure that language learning activities relate to the real world but also to enhance students motivation. It needs to be emphasized however, for English language teaching and learning to entirely focus on grammar is to ignore the importance of communicative competence as the ultimate goal. Secondly, students need to be provided with more opportunities to be involved in activities that promote rich vocabulary acquisition. Finally, in a curriculum review exercise, it is imperative to include the opinions of the stakeholders particularly the students and teaching staff. The fact t hat both students and lecturers admit the same language problems, even though there is a significant difference between their perceptions make it less demanding for the programme provider to design a language programme that meets the needs of the stakeholders including the students and university.CONCLUSIONEven though Malaysian university students have the benefit of at least 11 geezerhood of exposure to English language learning as a subject in a school setting, the findings of the study indicate that both students and lecturers perceived grammar and vocabulary to be problematic to students. On this account, 3 hours of exposure to English a week for 14 weeks, which is a normal duration of an English course in a university will not produce a miracle. Notwithstanding, with a proper needs analysis, the programme provider will be able to formulate appropriate learning outcomes, adapt, adopt or develop relevant materials and design suitable learning activities to ensure university stud ents are violate prepared not only to undertake rigorous credit charge faculty courses in English but also to enter the example world.