Needs Analysis of Communication Tasks for English-Major Students at Roi-et Rajabhat University

The 1st International Conference on Research and Education, Art, Management and Science
(ICREAMS 2015) August 27-29, 2015; Rajabhat Roi Et University
Needs Analysis of Communication Tasks for English-Major
Students at Roi-et Rajabhat University
Angcharin Thongpan
Faculty of Education, Roi-et Rajabhat University
Angcharin@reru.ac.th
Abstract
The purposes of this study were to investigate the needs of Communication tasks for
English-major students and English language problem. This study also sought to determine
these students’ wants for the English course. A questionnaire was used to collect data from 121
participants who enrolled English for Communication course (GEL1104) required by RERU,
academic year 2014.
The findings were as follows:
1. According to 121 English-major students, speaking skill was needed at the most. The
order of needed skills were reading, writing, and listening.
2. The students’ needs of Communication tasks consisted of role-play, jigsaw, spot the
difference, opinion exchange, problem solving, information-transfer, and sharing personal
experiences respectively.
3. The students expressed a high degree of problems with writing skill.
4. With regard to students’ wants for the English for Communication course (GEL1104),
they wanted speaking at the most.
The results of the study are useful for the curriculum development and material design for
a course in English for Communication (GEL1104) for English majors. Moreover, the results
reflect the role of learners’ needs in designing and developing materials for a course. By taking
into account the needs of learners, educators and teachers can provide appropriate instructional
input to foster effective learning.
Keywords: Needs analysis, Communication tasks
Introduction
The English language plays an important role in the world’s communication because it is
the most widespread language, and employed as a medium of international communication. In
Thailand, it has increasingly gained an important role in both academic and business areas. A
person with a good command of English is likely to have a better chance to get a desired job.

Thus, it is not surprising why English has been a popular major subject among students at the
undergraduate and graduate levels. Educational institutions in Thailand offer general education
programs in which English is required for all undergraduate students, especially Roi-et Rajabhat
University also provides an English for communication course ( GEL1104) for the first-year
students. When they registering for the Bachelor Programs at Roi-et Rajabhat University they are
required to take two courses in the first and second semester ( English for Communication,
English for Study skills) . To develop English for communication course ( GEL1104) , the needs
analysis undertaken here was designed for the English for communication course, the focus of
which is to improve learners’ general English communication skills. Therefore, it is the aim of
this study to investigate the needs of Communication tasks among English-major students at Roi-
et Rajabhat University. A needs analysis will be carried out as a starting point in determining the
students’ needs in terms of the content/topic and activities of a course. The results of the study
will reveal the needs of the students in detail. Moreover, the results will provide the guidelines
for developing the teaching materials that correspond with the needs of this group of students.
Objectives of the study
1. To investigate the needs of Communication tasks for English-major students ,Roi
et Rajabhat University
2. To provide the guidelines for developing the teaching materials of English for
communication course (GEL1104) that are mostly beneficial to English-major students, Roi et
Rajabhat University
Literature review
As the purpose of this study is to conduct a needs analysis involving the Communication
task of English majors, the review of the literature will focus on two areas: needs analysis and
the Communication task.
Needs analysis
The term needs is used to refer to wants, desires, demands, expectation, motivations,
lacks, constraints, and requirements (Brindley, 1984: 28). Learner needs imply what learners

hope to gain from a particular course (Berwick, 1989). Procedures which are used to collect
information about learners needs are known as needs analysis (Richards, 2001: 51).
Needs analysis as a distinct and necessary phase in planning educational programs
appeared in the 1960s; it served as part of an approach to curriculum development (Stufflebeam,
1985). It has a very crucial role in the development of a course. Graves (2000: 98) expressed
such a view as follows
“Essentially, needs assessment is a systematic and ongoing process of gathering
information about students’ needs and preferences, interpreting the information, and then
making course decisions based on the interpretation in order to meet the needs It is based on the
belief that learning is not simply a matter of learners absorbing pre-selected knowledge the
teacher gives them, but is a process in which learners—and others—can and should
participate... When needs assessment is used as an ongoing part of teaching, it helps the learners
to reflect on their learning, to identify their needs, and to gain a sense of ownership and control
of their learning”.
Richards (1984) suggested that needs analysis serves three main academic purposes. It
provides a means of obtaining wider input into the content, design, and implementation of a
course; it is used in developing goals, objectives, and content; and it functions to provide data for
reviewing and evaluating an existing program.
Graves (2000) noted that needs assessment involves six steps which are cyclical in nature
and result in valuable information for designing, implementing, developing, reviewing, and
evaluating a course. These steps include (1) deciding what information to gather and why; (2)
deciding the best way to gather it; (3) gathering the information; (4) interpreting the information;
(5) acting on the information; and (6) evaluating the effect and effectiveness of the action.
A variety of procedures are used in conducting a needs analysis. Questionnaires are one
of the most common instruments. The reasons for their popularity are because they are relatively
easy to prepare, they can be used with large numbers of subjects, and they information that is
relatively easy to tabulate and analyze (Richards, 2001: 60). Other common instruments include
interviews, observations, and analyses of available information.

Communicative task-based language teaching
The features of Communicative Language Teaching can be found in a more specific
communicative approach to L2 instruction such as Task-Based Instruction (TBI). Currently,
there are two main second language acquisition (SLA) theoretical accounts for TBI; the
psycholinguistic and the socio-cultural approaches (Ellis, 2003). The psycholinguistic approach
to TBI is also known as the cognitive approach of language learning (Skehan, 1998). In general,
Skehan’s (1998) cognitive approach to TBI for language learning concerns with psycholinguistic
factors such as fluency, accuracy, and complexity of language production when students engage
in meaning-making oriented tasks. However, such meaning-making oriented tasks within the
cognitive approach of TBI is related to language learning processes that take place in the readers’
mind in line with the cognitive information processing of SLA. On the contrary, within the
perspective of the sociocultural theory of SLA, tasks in Communicative Task-Based Language
Teaching (CTBLT) constitute the co-construction of meaning via students’ participation, self-
regulation through private speech, mediation, imitation, internalization, and assisted interactions
within a learner’s ZPD or zone of proximal development (e.g., Ellis, 2003).
Communicative Task-Based Language Teaching is a form of Communicative Language
Teaching in which tasks or activities are viewed as central to meaningful language learning
(Nunan, 2004; Skehan, 1998). The primary goal of Communicative Task-Based Language
Teaching is to prepare learners with language that matches their needs (Long & Crookes, 1993)
and is suited to their context and familiarity (Ellis, 2003). Teaching and learning activities under
Communicative Task-Based Language Teaching typically involve learners as problem solvers
who have to fulfill a specified real world task in relation to the instructional objectives or
learning outcomes such as making travel arrangements with a travel agent (Crookes, 1986;
Prabhu, 1987).
Communication tasks
Second language acquisition researchers describe tasks in team of usefulness for
collecting data and eliciting samples of learners language for research purposes. For example,
Bialystok ( 1993:2-9) suggest that a communication tasks must ( a) stimulate real communicative
exchange, ( b) provide incentive for the L2 speaker/listener to convey information, ( C) provide
control for the information item required for investigation and (d) fulfill the needs to be used to

the goal. Similarly, Pica ( 1980) argues that tasks should be developed in such as ‘way to meet
criteria for information control, information flow and grow of the study’.
Willis ( 1996b:53) defines task as a goal-oriented activities in which learner use language
to achieve a real outcome and reflect language use in the outside world. Other definitions are
more general. Nunan’( 1989a) one of the most commonly cited pedagogical definition of task,
Nunan proposes that a communication task
…….a piece of classroom work which involves learners in comprehending,
manipulating, producing or interacting with the target language while the their attention
is principally focuses on meaning rather than form (Nunan,1989a;10)
Task types
Task types can be identified in a number of ways. For example, ( Nunan,1989) suggest two
board of categories: real world task ( such as using telephone) and Pedagogical tasks ( such as
information gap activities) these can be subdivided by language function ( e.g. giving
instruction,apolpgizing, making suggestions) , cognitive process or knowledge hierarchies ( e.g.
listing, ordering and sorting, sharing personal experiences, problem solving, Comparing,
creative;) ( Willis,2001) Others might classify tasks by topic and language skills require for
completion, or by whether the outcome is closed or ended ( Long( 1989) . Pica, Kanagy and
Folodum ( 1993) take their starting points the type of interaction that occur during task
completion, e.g. one way or two way information flow, result in 5 types, jigsaw tasks,
information gap, problem solving task, decision making task, and opinion exchange.
Research methodology
The study employed the quantitative and qualitative approaches, using a questionnaire to
collect data and interpreting the results in terms of the needs of the communication tasks for
English-major students. The details of the participants and the questionnaire are as follows:
Participants
The target population was English-major students who had taken at least one course in

English for communication course ( GEL1104) . Both the purposive sampling and the random
sampling procedures were used to select the representatives of the population. That is,
undergraduate majoring in English at Roi-et Rajabhat University were targeted since they all
took an English for communication ( GEL1104) as one of their compulsory courses in the
program. The participants were then randomly selected from this group of students. The
undergraduate students were in the second and third years of their study in the English program.
They took a course in English for communication (GEL1104) in the first year of study. There
were 15 second-year students and 15 third-year students, yielding 30 students were chosen to
participate in the present study.
Instrument
A five-point Likert scale questionnaire was used to investigate the needs of
Communication task for English-majors students. It was constructed based on a number of
studies in needs analysis and a wide range of topics / tasks presented. There are three parts of
questions consisted of background questions focusing on potential problems that the respondents
had in language learning and the needs of topic and tasks (see Appendix).
Findings
The results of Needs Analysis in Learning English and Communication Tasks for English
major students at Roi –Et Rajabhat University, Academic Year 2014
Table 1 : Particpants’general information, opinion and experience in learning English (N= 30)
No Statements Samples Percent (%)
1 Gender
Male
Female
5
15
17.0
83.0
2 Listening skill
 Excellent
 Good
 fair
 weak
 very weak
0
0
7
16
7
0
0
24.0
52.0
24.0
3 Speaking skill
 Excellent
 Good
 fair
 weak
 very weak
0
0
7
4
19
0
0
24.0
13.0
63.0

4 Reading skill
 Excellent
 Good
 fair
 weak
 very weak
0
0
14
16
0
17.0
20.0
27.0
13.0
10.0
5 Writing skill
 Excellent
 Good
 fair
 weak
 very weak
0
0
16
13
1
0
0
53.0
44.0
3.0
Table 1 reveals that the proportion of students were female as many as that of the male
students. It was found that the students assessed their English skills at a fair level; however,
considering each skill, reading was ranked at the highest level, followed by listening, writing, and
speaking, respectively.
Table 1: Participants’ Needs for topic to study English for communication (GEL 1104) (N=30)
No. Needs for topics Mean SD meaning Ranking
1 Personal identification 3.91 0.13 much 1
2 House and home, environment 3.83 0.06 much 4
3 Daily life 3.77 0.18 much 5
4 Free time/ entertainment 3.67 0.19 much 8
5 Travel 3.70 0.29 much 7
6 Relations with other people 3.65 0.24 much 9
7 Health and body care 3.63 0.20 much 10
8 Education 3.87 0.04 much 2
9 Shopping 3.60 0.13 much 11
10 Food and drink 3.72 0.22 much 6
11 Services 3.56 0.21 much 12
12 Places 3.51 0.18 average 13
13 Language 3.47 0.04 average 14
14 Weather 3.86 0.11 average 3

According to Table 1, the students ranked their need for topic, three are as the highestneed; Personal
identification (M=3.91), Education(M=3.87), and Weather(M=86) respectively.For the lowestneeds are,
Language (M=3.47), Places (M=3.51), and Services(M=3.56).
Table 2: Participants’ Needs of Characteristics of Learning and tasks
No. Needs for Characteristics of Learning and tasks Mean SD meaning Rankin
g
1 Learning through completing 3.88 0.08 3.88 5
2 Learning through role play 3.90 0.14 3.80 4
3 Learning through presentations (e.g. oral, exhibition,
poster …)
3.76 0.19 3.76 9
4 Learning through problem solving 3.79 0.24 3.70 7
5 Learning through competition 3.99 0.99 3.70 1
6 Learning English through jigsaw 3.68 0.05 3.68 12
7 Learning through language games 3.63 0.17 3.63 14
8 Learning through opinion exchange 3.78 0.06 3.63 8
9 Learning through simulation 3.64 0.35 3.53 13
10 Learning through decision making 3.53 0.19 3.53 15
11 Learning through demonstrations 3.71 0.18 3.51 10
12 Learning through ordering and sorting 3.69 0.09 3.49 11
13 Learning through sharing personalexperiences 3.96 0.21 3.46 2
14 Learning through comparing 3.45 0.16 3.45 16
15 Learning through information-gap 3.93 0.21 3.43 3
16 Learning through information transfer 3.87 0.26 3.43 6
17 Learning through group work discussion 3.41 0.24 3.40 17
18 Learning through story telling 3.40 0.27 3.40 18
19 Learning through hands-on experience 3.31 0.18 3.31 19
The findings revealed that students ranked their needs for Learning through competition at a highest
(M=3.99), Learning through sharing personal experiences (M=3.96) Learning through information- gap(M=3.93)
consequently. Three of the lowest mean score they needed in language learning and tasks consists of; Learning
through hand-on experience (M=3.31), Learning through story telling (M=3.40) and Learning through group work
discussion (M=3.41) respectively.
Qualitative results
The results from the open-ended question analysis were consistent with the findings from
the questionnaire. Ten English major students perceived that the last two skills they performed
worst were listening and speaking, which they consequently regarded as difficult. However, they
revealed that speaking was more difficult than writing, and interestingly five second year
students were still facing the same English language difficulties and boring as seen from the
following quotes translated from Thai:
Student 1,: I feel speaking is the hardest for me. Sometimes I want to express some ideas
but I can’t deliver at all.
Student 2,; We rarely discuss in the classroom,anyway.it’s such a boring class.
Student 3,; Not enough interesting activities, just memorize the grammar for the exam.

Conclusion and Suggestions
In conclusion, this study investigated the needs of Communication tasks for English-
major students. Data were drawn by using a questionnaire collecting opinions and judgments
from 30 English majors’ students. The results revealed the students’ needs of topics and tasks.
Eight of topics needs were judged as significantly needed. These included Personal
identification, Education, Weather, House and home environment , Daily life, Food and drink,
Travel and Free time, entertainment. Additionally, eight of students prefer tasks will apply for
the chosen topics; Learning through competition, Learning through sharing personal experiences,
Learning through information-gap, Learning through role play, Learning through completing,
Learning through information transfer, Learning through problem solving and Learning through
opinion exchange.
The results are useful for the curriculum development and material design for a course in
English for communication ( GEL1104) for English majors. They provide some guidelines for the
scope of the course content /topics and tasks that matches the needs of this group of students.
Moreover, the results of the study reflect the role of learners needs in designing andDeveloping
the materials for a course. By taking into account the needs of learners, educators and teachers
can provide appropriate instructional input to foster effective learning.
References
Berwick, R. 1989. Needs Assessment in Languages Programming: From Theory to Practice,
pp.48-62. In R. K. Johnson (ed.). The Second Language Curriculum. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Brindley, G. 1984. Needs Analysis and Objective Setting in the Adult Migrant Education
Program. Sydney: N.S.W. Adult Migrant Education Service.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press.
Graves, K. 2000. Designing Language Courses: A Guide for Teachers. Boston, MA: Heinle &
Heinle.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London, Longman.
______, S. (1985). Input in second language acquisition. Oxford, Pergamon.

Long, M. (2005). Methodological issues in learner needs analysis. In Long, M. (Ed.), Second
language needs analysis (pp. 1-76). Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Long, M. (2005). Second language needs analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Long, M., & Crookes, G. (1992). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL
Quarterly, 26, 27-56.
Long, M., & Norris, J. (2000). Task-based teaching and assessment. . In Byram, M
(Ed.),Rutledge encyclopedia of language teaching and learning (pp. 597-603). London:
Rutledge
Munby, J. (1981). Communicative Syllabus Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Nunan, D. 1988. The Learner-Centered Curriculum: A Study in Second Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C.( 2001) Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Skehan, P. 1996 Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction in Willis J. &
D.(ed) Challenge and Change in Language
Teaching Macmillan Heinemann
Willis, J. 1996 A flexible framework for task-based learning in Willis J. & D. (ed)
Challenge and Change in Language Teaching Macmillan Heinemann
Willis, J. 1998 Task-based learning ETP Issue 9
Willis, J. & D. 1998 A Framework for Task-Based Learning Longman.

Needs Analysis of Communication Tasks for English-Major Students at Roi-et Rajabhat University

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Needs Analysis of Communication Tasks for English-Major Students at Roi-et Rajabhat University

Similar to Needs Analysis of Communication Tasks for English-Major Students at Roi-et Rajabhat University (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Needs Analysis of Communication Tasks for English-Major Students at Roi-et Rajabhat University