Needs analysis and the three areas of controversies in EAP
Juxtaposing needs analysis with rights analysis has been an alternative approach in employing needs analysis in EAP (Benesch, 1999, 2001). On a different note, Hyland (2006) proposes that EAP can be related to three areas of controversies: 1) the two approaches in EAP – EGAP and ESAP; 2) the approac...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Proceeding Paper |
| Language: | en |
| Published: |
The Malaysian Association of Applied Linguistics
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://irep.iium.edu.my/97258/1/97258_Needs%20analysis%20and%20the%20three%20areas.pdf http://irep.iium.edu.my/97258/ |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Juxtaposing needs analysis with rights analysis has been an alternative approach in employing needs analysis in EAP (Benesch, 1999, 2001). On a different note, Hyland (2006) proposes that EAP can be related to three areas of controversies: 1) the two approaches in EAP – EGAP and ESAP; 2) the approaches in the teaching of student writing – the study skills, academic socialisation and academic literacies models; and 3) the pragmatic and critical perspectives of EAP. Considering the central position of needs analysis in EAP, it is deemed necessary to situate rights analysis and needs analysis in the discussion of these three areas of controversies. This paper attempts to establish a clear picture of how the three areas are interconnected and interrelated, and how their concepts and ideologies are related to needs analysis and rights analysis. The outcome of this discussion is hoped to give the EAP practitioners a better understanding particularly on the less chartered areas in needs analysis and EAP. |
|---|