Investigating the Values and Behaviors of ESP Teachers and Their Experience in Classrooms
Keywords:
Iran, Behaviors, Teacher’s Value, Teacher’s Belief, English for specific purposesAbstract
The current research sought to explore the values and relations between Iranian ESP teachers and classroom experience. To do this, 20 five ESP teachers who teach English for unique purposes at the Islamic Azad University, Kermanshah Branch, Kermanshah District, Kermanshah, Iran participated in the study through convenient sampling in various disciplines, such as Chemistry, Accounting, Mathematics and Law. Gender was not among the targets of this analysis as the participants monitored their possible results. The participants were interviewed and asked to fill in the gaps at periods while they had spare time in order that the results would be as accurate and relevant as possible. The instructor had a questionnaire completed by the researcher. They were therefore regularly interviewed outside the university in their spare hours. The research results showed that the ESP teachers’ views regarding their classroom teaching experience were inconsistent.
References
Atai, M. R. (2002a). Iranian EAP programs in practice: A study of key methodological aspects. Sheikhbahaee ELT Journal, 1(2), 1-15.
Atai, M.R. (2002b). ESP methodology revisited: A genre-based reading comprehension course for the students of dentistry. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 77-90.
Basturkmen, H. (2006). Ideas and options in English for specific purposes. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Berliner, D. C. (1986).In pursuit of the expert pedagogue. Educational Researcher, 15(7), 5-13.
Borg, M. (2001).Teachers’ beliefs. ELT Journal, 55(2), 186-188.
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: a review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81-109.
Borg, S. (1999). The use of grammatical terminology in the second language classroom: a qualitative study of teachers’ practices and cognitions. Applied Linguistics, 20, 95-126.
Brindley, G. (2004).Needs analysis. In M. Byram (Ed.). Rout-ledge Encyclopedia of language teaching and learning (pp.438-441).New York: Taylor and Francis.
Brown, J. D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge UP.
Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986).Mind over machine. New York: Free Press.
Dudley-Evans, T. (1998). Developments in English for Specific Purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge University Press.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright is a property right, which exists to protect the expression of ideas and the use of works by authors and publishers of various types of works, including literary (e.g. books, newspapers, magazines and journals), artistic works (including photographs, paintings, sculptures, diagrams), musical works, sound recordings, films and broadcasts.
Copyright is one of several intellectual property (IP) rights that exist, including, amongst others, trademarks, patents and designs. Intellectual property is a fundamental right, as set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (Article 17(2)).
Like with other types of property, copyright can be sold, purchased, licensed, transferred, or violated. However, owning a copyright protected work, such as a book for example, has to be distinguished from ownership of the copyright: buying the book does not mean that you then own the copyright in the book.
In this journal, the author(s) has/have got the copyright. The author(s) may share their works by reffering to this journal. If the author(s) do/ does not reffer to this journal then the author(s) is/are viewed as plagiator.
