Students and teachers ideals of effective Business English teaching

Ruth Trinder and Martin Herles

Learners and teachers evaluation of what constitutes useful, appropriate, and goal-relevant English may well shift in view of the globalization of English and its dominance in non-native contexts, business, and new media. Against this background, this study explores the extent to which a specific Business English university programme meets teachers and learners expectations. We argue that students own experiences and goals, including their past, present, and projected use of English, shape their expectations and, consequently, their evaluations of the teaching reality. The results of our study reveal that though learner and teacher beliefs tend to be aligned in most areas, students judgements of effective teaching and learning practices are highly dependent on personal motivations and specific language use purposes, and this difference manifests itself most clearly in teachers and learners divergent views on the value of grammatical accuracy and corrective feedback.

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Uludag University on March 18, 2013

Introduction

Timmis (2002), referring to the debate about International English, stresses the importance of listening to students and classroom teachers voices. Investigating the attitudes of the main stakeholders in the teaching process makes sense for other ELT areas, too. Learner beliefs are nowadays considered a critical influence on what students do (or refuse to do) in and out of the classroom (Yang 1999; Breen 2001; White 2008). Ideas about the nature and difficulty of language learning have been shown to affect students evaluation of the effectiveness of certain teaching methods and learning tasks (Horwitz 1988; Wenden 1999). Studies that have widened the perspective to include teachers viewpoints (for example Brown 2009; Ranta 2010) were interested in similarities and differences between the main players views, pointing out the potentially very negative consequences of mismatches between beliefs and classroom reality (ranging from demotivation to discontinuation of study). Currently, the effects of beliefs on learner actions (or refusal to act) are quite well documented in the literature. Learners may refuse or invest little effort in learning activities if these conflict with their views of how languages should be taught and what particular

220

ELT Journal Volume 67/2 April 2013; doi:10.1093/elt/ccs080

The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved. Advance Access publication December 20, 2012

language courses should offer. Less attention, however, has been paid to the factors shaping a particular teaching approach. Common sense would suggest that instructors own beliefs about effective teaching, acquired during their teacher training courses or based on their own learning experiences, would translate directly into specific instructional practices. However, such a view fails to take important contextual factors and outside pressures into account; in reality, many practitioners have to adapt their instructional approaches if they are to cover an (externally dictated) syllabus despite, for instance, cuts in contact hours and increases in student numbers.

Purpose of the study

In this study, we therefore attempt to present a more global picture of how teachers and students views compare against the background of a given teaching context, detailing in the first part the factors that have moulded it. The study was conducted at Vienna University of Economics and Business (WU) and adopted a qualitative approach (interviews and mini-essays), addressing the following aspects/facets of language learning beliefs:
1 What do students and teachers at a business school consider good and

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Uludag University on March 18, 2013

useful English?
2 What are students and teachers beliefs concerning the nature of

language learning?
3 How important are NS norms to students and how useful do they

find communicating with NNSs as opposed to NSs?

4 Reactions to the learning environment: How do students and

teachers notions of goal-relevant teaching and learning practices compare? To what extent are these practices facilitated by the Business English programme? How do they deal with mismatches between their beliefs and the actual learning situation?

Over a period of four semesters, we asked more than 200 advanced (third year or higher) students for their opinions, using open-ended questions to give them the opportunity to think about and expand on a given point. The entire departmental teaching staff (n=28) was then interviewed to provide an insight into the ramifications of context and beliefs from the facultys perspective.

Factors that shape and constrain the teaching and learning reality

Learner and teacher practices are determined not only by their individual beliefs and motivations but also by outside forces that may curtail or extend their flexibility. Thus, before we analyse how the two groups responded to the way English is taught at our university, it makes sense to refer to developments shaping the learning context. Here we found it useful to distinguish between global, national, and local influences. Global developments, for instance, include the predominance of English in international, non-native business contexts (as witnessed by the emergence of acronyms such as BELF for Business English lingua franca) and the ubiquity of the internet and social media (such as Skype and Facebook), where, again, much of the interaction takes
Ideals of effective Business English teaching 221

place in English between NNSs. At the national level, constraints on the teaching context in the narrower sense include open university access (in contrast to neighbouring countries), the change from a four- to a three-year system, and budget cuts. Effectively, these factors have meant highly unfavourable studentteacher ratios and reductions in contact hours. The strongest local influence is departmental policy arising from the necessity to justify a separate language department at a business university, which dictates a strong emphasis on content and terminology. These conditions interact to produce substantial restrictions on what is actually feasible in terms of instructional approaches and testing and have led to teaching situations that may be at odds with teachers as well as students aims, motivations, and expectations. Thus, it could be argued that for this particular student community (and probably for many other university contexts, too), external factors have conspired to produce enhanced learning and communication opportunities in the real world, whilst effectively placing heavy constraints on what happens in the classroom. Most of the open questions we asked directly or indirectly tapped into students and teachers perceptions of this conundrum.
Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Uludag University on March 18, 2013

Findings Question 1

Student responses In answer to the introductory question of what constituted, in their eyes, good and useful English, we found that the vast majority of students assessed communicative competence, or at the very least intelligibility, in a wide range of communicative encounters to be the main benchmark. In particular, respondents mentioned being able to express yourself, being able to talk about a variety of topics, and fluency. To give some examples: Useful English means being able to communicate freely on an advanced rhetoric level, in a professional manner and about complex issues. In my opinion good and useful English refers to the ability to express yourself and be understood by the listeners. Obviously, overlapping with communication skills, but separately mentioned as signs of a good command of English were, in order of frequency, extensive vocabulary, good pronunciation, good knowledge of Business English, appropriacy, and, to a lesser extent, accurate grammar. Student comments included: Good and useful English ... is the ability to speak fluently and with a good pronunciation and vocabulary. ... is correct English and also the English which is used in everyday life as well as Business English. In general, what they termed inferior pronunciation and pronunciation mistakes were seen as a greater impediment to intelligibility than grammatical errors:

222

Ruth Trinder and Martin Herles

There are people who make grammar mistakes, but at least they know how to express themselves. However, the correct pronunciation is essential, since if a person mispronounces a word, he might be misunderstood. Despite their emphasis on oral communicative competence, most students also showed awareness that different situations require different skills, registers, and levels of accuracy: Good English is the ability to communicate in a proper way, either written or oral. You have to be able to adapt your English to different situations, such as business talks, writing emails, talking to a friend and soon. Written texts should be correct; in presentations you should speak correctly, but for informal communicationits not so important.
Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Uludag University on March 18, 2013

Question 2

Student responses The strong emphasis on oral communication reflects students conceptions of the nature of language learning. Many respondents considered exposure to the target language, as well as the readiness to exploit communication opportunities, to be the prime drivers of language acquisition, at least at a more advanced level. This belief that speaking equals learning is quite central to the student cohort. Asked how they could improve their English, many students gave answers along the lines of: The best solution is to go to an English speaking country for some months. The best way to speak good and fluent English is to communicate regularly with a native speaker. I am convinced that speaking would be much more helpful than simply writing emails or communicating via a chatroom.

Question 3

Student responses Though many students found it easier to communicate with NNSs as they often used simpler sentences and spoke more slowly, it was for these very reasons that interaction with NSs was preferred: only from NSs, they reasoned, could they learn how to speak fluently and, as they saw it, correctly. Students notions of correctness seemed to include pragmatic, lexical, and structural aspects as well as correct pronunciation, with only few respondents referring to the peculiarities of particular regional NS accents. Despite a strong awareness of English as a Lingua Franca (ELF), most still aspired to NS norms: I do communicate a lot with speakers of other languages but too little with English native speakers. Im fully aware that this is a problem, because you can learn a lot more from a native speaker (for example pronunciation). I think Ibenefit more from native speakers because Ican always ask them something. With a non-native speaker Iwill not enhance my
Ideals of effective Business English teaching 223

English skills, but a native speaker can always correct me and tell me how Icould say something. Although students universally insisted on the dominance of fluency over grammatical accuracy, those respondents who particularly expected to work in an environment where English is either the corporate language or at least used regularly in international negotiations also considered good (ideally, in their view, native-like) pronunciation and good grammatical competence indispensable for their future careers. Students thought that error-free language would give them more credibility and status on formal (business) occasions: You seem more competent when you speak correctly. I put a lot of importance on a right pronunciation in order to sound less German to international business contacts, which might be a sign of professionalism tothem. In modern business it is necessary to be able to write business letters and to participate in conference calls in English. An inferior level of English is not only embarrassing for oneself but can even harm the whole companysimage. I think that most business people should apply better grammatical structures and fluency in their expression, because that simply conveys a more professional image of the speaker. To sum up, students are aware of and use communication opportunities with NNSs as a matter of course, whether in the form of social media to keep up with international friends, face-to-face at university, or during travels. However, in view of their professional aims, such NNS interactions are considered inferior learning opportunities as they cannot guarantee correctness of expression; NNSs thus cannot serve as models. Chavez (2007) investigated four possible language use purposes that potentially might motivate students towards accuracy in oral production:

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Uludag University on March 18, 2013

deriving a personal sense of accomplishment; being comprehensible to a NS; sounding pleasant to a NS; getting an A in class.

The first three considerations were implied in a number of our responses, too; however, our students seemed to be motivated most by the sense of getting a competitive edge in business encounters, at least as far as phonological and lexical accuracy was concerned.

Teacher responses to If anything, teachers were even more adamant in stressing the importance of effective communication. In contrast to the majority of Questions 13

students, they see individual features such as grammatical correctness, extensive vocabulary, and accurate pronunciation generally only as means to an end, namely getting the message across successfully,

224

Ruth Trinder and Martin Herles

rather than as ends in themselves. As pointed out earlier, students quite in contrast to todays ELF ideastill seem to strive for NS pronunciation, as this, for them, signals competence. Teachers, however, show greater awareness that, in a global environment, most communication actually takes place in NNS settings, which makes NS standards less pertinent: Decent pronunciation is nice, but less and less important today, Ithink. Given that teachers, quite in line with students, assume that the latter use or will use English for practically anything, from their studies to private life to their prospective jobs at international companies, this seems conclusive. Thus, elements such as accuracy and an extensive vocabulary, though doubtlessly important, are only interpreted as relevant in their contribution towards achieving the communicative goals and avoiding ambiguities and misunderstanding. Basically, you just have to make yourself understood and react adequately. This is clearly in some contradiction to what is expected of students in most exams, which effectively shows the discrepancy between externally determined conditions and the teaching staffs own beliefs. The teachers and students diverging ideas about the importance of accuracy also led to an interesting discrepancy between their attitudes concerning overt error correction in class. Students mostly appreciate having inaccuracies corrected, in particular when mispronouncing a word, choosing the wrong word, or using an expression inappropriately. They generally consider this the most effective way of improving beyond simply getting their meaning across. However, the majority of teachers deliberately try to avoid individual error correction in most cases, in order not to embarrass students in front of their peers. Making teachers aware of this mismatch can thus eradicate this particular source of dissatisfaction without great effort.

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Uludag University on March 18, 2013

Question 4

Student responses We have so far established that, corresponding to their language learning beliefs and their present and projected language use purposes, students strive for excellent communicative competence and a good grasp of General and Business English vocabulary. The question is now to what extent the Business English programme, and the teaching reality with all its constraints detailed above, can help them achieve thoseaims. The views concerning learning and professional aims put forward by the student sample obviously have ramifications on the type of teaching they would value. Virtually all respondents agree that smaller groups, discussions (also of non-economic current topics), group work, more lectures in English, conversation classes, and different types of assessment (for example oral examinations not focusing on Business English) would improve the quality of the WU offering.
Ideals of effective Business English teaching 225

As far as goal relevance was concerned, there was some consensus that the emphasis on business topics was obvious and necessary in a business school. However, possibly depending on the level of General English they had already attained, individual students differed in their judgements concerning the usefulness of the strong business focus and on how much General English (ranging from grammar to small talk) should be taught: Classes are too specialized in business topics. For me it is more important to improve my every-day life English, for getting into contact with people. Also within business life it is important to be able to talk about different topics, not only about business and work. If youre having lunch with your partner its important to be able to do small talk. Yet though a large majority would welcome a more communicative approach to teaching that gets students to speak, we find two distinct schools of thought. The first group puts the responsibility for providing opportunities for improving speaking skills firmly in the teachers court, criticizing the strong focus on business and the lack of oral interaction: Being prepared for the world of business does not necessarily mean holding presentations on business topics or writing memos, but also means entering oral negotiations and going out to dinner with a partner. And we do not get trained forthat. Day-to-day speaking is neglected in class, Icant do it, Ican only discuss economic concepts. This group suffers most from a mismatch of their expectations and the actual situation at university. The frustration these students experience causes them to adopt a surface, syllabus-bound, exam-oriented approach to studying: I concentrate strictly on studying business vocab by heart because the exam is like that; Ithen easily forget words learnt for exam. The second group of students shows greater awareness of the constraints teachers operate under. They have a more realistic outlook and a more autonomous approach to their learning, perceiving the remit of Business English classes to be limited (i.e. to provide/transmit specialized knowledge) and accepting responsibility for complementing their content-based classes by looking for communication opportunities in the real world. WU classes are very much business oriented but as we are a business school it is allright. Its the responsibility of the WU to teach business vocab; its the students responsibility to find opportunities to speak. The second group in particular is adept at finding measures to make up for the shortcomings of the WU setting. Strategies frequently mentioned include:
226 Ruth Trinder and Martin Herles
Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Uludag University on March 18, 2013

stay/study abroad; online media (news, American television shows) and old media (books, films, and newspapers) for vocabulary development; social media to communicate (often ELF); NS assistance; strategy adaptation for WU programme (formal practice).

In view of the above, it is not surprising that it is particularly those students who actively look for and exploit out-of-classlearning opportunities who have very different expectations of the kind of benefits they are seeking from formal and informal learning: a firm grounding in business language versus fluency and general vocabulary. This dual approach is also reflected in many students notions of error correction; whilst in informal communication situations, respondents would find it unbefitting to have incorrect grammar or pronunciation corrected, they welcome it in classes, with some even claiming that overt correction of mistakes was one of the main points of classes. Teacher responses Interestingly, in many respects teachers feel quite similarly about the shortcomings of the current situation. Almost unanimously, they feel that there is clearly too little focus on communication, in particular on oral communication skills. They also consider the exams as too difficult and believe that they do not always test language skills but only content. Furthermore, given students often less-than-impressive level of General English, they broadly think that there is too much emphasis on Business English, especially terminology, while the learners would actually need support in more basic language skills. In addition, they also feel that they generally have very little room for creativity as they have virtually no choice regarding the textbooks used for the course. Moreover, they consider the non-compulsory attendance in first-semester classes as counterproductive to effective learning. Finally, regarding the learners, teachers criticize the students rote-learning attitude. Of course, and in contrast to at least the first group of students discussed above, teachers are aware of the main reasons why the situation looks the way it does: the local (excessive content orientation and no legal limit on the number of students) and global (shortened curricula and reduced funding) constraints on the learning/teaching environment. Potentially, the awareness of this substantial mismatch between pedagogical beliefs and reality makes their experience all the more frustrating. Nevertheless, the teaching staff does try to make the best of an unsatisfactory situation. Some of the more commonly applied strategies to make up for the shortcomings are:

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Uludag University on March 18, 2013

including more interactive exercises, pair and team work, presentations, projects, and role play; making modifications to coursebooks and other course material by, for example, making selected cuts and adding extra material; focusing on explanations, feedback, and repetition; using a broad variety of media; trying to establish a rapport and encouraging more contact with students (for example by offering more and extended office hours).
227

Ideals of effective Business English teaching

Conclusion

First, results indicate that in many relevant areas, students notions concerning parameters that hinder or promote effective learning and studying are broadly in agreement with the teachers perspectives. For instance, the importance of both ELF and the need for good communicative skills are universally acknowledged. There is also overall agreement on the flaws in the design of the classes and how the situation, ideally, could be improved. There are some aspects, though, where teachers and learners opinions diverge, such as the role of accuracy, which teachers deem much less significant, and the usefulness of explicit error correction, where teachers apparently err on the side of caution. These findings, especially regarding the issue of corrective feedback, are of relevance for teaching practice for two reasons. Very specifically, disappointing students expectations about error correction by erroneously assuming that the students beliefs are in accordance with ones own could be counterproductive and have a demotivating effect. More generally, the question can be raised whether a specific group of students in a particular setting might have different assumptions, and hence needs, to what research-driven pedagogy recommends. The findings thus add to the body of research analysing whether specific teaching recommendations from second language acquisition (SLA) research can universally be applied to particular, often very specific, contexts. Second, what clearly transpires is that the main conflict students and teachers experience is due to top-down pressure and contextual limitations, and in the case of some students, a lack of autonomy and, concomitantly, an overreliance on teacher-provided learning (and speaking) opportunities. The major local constraining factors are, on the one hand, a strong focus on content-based teaching, born of tradition and the fact that language teaching constantly has to stress and justify its integration into a business school environment, and on the other, the legal situation that does not allow any restriction on student numbers on the part of the university. Global constraints are, first, the ongoing tendency to unify European university systems and the accompanying reduction in curricula and, second, budgetary pressures resulting in less funding for teaching programmes. Thus, contextual parameters can easily render teachers ideals and insights from research impracticable. The study uncovered how academic institutions may fall short of fulfilling students (and teachers) needs, and, furthermore, how students studying orientations may be dysfunctional in a given context. The contextual limitations are unlikely to change and cannot realistically be influenced by learners or teachers. One step towards at least addressing a part of the problem, i.e. some students unrealistic expectations and their teacher dependence, would be to draw upon their metacognitive knowledge and explicitly address curricular goals and constraints, as well as discuss their restrictive beliefs and underused strategies; in short, to point students in the direction of autonomy and independent learning. Final revised version received October 2012

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Uludag University on March 18, 2013

228

Ruth Trinder and Martin Herles

References Breen, M. (ed.). 2001. Learner Contributions to Language Learning. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Brown, A. 2009. Students and teachers perceptions of effective foreign language teaching: a comparison of ideals. The Modern Language Journal 93/1: 4660. Chavez, M. 2007. Students and teachers assessments of the need for accuracy in the oral production of German as a foreign language. The Modern Language Journal 91/4: 53763. Horwitz, E. 1988. The beliefs about language learning of beginning university foreign language students. The Modern Language Journal 72/3: 28394. Ranta, E. 2010. English in the real world vs. English at school: Finnish English teachers and students views. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 20/2: 15677. Timmis, I. 2002. Native-speaker norms and international English: a classroom view. ELT Journal 56/3: 2409.

Wenden, A. 1999. An introduction to metacognitive knowledge and beliefs in language learning: beyond the basics. System 27/4: 43541. White, C. 2008. Beliefs and good language learners in C. Griffiths (ed.). Lessons from Good Language Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Yang, N. D. 1999. The relationship between EFL learners beliefs and learning strategy use. System 27/4: 51535. The authors Ruth Trinder is Associate Professor at WU Wien, Vienna University of Economics and Business. Her main research interests include ICT in language learning, learner beliefs, and SLA theory. Email: rtrinder@wu.ac.at Martin Herles is Assistant Professor at WU Wien, Vienna University of Economics and Business. His main research interests include Business English terminology, discourse analysis, academic writing, and British cultural studies. Email: martin.herles@wu.ac.at

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Uludag University on March 18, 2013

Ideals of effective Business English teaching

229