Since 1986, when the open - Door policy and doi moi began to be applied in Vietnam, the country and its people have witnessed significant changes in many aspects of life. People from other countries have started to come in with investments. The presence o

Part A: Introduction The title of the study: An investigation into students’ conversational needs and some suggestions for a speaking syllabus to the 2nd-year English Bachelor students at Nghe An Junior Teachers’ Training College” I. The rationale for the study Nowadays, English has been used over the world for communication. It is necessary for every body in the world in general and in Vietnam in particular to communicate in English with people from other countries. For many years, the teaching of English in Vietnam always followed the frameworks of English Language Teaching (ELT), from the grammar translation to audio-lingual methods which teaching and testing are focused mainly on writing and reading so Vietnamese students of English had been very good at grammar but could hardly speak English. To catch on with the above demand, Vietnamese teachers of English have been searching for a more suitable and effective method of teaching, and have come to decide on using the Communicative Language Teaching Approach (CLT) at all levels. As a result, speaking skills have gained their important roles in the curriculum of most English courses nowadays. Many years ago, we taught general practice subject (integrated skills- Listening, Speaking, Reading, Writing skill) using the book HEADWAY (from pre-intermediate to upper-intermediate) for English major students during 2 school years in Nghe An Junior Teacher Training College (JTTC). Nowadays, speaking skill has been taught not only in general practice subject but also in speaking subject (3 periods per week for English Bachelor students) in the first and second school years. Nevertheless, there has not been an appropriate speaking syllabus for these students yet. When teaching speaking subject for English mayor students, teachers chose the speaking materials at random or make up their own textbook without basing on any principles or the needs of their students. The truth is that the speaking topics are based only on the subjective thoughts of these teachers. As a result, in the teaching and learning process, there still appears several difficulties that the teachers and students must confront, among which is the lack of relevant topics or practice. In four recent years, Nghe An JTT College has had the three-year training courses for English bachelors (non-teacher training students) with lower college entrance marks than the ones required for teachers of English training’s courses (teacher training students). Ironically, the same syllabuses are applied to teach different groups of students. Of course, they may share some characteristics. For example, a large proportion of them come from rural and remote areas of Nghe An province so their level of English proficiency is very low, and especially, their pronunciation, listening and speaking skills are terrible; But the goals of these two groups, teacher training students and non-teacher training students are quite different. The former usually has an unclear purpose when entering the college. For some of them, simply, they need a place to sit in after finishing school. Additionally, they do not have appropriate learning strategies or appropriate learning styles. What they are familiar with is rote learning of vocabulary and rules. They seem to prefer written work and private reading. Comparing the curriculums for these two groups, the only difference, which can be drawn out is that the one for training English Bachelors has one more Business English subject with two credits in the fifth semester. Obviously, this curriculum with so few professional choices gives student very slim chances in employment. In present time to make some changes to the existing curriculum seems impossible. The only one thing that, as teachers, we could do is to develop syllabuses based on the students’ needs analysis in order to bring motivation to our learners and help them learn English more effectively and efficiently. In our setting, teaching English for the English bachelor students is really challenging. Working with these students for some years in the speaking subject, I find that what we are teaching does not meet the students’ needs. Trying to analyze their conversational needs to develop an appropriate speaking syllabus for English bachelor students in Nghe An JTT College is the goal of this study. II. The aims and objectives of the study The main aims of this study are: - To investigate the students’ conversational needs in learning speaking subject - To give tentative suggestions for designing an appropriate speaking syllabus for the second-year English bachelor students in Nghe An JTTC. It is hoped that there are some suitable changes in teaching speaking subject for this group of students. To achieve the aims of the study, the following specific objectives and activities are carried out: - Firstly, to get overview of the basic theories relating to syllabus design. - Secondly, to find out the students’ needs, interests and expectation in learning English in general and in the speaking subject in particular. - Thirdly, to look for ideas from teachers and the students’ opinions on the current speaking syllabus with reference to students’ needs and interests. - Finally, to suggest an appropriate speaking syllabus for 2nd year English bachelor students in the third semester. III. Scope of study This study should present the basic theories relating to syllabus designing, such as designing, implementing, teaching method and evaluating. However, this study cannot cover speaking syllabus for all learners but it only focuses on a speaking syllabus for the second-year English bachelor students in Nghe An JTTC in accordance with the objectives of the training program for English bachelor students and their needs. In this study, the research will only investigate English bachelor students who have just finished the first year about their needs and interests in learning English in general and in speaking subject in particular in Nghe An JTTC. And then she will suggest a speaking syllabus for the second-year English bachelor students in the following semester basing on their needs analysis and goal setting. IV. Significance of the study This study will be a reference report for syllabus designers so it may be very useful to the teachers and students who teach and learn English-speaking skill in Nghe An JTT College particular and other colleges and universities in general. It is also helpful to those who are interested in this field of study. V. Methods of the study To achieve the aims stated, the main method we apply to carry out the study is quantitative methodology. The data were collected by means of two instruments: questionnaires and interviews and then analyzed quantitatively. After interviewing some experienced teachers in teaching speaking, we will use qualitative analysis to investigate the present situation, the problems of the teachers in teaching speaking subject for English bachelor students at Nghe An JTTC. In reviewing the literature in the field of syllabus design, the main methods are descriptive and inductive. Besides, personal observation through some years of the researcher’s teaching at the college, discussion with colleagues, and talks with students are also the methods of this study. The survey was done on about 100 first – year English bachelor students (three classes) in Nghe An JTT College to investigate their needs, interests and expectation in the speaking subject and their evaluation on the current speaking course. The findings from the data analysis were used as the main basis to develop a tentative syllabus to teach the speaking subject to this group of students in their third semester. VI. Design of the study The study consists of three main parts, a list of reference, and appendices 1. Part A: Introduction presents the rationale, aim, scopes, significance, method of the study and the design of the study. 2. Part B: Development includes three important chapters: - Chapter I reviews the literature related to ESP definition, needs analysis and syllabus design and speaking skills. The literature is a theoretical background for designing syllabuses on speaking skill. - Chapter II shows an overview of English teaching and learning at Nghe An JTT College, teaching staff perspectives to material and syllabus development, and students’ attitude to the current speaking material. - Chapter III presents the study with summary of the findings based on needs analysis and suggests a speaking syllabus to the 2nd – year English bachelor students at Nghe An JTT College in the third semester. 3. Part C is the conclusion of the study, providing summary of the major findings, conclusion, limitation and suggestion for further study. Part B: Development Chapter 1: Literature Review 1.1. An overview of ESP 1.1.1. Definition of ESP Many linguists have defined English for Specific Purpose, which corresponds to the abbreviation ‘ESP’, differently. Each has their own views of the elements that characterize ESP although all of them emphasizes on the needs of the learners. Focusing on the primary of needs in ESP related to the learners, Hutchinson and Waters (1987: 21) state that; “ESP is an approach to language teaching which aims to meet the needs of particular learners”. In another way, Munby (1978; 2) says that: “ESP courses are those where the syllabus and materials are determined in all essentials by the prior analysis of the communication needs of the learners”. In the late of 1960s, thanks to new developments in educational psychology, ESP shifted its attention to the central importance of the learners and their attitudes to learning. Rodgers (1969) points out that learners have different needs and interests, which would have an important influence on their motivation to learn and therefore on the effectiveness of their learning. The assumption underlying this approach is that the clear relevance of the English course to learners’ needs would improve their motivation and thereby make learning better and faster. Many researchers (e.g. Kerr, 1977; Munby, 1978) agree that needs analysis should be conducted prior to course design and material development or selection, and that not only the syllabus, the material, but also teaching methodology should be adapted to the needs of the learners. However, Peter Stevens (1988:1) gave the clearest definition of ESP, in my opinion, as follows: Absolute characteristics of ESP- ESP consists of language teaching, which is: - Designed to meet specified needs of the learners. - Related in content (i.e. in its themes and topics) to particular disciplines, occupations and activities. - Centered on the language appropriate to these activities, in syntax, lexis, discourse, semantics etc. - In contrast with general English Variable characteristics of ESP-ESP may be, but not necessarily: - Restricted as to the language skills to be learned (e.g. reading only, speech recognition only, etc). - Taught according to any pre- ordained methodology (i.e. ESP is not restricted to any particular methodology- although communicative methodology is very often felt to be the most appropriate) It is noteworthy that those definitions imply two factors: (1) the broad meaning of the term purpose and (2) the syllabus basing on learners’ needs analysis to determine the content of the syllabus, the material, and method of teaching to achieve these purposes. Steven’s definition does not only focus on the needs of the learners but also points out the four absolute and two variable characteristics of ESP. It revises and covers all the important features of ESP mentioned previously by other scholars. Therefore, this definition is made as a choice for the basic definition of this study. 1.2. Syllabus design 1.2.1. Definition of syllabus “Syllabus” is a common notion in language teaching. Many linguists have defined “Syllabus” differently. In Wilkins' (1981) words, syllabuses are "specifications of the content of language teaching which have been submitted to some degree of structuring or ordering with the aim of making teaching and learning a more effective process. According to Yalden’s work (1984: 14) “The syllabus replaces the concepts of “methods”, and the syllabus is now seen as an instrument by which the teacher with the help of the syllabus designer can achieve a degree of “fit” between the needs and the aims of the learners (as social being and individual), and the activities which will take place in the classroom”. " Robinson (1991:33-34) shares the same view with Yalden, a syllabus is “a plan of work to be taught in a particular course and is thus essentially for the teachers as a guideline and context for class content.On the common ground, Hutchinson and Waters (1987:80) considers a syllabus as “a document which says what will (or at least what should) be learnt”. 1.2.2. Language Syllabus Design According to Webb (1976), syllabus design is understood as the organization of the selected contents into an ordered and practical sequence for teaching purposes. His criteria for syllabus design is as follows: - Progress from known to unknown matter - Appropriate size of teaching units - A proper variety of activity - Teachability - Creating a sense of purpose for the student. According to Stern, "syllabus design" is just one phase in a system of interrelated curriculum development activities. According to Munby (1984), syllabus design is seen as "a matter of specifying the content that needs to be taught and then organizing it into a teaching syllabus of appropriate learning units." From the above explanations on syllabus design, it can be concluded that syllabus design involves a logical sequence of three main stages: i, needs analysis, ii, content specification iii, syllabus organization. This follows very closely the general model advocated by Taba (1962) with the following steps: needs analysis formulation of objectives selection of content organization of content selection of learning activities organization of learning activities decisions about what needs evaluating and how to evaluate. It is the intention of this paper to deal with the three main stages of syllabus design as listed earlier 1.2.3. Approaches to syllabus design There are probably as many different approaches to ESP syllabus design as there are many course designers. However, in this study, we just examine three main approaches to ESP syllabus design proposed by Hutchinson and Water (1987: 65): Language-centered, skills-centered and learning centered. 1.2.3.1. Language-centered approach This process is the simple and probably the one most familiar to English teachers and it is particularly common in ESP. It, according to Hutchinson and Water (1987), “aims to draw as direct a connection as possible between the analysis of the target situation and the content of the ESP”. This approach has some shortcomings: It is learning-restricted not learner-centered because only the restricted area of the language is taught not the whole of English. The language process can also be criticized for being a static and inflexible procedures, which can take a little account of the conflicts and contradictions that are inherent in any human endeavor. The language-centered model gives no acknowledgement to factors, which must inevitably play a part in the creation of any course. The language-centered analysis of the target situation data is only at the surface level. It reveals very little about the competence that underlies the performance. In sum, it fails to recognize the fact that learners being people, learning is not a straightforward, logical process. 1.2.3.2. Skills-centered approach This approach aims at helping learners to develop skills and strategies, which will continue after the ESP, course itself with its aim of not providing a specified group of linguistic knowledge but making the learners better processors of information. This approach is founded on two fundamental principles, one theoretical, the other pragmatic. This approach, therefore, certainly takes the learners more into account than the language-centered model: a. It views language in terms of how the mind of the learner processes it rather than as an entity in itself. b. It tries to build on the positive factors that the learners bring to the course, rather than just on the negative ideas of ‘lack’. c. It frames its objectives in open-ended terms, so enabling learners to achieves at least something. In sum, in spite of its concern for the learner, the skills-centered approach still approaches the learner as a user of language rather than as a learner of language. 1.2.3.3. A learning centered approach According to Hutchinson and Water (1987:72), “we would reject the term a learner-centered approach in favor of a learning-centered approach to indicate that the concern is to maximize learning” because of the following reasons: * The learner is the only one factor to consider in learning process. * Learning can and should be seen in the context it takes place. * Learning should be seen as an external process since learning is not just a mental process, it is a negotiated process between individuals and society. This approach says that we must look beyond the competence that enables someone to perform, because what we really want to discover is not the competence itself, but how someone acquires that competence. Learning centered approach is an integration of two approaches above, considers the learners at their full components at every stage of learning process: ‘syllabus and materials evolve together with each being able to inform the other’. The learner’ needs as ‘users’ and ‘learners’ of the language are both met. In brief, the researcher will suggest an appropriate syllabus based on learning centered approach because of the advantages of this approach mentioned above. 1.2.4. Three principle types of language syllabus 1.2.4.1. Structural syllabus Wilkins (1976) regards structural syllabus as synthetic. In structural syllabus, the teacher may use either a grammar-translation method or an audio-lingual one, or “eclectic” approach. Whichever he uses, the constraints are the same: the content of the syllabus has been determined by giving top priority to teaching the “grammar” or “structure” of the language. (Yalden,1983:22). In structural syllabus, the vocabulary content is secondary in importance, i.e. the vocabulary learning should not be held down until the major part of the grammatical system has been learned. The structural syllabus is very familiar to language teachers, and it has several advantages. However, structural syllabus has its shortcomings. In teaching approaches based on structural syllabus “meaning has been taught, of course, but it has been primarily the meaning of words and sentences as isolates, and not their meaning within stretches of discourse” (Yalden, 1983:27). According to Karl (1987), there are several weaknesses in using structural syllabus. The most important of these is the usability of structural knowledge. He argues that structural knowledge may be teachable, but it hardly affects behavior in language use to any great degree. He explains: “many students do learn structural matter, and they can demonstrate their knowledge on certain types of tests, but this knowledge does not seem to manifest itself during unmonitored language use. Thus the knowledge is learnable, but the degree to which it is usable is questionable”. Another weakness is a result of the sequencing or grading problems. A strictly structural syllabus may prevent students from producing structures they have not been taught. As a result, students are severely limited or controlled in using the new language until the needed structures have been taught. Oth