A Theoretical Framework For Developing Reading Materials For Information Science Students

1
A Theoretical Framework for Developing
Reading Materials for Information Science
Students
Najia ABDALLAOUI MAAN
Professeur de l’Enseignement Supérieur
Ecole des Sciences de l’Information
Abstract
ESP has always been designed as materials- led and practical in its approach.
The selection of these materials can generate many challenges since the materials should meet
the learners’ needs and be linguistically, thematically and academically adequate. The article
discusses the theories and principles underlying the selection of ESP (English for Specific
Purposes) reading materials for tertiary education students. It also addresses other related
issues like the weight of the faculty responsibility and the assumption of ESP(English for
Specific Purposes) teaching as education rather than training.
ESP (English for Specific Purposes) reading courses in academic settings are
commonly thought of as practical in their orientations. They start from the purposes
they serve and finish with a definite outcome agreed on from the start. This
outcome is usually expected to be a set of fixed linguistic skills and specific
terminology. The missing elements in this view, however, are the nature of the
subject (as involving several disciplines, e.g. reading theory, language learning,
linguistics and education), the human factor (the learner and instructor), the
specificity of the setting (in our case Moroccan tertiary education), and the
interaction among all these variables.
The instructor (who is usually in charge for preparing the course) has to account for
all the factors mentioned above and make decisions during the whole process of the
course development. Her/his practices originate from beliefs, intuition,
experience, or understandings about reading comprehension and language
learning.
Nevertheless, if coherence and performance have to be ensured, decisions have to
be based on clear-cut, conscious principles which are related to one theory or
another. Theories do not dismiss the responsibility of the instructor but provide
her/him with valuable insights and guidance into issues. The instructor has to
make the final decisions.
In fact, in a tertiary level education, whether involved in language teaching or
another subject, the faculty have to base their decisions about the varied aspects

2
of their courses (from objectives, through programmes, to methodology or
contents) on scientific procedures. Old practices and wisdom have to be verified
against new developments.
Experience of itself has no significance but can only have
significance attributed to it. Custom of itself is no surety of
effective action. It may of course turn out that there are after all
good independent reasons for respecting the intuitive judgements
which come from long experience. But it does not seem sensible
to accept them unless they can be given rational sanction
(Widdowson, 1990: 2).
In a rapidly changing context, the faculty have to actualize their knowledge to
keep up with current views both on the subject matter of their course and
educational theories. This cannot be achieved, of course, unless they are willing
and supported to expand their potential, and are given the opportunity for change
and growth through continuous education and research.
The faculty involved in ESP (English for Specific Purposes) classes make no
exception. They deal with adults in academic settings and are under pressure to
respond to the challenging needs of their learners and the demands of their ever
changing profession.
In an ESP (English for Specific Purposes) reading course, the faculty are required to
make several decisions and choices to develop materials. Sound criteria have to be
determined.
Criteria to consider for materials’ development are numerous and vary from a
focus on learners, through learning, to language, contextual variables, activities
and task types, to the format they may take. To account for them all is beyond the
scope of this paper.
As argued above, any decision has to rely on a clear approach. In this paper, I will
review the theoretical basis for developing reading materials, notably reading
theories and ESP (English for Specific Purposes) perspectives, address key issues
and try to set a conceptual framework, wide enough to cover the varied
dimensions revealed by reading and ESP (English for Specific Purposes) research
but sufficiently coherent and integrated to ensure continuity and relevance in ESP
reading materials for tertiary education students.
1. Underlying Theories and Orientations for Materials Development
1.1. Perspectives of Reading and Teaching Practices

3
Research and assumptions about the reading process have evolved in parallel and
profited from insights of other disciplines, like psychology, education, linguistics,
and information processing. Several marked phases of the reading process and
learning can be differentiated. The phase of “conditioned learning” was shaped
by the principles of behaviourism; the era of natural learning reflected the
perceptions of cognitive theory; the era of information processing was affected by
artificial intelligence research; the era of sociocultural learning was controlled by
social and cultural studies; and finally the present period which accounts for the
hypermedia environment and the student’s motivation (Alexander and Fox,
2004).
1.1.1. Behaviourism and Reading
The first early research on reading is connected with behaviourism and assumes
that reading is a precise bottom-up process which relies on perceptual stimuli,
letter by letter, word by word decoding, and phonic recoding to get meaning.
Learning to read occurs, not as growth or development, but as the learning of a
definite observable set of skills and processes through repeated and controlled
stimulation. Research places emphasis on identifying the subskills, i.e. the
grapho-phonic system (letters and sounds that render them), words, and
grammatical structures required for reading.
Along the same lines, “traditional” ESL/EFL (English as a Second Language
/English as a Foreign language) reading instruction relies on teaching
pronunciation, lists of words and structures. The text is usually short and
controlled and used as a means to illustrate grammatical structures and
vocabulary; meaning is secondary. The reader may not even depend on the text
for meaning but on the teacher who is regarded as the primary source of
information.
1.1.2. Cognitive Theory and Reading
Shaped by cognitive theory and Chomsky’s ideas (i.e. that language has a natural
and rule-governed structure), psycholinguistic models view reading as an inherent
ability which can be developed by exposure in meaningful situations. They also
stress the central role of the reader in the reading process and minimal attention to
visual decoding (Goodman, 1980). Reading is viewed as “a selective process…a
psycholinguistic guessing game” (Goodman, 1972: 16). Teaching reading places
emphasis on prediction, guessing and use of background knowledge instead of
focus on letters and words.

4
Psycholinguistic models, however, like their predecessor show weaknesses
because of their overemphasis on the top-down processing concept and neglect of
the linguistic aspects of the text in meaning construction.
1.1.3. Information processing and Reading
The following phase in reading research is shaped by artificial intelligence and
information- processing perspectives. It has a pervasive impact on reading
understanding and instruction.
The reading models proposed maintain that both bottom-up and top-down
processes operate simultaneously or alternatively and influence each other. The
reader, simultaneously but selectively, utilizes a wide range of sources of
information: visual, lexical, syntactic, semantic and schematic. Both internal
mental workings and textual factors are involved in the reading process.
Interactive models, however, are numerous and differ in the degree of emphasis
placed on defining how processes interact (Rumelhart & McClleland, 1981;
Stanovich, 1980; Perfetti & Roth, 1981).
A further development of the interactive models is schema-theory which tries to
describe how knowledge is represented in the mind and used in comprehending a
text. Schemata are defined as abstract knowledge structures (not the background
knowledge but its structures) which provide frameworks for related concepts and
facilitate the use of this knowledge; they are the building blocks of cognition
(Rumelhart, 1980). The schematic knowledge is divided into formal schemata,
i.e. the background knowledge of the rhetorical organisational structures of texts,
and the content schemata, i.e. the background knowledge of the areas of these
texts (domain –specific and cultural components included).
The schema theoretical model, which presents reading comprehension in general
as an interaction between the reader and the text has resulted in a wide literature on
text description and analysis (e.g. Kintsch & Van Dijk, 1978 and Meyer, 1975),
and a shift in reading pedagogy. Emphasis is placed on teaching strategies (e.g.
predicting, summarizing, mapping, self-questioning, etc.) which help the reader
activate, access and refine her/his knowledge.
Knowledge exists in several forms and interactive dimensions; knowledge of one’s
abilities, beliefs and goals (declarative knowledge), knowledge of strategies
(procedural knowledge), and Conditional knowledge (knowing the conditions under
which one may apply certain actions) (Paris, Lipson, & Wixson, 1983). Reading
situations and corresponding students’ behaviours are analysed and reported. Lorch
& al (1993) records ten situations of reading distributed into two categories. The
first category, reading for school, includes exam preparation, reading for research,

5
class preparation and reading to learn. The second category, reading by choice,
includes reading to apply, search reading to self-inform, to carry out intellectually
challenging reading, reading for stimulation and light reading. Each situation
combined with the student’s purpose engenders specific cognitive demands,
involvement, depth of reading and strategy use.
ESL/EFL (English as a Second language/ English as a Foreign Language) reading
research embraces the views of a schema interactive reading theory and places
emphasis on the reader and the strategies s/he uses to construct meaning.
Strategies, however, reveal abundance and disparities in definitions and
classifications. Several interacting factors are found to influence effective selection
and use of these strategies, notably, motivation, beliefs, language proficiency and
cultural background. Strategies are “successful” or “unsuccessful” only in relation
to a specific purpose, context, reader and text. Instruction aims at “bridging the gap”
between the author’s and the reader’s schematic worlds through appropriate
strategy use. The reader’s contextual factors, affect and beliefs are accounted for
(Abdallaoui, 2001).
Controversy persists concerning the extent of focus which should be placed on
lower-level processes (e.g. letter, feature, word and syntactic processing).
Supporters argue language skills are critical for developing fluency and
automaticity which EFL readers lack. Opponents fear reading instruction would slip
back to structuralism and be equated with decoding and teaching lists of
vocabulary. EFL/ESL (English as a Second language/ English as a Foreign
Language) reading ability and language proficiency are interrelated but distinctly
different abilities (Abdallaoui, 2001).
A general consensus, however, exists about the benefits of extensive reading in
increasing, among others, readers’ fluency and vocabulary input. Extensive reading
raises other issues for consideration, notably, the nature of the materials used (e.g.
narratives or expository texts, authentic or simplified, literary works, content-area,
or self-selected materials), the vocabulary load, timing, evaluation, etc. Research
findings are not conclusive (Day & Bamford, 1998; Nation, 2001; Gardner, 2004;
Hunt & Beglar, 2005).
1.1.4. Sociocultural Research and Reading
Further change in the perspectives of reading research came with educational, social
and cultural studies which put emphasis on the conception of learning as a
sociocultural experience closely interacting with knowledge.
Knowledge exists in the social and contextual interchanges and no longer in
individual minds, and its conditionality can arise from social and contextual factors

6
(Lantoff, 1999; Scollon, 1999). Gardner (1991) points to the existence of formal
knowledge (“schooled”) and informal knowledge (“unschooled”) and their salience
in learning. In certain circumstances, knowledge is even revealed to negatively
affect learning and obstruct conceptual change through misconceptions and strong
opinion. The specific nature of disciplines (e.g. mathematics versus history) and the
beliefs about the learning of these disciplines are also factors which modify
knowledge (Alexander & Fox, 2004).
Literacy instruction has to be responsive to the sociocultural dimension of the
student’s knowledge to promote learning (Au, 2001, 2002; Gregory, 2002). This is
translated in the form of cultural relevance of educational materials and procedures,
literature instruction, collaborative learning, and learners’ engagement.
This interest in the readers’ engagement has resulted in focus on motivational
factors, notably, goals and interests. Research concludes that there is an interaction
between the readers’ motivation, knowledge, strategies and the text (Guthrie et al,
1996; Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000; Pressly, 2002; Ridgway, 2003; Ozgungor &
Guthrie, 2004; Walter, 2004).
1.1.5. Information and Communication Technologies and Reading
The advent of the new technologies has transformed research on reading and
reading instruction. New approaches and procedures are required to deal with the
non print, non linear and visually complex reading materials. The conception of
literacy has to be redefined and expanded to account for the new demands of the use
of information and communication technologies (ICTs) (Hanson-Smith, 2003).
The new technologies provide enormous facilities to empower learning. They help
develop the ability to construct meaning through the use of multiple sign systems
and reflect on language (Carroll, 1999). The Internet provides a wide pool of
authentic materials of different genres, topics, registers and sources. The learner has
to be equipped with new reading procedures and competencies. Above all, critical
thinking and critical reading skills (i.e. ability to understand, analyse, interpret,
monitor comprehension, evaluate content, discern fallacies and biases, etc.) are
required (Leu et al, 2004; Stapleton, 2005).
In sum, reading comprehension perspectives are wide, complex, and
multidimensional. Reading occurs in a bottom-up, top-down and in an interactive
manner, shaped by several factors: physical, psychological, social, textual, and
technological factors. Instruction aims at developing a fluent, autonomous and
engaged reader, capable of constructing meaning, reflecting on language and
evaluating what s/he is reading. Instruction practices vary from focus on phonics,

7
single words and structures, to a holistic approach which involves text analysis and
use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies.
Several issues, however, are still unanswered, especially in terms of the balance to
be established among the various interacting parameters, and the extent of focus to
place on each. Moreover, knowledge, abilities, motivation and experiences interact
and differ in countless ways, which makes each reading setting as well as its
requirements unique.
1. 2. ESP (English for Specific Purposes) Perspectives
Several abbreviations and labels have been attributed to ESP (English for Specific
Purposes), but it is commonly agreed to divide ESP in two classes; English for
Academic Purposes (EAP) and English for Occupational Purposes, or professional
purposes (EOP). Further groupings of the two main branches and more
abbreviations have been added to reflect the increasing specificity of the
corresponding courses: e.g. English for Science and Technology (EST), English for
Medical Purposes (EMP), English for Business Purposes (EBP)…etc. Of note here
is the distinction made in EAP (English for Academic Purposes) between English
for General Academic Purposes (EGAP) and English for Specific Academic
Purposes (ESAP).
This “splitting-up” of the field generates overlapping and confusion among its
different branches and the programme components to be included. Dudley-Evans &
St John (1998) suggest presenting the whole of English Language Teaching (ELT)
on a continuum which starts with general English courses for beginners to very
specific courses. The course becomes really specific only at the end of the
continuum. Anyway, whatever the groupings proposed, they all have the learners’
specific needs at the centre.
In fact, ESP (English for Specific Purposes) is an approach to language teaching in
which all decisions concerning design, materials and methods are dependent on the
learners’ specific needs. Anchored in Applied linguistics and ELT (English
language Teaching), “ESP is essentially a materials- and teaching-led movement”
(Dudley-Evans & St John, 1998: 19). It has gone through different stages which
correspond to parallel developments in educational pedagogy, linguistics and
language teaching.
1.2.1 Trends in ESP (English for Specific Purposes)
ESP grew as a result of the scientific, technical and economic changes of the 60’s
and the increasing need for learning English. Practitioners, relying on language
teaching and applied linguistics perspectives, worked under pressure to produce

8
teaching materials. They, in turn, enriched the same fields with their new views and
experience. ESP (English for Specific Purposes) has been marked by a continuous
fluctuation between practice and theory. The following trends can be noted:
Learning Needs Analysis, Register Analysis (or language structure), Rhetorical,
Discourse and Genre Analysis, and Skills Analysis.
1.2.1.1. Learning Needs Analysis
“Needs analysis should be the starting point for devising syllabuses, courses,
materials and the kind of teaching and learning that takes place” (Jordan, 1997 :
22). In ESP (English for Specific Purposes), Needs Analysis holds a central place.
Definitions of the concept, however, vary from one study to another, depending
on the perspective and beliefs of the researcher (Abdallaoui & Hadddouchi,
2002).
Closely linked with an ESP (English for Specific Purposes) perspective, the
Target Situation Analysis defines needs in terms of the target needs, or the uses
to which the language will be put (Mackay and Mountford, 1978; Dubin and
Olshtain, 1986).
More comprehensive, Munby’s Communicative Syllabus Design (1978) follows a
sociolinguistic approach. It tries to define “the content of purpose-specific
language programmes”. At the centre of the model is the “communication needs
processor” (CNP) which indicates in great detail “the variables that affect
communication needs”. They are organised into two sets of parameters. The first
set is concerned with the non-linguistic information about the “participant”, the
purposive domain, the setting where the language will be used, and the
instrumentality (the medium, mode and channel of communication). The second
set of parameters provides linguistic data; dialect, level of linguistic proficiency,
communicative events (what the learner will have to do in English) and
communicative key (the manner in which communication needs to be done).
Munby’s work, though complex and difficult to use, marked a turning point in
needs analysis.
Richterich and Chancerel (1980) and Richterich (1983), while still thinking in
terms of the outcome of learning, believe that needs should be defined from the
point of view of the learner who is at the centre of the system. Information about
the learner’s personal resources and the state of her/his language proficiency at
the beginning of the language course is vital. Needs are also viewed as
developing and changing not static. The learner’ needs will be provided by the
learner herself/himself, the teaching establishment and the “utilizing institutions”;

9
which means making compromises among the learner’s resources, the
administrative goals and the social orientation of these institutions.
Hutchinson and Waters (1987) represent another trend, which also focuses on
language needs but recommends a learning-centred approach. Target needs are
composed of “necessities” (what the learner needs to know in order to cope),
“lacks” (what necessities the learner does not know) and finally, “the wants” as
perceived by the learner.
The adherents to the cognitive perspective have a different standpoint.
“The defining of the subject English is in this view primarily not a
matter of language but of non-linguistic content. One might argue
then that the effectiveness of language teaching will depend on what is
being taught, other than the language, that will be recognized by the
learners as a purposeful and relevant extension of their schematic
horizons.” (Widdowson, 1990: 103)
Needs are then defined in terms of processes of learning rather than solely in
terms of end goals and purposes (Nunan, 1988). Emphasis is placed upon the
methods of learning and methodology of teaching. Strategy (or skills, processes)
analysis is one of the areas most favoured in this perspective (see below skills
analysis).
The next trend to be introduced defines needs in terms of affective goals. In fact,
placed within a humanistic theory, this approach considers that the existing
attitudes of learners, their previously acquired experiences, and their affective
engagement with the learning process influence the development of proficiency.
Information about those attitudes and experiences could be of paramount
significance to language classes (Stern, 1992).
Further descriptions of needs refer to “felt” needs and “perceived” needs. Felt
needs are those which learners have whereas perceived needs are teacher- centred
inputs to the planning process. Likewise, a distinction is made between
“subjective” and “objective” needs (Brindley, 1989; Brown, 1995). The first of
these terms refers to the cognitive and affective needs of the learner in the
learning situation. The second term is determined through factual, observable
data related to the situation, the learners, the language to be acquired, the
learners’ present proficiency and skills levels, etc.

10
In sum, needs analysis emerges as a concept difficult to delineate and varies with
the perspective of the researcher. Nevertheless, researchers agree on certain
concepts. First, a distinction is made between the final goals to be reached and
the means or objectives for achieving those goals.
“Goals are a way of putting into words the main purposes and
intended outcomes of your course. If we use the analogy of a
journey, the destination is the goal, the journey is the course”
(Graves, 2000: 75).
The second belief relates to the fact that needs analysis is not static but a flexible
and ongoing process of collecting data about learners’ needs and preferences
(Brown, 1995; Graves, 2000). Finally, the last point professionals agree on
concerns the complexity of needs analysis, and the necessity for curriculum
developers to be aware of the wide range of needs and beliefs underlying them.
Priorities will then be determined depending on the particular specificities of
each context (Brown, 1995; Jordan, 1997; Graves, 2000).
1.2.1.2 Register Analysis
Related to target needs analysis, Register analysis is based on the premise that
specific academic disciplines and professional areas have specific languages
different from the general language. It is shaped by the structural view which
assumes that learning a language means mastering the “building blocks” of the
language, from phoneme to word, to sentence and mastering the rules (the grammar
and structures) that combine them (Richards & Rodgers, 1986).
Early ESP (English for Specific Purposes) practitioners set themselves the task to
analyse specific languages in order to determine their linguistic and functional
properties and provide an input for teaching materials. The research on register
analysis is carried in structural terms and involves quantitative studies about English
for Science and Technology. Frequency counts of grammatical structures and
vocabulary items are provided. ESP (English for Specific Purposes) has become
associated with certain types of vocabulary and grammatical structures like the
passive or the simple present tense, which are reported to characterize scientific
writing.
Nevertheless, research has recognized the difficulty of teaching semi-technical
vocabulary, i.e. partly specific to certain disciplines but used in general English like
“consists of”, “contains”…etc. The idea of a basic specific language common to all

11
scientific disciplines has pervaded and with it the issue of how specialised an ESP
(English for Specific Purposes) course should be.
The materials produced under that perspective are substandard. The passages used
are usually related to a specific discipline, followed by a set of repetitive exercises,
lacking variety. The concentration on vocabulary and grammar is inadequate for
writing a credible textbook on English for Science and Technology (Dudley-Evans
& St John, 1998). Concern for meaning in language learning casts doubts about
register analysis.
1.2.1.3. Rhetorical, Discourse and Genre Analysis
Along with the realisation that language involves more than inventories of
grammatical structures and vocabulary, a broader view of language has emerged
and has given rise to functional, notional and communicative perspectives.
Functions are the communicative purposes for which we use language (e.g.
definitions, dimensions, properties), while notions are the conceptual meanings
(objects, entities, state of affairs, logical relationships, and so on) expressed through
language” (Nunan, 1988: 35).
Analysing language in terms of functions and notions, and starting with the content
of scientific language rather than structures, has been particularly appealing to ESP
(English for Specific Purposes) practitioners. ESP learners would have the
opportunity to know about how scientists use the system and follow new courses
instead of previous remedial courses.
The approach has moved forward to examine the relations between grammatical
items and purpose. Trimble (1985) investigates the rhetorical elements in the
discourse of scientific and technical English. Rhetorical elements are “the process a
writer uses to produce a desired piece of text. This process is basically one of
choosing and organizing information for a specific set of purposes and a specific set
of readers” (p.10).
Further insights have emerged from the field of discourse analysis which has
produced an extensive literature especially on cohesion and coherence,
background/foreground information, given/new, story grammar (the structure of
narratives), text structure (e.g. problem/solution, cause/effect, description,
comparison, recall, etc.) (Abdallaoui, 2001).
Nevertheless, the communicative approach has shaped ESP (English for Specific
Purposes) and focus is placed on analysing the nature of discourse and the abilities
involved in creating it. Teaching scientific and technical English implies teaching
how scientists and technologists use the system instead of presenting a set of

12
isolated functions and notions. In other words, ESP (English for Specific Purposes)
courses should enhance communicative abilities of learners by focusing on “use”
rather than “usage” (or conventional form), and associating teaching the language
with other subjects in the curriculum (Widdowson, 1978).
In the ESP (English for Specific Purposes) classroom, the content-based approach
does not seem to be satisfactory; it raises some doubts related to the mismatch
between the ESP (English for Specific Purposes) the learner’s and the instructor’s
knowledge of the specific domain. A trivialized content can be uninteresting and
frustrating to learners. The other concerns are related to the selection and
sequencing of contents.
The next development is genre analysis. According to Swales (1990):
A genre comprises a class of communicative events, the
members of which share some set of communicative purposes.
These purposes are recognised by the expert members of the
parent discourse community, and thereby constitute the
rationale for the genre. The rationale shapes the schematic
structure of the discourse and influences and constrains choice
and of content and style (p.58).
The assumption underlying genre analysis is that certain categories of discourse
present regular patterns of “moves” or “steps” as they occur. For example, in
research article introductions, genre analysis identifies a set of moves which writers
across disciplines follow to write a research paper. Genre imposes constraints at the
level of discourse structure, whereas register imposes constraints at the level of
vocabulary and grammatical structures.
Genres may include research papers, abstracts, letters of personal reference, news
broadcasts, recipes, political speech, etc. Swales (1990) accepts that content and
formal schemata contribute to recognizing a genre and to producing similar models.
Nevertheless, schema-theory is primarily concerned with the cognitive aspects of
text processing, and relies on “decontextualised” samples of texts. Therefore,
schema theory cannot account for the communicative dimension of genres.
Genre analysis seems to be useful and easily adaptable to the ESP (English for
Specific Purposes) classroom. Moves of a given genre can be identified and used
for materials development. The risk, however, lies in dealing with moves as fixed
“technical” entities and ignoring their communicative aspects. Hyland (2005)
suggests raising students’ consciousness of the nature of conventions used,
highlighting features by comparing texts from different disciplines, i.e. getting
students to become “mini-discourse analysts”.

13
Another evolution of ESP (English for Specific Purposes) is the increasing interest
and analysis of specialised corpora (or electronic text collections). Large and varied
language corpora are being built in different fields and allow researchers to obtain
comprehensive and representative data of language use. Like register analysis,
corpus analysis provides frequency counts of the linguistic properties of a specific
language. Unlike register analysis, however, it uses large samples of language,
which allows more accurate statistics and a deeper insight into the relations existing
among the various rhetorical functions of a text (Flowerdew, 2002).
Corpora analysis has led to a renewed interest in Register analysis and instruction of
form, and with that the risk of focus on the product at the expense of the process.
Nevertheless, by revealing characteristics of discourse, corpora analysis has paved
the way to other perspectives, notably “hedging” or vague language. Hedging is
defined as the practice of expressing statements with “caution” and “diplomatic
deference” to the views of colleagues in academic language. In other words,
hedging is a discoursal resource in expressing uncertainty, scepticism, and open-
mindedness about one’s propositions (Hyland, 1996). The most frequently used
devices are “shields”, i.e. modal verbs expressing possibility, probability;
“approximators”, expressing quantity, degree, frequency, etc.; expressions such as
“I believe”, “to our knowledge”, etc.; “emotionally-charged intensifiers”, such as
extremely interesting, unexpectedly, etc. Foreign language learners should be made
aware of such “hedging techniques”. Consciousness-raising exercises are proposed,
like rewriting exercises and translation (Jordan, 1997).
1.2.1.4. Skills Analysis
Along with a growing interest in processes and learners, the skills approach has
been concerned with what learners do as readers, writers, listeners and speakers.
The focus is on processes rather than language. The approach is particularly useful
when a group of learners is heterogeneous and the decision about language data is
complex.
Three parameters are involved in skills analysis: the study situation (e.g. lecture,
seminar, private study, research, etc.); skills or macro-skills (i.e. reading, writing,
listening and speaking); and sub-skills (or study skills, i.e. the techniques, abilities
or strategies used when reading, writing, or listening).
The integration of skills in a course depends on the learners’ needs and contextual
factors. One or more skills may be needed and may stand in a hierarchical position.
Moreover, the boundaries between skills may be blurred; for example, teaching
reading comprehension may rely on writing or listening and vice versa. It may also

14
share the same sub-skill (e.g. note taking) with another macro-skill (e.g. listening)
(Jordan, 1997).
Study skills, needed by university learners studying in English textbooks, are wide
and can be difficult to specify. Jordan (1997) draws a list of eight situations and
more than fifty study skills which can be used more than once depending on the
target situation. Study skills can vary from reading efficiently, note taking,
summarising, paraphrasing, asking questions, clarifying, to finding and analysing
evidence or preparing for exams. The analysis of the target situation helps defining
the skills needed.
The approach is particularly relevant to EAP (English for Academic Purposes)
learners as it answers immediate needs. The danger, however, is dealing with the
skills in a mechanical manner, transforming the EAP (English for Academic
Purposes) class into a training class. The educational dimension of the EAP class is
necessary for the development of “a general capacity or set of procedures to cope
with a wide range of needs” (Dudley-Evan & St John, 1998: 42).
In sum, ESP (English for Specific Purposes) has gone a long way since it started but
its concerns seem to be constant. Hewings (2002) presents a paper in which he
analyzes the evolution of the field of ESP (English for Specific Purposes) through
the topics covered by the journal of English for Specific Purposes (which was
previously called ESP Journal and which is an established journal in the field)
during a period of 21 years. The following categories are revealed: analysing
discourse, describing a programme or a course, focusing on needs or syllabus
design, dealing with materials or methods, presenting an argument or discussion,
dealing with testing and teacher training. He also notes that the main change that
has occurred through the years is the increasing interest in discourse analysis and
the relative decline in programme descriptions.
The identified categories reflect the focus of ESP (English for Specific Purposes) on
practical matters of teaching. The missing ingredient, however, is focus on the
learner and learning processes. Skills analysis looks into the processes but from an
external position and not from inside, i.e. learning strategies, their interaction with
learners and discipline factors.
1. 2. 2. Issues in ESP (English for Specific Purposes)
ESP research and practices have matured and have influenced ELT (English
Language Teaching) in their focus on meeting learners’ external needs.
Nevertheless, many issues are still controversial, notably authenticity, specificity of
materials, status of the courses.

15
1.2.2.1. Authenticity
Utilising authentic or natural language in the classroom has been one of the points
debated in ESP (English for Specific Purposes) circles. The assumption is that
learners should use language in the classroom in an identical manner as that they
would use in natural circumstances. For example, if a learner is being prepared to
read the literature of a specific discipline, the texts used in the classroom should be
from that literature.
The word “Authentic”, however, is not clear. For some it refers to the language
input only; for others it refers to language input and tasks; and still for others it
includes even the nature of the learners’ engagement. In that sense, some argue that
the concept is illusive (Widdowson, 1990). When a text or a discourse is removed
from its natural context, it is no longer authentic (Graves, 2000). Besides, learners
cannot be engaged with the text in the manner a native or fluent speaker of the
language may do. Others, however, believe that authenticity of materials could be
realized if materials serve both an authentic communicative purpose and a language
learning purpose (Clark, 1987).
The question is debatable and no clear answer has been provided by research.
Nevertheless, the concept of authenticity has made its way in the field of ESP
(English for Specific Purposes) especially that of the text used in the classroom. As
pointed above, authenticity has several degrees and complete authenticity may not
be feasible but authenticity of the text (in the sense the text is originally written for
native or fluent readers, not for language classes) has been widely used and
approved.
In fact, learners have to be exposed to an authentic text for several reasons. A
simplified text has been proved to disrupt the meaning of a text or make it more
complex by reducing its cohesive ties, the continuity and redundancy features
which could help reading for development of ideas. Moreover, an authentic text can
be motivating and challenging especially to tertiary education students. (For more
details see Abdallaoui, 2001).
1.2.2.2. Degree of Specificity of Materials
Another debate which has prevailed in the field of ESP (English for Specific
Purposes) is the degree of specificity of the materials used. The advocates of
specificity argue that different academic disciplines have varying rhetorical
conventions which have to be focused in an ESP course. Exposing learners to the
language of their discipline would make their classes more efficient. Learners’
specific needs have to be accounted for (Swales, 1990; Dudley-Evans & St John,
1998).

16
The opponents argue for a “wide-angle” approach which allows using texts from
other fields than those of the learners. The underlying belief is that a “narrow-
angle” approach may prove demotivating and irrelevant to learners’ needs
(Hutchison &Waters, 1987). Moreover, Learners can handle the complexities of
terminology of their own discipline more than the ESP (English for Specific
Purposes) instructor. As mentioned previously, a trivialisation of content can be
frustrating and time wasting.
The narrow-angle approach can also be restrictive to both learners and instructors.
In fact, learners may need to be exposed to materials from their discipline, know
about its linguistic properties and communicative use, but it may also be valuable to
them to be exposed to a variety of patterns and genres of core academic English
used across disciplines. Moreover, in academic settings, disciplines overlap in
diverse and countless ways. It would be unfeasible for an ESP (English for Specific
Purposes) course to expose learners to samples of all the language they may need in
real contexts.
Certainly, a compromise between common core Academic English and Specific
English has to be established, otherwise ESP would have no reason to exist. Yet, it
should be remembered to sort out the confusion occurring between the goal (“the
destination” or the language learners should be capable of dealing with once they
have finished their ESP (English for Specific Purposes) classes) and the means (the
course, or what they have to do to learn to use the language naturally).
Whatever the approach employed, it should aim at developing the learner’s capacity
to cope once the course is finished. The ultimate aim is an autonomous critical
learner, capable of solving problems as they arise in authentic situations.
1.2.2.3. Training versus Education
Since the beginning, ESP (English for Specific Purposes) has been characterised by
focus on end product, not process and has been expected to be “in the service” of
other disciplines. The concept “in the service” has created both openings and
difficulties to the field.
Dealing with other disciplines gives ESP (English for Specific Purposes) different
prospects from the parent field ELT (English Language Teaching). ESP has
contributed to and profited from research in register and discourse analysis; it has
acquired new knowledge about methods and activities of the disciplines it “serves”
and, in turn, has influenced them by its insights and pedagogy (Swales, 1990).

17
As an example, the insights about the workings of academic language provided by
genre analysis profit not only to the language learners but also to both the academia
and native speakers. In the same vein, study skills are moving from the “technique”
to the “critical thinking” concept which helps the learner develop a methodology
and an intellectual capacity valuable, not only in language learning, but to academic
performance in general.
The other side of the story, however, does not present equally positive prospects.
Being “in the service” of other disciplines may lead to thinking that the course
involves training learners in some techniques which do not, in a certain way, belong
to the academic realm; anyone mastering the language can teach it. It is just a
matter of knowing the vocabulary and grammar. Some non- language specialists
think it is their duty to provide language instructors with indications about how to
teach-even the language, while others feel the EAP (English for Academic
Purposes) instructor is intruding on their field.
The result is that the discipline is sometimes believed to be of lower status. This
may be translated in giving it low priority in facilities of research and further
education, in resources, time allocation, and cooperation with non-language
specialists.
As shown and argued throughout this paper, several factors are intertwined in
teaching a language, be it general or specific. It is not just a question of making lists
of objectives, materials and techniques to obtain an end- product. It is about
education. Teaching a language implies taking decisions and making choices at all
levels: linguistic, conceptual, psychological, sociocultural, ethical, etc. In an
academic setting, where learners are adults of certain intellectual abilities and
expectations, the factors involved take higher dimensions (see introduction).
The faculty have to be accountable, measure up to those expectations, and be
granted the opportunity to develop academically and professionally. They should
also respect students as citizens having rights and duties. The students, who should
show responsible and positive attitudes towards their learning, have the right to
have worthwhile challenging and enriching courses.
The courses should be accorded a status equal to that of other subjects, and be dealt
with as distinct entities involved in education, not training; yet an essential part of
the institution’s educational scheme.
2. Principles from Theory to Guide Reading Materials Development

18
Drawing from reading theory and ESP (English for Specific Purposes) orientations,
a list of the main principles, which will form the basis for developing a framework
for reading materials, will be established.
2.1. Principles from Reading Theory
 Reading comprehension is an interactive process which involves
communication between the reader and the author.
 Reading involves Knowledge. Knowledge is complex and is
shaped by wide parameters: physical, cognitive, psychological,
sociocultural, technological, etc.
 Reading instruction aims at learners’ engagement and
development, not only the mastery of skills.
 Text is linear, knowledge is not. Reading involves both text and
knowledge. Balance needed between lower-level language skills
and higher-level processing skills.
 Readers’ strategies help activate and access knowledge.
2.2. Principles from ESP (English for Specific Purposes) Orientations
 ESP (English for Specific Purposes) is multidisciplinary: it
involves language learning, applied linguistics, related specific
disciplines insights, etc.
 Language is not a set of isolated grammatical items, vocabulary
and functions. Language is a whole based on meaning and
communication.
 The goals to be attained are different from the content of the
course.
 Language provided should reflect learners’ needs, interest and
aspirations.
 Skills should be focused on to engage learners in their learning.
2.3. Principles from Both Perspectives
 Reading and language instruction aim at learners’ development,
not training.
 Reading comprehension and language learning are not just a
matter of linguistic knowledge.
 Reading comprehension and language learning are
communicative and involve bridging the gap between two
schematic worlds.
 Need for integration of balance between language skills and other
processing procedures.

19
 Materials have to be responsive to the parameters interacting in
reading and language learning: cognitive, linguistic, psychological,
social, affective, etc.
 The reader and the specific language learner are central to their
learning and have to participate in that learning.
 Materials should account for learners’ needs and promote learners’
responsibility and their capacity of learning how to learn.
3. Reading Materials Development
Once the approach, or principles, is elicited, the next step will be making decisions
about Materials’ selection. First, however, a definition of materials as used in this
paper will be provided.
3.1. Defining Terms
The definition of materials for language teaching differs from one researcher to
another. For some, materials refer to “any systematic description of the
techniques and exercises to be used in classroom teaching” (Brown, 1995: 139).
Such definition is wide as it includes lesson plans as well as books, packets of
audiovisual aids, games, or any other types of activities that go on in the language
classroom. A similar definition, but more limited, refers to “materials” as “units
and lessons within those units to carry out the goals and objectives of the course”
(Graves, 2000: 149).
In turn, techniques, activities and exercises used in a language classroom are not
clear-cut. It is widely affirmed that the lines between techniques, activities,
exercises and the form in which they are presented are often blurred (Brown, 1995;
Graves, 2000; and Jordan, 1997).
In the case of a reading comprehension course, the text used and the related
exercises play an important role in implementing the objectives of the course.
Therefore, “reading materials” here refer to any written text, virtual or paper-
based, and the activities or exercises which could help in the teaching and
learning of reading comprehension in an ESAP (English for Specific Academic
Purposes) course.
3.2. Text selection
At this stage, and in agreement with the principles mentioned above, decisions
concerning the text selection will have to be made and criteria to be determined.
3.2.1. Learning Needs

20
The first factor to take into account, however, is the learning and learners’ needs. As
noted above, learners are at the centre and their interests guide choices.
Nevertheless, learners’ interests may be disparate and at times in mismatch with the
learning goals or approach (e.g. a learner may prefer to focus on formal grammar
rules, whereas the course relies on a communicative approach), with those of other
learners or with the institution’s goals. In that case, the various needs should be
elicited, and choices made accordingly. Most of the time, compromises have to be
reached, with the interests of the whole group in the foreground. Discussion and
negotiation can be valuable. (See Abdallaoui & Haddouchi, 2002, for more details
about ESI students’ needs analysis).
The second stage will be defining criteria for selecting texts. These are of two types:
textual features and content. The boundaries between the two types are fine, as it is
the case, for instance, of “authenticity”, “density”, but this dichotomy is utilized for
study purposes.
3.2.2. Textual features
They include instructional appropriateness, authenticity, organisation, density, and
cohesion.
Instructional appropriateness refers here to the linguistic level of the text which
should be neither exceedingly difficult nor desperately easy. The text structure,
genre of the text should be varied and yet representative of those students have to
handle in their specific field of study. For example, for information science
students, it would be more appropriate to choose an expository text, having a
problem- solution, or a comparative structure rather than fiction, though the latter
can be introduced in small doses in special circumstances, or for extensive reading.
Authenticity refers to the fact that texts (as defined above in section 1.2.2.), have
not been specially written for language classes. They focus on meaning, are
relevant to learners’ needs, and serve some genuine communicative purpose.
Learners deal with these texts as readers first and as language learners next.
Authentic texts can prove challenging and valuable for adult tertiary students as a
“controlled” transition from the classroom language to real language in a real
environment.
Sometimes, however, these texts are complex. Prepared texts may be used and be
supplemented with authentic texts on the same topic. Reading across texts can
eventually activate and develop the learner’s schemata, facilitate understanding and
focus on meaning (Abdallaoui, 2001).

21
Organisation (purpose and arrangement of information in a text), density (the
number of new ideas and vocabulary contained in a text) and cohesion (the way
information is tied together from sentence to sentence, paragraph to paragraph) are
other textual features which contribute to determining the readability level of a text.
Singer & Donlan (1989) determine the readability level of a text by estimating its
“friendliness” against a long inventory they supply. For a text to be “reader
friendly”, it
Should be well organised, consistent, and coherent. It should have
examples that activate and make contact with students’ prior
knowledge and experience, have an appropriate level of conceptual
density, and define terms as they appear... (Singer and Donlan,
1989: 144)
Nevertheless, lack of organisation, cohesion, density, etc. if they occur could be
exploited through the guidance of the instructor. The learner will have the
opportunity to discover more about authentic discourse, think about and grasp the
workings of the system.
3.2.3. Content of the Text
The factors related to content are instructional appropriateness, value, conceptual
level, novelty and variety.
Instructional appropriateness is used here in terms of topic, ethical dimension of
the content, and responsiveness to the learner’s culture and expectations. For
example, giving to Moroccan adult students decontextualised excerpts from
speeches of George W. Bush would be highly controversial. The instructor may
have the good intention of presenting a sample of the American way of thinking,
but many issues can arise. First, there are concerns about the instructor’s political
knowledge and ability to handle such a topic in a tertiary level classroom, in an
international and a Moroccan context particularly sensitive. Second, students may
perceive such a text as propaganda for a certain ideology; others may experience it
as an intrusion on their privacy if they are reluctant to expose their political views.
Last, presenting such topics needs providing alternative views or opportunities for
students to reflect and make choices.
The cultural content of the text has also to be scrutinized. In fact, one of the
principles drawn from the theory reviewed above is that learning a language and
reading involve bridging gaps between two schematic worlds, which of course
includes cultural schemata. Cultural knowledge has been found to affect reading
comprehension more than the level of semantic and syntactic complexity, and
second or foreign language learners are necessarily culture learners (Abdallaoui,
2001). Yet, teaching culture within a language class in a foreign context is not

22
without hurdles. In the case of ESAP (English for Specific Academic Purposes)
students, awareness-raising of foreign cultural dimensions in academic discourse is
necessary, but the materials and activities employed should be relevant and should
consider the learner’s cultural identity and beliefs, otherwise resentment and
subsequent failure will take place.
Value refers to the quality of the content in terms of relevance, intellectual
challenge and enrichment. For example, damping on tertiary level Information
Science students texts on “horoscope” or “sleeping positions” could be irrelevant
or insulting to some, trivial and time-wasting to others. Some students may have
fun, participate at the moment, but apart from the vocabulary they may encounter,
no genuine intellectual purpose or challenge are engaged. What matters is not
simply “seducing” students into learning but really motivating them.
Too often judgements about materials are based on considerations
of interest and enjoyment. These are important factors in
achieving learner engagement but it is possible for learners to
enjoy using materials without learning very much from them and it
is also possible to learn a lot from materials which are not
particularly interesting or enjoyable to use (Tomlinson, 1998:
263).
In addition, and as argued above, selecting texts for the sheer manipulation of the
linguistic items they contain is widely contested by reading instruction
specialists.
A text also has value when its source is known. For both deontological and
practical purposes, all texts should be referenced in an ESAP (English for Specific
Academic Purposes) course. Information about the author of the text, the wider
social, ideological, or scientific context provides the reader with a framework
which could activate existing schemata, facilitate understanding and prevent false
attributions. Take the previous example of the excerpts attributed to George W.
Bush. If the text is not referenced, its content can be false, yet students may be led
to believe the opposite because of the “sanctity” of the classroom. Actually, with
the advent of the internet, and the facility of text dissemination, it is imperative to
raise students’ awareness of such contextual aspects of the text.
The conceptual level of a text refers to the complexity of the introduced
concepts. Unfortunately, there are no scales to measure the conceptual difficulty
of a text except the instructor’s common sense and knowledge of the students’
level. Nevertheless, in an ESAP (English for Specific Academic Purposes)
situation, texts could be provided by the specific disciplines’ instructors or by the
students themselves, which ensures a familiarity with the concepts, and
subsequently leads to an increased involvement and performance. When the

23
students have acquired a sufficient control over their reading, more texts of varied
schemata than the familiar ones can be introduced.
Complexity, grading and sequencing of the text are dealt with in terms of degree
of familiarity with the text, not difficulty of the language or length of the text.
Language instructors, however, have to be knowledgeable about the content they
present, otherwise they may lose credibility.
Novelty and variety of the materials are essential in engaging students in learning
and in meeting varied learning needs. Moreover, novelty and variety permit a
certain level of authenticity to occur. In the real world, texts are read for the
novelty of their contents, be it information, an argument, a report or a complaint.
In a real context, texts are also varied, in terms of topics, discourse, and genres.
Classrooms should try to provide representative samples of the target situation in
which the foreign language may be used.
In some situations, where English is a foreign not a second
language, the ESP classroom may be almost the only source of
English. Materials then play a crucial role in exposing learners to
the language, which implies that the materials need to present real
language, as is used, and the full range that learners require.
(Dudley-Evans & St John, 1998: 171).
3.3. Activities and Exercises Selection
Once the text is selected, the next stage will be eliciting activities and exercises
which encourage students’ active processing and analysis of the text. Here as well
criteria have to be considered. The determined reading and language learning
perspectives are the guiding lines.
First activities and exercises should meet the learners’ needs. Second, they should
promote learners’ active engagement, awareness, autonomy and critical reading.
Last, textual aspects (organisation, cohesion, genres, hedging, grammatical cues,
etc.) are to be considered in terms of their role in building meaning.
The activities and exercises will have to consider the learners’ purposes for reading
and types of reading. In fact, activities should provide the learner with an
opportunity to reproduce real world interaction with the text. In the real world, the
learner may need to read in English in a specific context (e.g. library or home in
front of a computer) for a certain purpose (e.g. obtaining information, understanding
a notion or a theory, verifying the reliability of a statement, etc.). In reading
instruction, the different purposes for reading of the learner should be specified (see
section 1.2.1.4. above). Exercises and activities should be devised accordingly and
should help the learner succeed in his/her enterprise. For example, if the purpose of

24
reading a given text is to obtain information, using scanning as an activity would be
adequate. If on the other hand, the purpose of reading is to understand a theory,
note-taking, using background knowledge, summarising, or diagram/table
construction would be more appropriate.
Closely linked to the above, the second criterion is related to the nature of the
activities and exercises. They should permit learners to actively engage in the
process of reading rather than simply test the outcome of that reading. For example,
exercises will consist of leading the learner to contextualise the text (i.e. find about
the author, the social/ historical, academic context, check the degree of certitude of
content by verifying references, quotations, etc.), discover the hidden message of
the author, or express personal reaction to the text, etc.
Critical thinking procedures would be valuable. In fact tertiary level learners can
profit from activities and exercises for raising awareness about the nature of
arguments in academic discourse, the difference between factual information and
opinion, controversiality, common fallacies (like hasty generalisations, false cause,
fallacies of evidence, false analogies, etc.), consistencey, recency, relevance, etc.
(For more details about Critical thinking, see Inch & Warnick, 2002).
Third, activities and exercises should help readers use strategies to learn how to
cope, monitor their reading and be autonomous. Strategies can be taught through
awareness-raising of their appropriateness in certain contexts and for specific
purposes, or through modelling, etc. Strategies are numerous and can vary from
predicting, scanning, skimming, guessing word’s meaning to finding the main idea,
summarising, making grammatical analysis or consulting external documents, (For
further details about EFL reading strategies see Abdallaoui, 2001).
Last, activities and exercises should consider distinctive structures and linguistic
features of the text and raise learners’ awareness of the role of these features in
conveying meaning. The features concerned, whether vocabulary, cohesive cues
(e.g. reference within a text, tense agreement, etc) or overall text organisation
should be contextualised and their meanings explicated. If tenses are dealt with, for
instance, their role in meaning making should be stressed. Similarly, when dealing
with adverbials (e.g. possibly, perhaps, ultimately, etc.), or modal auxiliaries (may,
might, should, etc.), emphasis should be put on their role in the interpretations we
make of the text. In a way, students will be involved in analysing discourse. Ideas
from research on hedging could be pertinent.
In sum, in a similar way to the text selected, exercises and activities should be
relevant to learners, meaningful and purposive.

25
To enhance learning, materials must involve learners in thinking
about and using the language. The activities need to stimulate
cognitive not mechanical processes (Dudley-Evans & St John,
1998: 171).
Conclusion
ESP (English for Specific Academic Purposes) has always been designed as
materials-led, as being practical in its approach, serving the immediate needs of
the learners. Yet, throughout this paper, materials development for an ESAP
(English for Specific Academic Purposes) reading course has been shown to rely
on decision- making, which itself relies on beliefs. Beliefs are grounded in theory.
If the theoretical background is not clear, the outcome will lack coherence,
continuity and efficiency. Writing materials for an ESAP (English for Specific
Academic Purposes) reading course also requires of the faculty (usually the
materials’ providers) to have, besides their linguistic proficiency and knowledge
of applied linguistics, other academic capacities and qualities, notably,
knowledge of the requirements of the context in which they work, ethical
behaviour, responsibility, integrity and the capacity to secure students’ rights for
respect and for challenging and enriching courses. ESAP (English for Specific
Academic Purposes) classes are involved in education, not training, and seek the
learner development.
The framework proposed for reading materials development is based on a set of
principles drawn from reading theory and ESP (English for Specific Purposes)
perspectives. These regard reading and language instruction as requiring more
than simple linguistic knowledge. They involve bridging the gap between the
reader’s and the author’s schemata, which implicates an interaction among
several parameters; physical, cognitive, social, linguistic, and affective. Reading
materials should account for these dimensions, try to respond to learners’ needs
and aim at actively engaging them in reading. Striking a balance between the
materials’ pertinence and their suitability to the learners’ cultural and ideological
background is a challenging task especially in a world context and an Arab
country where sensitivities are high.

26
REFERENCES
Abdallaoui Maan, N. 2001. Reading Strategies of Learners of English as a Foreign
Language. Rabat: Ecole Des Sciences de L’Information.
Abdallaoui Maan, N. and F. Haddouchi, 2002. “Needs Analysis for English Classes at Ecole
des Sciences de l’Information”. In Revue de la Science de l’Information, n.12.
Alexander P.A. & E. Fox, 2004 “A historical Perspective on Reading Research and Practice”
in R.B. Ruddell & N.J. Unran, (Eds) Theoretical Models and Processes of reading (5th
ed.),
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Au, K.H. 2001. “Culturally Responsive Instruction as a Dimension of New Literacies. In Reading
Online, 5(1) www.readingonline.org
Au, K.H, 2002, “Multicultural factors and the effective Instruction of Students of Diverse
Backgrounds” in A.E. Farstrup & S. Samuels (Eds), What Research Has to Say About Reading
Instruction, Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Brindley, G. 1989. “The Role of Needs Analysis in Adult ESL Programme Design” in R.K.
Johnson (Ed). The Second Language Curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, J.D. 1995. The Elements of Language Curriculum. Boston: Heinle & Heinle
Publishers.
Carroll, M. 1999. “Dancing on the Keyboard: A Theoretical Basis for the Use of Computers in
the Classroom”. In Reading Online, www.readingonline.org
Clark, J.L., 1987. Curriculum Renewal in School Foreign Language Learning. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Day, R. & J. Bamford, 1998. Extensive Reading in the Second Language Classroom.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dubin, F. and E. Olshtain, 1986. Course Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dudley-Evans, T & M.J. St John (1998). Developments in ESP. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Flowerdew, L., 2002. “Corpus-based Analysis in EAP”. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.) Academic
Discourse. London: Longman.
Gardner, D. 2004. “Vocabulary Input Through Extensive Reading: A Comparison of Words
Found in Children’ Narrative and Expository Reading Materials”. In Applied Linguistics, 25/1: 1-
37.
Gardner, H. 1991. The Unschooled Mind: How Children Think and How Schools Should Teach.
New York: Basic Books
Goodman, K. S., 1972, “reading: A Psycholinguistic Guessing Game”. In L.A. Harris and
C.B. Smith (Eds), Individualising Reading Instruction: A Reader. London: Rinehart and
Winston, Inc.
Goodman, K.S. and Y.M. Goodman. (1980). “Learning to Read is Natural”. In L.B. Resnick
& P.A. Weaver (Eds). Theory and Practice of Early Reading (Vol.1, pp. 137-154). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Graves, K. 2000, Designing Language Courses: A Guide for Teachers. Boston: Heinle &
Heinle Publishers.
Gregory, E. 2002 “Getting to know Strangers: a Sociocultural Approach to Reading, Language,
and Literacy”, IRA Multilanguage Literacy Symposium, July 2002, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Guthrie, J.T. et al, 1996. « Growth of Literacy Engagement: Changes in Motivations and
Strategies During Concept-oriented Reading Instruction”. In Reading Research Quarterly, 31/3,
306-332.
Guthrie, J.T. and A. Wigfield, 2000. “Engagement and Motivation in Reading.” In M.L. Kamil,
P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol.3), Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.

27
Hanson-Smith, E. 2003. “Reading Electronically: Challenges and Responses to the Reading
Puzzle in Technologically- Enhanced Environments). In The Reading Matrix, 13/3.
Hewings, M. 2002. “A History of ESP through ‘English for Specific Purposes’; In ESP World,
3/1. http://www.esp-world.info/
Hinkel, E. (Ed) 1999, Culture in Second Language Teaching and Learning, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press).
Hunt, A. & D. Beglar, 2005. “A Framework for Developing EFL Reading Vocabulary”. In
Reading in a Foreign Language, 17/1: 23-59.
Hutchinson, T. & A. Waters, 1987. English for Specific Purposes: A learning-Centred
Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K. 2005. “Perspectives on EAP”. In ELT Journal, 59/1: 57-64
Inch E.S. & B. Warnick 2002. Critical Thinking and Communication. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Jordan, R.R. 1997.English for Academic Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kintsch, W. and T.A. Van Dijk, 1978. “Toward a Model of Text Comprehension and
Production.” In Psychological Review. 85/5: 363-368;
Lantoff, J.P. 1999, “Second Culture Acquisition, Cognitive Considerations”. In Hinkel, E. (ed)
1999, Culture in Second Language Teaching and Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press).
Leu, D.J. et al, 2004. “Toward a Theory of New Literacies Emerging From the Internet and Other
Information and Communication Technologies”. In R.B. Ruddell & N.J. Unran, (Eds)
Theoretical Models and Processes of reading (5th
ed.), Newark, DE: International Reading
Association.
Lorch, R.F., E.P. Lorch and M.A. Klusewitz, 1993, “College Students’ Conditional Knowledge
about Reading” in Journal of Educational Psychology, 85/2,239-252)
Mackay, R. and A. Mountford, 1978. “The Teaching of English for Specific Purposes:
Theory and Practice”. In Mackay, R & A. Mountford (Eds), English for Specific Purposes,
London: Longman.
Meyer, B. 1975. The Organisation of Prose and its Effects on Memory. Amsterdam: North
Holland
Munby, J.L. 1978. Communicative Syllabus Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, P. 2001. Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Nunan, D. 1988. Syllabus Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ozgungor, S. and J.T. Guthrie, 2004. “Interactions among Elaborative Interrogation,
Knowledge, and Interest in the Process of Constructing Knowledge from Text”. In Journal of
Educational Psychology, 96/3: 437-443.
Paris S.G., M.Y. Lipson and K.K. Wixson, 1983. “Becoming a Strategic Reader”. In
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8: 293-316.
Perfetti, C.A. and S. Roth, 1981. “Some of the Interactive Processes in reading and Their
Role in Reading Skill”. In A.M. Lesgold. & C.A. Perfetti (Eds) Interactive Processes in
Reading. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pressly, M. 2002. “Metacognition and Self-Regulated Comprehension”. In A.E. Farstrup, & S.
Samuels (Eds), What Research Has to Say About Reading Instruction, Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.
Richards, J. & T. Rodgers, 1986. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Richterich, R. and J.L. Chancerel. 1980. Identifying the Needs of Adults Learning a Foreign
Language. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Richterich, R. (Ed) 1983. Case Studies in Identifying Language Needs. Oxford: Pergamon
Press.

28
Ridgway, T. 2003. “L1 and L2 Reading and Transferability: The Importance of Styles and
Attitudes”. In Reading in a Foreign Language, 15/2: 117-129.
Rumelhart, D.E. 1980; 3Schemata: The Building Blocks of Cognition”. In R. Spiro, B. Bruce
and W. Brewer (Eds). Theoretical Issues in Reading Comprehension. New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Rumelhart, D. E. and J.L. McClelland, 1981. “Interactive Processing Through Spreading
Activation”. In A.M. Lesgold, & C.A. Perfetti (Eds). Interactive Processes in Reading. New
Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Scollon, S. 1999, “Not to waste Words or Students” in Hinkel, E. (Ed) 1999, Culture in Second
Language Teaching and Learning, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Singer, H. and D. Donlan, 1989 (2nd
Ed). Reading and Learning from Text. New-Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stanovich, K.E. 1980. “Toward an Interactive Compensatory Model of Individual Differences
in the Development of Reading Fluency.” In Reading Research Quarterly. 16/1: 32-71.
Stapleton, P. 2005. “Evaluating Web-Sources: Internet Literacy and L2 Academic Writing”. In
ELT Journal, 59/2, 135-143.
Stern, H. H. 1992. Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Swales, J. 1990. Genre Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tomlinson, B. 1998. Materials Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Trimble, L. 1985. English for Science and Technology. A Discourse Approach. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Walter, C. 2004. “Transfer of Reading Comprehension Skills to L2 is linked to Mental
Representations of Text and to L2 Working Memory”. In Applied Linguistics, 25/3: 315-339.
Widdowson, H. G. 1978. Teaching Language a Communication. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Widdowson, H.G. 1990. Aspects of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

A Theoretical Framework For Developing Reading Materials For Information Science Students

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to A Theoretical Framework For Developing Reading Materials For Information Science Students (20)

More from Dawn Cook (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A Theoretical Framework For Developing Reading Materials For Information Science Students