International Teacher Education Conference 2014 1

International Teacher Education Conference 2014
Introduction
ESP teaching typically “involves orientation to specific spoken and written English which is required to carry
out specific academic or workplace tasks” (Orr, 2001, p.27). In the case of engineering disciplines, these tasks
are manifold but are governed by the overall need for clear, concise and unambiguous communication (Irish &
Weiss, 2009). The ability to communicate well in English is particularly important in the highly globalized
automotive branch, where engineers nowadays can expect to work not only in multidisciplinary and
multinational teams at home, but also to spend a considerable amount of time communicating with their
counterparts in other teams and companies worldwide. Thus, ESP is an indispensable element in the education of
young engineers.
This paper describes an activity designed and introduced into a third semester undergraduate course for
students of Automotive Engineering at the FH JOANNEUM (FHJ) University of Applied Sciences, Graz,
Austria. FHJ is a tertiary level institution offering over 40 degree programmes, each with a specific vocational
orientation, ranging from health sciences to international business to engineering disciplines. All degree
programmes include mandatory ESP courses. In the Automotive Engineering programme, this amounts to 150
(45-minute) units at bachelor’s level and 90 units at master’s level (in addition to English as the main language
of instruction in the Master’s courses).
Rationale
Students in the Automotive Engineering programme often choose this course of studies based on an avid
interest in the technology and design of motorized vehicles. One could argue that their motivation in this case is
highly intrinsic, in other words it comes from within (van Lier, 1996). By contrast, their reactions to ESP
lessons in the early semesters indicate little intrinsic motivation to improve their language skills. While, the
global automotive industry requires graduates who are not only well versed in engineering subjects but also
proficient in the lingua franca of the industry, many undergraduates fail to make the connection between these
industry requirements and the inclusion of ESP as a compulsory part of their degree programme. Thus, the
extrinsic motivation, or external incentive driving the language learner (van Lier, 1996; see also Dörnyei, 2001;
Dörnyei & Csizer 1998; Gardner & Lambert 1959, 1972) also appears to be low. Motivation, however, cannot
be taught. It must come from the students themselves and “be based on their perception that what they are
learning is of interest and value to them” (McKay & Tom, 1999, p.4). Faced with this situation, the authors set
out to investigate means of improving the language learning environment in such a way that students would
want to participate more actively and, ideally, want to learn (Ushioda, 2011).
Research conducted into the learning preferences of students of Automotive Engineering and Aviation at FHJ
showed that the majority of the engineering student cohort surveyed in the course of the longitudinal study had
clear preferences for a more communicative (interpersonal) and hands-on (bodily-kinesthetic) approach to
learning, as defined by Gardner in his theory of multiple intelligences (Millward-Sadler et al., 2010). It became
clear that in order to engage the learners in the ESP classes, the activities used and materials developed would
have to address the abovementioned learning preferences more directly, revolving around the dominant
intelligences identified - interpersonal, kinesthetic, logical-mathematical and spatial - in order to foster
development of the weaker ones, including the linguistic intelligence (Millward-Sadler et al., 2011a). In
addition, they would do well to take into account the benefits of hands-on activities in terms of promoting
learning.
In the field of science teaching, hands-on activities have long been regarded as enhancing cognitive learning
(Korwin and Jones, 1990, n.pag.) In her discussion of why hands-on science activities are so effective for
student learning, Satterthwait (2010) points to the significant role such activities have on student engagement
and motivation. The manipulation of three-dimensional objects, she argues, invokes curiosity within the learners.
This curiosity fosters learning. Further, set against the backdrop of constructivist theory, she highlights the
influence of peer interaction in what she calls “cooperative learning settings” on the learning process
(Satterthwait, 2010, pp.7-8).
A further consideration informing the development of new materials was the question of relevance. If
materials which appear relevant and are of interest to our students are integrated into our teaching, we may, as
instructors, help to improve their intrinsic motivation (Meixner, 2013). It has already been noted by colleagues
lecturing in the engineering disciplines in the Automotive Engineering programme how students are “motivated
by tasks that stem from real engineering problems” (Bischof et al., 2009, n. pag.). Thus, relevance to their area
of studies and future workplace was of key importance. The following section describes the design and
143