English For Construction: A Needs Analysis

1. English For Construction: A Needs Analysis Kelsey Parker

2. Lit Review • R. Jasso-Aguilar (1999) • Needs analysis for hotel Maids in a popular Waikiki hotel • looked at daily tasks performed by the hotel maids and the language involved in these tasks & the needs and wants of the maids and the representatives from the hotel • G. Storer (1999) • part of an ongoing study of language needs of bar-based male sex workers in Thailand

3. Lit Review Cont. • Wozniak (2010) • Language needs analysis of French mountain guides • Li So-mui (2000) • Analysis of communication needs of textile and clothing merchandisers • West (1984) • Needs assessment in occupation-specific VESL • All three contributed to my methodology

4. Introduction • NA for native Spanish speakers currently employed at Parker General Contractors • Small Construction Company (under 10 employees) • Goal was to assess language needs of ESL employees and eventually develop VESL materials to train current and future employees. • Limited Data on VESL and NO data on English for Construction

5. Methods • Two 4 hour job site observations • 6 short (20 min.) interviews, and one longer follow up interview • Authentic workplace texts

6. Sources • Jim - owner • Tom- foreman • Steve- NS employee • Luke- NS employee • Oswaldo- NNS employee • Bonnie- NNS employee

7. Results • Workplace observation and interviews revealed that the following things are important for an ESL speaker to succeed in a construction job: • Tools and Materials • Measurements • Safety • Basic Communication • Detailed/ Skilled work • Employment opportunities • Perceived needs

8. Tools and Materials • Kelsey: “If someone new started working here that didn’t know very much English. What um… would be the most important thing for them to learn… quickly… in order to uh…be successful?” • Bonnie: “I think the important thing is that they have to learn Uh. If they don’t communicate with our boss like Jim or Tom. Almost.. It’s a lot of Mexicans working on construction. So like Tom had a lot of Mexicans and they didn’t talk English. So Tom would tell me to tell them. So uh they would have to learn uh the the tools names in English and the wood lumber… and all that stuff… that’s the important thing”

9. Measurements • Kelsey: “If a non-native speaker came to this country and wanted to get a job quickly working construction and they had limited English… what are some of the most important things you think they would have to like pick up on?” • Luke: “Well definitely numbers… reading off a measuring tape, and fractions… you know uh being able to be able to communicate math…well that’s the basic stuff. I’m sure it goes on and on and on from there. Knowing the sizes of stuff. That’s it

10. Safety • Kelsey: “What kind of errors do new workers make and how are they handled?” • Jim: “Um they make mistakes with safety mostly, and we just correct them… tell them what they need to do right and show em how to do it, and that’s about it” • Kelsey: “What common errors do new workers make?” • Tom: “Umm… I’d say… not cleaning up…and uh cutting things wrong. Or getting hurt.”

11. Basic Communication • Kelsey: “In what specific areas have you had problems communicating with non-native speakers?” • Tom: “I guess um… just trying to explain to them how to do a certain job” • Kelsey: “Do you feel that your employees need to improve their English? Or umm maybe think about past employees? How could they have improved their English?” • Tom: “Uhh… honestly if they can’t speak English… they’re not gonna last too long”

12. Detailed/ Skilled Work • Kelsey: “Do you think it’s important that your coworkers speak English? And how fluently?” • Steve: “Well it depends on what you want done. There’s a lot of work you can do that you can just say… go do this… and they can understand it. But if its uh very detail oriented… the more details involved with it like.. the more they need to understand English. Or I need to understand their language. One of the two” • Kelsey: “So what kind of things would be that like detail oriented sort of work?” • Steve: “Uhhhh maybe stairs are more intricate, roofs are more intricate… the more intricate the job the more they need to know”

13. Employment Opportunities • Kelsey: “Can you give me some ideas of what you mentioned earlier… the more uh detailed tasks, that people might need to know more than just, like, conversational English for?” • Jim: “Stuff like finish carpentry where it’s real detailed… because it’s hard to explain to them exactly what you want. But if its just rough carpentry or labor work its usually just tellin’ em directions of where to put things or where to move things. Pick it up. Put it down. That kind of stuff. So again, the more specific the task the more they would need to learn English. Like electrical work. Plumbing work. Maybe if they had to go pick up supplies I could have a really hard time explaining exactly what I needed. Any tech- technical trade… so uh… audiovisual… plumbing, electric like I mentioned.” • Kelsey: “And… are those all trades that you could hypothetically learn on the job? I mean, you wouldn’t have to go to trade school or anything?” • Jim: “No most of them they could learn on the job… yeah they would just have to be able to pick it up”

14. Perceived Needs • Kelsey: “Are there specific things you think you need to know for your job… or just…. For life?” • Oswaldo: “For life and for my job. Yeah. It’s like….It’s I don’t know how to call that stuff… and yeah… a lot of stuff I have to learn” • Kelsey: “Do you feel that your employees need to improve their English in any specific areas?” • Jim: “Some of them do, but it’s for their own good… like I wouldn’t say they really needed to for work. Usually we can get by… someone can always translate for them”

15. Pedagogical Implications • For speakers with a very limited level of English: • Instruction should focus on basic vocabulary (tools, materials, equipment, numbers, measurements), safety instructions, and communication strategies needed to understand directions and report back to employer • Once employees have reached a more advanced level: • Instruction should focus on more technical vocabulary and the understanding and communication of detailed instructions in order to give employees the chance to learn a trade • Further instruction: • Help employees to improve their English both in and out of the workplace so that they can be productive members of the English speaking community

16. Limitations and Further Research • Limitations • Quantitative research • Cannot be generalized • Failed to triangulate methods and sources • Due to safety precautions I could observe but not get close enough to record authentic workplace communication • Surveys could have been useful • Authentic texts did not reveal very much • Further research should look at the current materials for English for Construction and see if they meet the needs of ESL employees

17. References • Jasso-Aguilar, R. (1999). Sources, methods and triangulation in needs analysis: A critical perspective in a case study of Waikiki hotel maids. English for Specific Purposes, 18(1), 27-46. • Li, S. F., & Mead, K. (2000). An analysis of English in the workplace: The communication needs of textile and clothing merchandisers. English for Specific Purposes, 19(4), 351-368. • Marra, M. (2013). English in the Workplace. In Paltridge, B. & Starfield, S. (Eds.), The Handbook of English for Specific Purposes (175-192). Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons. • Peirce, B. N., Harper, H., & Burnaby, B. (1993). Workplace ESL at levy Strauss: "dropouts" speak out. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada, 10(2), 9-30. • Storer, G. (1999). Working the bars. English for Specific Purposes, 18(4), 367-374. • West, L. (1984). Needs assessment in occupation-specific VESL or How to decide what to teach. English for Specific Purposes, 3: 143-152. • West, L. (1984); Readings from Responses to ESP (2000). • Wozniak, S. (2010). Language needs analysis from a perspective of international professional mobility: The case of French mountain guides. English for Specific Purposes, 29(4), 243-252.