Skip to main content

Table 2 Descriptive statistics of the attitudes toward the learning needs satisfaction

From: The pedagogical efficacy of ESP courses for Iranian students of engineering from students’ and instructors’ perspectives

Sub-domain

Statement

User

Percentage (P)

M

SD

SA

A

U

DA

SDA

Teaching/Learning Features

1. The course entailed an active type of monitoring which allows students to frequently ask for help and advice.

St.

3.64

9.67

10.43

55.53

20.73

2.20

0.99

Inst.

14.81

22.22

3.70

38.89

20.37

2.72

1.41

2. The students’ errors received corrective feedback mainly in the form of recast.

St.

13.94

31.41

23.11

22.99

8.54

3.19

1.19

Inst.

22.22

48.15

0

18.52

11.11

3.52

1.33

3. The course promoted both collaborative and individual task accomplishment.

St.

18.09

31.15

9.55

28.77

12.44

3.14

1.30

Inst.

14.81

24.07

11.11

29.63

20.37

2.83

1.44

4. Throughout the course, the students received a combination of teacher and peer scaffolding.

St.

20.10

30.02

1394

23.11

12.81

3.21

1.33

Inst.

31.48

31.48

0

31.48

5.56

3.52

1.37

Syllabus

5. The course promoted a communicative task-based ESP teaching.

St.

22.99

25.98

13.19

26.76

11.18

3.23

1.34

Inst.

16.67

31.48

11.11

25.92

14.81

3.10

0.95

Materials

6. The prescribed textbooks were accompanied by instances of technical language use in academic/working contexts.

St.

11.56

35.30

18.34

24.25

10.55

3.13

1.21

Inst.

14.81

18.52

7.41

27.78

31.48

2.57

1.47

7. The course mainly took advantage of textbook-derived tasks to reinforce the newly-learnt language.

St.

35.55

49.50

6.53

4.77

3.64

4.08

1.01

Inst.

22.22

44.44

0

16.67

16.67

3.39

1.43

Administration

8. The course was presented as a three-credit tertiary level course of three hours’ duration per week.

St.

28.27

40.07

2.39

17.46

11.81

3.56

1.30

Inst.

29.63

31.48

0

24.07

14.81

3.37

1.49

9. The instructor enjoyed an acceptable degree of English teaching and the subject-specific knowledge.

St.

28.52

40.07

13.44

10.93

7.03

3.72

1.14

Inst.

31.48

38.89

20.37

9.26

0

3.93

0.92

10. The course was regarded as a tertiary level compulsory course.

St.

33.42

19.35

2.76

19.60

24.87

3.17

1.64

Inst.

29.63

24.07

7.41

22.22

16.67

3.28

1.46

11. The course was administered taking advantage of modern educational facilities

St.

1.51

7.79

4.90

36.31

49.50

1.84

1.11

Inst.

1.85

3.70

0

37.04

57.41

1.56

0.82

Assessment

12. The students’ technical English learning was gauged using a combination of low- & high-stakes exams.

St.

26.63

52.64

3.64

8.79

8.29

3.80

1.15

Inst.

25.93

38.89

0

25.93

9.26

3.46

1.37

Total

St.

19.14

29.16

11.49

23.99

16.22

3.11

1.29

Inst.

21.36

29.38

4.94

27.28

17.04

3.11

1.45