Language Teaching

Research Quarterly
2021, Vol. 23, 12-22

Affordances and Challenges of Mixed-

Methods Needs Analysis for the
Development of ESP Courses
Eun Jeong Park
College of Education, Sunchon National University

Received 22 February 2021 Accepted 20 June 2021

Abstract
This paper addresses the conceptions of needs analysis and mixed-methods research, and the affordances and
challenges of mixed methods needs analysis in implementing ESP courses. Language researchers and educators
maintain that a lack of identifying students’ needs hampers the development and improvement of English
language education in ESP. ESP teachers and educators may not be cognizant of utilizing needs analysis
effectively in their classrooms. Hence, the purpose of the paper is to characterize mixed-methods needs analysis
and recognize affordances and challenges of using needs analysis with the considerations of mixed methods in
research on foreign and second language education. A systematic mixed-methods learner needs analysis can
increase the rigour of course design, materials development, and the enhancement of curriculum and instruction.
This paper also informs ESP educators, teachers, professionals, and researchers of the usefulness and practicality
of mixed methods approaches in conducting needs analysis for ESP learners in the educational context.

Keywords: Needs Analysis, Mixed Methods, ESP, Curriculum and Instruction

Introduction
Systematically developing curriculum and instruction is critical and serious in education. As
theories and disciplines are established, methodological issues have also been highlighted in
language education (Bernstein, 2018; Divan et al., 2017; Healey et al., 2019; Hutchings, 2007;
Lock et al., 2018; Miller-Young & Yeo, 2015; Webb & Welsh, 2019). The theory is critical in
establishing the scholarship of language education because it is aligned with a process of
“meaning-making and knowledge-building” (Hutchings, 2007: 3). This process of theory
involvement takes different forms with multifarious sources and disciplinary expertise
(Hutchings, 2007). Educational researchers have delved into language education with their
disciplinary interest and expertise and have grappled with up-to-date literature and
unacquainted research methods (Healey et al., 2019). In this regard, Hutchings (2007)

parkej@scnu.ac.kr doi:10.32038/ltrq.2021.23.03
13 Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 2021, Vol 23, 12‐22

concerned the discrepancy between theory and practice due to varied applications in language
education. Miller-Young and Yeo’s (2015) claim is that theory and methodology are explicitly
and implicitly aligned, which signifies that theory assumes what and how people learn and
methodology as the assumption about how and why a study is conducted.
Conducting needs analysis is necessary due to its specific and varied purposes and
functions in English language education’s current or future use (Long, 2005). Many
educational scholars and researchers (Brown, 2009; Dudley-Evans & St John, 1998;
Flowerdew, 2013; Hyland, 2014; Johns & Makalela, 2011; Kaivanpanah et al., 2021; Long,
2005; West, 1994) have addressed the significance of implementing needs analysis in the
field of education. West (1994) offered three major functions of needs analysis: 1) improving
teaching methods, 2) adapting the teaching to the type of learning public, and 3) training the
learner how to learn (p. 2). Hyland (2014) considered needs analysis critical in collecting and
assessing relevant information about course design and development. Flowerdew (2013)
provided a chronological overview of needs analysis in English for academic and
occupational purposes, emphasizing corpus-based methodologies (Biber, 2006) and
ethnographic and socio-rhetorical genre-analytic needs analysis (Jasso-Aguilar, 2005) as
crucial in the field of language teaching and learning. Kaivanpanah et al. (2021) indicated the
EAP teachers’ crucial roles and responsibilities in performing needs analysis.
In the 1970s, a notional-functional system developed by Wilkins (1974) was popular in
developing and implementing syllabi and pedagogic materials in education. This notional-
functional approach has been believed to meet various learners’ language needs in a
standardized way. The sequences of lexical, structural, notional, and functional language
components are pre-planned in this prescriptive way, assuming that these sequences meet
learners’ needs. However, Long (2005) criticized a heavy reliance on the notional-functional
way to understand learners’ needs. However, it included conflicting issues such as
developmental structures in foreign and second language learning (Larsen-Freeman & Long,
2014) and cognitive processing constraints on learnability and teachability (Pienemann,
1998).
Furthermore, the prescriptive notional-functional approach to assume students’ needs is
decontextualized, misleading the information about the learners’ actual needs. Most linguistic
analyses are based on the supra-sentential and textual level, which does not reach the
satisfaction of foreign and second language learners. For these reasons, Long’s (2005) task-
based syllabus has become practically affordable as a potential needs analysis. Task-based
needs analyses are learner-centred, aligned with learners’ internal development of language
learning. Long’s (2005) extensive survey of the scholarly literature on needs analysis enabled
us to pinpoint the potential of using various sources from insiders’ and outsiders’ perspectives
to combine qualitative and quantitative methods.
This paper addresses the definition of needs, the rationale, and the affordances and
controversial issues of the mixed-methods approach in implementing and utilizing needs
analysis in language education, particularly focusing on ESP courses. This paper also
attempts to expand Long’s (2005) discussion about using different methods for the
development of needs analyses in language education. Despite the paucity of relevant mixed-
methods needs analysis in ESP classroom research, it is important to consider mixed methods

www.EUROKD.COM
 Eun Jeong Park 14

for learner needs analyses. Hence, this paper strives to fill the gap mentioned above in
bridging theory and practice by delimiting the conceptions of needs, needs analysis, and
mixed methods research and unfolding the ways educational researchers have conglomerated
mixed methods research and needs analysis in the field of ESP and broadly language
education.

What are “Needs”?

It may be obvious that English language courses are necessary for college students’
intellectual and linguistic development and higher education careers. However, we often
neglect what the language course is for. Do college students take language courses because
there is a policy to promote communication competency in college? Is the language course
seriously and solely for college students or for university? No matter whether a policy matters,
it may still be essential to consider why language courses are offered and what their benefits
are for college students to take. In this regard, identifying the needs of language learning and
use is critical in higher education. As language educators and professionals, we need to
develop syllabus designs and prepare relevant materials to meet the learner needs. The needs
may be the present or future requirement of learners, indicating “the students’ study or job
requirements, that is, what they have to be able to do at the end of their language course”
(Widdowson, 1981, p. 2). Needs are what is perceived by the society, the organization, and/or
particularly language programs and instruction (Mountford, 1981). Basturkmen (1998)
identified language needs as the important consideration of acknowledging the gap between
the present proficiency and the target proficiency of learners, which greatly influences the
development of syllabus designs, curriculum and instruction. Needs have been described as
learners’ goals, desires, preferences, expectations, and/or necessities of language learning
(Hyland, 2014; Richards, 2013). Needs can also be students’ awareness of language
proficiency and their motives for taking a course (Hyland, 2014). Recently, Brown (2016)
defined language needs as “sets of judgments and compromises justified by observation,
surveys, test scores, language learning theory, linguistics” (p. 16). Needs analysis can
function as the rigorous and methodical investigation of the learner needs for syllabus designs,
curriculum and instruction in education.

Needs Analysis in ESP

Needs analysis has widely been used in the field of ESP across different disciplines and
countries (Ahmmed et al., 2020; Alhasani, 2021; Creamer & Ghoston, 2013; Javid &
Mohseni, 2020; Karapetian, 2020; Miller, Klassen, & Hardy, 2020; Petraki & Khat, 2020;
Thepseenu, 2020; Yatroon, 2020). In particular, STEM has utilized needs analysis for various
reasons (Alhasani, 2021; Creamer & Ghoston, 2013; Petraki & Khat, 2020; Thepseenu, 2020).
Creamer and Ghoston (2013) conducted a mixed-methods content analysis of the mission
statements of colleges of engineering in mapping derived codes and examining any
significant association with institutions that robust representations of women. The mixed-
methods content analysis showed the significant relationship between the diversity code and
the representation of women. Alhasani’s (2021) study examined the impact of the ESP
courses on the communication of engineering and/or architecture students in Albania. A
15 Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 2021, Vol 23, 12‐22

mixed-method with the questionnaire and the semi-structured interviews was used in
exploring the students’ needs. The findings revealed that the students’ high interest and
emergent appreciation contributed to the development of cognitive acquisition and the
improvement of soft skills. Thepseenu’s (2020) study investigated language needs and
perceptions of civil engineering students in Thailand. A mixed methods design including the
survey questionnaire and focus group interviews was employed to explore the students’
perceived language needs on the ESP course. The study discovered that students needed the
development of speaking and listening skills related to work and career situations. The
participants also preferred pair and group work activities. Petraki and Khat’s (2020) study
examined the challenges and constraints of both industry and academic stakeholders who
designed an ESP course in the field of STEM in a Cambodian university. Data were gathered
and analyzed with the use of interviews and document analysis. Several challenges included a
dearth of ESP training opportunities, a lack of teacher motivation, the hardship of material
development, and the students’ low level of English proficiency. The study implied the
importance of collaboration and shared decision-making as the key to the ESP course design
success. Most needs analysis research tends to put a heavy focus on students’ perspectives for
curriculum and course designs. However, Petraki and Khat’s (2020) study attempted to see
the stakeholders’ views, which has tried to fill the gap of needs analysis research.
Other disciplines have paid close attention to various ESP learners (e.g., economics and
law students, nursing students, guarding police cadets, seafarers). Lock et al.’s (2018) study
explored the impact of co-teaching in nurse education by examining the students’ and
instructors’ perspectives and experiences of co-teaching by using mixed methods. Ahmmed et
al. (2020) identified the needs of acquiring maritime English language skills for Bangladeshi
seafarers who work on ships and seek employment opportunities in the maritime sector.
Senior cadets and recruiting agencies were the participants of the study. The study employed
a mixed-method design to collect both qualitative and quantitative results. The study revealed
that communication efficiency was an essential skill for the seafarers, and the agencies
required their cadets to improve speaking skills the most. Ahmmed et al.’s (2020) would be
meaningful in that no studies were conducted on the needs analysis of the maritime skills and
qualifications that the Bangladeshi maritime graduates require to work on-board vessels.
Javid & Mohseni’s (2020) study described needs analysis of the ESP curriculum for guarding
police cadets in an Iranian university by utilizing an exploratory sequential mixed methods
design. The learner factors, target situation, present situation, and specialist discourse of the
participants were analyzed through needs analysis. The findings showed the different needs
of the stakeholders, the mismatch between the major purpose of the curriculum and the ESL
course, and several suggestive ways of curriculum development. Karapetian’s (2020) study
evaluated the flipped classroom model of the ESP course, Business English, at the college of
Economics in Ukraine. The economics students’ critical thinking skills and academic
performances were measured through a mixed-methods experimental study. The findings
showed that the students in Economics perceived flipped classroom as useful in developing
their critical skills and academic performances through the involvement of problem-solving
activities and the use of different learning styles. Yatroon’s (2020) study explored
international law students’ language needs with the use of the mixed methodological

www.EUROKD.COM
 Eun Jeong Park 16

approach at Iran universities. The results showed the disagreement between the learners’
needs and the expected needs from the relevant tasks in the textbooks, which can be useful to
material developers and book designers in the field of law ESP.
Overall, all of the studies indicated that their universities in different countries have not
considered conducting systematic needs analysis seriously, and the needs analysis has been
under-evaluated in the field of ESP. Divan et al.’s (2017) review study implied that further
investigation of mixed methods research would be advantageous in the development of ESP
courses with rigour.

Characteristics of Mixed Methods Research

Mixed-methods research has been acknowledged as a potentially adequate research method
to confront the complexity and the abstractness in the levels and phases of manifold data
sources, data analyses, research designs, and interpretation of data collection and analysis in
education (Creswell & Clark, 2007; Howe, 1998; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Tashakkori
& Teddlie, 2003; Wilkinson & Staley, 2019; Yin, 2006). The term mixed methods research
refers to “an intellectual and practical synthesis” (Johnson, Onwuegbuzie, & Turner, 2007:
129) in the process of collecting and analyzing data, integrating the findings, and drawing
inferences with the use of both quantitative and qualitative methods and/or approaches in a
single study (Creswell & Clark, 2007).
Mixed methods research designs have several characteristics, particularly aligned with the
major purpose of research: answering research questions in practice per se. The inquiry in
research can be achieved through data collection and analysis in both quantitative and
qualitative domains (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2011). Mixed methods research designs embrace
the complexity of the data source collection and analyses with divergent perspectives. Mixed
methods research sanctions an emphasis on the research question with proper methods and
approaches within a single study (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Teddlie & Tashakkori,
2011). In this way, language and educational research can be posited in a transformative or
transdisciplinary framework by addressing different theoretical and methodological
perspectives at different levels and phases under the pragmatic paradigm. Language and
educational researchers (Hashemi, 2012; Hulstijn et al., 2014; King & Mackey, 2016; Riazi,
2016; Riazi & Candlin, 2014) have delved into the development of mixed methods research
in the field of education. Mixed methods research can expand the extent and the scope of
research by layering (King & Mackey, 2016) methodologies across diverse epistemological
perspectives. Needs analysis can collectively and collaboratively be examined with mixed
methods for real-world problem solving of language learning, including diverse
epistemological stances, in ESP classrooms. Hashemi and Babaii’s (2013: 828) study showed
the potential of mixed methods research as novel research designs, suggesting the effective
use of mixed methods research as a “versatile research methodology” in the field of education.

Affordances of Mixed Methods Needs Analysis

Triangulating methods for mixed-methods needs analysis is salient in ensuring credibility and
dependability (Long, 2005). On top of the function of triangulation, mixed methods research
can offer an avenue to implement needs analyses efficiently. Greene, Caracelli, and Graham
17 Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 2021, Vol 23, 12‐22

(1989) proposed five functions of mixed-methods designs: (1) triangulation/convergence, (2)

development, (3) complementarity, (4) expansion, and (5) initiation.
Triangulation/convergence encompasses answering the same question with the use of both
types of quantitative and qualitative methods, either by converting data from one type into
another (e.g., qualifying quantitative data or quantifying qualitative data) or by comparing the
results to reach the same conclusion (triangulation). Development involves using one method
for some questions and the other method for other questions (e.g., developing interventions or
data collection measures). Complementarity exploits each set of methods to answer a series
of questions for the purpose of elaboration (e.g., using qualitative data for the depth of
understanding and quantitative data for the breadth of understanding). Expansion signifies
using one method to answer research questions raised by the other type of method (e.g., using
qualitative data to describe the results of quantitative data). Initiation is about combining
qualitative and quantitative methods to resolve or uncover any contradiction of the results in
research. Mixed methods research can be a fundamental research method to make needs
analysis rigorous and systematic. Mixed-methods designs can help us reconceptualize and
develop needs analysis by triangulating multiple sources and different analyses and
developing, expanding, complementing, and strategically initiating them.

Challenges of Mixed Methods Needs Analysis

Despite the significance of using mixed methods for needs analysis, we may encounter some
challenges and controversial issues of conducting mixed methods needs analysis in the field
of education. Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004) recognized several challenges of using mixed
methods in research and curriculum development, which researchers should be aware of
when they implement needs analysis with mixed methods. Researchers must learn multiple
methods so that they can analyze mixed data with rigour. Melekhina and Ivleva (2020)
discussed psychological problems and pedagogical issues that novice teachers encounter at
the workplace. It may also be a daunting task to interpret conflicting issues and contradictory
results, analyze quantitative data qualitatively, and vice versa. Conducting needs analysis
with mixed methods may be expensive and time-consuming due to varied phases and diverse
data collection and analyses. It may take a relatively longer time for researchers and
practitioners to collect and analyze data sources. Mirhosseini (2017) has recently
problematized the puzzlement of the epistemological viewpoint in conducting mixed methods
research. In mixed-methods research, objective measurement is essential (Sale, Lohfeld, &
Brazil, 2002) in the positivist epistemological stance, while contextual meaning-making is the
purpose of conducting qualitative research (Denzin & Lincoln, 2007) in the interpretivist-
constructivist position (Mirhosseini, 2017). Mirhosseini (2017: 5) maintained that
“epistemological incompatibility” favoured in other mixed methods research (Hashemi, 2012;
Riazi & Candlin, 2014) is not convincing. Mirhosseini (2017) argues that “the choice” (Riazi
& Candlin, 2014: 143) of a foundational paradigm (i.e., pragmatism or critical realism) is
problematic, and a concrete epistemological stance for mixed-methods research should be
commenced in research. The cramps of the epistemological stance of mixing methods may be
reasonable in a sense.
On the other hand, we would argue that learners’ language needs may not merely emerge

www.EUROKD.COM
 Eun Jeong Park 18

on the surface with an extremely limited standpoint. The phases of collecting, analyzing, and
interpreting data sources in conducting needs analysis should appropriately be layered to do
the right needs analysis. Therefore, mixed methods designs can enable researchers and
practitioners to discover actual learner needs in a pluralistic and corroborative way in the
classroom context. Furthermore, faculty mentoring would be effective and helpful to novice
teachers and professionals to implement needs analysis (Melekhina & Ivleva, 2020). In this
regard, senior faculty can share their ideas and knowledge of mixed methods needs analysis
and collaborate with novice and inexperienced researchers and teachers in a teacher
community.

Discussion
While other disciplines or areas of research (e.g., health and medical science, engineering
education) have made noticeable progress in building systematic methods of needs analysis
with mixed methods, not many language teachers and practitioners appreciate how
developing mixed methods needs analysis in rigour. Onder-Ozdemir’s (2019) longitudinal
critical needs analysis identified the English for academic purposes (EAP) needs of
undergraduate medical students. This study presented the process of developing critical needs
analysis in EAP by employing mixed methods. However, language education and applied
linguistics have not yet developed the academic discourse regarding the practicality,
applicability, and affordances of mixed methods for needs analyses, particularly in the EFL
context. Thus, it is critical to bear learner needs analysis with mixed methods research in
mind as follows:
First, the systematicity of mixed methods research methods is often disregarded in the
implementation of needs analysis. The notional-functional system (Wilkins, 1974) has not
represented what learners want or lack due to its characteristic of the prescriptive
standardization. Instead, Long’s (2005) task-based needs analysis uncovered learners’
language and learning needs. Long saw the potential of mixed methods and applied it to the
enactment of needs analysis. Researchers and educators who conduct mixed methods needs
analysis should consider the major three components: the purpose of needs analysis,
stakeholders, and multiple sources. Implementing mixed-methods needs analysis entails
multiple data sources for the breadth and depth of analysis because the triangulation of data
sources commonly brings about convincing findings with validity and credibility (Long,
2005).
It should be noted that triangulating data sources and analyses is not the ultimate tactic in
successful mixed methods needs analysis. As Greene et al.’s (1989) proposal of different
functions, needs analysis can develop, expand, complement, and initiate data sources and
analyses in investigating learners’ needs. It is also important to approach and develop mixed
methods needs analysis concurrently or sequentially on a research-based system.
Second, mixed-methods needs analyses can help broaden the fields of research through
capacity-building in encountering mixed methods at leading institutions. Mixed methods
needs analyses can be used by organizations to prioritize learner needs and improve syllabus
designs, curriculum and instruction. The quality processes can be assured through the
comprehensive understanding of learner needs (Kiely & Rea-Dickens, 2005) and the
19 Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 2021, Vol 23, 12‐22

evaluation process of curriculum and instruction, accompanied with mixed methods.

Third, we should focus on not only learner needs but also teacher needs. Seminal studies
of Basturkmen (2017) and Bocanegra-Valle & Basturkmen (2019) discussed the issue of
teacher needs, which is critically important but is under-researched. In particular, teacher
needs in ESP remains an unexplored constituent in teacher education (Basturkmen, 2017).
Teachers are also stakeholders of course designs, curriculum development, and broadly
teaching and learning. Teachers’ voice should also be heard for successful language learning
and teaching. Teachers’ needs can be analyzed by themselves and/or with institutional support.
In other words, institutions should take educators and teachers’ needs into account to achieve
the ultimate goal of education.
Although the process may require a deep understanding of the complex and dynamic
context and setting, the investment in the development of rigorous mixed-methods needs
analysis would be a crucial component towards empowering ESP educators and teachers to
pursue high quality instructional activities and advance curriculum and instruction in the field
of ESP education, which leads to its productivity and effectiveness. This paper would also
help ESP researchers and professionals to explore the gist of mixed-methods needs analysis
to make progress in the field of ESP.

Conclusion
All in all, a thoroughly sequenced mixed-methods needs analysis can contribute to the
rigour of course design, materials development, and the improvement of curriculum and
instruction. Hence, it is crucial to be cognizant that implementing mixed methods needs
analysis systematically. This paper also informs ESP educators, professionals, and researchers
of the practicality and usefulness of mixed methods approaches in implementing needs
analysis for learners and teachers in the educational setting.

Funding
This work was supported by a research promotion program of Sunchon National University.

References
Ahmmed, R., Sinha, B. S., Khan, R., & Islam, D. M. (2020). A needs analysis of maritime English language
skills for Bangladeshi seafarers to work on-board ships. Marine Policy, 119, 104041.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104041
Alhasani, M. (2021). A study on Albanian students’ perceptions of the ESP courses contribution to their
engineering/architecture knowledge acquisition and communication competence. Journal of Teaching
English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 9(1), 109-117. https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP2101109A
Basturkmen, H. (1998). Refining procedures: A needs analysis project at Kuwait University. Forum, 36(4), 2-9.
Basturkmen, H. (2017). ESP teacher education needs. Language Teaching, 52(3), 318-330.
Bernstein, J. L. (2018). Unifying SoTL methodology: Internal and external validity. Teaching & Learning
Inquiry, 6(2), 115-126. http://dx.doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.6.2.9
Biber, D. (2006). University Language: A Corpus-Based Study of Spoken and Written Registers. Philadelphia,
PA: John Benjamins.
Bocanegra-Valle, A., & Basturkmen, H. (2019). Investigating the teacher education needs of experienced ESP
teachers in Spanish universities. Ibérica, 38, 127-149.

www.EUROKD.COM
 Eun Jeong Park 20

Brown, J. D. (2009). Foreign and second language needs analysis. In Long, M., & Doughty, C. (Eds.), The
handbook of language teaching (pp. 269-293). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Brown, J. D. (2016). Introducing Needs analysis and English for Specific Purposes. New York, NY: Routledge.
Creamer, E. G., & Ghoston, M. (2013). Using a mixed methods content analysis to analyze mission statements
from colleges of engineering. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 7(2), 110-120.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2007). Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Divan, A., Ludwig, L. O., Matthews, K. E., Motley, P. M., & Tomljenovic-Berube, A. M. (2017). Survey of
research approaches utilized in the scholarship of teaching and learning publications. Teaching & Learning
Inquiry, 5(2), 16-29.
Dudley-Evans, T., & St. John., M. J. (1998). Developments in English for Specific Purposes: A Multi-
Disciplinary Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Flowerdew, L. (2013). Needs analysis and curriculum development in ESP. In Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S.
(Eds.), The Handbook of English for Specific Purposes (pp. 325-346). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham. W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed method
evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255-274.
Hashemi, M. R. (2012). Reflections on mixing methods in applied linguistics research. Applied Linguistics,
33(2), 206-212. doi:10.1093/applin/ams008
Hashemi, M. R., & Babaii, E. (2013). Mixed methods research: Toward new research designs in applied
linguistics. Modern Language Journal, 97(4), 828-852.
Healey, M., Matthews, K. E., & Cook-Sather, A. (2019). Writing scholarship of teaching and learning articles
for peer-reviewed journals. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 7(2), 28-50. doi:10.20343/teachlearninqu.7.2.3
Howe, K. R. (1988). Against the quantitative–qualitative incompatibility thesis or dogmas die hard. Educational
Researcher, 17(8), 10-16.
Hulstijn, J. H., Young, R. F., Ortega, L., Bigelow, M., DeKeyser, R., Ellis, N. C., Lantolf, J., Mackey, A., Talmy,
S. (2014). Bridging the gap: Cognitive and social approaches to research in second language learning and
teaching. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36, 361-421.
Hutchings, P. (2007). Theory: The elephant in the scholarship of teaching and learning room. International
Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 1-4. doi:10.20429/ijsotl.2007.010102
Hyland, K. (2014). English for Academic Purposes. London: Routledge.
Jasso-Aguilar, R. (2005). Sources, methods and triangulation in needs analysis: A critical perspective in a case
study of Waikiki hotel maids. In Long, M. (Ed.), Second Language Needs Analysis (pp. 127-158).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Javid, M., & Mohseni, A. (2020). English for law enforcement purposes: ESP needs analysis of border guarding
officers. Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(4), 89-111.
Johns, A., & Makalela, L. (2011). Needs analysis, critical ethnography, and context: Perspectives from the client
– and the consultant. In Belcher, D., Johns, A. M., & Paltridge, B. (Eds.), New directions in English for
Specific Purposes Research (pp. 197-221). East Lansing, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has
come. Educational Research, 33(7), 14-26.
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie., A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research.
Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112-133.
Kaivanpanah, S., Alavi, S. M., Bruce, I., & Hejazi, S. Y. (2021). EAP in the expanding circle: Exploring the
knowledge base, practices, and challenges of Iranian EAP practitioners. Journal of English for Academic
Purposes, 50, 100971.
Karapetian, A. O. (2020). Creating ESP-based language learning environment to foster critical thinking
21 Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 2021, Vol 23, 12‐22

capabilities in students’ papers. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(2), 717-728.

Kiely, R., & Rea-Dickens, P. (2005). Program Evaluation in Language Education. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
King, K. A., & Mackey, A. (2016). Research methodology in second language studies: Trends, concerns, and
new directions. The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 209-227. doi:10.1111/modl.12309
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. (2014). An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research. London:
Longman.
Lock, J., Rainsbury, J., Clancy, T., Rosenau, P., & Ferreira, C. (2018). Influence of co-teaching on undergraduate
student learning: A mixed-methods study in nursing. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 6(1), 38-51.
doi:10.20343/teachlearninqu.6.1.5
Long, M. (2005). Methodological issues in learner needs analysis. In Long, M. (Ed.), Second Language Needs
Analysis (pp. 19-76). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Melekhina, E. A., & Ivleva, M. A. (2020). Novice teachers entering the profession: Problems and needs analysis.
In Proceedings of the Conference Integrating Engineering Education and Humanities for Global
Intercultural Perspectives (pp. 745-750). Cham: Springer.
Miller, L. R., Klassen, K., & Hardy, J. W. (2020) Curriculum design from theory to practice: Preparing Japanese
students to study abroad using content-based language teaching. The Curriculum Journal, 31(2), 1-32.
Miller-Young, J., & Yeo, M. (2015). Conceptualizing and communicating SoTL: A framework for the field.
Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 3(2), 37-53.
Mirhosseini, S. A. (2017). Mixed methods research in TESOL: Procedures combined or epistemology confused.
TESOL Quarterly, 52(2), 468-478. doi: 10.1002/tesq.427
Mountford, A. (1981). The Way and the Way. London: Longman.
Onder-Ozdemir, N. (2019). Developing a questionnaire for critical needs analysis in EAP. The Asian ESP
Journal, 15(1.1), 98-118.
Petraki, E., & Khat, K. (2020). Challenges and constraints in the design of an ESP course in Cambodia:
Implications for higher education institutions. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 1-16.
doi:10.1080/02188791.2020.1798738
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language Processing and Second Language Development: Processability Theory.
Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Riazi, A. M. (2016). Innovative mixed-methods research: Moving beyond design technicalities to
epistemological and methodological realizations. Applied Linguistics, 37(1), 33-49.
doi:10.1093/applin/amv064
Riazi, A. M., & Candlin, C. N. (2014). Mixed-methods research in language teaching and learning:
Opportunities, issues and challenges. Language Teaching, 47(2), 135-173. doi: 10.1017/S0261444813000505
Richards, J. C. (2013). Curriculum approaches in language teaching: Forward, central, and backward design.
RELC Journal, 44(1), 5-33.
Sale, J. E. M., Lohfeld, L. H., &. Brazil, K. (2002). Revisiting the quantitative–qualitative debate: Implications
for mixed-methods research. Quality and Quantity, 36(1), 43-53. doi:10.1023/A:1014301607592
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2011). Mixed methods research: Contemporary issues in an emerging field. In
Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.) (4th Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 285-299).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Thepseenu, B. (2020). Needs analysis for ESP course development: Thai civil engineering students’ perspectives.
Asian Journal of Education and Training, 6(3), 433-442.
Webb, A. S., & Welsh, A. J. (2019). Phenomenology as a methodology for Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning research. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 7(1), 168-181. doi: 10.20343/teachlearninqu.7.1.11
West, R. (1994). Needs analysis in language teaching. Language Teaching, 27, 1.

www.EUROKD.COM
 Eun Jeong Park 22

Widdowson. H. G. (1981). English for specific purposes: Criteria for course design. In Trimble, L., Selinker, L.,
Tarone, E., & Hanzeli, V. E. (Eds.), English for Academic and Technical Purposes: Studies in Honor of Louis
Trimble (pp. 1-11). London: Newbury House.
Wilkins, D. A. (1974). Notional syllabuses and the concept of a minimum adequate grammar. In Corder, S. P., &
Roulet, E. (Eds.), Linguistic Insights in Applied Linguistics. AIMAV/Didier.
Wilkinson, I. A., & Staley, B. (2019). On the pitfalls and promises of using mixed methods in literacy research:
Perceptions of reviewers. Research Papers in Education, 34(1), 61-83.
Yatroon, P. (2020). Assessing task-based language needs of the students of international law. Language Teaching
Research Quarterly, 18, 115-128.
Yin, R. K. (2006). Mixed methods research: Are the methods genuinely integrated or merely parallel. Research
in the Schools, 13(1), 41-47.

Acknowledgements
Not applicable.

Funding
Not applicable.
Ethics Declarations
Competing Interests
No, there are no conflicting interests.
Rights and Permissions
Open Access
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,
which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or
format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide
a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. You may view a
copy of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License here:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.