Tailored vs. Standard Curriculum and General English Achievement: A Study of Teachers’ Views





English for General Purposes, EGP, needs analysis, NA, pre-requisite general English course, curriculum development, curriculum tailoring, curriculum evaluation


This study was conducted in two phases. The first one is the preliminary phase aimed at tailoring the standard curriculum based on learners’ needs analysis. The second one is the main phase, intended to evaluate the tailored curriculum based on teachers’ views. The participants in the preliminary phase of the study (tailoring the curriculum) were 346 non-native male and female undergraduate students who received the same Pre-Requisite General English course at their first semester in university. They were studying different majors, including Accounting, Architecture, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, and Mechanical Engineering. The participants in the main phase (evaluation of the tailored curriculum by teachers) were 10 non-native male (7) and female (3) teachers who taught the Pre-Requisite General English course through the tailored curriculum. The findings of the study supported the hypothesis that the teachers have a positive attitude toward using the tailored curriculum in teaching the Pre-Requisite General English course. It seems that the implementation of this tailored program, which is based on learner-needs-analysis, can enhance the effectiveness of the English for General Purposes (EGP) course, compared to the standard one.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Bizhan Hekmatshoar Tabari, Department of English Language, Tonekabon Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tonekabon, Iran

PhD Candidate in TEFL at the Islamic Azad University, Tonekabon Branch, Iran. He is also a member of Faculty at Ayandegan Institute of Higher Education, Tonekabon, Iran. He has been teaching at Iranian universities and institutes of higher education for about 14 years. He received his B.A. in 2005 in English Language and Literature from Ershad Institute of Higher Education, Damavand, Iran. He got his M.A in TEFL in 2008 from Mazandaran University of Babolsar, Babolsar, Iran. He published several articles. He is interested in teacher cognition and curriculum development.

Ramin Rahimy, Department of English Language, Tonekabon Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tonekabon, Iran

Assistant professor in TEFL. He is the faculty member of the Islamic Azad University, Tonekabon Branch, Iran where he has been teaching English courses for over 20 years. He has ever published papers on different fields of second language acquisition and applied linguistics in the academic journals. He is interested in psycholinguistic aspects of L2 acquisition, translation studies, and sociolinguistics and is focusing on EFL vocabulary learning. He has also reviewed various articles for SAGE journals, Pablons and other known journals.


Ahmadi, A., & Derakhshan, A. (2015). An evaluation of the Iranian junior high school English textbooks “Prospect 1” and its old version “Right Path to English 1” from teachers’ perceptions. International Journal of English Language and Literature Studies, 4(1), 37–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.23/2015.4.1/

Ahmadi-Safa, M., Ghonchepoor, A., Malek Mohamadi, R., Seifi, Z., & Zekrati, S. (2017). Prospect II: A textbook evaluation study based on EFL teachers’ perspective. Journal of Language Research (JLR), 9(24), 7–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22051/JLR.2016.2437

Alwan, F. H. (2006). An analysis of English language teachers’ perceptions of curriculum change in the United Arab Emirates (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). University of Exeter, Exeter.

Arap, B. (2016). An investigation into the implementation of English preparatory programs at tertiary level in Turkey (Doctoral dissertation). Çukurova Üniversitesi, Adana.

Asadi, M., Kiany. G. R., Akbari, R., & Ghafar Samar, R. (2016). Program evaluation of the new English textbook (Prospect1).Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(2), 291–301. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0602.10

Atai, M. R., & Mazlum, F. (2013). English language teaching curriculum in Iran: Planning and practice. The Curriculum Journal, 24(3), 389–411. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.547606

Atai, M. R., & Tahririan, M. H. (2003). Assessment of the ESP status in the current Iranian higher education system. LSP 2000, communication, culture and knowledge. University of Surrey.

Bayram, Í., & Canaran, Ö. (2019). Evaluation of an English preparatory program at a Turkish Foundation University. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(1), 48–69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.547606

Behzadi, A., & Lashkarian, A. (2015). Iranian undergraduate students’ needs in English courses for general and specific purposes. International Journal of English and Education, 4(3), 67–80.

Brown, J. R. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to program development. Heinle & Heinle.

Burgos, S. (2012). Behind classroom doors: Consistency between policy and practice in the English as a second language classroom (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Universidad Del Turabo, Puerto Rico.

Chaudron, C., Doughty, C., Kim, Y., Kong, D. Lee, J., Lee, Y., Long, M., Rivers, R., & Urano, K. (2005). A task-based needs analysis of a tertiary Korean as a foreign language program. In M. Long. (Ed.), Second language needs analysis (pp. 225–261). Cambridge University. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667299.009

Dooey, P. (2010). Students’ perspectives of an EAP pathway program. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9, 184–197. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.013

Dündar, E., & Merç, A. (2017). A critical review of research on curriculum development and evaluation in ELT. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 2(1), 136–168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.437574

Flowerdew, J., & Peacock, M. (2001). Research perspective for EAP. Cambridge University Press.

Ghanbari, B., & Ketabi, S. (2011). Practicing a change in an Iranian EFL curriculum: From ivory tower to reality. The Iranian EFL Journal, 7(6), 268–282.

Gholami Mehrdad, A. (2012). A subjective needs assessment of EGP students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 546–554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.101

Gillett, A. J., & Hammond, A. C. (2011). Pre-Master’s course design: What can we learn from assessment? In S. Etherington (Ed.), English for specific academic purposes (pp. 95–100). Reading: Garnet Education.

Guo, Z., & Xu, L. (2016). Study on the integration mode of computer network technology and college English curriculum. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 11(8), 40–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v11i08.6046

Harris, L. S. (2010). A case study of the English second language programs of a North Carolina school district (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). The University of North Carolina, Charlotte.

Hayati, A. M. (2008). Teaching English for special purposes in Iran problems and suggestions. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 7(2), 149–164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022208088645

Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-centered approach. Cambridge University Press.

Iwai, T., Kondo, K., Lim, D. S. J., Ray, G. E., Shimizu, H., & Brown, J. D. (1999). Japanese language needs assessment 1998–1999 (NFLRC Net Work #13) [HTML document]. Honolulu: University of Hawai`i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center. http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/

Ínal, B., & Aksoy, E. (2014). Evaluation of the curriculum of English preparatory classes at Çankaya University. Journal of Education and Training Research, 3(3), 85–98.

Jahangard, A. (2007). Evaluation of EFL materials taught at Iranian public high schools. Asian EFL Journal 9(2), 130–150.

Johnson, K., & Johnson, H. (1999). Encyclopedic dictionary of applied linguistics: A handbook for language teaching. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Jordan, P. R. (1997). English for academic purposes. Cambridge University Press.

Khansir, A. K. (2014). Needs analysis and General English Language. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW), 7(2), 161–174.

Khany, R., & Tarlani-Aliabadi, H. (2016). Studying power relations in an academic setting: Teachers’ and Students’ perceptions of EAP classes in Iran. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 21, 72–85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.12.002

Kiany, G. R., Mahdavy, B., & Ghafar Samar, R. (2011). “Towards a Harmonized Foreign Language Education in Iran: National Policies and ­English Achievement.” Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal, 2, 462–469.

Kleckova, G., & Dalle, T. (2018). Working with a course book and the curriculum. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (1st Ed.). Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 1–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0208

Krekeler, C. F. (1993). An evaluation of the elementary English-as-a-second language program in Klein, Texas Independent School District (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Texas A&M University, Texas.

Maftoon, P., Yazdani Moghaddam, M., Golebostan, H., & Beh-Afarin, S. R. (2010). Privatization of English education in Iran: A feasibility study. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 13, 1–12.

Marsh, C. (2004). Key concepts for understanding curriculum (3rd Ed.) Routledge Falmer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203326893

Mohamadi, Z. (2013). Program evaluation on general English course: A case study at Tabriz University. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(6), 1285–1297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.6.1285-1297

Moiinvaziri, M. (2014). Students’ voice: A needs analysis of university general English course in Iran. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies, 14(1), 57–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17576/GEMA-2014-1401-05

Mukundum, J., & Nimehchisalem, V. (2011). An evaluation of English teaching courseware in Malaysia. English Language Teaching 4(3),

–150. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n3p142

Nam, J. M. (2005). Perceptions of Korean college students and teachers about communication-based English instruction: Evaluation of a college EFL curriculum in South Korea (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Ohio State University, the USA. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1110161814

Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. Routledge.

Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (Eds.). (2011). Case studies in language curriculum design: Concepts and approaches in action around the world. Routledge.

Nemati, A., (2009). Evaluation of an ESL English course book: A step toward systematic vocabulary evaluation. Journal of Social Sciences, 20(2), 91–99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09718923.2009.11892726

Nichols, B, Shidaker, S., Johnson, G., & Singer, K (2006). Managing curriculum and assessment. A practitioner’s guide. Ohio.

Nunan, D. (1988). The learner-centered curriculum. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524506

Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia-pacific region. TESOL QUARTERLY, 37(4), 589–613. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3588214

Powell, J. M. (2008). English language learner programs and services: A case study of Nebraska middle schools (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). University of Nebraska, Lincoln. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dissertations/AAI3315207

Richards, J. C. (1990). The language teaching matrix. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667152

Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667220

Richards, J. C. (2017). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Longman (Pearson) Education.

Robinson, P. (1991). ESP Today. Prgamon Press.

Seedhouse, P. (1995). Needs analysis and the general English classroom. ELT Journal, 49(1), 59–65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/49.1.59

Soodmand Afshar, H., & Movassagh, H. (2016). EAP education in Iran: Where does the problem lie? Where are we heading? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 22, 132–151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.04.002

Tavakoli, M., & Tavakol, M. (2018). Problematizing EAP education in Iran: A critical ethnographic study of educational, political, and sociocultural roots. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 28–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.12.007

Tomlinson, B., & Masuhara, H. (2018). The complete guide to the theory and practice of materials development for language learning. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Tunç, F. (2010). Evaluation of an English language teaching program at a public university using CIPP model. (Thesis Submitted to the Graduate School of Social Sciences), Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.

Üstünlüoglu, E., Akgül-Zazaoglu, K. F., Keskin, M. N., Sarayköylü, B., & Akdogan, G. (2012). Developing a CEF based curriculum: A case study. International Journal of Instruction, 5(1), 115–129.

Wang, L. H. C. (1996). A formative evaluation of the English language program in Fong Shin senior high school, Kaohsiung country, Taiwan (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Florida State University, Florida.

Zohrabi, M. (2005). Trends in ESP & EGP. The first national ESP/EGP conference. Tehran, Iran.

Zohrabi, M., & Sabouri, H. (2012). An assessment of strengths and weaknesses of Iranian first year high school English course book using evaluation checklist. English Language and Literature Studies, 2(2), 213–222. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ells.v2n2p89




How to Cite

Hekmatshoar Tabari, B., & Rahimy, R. (2021). Tailored vs. Standard Curriculum and General English Achievement: A Study of Teachers’ Views. Latin American Journal of Content &Amp; Language Integrated Learning, 14(1), 123–149. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2021.14.1.5