Brown-pg. 69
1. I think that all of the groups mentioned by Brown should be included in a needs analysis. There are a number of reasons to include each group.
- Target group (students)-this group should obviously be included as they are the group who will participate in classes, and who will need the knowledge they gain in the future. I think that this group might often be overlooked however as teachers and administrators might believe they know what is needed and best for students. However, students are likely to have a good grasp of what they need, and also including student WANTS in a curriculum can help with engagement and motivation.
- Target group (teachers)-I think that this is very important. Teachers are often included in a needs analysis, but perhaps not given the opportunity to speak as a target group. For instance, teachers might be asked what grammar point students need to know for the essays they write, but they may not be asked about their needs as teachers. This is especially important when you have a multicultural group of teachers with different education and professional backgrounds, as well as different beliefs about education in general.
- Audience-When considering the audience, it is important to include ALL groups who will be involved with the curriculum. Problems are bound to arise if a group is not included in the development of the curriculum and then later required to participate in it in some way. For instance, it may be that lab and IT people are not included in a needs analysis, though the curriculum eventually includes use of the labs and new software.
- Needs analysts-In my experience, this has usually been faculty designated for the job. In this case, they would of course be included. However, I believe that there is some value in having a third party run a needs analysis. The conducting of a needs analysis and the subsequent development of curriculum can be very political, and this may not be conducive to a well integrated faculty. It is also likely that faculty needs analysts could allow personal experience and wants to override or overshadow the results of the needs analysis.
- Resource groups-Again, here it is important to consider ALL groups who may offer information about the student. Certain groups will be more or less important to the needs analysis depending on the context. For instance, in Kuwait, parents were very much involved in their children’s education (on a daily basis) even at the college level and helped choose classes as well as meeting with teachers to discuss student progress. In this case, it would be wise to include them in a needs analysis. However, this group may be less important for college students in countries like the United States, as they tend to exercise more autonomy. The inclusion of information from many groups can also help students feel that they are receiving the best information for their future needs (when including information from future teachers or employers) and this can be motivating.
6. In a table on instruments for collection of needs analysis information, Brown does not include existing information or tests in the collection instruments for language needs. I found this interesting as he suggests that language needs include current student ability, and I think that this is most likely measured through proficiency testing. It would also be useful to review past records to see where there have historically been gaps in student knowledge (based on grades or sample work) so that these can be addressed. Brown also suggests that discourse and text analysis is useful in assessing language needs, and I agree. The difficulty arises in knowing exactly what texts to analyze, and this is largely dependent on the set up of the program (for instance, is it an ESP class? EGAP?) There are also a number of instruments that may be used to gather information on both situation and language needs, which seems reasonable. This allows analysts to use observation, self-reporting of participant groups, and questionnaires to collect relevant data.