Estudios en el contexto nacional

As mentioned in section 4.2, the 45 students also took the Scientific English Grammatical Structures Test in phase one and in phase two after one week of the TOEIC in each phase. The scores of the Scientific English Grammatical Structures Test from both phases were analysed and compared to find out the students’ proficiency in the grammar structures used in sciences. These scores can be used for interpreting the English language information about the learners (C) and learners’ lacks (D) of the needs analysis model.

The results from the total score and the t-test analysis are reported, followed by the scores of the students in the three main scientific grammatical structures, and the strengths and weaknesses in the grammar structures of the students. The summary drawn from these findings is presented at the end of the section.

4.2.2.1 The total score and the t-test for the Scientific English Grammatical Structures Test

The descriptive statistics for the total scores of the 45 students in phase one and phase two illustrate that the majority of the 45 students had a score less than half of the maximum score of 45. In addition, although the mean values in phase two were higher than those in phase one, the t-test indicated no significant difference between the mean values in phase one and in phase two (t (44) = -.935, p<.355). The results suggest that the 45 students did not significantly improve their knowledge of the grammar structures used in sciences during the period of the ESP programme (Table 4.6).

133

Table 4.6 The differences between the mean scores of the total score of the 45 students in phase one and phase two

Tests N Mean S.D. t-test d.f. Sig.

(2-tailed)

Phase one 45 11.69 3.26 -.935 44 .355

Phase two 45 12.24 3.61

(p<.05)

4.2.2.2 The scores of the students for the three main scientific grammatical structures

The Scientific English Grammatical Structures Test encompasses three grammatical structures: complementation, relativization, and comparison. The analysis showed that the mean percent of the 45 students for all the three grammatical structures increased in phase two. In addition, the highest mean percent was in the complementation in phase one and in the relativization in phase two, whereas the lowest mean percent was in the Comparison in both tests (Table 4.7).

Table 4.7Mean per cent correct for the three main scientific English grammatical structures of the 45 students in phase one and phase two

Scientific English grammatical structures Overall

Phase one Phase two

Complementation 27.41 27.85

Relativization 26.74 28.45

Comparison 21.78 25.33

Since most of the students did not achieve half of the maximum score and the mean percent was relatively low, the next process of the research further investigated the strengths and weaknesses regarding these three scientific grammatical structures. The number of students that had a correct response to the test questions was assumed to be the students’ strengths, whereas the low number of students having a correct response to the questions was assumed to be the students’ weaknesses.

134

4.2.2.3 The strengths and weaknesses of scientific grammar structures of the students

This section reports the findings from the analysis of the questions that the 45 students got correct. The findings revealed the strengths and weaknesses of the students in scientific grammatical structures. The 45 questions on the Scientific English Grammatical Structures Test measure the three main scientific grammatical structures or the fifteen sub-structures regarding scientific English grammar issues.

Complementation

The 15 questions in the Complementation structure were composed from five sub-structures (Table 4.8). The finding showed that a majority of the 45 students (36.30%) in phase one had a correct responses to questions no. 13, 27, and 42. The questions asked the students about “To- infinitive complement functioning as an object (Type 5),” which was also the highest percentage of all the 15 sub-structures. However, only 18.52% of the students had a correct response to questions no. 1, 9, and 25. These questions asked the students about “Participial – “ing” object complement following the preposition by.”

In phase two, the percentages of correct responses for the five sub-structures slightly increased, except the questions about “To-infinitive complement functioning as an object (Type 5),” which decreased to 21.48%, which was also the lowest percentage of the Complementation. However, the highest percentage in phase two was for the questions related to the “Finite subject complement which is declarative in form” (32.59%), which can be found in questions no. 5, 21, and 31.

135

Table 4.8Percentages of correct responses in the fifteen English grammatical structures of the 45 students

English grammatical structures Percentage (%) of

correct responses Phase one Phase two Complementation

1. Finite object complement which is declarative in form 21.48 27.41

2. Finite subject complement which is declarative in form 31.11 32.59

3. To- infinitive complement functioning as an object (Type 2) 27.41 28.15 4.To- infinitive complement functioning as an object (Type 5) 36.30 21.48 5. Participial -ing object complement following the preposition by 18.52 29.63 Relativization

6. Non-finite (restrictive) participial -ing relative construction 30.37 32.59 7.Non-finite (restrictive) participial -ed relative construction 32.59 34.07 8. Finite (restrictive) relative construction with the relative element that

as a subject

31.11 16.30

9. Finite (restrictive) relative construction with the relative element which as a subject

26.67 26.67

10. Finite (restrictive) relative construction with the relative element which functioning as a complement

12.59 32.59

Comparison

11. Comparison of difference with the comparative element other used with anaphoric reference

14.82 23.70

12. Comparison of equality with as showing relative-like characteristics 25.19 16.30 13. Comparison of similarity with the comparative element same used

reciprocally

18.52 22.22

14. Comparison of inequality used anaphorically with the absence of than

25.93 35.56

15. Comparison of inequality involving the implicit bound comparison with the presence of than

20.74 28.89

Although the findings showed the highest and the lowest percentage of the correct response in the five sub-structures, the relatively low percentages suggest that the students had difficulties with all five structures in the complementation.

Relativization

The 15 questions testing the relativizationstructure were composed from five structures (Table 4.8). The findings in phase one showed the highest percentage for questions no. 17, 32, and 38.

136

The questions tested the “Non-finite (restrictive) participial -ed relative construction” (32.59%), which also had the highest percentage in phase two (34.07%). The lowest percentage was the “Finite (restrictive) relative construction with the relative element which functioning as a complement”(12.59%), was also the lowest percentage in all 15 structures. The questions related to this type of structure were no. 14, 40, and 44.

In phase two, the percentages of correct response regarding the three structures slightly increased. For example, the percentage of the “Non-finite (restrictive) participial –ing relative construction” increased to 32.59%. However, the percentage of the questions about the “Finite (restrictive) relative construction with the relative element that as a subject” dropped to 16.30%. The percentage was also one of the lowest percentages among the 15 structures in phase two. The questions related to this structure included no. 2, 36, and 41.

Although the findings showed the highest and the lowest percentage of the correct response regarding the five structures, the relatively low percentages suggested that the students had difficulties with all five relativization structures.

Comparison

The 15 questions in the Comparison structure were composed of five structures (Table 4.8). The findings showed that the highest percentage in phase one and phase two was the “Comparison of inequality used anaphorically with the absence of than” (25.93%, and 35.56%, respectively). This particular sub-structure was found in questions no. 10, 15, and 23. The lowest percentage was the “Comparison of difference with the comparative element other used with anaphoric reference” (14.82%) in phase one, which appeared in questions no. 3, 28, and 35. In addition, the lowest percentage in phase two was the “Comparison of equality with as showing relative-like characteristics” (16.30%), which was one of the lowest percentages among the 15 structures and the only sub-structure among the five sub-structures of the

137 comparison. This particular sub-structure was found in questions no. 6, 16 and 26. From the results, it can be inferred that the 45 students had difficulties with all of the five sub-structures in the comparison.