6 TH INTERNATIONAL VISIBLE CONFERENCE ON EDUCATIONAL STUDIES AND APPLIED LINGUISTICS BOOK of PROCEEDINGS

Abstract

University of Salahaddin, a state-funded university in Kurdistan Region-Iraq, has recently reformed the English language module of university freshmen of all majors apart from English departments. General English for University Students (GEfUS), as a main course book, hasbeen introducedto this population, which has been developed by Garnet Education in collaboration with curriculum development experts at Salahaddin University – Erbil. This paper attempts to evaluate the teaching of this text book using questionnaire to collect data from the teachers who taught this material. The questionnaire included a number of various aspects in relation to teaching and application of the book. The practitioners’ specialization, class size, teaching methods, facility, teacher preparation and training
6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
189

courses, culture and social differences are among the important aspects that have been investigated. The results show that there is a lack of teacher training for teachers who taught this module. The absence of appropriate facilities required to be used in the English classes was also among the main findings. The class size, on the other hand, was a major hindrance to achievement of the objectives of the book. Another result shows that the book, especially the first theme, does not reflect the study and social life of Kurdish university students. Adapting the student-centeredness approach to teaching GEfUS, the teachers encountered a number of obstacles namely large class size, shortage of time and the length of the text. The paper ends with presenting a number of suggestions for developing the teaching of this course.

Keyword: Context, Curriculum development, Needs analysis, SUH

Full text

6TH INTERNATIONAL VISIBLE CONFERENCE ON
EDUCATIONAL STUDIES
AND
APPLIED LINGUISTICS
BOOK of PROCEEDINGS
April 26-27, 2015
Erbil

II
First published 2015
by Ishik University
Erbil- Kurdistan Region/Iraq
© 2015 Ishik University
Edited by:
Başar Batur
İbrahim Nişancı
Reviewed by:
Dr. M. Numan Kanar (Coordinator of Editorial Board) , Ishik University
Dr. Dilovan Safuddin Ghafoory, Salahaddin University
Assoc. Prof. Yakup Cetin, Fatih University
Assist. Prof. Dr. Himdad AbdulQahar, Salahaddin University
Assist. Prof. Dr. Anjuman Muhammad Sabir, Salahaddin University
Dr. Mustafa Bahar, Fatih University
Dr. Muhammad Omer Ahmed, Salahaddin University
Alice Rosemarry Farthing, Ishik University
Typeset in Ishik University by Başar Batur, Hamdi Serin
Printed and bound in Irfan Publishing/ Anıt Printhouse
ISBN 978-0-9962570-1-5
Reproduction of this Publication for Educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized
without prior permission from the copyright holder. Reproduction for resale or other commercial
purposes prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder.
Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information, contained in this
publication, Ishik University and Salahaddin University will not assume liability for writing and any use
made of the proceedings, and the presentation of the participating organizations concerning the legal
status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers
or boundaries.

III
Partner Universities
Ishik University (Erbil)
Salahaddin University (Erbil)
Honorary Committees
Prof. Dr. Ahmet Öztaş
President of Ishik University
(Head of Academic Advisory and Honorary Committee)
Prof. Dr. Ahmed Anwar Dizayi
President of Salahaddin University
Conference Chairs
Dr. Süleyman Çelik
Dean of Faculty of Education, Ishik University
Assist. Prof. Dr. Idrees Muhammad Tahir Harky
Dean of College of Education of Salahaddin University

IV
Organizing Committee
Co-chair: Başar Batur, Ishik University
Co-chair: Dilovan Sayfuddin Ghafoory, Salahaddin University
Organizing Secretary: İbrahim Nişancı, Ishik University
Organizing Committee Members in Salahaddin University:
Assist. Prof. Dr. Saeed Omer Ibrahim
Dr. Dilovan Safuddin Ghafoory
Dr. Muhammad Omer Ahmed
Dr. Muayad Jarjees
Academic Advisory Committee
Prof. Dr. Ahmet Oztas, President of Ishik University (Head of Academic
Advisory Committee)
Assist. Prof. Dr. Idrees Muhammad Tahir Harky, Dean of College of Education of
Salahaddin University
Prof.Dr. Adnan Kısa, President of Zirve University
Prof. Dr. Fatih Toremen, Dean of faculty of Education, Zirve University
Prof. Dr. Bayan Salim Obaid, Ishik University
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mikail Soylemez, Dicle University
Assoc. Prof. Yakup Cetin, Fatih University, Head of ELT Department
Assoc. Prof. Azamat Akbarov, Burch University
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Yaseen Alhiti, Head of Clinical Sciences Department at
Faculty of Dentistry at Ishik University

V
Assist. Prof. Volkan Cicek, Ishik University
Assist. Prof. Dr. Arif Çelebi, Dean of Dentistry Faculty , Ishik University
Dr. Mehmet Özdemir, Vice President, Ishik University
Dr. Huseyin Cakillikoyak, Dean of Faculty of Law, Ishik University
Dr. Doğan Özdemir, Dean of Faculty of Engineering, Ishik University
Dr. Sara Kamal, Suleymaniye University
Dr. M. Numan Kanar, Ishik University
Dr. Mustafa Altun, Ishik University
Dr. Zeynel Polat, Ishik University

VI

VII
Foreword
We are really pleased to introduce the proceedings of the Sixth International
Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics (VESAL
2015) organized by Ishik University and Salahaddin University. The aim of
the conference is to disseminate research findings and provide a platform for
scholars to debate and exchange ideas that will increase awareness of
importance of education.
We are particularly indebted to our keynote speakers: Laura Woodward,
Azamat Akbarov and Alaa Makki. Without their outstanding performances,
the conference could not have been successful. We wish to express our
sincere thanks to all of the presenters that contributed to the success of the
conference through many fruitful discussions and exchange.
A special thanks should also be extended to the session chairs. We would
also like to record our appreciation to the organizing committee whom we
owe a great debt for their remarkable work as this conference would not
have been possible without their constant efforts.
Finally, we would like to especially thank the Foundation of Fezalar
Educational Institutions for its moral and material support. All in all,
VESAL 2015 has been very successful. The plenary lectures and valuable
contributions of the presenters have brought new perspectives on educational
studies and applied linguistic studies.
Dr. Süleyman Çelik
Conference Chair
Ishik University
Assist. Prof. Dr.
Edrees Muhammad T. Harki
Conference Chair
Salahaddin University

VIII

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
IX
Table of Contents
1. Motivation Equals Participation
Laura Woodward ....................................................................................... 1
2. Developing Cognitive Linguistic Approaches to Implement Communicative
Language Teaching in EFL Classrooms
Azamat Akbarov ........................................................................................ 2
3. On Sophism in Mathematics Education
Abdullah Kurudirek, Hüseyin Akça ............................................................ 3
4. Assessment of Strategic Procedures Used in Teaching Communication in
English Department
Ali M. Jukil, Jwan Ahmed Mustafa ........................................................... 11
5. The Effect Of L1 Interference On Written English Acquisition For Kurdish
Students
Alice Farthing .......................................................................................... 31
6. To take notes or not to take notes? That is the question!
Alison Salm, Stacey Xaelani...................................................................... 45
7. Investigating University Students' Recogntion of Ilness as Metaphor in
"Hard Times" and "The Scarlet Letter"
Amra Ibrahim Sulltan, Afrah Adil Mahmood ............................................ 64
8. The Effective Use of Strategies in Purposeful Reading
Arkan Abdulqader Elias............................................................................ 87
9. Evaluation of Accuracy Criterion of Writing Skill of Second-year College
Students
Ayad Hammad Ali .................................................................................. 106
10. Criteria for Evaluating Students Essay Writing at the Tertiary Level at
Salahaddin University, Kurdistan Region, Iraq
Aziz Emmanuel Zebari, Asma Abas Brime............................................... 123
11. A Comparative Study of Phonological properties of English and Kurdish
Bandar A. Mohammad, Fatima Jalal Taher .......................................... 135

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
X
12. Awareness of Importance of Communicative Competence in Tefl among
Efl Teachers in Iraq
Elvira Koran ........................................................................................... 159
13. The Role of English in Present Day Higher Education
Eman Abdulsalam AL-Khalil ................................................................... 172
14. Storytelling in EFL Classes
Emine Bala ............................................................................................ 181
15. An Evaluation of the Teaching of “General English for University
Students” at Salahaddin University-Erbil
Fatimah Rashid Hasan ........................................................................... 188
16. Interrogative Sentences in English and Turkish language
Fawziya Mousa Ghanim , Ibtisam Arabi Abdulah ................................... 210
17. Turning the tables: lessons for teachers
Fay Al Jibory .......................................................................................... 215
18. Vocabulary Learning Strategies Of English Language Learners In Northern
Cyprus
Govand Anwar ...................................................................................... 226
19. Analysis of strategies in teaching ethics to university graduate students:
Evidence from Private University in Erbil
Govand Anwar, Navulur Krishna Surarchith, Omer Terzibasi .................. 245
20. The Issue of Gender Assignment in Code Switching
Haitham Hussein Bapeer ....................................................................... 257
21. Students’ Beliefs About Learning English Language As A Foreign
Language At English Department College Of Basic Education Salahaddin
Uviversity/ Hawler
Hazha Salih Hassan ............................................................................... 267
22. What Do Students Prefer to Do in an Extensive Reading Course?
Ibrahim Nişancı, Fatima Saadi, Niyan Said ............................................. 285
23. Designing, Implementing and Evaluating of Instructional Design That Was
Developed by Using Cabri 3D, Based on ASSURE Instructional Design.
İsmail Keskin ......................................................................................... 305
24. The Assessment and Suitability of ‘Treasure Island’ as Literary Reader in
Grade Twelve in Kurdistan Schools
Mohammad Aba-Bakir Khidhir .............................................................. 319

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
XI
25. A New Approach To The Study Of Linguistics
Mohammad S. Mansoor ........................................................................ 333
26. Using Role-Play Activities To Develop Speaking Skills: A Case Study In
The Language Classroom
Mustafa Altun ....................................................................................... 354
27. Assessing Sunrise 12 Ministerial Exam
Rawand Sabah ...................................................................................... 364
28. Code switching in English Language Teaching Environment
Rawand Sabah ...................................................................................... 374
29. Education and Instruction in Ancient Sumerian School "An Educational and
Comparative study"
Sattar Jabbar Haji .................................................................................. 386
30. The Role of Teachers in Developing Learners' Speaking Skill
Selcuk Koran .......................................................................................... 400
31. Considering the Foreign Language (English) Teachers as School
Counsellors
Suleyman Celik ...................................................................................... 417
32. Managing the Classes by Using Multiple Intelligence Instruction
Suleyman Celik ...................................................................................... 427
33. Mobile Social Media in Higher Education & Implementation of
“EDMODO” in reading classes
Tahsin Yagci .......................................................................................... 436
34. Utilization Media & Technologies for Distance Education
Wassan Adnan. Hashim, Omar Abdulmaged Hammood......................... 443
35. Problems of Acquiring Academic Skills in Children with Learning
Disability
Widad S. Shakir , Lana I. Abdullah ........................................................ 460
36. Evaluating the Role of Counselors and Counseling in High School
Learners’ Life in Erbil City- A Field Research
Widad S. Shakir ..................................................................................... 471
37. Definition Of Horyat In Iraqi Turkmen Folk Poetry And Its Etymological
Analysis
Zeynel Polat, Başar Batur ...................................................................... 482

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
XII

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
188
An Evaluation of the Teaching of “General English for
University Students” at Salahaddin University-Erbil
Prof. Fatimah Rashid Hasan
College of Languages, University of Salahaddin
fatimah.hassan@mhe-krg.org
Asst. Lecturer Yousif Ali Omer
College of Languages, University of Salahaddin
yousif_alio@yahoo.com
Asst. Lecturer Muhammad Abdulwahab Aziz
College of Education, University of Salahaddin
muhammadaziz85@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
University of Salahaddin, a state-funded university in Kurdistan
Region-Iraq, has recently reformed the English language module of
university freshmen of all majors apart from English departments. General
English for University Students (GEfUS), as a main course book, hasbeen
introducedto this population, which has been developed by Garnet Education
in collaboration with curriculum development experts at Salahaddin
University – Erbil. This paper attempts to evaluate the teaching of this text
book using questionnaire to collect data from the teachers who taught this
material. The questionnaire included a number of various aspects in relation
to teaching and application of the book. The practitioners’ specialization,
class size, teaching methods, facility, teacher preparation and training

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
189
courses, culture and social differences are among the important aspects that
have been investigated. The results show that there is a lack of teacher
training for teachers who taught this module. The absence of appropriate
facilities required to be used in the English classes was also among the main
findings. The class size, on the other hand, was a major hindrance to
achievement of the objectives of the book. Another result shows that the
book, especially the first theme, does not reflect the study and social life of
Kurdish university students. Adapting the student-centeredness approach to
teaching GEfUS, the teachers encountered a number of obstacles namely
large class size, shortage of time and the length of the text. The paper ends
with presenting a number of suggestions for developing the teaching of this
course.
Keyword: Context, Curriculum development, Needs analysis, SUH
1. INTRODUCTION
English language as a foreign language (EFL) has long been taught in
almost all different departments of Salahaddin University – Hawler (SUH)
colleges. EFL was especially introduced to all departments in the last
decade. This has been because of the political and economic transformation
in the early 2000s. Until 2013 there was not a prescribed textbook to be
taught at all departments. This offered much leeway to the individual tutors
to develop the content of this subject by themselves. In 2013 (Progressive
Skills in English, Level 1) (Philillips, etl. 2012) was slightly customized and
titled General English for University Students (GEfUS) by Garnet
Publishing in collaboration with SUH, and it was offered to all SUH
freshmen. The term General is often misinterpreted to mean everyday
English. However, this material offers and academic English and the word
“General” is used to mean learning the basics of English Languagein all
departments of SUH.
GEfUS is an academic English language course (comprising course
book with audio CDs and DVD, workbook with audio CD and teacher’s
book)
for the first year students, freshmen, at SUH, which aims at preparing
students to learn the skills required for academic life such as lectures,
tutorials, reading research and written assignments in English. In this
course, students are familiarized with the major types of academic spoken
language, lectures and seminars, and the key patterns of academic written
language, journal articles and encyclopedia entries(Phillips, et al., 2012).

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
190
GEfUS was initially taught two hours per week and later extended to
four hours a week, despite all the limitations caused ahead of this extension
with regards to halls, number of teachers and other facilities. The number of
hours dedicated for covering this material can be sufficient provided that the
freshmen start their courses in November each year.
Critical thinking and student-centeredness are two main aspects
integrated in the GEfUS activities to promote them among the students.
Critical thinking is developed here to encourage the students to ask and
evaluate information and relate them to their own lives and the world around
them. Students are aimed to be transferred from the questions what and when
to why and how throughout the course. From this perspective, the learners
are not only supposed to describe things but it is hoped that they will be
equipped with strategies necessary for evaluating and criticizing things.
A major focus has been put on student-centeredness in this course book
through enabling them to be autonomous learners. Students have to be
encouraged to seek knowledge by themselves and not to regard their teachers
as only sources of information. The learners have to do research and give
presentation to their peers.
There are some fundamental principles as reviewed in the literature that
should be taken into account when designing a course for specific
population: needs analysis, situation analysis, formulation of goals and
objectives, content and material, teaching methodology, teacher, assessment,
and course evaluation (Hoyt-Oukada, 2003; Nation and Macalister, 2010;
Richards, 2009).
Environment or situation analysis has been widely published by
researchers. It has also been coined constraint analysis (Richards, 2001). The
situation analysis is a base for goals and objectives of any course. It forms a
foundation for teaching methodology and assessment (Nation and
Macalister, 2010). Such an analysis determines whether the prospective
practitioners need to be trained, and it also helps course designers to take the
facilities of the context into account-without which a course is likely to fail
(ibid).
According to Nunan (1988), needs analysis embraces the fundamental
components of the course namely, content, methodology, length, and the
duration of the course. The existing literature shows that there is a general
consensus among researchers on the role of needs analysis to identify the
level of the students and to take the students from what they already know to
what they need to know (Richards, 2001; Nation and Macalister, 2010).
Research has confirmed correlation between students’ interest in enrolling
language classes and understanding their perceived needs. Such an
understanding promotes “a sense of self-efficacy and feelings of

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
191
accomplishment, nurturing enthusiasm, interest, and volition” (Hoyt-
Oukada, 2003, p. 721).
Specifying objectives encounters setting language ideas, skills, and
texts, and this makes designing and evaluating courses feasible (Nation and
Macalister, 2010). Brown (1995) mentions that goals have to be interpreted
into more specific objectives. Such a breaking down contributes to
evaluating and assessing the learners’ achievement (Nation and Macalister,
2010). Clear description of goals brings about effective course programmes
(Richards, 1991).
Content as one of a fundamental aspect of curriculum design has to be
developed based on the objectives driven from the needs analysis. As far as
Richards (2001) is concerned, content selection relies on “subject-matter
knowledge, the learners’ proficiency levels, current views on second
language learning and teaching, conventional wisdom, and convenience”
(148).
2. METHODOLOGY AND CONTEXT BACKGROUND
In this section, the research question is presented. Choice of context and
the research method are rationalized. There is also a consideration for
participants, procedure, and issues and limitations.
This research aims at finding the applicability of “General English for
University Students” (GEfUS) in the context of University of Salahaddin in
Erbil, Kurdistan Region. This context has been selected as this course book
has newly been introduced to freshmen of Salahaddin University. To this
end, questionnaire (See Appendix I) is used to collect data from the
practitioners who have taught this course. Questionnaire has widely been
used in language teaching research as a main tool for gathering information
from participants under scrutiny for its simplicity, ease of construction, and
its efficacy of gathering huge amount of information in short periods of time
(Dornyei and Taguchi, 2010). Processing data collected from questionnaire
is more practical than from other tools (Denscombe, 2008).
The population of this study is Salahaddin University teachers holding
Master’s or Doctorate degrees in different fields with having different years
of English language teaching experience. These individuals were particularly
selected to be involved in this study to find out their perspectives on
adopting this new course book. The questionnaire was sent out via email
message to 70 GEfUS teachers of different colleges and departments of
Salahaddin University. Out of this number 30 questionnaires were completed
and returned. The teachers voluntarily participated in this study, and they

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
192
were assured of their anonymity and confidentiality of their information
processed.
There were ten sections in the questionnaire including the following
aspects in relation to the application of GEfUS: The practitioners’
specialization, class size, teaching methods, facility, teacher preparation and
training courses, culture and social differences are among the important
aspects that have been investigated.
Validity and reliability of the questionnaire have been touched upon in this
present study. Validity has been ensured by precise structure and clear
instruction of the items to avoid biased information (Bryman, 2004; Denzin,
1970). Reliability, on the other hand, has been realized by presenting
detailed information about the study procedure. Late responses from the
participants and partial completion were main limitations of this study.
3. FINDINGS, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
This section analyses and discusses the findings of this study. Analysis of
the main questionnaire items will firstly be presented followed by providing
their interpretations. It is worth mentioning that there are some items of the
questionnaire which have neither been analyzed nor discussed in this paper.
The reason behind that stems from the fact that this questionnaire was
originally developed for GEfUS evaluation report upon its first year
application in which the researchers were involved. Later the researchers
decided to use the data of some items for writing the present paper. Below
are the items that have been analyzed and discussed in this section.
3.1. TEACHERS' SPECIALIZATIONS
It is immediately apparent from the data that 54.5% of the practitioners
were not specialized in English language, and only 45.5% were English
specialists, as shown in (Figure 1) below.

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
193
This was interpreted as one of the most challenging issues in the
application of this course. According to the University of Salahaddin
regulations, on the other hand, teachers who are supposed to teach this new
course book have to hold Master's or PhD degree in English language.
However, non-English specialists who had good mastery of English
language were assigned to teach this text book because of two reasons: the
lack of English specialized teachers, and the large number of teachers
required to teach this course in all departments. Based on this finding, the
office of curriculum development in the University was prompted to institute
new policy that did not allow non-English specialists to teach this module in
the following years. Teachers from English language departments at SUH
and recent Master graduates in English language related majors were
assigned to teach this new course book.
3.2. YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE
Data also shows that most of the teachers 63.2% have one to five years
of teaching experience; 26.3% have longer experience (6-10 years) and only
10.5% percent of the participants have wide experience of more than ten
years of working in the field, see (Figure 2) below.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
English Non-English
FIGURE 1: Practitioners specialization
Specialization

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
194
Approximately two-third of the participants have limited years of
teaching experience which makes it extremely unlikely for the aims and
objectives of a new text book in a new context, without previous training
course on the methodology of that book .
3.3.COURSE BOOK OBJECTIVES
The responses to the questions asking whether the objectives are clear
and achievable, almost all participants indicated that the objectives are clear.
On the other hand, three-fourth of the participants showed that the objectives
are achievable, see (Table 1) below.
TABLE 1.
Coursebook objectives
As can be seen, there is a modest drop between clarity and
achievability percentages. In other words, a sizable portion 28.6% of the
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1-- 5 6--10 10+
FIGURE 2 Years of Experience
Year of Experience
Clear
Not clear
Achievable
Not achievable
95.4 %
4.6.%
71.4%
28.6%

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
195
respondents marked the objectives unachievable – clarity of the objectives
seems not to have positively contributed to making them easily achievable.
This can stem from the following: despite their clarity, the objectives tend to
be unrealistic, that is they are unlikely to be realized in SUH context. To this
end, the objectives have to be revisited and reformulated as to meet the needs
of the context. Lack of teaching experience and a limited number of training
courses for the practitioners can be considered as other reasons making the
objectives not fully achievable. Taking this into account, more GEfUS
specific teacher preparation courses should be offered to the teachers - less
experienced teachers in particular.
3.4.TEACHING METHODS
This section of the questionnaire is devoted to find the teaching method
adopted by the teachers. Among the respondents, 20 teachers completed this
section. As seen in (Figure 3) below, 85% of the participants adopted
lecturing, and pair and group work. Critical thinking, on the other hand, has
been applied by 90% of the teachers. Seminars, however, has been used by
40% of the respondents.
This result demonstrates that the content of this material (GEfUS) can
be claimed engaging and argumentative as it allows for application of these
methods. In other words, the activities are especially designed to foster pair
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Pair- and
Groupwork
Lecturing Seminars Critical
Thinking
FIGURE 3: Teaching Methods
Teaching Methods

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
196
and group work, as well as critical thinking. Interestingly, there has to be a
negative correlation between pair and group work, and lecturing but what
has been found is a perfect positive correlation (+1.00) between these two
variables. This can stem from the participants’ misinterpretation of this term
“lecturing”, which has been used to mean “teacher-centred approach” in
which pair and group work activities are less likely to be used. Thus, other
terms had to be used to collect realistic data.
3.5. STUDENT CENTRED-APPROACH
The respondents were asked whether they were successful in the
implementation of student-centred approach. This question was followed by
another item, asking those who were not successful in applying this
approach, to indicate the obstacles that lead to the failure of adopting this
approach.
Among the 21 respondents who completed this section 52.3% were
successful and 47.7% were not. Indicating the reasons behind their failure to
adopt the approach, large classes were the most outstanding reason 70%, see
(Figure 4) below. Length of the text was the second most chosen obstacle
55% confronted by the teachers to apply student-centered approach.
Shortage of time was less likely 45% to be the main reason behind
unsuccessfulness of implementingthis approach.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Large Calss Shortage of time Length of text
FIGURE. 4 Why you were not successful in applying
student-centered teaching method

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
197
Despite the above obstacles ahead of application of student-centred
method, the teachers, in an open question item, mentioned other reasons as
the following:
1- Lack of suitable lecture hall (3 participants)
2- Low level of Language (5 participants)
3- Lack of motivation (5 participants): “they don’t need English for their
future career”, one teacher said.
4- Irrelevant subjects to their major (1 participant)
Based on the data presented above, it can be realized that large number
of students can be a major hindrance to make students autonomous learners,
in other words, students tend to regard their teachers as only sources of
knowledge. This can source from the fact that the freshmen graduate are
from different schools in different areas with different levels of English
proficiency, as five of the respondents clearly depicted the learners’ low
language level, as some students come from different branches of secondary
education apart from two major branches (literary and scientific branches)
namely, fine arts and Islamic education where English language has not
received a major attention. The content of this material requires equipped
classrooms which are hardly found in the places where it is taught. Lack of
means of technology tends to negatively impact the student-centeredness.
Well-equipped classes have to be provided in order for the approach to be
effectively adopted. Indicating length of the text as the second reason for not
promoting independent learning might be due to the shortage of time the
teachers have to complete the text book. Students’ admission process in
universities in this context has been a major reason for reducing the number
of weeks of First Year. The number of teaching hours per-week can be
increased to tackle this obstacle.
3.6.CHALLENGES FACED BY GEFUS TEACHERS
In terms of the challenges the teachers faced in teaching GEfUS, the
teachers were asked to choose among the following problems see (Figure 5):
using CD (43.3%); difficulties of the course (33.3%); the course is not
addressing all the specializations (33.3%), and lack of teacher training
(36.6%).

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
198
The teachers indicated the following problems in an open question
enabling them to mention other difficulties they had.
 Poor listening skill
 Low level of the learners’ English
 Lack of students’ personal computers
 Big classes
 Lack of equipment (e.g. CD player and textbook)
 Lack of language lab
Interestingly enough, most of the respondents showed that they
overcome such problems. Among this population 60% demonstrated that
they were able to tackle the problems, while only 33.3% were not able to do
so. However, few respondents 6.7% did not complete this item.
It is apparent that most of the respondents reported having technical
difficulties in teaching this material. Listening is one of the skills that has
been focused on in this course book which requires the students to listen to a
number of recorded conversations. To promote this skill, classes have to be
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Using CD Difficulties of
course
The course is
not
addressing all
the
specialization
Lack of
teacher
training
FIGURE 5 What challenges did you face?

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
199
equipped with allfacilities needed. Lack of language labs and large number
of students can be major dilemmas in teaching this new course book.
A considerable portion of the teachers declared that the content of the
book does not address all academic fields to be taught in all different
departments of university. In other words, teachers teaching science
departments find business and psychology themes irrelevant to be given to
their students. The departments have to be able to introduce English for their
specific purposes and needs (ESP) in the following stages of their
department since GEfUS is for learning the basics of English Language not
for ESP.There is a drastic need for more teacher training courses as
demonstrated by a number of respondents. Potential GEfUS teachers should
be given courses on how to teach, assess, and promote critical thinking and
autonomous learning.
The last section of the questionnaire offered the chance to the teachers
to present their suggestions and recommendations to enrich this new
programme in the future. The following points summarize these suggestions
and also show the number of the teachers who indicated the same points:
1- The objectives of the book need to be revised to meet the students’
needs in their major in the university during their study and outside the
university.
2- Modifying the content of the book in order to reflect the life of SUH
students.
3- Introducing the English course in all the four years of study.
4- Providing enough copies of textbooks to the students.
5- Open pre-university language courses (foundation year or supporting
language courses).
6- Annual revision of the course to include new developments and trends
in terms of methodology of language learning and teaching
7- Adding another theme under the title “Law” for law students to learn
basic legal terms and general information.
The suggestions above necessitate reconsideration and a revision of the
text book’s objectives and the selection of the content in order to meet the
students’ needs and expectations on one hand and reflect the social and
cultural elements of the context on the other hand.
The suggestions also propose the introduction of English in all four
stages of college. To this end, it can be recommended that English language
can be started from a more general (first two years) English. This means, the
first two years can be devoted to improve the students’ academic English
proficiency. The last two years can be dedicated for more major – specific
English (English for Specific Purpose).

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
200
There is a strong tendency for the freshmen to be mixed level learners
as they come from different schools – private and public and some of them
come from other branches of tertiary education where English language is
sidelined. This might raise the need for either pre-university English course
or in-sessional supporting remedial language course in order to reach the
language level of their peers.
4. CONCLUSION
This study sought to find out the suitability and applicability of General
English for University Students (GEfUS) textbook in the context of
Salahaddin University -Hawler, Kurdistan Region. The results show that the
main principles required for designing a language course in a given context
have not been fully taken into account. It is worth mentioning that GEfUS
originates from “Progressive Skills in English, Level 1” with being slightly
customized for SUH context.
Adopting Progressive Skills in English indicates that the process of
situation and needs analysis have not been conducted. As such teachers and
learners have not been involved in the process of developing this material
(Allright, 1981). It is recommended that this course can be adapted and
redesigned to embrace situation and learners’ needs, as well as other
important principles needed for a course development (Nation and
Macalister, 2010).
The cultural elements do not reflect the academic life and study at SUH.
Students find the content irrelevant to themselves and the world surrounding
them. More teacher training courses have to be offered to the teachers in
order to be empowered by tools and instructions needed to teach this course.

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
201
References
Allwright, R.L. (1981). What do we want teaching materials for? ELT
Journal, 36 (1): 5-18.
Brown, J. (1995). The Elements of Language Curriculum. New York:
Newbury House.
Bryman, A. (2004). Social Research Methods (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Denscombe, M. (2008). The Good Research Guide for small-scale social
research projects (3rd ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Denzin, N. (1970). The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to
Sociological Methods. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co.
Dornyei, Z. & Taguchi, T. (2010). Questionnaires in Second Language
Research: Construction, Administration, and Processing (2nd ed.). New
York: Routledge.
Hoyt-Oukada, K. (2003). Considering Students’ Needs and Interests in
Curriculum Construction. The French Review, 76 (4): 721-737.
Nation, I.S.P & Macalister, J (2010). Language Curriculum Design. London:
Routledge.
Nunan, D (1988). Syllabus Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Phillips, T., Phillips, A., & Regan, N. (2012). General English for University
Students. Reading: Garnet Publishing Ltd.
Phillips, T., Phillips, A., & Regan, N. (2012). General English for University
Students (Teacher’s Book). Reading: Garnet Publishing Ltd.
Richards, J. (2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
202
Appendix I
Feedback Form for Teaching English Language (GEfUS)/May 2013
Salahaddin University-Hawler
Directorate of Curriculum Development
______________________________________________________________
Dear Lecturer,
Kindly fill in the following form in order to contribute to the promotion of
GEfUS.
First: General Information:
College: Department: Academic Status:
specialization: Years of teaching English:
Gender:
Second: The Objectives of the Subject:
1. Have you received the English Language Book GEFUS
from the University? Yes No
If yes, please answer the following questions:
a) Do you think the objectives of the subject are clear?
Yes No
b) Do you think the objectives of the subject are achievable?
Yes No
i. If No, have you used any other book for the subject?
Yes No
ii. If yes, please write the title below:
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………….

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
203
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………….
Third: Teaching methods and techniques
1. What specific teaching methods and techniques do you follow in
teaching the subject?
a) pair and group works Yes No
b) Lecturing Yes No
c) Seminars Yes No
d) Critical thinking activities Yes No
2. Have you been successful in adopting student-centered learning
methods?
Yes No
a) If your answer is No, please identify the obstacles amongst the
followings:
i. Large class Yes No
ii. Shortage of time Yes No
iii. The length of the textbook Yes No
iv. Any other reason, please state below:
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
3. Have you been able to overcome any of the above difficulties?
Yes No

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
204
a) If yes, please state below how:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
4. Did you follow the instructions of the teacher’s book?
Yes No
5. Did you use the CD and DVD with the activities?
Yes No
Fourth: The course book themes:
1. Which one of the followings have you covered in your teaching?
a) Education Yes No
b) Psychology and Sociology Yes No
c) Work and business Yes No
d) Science and nature Yes No
e) Physical world Yes No
2. Which skill did you focus on in each theme?
a) Listening Yes No
b) Speaking Yes No
c) Reading Yes No
d) Writing Yes No
3. Which of the following language areas did you focus on?

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
205
a) Vocabulary Yes No
b) Grammar Yes No
c) Pronunciation Yes No
4. Have you been able to cover all the core lessons in the course book
Yes No
a) If not, how many core lessons did you cover? Please mention them
below:
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
5. Did you use the Activity Book? Yes No
a. If yes, how often …………………………………………
b. If not, please specify the reasons below:
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
Fifth: Assessment Methods:
1. Do you think the following assessment methods are appropriate?
Academic year efforts (assignments, reports, presentations, and
in-class tests): 40%. And the Final Exam: 60%( 20% for oral exam-
reading a passage and asking general questions-, and 40% for the
written exam)

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
206
Yes No
If your answer is No, please write your suggestions below:
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………..
2. What assessment methods did you use for oral exam?
a) Rubric Yes No
b) Portfolio Yes No
3. Which of the following activities do you prefer to be included in
the final oral exam?
a) Presentation Yes No
b) Reading a passage Yes No
c) Dictation (listening to a text) Yes No
d) Group discussion seminar Yes No
e) One to one interview Yes No

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
207
Sixth: the format of the book
1. What do you think of the chapter divisions, photos, shapes,
maps of the book? Please write your feedback below:
……………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………
………
Seventh: Student Number and time allowance
1. How many students are there in a class? ( )students
2. How many English Language classes do you teach per week? (
) classes
3. What is the time of your lecture?
8:30- 10:30 10:30- 12:30 12:30-2:30
Other time
Eighth: Problems
1. What challenges did you face?
a) Using CD Yes No
b) Difficulty of the course Yes No
c) The course is not addressing all the specializations
Yes No
d) Lack of teacher training Yes No
e) Others:

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
208
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
2. How did you solve such problems?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………
Ninth: Please list the mistakes you have found in the book:
a. grammatical mistakes
……………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………
………………
b. scientific mistakes
……………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………….
Did you FIND anything inappropriate in the book:
a. Socially
………………………………………………………….
b. Culturally
……………………………………………………………..
c. Religiously
…………………………………………………………

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
209
d. Others
…………………………………………………………
Tenth: Suggestions:
1. Please write below your suggestions and recommendations for
developing and improving the English Language teaching:
……………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………
……
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………..
.Directorate of curriculum development –Salahaddin University-Erbil

6th International Visible Conference on Educational Studies and Applied Linguistics - 2015
Saatçi, Suphi, (2007), Tarihten Günümüze Irak Türkmenleri, Ötüken
Neşriyat, Ankara.
Sarıkaya, Kasım, (2006), Irak Türkmen Edebiyatı’nda Hoyratlar, Irak
Türkmen Cephesi Kültür Müdürlüğü Yayınları, Ankara.
Terzibaşı, Ata, (1975), Kerkük Hoyratları ve Manileri, 1. ve 2. cilt, Ötüken
Yayınları, İstanbul.
Türk Dil Kurumu, (1998) Türkçe Sözlük, Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi,
Ankara.