ESP Activities

Quick note (in Uzbek)

Maqsad: Ushbu faoliyatlar iqtisodiy yoʻnalishdagi talabalarni hamkorlik qilish uchun zarur
bo‘lgan muloqot hujjatlarini tayyorlashga o‘rgatadi: professional emails, meeting agendas and
minutes, project proposals, Memoranda of Understanding, briefing notes, and collaborative
reports.

Activity 1 — Drafting a Collaborative Project

Proposal (Writing + Reading + Critical
Thinking)
Skill focus: Professional report/proposal writing for cross-institutional collaboration.
Learning outcomes: Students will be able to write a concise project proposal (500–700 words)
that includes problem statement, objectives, methods, roles, timeline, and budget summary.
Materials: Sample proposals (2 short examples), project brief (one-page), proposal template,
projector.

Procedure (90 minutes)

1. Lead-in (10 min): Show a 1-minute news clip or slide about an economic issue (e.g.,
youth unemployment in region X). Ask students: “What kind of collaborative project
could tackle this?” Note suggestions.
2. Modelling & Analysis (15 min): Distribute two short sample proposals. In pairs,
students identify structure (title, summary, objectives, methodology, roles, timeline,
budget). Teacher elicits genre features: executive summary, measurable objectives,
SMART indicators.
3. Task prep (10 min): Give a one-page project brief describing stakeholders (local
university, small business association, municipal economic office), desired outcome, and
constraints.
4. Writing (35 min): Individually, students draft a 500–700 word project proposal using the
provided template. Teacher circulates, giving on-the-spot micro feedback (structure,
clarity, formal tone).
5. Peer review (15 min): Swap proposals; use a peer checklist: clarity of problem,
measurable objectives, feasibility of timeline, clear roles, realistic budget. Provide written
feedback.
6. Plenary (5 min): One volunteer reads their executive summary; class gives two
suggestions for improvement.

Assessment

• Use a rubric (Content 40%, Structure 20%, Language/Formality 20%,

Feasibility/Accuracy 20%). Provide numeric band descriptors for each criterion.

Language/Genre features to teach

 • Executive summary language (In this proposal we aim to… / The project will deliver…)
• Objectives phrasing (to reduce X by Y% within Z months)
• Modal verbs for recommendations (should/ought to/will/could)
• Budget expressions (estimated cost, per annum, one-off, recurring)

Extension

• Convert proposals into 5-minute pitch presentations for stakeholders.

Activity 2 — Writing Professional

Collaborative Emails (Writing + Speaking)
Skill focus: Formal and semi-formal emails for partner communication (requests, invitations,
confirmations).
Learning outcomes: Students will write three types of emails: invitation to collaborate, follow-
up confirmation, and a polite refusal/alternative proposal.

Materials: Email templates, sample subject lines, email checklist, role cards.

Procedure (50 minutes)

1. Warm-up (5 min): Brainstorm subject lines for an email inviting a bank to co-sponsor a
student research project.
2. Mini-lesson (10 min): Show structure (subject, salutation, opening frame, purpose
statement, details, call to action, closing). Highlight tone differences (formal vs. semi-
formal) and useful phrases: “I am writing to invite…”, “We would appreciate your
support in…”, “Please let us know by [date].”
3. Controlled practice (20 min): In pairs, students create the three emails based on one
scenario (joint research on small business credit). Use templates; teacher monitors.
4. Role-play reading (10 min): Pair A reads invitation; B replies with a positive reply
(acceptance) or a refusal with a counter-proposal. Swap roles.
5. Feedback (5 min): Teacher highlights strong sentences and common errors.

Assessment

• Checklist: Clear subject line, concise opening sentence, clear request, asked next steps,
polite closing, correct register.

Language samples

• Invitations: “We would be honoured if…” / “We kindly request your participation…”
• Follow-up: “Further to my previous email…” / “I would like to confirm…”
• Refusal: “Unfortunately, we are unable to… However, we propose…”

Extension

• Use email exchange as input for Activity 3 (agenda writing).

Activity 3 — Preparing an Agenda &
Running Meeting Minutes (Listening +
Writing + Interaction)
Skill focus: Producing meeting agendas and minutes for collaborative negotiations.
Learning outcomes: Students can draft an agenda and accurately take/produce minutes (bullet
points and action items).

Materials: Sample meeting transcript (5–7 minutes audio), agenda template, minutes template.

Procedure (60 minutes)

1. Pre-task (10 min): Teach agenda parts: title, date/time, venue, participants, objectives,
items (with timings), preparation required. Model a strong agenda.
2. Task A — Draft Agenda (15 min): In groups of 3, students receive a scenario (e.g.,
meeting between university partnership and local SME: discuss pilot internship program).
They draft an agenda using the template.
3. Task B — Listening & Minute-taking (25 min): Play audio (simulated short meeting)
once for gist, then again for detail. Each student takes minutes. After listening, groups
compare notes and produce final minutes including decisions, responsibilities (who does
what by when), and follow-up.
4. Reporting (5 min): One group presents their minutes. Teacher corrects format and
content.

Assessment

• Minutes rubric: accuracy of key points (40%), clarity of action items (30%), appropriate
vocabulary/register (20%), concision & format (10%).

Language/Genre features

• Passive vs active in minutes (“It was agreed that…” / “The committee decided to…”)
• Action item phrasing: “Action: [Name] to [task] by [date].”

Extension

• Students rotate roles (chair, secretary, participant) and run a 20-minute simulated meeting
next session.

Activity 4 — Drafting a Memorandum of

Understanding (MoU) — (Reading + Writing
+ Critical Thinking)
Skill focus: Producing formal agreement drafts to clarify collaborative responsibilities.
Learning outcomes: Students will identify essential MoU clauses and draft a one-page MoU
skeleton.

Materials: Two sample MoUs (one good, one flawed), MoU skeleton template, clause bank.

Procedure (75 minutes)

1. Input & analysis (20 min): In small groups, compare good vs flawed MoU. Identify
missing or ambiguous clauses (purpose, scope, obligations, duration, termination,
confidentiality, dispute resolution).
2. Mini-lecture (10 min): Explain legal/formal register features: precise language,
definitional clause, active vs passive, use of shall/will/may, conditional clauses.
3. Drafting (30 min): Groups draft a 1-page MoU skeleton for a hypothetical collaboration
(university + local municipality to run a macroeconomic forecasting training). Use the
clause bank for phrasing.
4. Peer audit (10 min): Swap drafts with another group; audit using checklist: clarity,
completeness, timelines, signatures.

Assessment

• Use a detailed checklist; focus on clarity of obligations and measurable outputs.

Language/Genre features

• “This Memorandum of Understanding is made between…”

• “Party A shall …” / “Party B agrees to …”
• “This MoU shall remain in effect for a period of…”

Extension

• Convert MoU skeleton into final document and simulate signing ceremony; students
prepare short statements.

Activity 5 — Creating a Joint Policy Brief

(Reading + Writing + Synthesis)
Skill focus: Synthesising research into a 1-page policy brief for stakeholders.
Learning outcomes: Produce a concise policy brief (max 1 page) that outlines the problem,
evidence, options, and a recommended action with economic justification.

Materials: Short data pack (chart on unemployment, short article, stakeholder positions), policy
brief template.

Procedure (90 minutes)

1. Reading & data analysis (20 min): Individually, students read provided sources and
identify 3 key evidence points.
2. Planning (15 min): In triads, students decide the policy brief’s audience (mayor, bank
manager, donor) and list top 3 recommendations.
 3. Drafting (35 min): Write the 1-page brief. Emphasize succinct headings: Issue, Context,
Evidence, Options, Recommendation, Who should do what.
4. Peer review (15 min): Triads exchange briefs and apply a 6-point clarity checklist.

Assessment

• Brief evaluated on clarity of problem (20%), use of evidence (30%), feasible

recommendation (30%), conciseness & format (20%).

Language/Genre features

• Headings, bullet points, callouts, statistics language: “According to X, unemployment

rose by 3 percentage points…”

Extension

• Short oral briefing: each triad presents 3-minute brief to class “mayor”.

Activity 6 — Telephone Negotiation &

Follow-up Email (Speaking + Listening +
Writing)
Skill focus: Telephone negotiation strategies; producing confirming emails after calls.
Learning outcomes: Conduct a short telephone negotiation (5–7 mins) resolving a specific
logistical issue; write a confirming email summarising agreed points.

Materials: Role cards, checklist for telephone language, email template.

Procedure (45 minutes)

1. Pre-task (10 min): Teach phone English: opening lines, clarifying, checking
understanding, summarising, closing. E.g., “Can I put you on speaker?”; “Would you
mind repeating the deadline?”; “To confirm, we agree that…”
2. Role-play (20 min): Pairs perform a negotiated call (e.g., agreeing on internship
placements number and calendar). One is the university rep; the other is a company HR
manager.
3. Post-task (10 min): Each student writes a short confirming email (5–8 sentences)
summarising decisions and next steps.
4. Feedback (5 min): Swap emails; peer checks for accuracy.

Assessment

• Phone rubric: clarity, politeness, negotiation success. Email rubric: accurate summary,
action items, tone.

Language/Genre features

• “I would like to propose…”; “Could we postpone…”; “As discussed, the company

will…”
Extension

• Record calls (with consent) for self-review.

Activity 7 — Collaborative Data Report

(Team Writing + Presentation)
Skill focus: Team production of analytical report + collaborative presentation.
Learning outcomes: Produce a 1200–1500 word collaborative report on a market analysis and
present key findings in a 10-minute team presentation.

Materials: Dataset (CSV or simplified tables), report template, slide template.

Procedure (2–3 lessons / blended)

1. Data familiarisation (30–40 min): Introduce dataset (e.g., local consumer spending
trends). Teach key verbs and phrases for describing data.
2. Team planning (30 min): Allocate roles: data analyst, writer, editor, presenter. Create
timeline (who drafts which section).
3. Drafting (Homework + in class): Teams produce report with visualisations. Teacher
provides interim feedback.
4. Presentation prep (60 min): Prepare slides; rehearse.
5. Presentation & Q&A (2 x 10 min per team): Other teams ask stakeholder-style
questions.

Assessment

• Report (70%): data accuracy, analysis, recommendations. Presentation (30%): clarity,

slide design, Q&A handling. Also peer assessment of contribution.

Language/Genre features

• Data language: “grew steadily”, “a sharp decline”, “correlation”, “per capita”.

Recommendation phrasing: “We recommend that…”

Extension

• Submit report to local stakeholder (municipal office) and invite feedback.

Activity 8 — Editing & Proofreading

Professional Documents (Writing Accuracy +
Genre Awareness)
Skill focus: Editing for clarity, coherence and formal register in business documents.
Learning outcomes: Identify and correct common errors; improve clarity and coherence in a
partnership letter or short report.
Materials: Four short documents with deliberate errors (ambiguous sentences, register
mismatches, passive/active misuse, missing action items).

Procedure (50 minutes)

1. Warm-up (5 min): Quick poll: “What makes a professional document weak?”

2. Editing task (25 min): Pairs edit one document using the editing checklist: clarity of
purpose, audience, tone, concise sentences, correct headings, action items present,
consistent terminology.
3. Justify edits (10 min): Pairs write 3 short justifications for major edits (why they
rewrote, grammar vs clarity).
4. Share & discuss (10 min): Teacher elicits common corrections and highlights typical
register issues.

Assessment

• Use checklist to score edits and quality of justifications.

Language/Genre features

• Direct vs indirect language, hedging (“may”, “might”), nominalisation for formal tone
(“implementation” vs “implement”).

Generic Assessment Rubrics & Checklists (copy/paste

ready)
Proposal rubric (100 pts)

• Problem & relevance (20)

• Clear objectives (20)
• Methodology & feasibility (20)
• Roles & timeline (15)
• Budget realism (10)
• Language & register (15)

Email checklist

• Subject line clear? / Greeting appropriate? / Opening sentence states purpose? /

Request/action clear? / Polite closing / Signature / No spelling errors

Minutes checklist

• Title/date/participants present? / Key decisions recorded? / Action items with

names/dates? / Concise language? / Follow-up items?

Teacher Notes & Differentiation

• Scaffolding: For lower B1 learners, provide stronger templates and phrase banks. For
higher B1/B2, require independent drafts and less scaffolding.
• Formative feedback: Use written feedback and 1:1 conferences to target recurrent
lexical/grammatical issues.
 • Authenticity: Invite local business partners to set real briefs where possible.
• Assessment: Combine teacher assessment + peer assessment + self-reflection.

Phrasebank (use across activities)

Opening emails: “I hope this finds you well. I am writing to propose/confirm/discuss…”
Action items: “Action: [Name] – [task] – by [date].”
Recommendation language: “We recommend that… / It is advised to…”
Polite negotiation: “Would it be possible to…? / We could consider… / We are open to…”
Minutes language: “It was agreed that… / The committee decided to… / No objections were
raised.”
MoU language: “Party A shall … / The parties agree to…”

If you want, I can now:

• Convert selected activities into printable worksheets (PDF) with templates and
phrasebanks,
• Produce graded versions (B1 vs. B2) of each activity, or
• Prepare a two-week lesson plan using these activities.

Which would you like next?