Reflecting on Existing English for Academic Purposes Practices: Lessons for the Post-COVID Classroom

Abstract

This study explored the remote teaching experiences of a group of English-for-academic-purposes teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on what was learned from the transition to identify which practices are worth keeping and which should be abandoned as well as how English-for-academic-purposes practitioners can move from emergency to sustainability. In this qualitative, interpretive study, a total of 15 teachers participated in semi-structured interviews investigating their experiences, challenges, and opportunities teaching English-for-academic-purposes during emergency remote teaching and their opinions on how this information could be leveraged to develop sustainable English-for-academic-purposes technology practices. The results indicated that the teachers understood the necessity of emergency remote teaching, were aware of their role in their students’ academic success, and believed in the importance of integrating technology into language teaching and learning. They also adopted various strategies for online English-for-academic-purposes delivery. It is suggested that effective professional development for English-for-academic-purposes teachers consider what teachers believe they need, the shifting educational landscape, and how to inculcate pedagogical practices that will enrich the language classroom by using technology in language teaching and learning. They also adopted various strategies for online English-for-academic-purposes delivery. It is suggested that effective professional development for English-for-academic-purposes teachers must consider what teachers believe they need, the shifting educational landscape, and how to inculcate pedagogical practices that will enrich the language classroom.

1. Introduction

In English-for-academic-purposes (EAP) courses worldwide, technology-based tools and approaches have been incorporated to facilitate language learning [1,2]. These tools provide opportunities for authentic interaction, adaptive and self-paced learning, and multimodal language input [3,4]. In Hong Kong, higher education institutions have supplemented face-to-face EAP courses with asynchronous resources (e.g., discussion boards, forums, quizzes) for several years to maximise the potential for academic success [5,6]. However, the forced transition to using video-conferencing software (VCS) (e.g., Zoom, Microsoft Teams, and Blackboard Collaborate) for fully synchronous lessons was new to EAP teachers in Hong Kong and universities around the world.

The COVID-19 pandemic forced educational institutions to suspend in-person teaching and learning and instead adopt emergency remote teaching (ERT), defined as “a temporary shift of instructional delivery to an alternate delivery mode due to crisis circumstances” [7] (p. 12). EAP teachers had to leverage both synchronous and asynchronous technologies (e.g., learning management software, interactive websites, mobile apps, and student response systems) to provide and sustain flexible learning opportunities (e.g., HyFlex) [8]. Without any time for preparation, teachers had to rapidly modify their courses, move them online, and deliver them synchronously utilising VSC. While ERT was expected to be a temporary measure, it has continued due to the ongoing disruption caused by COVID-19.

This study explored a group of EAP teachers at a public university in Hong Kong’s experiences of ERT during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on what was learned from the transition, to identify which practices are worth keeping and which should be abandoned and how EAP practitioners can move from emergency to sustainability. The lessons learned from the pandemic can inform future EAP technology-enhanced teaching and learning. Therefore, we conducted the present study to investigate the issue, aiming to reflect on how EAP teachers in Hong Kong cope with the transition to emergency remote teaching and discuss how sustainable EAP technology-enhanced practices can be achieved. The research findings are expected to assist teachers in coping with the transition and improving their teaching quality for the post-COVID classrooms.

2. Literature Review

The possible affordances of technology can facilitate language and academic skill mastery and complement traditional face-to-face instruction [9,10]. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, EAP teachers in Hong Kong utilised numerous technologies in their face-to-face classrooms in order to enhance the student experience and improve learning outcomes. Digital tools help students develop the abilities to reflect on their work, learn independently [11], collaborate, share their work [12], and enrich reading and writing skills through wikis [13]. However, few studies have examined digital tools’ utilisation and perceived value for creating participatory learning environments, fostering autonomy, and enhancing transferable skills.

Technologies must be used effectively to reach their full potential in the EAP classroom [14]—but how they are employed therein is determined by pedagogical beliefs on “what learning is and how teaching is best delivered” [15] (p. 6), [16,17]. Pedagogical beliefs can be divided into two main categories: constructivist beliefs and direct transmissive beliefs [18]. Teachers adhering to transmissive beliefs tend to act as authorities in the classroom, transmitting knowledge using teacher-centred activities. In contrast, constructivists act as facilitators, encouraging students to participate in active learning and create meaning for themselves. Though these two beliefs may be contradictory, studies have shown that teachers can alternate between student- and teacher-centred teaching practices [19].

In deciding whether to adopt technological tools and choosing which tools or digital pedagogical methods to use, teachers reference their previous experiences with technology [20,21] and decide if the new options coincide with their ideas of effective teaching and learning [22]. The selection of information and communications technology (ICT) tools may indicate a language teacher’s overall approach to language education [23]. Teachers with constructivist beliefs are more likely to use technology in the classroom [24,25] and to do so in a student-centred fashion [26] than teachers holding transmissive views [21].

There are, nevertheless, exceptions to this. Teachers’ attitudes towards technology and their willingness to use technological tools in the classroom are not always in line with their pedagogical beliefs [27] due to constraints of the classroom setting [28], including inadequate computers, limited software, and limited Internet bandwidth. Furthermore, strong constructivist beliefs may not be enough to inspire the adoption and the associated use of technology [29], a finding especially important in framing the present study, as EAP teachers were forced to transition to online instruction due to an unprecedented situation. As a result, their adoption of new teaching practices that incorporate technology may not be long-lasting.

When making pedagogical choices of classroom activities according to their values, attributes, and beliefs, teachers enact agency [30]— a willingness to “intentionally act” [31] (p. 94). Previous studies [32] have explored how beliefs could interfere with teachers’ agency. In such cases, some were motivated to make changes. Teachers need to understand technological tools and digital pedagogy holistically [33] to overcome barriers that exist both internally (e.g., beliefs, attitudes, and classroom practices) and externally (e.g., access, support, and time) [34,35,36]. To understand how the forced transition to ERT may impact future EAP delivery, it is necessary to investigate whether this experience changed teachers’ beliefs and agency and motivated them to make lasting changes.

The demand for online and distance courses in higher education has increased in recent years [37]. A desire for new challenges and an interest in exploring innovative pedagogical practices are the dominant factors motivating instructors to teach online [38]. They may also appreciate the flexibility of anytime and anywhere teaching and learning [39] or be curious about new technologies [40]. However, many lack preparedness and, thus, the digital competency required to integrate technology into their teaching practices [41]. The technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) model [42] offers a theoretical framework often used to investigate the integration of teaching and technology [43]. Subsequent studies have expanded the model to include the critique of technologies [44].

In light of the importance of EAP instruction for students’ academic success [45] and the potential of online and blended learning within EAP [46], this explorative case study investigated how EAP teachers turned challenges into opportunities and moved from ERT to sustainable technology practices.

Through addressing these two questions, it is hoped that EAP technology instruction can be used to better prepare students for academic success:

 RQ 1. 

How did EAP teachers in Hong Kong cope with the transition to emergency remote teaching?

 RQ 2. 

How did these teachers transition from emergency remote teaching to sustainable EAP technology-enhanced practices?

3. Methodology

This qualitative study, situated within the interpretive paradigm, offers insight into the varied perspectives of multiple EAP teachers [47]. The research was conducted through semi-structured interviews designed to facilitate in-depth commentary on the participants’ lived experiences and perceptions [48,49].

3.1. Context of the Study and Participants

The participants in this study all taught an EAP general-credit course for undergraduate students pursuing various majors at a publicly funded university in Hong Kong. The course, which is compulsory for all undergraduate students, helps students study effectively in the university’s English-medium learning environment and improves and develops their English language proficiency. Upon its successful completion, students are able to:

• Refer to sources in written texts and oral presentations;
• Paraphrase and summarise materials from written and spoken sources;
• Plan, write, and revise expository essays with references to sources; and
• Deliver effective oral presentations.

The course consists of 13 sessions delivered once weekly, with each session lasting for three hours. Before ERT, face-to-face learning in the course was supplemented with discussion forums, quizzes, and materials available through the university’s learning management system (LMS).

The first author invited 15 teachers at a single Hong Kong university to participate in the study. All had more than seven years of experience as EAP teachers and held a master’s degree and teaching qualifications (see

Table 1. Demographics of interviewee participants (N = 15).

	Pseudonym	Degree	# of Years of Teaching Experience	# of Years of Teaching Experience on the EAP Course
T1	Alan	MA	7	2
T2	Emily	MA	10	2
T3	John	MA	16	6
T4	Beth	MA	8	7
T5	Frank	MA	11	4
T6	Sara	MA	14	6
T7	Michael	MA	16	3
T8	Sophia	MA	6	5
T9	Adam	MA	24	8
T10	Oscar	MA	10	7
T11	Jake	MA	6	1
T12	Michael	MA	18	4
T13	Jacob	MA	9	5
T14	David	MA	12	6
T15	Dennis	MA	17	8

). No participants had any synchronous teaching experience or training beyond having attended two to four workshops offered by the university at the beginning of the transition to ERT. Before commencing ERT, the university postponed all classes for two weeks to provide teachers with the opportunity to familiarise themselves with online teaching practices and prepare their materials for online delivery. During these two weeks, the university arranged several voluntary workshops, including “Best Online Teaching Practices,” “How to Delivery Synchronous Lessons,” and “How to use Zoom,” to name a few. The only hardware made available by the university was a web camera; no desktops, laptops, out-of-office workspaces, high Internet bandwidth, etc. was provided.

Each participant received a letter outlining the study’s purpose and the procedures involved, as well as a consent form to sign. Pseudonyms were used throughout the study to protect the participants’ anonymity.

3.2. Data Collection and Analysis

Convenience sampling was adopted in this study. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews conducted in English. The interviews lasted an average of 38 min and were audio-recorded. An interview guide was designed to help interviewers elicit insights into the participants’ experiences, challenges, and opportunities when teaching EAP during ERT and their opinions on how this information could be leveraged to develop sustainable EAP technology practices. The following flexible questions were asked:

• How would you describe your experience teaching EAP during ERT?
• What did you find most useful, and why?
• What did you find most challenging, and why?
• What strategies did you use, and why?
• How has the suspension of in-person teaching affected your classroom practices? If it has changed, what factors influenced the change? If it has not, why not?
• What should be kept or left behind from this experience, and why?

The rich data collected were subjected to iterative thematic analysis [50]. A code-recode strategy [51] was employed to improve the data’s stability and dependability over time—the authors coded the data independently, waited for two weeks, and then re-coded the same data. After each round, the authors checked their understanding, asked for clarification, and discussed any differences [48]. After the two rounds of independent coding, the authors’ results were nearly identical, indicating the findings as dependable. At this stage, representative quotes were selected in accordance with the interpretive paradigm [52,53]. Two member checks were also performed to improve the data’s trustworthiness [54]. Each participant received a copy of the transcripts and the results with themes and representative quotes. No participants requested additions or made suggestions.

4. Findings Discussion

Five themes addressing the research questions emerged during the analytical process, as shown in the thematic map (Figure 1). Below this overview, excerpts from the interviews provide insights into the teachers’ learning experiences during ERT and—more importantly—how their experiences may affect their future pedagogical practices.

4.1. Motivation to Teach Online

It is important to understand the motivations of teachers transitioning to online lessons to understand the impact of ERT on EAP course instructors. All of the participants wanted to teach during the suspension of face-to-face classes. They felt a strong sense of responsibility towards their students and cared about their well-being. For example, Alan found being “able to help students [to] continue to succeed in their studies” motivating. They also felt an obligation to maintain, as Emily put it, some semblance of “normal” [55]. These comments reflect teachers’ understanding of the necessity of ERT and an awareness of their role in their students’ academic success. Earlier studies likewise reported that teachers are motivated by their impact on students’ academic development [56].

4.2. Online Teaching and Digital Pedagogy Gap

While the teachers were determined to deliver lessons online, all were unprepared for the shift in format, e.g., [57], and were left feeling like novices. For example, though John was determined to deliver lessons that were pedagogically sound, he felt “unsettled” and “uncomfortable” teaching online because he lacked relevant technical skills and knowledge of digital teaching methods. Other teachers expressed similar discomfort: Beth said, “Like my colleagues, I had used discussion boards and forums but never heard of Zoom and felt clueless of where to even start.” Frank echoed Beth’s concerns and added that he had been stressed by the lack of time to “catch up” to deliver “student-centred and engaging lessons.”

The teachers were displeased with the increase in workload that online education entailed, e.g., [58]. They reported that it led to frustration and stress, echoing [59]. Several highlighted the extra effort required to adapt materials from printed textbooks and find suitable software, attributing this to their inexperience with online teaching, e.g., [60]. As a group, the teachers experienced the shift to synchronous learning as a major disruption. Sara articulated this as follows:

Okay, so I don’t have enough knowledge of online teaching, and this was something I really had to work on. In the face-to-face classroom, it is easy to connect with my students, understand if they have understood my instruction [and] monitor their learning progress, but in the online classroom, I can’t use the same approach.

All of the interviewees mentioned feeling a sense of uncertainty or self-doubt about their effectiveness as online teachers. Six felt inadequate. In particular, Michael was “unhappy” about being “unable to engage” his students with “the tech”; Sophia said, “I need to use a wide range of pedagogical strategies to promote interaction and engagement that are new to me”; and Matthew found developing a “positive rapport with [his] students” much more difficult and “missed the face-to-face connection.” An earlier study [61] also observed this lack of connectedness and difficulty building rapport with students online. Similarly, [62] found a lack of intimacy in online learning. However, as Adam pointed out, “most of [the teachers] are open to learning more about using technology in EAP.” Overall, this suggests an awareness of the possibilities of technology for motivating students and sustaining language learning, e.g., [63,64], but an initial inability to take advantage of these benefits.

Teaching online requires specific skills [65,66], as described by Oscar:

I need to be able to select apps that benefit the points I’m trying to convey. Then, I have to figure out how to use them, and how to best and when to integrate them with the teaching material. It is not just telling students to take out their phones and click on something.

In the classroom, I ask them to Google and brainstorm a topic and then present it using a Padlet. Now, when we are online, they first have to go into a breakout room, then share a window, collaborate on the ideas on Padlet, save it and come back to the main room and present what they found. It’s like we are going from one window to the next and so on.

Jake had difficulty understanding the pedagogical rationale behind each of the technologies and finding suitable software to support learning and, as a result, felt that he “disappointed” his students. When asked to elaborate on the purposes for which he had hoped to find software, he gave examples of creating gap-filling and matching activities. Other teachers indicated a lack of awareness of various Zoom features (e.g., the poll function or built-in whiteboard) and an unsureness as to when additional online resources (e.g., Miro, GoSoapBox, Mentimeter) would better engage students e.g., [67,68]. These comments demonstrate that most teachers were simply not pedagogically or technically prepared to deliver fully online classes, e.g., [57].

Most of the teachers indicated that their previous training had focused on specific digital tools rather than on a range of options, matching the findings of previous studies [69,70]. Ella commented that professional development training often disregarded contextual factors and teachers’ individual needs and interests, e.g., [71]. Michael noted there had not been “enough practical professional development to help us [to] engage and experiment with technology … which can be a little frustrating.” This correlates with the findings of a previous study [72] that professional development paid insufficient attention to English language teachers’ practical competencies utilising technology. On a positive note, all participants reported becoming increasingly confident about their digital pedagogical skills and, as Jacob expressed it, now feel “able to make the right choices for which tool and when to use it” and “better prepared for the future.” As the teachers became more familiar with various technologies, they began to see them as opportunities to innovate—see [39].

4.3. Preferred Technology Usage

During the interviews, teachers discussed the value of technology in EAP classes in terms of motivation, engagement, collaboration, and authentic language learning, e.g., [2]. Broadly, most teachers felt favourably towards integrating technology into language learning when each task had a clear pedagogical rationale. Participants had previously experimented with technology in their face-to-face classes and mentioned using Kahoot!, wikis, and Google Docs because of their simplicity, user-friendly interfaces, and ability to break up monotonous lessons [73]. These positive effects of online collaborative tools are consistent with the findings of [74,75]. Sophie said:

I like to use wikis, as students can together work on a topic, brainstorm initial ideas, start organising their ideas, and then help to write and build their report by self-correcting each other before I clarify both general and specific language items.

David mentioned that through the incorporation of a student response system, each student “received an equal opportunity to participate and could do so anonymously,” increasing their “confidence in their abilities.” In addition, he could correct students’ mistakes without singling them out, which “created a safe space for learning.” This is significant due to the importance of being able to take risks without the fear of making mistakes when language-learning [76]. These comments illustrate the supportive role of technology in EAP instruction to enhance language learning and provide opportunities for all to participate equally, collaboratively, and independently, anytime and anywhere [68]. Furthermore, the technology teachers used allowed students to engage as active participants, e.g., [77], instead of sitting quietly and listening.

Several participants reported that online learning made their teaching more multimodal. For example, Jake stated, “I ask students to incorporate more images and videos in their work.” However, most participants doubted that technology could replace two-way face-to-face interactions. “Our students are second-language learners and need help to express themselves and interact in English,” Johan said, “and this is best achieved face-to-face.” Dennis elaborated:

In the last couple of years, when we attend conferences or seminars, they tend to be predominantly about technology this or that… I just don’t feel that I need to use it… It just doesn’t add anything extra to my lessons.

Both Johan and Dennis’s comments express that using technology in EAP instruction does not necessarily match their vision of effective teaching, e.g., [22]. Knowledge and skills do not automatically translate into practice. Robert and Anna agreed that second-language learners benefit from face-to-face interaction and that online teaching cannot replace this crucial learning component. However, despite their hesitancy about online teaching and learning, they embraced it in the transition. In Robert’s words, they were eager “to deliver good and useful lessons,” highlighting the importance of technology in the current teaching environment, where the ability to teach face-to-face is limited.

4.4. Coping Strategies

As the interviews showed, teachers adopted various strategies for online EAP delivery. Alex stated that he implemented a “fake it till you make it” approach and incorporated new tools (e.g., Lino, Padlet, and Jamboard) in every lesson, feeling it was important his students see him as knowledgeable and in control. In contrast, Cynthia did not venture beyond the built-in Zoom features and was honest with herself and her students, explaining that they were learning this together. Although the participants found online teaching challenging and coped in different ways [78], all became more confident [79] as the semester progressed. Encouragement from colleagues and positive feedback from students, which validated their perceived abilities and enabled them to overcome uncertainty, was instrumental in this development. Jonathan explained:

I knew I would struggle with online teaching. But the more I taught, the better I felt students responded, and I became more confident to experiment and less anxious. I also received tips and tricks from students, and eventually, I felt my hard work paid off.

When asked how they developed confidence in delivering online instruction, participants mentioned watching YouTube videos and using other forms of self-education or, in Emily’s words, “exploring by seeing and playing with what’s available.” Others learned by proactively reaching out to colleagues and suggesting strategies in return, e.g., [69]. Participants perceived their ability to adapt to online teaching as a team effort. Everyone contributed by sharing best practices, helping them develop a holistic understanding of the endeavour, e.g., [33]. A couple of participants referred to this process as “reinventing themselves,” and Frank added, “I feel more versatile as a teacher now.” This satisfaction may be attributable to the acquisition of digital teaching skills and the ability to select and use appropriate technologies to achieve lesson objectives. Thus, it appears that the transition to fully online teaching forced participants to gain the competencies necessary for confidence therein.

4.5. Technology in Future EAP Instruction

As participants became more familiar with online instruction, they learned how technology could benefit their teaching when face-to-face courses resume. For example, several would like to continue using student response systems to more systematically gauge students’ understanding of course content—perhaps as an entry and exit ticket—rather than only as a way to break up monotonous lessons. Chris explained that he used the data from such entry and exit tickets to “better tailor his instruction”: he provided supplemental materials and explanations or offered individual consultations accordingly. Overall, the teachers believed they should consider their students’ needs more carefully than before and thus developed less generic and more individualised lessons to adjust for students’ weaknesses and strengths.

Teachers reported an overall increase in participation in online lessons. Adam admitted to being surprised at this trend, attributing it to students feeling “safer in trying out new language items” and observing that they seemed more “motivated and engaged.” Similarly, Jake thought the students felt more “secure” and “willing to take risk[s]” online. It is particularly positive that the teachers felt online learning improved their understanding of students’ language needs. Jonathan explained, “I provide extra online office hours and found students more willing to engage and chat…and this helped me to really get to know the students.” Robert had a similar experience, noting that while “online learning can be a passive experience,” he found it had a “strong sense of immediacy” and felt everyone contributed to creating an environment conducive to learning. Several participants stressed the importance of carving out time during each lesson to talk with students, either in groups or individually, to impart a sense of belonging and care. While this was seen as an excellent strategy to connect with students, build rapport, and individualise learning, the teachers were keen to return to in-person teaching as soon as possible.

The new learning modality forced students to learn independently and collaboratively—according to Dennis, it gave “learners the freedom to actively take charge of their own learning.” Other participants felt that there was no need for three-hour classes and liked the idea of flipped learning, believing it would make their teaching more efficient, e.g., [80]. Generally, teachers were encouraged by the way students responded to their efforts. This was reflected in Jake and Michael’s respective comments that their experiences “[made them] better” and “forced [them] to rethink how [they] teach.” Ultimately, Jonathan came to believe the experience would likely open up future career opportunities and, with universities increasingly employing online learning, Emily felt she and her fellow teachers would be better “prepared to teach in any environment around the world.” ERT prompted teachers to examine their pedagogical practices and technical skills to develop both autonomously and collaboratively as professionals.

5. Conclusions and Implications

This study explored EAP teachers’ experiences during the transition to ERT and how these experiences might shape their post-COVID teaching. A lack of digital preparedness and competency initially impeded their confidence in online teaching, and these results suggest that existing professional development in digital competency and preparedness [41] has been inadequate. However, the teachers’ professionalism became evident as they overcame technical and pedagogical challenges and rapidly developed their ability to teach online effectively.

Teachers’ views of technology use in EAP instruction became moderately more favourable during ERT, but this is unlikely to lead to a post-COVID infusion of technology in the classroom. That said, some technology use did coincide with teachers’ concepts of effective teaching (e.g., active learning, engagement, and collaboration) [81]. When teachers decided to adopt a specific tool, they paid close attention to the quality of learning [82,83].

EAP teachers can no longer avoid integrating technology, and informal professional development (such as collaborative learning and watching teaching and learning videos) seems to help them productively employ technological tools and digital pedagogy. Therefore, effective professional development for EAP teachers must consider what teachers believe they need, the shifting educational landscape, and how to inculcate pedagogical practices that will enrich the language classroom.

While this current study sheds light on the ERT experiences of EAP teachers at a tertiary institution in Hong Kong during COVID-19, the results have limitations. Although the sample size was relatively small, it was considered large enough to allow for “new and richly textured understanding” [83] (p. 183) of the phenomenon under study. Moreover, the use of an interview guide with flexible questions and open questions helped to limit the bias of the pre-formulated questions as the interviewees had freedom in deciding how to reply [84] and were able to modify their responses [85]. The use of additional research methods (e.g., quantitative, observational) could have added more breadth to this study. In this interpretive study, it was left to the reader to position themselves vis-à-vis the research, deciding what is most relevant and valuable to their context [86].

This interpretive, qualitative study provides a starting point for future research. Few studies have explored the role of transitioning to ERT and its impact on future EAP provision. Future researchers may consider inviting a larger number of teachers to participate or employing different research methods (e.g., quantitative, observational, or mixed-method studies) to yield more robust results. Studies could also measure how closely teachers’ beliefs—constructivist or transmissive—align with technology integration. Moreover, our research was limited in that all teacher participants were from the same university. Future studies may consider inviting teachers from different universities to share their experiences and analysing the issue from more diversified perspectives. Another limitation was the length of our research, which was one academic semester. Future research may consider investigating the long-term impact of the transition to ERT on teaching and learning. Through exploring the adoption of new teaching practices, the conditions required for EAP teachers to thrive in the post-COVID classroom may be better understood.