Faculty Publications and Conference Presentations

日本語初級コースLang1210におけるBlended Learningを有効活用したコースデザインの実践<br/>- 学びを深めるFacilitatorとしての実践事例 –<br/><br/>背景と問題意識<br/>　科学技術の発展に伴い、学び方が時代とともに変容してきている。コロナ禍でOnline授業、e-learningなどの教育のデジタル化が大きく進展した。対面型の授業であれ、e-learning型の学習であれ、それぞれ良さを秘めている。これからの教育活動を考える時、それぞれの良さを融合したデザインが求められると考える。この問題意識のもと、この実践がはじまった。<br/><br/>研究の経過<br/>１年次　副題「自立的に自ら学びを進める学習者を育てるために」<br/>　コース全体のデザインを構築し、e-Learningを通して、自ら学びを進める学生を育てる実践に取り組んだ。　<br/>２年次　副題「つながる・機能する・広がる」<br/>　授業の中で「教師と学生」、「学生と教材」、「学生と学生」をつなぎ、学習を機能させ、広がっていくようなグループ学習の実践に取り組んだ。<br/>３年次　副題「学びを深めるFacilitatorとしての実践事例」＜本年＞<br/>学期ごとに履修学生はかわる。その中で、よりカスタマイズできるように柔軟に調整する実践に取り組んだ。<br/><br/>研究の手法や情報の収集<br/>e-Learningについては、定期的にSFQを実施し学生の声を集め、分析を繰り返した。また、Chatbotをコース用に準備し、一人ひとりの利用状況をモニターリングした。<br/>授業ではグループプロジェクトやタスクを豊富に含めて学生同士の学びの時間を充実させた。<br/><br/>研究の成果<br/>グルーピングの意義を理解し、学生が自ら動いて築くグルーピング。<br/>グループの状況に応じて、ファシリテーターとしての支援。<br/>定期的なSFQからの教師の発見。<br/>AIのツールとしての真価。<br/>どんな時代にあっても信頼関係は基本。<br/><br/>研究の貢献<br/>　誰がやるようなことでも、学生とのより良い学びを創造できるなら、そういう時間が教師を育てる。誰もやっているようなことを話し合える環境や仲間は大事である。新しいことだけが研究ではないはずだ。学生の学びが花開くなら、その実践こそが語り合うべき１つの実践研究になると信じたい。<br/>　<br/><br/>キーワード<br/>IT活用・Empoweringできるグループ・わかる授業・信頼関係<br/><br/>

Link to the published blog / article:

https://theory-into-practice.weebly.com/tip-blog/dissolving-the-theory-practice-divide-highlights-from-hong-kong

The 2024 CLE-TCA Conference on Dissolving the Theory-Practice Divide in Language Education : Highlights from Hong Kong

The recent shift in institutional priorities is characterized with a greater emphasis on promoting scholarship in English for Academic Purposes (EAP). This change recognizes EAP as a dynamic discipline, evolving to meet student needs and align with the goals of higher education (Davis, 2019; Ding & Bruce, 2017; Webster, 2022; Whong, 2023). At the Center for Language Education (CLE) within The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST), this trend has found expression under the leadership of Director Melinda Whong, playing a pivotal role in driving scholarship within the field. 
 
A crucial aspect of this emphasis on scholarly engagement in EAP is the recognition of theory-informed teaching practices (Bruce, 2021; Walková, 2021). Educators now understand the importance of a strong theoretical foundation and evidence-based pedagogical strategies to create effective language learning experiences. Against this backdrop, I share highlights from our conference, "Dissolving the theory-practice dualism in language education," held on April 13, 2024, at our Center. 
 
The conference attracted language teachers, researchers, and academics from universities, colleges and schools in Hong Kong, Macau, and neighbouring cities. Despite limited livestreamed keynotes, these were watched by more than 8,000 people in China. Approximately 150 attendees physically visited the conference venue on campus.
 
In the following paragraphs, I reflect on the keynotes, parallel sessions, and the roundtable, illustrating how the conference addressed the theory-practice divide.
 
Keynotes
 
The conference aimed to foster meaningful discussions and explore the crucial connection between theory and practice in the domains of translanguaging, English Medium Instruction (EMI), and World Englishes. Through thought-provoking talks, it challenged conventional notions and sparked critical reflection, examining translanguaging as a pedagogical practice where students alternate between languages for receptive or productive use (Garcia  & Li Wei, 2014), while highlighting World Englishes as indigenized varieties of English in their local contexts of use (Jenkins, 2006).
 
Our first keynote speaker, Prof. James Simpson from HKUST, delved into the concept of translanguaging, urging us to reconsider established ideas of cultural and linguistic homogeneity while emphasizing the importance of belonging(see: here). He argued that the theory and practice divide in learning English is evident in the discrepancy between societal expectations of assimilation through language proficiency and the negotiated nature of belonging and suggested moving beyond language as the sole determinant of integration. 
 
Our second speaker, Prof. Michelle Gu (EduHK), shed light on the significance of Family Language Policy (FLP) in the digital era, as she highlighted the role of social media in the effective collaboration between families and schools. She demonstrated how language practices on social media platforms could bolster multilingual development and stressed the importance of professional support in establishing FLPs that uphold cultural values. These insights align with asset-based pedagogies (Flint & Jaggers, 2021), which recognize and build upon students' existing strengths, including their linguistic diversity and literacy skills.
 
The next keynote was delivered by Prof. Guangwei Hu (HKPolyU) who pointed out that little attention has been given to EMI teacher experiences and described his study investigating how Chinese university teachers navigated their classrooms. His findings challenged the notion of EMI as an English-only space and highlighted the importance of empowering teachers to reconstruct instructional settings as multilingual spaces, especially where English is taught as a Foreign Language.  
 
Lastly, Prof. Heath Rose shared his research on the identities of 400 researchers. His findings suggested that the perceived divide might be superficial as a significant number of EAP researchers began their careers as teachers. He concluded by advocating for stronger partnerships between practitioners and researchers (see: here).
 
Parallel sessions
 
As both a participant and organizer of the conference, I was particularly pleased with the unique format of the parallel sessions. While the researcher sessions encouraged discussions around the practical implications of applied linguistic theories, the practitioner sessions focused on participants exploring pedagogical issues through a theoretical lens. 
 
The researcher sessions had speakers highlighting the role of Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) as well as Digital Media Compositions (DMCs) in translanguaging. While I couldn't attend every session, I was able to learn from Prof. Wen's research on digital language portraits and the power of synchronous Computer-Mediated Communicationplatforms in facilitating interactive translanguaging (see here.). Prof. Tai's emphasis on creating technological sub-spaces in translanguaging for social justice also resonated with me. Other talks focused on the technological affordances of GenAI for critical text analysis, issues of academic integrity, and the use of Appraisal framework to develop critical writing skills. Presentations that dealt with the challenges faced by EMI institutions in terms of teaching English in the Disciplines and for students’ listening activities, were also extremely engaging. 
 
The practitioner sessions were highly impactful too. These sessions explored the widespread application of GenAI tools and their potential to create digital translanguaging spaces within classrooms. They demonstrated how ChatGPT could be utilized to familiarize students with World Englishes, highlighted the role of learning analytics in guiding language learning theory and shed light on the challenges faced by English language teachers in self-financed institutions, who strive to stay abreast of scholarly advancements despite demanding teaching schedules and limited funding opportunities. The disparity between theoretical developments and classroom practices regarding World Englishes was a notable feature of these sessions as it became evident that classroom practices are still predominantly influenced by standard English and native speaker ideologies. 
 
Roundtable
 
The talks and discussions culminated in a highly anticipated roundtable forum. This primarily touched upon the distinction between teachers on research track and teaching track positions within universities, highlighting the differing expectations for academic staff belonging to the two groups. It also reiterated the argument that an effective teacher is also a scholar, engaging in inquiry into language teaching practices and disseminating practitioner scholarship outputs to advance knowledge in their field. The forum thus fostered shared learning and exploration of digital translanguaging spaces, teacher and student challenges in EMI contexts, and the concept of criticality. 
 
Final thoughts
 
The conference has laid the groundwork for future endeavours. The connections made and discussions sparked during the event will facilitate ongoing collaborations in the Greater Bay Area and beyond. I would recommend that similar events based on theory-informed practice (TiP) approach be held and people invited from around the globe to submit proposals to include an even greater range of perspectives and participants.
 
For conference details visit https://bit.ly/cletca2024 and to view the event photos click Conference photos
 
References

Bruce, I. (2021). Towards an EAP without borders: Developing knowledge, practitioners, and communities. International Journal of English for Academic Purposes: Research and Practice, 2021(Spring), 23-36.

da Costa, N., & Rose, H. (2024). The impact of Global Englishes classroom-based innovation on school-aged language learners' perceptions of English: An exercise in practitioner and researcher partnership. System, 121, 103263.

Davis, M. (2019). Publishing research as an EAP practitioner: Opportunities and threats. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 39, 72-86.

Ding, A., & Bruce, I. (2017). The English for academic purposes practitioner. Palgrave Macmillan.

Flint, A. S., & Jaggers, W. (2021). You matter here: The impact of asset-based pedagogies on learning. Theory Into Practice, 60(3), 254-264.

García, O., & Wei, L. (2018). Book Review Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education, by. Bellaterra J Teach Learn Lang Lit, 85.

Jenkins, J. (2006). Current perspectives on teaching world Englishes and English as a lingua franca. TESOL quarterly, 40(1), 157-181.

Mu, S., Li, A., Shen, L., Han, L., & Wen, Z. (2023). Linguistic repertoires embodied and digitalized: a computer-vision-aided analysis of the language portraits by multilingual youth. Sustainability, 15(3), 2194.

Simpson, J., & Bradley, J. (2024). Belonging-in-Interaction: Expressing and Performing Translocal Belongings Through Language and Arts Practice. Applied Linguistics, 45(3), 464-480.
Walková, M. (2021). Scholarship is a journey. The Language Scholar, 9, 97-104.

Webster, S. (2022). The transition of EAP practitioners into scholarship writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 57, 101091. 

Whong, M. (2023). Scholarship in its own right. Scholarship of Teaching in Language Education, 1(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.59936/stile.v1i1.78
 

Authors: Maisie Glofcheski and Rosita Cheng

Presentation Context:

Now that our pilot project is complete, we are currently testing some materials and ideas in the LANG4030 course, which will no longer be offered after this year. Moving forward, our current plan is to create short 1-2 credit courses with an innovative structure. Our plan is to start with in-class lessons during the add/drop period to help students understand how the course works, followed by out-of-class learning through microlearning modules, scaffolded by student peer-review activities, and face-to face consultations with the instructor. Students will then be invited back to the classroom at the end of the course. The timing will be strategically aligned with their needs during major final year project deadlines.

Based on the feedback and recommendations from the discussion and survey conducted during our Wednesday session, here is a summary of the comments:

Short Report Writing Courses:

• Course Structure: The majority of colleagues (83%) believe that writing courses should be 1 credit, discipline-specific (for Engineering only), and graded on a pass/fail basis.
• Consultations: Many colleagues suggested integrating one-on-one consultations midway through the course as a scaffolding measure, inspired by the LANG4030 design.
• Workshop Offerings: Some colleagues recommended that the CLE also offer some general writing workshops for students looking to build foundational skills, as indicated by CSE faculty in the student needs analysis survey.
• Microlearning Modules: There was unanimous support for combining discipline-specific microlearning modules with face-to-face elements.

Short Oral Presentation Courses:

• Discipline Specificity: Colleagues were divided on whether these courses should be discipline-specific (40% in favour, 60% against). Many noted that essential presentation skills and techniques are common across disciplines.
• Course Offerings: Some colleagues suggested that both discipline-specific and general courses should be available in the future, although FYP presentation skills should be prioritized in the short term.
• Instructional Methods: There was a consensus that microlearning modules are more suitable for written reports, while a heavier emphasis on face-to-face instruction is necessary for oral presentation courses to facilitate instant feedback. Suggestions included using pre-recorded videos and authentic student video examples, as mentioned by CSE faculty in the student needs analysis survey.

Additional Suggestions

• Multimodal Video Courses: Several colleagues highlighted the need for 1 credit short courses on designing multimodal videos, as video creation has become a replacement for poster presentations in CSE/CPEG and potentially other sub-departments in Engineering and related disciplines. This course may not need to be discipline-specific, so we will investigate which departments require videos for their final year projects.
• Resource Reutilization: It was proposed that many resources from the retired LANG1403 course could be repurposed for this initiative, maximizing the value of existing materials.

by Eunice Tang and Venus Kam

Differentiated instruction starts with instructors who ‘mark/identify in both students and possible teaching strategies and make adjustments according to what will benefit students most and best facilitate learning in the classroom’ (Blaz, 2016).  

Before this term even emerged in our head, we were discussing our students in different course sections with contrastive learning styles and trying to put our heads together about what we can do more for quiet sections. Were they introverts? Did they prefer listening to speaking? And we even wondered if they had a lack of interest in learning? Should we give them more time to think? Should we let students contribute to the class in different media like polling and writing – not just speaking? Should we add some warm-up questions before the first questions in the lesson materials? 

This was our initial stage trying to identify the needs and possible teaching strategies for our students in different sections. As can be seen in the questions above, initially we considered students’: 

• Possibility of having different personalities; 

• Different learning preferences or forms of presentation; 

• Motivation for learning; 

• Readiness to contribute their ideas; 

• Reactions to interactive and digital technology; 

• Assistance needed for understanding the initial questions in the materials – and so on.   

The process does not stop here, and neither does Blaz (2016)’s definition: ‘they then develop and implement, bit by bit, the characteristics of a differentiated classroom’. This is followed by a stage of ‘development’ - ‘assessment, evaluation and reflection are the keys to finding what works and what doesn’t work, and trying to fix the latter’. 

Venus and I will share with you in the next article more about our application of these scholarship-informed principles in our classrooms.  

Reference:  

Blaz, D. (2016) Differentiated instruction: a guide for world language teachers. New York: Routledge   

By Eunice Tang and Venus Kam

(Link to Part 1- In Theory: https://project.cle.hkust.edu.hk/dps/differentiated-instructions-fit-class-sections-diversified-learning-styles-increase-their-learning)

While there is no single approach to differentiation, some basic principles can guide lesson planning and in-the-moment instructional adjustments. Tomlinson and Imbeau (2010) define differentiation as balancing attention to individual learners and curricular objectives. At its core, differentiation involves customizing the "content (what to teach)," "process (how to practice)," and "product (how to assess)" based on students' readiness, interests, and preferences to ensure appropriate challenges. 

Joseph et al. (2013) examined differentiated instruction with university students. As shown in Table 1 below, they outlined strategies like: 

• Varying content complexity, abstractness, and style of presentation; 

• Using flexible grouping, tiered assignments, and different levels of scaffolding to differentiate process; and 

• Employing rubric choice, self-assessment, and portfolio-based assessments to differentiate products. 

Note. Retrieved from “The impact of differentiated instruction in a teacher education setting: Successes and challenges,” by Joseph, S., Thomas, M., Simonette, G., and Ramsook, L., 2013 International Journal of Higher Education, 2(3), p.31-32. Copyright 2013 by Sciedu Press. 

As we found the above strategies insightful, we tried to experiment with them by incorporating some of them into our EAP (LANG1402 and LANG1403) classes. 
 
 

Our experiences in EAP classrooms 

Venus: 

Progressive EAP writing activity with the incorporation of differentiated instructions  

In one lesson on paraphrasing and summarizing in LANG1402, students had a 10-minute task to rephrase the sentence "Tom is tall" to practice varying expressions and patterns. 

I differentiated content based on class profiles. With a section with more passive students, I first introduced possible modifications like vocabulary, structure, and techniques to provide more guidance and scaffolding before the task. However, for the higher-proficiency students, they were given more flexibility and room to create as many sentences as they could without the need of pre-task scaffolding.   

I also differentiated the process. For the quieter class, each group produced one sentence using only one technique, and strategies could not be repeated across groups. I provided support when needed, and taught them how to use ChatGPT to generate ideas. Meanwhile, the more active class strove to create at least six varied sentences employing different language skills. 

The products were also differentiated. Passive groups recapped paraphrasing strategies employed after the task in a more general and simple way, e.g. changing the vocabulary, sentence patterns, word order, etc. But active groups were required to delve deeper and be more technical and specific in explaining which strategies they applied to their constructed sentences, e.g. changing the vocabulary specifically by using synonyms. This addressed uneven needs and engagement levels through gradual release of responsibility and customized expectations.  

Writings produced in the section with more passive students: 

Writings produced in the section with more proficient students: 

Implementing differentiation strategies in my LANG1402 classes yielded some promising successes but also created challenges that point to opportunities for improvement. Scaffolding content and employing small groups for the quiet class boosted engagement and performance, as evidenced by their enhanced comfort level and participation. Additionally, pushing the active class to generate varied complex sentences stimulated and elevated their thinking. However, finding the right balance of support and independence for varied learners, and planning distinct approaches within one lesson proved more difficult and time-consuming than anticipated. Going forward, differentiating key elements like gradually building skills over time for the quiet class, and varying concepts between lessons for the active class, shows potential to better optimize student experiences and outcomes. Collectively, these strategies addressed diverse needs but also highlighted the nuanced nature of differentiation requiring refinement. Tweaking aspects such as content coverage, activity sequencing and use of exemplars will help strengthen my ability to meet all learners where they are. 

Eunice: 

Differentiated instructions for peer feedback incorporating multimodality  

I would like to share one example of peer feedback to student presentations that worked well in my LANG1403 that can also be used in other courses. 

One of the most common ways for peer feedback is inviting questions and comments from the peers in a Q&A session after the student presentations. This type of ‘consecutive feedback’ (happens right after the presentation) is timely and easy for instructors to administer but fails to consider students who are less vocal or need more time to organize their answers. It also tends to involve contributions from just a handful of students given the time limit. 

To cater for different communication styles among the students, I changed the format of the Q&A and turned the ‘consecutive feedback’ into ‘synchronous feedback’, in which the peers can start as early as the beginning of the presentation to give feedback. Additionally, ALL the peers can contribute with a choice of media -- instead of just a few students -- by writing down their feedback or speaking during the Q&A.  

In a video sharing session of LANG1403 with 9 students (half the class), you can see that ALL the students (8 in the audience) participated in the feedback session and gave sound advice to the presenting student. 

References: 

Joseph, S., Thomas, M., Simonette, G., & Ramsook, L. (2013). The impact of differentiated instruction in a teacher education setting: Successes and challenges. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v2n3p28 

Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom. ASCD. 

Eunice and I will share some more suggested interactive classroom activities in the next blog. Stay tuned!

In comparison to the longer tradition of business communication studies in the US and Europe, its study in Chinese contexts is less developed. In part this can be attributed to a state planned economy with little need for business communication in the western sense up to the introduction of economic reforms in 1978. However, as China’s economy has risen in a few decades from obscurity to being the second largest in the world, interest has increased dramatically. Three important strands of research within the study of Chinese business communication include: (1) L1 Chinese business communication; (2) intercultural studies of business communication; and (3) cross-cultural studies of business communication. In L1 Chinese business communication research a key theme which emerges is its use to build relationships. In written and spoken discourse, researchers highlight different language strategies used to construct interpersonal relationships. Given the status of English as the business lingua franca, intercultural communication research exhibits a bias in the examination of L2 English business communication of Chinese professionals. Chinese business communication has frequently been referred to as indirect or implicit in style. Studies examining East-West intercultural communication have often concluded that diverging styles of communication associated with the two cultural models have impacted the communication process and outcome. Within intercultural studies the ‘large-culture’ approach of examining national cultures has been criticised for promoting generalisations and stereotypes. To mitigate potential problems of this approach many scholars have adopted a ‘small-culture’ paradigm which abandons national or ethnic comparisons and instead explore smaller social groupings which exhibit cohesive behaviour. Lastly, cross-cultural studies which is distinct from intercultural studies in that instead of examining the interaction of cultures, it is the comparison of cultures when not in contact. Here, Chinese business communication has often been contrasted with the U.S. and like intercultural studies, scholars have often found distinct variations in the discourse of the two cultural models.

本书贯彻落实党的二十大关于“加快建设高质量教育体系，发展素质教育”的相关要求，落实立德树人根本任务，以《关于加强高等学校服务国家通用语言文字高质量推广普及的若干意见》为纲领，以职场新人需具备的专业素质为导向，以普通话口语为呈现方式，结合教育学、心理学等知识，融入中国传统文化和现代礼仪等内容，旨在提升学生的沟通能力、思维品质和综合素养。全书按照沟通与表达的难易程度由浅入深地进行设计，分为初级尝试、中级把握、高级探究3个项目，共18个沟通任务，每个任务下巧设案例导入、知识解析、方法突破、综合训练、自我评估等栏目，有机融入思政元素，突出职场模拟训练，注重沟通中的双向交流，强调语言表达的精确性、生动性、成效性，体现了能力目标与过程训练的结合，使学习者有抓手、见效快。 本书配套有知识拓展、沟通测试等资源，力图构建多样性、实用性和交互性的立体化教学空间。 本书既可作为高职院校沟通与口才、职业素养等课程的教学教材，也可供有意提升沟通能力的社会人士学习实践，亦可作为企业培训的指导用书。

<p>Phrasal verbs are highly common in informal discourse among native English speakers, yet they pose extraordinary difficulty to second language (L2) English learners. Informed by usage-based theory, this mixed-methods study attempted to determine the relationship between the amount of out-of-class English exposure in study abroad and the phrasal verb knowledge of international adult students in the United Kingdom. It also brought foundation program students (i.e., students in a preparation course for university degrees), a previously under-researched study-abroad population, under the spotlight. One hundred and eighteen foundation program students at a British university completed a modified Language Contact Profile and a productive phrasal verb test. Nine students were interviewed to further unravel how they acquired phrasal verbs via informal language contact. Analyses revealed a significant positive relationship between speaking English with international friends and phrasal verb knowledge. Hierarchical regression identified that overall English proficiency, spoken input contact, and non-interactive language contact were significant predictors of phrasal verb scores. This study points to the importance of having meaningful, emotionally enjoyable, and regular L2 contact to formulaic language competence during study abroad.</p>