Developing English language teachers’ and learners’ ELF awareness: the background, design and impact of the ENRICH project’s continuous professional development programme

2.1 European union policies supporting multilingualism and ELF

The priorities of ENRICH are grounded in a variety of studies and reports developed by European Union (EU) institutions, including the European Commission (EC) and the European Parliament (EP). Indeed, the significance of supporting multilingualism is nowadays emphasised within the EU (Council of the EU 2014) as, due to globalisation, intra-European mobility and international migration, multilingual classrooms have become the norm rather than an exception in Europe (Eurostat 2017; OECD 2016). Even though much progress has been made in the framework of the European Strategy for Multilingualism (cf. Saville and Gutierrez Eugenio 2016), research shows that, still, “current attitudes and practices in schools are not conducive to equal treatment of multilingual children” (European Commission 2017a: 3). This is especially true as regards children from migrant backgrounds. Research shows that immigrant children tend to leave school early (Eurydice 2015: 4), while children from refugee and asylum-seeking families remain largely disadvantaged due to “the lack of established networks and opportunities” enabling them to connect with each other and the host communities through “dialogue [and] exchange” in a “shared” language (Lewis and Martin 2017: 21). Teaching multilingual classes, especially classes with learners from migrant backgrounds, is “not sufficiently covered by CPD” (European Commission 2017b: 15). However, this area is particularly high among teachers’ training needs (European Commission 2014).

To support learners in multilingual classrooms, including migrants, to reach their educational and professional potential, EU educational policy reports highlight the urgent need to “fundamentally rethink” additional language teaching in view of the demands of the current “increasingly globalised world” (European Commission 2017a: 1–5). This involves helping learners to develop communicative and other transversal skills (e.g., cultural awareness) which are necessary for employability and social inclusion “through languages of international communication”, which “increase mutual understanding and provide access to other countries and cultures” (European Commission 2017a: 1–5). This, of course, requires a “new set of competences for teachers” (European Commission 2012: 10). ELTs, in particular, “should acknowledge the new role of English as the lingua franca” in Europe and beyond (Saville and Gutierrez Eugenio 2016: 37), i.e., as an inherently multilingual means of English-medium communication among people from different linguacultural backgrounds (Mauranen 2018) and as a sine qua non for professional success (Araújo et al. 2015). CPD is, therefore, crucial so that ELTs raise their awareness of the importance of English in connecting learners with each other, the local communities and the world, and are empowered to use innovative language teaching practices, such as translanguaging, and cultural elements which are particularly appropriate to this end (European Commission 2017a).

In light of the above, the main target group of the ENRICH Project is English language teachers in countries where English is taught as a “foreign” language. ENRICH is built on the premise that, “for children who grow up in a multilingual environment”, other languages they use except their mother tongue, no matter how well, are “not considered as ‘foreign’ but a tool to communicate with people around the world” (European Commission 2017c: 12). This primarily refers to English, which, due to its widespread use as a lingua franca, i.e., a “common” language, in various domains of social and professional life, “has been deforeignized to become common property”, even for children themselves (Widdowson 2013: 193). Indeed, as research shows, despite their age, children nowadays use English to interact with people all over the world, even with people sharing their mother tongue (e.g., in social networks, where English is “a symbol of modernity” – European Commission 2011: 25), thereby embracing it as “theirs” (cf. Ehrenreich 2018; Vettorel 2014). The same holds true for migrant and refugee children, for whom English is also a “bridge” to host communities and a means for projecting their own socio-cultural values (Guido 2018).

However, English is still taught as a predominantly “foreign” language, i.e., as “owned by its native speakers” (Widdowson 2013: 193), rather than as a shared language, which can prevent learners from achieving their potential as efficient users of English (Sifakis 2019). Research shows, in fact, that ELTs tend to prioritise areas which are found to be much less important nowadays (e.g., native-like accuracy, native-speaker culture – Seidlhofer 2018) and largely ignore: (a) the ways that the nature of English itself has changed, enabling mutual understanding, access to other cultures and self-expression (cf. Jenkins et al. 2018), and (b) communicative competences (e.g., mediation, negotiation – cf. Council of Europe 2018) and other transversal skills (e.g., cultural awareness – cf. European Commission 2017d) that learners, including migrant ones, need to develop for their current and future interactions in ELF (Jenkins et al. 2018; Kohn 2015; Llurda et al. 2018). A key reason for this is that ELF-related issues are not sufficiently covered either in teaching courseware (Galloway 2018; Lopriore and Vettorel 2015) or in large-scale teacher education across Europe (Bayyurt and Dewey 2020; Dewey and Patsko 2018; Sifakis and Bayyurt 2018), which highlights the urgent need for a transnational project focusing on developing relevant teacher competences.

2.2 Principles of ELF awareness

The concept of ELF awareness has gained momentum over the past few years in the field of ELF research (cf. the title “ELF awareness in ELT” of the ELF12 International Conference in Colombia, in July 2019). As a concept, it draws on current thinking about ELF as a “multilingual franca” (Jenkins 2015: 73) which is “beyond description” (Jenkins 2015: 55). ELF awareness broadly refers to the effective and appropriate integration of insights gained from ELF research in all areas surrounding teaching and learning, including policy making, curriculum and syllabus design, development of courseware, instructional materials and activities, assessment and testing and, of course, teacher education (Sifakis 2014, 2019; also cf. Bayyurt and Sifakis 2015; Sifakis and Bayyurt 2018; Sifakis and Kordia 2019; Sifakis and Tsantila 2019; Sifakis et al. 2018).

ELF awareness is framed along three parameters (Sifakis 2019: 291). Awareness of language and language use, which refers to awareness of ELF discourse, including the phonology and pragmatics of ELF, and an appreciation of the use of ELF in multilingual and in migration contexts, the role of translanguaging and meaning-negotiation strategies. Awareness of instructional practice, which refers to awareness of all parameters related to classroom teaching, from lesson planning to lesson evaluation, including one’s own perceptions and underlying assumptions, as well as of the ways in which, and the reasons why, these could be modified and/or enriched in view of ELF. Awareness of learning, which refers to awareness of “the major impact ELF use has for learning” (Sifakis 2019: 291), with particular reference to the ways in which the learners themselves use ELF and the ways in which their own experiences and attitudes may influence and inform their development.

The ELF awareness framework forms the backbone of the ENRICH CPD, as it embraces and prompts the following:

1. The need for change: ELF-aware teacher education, and, in our case, the ELF-aware ENRICH CPD, is highly relevant to the EU educational policy recommendation that ELTs should fundamentally rethink a range of issues, especially when they teach multilingual classes. In essence, the ELF-aware CPD involves helping ELTs bring about a significant cognitive and behavioural change in view of recent developments in ELF research (e.g., Ekşi et al. 2019). In short, bringing about a cognitive change includes a re-appreciation of one’s beliefs, attitudes, dispositions and assumptions about various issues (e.g., normativity, communication involving non-native users, the notion of “linguistic error”, etc.) which reflect what has been termed “native-speakerism” (Holliday 2006). This is because, due to the findings of ELF research, such beliefs are nowadays considered particularly problematic (Jenkins et al. 2018). Behavioural change, on the other hand, includes becoming aware of the ways such attitudes, beliefs, assumptions and convictions may have influenced one’s past and current teaching practices. On this basis, teachers are empowered to modify their teaching inspired by ELF, to the extent that this is appropriate and relevant (Sifakis et al. 2018). Raising one’s ELF awareness, in other words, involves identifying and addressing a possible discrepancy between the way the language is currently employed in “real life” and the way it is still generally taught and learnt in the classroom, as well as the factors which have generated or reinforced such a discrepancy (Sifakis and Kordia 2019).

2. ELF as a means for teacher development: In order to empower ELTs to bring about this cognitive and behavioural change, ELF-aware teacher education should integrate a constructivist understanding of CPD. An ELF-aware CPD focuses not only on the provision of ELF-related knowledge but, more importantly, on helping ELTs identify, challenge and, if necessary, transform their beliefs, attitudes, dispositions and assumptions, to the extent that they are willing (and ready; see Sifakis and Kordia 2019) to do so (Sifakis and Bayyurt 2018: 459).

3. The phases of ELF-aware teacher education: An ELF-aware CPD course may include three major (but not necessarily linear) phases (Sifakis and Bayyurt 2018). The first phase exposes ELTs to ELF research (e.g., through selected research articles, presentations of key findings of empirical research, videos illustrating these findings in authentic communication, etc.). It also prompts them to reflect on the complexities of English language use in relation to their own and others’ experience and beliefs, both as teachers and as users of the language (e.g., through group discussions, specially designed questionnaires, case analysis). The second phase involves raising their awareness of the implications and challenges that these complexities pose for their own teaching context (e.g., by responding to relevant reflective questions in their journals, through workshops focusing on helping them identify beliefs and dispositions underlying their practices, through analysis of critical incidents that have occurred in the classroom). Finally, the third phase entails engaging ELTs in action research in their own classrooms, by having them design, implement and critically evaluate instructional activities that integrate ELF in teaching and learning, after a careful analysis of the particular characteristics and demands of each local context (Lopriore 2016).

4. Mentoring and constructive collaboration: Raising ELF awareness can be a fairly demanding endeavour, as research from previous ELF-aware teacher education courses suggests (cf. Bayyurt and Sifakis 2015; Kordia 2016). For instance, it involves “getting to grips with a fair amount of theorizing that may not be immediately accessible” to ELTs (Sifakis 2019: 290), as well as discerning the pedagogical implications of a construct such as ELF which, by and large, “is not readily translated into practice” (Kordia, in Sifakis et al. 2018: 199). What is more, just like any truly developmental process, it may also generate feelings of disappointment and self-doubt, as well as a sense of isolation, especially when the ELF-aware course includes self-study (Kordia 2018). This is why face-to-face mentoring partnerships, which establish “bridges” between ELTs and the ELF scientific community on the one hand, and reflective activities fostering constructive collaboration among ELTs, on the other, constitute essential components of any ELF-aware teacher education course.

2.3 Fundamental considerations of the ENRICH CPD programme

In this section we consider the teacher education model that was adopted by the ENRICH Consortium as one that combines the priorities set by the EU institutions regarding multilingualism and using ELF and by the ELF awareness framework described above.

The concept of Continuous Professional Development constitutes a key aspect of in-service teacher education that refers to the “process of continuing growth of a professional after joining the profession” (Padwad and Dixit 2011: 7). In the research literature, CPD is generally identified in terms of two views of teacher education: the “narrow” view, which is associated with teacher training, and the “broad” view, which considers CPD as a means for teacher development (Richards and Farrell 2005). These views illustrate different conceptualisations of teacher learning, or else, professional learning – viewing it, for instance, as a linear process, a “multiple pathway” process or a cognitive process (for a review of models of professional learning, see Boylan et al. 2018). More importantly, they draw on different types and processes of learning itself (for instance, cumulative, assimilative, accommodative or transformative learning; cf. Illeris 2015).

In general, teacher training aims at short-term and immediate goals and involves acquiring knowledge and specific sets of skills in order to address particular professional needs or requirements in a more effective way. The content of the Course is, by and large, pre-determined by experts in the field (e.g., university professors) and successful completion usually leads to some form of accreditation, following an evaluation process. On the other hand, teacher development involves a “much deeper, wider and longer-term process” (Padwad and Dixit 2011: 7), which relates to the overall growth of a teacher by bringing about a significant change in their understanding not only of teaching but of themselves as professionals and as individuals. Therefore, teacher development is often associated with critical reflection leading to teacher autonomy (Vázquez 2016). In this sense, an in-service teacher development course may engage teachers in documenting, analysing and reflecting on their own as well as their colleagues’ teaching practices, beliefs and attitudes, in relation to the needs of their learners, the requirements of their teaching context and new knowledge acquired about the subject they teach.

For the ENRICH CPD to meet the requirements of the EU’s priorities regarding multilingualism and respond to the constraints of ELF awareness described earlier, a decision needed to be made with regard to the teacher education model to be adopted. Kennedy (2014: 692–693) identifies three broad categories of purposes which CPD may encompass: the “transmissive” purpose, which focuses primarily on provision of knowledge and enhancement of concrete skills, usually according to a set of externally prescribed standards; the “malleable” purpose, referring to situations which ask for increased autonomy, e.g., in Masters’ programmes or in coaching and mentoring programmes; and the “transformative” purpose, which promotes “collaborative professional enquiry”, experiential learning and critical thinking about one’s own and others’ practices. The model adopted for the ENRICH ELF-aware CPD was the transformative one, as it is inherently associated with a “reflective, inquiry-oriented teacher education” (Vázquez 2016: 9) that encourages personal theory-building and constructive collaboration among ELTs engaged in diverse English language using, teaching and learning settings. Furthermore, the model meets the call by EU institutions for “renewed” forms of CPD that reflect the recent changes in classroom conditions regarding linguistic and cultural diversity.

Along these lines, the ENRICH CPD adopted a variety of strategies for teacher development, including the following (cf. Martin and Polly 2017; Richards and Farrell 2005; Vázquez 2016):

1. workshops and group discussions, which encourage reflective dialogue and peer-learning;

2. self- and peer-assessment, which encourage self-monitoring and critical thinking about one’s own and others’ beliefs and practices;

3. case analyses, including analyses of critical incidents, which prompts close examination of one’s own and others’ practices, as well as of the beliefs, attitudes and dispositions underlying these practices;

4. brief or longer questionnaires, which encourage respondents to identify practices as well as underlying beliefs and assumptions;

5. reflective (physical or digital) diaries/journals/logs, which encourage the identification, examination and critical evaluation of past and current practices, beliefs and dispositions, preferably based on a set of well-designed reflective questions;

6. action research, including collaborative action research, which facilitates change in one’s teaching practices through a recursive and cyclical process of planning, acting, observing and reflecting (Bell and Aldridge 2014).

In drawing out these practices the ENRICH CPD did not undermine the significance of enhancing participants’ professional knowledge and skills but attempted to overcome the limitations of the traditional “transmissive” orientation and include as many features associated with teacher development as possible. To that end, the selected medium of instruction was not the traditional reading materials but online audiovisual lectures with the integration of additional resources that could all be accessed online. Moodle was selected as the most suitable open-access platform for integrating a variety of tools both for presenting information in a more attractive way and for constructing activities that promote the development of teaching skills, critical reflection and collaboration (e.g., chats and forums for synchronous and asynchronous communication, digital workshops and wikis).

Another aspect of the ENRICH CPD transformative model was conceiving the materials (video lectures) as the main input of information. This freed the ENRICH Consortium teacher educators to act as “facilitators” and “consultants” rather than as “transmitters of knowledge” (Vázquez 2016: 8). They acted as mentors, providing advice, guidance as well as intellectual and emotional support (Orland-Barak 2016), which further prompted participants’ own development as ELF-aware practitioners and enhanced their autonomy (also see Lai 2010).

4.1 Sample A: “good English learners”

The activity is embedded in the “Learning English” section and, specifically, in the subsection entitled “Learners”. The activity is the fourth in this subsection and focuses on “The good English learner”. It invites participants to “explore the characteristics of a strategic learner of EFL and a user of English as a contact language (ELF).” Specifically, it asks: “To what extent would you say the characteristics of ‘good language learners’ inside the ELT classroom and those of ‘competent users of English’ are compatible with and relevant to each other? Why?” Participants’ responses acknowledge the priority that developing accommodation strategies in ELF interactions has for learners. The following response offered by a teacher working in an ELT context in Greece distinguishes these strategies from those traditionally taught in typical EFL contexts:

The criteria of accuracy, fluency, and complexity that describe a good language learner in the EFL classroom do not necessarily apply to competent users of English. Priority is given to communication strategies, accommodation and negotiation of meaning as the aim is to get the message across and have a successful interaction. Teachers need to provide not only the knowledge and skills, but also the strategies needed to have a successful communication. In addition, providing a safe environment where students can express themselves openly without the fear of rejection by stressing their errors is the best way to develop into confident and effective users of English.

Competence in using English is linked by this participant to a strong sense of self-confidence when interacting, and the role of the teacher becomes that of a prompter and a facilitator of such interactions in the classroom. Here are two more responses to the same activity, from an English language teacher from Norway and from Turkey:

Good language learners have to try to use English (what they know of it) as much as they can, not worrying about making mistakes. This way they will also be able to adapt their English to the person they are speaking to later in life. This is how the characteristics of good language learners might turn them into competent users of English. In class, teachers should be able to create an environment where students feel at ease using and experimenting with English to interact with other students either by speaking or writing.

Good learners take risks when using the language to communicate, they make use of a variety of effective learning strategies to internalise what they have learned and regard mistakes as opportunities for making progress. […] By employing these tactics, they become more comfortable and confident, which in turn helps them to become more competent in their use of English.

4.2 Sample B: “evaluation and improvement of ELT activities”

Activity 3 in the subsection entitled “Large and small cultures in ELT” asks participants to evaluate specific activities taken from published courseware, which focus on cultural issues. Using these activities’ input as a starting point, participants are then encouraged to develop their own ELF-aware activities that are relevant to their own context. It is interesting that, drawing on this subsection’s input, participants’ responses underline their awareness of the stereotypical treatment of cultural issues in certain courseware activities that they were asked to evaluate. The following response is from a teacher in Portugal:

This activity aims at practicing on the names of countries, places and the present continuous tense. I would not think of it as an ELF aware task since it asks learners to overgeneralize in order to guess the origin of the people in the photo (we cannot define with certainty one’s origin from the colour of their skin). I would try to improve it by adding some metalinguistic and metacognitive questions, like: What language do you think they use to communicate? Do you think that they will achieve communication in the end? What obstacles might they encounter? Has it ever happened to you? Would you feel stressed to communicate in English with them? Where do you think that any potential fear derives from?

Another aspect of culture as presented in various published courseware commented upon by participants is the fact that non-native speaker discourse is often presented as “flawless” Standard English. (Response from a teacher in Italy):

Here there is a Japanese girl writing in perfect English while she is presenting the Japanese way of living in a stereotypical way, focusing on the large culture. It could be better if questions like the following were included: “What language would she use to communicate with her international friends?”, “Could they go on holiday together?”, “What problems could they have”, “How could they overcome any problems?”

It is interesting that, in her above response, the teacher fully understands that the underlying assumption of the textbook is (a) to expose learners to idealised varieties of native-speaker English even when these are localised in Expanding Circle contexts (in this case, Japan and Japanese users) and (b) to trivialise the Japanese way of living by framing it within stereotypical preconceptions.

4.3 Final course evaluation

A final evaluation of the Course was contributed by the 96 teachers who completed it. The evaluation offers a comprehensive picture of the impact of the Course. Interestingly, 76% of participants had never attended another course or seminar focusing on the topics of the ENRICH Course. Overall, the Course received very positive feedback: 95% of participants thought (strongly agreed/agreed) that it met their expectations (e.g., with respect to its content, mentors’ support, etc.). In total, 97% acknowledged that it contributed to their development as teachers, while 98% said it helped them expand their knowledge on certain issues (e.g., on ELF and linguistic diversity), and 97% agreed/strongly agreed that it helped them further develop their teaching skills. Participants also agreed/strongly agreed that the Course helped them reflect and further improve their critical thinking skills (97%) and that it helped them feel more self-confident as teachers (93%).

When asked to provide an overall evaluation of the content of the course, participants underlined that it helped them learn new things not only about ELF (“The content of the course was various, which is very beneficial to discuss a lot of components of ELF”, according to one participant) but about teaching in general (all comments below are anonymised):

The whole course was an unbelievable journey into the realm of English language teaching and the English language itself. I enhanced my skills and widened my horizons, for which I would like to thank all the contributors. A journey worth taken.

I would like to express my gratitude for taking part in this course as it helped me activate previous knowledge and acquire new one. It helped me get a new perspective as a teacher and material designer, develop an understanding for my students’ needs. I also have to say that I appreciate the professionalism with which the whole programme was set up!

Also, some participants appreciated the reflective component of the Course – e.g.,

The content of the course has opened my eyes to new ways of teaching and approaching certain subjects. I have re-evaluated certain beliefs and teaching methods and have been introduced to new topics and ways to further my critical skills, confidence and general stance as a teacher (and person).

This CPD course really gave me a boost as a teacher. Apart from getting acquainted with the ELF approach, all the material and the way it was organized helped me rethink of my teaching practices, gave me 100% awareness of all the issues concerning teaching and learning a foreign language! It really helped me a lot, gave me confidence to continue and become a better teacher.

Others underlined the international character of the actual course:

I highly appreciate that you accepted the participation proposal from teachers working in completely different teaching contexts and from a huge variety of international backgrounds. A truly inclusive approach to be able to dive deeper into ELF aware teaching and learning.

While 76% of the participants found the online and face-to-face interactions with their colleagues useful, there were mixed responses regarding the extent to which the Course prompted dialogue among teachers and a sense of community. This was probably due to the non-intrusive nature of the Course, with mentors acting more as instigators and advisers rather than as feedback- or solution-providers. What is more, the element of distance learning, which was further enhanced by the COVID-19 pandemic, further complicated issues for certain participants. As expected, there were some enthusiastic comments, e.g.:

It has been a demanding but totally worth it course during which I gained or updated knowledge on learning and using English, learners and methodology, ELF awareness, lesson planning and assessment. Most importantly, the course enabled me to have a glimpse in colleagues’ classes across Europe and exchange views on educational practices and policies.

The course has helped me feel a valuable member of the ENRICH educational community (e.g., in terms of communicating with colleagues…).

Thank you for all your hard work, putting this course together. […] In the end, the mentors were much more active and I really appreciated that.

The Moodle design was easy and intuitive. Also the opportunity to choose to access the … 100% amazing! I really do not have anything else to add. Modern lay-out, easy to use, very progressive.

There were also some more critical comments, e.g.:

I had expected communication and interaction among teachers, members, mentors- instead I felt alone and left to wonder whether anyone reads or cares about what I write, about the help I need, about the questions I have…

More interaction with the other course participants and with the team of mentors would have been desirable.

Participants appreciated the content of the activities (94% strongly agree/agree), while 93% were in favour of the audiovisual mode of course input. Online navigation of the Course sections was deemed easy by 92% of participants, and 93% found the overall layout of the sections on Moodle satisfying. Overall, participants appreciated the Course’s aims and understood the need to integrate ELF-aware activities in their context, perhaps linking them with other approaches:

Teachers should be aware of the existence of ELF and what this notion means as far as nativespeakerism goes and what their learners’ purpose is in the learning process. Teachers should use a teaching approach along the lines of TBL [Task-Based Learning], in particular with adult ESP [English for Specific Purposes] learners (my age group).

Others indicated the demanding nature of the Course:

The overall design and delivery of the course were absolutely satisfying. Personally speaking, I think that for someone who wanted to complete the assignments in depth there was not enough time to keep up with the views of the rest of the participants and interact with them. I have the feeling that I did not fulfil this possibility provided by the course.

The importance of interacting with fellow participants and the mentors was also underlined:

I enjoyed every bit of this ENRICH project!! Nonetheless, I would have preferred an interaction with both mentors and participants as we experienced in the third chapter (Learning English) of this course, because it highlighted the true potential of this community of practice to increase collective intelligence to an even higher degree than already achieved beforehand. When experiencing feedback and true exchange among participants during this chapter, it slightly felt like a missed opportunity during the first two parts. The quality and interaction of the contact sessions was excellent. I took part in all of them and always felt energized afterwards and being part of a wonderful community.

Even though the Course took place at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which dramatically changed the nature of teaching all over the world, participants acknowledged that it had or was projected to have significant impact on their learners as well. In total, 77% of participants appreciated the impact of the Course on their learners’ language skills, 76% accepted that it contributed to the development of their learners’ skills in establishing effective communication in multilingual contexts and 83% agreed that it contributed to their learners’ understanding of themselves as co-owners of English.

When asked to suggest improvements they would like to see in the Course, participants mentioned more interaction with fellow participants (there were suggestions for establishing forums dedicated to primary or to secondary school teachers) and more meetings with the mentors, fewer compulsory activities per subsection, while some mentioned their preference to have additional reading input in the form of articles, and so on.