Exploring the feasibility of incorporating ELFA awareness into the development of EAP pedagogy in a UK pre-sessional course

3.1 Research setting

This study was carried out within a pre-sessional course in a university in London, which is rigorously regulated and monitored by the university’s Foundation Department regarding pedagogy, assessment, and teaching materials. This situation to some extent restricts tutors’ flexibility and freedom in adapting pedagogical methods and choosing their preferred teaching materials. The course primarily targets students from diverse disciplines, which often leads to limited preparation for discipline-specific conventions while placing emphasis on the rhetorical features of general academic English. Moreover, built on a conventional, normative teaching framework, all international students enrolled in this course are typically classified as non-native speakers and perceived by the institution to be less ‘linguistically competent’ than native speakers.

3.2 Data collection and analysis

To address these two questions, this study is qualitative in nature with the employment of classroom observation and semi-structured interviews. The first stage of this study, classroom observation, was adopted to explore EAP practices currently implemented in pre-sessional courses within UK HE. The classroom observation dataset consists of approximately 24 h of audio-recordings of sessions led by four pre-sessional tutors with rich EAP teaching experiences in the UK HE context. The classroom observation recordings were also complemented with written field notes (see Appendix 1) to gather specific details, such as students’ linguistic backgrounds, English competencies, key teaching objectives, and other information that would be difficult to capture solely through audio recordings.

Following the observations, semi-structured interviews were conducted with each of the four observed tutors to gain their insights on enriching EAP pedagogy through the incorporation of ELFA-aware principles. Prior to interview, tutors were given a summary of key points regarding ELFA-aware pedagogical principles (see Appendix 2) as proposed by ELF scholars (Cogo 2020; Dewey 2014; Jenkins and Mauranen 2019; Mauranen 2012; Sifakis 2019). This practice was undertaken on the assumption that while there would be varying degrees of prior awareness of ELF among these investigated tutors, they might still lack a clear understanding of developing ELFA-aware teaching (Dewey 2012). During the interview process, I tried to play a flexible role in involving tutors in critical reflection on how they can skilfully integrate the proposed ELFA-aware principles into their EAP pedagogical practices. Nevertheless, as the interviews were conducted in a semi-structured format, they were guided by several essential questions (see Appendix 3). Furthermore, Table 1 demonstrates demographic information about the four tutors investigated in this study, showcasing their EAP teaching experiences, educational backgrounds, and professional training history.

The data collected from classroom observations and interviews was analysed by employing thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke 2012). The analytical work was initiated by transcribing all audio-recorded interviews and pre-sessional classes with the supplemented information obtained from field notes. Once the transcripts were available, an inductive approach (Riazi 2016) was employed to identify and examine recurring themes. These themes were subsequently categorized and transformed into codes via NVivo software, which enabled me to examine the transcripts from both data sources without depending on a pre-existing theoretical framework to guide the analysis. To address the first research question, two codes were created from classroom observation data, namely (i) inductive approach to review pragmatic strategies and (ii) task-based language teaching (TBLT) to practice pragmatic strategies. These codes were organized under the theme “EAP pedagogical approaches currently implemented in pre-sessional class”. To deal with the second research question, three codes relating to ELFA-aware principles were generated, namely (i) prioritizing communicative effectiveness over standard NES norms, (ii) increasing exposure to diverse Englishes and (iii) encouraging the employment of multilingual repertoires to facilitate ELFA interaction. These codes were categorized under the theme “pre-sessional tutors’ insights on integrating ELFA-aware principles into EAP pedagogy”.

4.1 Inductive approach for reviewing pragmatic strategies

This section exemplifies how an inductive approach was employed by one pre-sessional tutor to enhance students’ development of specific pragmatic strategies to improve communicative effectiveness. The use of the inductive approach is mainly intended to create the essential conditions for pragmatics learning, which include exposure to relevant input, opportunities for communicative practice and feedback on their performance. Thus, EAP learners are not explicitly taught the rules; instead, they are encouraged to discover the rules of pragmatic strategies used by NESs through being exposed to common examples and participating in discussions about their pragmatic roles in academic contexts. Before conducting the classroom observation, the researcher had a conversation with the pre-sessional tutors being observed to gather basic information about the class. The researcher was informed that as the pre-sessional class is monitored to uniformly implement an English as a foreign language (EFL) approach, this situation forces tutors to uncritically teach the norms and conventions of pragmatic strategy to fulfil their professional obligation. Conformity to NES norms is also reflected in the teaching materials currently used in pre-sessional classes. For instance, Table 2 and its related guidance and task requirement are extracted from the original teaching material employed in the pre-sessional class. They are designed and subjected to strict regulation by the foundation department. This episode is chosen for analysis in this study as it serves as a prime example of the essential NES-based content typically covered in pre-sessional classrooms, highlighting key aspects of the teaching approach and curriculum focus. The selection of pragmatic strategies listed in each category of Table 2 is guided by specific criteria: whether NESs frequently use them as pragmatic strategies to achieve specific communicative purposes in academic interactions. In other words, these pragmatic strategies are systematically organized based on their specific functions they perform in academic communication and are selected according to the typical usage preferences of NESs for facilitating effective and purposeful interaction.

Table 2 displays a series of pragmatic strategies, divided into five columns based on their functional roles in communicative effectiveness in academic intercultural settings. Once students have downloaded the provided teaching material and access Table 2, the pre-sessional tutor Mary initially guides them to review the pragmatic strategies in each column and its corresponding functional heading through self-reflection. Subsequently, she engages students to work in pairs to discuss the role of each pragmatic category and select the most appropriate heading from the given list in Table 2 to summarize their functions. To respond to students’ answers, Mary evaluates and comments on their responses using NES usage as the standard criterion. In this regard, the implementation of an inductive approach to review pragmatic strategies reveals that the linguistic expectations and learning requirements of the pre-sessional program at this UK university continue to focus on preparing students to uncritically embrace standard NES norms and conventions (Wingate 2018). The notions of standard NES norms, correctness, and native-like proficiency still constitute the main reference points in EAP teaching (Jenkins 2014; Widdowson 2015). There is also no evidence in this practice to suggest that EAP pre-sessional tutors are yet positioned to incorporate ELFA awareness to better reflect the sociolinguistics of English use in academic intercultural communication.

4.2 TBLT approach for practicing pragmatic strategies

After reviewing pragmatic strategies through an inductive approach, the four observed pre-sessional tutors emphasize creating opportunities for students to employ pragmatic strategies to enhance their communicative competence in authentic academic interactions. To accomplish this goal, they adopt TBLT, guiding and engaging students to complete a communication task by applying the reviewed pragmatic strategies as needed. In this sense, the primary goal of implementing TBLT in pre-sessional classes seems to generate communicative contexts within the classroom to facilitate the “authentic use of language” (Ellis and Shintani 2013: 136). Nevertheless, in line with key principles of TBLT, pre-sessional tutors appear to connect “authenticity” with how closely communication reflects “real-life” NES contexts (Widdowson 2013), engaging students in employing pragmatic strategies in a manner that is “natural” to NESs but “foreign” to them (Ellis 2017: 110). Additionally, they embrace TBLT principles by encouraging students to view language as a “tool” for communication to achieve task outcomes, rather than as an “object to be studied, analysed and displayed” (Ellis and Shintani 2013: 136). Taking these factors into account, pre-sessional tutors design, organize, and facilitate group discussion tasks as meaning-focused and goal-oriented opportunities for students to apply pragmatic strategies in academic intercultural communication. To clarify this point, this section specifically illustrates how the pre-sessional tutor Kola implements TBLT by dividing a group discussion task into three phases, namely pre-task, main-task, and post-task phases (Ellis 2017).

In the pre-task phase, Kola initially clarifies the task requirements and specific guidelines for this group discussion task. With the aid of a teaching handout sent to students before the class (see Appendix 4), students are introduced to the discussion topic. To ensure students can develop arguments effectively and actively engage in the discussion, Kola also offers four guiding questions (see Appendix 5) to inspire their deep thinking and reflection on the topic. To support students who may struggle to generate ideas, Kola rephrases the four main questions into a series of follow-up prompts and suggestions to spark their immediate thoughts on the discussion topic. Once the preparation work has been completed in the pre-task phase, students are allocated to two groups for participating in a 20-min discussion task. During the main-task phase, as students discuss the assigned topic, Kola randomly joins different groups to monitor their performance in the discussion. She specifically focuses on observing whether students use clear evidence to support their arguments, assessing how effectively they apply the pragmatic strategies practiced in class for managing academic interactions, in preparation for providing feedback. In the post-task phase, two separate groups reconvene for a plenary discussion. Kola provides general feedback and evaluates each group’s performance in line with NES norms and conventions, drawing from the notes she took while observing their participation in the group discussion task.

Kola’s teaching practices reveal that there exist essential similarities and differences between TBLT underpinned by a normative framework and an ELFA-aware pedagogy. On one hand, the two approaches share essential principles by emphasizing that language classes should be considered as “social events”, with language learners as communicators and “active agents of their learning” (Ellis and Shintani 2013: 143). In this sense, TBLT could serve as a valuable methodological framework for integrating the complexities and dynamics of ELFA communication into the EAP classroom. Implementing ELFA-aware task activity can also foster EAP learners’ ELFA pragmatic competence and enhance their sense of ownership over English in academic settings (Seidlhofer and Widdowson 2018). On the other hand, the crucial differences between the two approaches lies in how EAP practitioners perceive the role of linguistic norms. As exemplified in the current pre-sessional classroom, TBLT is applied within a normative framework, which automatically treats any linguistic divergence from NES norms as erroneous output. Such pedagogical practice overlooks the context of academic intercultural communication, where students might need to creatively or intentionally use non-standard language to adapt to their interlocutors. Considering this point, pre-sessional tutors need support and guidance to make a balance between considering students’ ELFA communication needs and their institutional duties, which are largely determined by the standard norm-oriented account of the English language (Widdowson and Seidlhofer 2023).

5.1 Prioritizing communicative effectiveness over NES norms

From an ELFA perspective, English is considered as a hybridized and adaptable resource, diversified in practice to meet users’ communicative needs for meaning making within academic interaction settings (Dafouz and Smit 2016; Mauranen et al. 2010). In this sense, communicative effectiveness lies in the speakers’ capabilities to take ownership of English and appropriate it for promoting negotiation of meaning with the goal of achieving intelligibility, rather than being assessed or sanctioned by standard NES norms (Jenkins 2011). When considering the impact of international academic environments on language practices, it is essential for EAP teaching models to undergo major changes by placing greater emphasis on communicative effectiveness over NES-based norms.

In Extract (1), pre-sessional tutor Mary exhibits a strong commitment to incorporating an ELFA-aware perspective into EAP teaching practice, which is evident by her awareness of the need to shift away from the predominant focus on NES. Her intention to develop an ELFA-aware teaching in a pre-sessional class is also obviously demonstrated in her preference to prioritize communicative effectiveness over strictly adhering to NES linguistic accuracy. In this sense, my research findings, in line with Dewey (2012), indicate that one of the key ELFA-aware principles has begun to increasingly feature in EAP tutors’ perceptions of language pedagogy. In Mary’s case, this is reflected in her emphasis on developing students’ pragmatic skills to facilitate interaction or improve communicative effectiveness (Cogo and Dewey 2012; Jenkins 2015; Llurda 2017; Mauranen 2012). She believes that enhancing students’ communicative competence in academic intercultural communication relies on developing their capabilities to utilize pragmatic strategies to not only manage interaction but also collaboratively achieve mutual intelligibility. The employment of pragmatic strategies in ELFA interaction is considered as a display of a high degree of interactional and pragmatic competence, rather than compensating for linguistic deficiencies. However, the demands and expectations of teaching standard NES norms, mandated by the pre-sessional program, seem to pose substantial challenges in translating ELFA from a sociolinguistic concept into a pedagogical approach.

While pre-sessional tutors may lean towards adopting ELFA-aware pedagogy in theory, they have to compromise ELFA-aware preference in practice to align with NES standard language models. Thus, one of the main points of resistance to the adaptation to an ELFA-aware perspective for pre-sessional tutors could be their “sense of professional obligation” towards teaching NES standard English (Sifakis 2018). As indicated in Extract (2), the limitation of the pre-sessional program length (normally ranging from 6 to 16 weeks) makes it particularly difficult for pre-sessional tutors to incorporate ELFA-aware teaching practices into class.

5.2 Exposing learners to diverse varieties of English

Another crucial aspect of transitioning towards ELFA-aware pedagogy in EAP classrooms entails increasing learners’ exposure to the diversity and complexity of interaction involving speakers from diverse linguacultural backgrounds (Llurda 2017; Seidlhofer 2011). An ELFA-aware approach strives to inform learners about the linguistic, pragmatic, and cultural flexibility of English used as lingua franca in academic settings. This means that the incorporation of ELFA awareness into EAP pedagogy should involve considering and acknowledging the diversity of English and integrating such diversity into classroom teaching practices. Considering this aspect, pre-sessional tutors demonstrate a strong interest and obvious convergence on this issue.

As demonstrated in Mary’s statement in Extract (3), it seems that she has recognized the importance of enhancing students’ exposure to authentic ELFA interaction. This is exemplified in her efforts to expose her learners to various speakers’ accents by carefully selecting recordings for listening activities. She selects these from their own database, which undergoes careful review and adaptation. Mary’s accounts reflect that to put an ELFA-aware proposal into practice, EAP teachers need to carefully evaluate and construct their own teaching materials based on criteria reflecting authentic ELFA communication and the requirements of their teaching situation. There are relatively few ready-made teaching materials or resources that can be directly employed to facilitate the introduction of ELFA in EAP classrooms. By involving learners in ELFA-aware listening materials, Mary strives to immerse them in an authentic context of academic intercultural communication. She supposes this approach can effectively foster learners’ deeper understanding of how speakers from diverse linguacultural backgrounds engage in discussions and negotiate meanings. Mary’s approach also demonstrates her commitment to helping learners understand the flexibility and adaptability of English in various ELFA contexts.

On the contrary, some pre-sessional tutors acknowledge their concerns regarding the incorporation of ELFA-aware pedagogy in the EAP classroom. The reluctance primarily arises from the apprehension that the diversity and variability in ELFA communication could pose learning challenges for EAP learners. Specifically, as shown in Extract (4), Jennifer expresses her worries that exposure to unfamiliar accents may lead to confusion and difficulty in comprehension, especially for students who are still grappling with understanding the accents of NESs. Jennifer’s apprehensions align with Sifakis’s (2018) discovery that the dynamic evolution of English, particularly the acknowledged prevalence of ELF with its fluid and boundless characteristics, could be seen as disconcerting and potentially intimidating for English language teachers. Thus, it is highly likely that the diversity and complexity of ELFA might lead some pre-sessional tutors to stick to established traditional methods in their teaching rather than adapting their pedagogical approaches in line with ELFA-aware principles.

5.3 Encouraging students’ use of multilingual resources to facilitate ELFA interaction

The deployment of multilingual repertoires has also been shown to be widespread among ELF users as part of the exploitation of resources “from within” and “from without” (Cogo 2020; Hülmbauer 2013). In this perspective, repertoires are not to be seen as “separate languages” but as part of multicompetence, with speakers flexibly deploying their “languaging capabilities” in an integrated way (Hülmbauer and Seidlhofer 2013: 402). Additionally, there is a growing agreement that EMI is English used as ELFA in conjunction with other languages in multilingual settings (Jenkins and Mauranen 2019). This means that embracing an ELFA-aware perspective in EAP pedagogical practice should move away from a monolingual (English-only) emphasis to embrace multilingualism. Nevertheless, the four pre-sessional tutors show divergence on this ELFA-aware principle. The research findings indicate that multilingualism poses a contentious issue within the EAP classroom. In line with ELF/A-aware proposals (Cogo 2017; Jenkins 2015), participants such as Kola and Andy support students to mobilize their available repertoire resources in a flexible and integrated way, transcending the stable and fixed separation between languages to facilitate ELFA interaction in the EAP classroom. Specifically, Kola emphasizes that enabling learners to strategically utilize their additional language resources for negotiating meaning does not diminish the value of their non-English language and perpetuate a native-speaker attitude. Nevertheless, both of them also highlight that students are not supposed to rely on multilingual resources excessively and frequently.

As can be seen in Extract (5), Kola embraces an inclusive approach towards her students’ use of their multilingual resources for negotiating meaning in EAP classrooms. As opposed to some traditional EAP teaching practices which prohibit the use of any languages other than English in pre-sessional classes, Kola considers students’ existing language knowledge as valuable and productive resources to enhance academic communicative effectiveness. Consequently, she believes that students can derive numerous benefits from integrating their bilingual or multilingual resources into EAP classrooms. As indicated in her statement (Extract [5]), she supports the positive impact of a translanguaging strategy in boosting students’ speaking and cultural confidence. Furthermore, she anticipates that encouraging students to employ the translanguaging strategy can prompt them to recognize the value of their entire linguistic repertoires in fostering communicative performance in academic settings.

Similarly, another pre-sessional tutor, Andy, also supports his learners to employ their available multilingual resources to negotiate meaning when struggling to interpret complex concepts or technical terms.

In line with Cogo’s (2012, 2017) suggestions, Andy prefers to teach EAP beyond the prescribed monolingual approach and prioritizes the achievement of mutual understanding over adhering to standard NS norms. As shown in Extract (6), he allows his learners to do translanguaging only when they need to address challenges in clarifying intricate technical terms or concepts with speakers who share a common language. In line with Galloway and Ruegg’s (2022) exploration on attitudes towards the use of the first language in EMI settings, Andy proposes that students’ additional linguistic repertoires can serve as a valuable resource for content comprehension. Nevertheless, once mutual intelligibility can be accomplished through translanguaging, Andy still advocates steering students towards replacing translanguaging with the use of other ELFA pragmatic strategies such as paraphrasing to address non-understandings and improve mutual comprehension.

In contrast with Kola and Andy, Mary expresses her reservations about encouraging students to utilize their multilingual repertoires to enhance comprehension in the classroom. As Extract (7) shows, Mary holds dual concerns. On one hand, she is worried about the possibility of students becoming accustomed to excessively relying on their mother tongues when encountering challenges in expressing themselves in English. Frequent translanguaging to their first language may hinder students from attaining the desired learning outcomes in EAP pre-sessional classes, which are committed to enhancing English proficiency and developing skills in employing English as a medium of communication exclusively. Mary’s concern also arises from the consideration that switching to a language understood only by a specific group may result in creating a sense of isolation for other interlocutors. In this respect, Mary’s opposition to promoting multilingualism in the EAP classroom corresponds with the claim from Rose et al. (2021), who find that EMI lecturers oppose students’ use of their first language because of the potential for excluding and isolating international students. Perhaps most significantly, Mary’s statement also reflects that the pre-sessional program is tightly regulated and monitored, particularly regarding pedagogical approaches. This situation places significant limitations on the individual flexibility and autonomy among pre-sessional tutors in developing ELFA-aware pedagogy. As Dewey (2012) notes, even though teachers may gain knowledge of ELF theory through TEd programs, adapting ELF to classroom practice can be challenging due to various constraints. Mary’s statement also attests to the fact that there is still a lack of opportunities for EAP teachers and practitioners to critically reflect on the practicality of integrating ELFA-aware principles into language classrooms.

6.1 Challenges of incorporating ELFA awareness into EAP

Unlike the previous studies reporting that ELT practitioners display unawareness of ELF as a concept (Öztürk et al. 2010), pre-sessional tutors in this study seem to have realized that ELFA is a global phenomenon in academic settings. The four tutors indicate their preferences and pedagogical insights on incorporating ELFA-aware principles. This is shown in their high motivation and creative efforts to integrate ELFA into their teaching practices such as focusing on communicative effectiveness or exposing learners to different varieties of English. Pre-sessional tutors’ emphasis on intelligibility, rather than adhering to standard NS norms contrasts with mainstream normative approaches that predominantly implement in EAP classes. This contradiction reveals that EAP teachers need more professional training opportunities and autonomy to experiment with ELFA-awareness in practice. Nevertheless, implementing ELFA-aware teaching inevitably poses critical challenges for EAP practitioners who are burdened with the task of preparing learners for high-stakes examinations (Newbold 2021; Sifakis et al. 2020). The pre-sessional class is a typical example in this scenario, where one of its primary teaching aims is to prepare learners to achieve satisfactory scores in foreign language tests such as IELTS or TOFEL. Thus, while pre-sessional tutors show interest in ELFA-aware teaching, they still face practical challenges in striking a balance between developing ELFA-aware teaching activities and meeting teaching objectives necessitated by exam-oriented classes.

The primary challenge for EAP pre-sessional tutors stems from navigating the inherent variability and hybridity of ELFA itself. This contrasts sharply with traditional perceptions of English in EAP programs, where it is typically regarded as a language with well-defined, relatively stable and easily “teachable” norms (Sifakis et al. 2018). Nevertheless, the shift towards ELFA-aware pedagogy necessitates dealing with the fact from an ELFA perspective English cannot be taught as a typical bounded variety. There are also no dictionaries or grammar books available to assist in “teaching ELF” as is the case with British or American English in a norm-based classroom (Sifakis 2018). Thus, the fluidity and complexity of ELFA poses a challenge for EAP teachers accustomed to predominantly conforming to the standards of a normatively established variety (Bayyurt and Lopriore 2018; Widdowson 2013). As presented in this study, pre-sessional tutors mainly adopt inductive and TBLT teaching methods to ensure learners’ development of pragmatic strategies but do so in line with the NES standard models.

In addition to independently translating ELFA research implications into practice, EAP teachers have to navigate the intricacies inherent in the teaching practice itself. ELFA-aware teaching entails considering the specific characteristics of the local context, including factors such as EAP learners’ needs to improve communicative competence in EMI degree study, the attitudes and expectations held by learners themselves, as well as the curriculum and teaching resources sanctioned by the institution for use in the classroom. Reflecting on these factors encourages tutors to adopt a critical stance towards pedagogical innovation that responds to the challenges of using English in academic intercultural settings. This can present significant challenges for EAP pre-sessional tutors, especially when they have limited time or freedom to develop their preferred pedagogy or teaching materials. As revealed in this study, pre-sessional tutors can be constrained by existing contextual restrictions and pressures to strictly follow NES norms as required by the program stakeholders. This situation inevitably limits pre-sessional tutors from developing or enriching their pedagogy from an ELFA-aware perspective. Hence, to realize the purpose of translating ELFA-aware implications into practical applications, EAP tutors have to grapple with challenging questions about how to avoid potential conflicts between developing ELFA awareness and normative teaching settings.

6.2 Suggestions to incorporate ELFA awareness into EAP

Given these challenges, this study strives to present a series of solutions by drawing on the ELF awareness model suggested by Sifakis and Bayyurt (2018). Pre-sessional tutors also contribute their own insights into closing the gap between understanding ELFA theory and applying ELFA-aware principles to respond to the impact of global spread of ELFA on EAP pedagogical development. For the integration of ELFA pedagogy, the study highlights the importance of enhancing learners’ exposure to diverse English varieties and prioritizing achievement of communicative effectiveness over adherence to NES norms. Specifically, Jennifer and Mary devise implicit forms of ELFA-aware integration like exposing their learners to the audio-recordings of academic conversations involving different non-native speakers. In this sense, pre-sessional tutors seem to have raised awareness and sensitivity towards the need for incorporating a more inclusive, realistic approach in their teaching practices. However, these pre-sessional tours demonstrate a divergence on allowing learners to use multilingual resources to facilitate understanding in pre-sessional classes which specifically emphasize English language proficiency training. Their divergence on this issue implies that some pre-sessional tutors have not fully developed a pluricentric view of English, understanding it as dynamic social practice, but are still influenced by a monocentric view due to institutional constraints.

EAP pre-sessional tutors would benefit from additional professional training to cultivate sensitivity towards the prevailing sociolinguistic reality of English and critically assess its implications in EAP practices. Considering this point, TEd should be emphasized as an initial and fundamental step to realize the actual integration of ELFA-aware principles into the development of EAP pedagogy (Bayyurt and Akcan 2015; Seidlhofer 2011). TEd is of crucial importance for teachers to critically evaluate current practices and develop an ELF/A awareness that guides their teaching orientation (Sifakis and Tsantila 2018). However, informing ELT practitioners about ELF/A and motivating them to implement ELF/A-aware pedagogical changes pose numerous difficulties and complexities (Sifakis 2018). Professional EAP teacher training is also still falling short when it comes to incorporating ELFA-aware principles into EAP pedagogy in a practically relevant way. Thus, this study provides suggestions regarding how to draw on the ELF awareness model (Sifakis and Bayyurt 2018) to incorporate ELFA into EAP TEd.

Engaging in discussions on ELFA literature and research implications enlightens EAP practitioners on how the challenges of developing ELFA-aware teaching in specific teaching contexts have so far been addressed. This can also help EAP teachers develop a deep understanding of the fundamental principles of ELFA-aware pedagogy and determine the extent to which ELFA-aware implications, with their inherent fluidity, can be integrated into their own practices. Existing literature on ELF/A emphasizes the importance of critical reflection in establishing the relationship between ELF and ELT (Sifakis and Bayyurt 2018). In light of this, deep critical reflection on current EAP teaching practices and rethinking of ELFA-aware principles should be promoted in EAP TEd to move beyond the first “awareness phase” (Dewey 2018; Sifakis 2019). Through the evaluation of current teaching materials and participation in reflective group discussions, EAP practitioners could gain valuable insights into the implications of ELFA for their teaching context. This process may also help develop relevant resources and activities that reflect a broader understanding of the social and cultural dimensions of language. A reflective-transformative perspective in EAP TEd should also incorporate discussion of the issues leading to the appropriation of English by its multilingual speakers and reconsidering the way English is conceptualized in current EAP pedagogy. Moreover, there are no ready-made solutions or dedicated teaching materials that facilitate ELFA incorporation in pre-sessional classrooms.

To deal with this issue, EAP practitioners should be given autonomy to make necessary adaptations to their teaching methods in order to become ELFA-aware as progressively and intuitively as possible. They need to initially evaluate their existing EAP teaching materials based on criteria that consider the global use of ELFA and the demands of their immediate teaching situation. Subsequently, it is necessary for EAP teachers to adjust tasks or even create their own ELFA-aware teaching materials from scratch. Thus, adopting an ELFA-aware orientation in teaching involves an active engagement by EAP teachers with ELFA research implications to develop a critical and reflective understanding of how it can be integrated into their local teaching contexts (Sifakis and Bayyurt 2018). Nevertheless, when incorporating ELFA into EAP, it is also crucial to realistically consider some intricate parameters such as the needs and preferences of learners, the reality of target academic communication situations, and the constraints of the local educational setting.

While pre-sessional tutors need to establish a connection between ELFA and EAP in their classrooms, this does not mean that existing practices need to be entirely replaced by an ELFA-aware approach. ELFA and its developments can be equally considered in EAP classes within which tutors are operating from an institutionally normative framework. In such situations, the incorporation of ELFA-aware consideration can provide immediate benefits, particularly in bringing EAP teachers closer to perceiving language as a social practice. ELFA holds the potential to bring authenticity, providing “richness and variability” to EAP pedagogy that may not be commonly present. Consequently, it will be more helpful in preparing EAP learners to deal with the plurality and linguacultural diversity of academic intercultural communication. Overall, the development of ELFA-awareness involves making an effort step by step to improve the effectiveness of EAP teaching practices inspired and enriched by ELFA-aware implications. Achieving the integration of ELFA awareness into EAP necessitates developing a substantial level of reflexivity, autonomy, and maturity among practitioners. While this study suggests some ways to incorporate an ELFA-aware perspective, it is important to note that EAP practitioners are in a better position to determine and select what kinds of methods or activities work well in their own classrooms by taking into account the local educational context and various challenges they may encounter. The transition towards ELFA-aware pedagogy can only be achieved by actively involving tutors themselves, as they are the primary stakeholders responsible for incorporating ELFA into EAP practices. Thus, despite receiving guidance from ELFA scholars or teacher educators, EAP teachers still need to independently experiment with applying ELFA-aware principles in their classrooms.

The suggestions discussed in this study are targeted at motivating EAP practitioners to conduct continuous and critical reflection regarding established (often norm-driven) practices and explore solutions for redesigning and incorporating contextually appropriate ELFA-aware activities into EAP classes. The integration of ELFA principles in EAP practices can be an effective way to stimulate learners’ intercultural awareness and improve communicative effectiveness. Such pedagogical innovation provides opportunities for EAP learners to engage in authentic intercultural communication, thus closing the gap between classroom language learning and real-life language use in their EMI degree study. Thus, the development of ELFA awareness means a process of engaging with ELFA research and developing a personal understanding of how ELFA research implications can be incorporated into one’s own specific classroom. This involves an ongoing cycle of critical reflection, design, implementation, and evaluation of instructional activities that adapt to one’s own interpretation of the ELFA construct.

The entire process of developing ELFA awareness is worth considering for integration into EAP TEd programs. It has the great benefit of enhancing the EAP teaching experience, bringing it closer to a more authentic representation of global academic communication in English. Along this line, in the future, ELFA scholars need to continue to explore the relevance of ELFA to key domains within EAP. As Dewey and Patsko (2017) suggest, there is a necessity to conduct further empirical research to determine how an ELFA-aware perspective can be more thoroughly incorporated into the EAP pre-sessional domain. It is also crucial to highlight that the implications and suggestions concerning the development of ELFA-aware pedagogy discussed in this study are not presented as ready-made solutions. Merely acknowledging the importance of raising EAP tutors’ awareness of ELFA or claiming the potential benefits of adopting an ELFA perspective in classroom practice is not sufficiently valid (Dewey 2012). The future of ELFA-aware pedagogy relies on tutors’ willingness to actively engage with it and document their practical experiences – but this also requires institutional support. Due to the inherent differences between ELFA interaction and the established practices and principles endorsed by the EAP profession, EAP teachers are well-suited to assess the significance and applicability of ELFA principles within their teaching contexts. Thus, an ongoing exploration of ELFA research is necessary, contemplating both challenges and opportunities that the ELFA phenomenon might present to EAP professionals.