logo

Articles

Vol. 3 No. 2 (2023): Teaching practices in times of digital transformation

The digital turn in EAP: teachers’ perspectives on transitioning to blended or hybrid teaching post-Covid-19

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.c7cb7ac5
Submitted
11 August 2026
Published
15-08-2026

Abstract

This small-scale empirical study investigates English for Academic Purposes (EAP) practitioners’ perspectives on transitioning to blended or hybrid teaching after teaching online during the Covid-19 pandemic period in UK universities. The study aims to understand what this transition required of teachers, and how the adoption of the digital mode of teaching in EAP influenced their perspectives concerning the transition from fully online to hybrid or blended teaching.

The study draws on the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) theoretical framework, which focuses on technological knowledge (TK), pedagogical knowledge (PK), and content knowledge (CK), to explore the dilemmas and challenges teachers faced when transitioning between different modes of teaching as part of the digital transformation which took place during Covid-19 which forced the UK Higher (HE) institutions to make drastic changes to the delivery of EAP courses. Moreover, it helps to clarify how the technology they chose to integrate into their online courses communicated the content and supported their pedagogy so that their students could continue their learning experience without disruption.

The study suggests that, although transitioning to blended or hybrid modes may bring about certain challenges for teachers, in terms of pedagogy and technology, the experiences gained through such transitions may equip teachers with a new set of skills and new knowledge of online teaching, affording them opportunities to develop new ways of teaching.

As the phenomenon investigated in this study is recent, the findings produced offer new insights to develop the field.

References

  1. Anney, V.N. (2014). Ensuring the quality of the findings of qualitative research: Looking at trustworthiness criteria. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 5, 272–281.
  2. Bashir A., Bashir S., Rana K., Lambert P., Vernallis A. (2021). Post-COVID-19 Adaptations; the Shifts Towards Online Learning, Hybrid Course Delivery and the Implications for Biosciences Courses in the Higher Education Setting. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.711619
  3. Beatty, B. J. (2019). Hybrid-Flexible Course Design: Implementing Student-Directed Hybrid Classes. EdTech Books. Available online: https://edtechbooks.org/hyflex/.
  4. Bozkurt, A., & Sharma, R. C. (2020). Emergency remote teaching in a time of global crisis due to CoronaVirus pandemic. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), i-vi. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3778083.
  5. Bruce, E., & Stakounis, H. (2021). The impact of Covid-19 on the UK EAP sector during the initial six months of the pandemic. BALEAP-funded report.
  6. Chakraborty, M., & Victor, S. (2004). Do’s and don’ts of simultaneous instruction to on-campus and distance students via videoconferencing. Journal of Library Administration, 41(1-2), 97-112. https://doi.org/10.1300/J111v41n01_09
  7. Cowden, G., Mitchell, P. & Taylor-Guy, P. (2020). Remote learning rapid literature review. Association of Independent Schools NSW & Australian Council for Educational Research (Acer).
  8. Davies, G.; Otto, S.E.K.; Ruschoff, B. (2013). Historical perspectives on CALL. In M. Thomas, H. Reinders., M. Warschauer. (Eds.), Contemporary Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Bloomsbury Academic.
  9. Doo, M.Y., Tang, Y., Bonk, C.J., Zhu, M. (2020). MOOC Instructor motivation and career development. Distance Education. 41, 26–47. DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2020.1724770
  10. Ertmer, P.A. & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T. (2010). Teacher Technology Change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42, 255–284.
  11. Ertmer, P.A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., & Tondeur, J. (2015). Teacher beliefs and uses of technology to support 21st century teaching and learning. In H.R. Fives & M. Gill (Eds.), International Handbook of Research on Teacher‘s Beliefs. Routledge.
  12. Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Shea, P., Pelz, W., Swan, K. (2019). Factors Influencing Faculty Satisfaction with Asynchronous Teaching and Learning in the SUNY Learning Network. Online Learn. Available at: https://olj.onlinelearningconsortium.org/index.php/olj/article/view/1897
  13. Golden, C. (2020, March 23). Remote teaching: The glass half-full. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/blogs/2020/3/remote-teaching-the-glass-half-full
  14. Hamer J., & Smith J. (2021). Online and blended delivery in Further Education: A literature review into pedagogy, including digital forms of assessment. Department for Education. [Online]. Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/996342/online_and_blended_delivery_in_further_education.pdf
  15. Herr, K. and Anderson, G. L. (2014). The action research dissertation: A guide for students and faculty. 2nd edition. Sage.
  16. Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T. and Bond, A. (2020) The Difference Between Emergency Remote Teaching and Online Learning. Educause Review. Available from: https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning
  17. Hua, M., Wang, L. (2023) The relationship between Chinese university students’ learning preparation and learning achievement within the EFL blended teaching context in COVID-19 post-epidemic era: The mediating effect of learning methods. PLoS ONE, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0280919.
  18. Hudson, J. (2022) Becoming an online EAP teacher: An autoethnographic reflection on teaching remotely during the coronavirus pandemic. Professional and Academic English, 29(1), 7-20.
  19. Kessler, G., & Plakans, L. (2008). Does teachers' confidence with CALL equal innovative and integrated use? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 269-282. DOI: 10.1080/09588220802090303
  20. Kohnke L, Zou D. (2021). Reflecting on Existing English for Academic Purposes Practices: Lessons for the Post-COVID Classroom. Sustainability, 13(20):11520. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011520
  21. Lee, B. N. (2023). Hybrid and Virtual Learning: Bridging the Educational and Digital Device. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 8(1).
  22. Liu, M. H., & Kleinsasser, R. C. (2015). Exploring EFL teachers’ CALL knowledge and competencies: In-service program perspectives. Language Learning & Technology, 19(1), 119–138. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/february2015/liukleinsasser.pdf
  23. Marcelo, C., & Yot-Domínguez, C. (2019) From chalk to keyboard in higher education classrooms: changes and coherence when integrating technological knowledge into pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(7), 975-988. DOI: 10.1080/0309877X.2018.1429584
  24. Meydanlioglu, A. , Arikan, F. (2014). Effect of Hybrid Learning in Higher Education. International Journal of Information and Communication Engineering, 8(5), 1292 - 1295.
  25. Miller, A. N., Sellnow, D. D., & Strawser, M. G. (2021). Pandemic pedagogy challenges and opportunities: Instruction communication in remote, HyFlex, and BlendFlex courses. Communication Education, 70(2), 202–204.
  26. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teachers’ knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
  27. Serhat, K., (2019, September, 16). TPACK: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework. Educational Technology. Retrieved from https://educationaltechnology.net/technological-pedagogical-content-knowledge-tpack-framework/
  28. Kergel, D., Heidkamp, B., Telléus, P. K., Rachwal, T., & Nowakowski, S. (Eds.) (2018). The digital turn in higher education: International perspectives on learning and teaching in a changing world. Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-19925-8
  29. Penrod, J. (2022). Staying Relevant: The Importance of Incorporating HyFlex Learning into Higher Education Strategy. Educause Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2022/3/staying-relevant-the-importance-of-incorporating-hyflex-learning-into-higher-education-strategy
  30. Polly, D., Mims, C., Shepherd, C.E., Inan, F. (2010). Evidence of impact: Transforming teacher education with preparing tomorrow’s teachers to teach with technology (PT3) grants. Teaching and Teacher Education. An International Journal of Research and Studies, 26, 863–870.
  31. Romero-Hall, E., & Ripine, C. (2021). Hybrid Flexible Instruction: Exploring Faculty Preparedness. Online Learning, 25(3). doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v25i3.2426
  32. Sang, G., Valcke, M., van Braak, J., & Tondeur, J. (2010). Student teachers’ thinking processes and ICT integration: Predictors of prospective teaching behaviors with educational technology. Computers & Education, 54, 103–112.
  33. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
  34. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22
  35. Starkey, L. A. (2019). Review of research exploring teacher preparation for the digital age. Cambridge Journal of Education, 50(1), 37-56. DOI: 10.1080/0305764X.2019.1625867
  36. Turnbull, D., Chugh, R. & Luck, J. (2021). Transitioning to E-Learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: How have Higher Education Institutions responded to the challenge? Education and Information Technologies 26, 6401–6419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10633-w