Poster Presentation
Innovations in EAP: Material Design
Tony Cripps, Fern Sakamoto, and Sean H. Toland
Nanzan University
This paper outlines the design, development, and implementation of a first-year academic
English course at a Japanese university with a focus on designing materials that encourage
active learning through project-based learning (PBL). The authors explicate the processof course design and material creation designed to incorporate academic genres into
communicative tasks. This paper should be of interest to educators who are involved incurriculum design, course design, and material creation

The fundamental goal of English for Academic Purposes (EAP) is to cultivate
in students the communicative skills they need to study in an English language
environment (Hyland & Hamp-Lyons, 2002). It is important, then, that educators
incorporate communicative activities into the EAP classroom (BALEAP, 2008;
Karimkhanlui, 2007), yet many teachers find it difficult to do so. This paper
outlines the design and development of a series of communicative academic
English courses at a Japanese university, using Nation and Macalister’s (2010)
model of the curriculum design process. This framework depicts eight essential
components of the course design process: (a) considering the environment, (b)discovering needs, (c) following principles, (d) goals, (e) content and sequencing,(f ) finding a format and presenting material, (g) monitoring and assessing
students, and (h) evaluating a course. Each step of the process is explicated below.

Environment

In 2016 a decision was made to create a new curriculum for the Department
of British and American Studies (“Eibei”) at Nanzan University. This decision
stemmed from the university’s move to a quarter system from April 2017. It was
decided that first-year students would study one Academic English A (AEA)108

Innovations in EAP, OnCUE Journal, 11(2), pages 108-115

course per quarter, with each course comprising fifteen 90-minute classes (twoclasses per week for 7.5 weeks). Three teachers would each be responsible forteaching two sections of the course, for a total of six sections, with 22-25 students
per section. The four AEA courses (AEA I, II, III, and IV) would follow acontent-based framework, with content areas chosen according to Eibei faculty
members’ areas of expertise (Table 1). This content exposure would also be
combined with the teaching of practical skills to help prepare students for future
academic studies in English.

Needs

Over the course of their studies at Nanzan University, students in Eibei are expectedto participate in overseas study programs, take content courses in English, andwrite their graduation theses in English. To prepare students for these learning
situations, the AEA course is needed to develop their critical thinking abilities
and autonomy and to equip them with presentation skills, information literacy,
language competency, and communication skills. As the first-year students were
new to university study, it was also important to consider their lack of familiarity
with the university environment and to help them transition from their various
high school English class styles to the student-centered environment of the course.
In addition, the course designers wanted to facilitate the development of strong
peer group bonds and create a supportive learning environment. It was hoped thata comfortable class environment would encourage students to be bold in speaking
out and sharing ideas and would help them grow in confidence as English users.
Table 1
Course Design Framework for Academic English
CourseQuarterContent 1 (classes 1-7)

Content 2 (classes 8-15)

AEA I

1

Language

Communication

AEA II

2

CultureEducation

AEA III

3

Literature

Sociology

AEA IV

4

History

Politics

109

Cripps, Sakamoto, & Toland

Principles

The course designers agreed that the new course must be constructed on a solid
pedagogical foundation. Project-based learning (PBL) has been documented as
an effective way to: (a) help students acquire academic skills and broaden theiracademic vocabulary (Beckett & Slater, 2005), (b) enhance students’ problemsolving abilities and motivation (Hung, Hwang, & Huang, 2012), (c) improvestudents’ interpersonal and cognitive skills (Kettanun, 2015), and (d) help
students develop a sense of trust and cooperation within their group (Fushino,2011). A PBL approach, then, seemed a natural choice in designing the AEA
course.
According to Hedge (1993), a project is “an extended task which usually
integrates language skills work through a number of activities” (p. 276). Students
have different learning styles (Hadfield, 2014), so it was important that the
projects in the AEA course include a diverse array of tasks. The projects alsoneeded to allow the students to think critically, expand their digital literacies,and develop their communication and presentation skills. Added to that,given that most AEA students would study abroad at some point during theiracademic careers, it was important for the course to include activities to develop
their intercultural communication skills.

Goals

Taking into account the needs of the first-year students outlined earlier, the course
design team came up with specific learning goals for each quarter of the course.
As an example, the course objectives for the second quarter are included here:
Students will
• listen to and comprehend the main points of a formal talk;• use reading strategies to read and identify key information in English texts;• further their understanding of and ability to think critically about issues
related to culture and education;• express their ideas clearly and participate actively in a discussion in
English;• develop their presentation skills and deliver effective presentations in
110

Innovations in EAP, OnCUE Journal, 11(2), pages 108-115

English; and• develop academic writing skills and write a short research report inEnglish.

Content and Sequencing

The instructors began by considering core projects that would serve as theprimary learning and assessment tools for the course. Each project would
expose students to genuine academic genres such as poster presentations andresearch reports. The course designers decided on a poster presentation anda ‘PechaKucha’ presentation as the two main projects for the first quarter. (APechaKucha presentation involves presenting using PowerPoint slides which
automatically change every 20 seconds – see Cripps, 2014). These were to be on
topics related to content covered in class. In the second quarter, each student
would work in a small group to produce a 3-4 minute video introducing an
aspect of Japanese culture for the first project. The second project would involvea 1,200-word group research paper addressing an issue related to education andformatted in American Psychological Association (APA) style. For each of thefour main projects, the students would be required to complete both written
and spoken tasks. For example, for the poster presentation, students worked inpairs to prepare and deliver a poster presentation and later submitted individual
written summaries of presentations they watched.

Format & Materials

Putting together comprehensive student textbooks was the most practical way
to give the AEA courses structure. Compiling complete textbooks ensured
some degree of continuity across the different sections and among instructors
implementing the syllabus. Having all the materials ahead of time enabledstudents to prepare before class and have easy access to past lesson material. It also
freed instructors from ongoing copying and lesson planning throughout the busy
academic quarters. With only one week between the end of AEA I and the startof AEA II, the authors decided to prepare and print materials for the first twoquarters together as one textbook. Materials for the third and fourth quarters
111

Cripps, Sakamoto, & Toland(AEA III and AEA IV) would then be created based on reflections and feedback
from the first two courses.
The textbook comprised activities and resources to equip students withthe knowledge, skills, and scaffolding they needed to succeed at the projects.
It comprised four units (corresponding to the four content areas of language,
communication, culture, and education), a speaking skills section, and a writing
skills section. Each unit included QR codes and website links for authentic
online material (e.g., newspaper articles, TED talks, YouTube videos). These
were used in conjunction with a variety of activities designed to get students toengage with and think critically about what they read, saw or heard. The skills
sections provided specific information and practice activities to help students
complete the written and spoken project components. The writing section, forexample, began with exercises and resources to familiarize students with the
APA 6th edition format. Students were required to adhere to this format for all
written assignments.
The course designers aimed to produce a textbook that allowed each
instructor a degree of flexibility. At the same time, we wanted to ensure
consistency when it came to the realization of course goals and implementation
and assessment of projects. To this end, the textbook held a surplus of activities
and resources from which each instructor could choose those best suited tohis or her class and teaching style. The core projects, on the other hand, were
designed to be implemented across all classes. The textbook included a separate
syllabus for each quarter showing a timeline for progress through the units andprojects but allowing each teacher to decide the details of which activities to use
in each class.

Monitoring and Assessing

Student assessment focused on the written (40%) and spoken (40%) componentsof the projects, and on learner participation (e.g., homework completion and inclass effort) (20%). For spoken tasks, presentations were either graded by the
instructor in real time, or, where this was not practicable, were video-recorded
and graded at a later time. For both written and spoken assignments, students
112

Innovations in EAP, OnCUE Journal, 11(2), pages 108-115

were provided with clear rubrics in advance that showed how the instructor
would be grading them. Rubrics focused on specific skills taught and emphasizedin preparatory activities (e.g., written assignments were expected to follow the
APA6 format, have a clear structure, and be well researched), as well as on theoriginality and critical thinking skills showed by students. Accurate use of specificlanguage forms was not a course objective and thus was not specifically assessed,
but students were taught several editing strategies and were expected to produce
work that was clear and easy to understand.

Evaluating the Courses

Course designers met regularly throughout the first two quarters to discuss
the progress of the course design and materials. Considerations included
class atmosphere, assignment deadlines, student motivation, technical issues,
necessary revisions or additions to the textbook, grading procedures, student
and teacher workload, and learner development. These reflective conversations
were highly valuable in identifying areas that needed to be improved and inenabling instructors to use the materials more effectively. Overall, the course
designers found that the syllabus was easy to implement and the project-based
approach showed benefits for student motivation and learning. As the course
unfolded, teachers observed that student discussions, which initially tended to
be short and somewhat stilted, grew longer and livelier, with less silence and moreanimation displayed by most of the students. This suggested that students weremore comfortable and confident speaking English with each other. In written
self-evaluations and reflective discussions completed after each of the four
projects in the first two quarters, the majority of students said that they enjoyedthe collaborative projects, and five students (of 57 who completed written selfevaluations) specifically commented that they felt a real sense of accomplishment
in successfully completing tasks that had initially seemed quite daunting to them.

Conclusion

This paper has provided a brief overview and discussion of the creation andimplementation of a series of university academic English courses. The authors
113

Cripps, Sakamoto, & Toland

took a project-based approach and created their own course materials. Initial
responses to the first two courses have been positive, and teachers have observed
students growing in confidence and displaying improvement in academic, criticalthinking, and communication skills. At the culmination of the (one-year) seriesof courses, students will be asked to complete quantitative surveys to indicate
how they perceive their own development in relation to the course goals and toprovide further feedback related to the approach and teaching materials used inAcademic English A. The researchers hope to be able to use this information torefine and develop materials for use in the new academic year. There is also a needto investigate the degree to which learners are able to implement skills gained inthese courses in the later stages of their studies (study abroad, writing theses, etc.)
for which the Academic English A courses seek to prepare them.

References

BALEAP. (2008, August). Competency framework for teachers of English
for Academic Purposes. British Association of Lecturers in English for
Academic Purposes. Retrieved from https://www.baleap.org/wp-content/
uploads/2016/04/teap-competency-framework.pdf
Beckett, G. H., & Slater, T. (2005). The project framework: A tool for language,
content, and skills integration. ELT Journal, 59(2), 108-116.
Cripps, A. C. (2014). “Muri, muri, muri!”: Reflections on a presentation skills
course. Journal of the Nanzan Academic Society, 95, 1-14.
Fushino, K. (2011). Students’ reactions to a group project in a university
English-as-a-foreign-language class for cultural understanding. Intercultural
Education, 22(4), 301-316. doi: 10.1080/14675986.2011.617423
Hadfield, J. (2014). Material writing principles and processes: What can welearn for teacher development? The European Journal of Applied Linguistics
and TEFL, 3(2), 71-89 [Kindle version]. Retrieved from Amazon.com.
Hedge, T. (1993). Key concepts in ELT. ELT Journal, 47(3), 275-277.
Hung, C. M., Hwang, G. J., & Huang, I. (2012). A project-based digitalstorytelling approach for improving students’ learning motivation,
problem-solving competence and learning achievement. Educational
114

Innovations in EAP, OnCUE Journal, 11(2), pages 108-115

Technology & Society, 15(4), 368-379.
Hyland, K., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (2002). EAP: Issues and directions. Journal of
English for Academic Purposes, 1(1), 1-12.
Karimkhanlui, G. (2007). EAP and communicative use of language. English forSpecific Purposes World, 6(2). Retrieved from http://www.esp-world.info/
Articles_15/EAP.htm
Kettanun, C. (2015). Project-based learning and its validity in a Thai EFLclassroom. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 567-573. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.094
Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. New York,
NY: Routledge.

Author bios

Dr. Tony Cripps is a Professor of English at Nanzan University. His researchinterests include CBT, ESP, material design, MOOCs, pedagogical innovation andteacher training. He is currently working on a major research project funded by JSPS
(Kaken B) that aims to provide pedagogical support for Japanese teachers of English.
cripps@nanzan-u.ac.jp
Fern Sakamoto is an Assistant Professor at Nanzan University where she teaches
in the Department of British and American Studies. Her research interests include
global issues in language education, intercultural communicative competence, andmaterial design with a focus on learner autonomy. fern@nanzan-u.ac.jp
Sean H. Toland is currently an Assistant Professor at Nanzan University. His
research interests include technology-enhanced learning, materials development andcritical theory. He is a PhD candidate at Lancaster University in the UK, studying
e-research and technology-enhanced learning. stoland@nanzan-u.ac.jp
Received: September 30, 2017
Accepted: November 10, 2018115