1. Using QQ to supplement an EAP
task: the challenges and
affordances in China
Dr Nicole Keng
Lecturer in Academic English
Coventry University
Nicole.Keng@coventry.ac.uk

2. English for Academic Purposes
(EAP)
• EAP is usually defined as teaching English with the aim of
assisting learners’ study or research in that language (e.g.
Flowerdew and Peacock, 2001: 8).
• Academic needs:
- Writing in academic style
- Referencing
- Collaborating in projects
- Problem-solving and critical thinking skills

3. EAP in China
• General impression
• Weaker students
- EAP just too hard for students with limited English proficiency.
- Not ready for discipline-specific tasks
- “general English” first
(Hyland, 2006: 10)

4. Task-based learning (TBL)
Willis (1996)
Framework

5. TBLT and CALL
• Language learning is a process. (Ellis, 2003)
• Learning language while using it by performing the tasks that
are relevant to learning needs. (Van den Branden, 2015)
• To make CALL successful: completely integrate it into
education and everyday life. (Bax, 2003)
• Much of CALL research has been done in China. (Xu, 2009;
Zhang et al., 2009; Liu, 2010; Dai, 2011)
• How the different affordances of modern technology can be
used?
• Which attributes of technology are effective for language
development?

6. Engagement with technology
in urban China
• China’s online users: 618 million.
• Almost three quarters of Chinese internet users access through
their smartphones.
• Face-to-face giving way to mobile communication
(China Internet Network Information Centre, 2015)

7. Engagement with technology
in classrooms in China
• Environmental issues:
- Not equipped with classroom Internet access or computers
• Students are not used to using email communication
• VLEs such as Moodle or Classjump proved unpopular

8. Popular IM tools in China

9. The current study: CALL and
EAP
• To integrate a local alternative (QQ) to a VLE
• To give an example of an EAP task
• To explore how the use of QQ can supplement EAP tasks

10. Research setting
• The context :
- A 2+1 partnership programme between a UK University and a
Chinese college
- No internet access in classrooms
- Fixed furniture
- Large class teaching
- Not ideal for CLT

11. Participants
• 115 Students:
- Failed Chinese college entrance exam
• Low
- motivation
- academic achievement
- English proficiency level
- (IELTS 4.0 - 5.0 / CEFR B1/ low-intermediate level)
• Reluctant to engage in face-to-face conversation in English

12. Research design – Phase 1
• Group project task
- Each group proposes a new business
- Each group member finds ONE similar business in overseas
market
- Use QQ to discuss example which can work in China market
- Each group designs a survey questionnaire
- Send out questionnaire on QQ
- Each group member writes a compare and contrast essay
- Each group makes a poster presentation
- Each group delivers a business pitch

13. Research design – Phase 2
• Focus group interviews
- 115 students
- 23 focus group interviews

14. Results – Phase 1 project result
• Record of QQ discussion
• Questionnaire survey
• Survey results analysis
• Poster presentation
• Business pitch

15. Phase 1 – QQ discussion

16. Phase 1 – QQ discussion

17. Phase 1 – QQ discussion

18. Phase 1 – Questionnaire result

19. Phase 1 – Poster Presentation

20. Results – Phase 2 Focus Group
• Positive feedback on the task
• Positive feedback on working in groups
• “The project is challenging. I have never had to do something
like this. But it’s very fun because I feel that I’ve learned a lot
and I’ve enjoyed the whole process, more than just learning
English.” (Focus group interview 1)
• “I didn’t like working in groups because I always ended up
being the one doing all the works. But this time is different. It’s
easier for everyone to share ideas on QQ than by face-to-
face….. I feel that we shared our workload more equally.”
(Focus group interview 3)

21. Results – Phase 2 Focus Group
• Advantages of using QQ in group discussion
1.Easy to make group members engaged
2.Easier to meet up for discussion virtually than physically after
class time
• Difficulties or challenges of using QQ
1.Some students prefer discussing face-to-face
2.Some students use WeChat instead because of its multiple
function.

22. Summary of the findings
• Learner-centredness: the ownership of the task
• The possibility of planning and monitoring their own learning
• Integrated skills and language
• More student engagement by integrating a locally relevant
alternative in life
• Learning motivation and student learning experience

23. Q&A
Dr Nicole Keng
https://www.facebook.com/ILoveEnglishTeaching
Nicole.Keng@coventry.ac.uk

24. References
• Bax, S. (2003). CALL – past, present and future. System, 31(1): 13-28.
• Dai, J. (2011). Study on the construction and application of QQ-based interactive after-class
translation teaching model. Computer-Assisted Foreign Language Education in China, 2:
61-66.
• Ellis, R, (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
• Flowerdew, J. and Peacock, M. (2001). “Issues in EAP: A preliminary perspective” in J.
Flowerdew and M. Peacock (eds) Research Perspectives on English for Academic Purposes
(pp.8-24), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Gu, Y., Hall, C. and Hall, E. (2006). Using the Computer in ELT: Technology, Theory and
practice. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
• Hyland, K. (2006). English for Academic Purposes: An advanced resource book. London:
Routledge.
• Liu, B. (2010). Application of English writing training mode based on QQ network platform
in vocational school. Education and Teaching Research, 24(4): 102-104.
• Van den Branden (2015) “Task-based language teaching and learning” in Robinson, R. (ed)
The Routledge Encyclopedia of Second Language Acquisition. p.629-632.
• Willis, J.R. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Harlow: Longman.
• Xu, J. (2009). The Communication based on QQ between teachers and students in colleges
and universities. Education and Teaching Research, 23(4): 13-16.
• Zhang, H., Li, R., & Li, M. (2009). Social network analysis of QQ virtual learning community.
Modern Educational Technology, 19(2): 80-83.