1. Building transition into course design
Mike Groves
Birmingham International Academy
University of Birmingham

2. Context How to design transition into a programme
Assumption that transition is not an event, it’s a process
Transition is not monolithic or lockstep
Or easy
This is not going to cover very familiar ground, such as autonomy vs direction, EGAP vs ESAP, discourse vs language etc

3. Outline
Some ideas of how transition can be embedded into (mostly EAP) foundation modules
Cultural adaptation
Textual re-orientation
Tutorial definition
Assessment process
Group discussion
Plenary discussion

4. What is “Transition”… In this context Language Knowledge Attributes
Self awareness

5. Cultural Adaptation
Instead of allowing students the space to adapt independently, giving them the language to discuss and understand the process of acculturation.
Laissez Faire
Guided
Student paced
Student directed
Equips students with understanding
Empowers students to communicate
Can “piggy back” off established schemes- eg “Pass” Birmingham
Vulnerability to stereotypes
Lack of skills
Fossilisation
Needs knowledgeable teachers
Runs the risk of box ticking
Students may be unwilling to discuss, even with peers.

6. Textual re-orientation
Instead of using short, lesson length texts written for EAP books,
the course is based around longer, multi-lesson texts, leading up to formative or summative assessment
Short “Pseudo academic” texts
Long “Pseudo academic” texts
Easy to find
Easy to manage in discreet chunks
Self-contained.
Less representative of “standard UG practice”
Less authentic (?)
Lack of autonomy
Can be focussed on students’ needs
Opens up classroom time
More representative of “standard UG practice”
Allows themes to build to allow co- development of cognitive and linguistic skills
Requires students to read at home
Harder to find/create

7. Tutorials vs Reflection
Instead of 1 free 20 minutes of 1-1s every few weeks, the students have to complete a task around a
personal attribute and how they can develop it
Blank
Structured
Allows students to lead discussions
Allows students to raise problems
Gives ownership of space to teacher/student
Move beyond numbers
Promotes reflective attitude
Encourages Dweck’s growth mindset
Allows planned development of personal attributes
Can be scattergun
Can get bogged down
Risks empty conversations
Might get in the way of genuine tutorial needs
Risks becoming a box ticking exercise
Students need to prepare
Some tutor resistance

8. Process vs Product Submissions
Students submit their essays in stages, for feedback and improvement. This is graded
(This is an idea I learned from the Nottingham Business Foundation)
Single
Multiple
More realistic
Less marking
Easier to QA
Allows deeper tutor guidance
Allows students to get it wrong “in the shallow end”
Confidence building
Can maybe discourage cheating
Encourages students to engage in the process
Can leave students vulnerable to accusation of Plagiarism
Can neglect study skills
“The IELTS effect”
Time consuming
Depends on student engagement
Defined assessment tasks might overtake individuality

9. Discussion
Try to work in groups of three to four, from different institutions.
Discuss these from a real world and ideal world point of view.
Teaching cultural awareness
Using longer texts
Structuring tutorials
Process submissions
Then we can do some plenary feedback.

10. Thank you very much