Training the Gatekeeper: how an EAP pre-sessional programme at a UK university influences the emerging identities of its teachers.

Abstract

Research to date on EAP identities is far from extensive with little to no attention paid to pre-sessional teachers (those employed on short programmes of EAP study for students entering higher education in English medium HE institutions) and description of how their EAP identities emerge, lacking in sufficient depth. Although an important and informative basis to advance research on EAP teacher identity, Hadley’s (2015) analysis does not describe the problem in the context of pre-sessional teachers on short term programmes or provide a description of the more specific mechanisms by which the formation or transformation of identity might happen. Employing a Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) analysis, the study seeks to identify the underlying principle(s) for the basis to (what constitutes legitimate knowledge) and focus (what is selected for study on the programme) of EAP knowledge and how the principles of the pre-sessional programme and those of teachers may align. The pre-sessional programme is found to be influential in the professionals’ discursive rationalisations and justifications for what constitutes legitimate EAP knowledge. Practitioners on the programme appear to legitimise the bases and focus of knowledge described and framed by the programme course designers and managers. In legitimising such ideas and beliefs, teachers may re-shape their identities by aligning with the principles of the programme. Those who will not are likely to seek other opportunities outside the programme. Dominant identities seek to preserve their project and are more willing to concede their beliefs and re-orient their stances to do so. Emerging from this is the ‘Gatekeeper’; disposed to re-negotiate her stance in response to the direction of the programme. This implies that, far from being passive recipients of structural influence, teachers on the pre-sessional are active agents in the transformation of what EAP means in the local practice context. A further conclusion is that the programme may affect the future of the pre-sessional EAP practitioner and pre-sessional EAP itself, reducing what professional knowledge is appropriate to teaching roles and how their role, ever adopting new orientations and technologies, is transformed to the point of losing some of its essential modalities. One example of this might be the capacity to help students understand and utilise the often-nuanced structures, vocabularies, and usages of academic English. It is then argued that a restricted professional learning context may fail to provide the plurality and depth of meanings that can equip the teacher with the resources to adequately negotiate the complexities of Academic English. Limited meanings of what EAP is and its purpose in the local context may constrain the effectiveness of programmes and their teachers in providing a varied and responsive learning environment.