Second Language Teacher Education in Response to Local Needs: Preservice Teachers of English Learning to Teach Diverse Learners in Communities

Second Language Teacher Education in Response to Local Needs: PreserviceTeachers of English Learning to Teach Diverse Learners in Communities CHINH DUC NGUYEN University of Danang Danang

Second Language Teacher Education in Response to Local Needs: Preservice

Teachers of English Learning to Teach Diverse Learners in Communities

CHINH DUC NGUYEN

University of Danang

Danang, Vietnam

TU CAM THI DANG

Hue University of Foreign Languages

Hue, Vietnam

Second language teacher education (SLTE) has changed its focusfrom cognitive to sociocultural perspectives By considering locatedSLTE and community learning, this qualitative study was conducted

to explore how preservice teachers of English as a foreign languagelearned to teach in response to learning needs in a Vietnamese city.Data sources for the study were written assignments produced by pre-service teachers and in-depth interviews with them Through theirengagement in the local community, the preservice teachers identi-fied nine groups of adult learners who were not able to gain access

to English learning in the formal schooling system Those learnerssought to learn English not only to meet their personal and profes-sional needs but also to contribute to socioeconomic development ofthe local community Based on the findings regarding the local learn-ers’ needs and characteristics, the preservice teachers developed ped-agogical practices appropriate to each specific group of learners andsuggested that university-based SLTE programmes should embracediverse learners and community-based teacher learning The studysubstantiates the concept of located SLTE and offers some implica-tions for SLTE in response to local needs

doi: 10.1002/tesq.551

In line with the sociocultural turn in education in general, secondlanguage teacher education (SLTE) has undergone a marked trans-formation (Burns & Richards, 2009) For decades, teachers were sim-ply viewed as technicians who were supposed to acquire knowledge in

TESOL QUARTERLY Vol 0, No , 0000

404

training courses (Johnson, 2009a; C D Nguyen 2017b) However,

tea-cher learning is, from a sociocultural perspective, inclined towards

social practice, which is simply understood as “a dynamic social activity

that is situated in physical and social contexts, and distributed across

persons, tools, and activities” (Johnson, 2006, p 237) Both research

and practice in teacher education have been marked by a number of

transformative approaches to teacher learning, such as identity

con-struction, reflective practice, and collaborative teaching

Community-based teaching learning, which refers to learning to teach by

partici-pating in communities, has been recognised as contributing to the

transformation of the field (Farnsworth, 2010) Although increasingly

integrated into teacher education for other disciplines,

community-based teacher learning has had limited impact on SLTE (Sharkey,

2012) Against this backdrop, more research is needed to explore in

what ways teachers of a second language (L2) develop their knowledge

and practice of teaching by being engaged in communities

Together with transformations in practice, SLTE today tends to

advocate a locally responsive curriculum, which supports teachers’

development of knowledge and pedagogy appropriate to local contexts

(Hawkins, 2011; Sharkey, 2012) Educating L2 teachers in this way is

known as located SLTE, whose core idea is to prepare L2 teachers to

teach in ways that are relevant to a local context on the basis of a

sys-tem of locally responsive practices (Johnson, 2009a) In this study, we

aimed to study located SLTE in the context of Vietnam by selecting a

city in Vietnam (with the pseudonym Central City) Preservice teachers

of English as a foreign language (EFL) in this city and throughout the

country undergo training in universities where they are prepared to

teach learners in formal schools in accordance with the national

cur-riculum and prescribed textbooks Though educated in this way, very

few can find a teaching post in the government-run schooling system

because the quota of teachers is limited (Nha, 2017) As a result, a

large number of teacher graduates who still wish to pursue a teaching

career tend to teach learners outside the formal schooling system,

especially adults who need English for practical and professional

pur-poses According to Bui and Nguyen (2016), there has been increasing

demand for English from various social and professional groups

throughout Vietnam This reality has implications for SLTE in

Viet-nam today More specifically, preparing future teachers to teach in

communities as well as in schools is considered a practical solution

and an aim of located SLTE

This study was conducted to explore how preservice teaching

Eng-lish to speakers of other languages (TESOL) candidates learned to

teach adult learners through their field trips to communities More

specifically, it aimed to examine (1) preservice teachers’ exploration

of the English learning needs in local communities and (2) the gogical practices in response to local needs that preservice teachersgained from community-based teacher learning The study also aimed

peda-to highlight (3) how educapeda-tors/teacher trainers used preservice ers’ community-based learning experiences for innovating university-based SLTE

teach-LITERATURE REVIEW

Community-Based Teacher Learning

A community-based approach to teacher education, whereby cher learning is situated in the interactions that take place outside theformal school contexts” (Farnsworth, 2010, p 1481), has beenemployed in a large number of teacher preparation programmes (Har-fitt, 2018; C D Nguyen & Zeichner, 2019; Payne & Zeichner, 2017;Sharkey, Clavijo Olarte, & Ram
ırez, 2016) The widespread implemen-tation of this approach indicates the innovation and progress of thefield in shifting teacher learning to sociocultural perspectives The pri-mary reason for advocating this approach is the persistent disconnec-tion between university coursework and school practice (Cochran-Smith et al., 2016) By participating in local communities, teachershave a chance to work with learners as well as other involved parties,such as school leaders, teachers, and students’ parents (Payne & Zeich-ner, 2017; Sharkey et al., 2016) In addition to practical knowledge,experiences gained from community fieldwork assist teachers in con-textualising students’ lives as part of the dynamic of the greater com-munity (Hallman & Burdick, 2015; Zeichner, Bowman, Guillen, &Napolitan, 2016) Therefore, community teachers are able to under-stand the culture of communities and learners’ identities, therebydeveloping pedagogical practices appropriate to the learners and local-ities (Murrell, 2001)

“tea-The benefits of learning to teach in boundary zones outside ofschool is succinctly expressed as follows: “They [preservice teachers]can encounter and engage with different perspectives and forms ofknowledge rather than those they typically accessed in schools and uni-versity-based spaces” (Zeichner, Payne, & Brayko, 2015, p 7) For themission of transforming teacher education, Payne and Zeichner(2017) suggested an epistemological shift in teacher educationwhereby community knowledge is combined with the academic knowl-edge provided in institutions of teacher education That is, preserviceteachers learn knowledge and skills from three sources: universityclassrooms, schools, and the community setting Drawing on the

benefits of engagement in community-based learning to preservice

teachers, Zeichner et al (2015) put forward the concept of hybrid

spaces for teacher education at higher education institutions, where

“academic, school-based, and community-based knowledge come

together in less hierarchical and haphazard ways to support teacher

learning” (p 3)

Despite the aforementioned benefits, community-based teacher

learning has received scant attention from both research and practice

in SLTE (Sharkey, 2012) Because alternative learning experiences are

increasingly encouraged in SLTE, we need more research on

alterna-tive models such as community-based learning, which may in turn

inform the practice of SLTE today (Wright, 2010) In addition to

lim-ited influence of community-based learning on SLTE, this approach

has been implemented mainly in Western countries, especially the

United States (Mills & Ballantyne, 2016) For the agenda of

transfor-mation in teacher education, community-based teacher learning has

been employed in other countries, such as Colombia (Sharkey, 2012;

Sharkey et al., 2016) and Hong Kong (Harfitt, 2018) In Vietnam,

tea-cher education is still grounded in transmission models whereby

teach-ers learn through the provision of knowledge from lecturteach-ers (C D

Nguyen, 2017b) Therefore, community-based learning is welcomed as

innovation in teacher preparation for L2 and other fields in Vietnam

(Hamano, 2008; C D Nguyen & Zeichner, 2019; L Nguyen, 2014)

This research study was therefore conducted to engage preservice

TESOL candidates in this innovative practice of teacher learning

Located Second Language Teacher Education

Teacher learning today is not confined merely to the locus of

“in-structed teacher-training environments” but expanded to “the wider

influences of socialization evident in individual development”

(Free-man, 2009, p 15) On this premise of transformation, research on

SLTE places a great weight on the local contexts in which teachers

and learners are situated Johnson (2009a) refers to this trend or this

approach to teacher learning as located second language teacher education:

“Both the content and activities of L2 teacher education must take

into account the social, political, economic, and cultural histories that

are ‘located’ in the contexts where L2 teachers learn and teach” (p

114)

For the importance of local contexts that shape teacher education

and eventually students’ learning, Hawkins (2011) argues that the

ped-agogy and curriculum of SLTE “must be responsive to local contexts

and contingencies” (p 3) Basically, the concept of located SLTE is

grounded in sociocultural or situated perspectives on teacher learningbecause teachers and teaching are socially, historically, culturally, andpolitically situated within a local–global or micro–macro system (Haw-kins, 2011; Johnson, 2009a, 2009b; C D Nguyen, 2017a).

From the perspective of located SLTE, a large body of research hasexplored teacher learning in local contexts A salient theme concernshow L2 teachers constructed and enacted their identities in response tothe social, cultural, and educational conditions of local contexts (Duff &Uchida, 1997; C D Nguyen, 2017b; Sayer, 2012; Simon-Maeda, 2004)

In the Vietnamese EFL context, for instance, teachers’ construction ofidentity specific to local reality was also foregrounded (Dang, 2013; C D.Nguyen, 2016) In addition to focusing on L2 teachers’ identities,research studies have highlighted how local teachers developed theirpedagogies appropriate to the schooling system or locally educationaldiscourses More specifically, EFL teachers in a variety of localities, espe-cially in Asia, showed their resistance to the Western import of teachingmethods or curriculum innovation imposed by policymakers (Hayes,2009; Hu, 2005; Liu & Xu, 2011; Tsui, 2007; Xu & Connelly, 2009) Fromtheir perspective, the imported pedagogies and curriculums were inap-propriate for both themselves as teachers and their students Locallyappropriate SLTE in this sense, as pointed out by Johnson (2009a, p.114), is not to force L2 teachers to conform to “hegemonic practices”imposed on them, but to give them spaces in which they create pedagog-ical values in accordance with local discourses To date, the notion oflocated SLTE has been embedded in the umbrella concept of a sociocul-tural perspective on SLTE The substantiation or elaboration of the con-cept mainly drew on the research literature that has foregroundedteachers’ resistance to pedagogical practices or reform imposed on themand their struggles for what is deemed locally appropriate (Kumaravadi-velu, 2006) Against this backdrop, located SLTE necessitates a morecomprehensive and further examination from a different angle ratherthan locally responsive pedagogies only That is, besides preparingteachers to be able to construct teaching methods appropriate to learn-ers and their learning culture in a local context, located SLTE engagesteachers in broader issues such as preparing teachers who would be able

to teach L2 for community development From a socioeconomic point

of view, SLTE needs to prepare preservice teachers to work with a sity of learners and a diversity of needs This highlights the role of lan-guage education, especially English as a global language, insocioeconomic development in local contexts today (Bui & Nguyen,2016; Ricento, 2015; Seargeant & Erling, 2013; Walsh, 2006)

diver-With regard to social needs, the demand for English competencecomes from learners of various ages and with different purposes (Cum-mins & Davison, 2007) However, English language instruction still, to

some extent, falls short of catering to a diverse population of learners.

Our literature review indicates that SLTE, whether from a

sociocul-tural or located perspective, has not taken learner diversity into

account Taking a course book for TESOL methodologies as an

exam-ple, we can see that the concept of “language learners” introduced to

teachers is still general with a classification of learners into “young,”

“adolescent,” and “adult” (Harmer, 2007) Thus, SLTE should expand

to other learners rather than focus mostly on students at school This

is why Kumaravadivelu (2012) calls for reform in L2 teacher education

for a global society That is, learners as well as their needs and

motiva-tion should be addressed in relamotiva-tion to macro-level, socioeconomic,

and educational contexts as well as micro-level matters Located SLTE

in this sense moves towards preparing L2 teachers to be able to teach

a variety of students in response to socioeconomic development of a

specific locality This direction is also congruent with the current

reform of higher education, which seeks to foster graduates’

employa-bility in the labour market (L H N Tran, 2017) As explained by the

National Foreign Language Project 2020 (Decision No 1400, 2008),

Vietnamese citizens have to learn English to enhance national and

regional employability and be able to communicate effectively in

glo-bal job markets To achieve this goal, English language education

needs to attend to various learners and their needs Thus, the current

study aimed at engaging preservice teachers of TESOL in exploring

various needs for learning English in a Vietnamese city

On the premise of located SLTE and community-based learning,

the current study addresses the following research questions (RQs):

1 What were the English language learning needs in local

com-munities explored by TESOL preservice teachers?

2 Based on their community-based learning experiences, what

pedagogical practices did the preservice teachers construct in

response to local needs?

3 To what extent did the preservice teachers’ community-based

learning inform changes in the TESOL/SLTE curriculum at the

university?

STUDY METHODOLOGY

Participants and Context of the Study

This qualitative study was conducted at a university in Vietnam with

the pseudonym Central University (CU) CU has an established history

of educating foreign language teachers, especially TESOL candidates.The TESOL programme offered at CU takes a maximum of 4 years,the standard for the majority of undergraduate programmes in Viet-namese higher education The curriculum is prescribed by the Min-istry of Education and Training through the Curriculum Framework(see Appendix A) Upon graduation, teacher candidates (TCs) areawarded a bachelor’s degree and are able to teach English in seniorsecondary schools Similar to other institutions in Vietnam, the TESOLprogramme at Central University aims to prepare teachers for teachingEnglish in the system of formal schooling based on a national curricu-lum, notably prescribed textbooks In particular, preservice teachersare provided with knowledge and practice of teaching EFL to students

up to 18 years old Based on our experience as lecturers and ers in SLTE, the needs of learners beyond the ages for formal school-ing have not been addressed in any single course of the programmedespite a great demand for English from this population As such, weused our initiative to introduce located SLTE in Central University, atypical institution for TESOL/SLTE

research-The participants of this study were 51 TCs who started their graduate study of TESOL in 2013 and finished in 2017 The majority

under-of the participants chose TESOL because under-of their love under-of English andteaching, and the TESOL programme at CU was an initial preparationfor their teaching trajectory At the time of investigation, the partici-pants ranged from 21 to 23 years of age, and approximately half had

13 years of EFL learning experience and the rest 10 years LanguageTeaching Methodologies (LTMs) is one of the core courses of theTESOL curriculum and aims to provide candidates with theories andgeneral principles of L2 learning In particular, the course includesfour modules: Insights Into L2 Learners, Reasons for L2 Learning,What L2 Learners Should Learn, and Methods and Approaches to L2Teaching The TCs took this course in the first semester of their thirdyear A field trip to a local community was designed as midterm assess-ment of the course, which consisted of 40% of the total grade TheTCs’ participation in local communities through their field trips isregarded as community-based teacher learning, whereby teachers notonly develop knowledge and skills but also establish their relationship

in local communities (Payne & Zeichner, 2017)

Data Collection

Data sources for this study included written assignments produced

by preservice teachers and interviews with them The detail of ing each source is described below

collect-In the first week of the semester, the lecturer of the LTMs course,

who was the main investigator, briefed the TCs on the midterm

assess-ment Drawing on discussion between the lecturer and the TCs about

their career prospects upon graduation (the unlikelihood of gaining a

position in the school system and a trend for graduates to teach adult

learners in communities), the class reached a decision on what the

TCs would do for their field trips to communities

The TCs worked in groups of five or six for a field trip to investigate

the needs of learning English in local communities Both the lecturer

and the TCs agreed that priority would be given to adult learners,

whose needs cannot be met in the formal schooling system Because

the total number of TCs enrolled in the course was 51, nine groups

were formed (three groups with five members and six groups with six

members) All the groups were required to spend the first week

social-ising in local communities to gain an initial understanding of the

learners and their needs for English instruction In the second week,

the lecturer worked with all the groups to determine what category of

learners would be chosen by each group of TCs After discussion and

negotiation, the class reached a final decision: Each group of TCs

investigated a specific category of learners during the field trip (see

Table 1) To help readers easily refer to a specific group of TCs and

their chosen learners for the field trip, we used the letter G with a

number from 1 to 9, followed by the category of learners in brackets

For example, G1 [cyclo riders] refers to the group of TCs numbered 1

and cyclo riders as the category of chosen learners

Each group had 5 weeks for involvement in local communities and

3 weeks for reporting their field trip experiences in a written

assign-ment (report) as group work, within the limit of 4,000 words, to

address four guiding questions (see Table 2) With this design, TCs

applied the theories provided in each module to the practice of

teach-ing their chosen learners In addition, the designed field trip reported

through a written assignment was part of the course assessment,

thereby necessitating TCs’ engagement and socialisation with

commu-nity members As Bieler (2012) pointed out, written assignments give

TCs an opportunity to gain in-depth understanding of their teaching

practice The guiding questions for both the field trip and the written

assignment were developed from the four modules of LTMs (see

Table 2) These guiding questions were also used as a frame for data

analysis For example, drawing on theories provided in the first two

modules on L2 learners and their purposes of learning L2, each group

of TCs addressed the questions of who their chosen learners were and

why the chosen learners wanted to learn English In the written

assign-ment of each group, the sections addressing these two guiding

ques-tions provided the data in answer to RQ1 Similarly, modules 3 and 4

of LTMs were linked to guiding questions 3 and 4 for the field tripsand written assignments, which provided the data for RQ2 Once sub-mitted by all the groups, the assignments were graded by the lecturer

of LTMs, who was also the main investigator

Regarding interviews, a member of each group of TCs was invited for asemistructured interview shortly after graduation, 18 months after thefield trip, so that he or she was able to provide a comprehensive view onuniversity-based teacher education in relation to the field trip and job-seeking experiences The second researcher in this study conducted nineinterviews in total, one with a representative from each group of TCs.These representatives were selected based on their willingness The

Job details Age

Reasons for English learning

1 [Cyclo riders]males Men earning living by

transporting goods and passengers on traditional three- wheeled vehicles named cyclos

35 – 65

Communicating with international visitors/ passengers

2 [Hotel staff]mixed Chambermaids, porters,

concierges, waiters, and waitresses working at small hotels

26 – 35

Being promoted to a position in a better hotel

3 [Officers/

employees]mixed

Officers or employees having a full-time job in private or state- owned companies or

organisations

30 – 50

Socialising with international business partners

4 [Stay-at-home

learners]mixed

Local residents (fishermen, peasants, and shop owners) involved in homestay services

in the district, known as a holiday destination to international tourists

35–

50

Conducting simple transactions in English with international visitors

Communicating and selling local products to international visitors

Communicating in basic English while travelling abroad

8 [Workers in

factories]males

Labourers working in manufacturing factories owned

by foreign investors

20 – 40

Talking to foreign supervisors and understanding their instructions

9 [Street vendors]

females

Local residents, mainly women, selling local produce and souvenirs to international visitors on streets

30 – 50

Communicating and selling local products to international visitors on streets

interviews focused on highlighting what the TCs had learned during their

engagement in local communities as well as their suggestions for

trans-forming the TESOL teacher education programme at CU (see

Appendix B) This source of data helped to answer RQ3

Researchers’ Positionality

The researchers played an important role in this study As the main

investigator and the lecturer of the course LTMs, the first author

initi-ated engagement of the students in field trips to local communities as

TABLE 2

Structure of Data Collection and Analysis

Written assignments reporting TCs’ field trips

Module in LTMs Guiding questions

for field trips and written

assignments

Research question addressed

Themes selected for analysis

Knowledge base (Darling- Hammond &

Bransford, 2005) Insights Into L2

Learners

Who is in need of English in communities?What are their learning characteristics?

1 A diversity of

learners (nine categories)Beyond ages for formal schooling

Learners and learning in social contexts Reasons for L2

Should Learn

What do they need

to be taught (e.g., language skills, materials)?

2 Communication and

communicative skillsSyllabus/

materials designated

to learners’ needs

Curriculum and subject matter

Methods and

Approaches to L2

Teaching

What approaches and methods are appropriate to their needs?

2 Locally responsive

approaches to teaching

3 SLTE curriculum

inclusive of diverse learnersCommunity- based learning incorporated into university-based SLTE

Three domains combined

Note TC = teacher candidate; LTM = language teaching methodology; SLTE = second

lan-guage teacher education.

an innovative way of learning to teach This decision stemmed fromthe author’s perceived gaps between global and local practice of tea-cher education, that is, sociocultural learning or transformative models

as global trends of SLTE in contrast to traditional approaches in nam As the lecturer of LTMs, the first author positioned himself as

Viet-an insider in this study for the following reasons First, working withstudents in his institution was an advantage for his access to theresearch site Second, the first author is responsible for teaching LTMs

in every academic year Third, by teaching his students as participants

in this study, he was able to adapt the midterm assessment to the fieldwork and written assignment However, he also positioned himself as

an outsider during the field trip of each group of TCs in the sensethat they were involved in a community by themselves The first authoronly supervised the progress of each group by asking the leader toreport what they were doing To make his positionality more objective,the first author invited a colleague from another institution of foreignlanguage teacher education to participate in the study as the secondresearcher, who is the second author of this article and, more impor-tantly, an outsider to the research site Both researchers share a pas-sion for research and seeking innovations in SLTE

for-in social contexts, knowledge of teachfor-ing, and knowledge of lum and subject matter These three themes also fit well with the threeresearch questions of this study

curricu-By considering the guiding questions for the TCs’ field trips andwritten assignments, we read all the submitted assignments for codingand identifying themes As in Table 2, the guiding questions framedthe analysis of data from written assignments For example, questions

1 and 2 helped us select codes relevant to who needed to learn lish, what learning characteristics they had, and why they needed tolearn English By grouping the codes, we identified the themes a diver-sity of learners in communities, English learning for personal and occupational

Eng-purposes, and learning purposes in connection to local needs These themes

were presented as findings in answer to RQ1 Because data analysis

partly lent a theoretical base to the knowledge base of learning to

teach, the above-mentioned themes were related to the knowledge

domain of learners and learning contexts (Darling-Hammond &

Bransford, 2005) We continued the data analysis with guiding

ques-tions 3 and 4 designed for the TCs’ field trips and written assignments

The results yielded three themes—communication and communicative

skills, syllabus/materials tailored to local needs, and locally responsive

approaches to teaching—which answered RQ2

Regarding the interview data, we were both responsible for analysis

to ensure the validity of the inter-rating process Thematic analysis was

also used for this set of data On the ground of TCs’ community

expe-riences for transforming university-based teacher education as the

focus of each interview, we particularly examined the curriculum and

pedagogy of university-based TESOL teacher education that needed to

be changed on the basis of the TCs’ community-based learning

experi-ences The interview data indicate that changes in curriculum and

pedagogy of the TESOL programme were also the most frequent

sug-gestions made by the interviewees As a result, two themes were

identi-fied as the TCs’ suggestions for transforming their TESOL programme

at CU, which helped to address RQ3 To triangulate the data (i.e., the

suggestions the TCs provided in the interviews), we also examined the

current curriculum of the TESOL programme at Central University in

combination with our experience in SLTE In particular, we analysed

all the courses related to TESOL theories and practice to see how the

interviewees’ perspectives or ideas were innovative or different from

what was addressed in those courses In addition, we drew on our

10-year experience of educating TESOL teachers to see in what ways the

interviewees’ suggestions for innovating the TESOL programme were

different from the knowledge and belief of the previous generations

of preservice teachers Because one researcher was responsible for

writ-ing the findwrit-ings identified from each type of data, the draft version of

analysis was sent to the other for feedback It was also sent to three

TCs for member checking as in qualitative research

FINDINGS

Discovery of English Learning Needs in Local Communities

This section describes the findings of preservice teachers when they

explored the English learning needs of local communities as the first

step of their written group assignment

Types of learners A diversity of learners, all beyond ages for mal schooling and representing a wide range of social classes, emergedfrom our qualitative analysis of the TCs’ work As shown in Table 1,each group of TCs identified a specific category of learners, making atotal of nine, who represented a wide range of social classes and pro-fessional backgrounds More specifically, learners as travellers to for-eign countries were representative of an upper class As explained inthe assignment of G7, “those learners were mainly businesspeople orhigh-ranking government officials who had a lot of money.” Othergroups of learners (i.e., officers/employees and officers in local gov-ernment) were considered representatives of a middle class with well-educated and professional backgrounds Stay-at-home learners werealso grouped into a middle class in terms of their income and finan-cial status, but their educational background was much lower than that

for-of for-officers Learners who were hotel staff, shop assistants, and factoryworkers were also described as lower middle classes More significantwere the categories of learners, including cyclo riders and street ven-dors, whose job was described as “unskilled,” “low-income,” and “unsta-ble” (G1 [cyclo riders] assignment) In terms of socioeconomic status

in the broader society, these two groups are seen as underprivilegedgroups because of their limited access to education and job opportuni-ties

Data gathered from the nine written assignments indicate that allthe learners were of post–school age Their background of Englishlearning varied among the categories, from none (some cyclo ridersand street vendors) to approximately 9 years (7 years at secondary edu-cation and 2 years at universities for some officers) However, most ofthe learners had forgotten what they had been taught, and their Eng-lish language proficiency at the time of the field trips was nearly at thesame beginner level

In their written assignment, each group of TCs identified istics of the category of chosen learners As mentioned in each assign-ment, learners could not study as quickly and effectively as students atsecondary schools or universities Time constraints were also seen asone of the salient challenges for all learners:

character-They have to work hard all day in factories When going home, theyhave to be with their family Therefore, it is difficult for them toarrange a fixed time for their English class Even when a class is set upfor them, they cannot attend regularly

(G8 [factory workers] assignment)According to the TCs of G3 [officers], learners tended to have nega-tive attitudes when reflecting on their prior experience of English

learning at schools or universities Presented in their assignment was

an officer sharing his past experience of failure and attempts to seek

new practice:

English teaching during my school time was not as good as today

because we just learned vocabulary and grammar That’s why we’re not

good at communication today Now I really want to learn English in an

effective way

(G3 [officers] assignment)Together with the characteristics regarded as challenges to learning,

each group of TCs explored a variety of advantages for learning

Eng-lish that their chosen learners had Our qualitative data analysis of the

nine assignments shows that the nine groups were attributed with the

following characteristics: rich life experience that they bring to each lesson

(G5 [officers in local government]), sense of discipline and responsibility

(G8 [workers in factories]), high motivation (G2 [hotel staff]), and

com-mitment to learning (G6 [shop assistants]) These positive characteristics,

according to each group of TCs, helped both the learners and their

teachers achieve the learning objectives

Reasons for learning English Learners sought to learn English for

personal and occupational purposes in relation to local needs As

pre-sented in the assignments of each group of TCs, the learners’

motiva-tion for learning English was to meet their job requirements and

personal needs Apart from travellers, the other eight groups of

learn-ers perceived English competence as a vehicle for their professional

promotion and advancement Through each assignment, the idea of

promotion was specific to each group of learners’ jobs For example,

three groups of TCs (i.e., G1 [cyclo riders], G6 [shop assistants], and

G9 [street vendors]) noted that the ability to communicate with

inter-national visitors in basic English was more likely to bring about a

dif-ference in the learners’ job, namely a daily income boost:

If cyclo riders know English, they can pick up more tourists and

visi-tors, talking to them Therefore, they can increase the income and the

standard of living of their family

(G1 assignment)This motive for learning English was the same for hotel staff and

stay-at-home learners According to three groups of TCs (i.e., G3

[offi-cers], G5 [officers in local government], and G8 [workers in

facto-ries]), these professionals’ motivation for learning also involved a

desire for brighter job prospects In addition to financial incentives

(pay rise), the learning purposes included the need to upgrade sional knowledge and stay informed of global trends:

profes-They [officers] want to learn English to access modern knowledge intheir fields Many officers said that with a good level of English, theycould exchange mails with their foreign partners, attend some interna-tional seminars, or simply read business news from foreign sources

(G3 assignment)The TCs of G7 [travellers to foreign countries] found a greatdemand for learning English in local communities for nonprofessionalpurposes For example, learners who were preparing for overseas tripsdecided to invest in English as they saw the benefits of English to theirjourneys:

A man aged 65 said that many of his friends encountered difficultiessuch as culture shock and miscommunication while travelling overseas.Therefore they looked for an English class to learn basic conversationsfor survival

(G7 assignment)Learning English for nonoccupational purposes was also found inother groups of learners whose primary objective was a change or pro-motion in their work As stated in the assignments of G3 [officers]and G5 [officers in local government], these learners, as parents,sought to invest in learning English for involvement in their children’sEnglish learning:

Parents now pay more attention to their children’s English education,

so they have to make themselves an example for their children to low Besides, parents want to be capable of English to guide their chil-dren how to learn

fol-(G3 assignment)Beyond professional and personal purposes, the TCs discovered ahigh demand for English learning in response to the socioeconomicdevelopment of Central City This reflects the relation between lan-guage education and socioeconomic development (Bamgbose, 2014;Walsh, 2006) In particular, the proliferation of tourism and hospital-ity, the spearhead economic sector of Central City, necessitates Englishcompetence Therefore, from the perspective of prospective teachers,the cohort of TCs contended that residents from a variety of socioeco-nomic backgrounds should be engaged in such an important mission

In the following extracts, two groups of TCs (i.e., G1 [cyclo riders]and G9 [street vendors]) explained in what ways their learners couldmake a contribution to local development if they knew English: