OPEN EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES FOR ONLINE LANGUAGE TEACHER TRAINING: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION

International Journal on Integrating Technology in Education (IJITE) Vol.11, No.3, September 2022
DOI :10.5121/ijite.2022.11301 1
OPEN EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES FOR ONLINE
LANGUAGE TEACHER TRAINING: CONCEPTUAL
FRAMEWORK AND PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION
Francesca Nicora, Oriana Bologna, Laura McLoughlin
Italian Studies, School of Languages, Literatures and Cultures,
University of Galway, Ireland
ABSTRACT
This paper discusses a conceptual framework for the design of Open Educational Resources (OERs) for
online language teacher training including an example of practical implementation. The authors identify in
the principles of micro- and macrolearning, cognitive load theory and Threshold Concepts (TCs), the key
elements that lead to the creation of effective OERs designed for the Lilac Project which aims to support
language teachers in managing online learning environments. Data from questionnaires and focus groups
were utilised to establish a set of TCs connected to online language teaching. These were then cross-
referenced with existing TCs, and utilised to create micro learning content that does not negatively impact
the cognitive load, but, at the same time, is positioned within a larger macro structure that allows for the
development of deeper knowledge and competences. The structure of Lilac OERs will be presented as a
practical example of how the potential of technologies to support learning can be embedded in online
contexts.
KEYWORDS
Open Educational Resources, Language Teachers’ Online Education, Threshold Concepts, Learning and
Cognitive Theories & Micro learning.
1. INTRODUCTION
Online teaching and learning have been a feature of education for nearly four decades now, ever
since the University of Toronto offered its first online course in 1984. It wasn’t however until the
arrival of the World Wide Web in the mid Nineties that online offerings really took off in both
academic and professional contexts.
Platforms, tools, apps and technology in general to facilitate delivery of online content have
multiplied over the years and training exists for course designers, creators, e-tutors and e-
moderators. Yet, the specific professionality involved in online teaching is not widely
acknowledged as recent events have shown: the emergency situation caused by the COVID-19
pandemic forced governments to move most teaching online and recurrent lockdowns often
meant on/off reliance on online classes. Anecdotal evidence however suggests that by and large
this has not worked well in all schools, as face-to-face courses were hastily adapted to the online
modality without the meticulous planning and the specialist training needed for creation and
delivery of successful distance education. Many research studies carried out across the world
reported that teachers were forced to teach online even without undergoing specific training. As a
result of this, teachers have been constantly feeling under pressure and have been struggling to
manage online contexts effectively as well as creating a pleasing and engaging learning
environment [1,2]. At the same time, students have been experiencing psychiatric disorders and

2
adverse mental health effects, such as feeling of isolation, depression, anxiety and stress over
home schooling [3, 4, 5]. In order to lead a more sustainable and efficient employment life and
build a healthier teachers-students, students-teachers as well as teachers-parents relationship,
many contributions have highlighted the importance of purposeful strategy building which aims
to address current issues such as the conflict between personal and working life balance which is
presumptuously making room in the historical era we are currently living in [6, 7]. However,
online and distance education continues to be perceived as a controversial topic.
In order to shed light on the benefits and advantages of online learning, the UNESCO Forum has
recently coined the concept of Open Educational Resource (OER) which refers to the openness
and provision of reusable digitalised resources for educational purposes which are released under
an open license and completely free of charge. This has led to the development of an enormous
number of public resources which can potentially be extremely relevant to both teachers and
learners in managing online learning environments. Nevertheless, finding appropriate OERs to be
used for a specific purpose still remains a challenging task. In fact, although OERs have proved
to be paramount and useful learning assets - especially in emergency situations like the COVID-
19 pandemic- there seems still to be a lack of adequate OERs for online language education.
The Lilac Project was not borne out of the extraordinary circumstances of 2020: it started towards
the end of 2019, following extensive needs analysis of learners and teachers involved in or
considering online courses. We feel however that it has become particularly topical in the light of
these developments. Lilac is specifically concerned with the peculiarities of teaching and learning
languages online and the skills and competences that both teachers and learners need in order to
make the most of their experience. In particular, Lilac OERs are conceived as web-based training
modules for independent study for both groups of stakeholders to help them reflect on, acquire or
enhance the necessary skills and appropriate online behaviour. Lilac modules (freely accessible
online https://www.lilac-project.com/) support personalised learning paths, with users free to
either select individual activities or follow an entire module sequentially. Learning
personalisation is in turn facilitated by a mixture of micro learning elements, which contribute to
the updating or enhancement of a given skill, and macro learning content, aimed at deepening
knowledge and providing new competences and skills on the basis of a number of identifiable
threshold concepts. The uniqueness of this project lies in devising and providing pioneering Open
Educational Resources (OERs), not yet available in the field of online language education, and
within a conceptual framework based on the principles of macro- and microlearning, cognitive
load theory and Threshold Concepts. One feature that makes the two training modules original is
also the bilingual version of the interactive OERs which were first created in English, then
translated into Gaelic. The two Lilac modules have been recently launched as an open course
entitled “LILAC: Online Language Learning and Teaching” promoted by the National Forum for
the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education and whose aim is to provide
teachers and learners with a digital badge for professional development supporting their lifelong
learning and career mobility (https://opencourses.ie/opencourse/lilac-online-language-learning-
and-teaching/). Furthermore, Lilac OERs have represented the conceptual and didactic
framework for a new teaching module, “Learning and Teaching Languages Online”, which was
designed and tailored for undergraduate students of the Bachelor of Arts in Global Languages
and ran online for the first time in Fall 2020 at the National University of Ireland, Galway[8].
In the paragraphs that follow we discuss the theoretical framework underpinning the design, the
structure and implementation of Lilac OERs with a focus on language teacher training module.

3
2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Open Educational Resources (OERs) are gaining support and recognition especially in higher
education. Numerous universities are now developing and providing their own. The term first
appeared in 2002 at a conference hosted by UNESCO during which the participants defined
OERs as: “The open provision of educational resources, enabled by information and
communication technologies, for consultation, use and adaptation by a community of users for
non-commercial purposes” [9]. Currently, the most widely-used definition of OERs explains that
they are “digitised materials offered freely and openly for educators, students and self-learners to
use and re-use for teaching, learning and research” [10]. An OER is commonly said to consist of
1. learning content - such as full courses, courseware, content modules, learning objects, etc.; 2.
tools, including software to enable users to develop, re-use and deliver learning content; 3.
implementation resources, which comprise intellectual property licenses to promote open
publishing of materials. Arguments in favour of promoting research in the field of online learning
and the development of OERs include the importance of sharing knowledge in line with
academic traditions, the reuse of resources, the reduction of costs, the potential of attracting new
students by providing more flexible materials and the need to look towards new and profitable
business models [11,12]. However, whilst OERs show great potential for future educational
practice, they are still in their infancy [13]. There are still critical and not entirely resolved issues
surrounding access, quality assurance and even cost that hinder the usage of OERs [12]. At the
same time, the complex relationship between design and pedagogical impact of an OER requires
further investigation, as it can affect motivation and, ultimately, the achievement of learners’
goals. Presentation, interactivity, collaborative value, time required for completion of the task are
all key issues that need to be addressed. Koohang & Harman [14] argued that
the educational value of an open digital content can contribute to its sustainability.
The value of OERs can be measured by how well they are designed and presented.
Instructional design (linked to learning theories) and presentation (associated with
user interface) are vital to sustainability of OERs.
Whilst online learning may have since moved on from a purely instructional design approach,
Koohang and Harman’s statement still ring true today. This paper analyses the pedagogical
principles, learning and cognitive theories that underpin the design of an OER at both
microlearning and macrolearning level, and discusses how the potential of technology can be
exploited to enhance and bring positive and substantial changes to teaching and learning. On the
basis of our experience with the Lilac Project, we argue that OERs can be designed in accordance
with the principles of microlearning and ubiquitous and adult learning theories (§2.1), can be
aligned with cognitive theories and module design practice (§2.2) and incorporate threshold
concepts (§2.3). The study therefore aims to position the complex and multi-faceted OER design
process within a solid theoretical and conceptual framework. The structure of Lilac OERs will
then be presented as a practical example of how the potential of technologies to support learning
can be embedded in online contexts (§5).
2.1. Microlearning, Ubiquitous and Adult Learning Contexts
The terms micro and macrolearning are often used in relation to online environments and OERs,
even though they also exist in other contexts. Microlearning refers to small chunks of content,
requiring limited time commitment and is based on the idea that short forms of learning,
including fine-grained, inter-connected and loosely-coupled learning activities with microcontent
[15, 16], can enable learners to access online resources quickly and construct knowledge in
specific moments and conditions of the every-day life. The term “macrolearning”, instead, refers

4
to larger formats of e-learning in terms of time and scope. In general, this concept refers to entire
multimedia learning modules or sizeable learning materials, such as text-based scripts or power
point slides, and the process of learning demands that several hours be spent on didactic
materials. The content is usually created by subject matter experts with authoring tools and
includes a wide range of topics presented through combined learning objects. Both micro and
macrolearning be conceptualised in many ways referring to different aspects, which in turn
include different areas, as shown in Table 1 [17].
Table 1. Microlearning and Macrolearning (adapted from Hug, 2005:3)
Linguistics Language
Learning
Learning
Contents
Course
Structure
Competency
Classification
Sociology
Micro
level
Single letters Vocables,
phrases,
sentences
Learning
objects,
micro
content
Learning
objects
Competencies
of learners and
teachers
Individualized
learning
Macro
level
Texts,
conversation,
linguistic
communication
Socio-
cultural
specifics,
complex
semantics
Topics,
subjects
Courses,
curricular
structures
Designing a
curriculum
Learning of
generations,
learning of
societies
Recently, an interesting study which examines the design of microlearning showed that adult
learners have contrasting opinions about the content areas perceived to be relevant for
macrolearning, conceived as longer timeframe, and microlearning [18]. Adult learners who need
to keep acquiring new information in order to keep up with fast societal changes, rely on
microlearning as an effective approach for obtaining that information, whereas macrolearning
was seen as more appropriate for deepening knowledge. In a nutshell, adults perceived that
domain-specific information can be delivered via macrolearning, while microlearning can be
more significant for domain-neutral areas. The authors suggest that institutions that intend to
develop microlearning should consider the dual structure of content delivery, so that learners who
want to keep up with topical content can study microcontents while those who prefer to deepen
their knowledge on more stabilised areas can attend e-learning courses. However, it should be
noted that whether microlearning content delivers merely information rather than knowledge is a
matter of debate and further research is needed on the best ways to help learners to progress from
the information consumption stage to the knowledge building stage [18].
The Lilac project is a web-based training programme accessible from different devices, with
OERs in the form of both larger modules and individual activities designed to assist online
language teachers/learners in their transition from face-to-face to online learning environments.
Lilac OERs therefore constitute a miscellaneous product made up of diverse forms of e-learning:
the online modules provide a richer macro-media format built around microcontent consisting of
self-contained small chunks of information and short interactive learning activities.
Microlearning offers a way of organising learning in small steps and with small units of content.
Whilst not designed to deliver complex concepts and foster deep knowledge, it does the
advantage of making learning seem less intimidating, faster and adaptable to one’s schedule. As
the most typical form of anytime-anywhere learning, it can be adapted to support individual
learning needs and is commonly defined as ubiquitous informal learning. At the time of writing,
the percentage of students who learn outside formal classroom settings is increasing and it is
interesting to note that it has now been known for some time that informal learning spaces
contribute to boost learners’ motivation [19], especially when learners perceive the learning goals

5
as achievable. Microlearning is therefore aimed at mobile modern users who need to update their
knowledge, skills or competences and identifies appropriate technologies and learning
environments to satisfy that need. Ubiquitous technologies and in particular mobile learning
environments are well positioned to support microlearning. For this reason, the Lilac project
makes its online modules accessible to a variety of devices and helps users to transfer knowledge
across different surroundings, as microlearning requires.
In modern societies characterised by new modes of technology-assisted learning, adults tend to
connect their educational experiences with their life tasks, and microlearning allows them to do
just that: the accessibility and flexibility of microcontent facilitates autonomous learning
whenever is required. The Adult Learning Theory focuses on the role of the adult learners and
how their own characteristics influence the process of learning in an informal context. [20]
identified four principles that characterise adult learners: 1. they are self-directed and wish to be
responsible for their own actions; 2. they have an extensive personal and professional experience,
and this is an essential component in the development of their identity; 3. they are ready to learn
and show a very high intrinsic motivation; 4. They have a specific goal and expect achievable
outcomes. In addition, adults need to be part of the development, implementation and evaluation
of the learning process [21] and need to see the value of their education and the information
provided [22]. In a nutshell, adult learners look to education to fill a gap in their lives and
microlearning, as an effective strategy, allows them to meet their immediate needs. However,
despite the growing interests in microlearning, research that can inform the design of
microlearning content still seems to be rather scarce, especially in the context of informal
learning for adult learners [18].
2.2. Microlearning, Cognitive Theories and Module Design
Course designers need to create e-learning materials that meet the specific needs of adult learners,
attract them and motivate them to learn. Successfully designed curses are those that identify
specific and attainable goals, and provide adult learners with opportunities to perform tasks,
including self-reflection tasks, that inspire them to attach the new information to personal
relevance, goal achievement, and problem-solving [22]. To this purpose, it seems advisable to
combine adult learning theory with a cognitive framework, in order to help adult learners to
retain and use the information provided.
Microcontent design is based on concepts derived from cognitive science. In particular, the
concept of cognitive load and how quickly the working memory may become overloaded is
extremely relevant for learning and teaching in online learning environments where the students’
attention span is greatly reduced. In these settings, if the limitations of the working memory are
overlooked, the learning process is very likely to slow down or even be completely jeopardised,
with negative consequences for learners’ affective filter. However, when information is
channelled via microcontent, cognitive load is decreased considerably, and information may be
retained and successfully exploited. Cognitive load theory applied to microlearning therefore
leads to the design of courses/tasks and activities where unnecessary information is removed and
only core information is presented, so that adult learners can more easily store the newly acquired
knowledge and utilise the long-term working memory efficiently [23] This ‘lighter’ approach is
especially appropriate when information is presented for the first time or complex knowledge and
skills need to be broken down to aid acquisition [24]. Delivering this content through lengthy
lectures or workshops tends to overwhelm the working memory, thus not guaranteeing the
learner’s retention of knowledge [22]. However, additional information and more in-depth
content can still be included in e-learning courses and made available to those who have more
time, or different motivation and goals. We suggest that a combination of micro and
macrocontent is ideally suited to the design of online courses, especially those courses that

6
support personalised learning paths. The mixture of the two elements allows designers to reach
different learner types and satisfy different needs.
The short chunks of learning do not imply simplified pedagogical strategies. On the contrary,
designing effective microlearning scenarios is a complex and challenging task, as it integrates
various didactical approaches [25]. Guidelines for the design of microcontent and microlearning
activities, therefore, should take into account both technical and pedagogical principles. From a
more technical point of view, the microlearning designer should consider:
(a) format: microcontent information needs to be easily scanned at a glance;
(b) focus: microcontent information needs to sum up in a sentence and offer the main message in
a text or in a stretch of discourse;
(c) autonomy: microcontents should be self-contained;
(d) structure: microcontents usually present the title, topic, author, date, tag and URL;
(e) addressability: microcontent should include a permalink to quickly access [26]
From a didactic perspective, the pedagogical strategies that facilitate microlearning include self-
directed learning, learner-driven learning, knowledge sharing, layered learning, and what we
might call cumulative and scalable learning, whereby the combination of several microlearning
sessions leads to the acquisition of more complex knowledge.
The Lilac project adheres to the technical guidelines and pedagogical strategies described above.
The implementation of the theoretical framework in an academic context however soon revealed
the complexity of the challenge. We see microlearning as a series of “light bulb moments” which
illuminate the learning path and personalise it by means of relevant, engaging contents and
activities that, while belonging to the field of informal learning, are nonetheless structured,
pedagogically sound and ready to be imported into more formal macrocontexts. This way,
microlearning sessions can represent short but meaningful moments of transition. According to
Hug, “when the focus is on learning tasks and processes, products or outcomes, it is important to
avoid definitions of microlearning that lack discriminating or differentiating power. If
microlearning is simply equated with informal learning, lifelong learning […], we end up in a
night in which all cows are black” [27].
The complex, albeit perhaps obvious challenge when designing online modules and developing
online OERs for adult learners is the need to marry their requirements, goals and expectations
with technical guidelines and the core principles of pertinent learning and cognitive theories. To
this purpose, we propose, possibly for the first time in the field on online language learning and
teaching, the application of a Threshold Concepts (TCs) framework (§2.3) to the design of
informal learning sessions for adult learners.
2.3. Threshold Concepts
There are times, during the learning process when learners seem ‘to get stuck’, and moving on to
the next level of knowledge feels like a mammoth task. This happens when learners reach a point
in their disciplinary developmental path where new and complex knowledge is needed in order to
continue along that path. They are on the threshold of a new level of understanding, but need to
be able to cross it in order to enter that new level. Threshold concepts (TCs) represent key
knowledge that, when integrated in the process of learning, has the potential to change a learner’s
world view and way of thinking irreversibly. So much so that
[a] threshold concept can be considered akin to a portal, opening up a new and
previously inaccessible way of thinking about something. It represents a

7
transformed way of understanding or interpreting or viewing something without
which the learner cannot progress [28]
TCs facilitate learners’ engagement in the discourse and practice of a given discipline and
therefore present specific features: they are
(a) transformative, because they involve a conceptual shift for learners;
(b) irreversible, once acquired, they will not be forgotten;
(c) integrative, because they enable learners to make a connection between new and previous
knowledge;
(d) bounded, and their boundaries are defined from a disciplinary point of view [28].
The TC paradigm has the potential to change teachers’ knowledge, beliefs and even identity
through a new model of knowledge. Since TCs focus on learners’ experience during a course,
their engagement and depth of learning, they are emerging as a useful tool for identifying key
components of student-centred curriculum design [29] and for pinpointing significant learning
thresholds for teachers in professional development contexts [30]. For that reason, the study of
TCs has become an interesting area of research that can lead to better curricular structure. As
[31] points out:
If we want to develop an understanding of the pedagogy of the subject we teach, we
have to start somewhere and making sense of what seems central and often difficult
to grasp by most learners, is a good place to begin our inquiry.
Online language teachers who work in secondary or higher education need to be aware not only
of the TCs with which their students are struggling but also of their own set of TCs, related to the
practice of online teaching. In addition, it would be advisable to flag TCs to learners, including
those encountered by teachers in order to facilitate learning and at the same time encourage a
critical self-reflection on the most challenging aspects of online teaching/learning languages. In
2017 Northcote and her team [30] analysed the challenges that a novice online teacher may face
and identified a set of TCs that can prove extremely useful for designers of professional
programmes. The list of TCs is presented on the project website in Table 2.
The researchers focused on TCs related to the teaching/learning of foreign languages in an online
setting and then showed how the articulation of these concepts can inform the development of
OERs. The LILAC project hinges upon language teachers’ and learners’ responses on how they
perceive online learning contexts, what concepts appear particularly challenging to them and
what areas of knowledge seem to be more troublesome than others. We suggest that making all
the hurdles explicit within the TCs framework facilitates a direct approach to them and their
resolution. These disturbances can be resolved using inquiry-based approaches [32] and critical
self-reflection [33].

8
Table 2. Threshold concepts about online learning at http://tcs4nots.avondale.edu.au/tcs/
The project on which this paper is based used a survey questionnaire to gather data from
academic staff as well as two rounds of focus-groups with the participation of Lilac team
members, language teachers, teaching assistants and students (from secondary and higher
education). The objective of both survey and focus groups was to identify a set of TCs related to
online language teaching and learning and then embed them in the design of the Lilac modules.
TCs identified following data analysis as well as more informal consultations with experts using
technologies applied to language learning are presented in the paragraph below (§4). The set of
possible TCs connected to online language teaching and learning lay the foundation of the design
of the OERs in the context of the Lilac project.
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1. Aim and Participants
In this article we discuss the Lilac Team’s replicable approach to OERs based on a solid
theoretical conceptualisation that takes into account learning and cognitive theories on one hand
and the threshold concepts framework on the other. In order to identify the set of threshold
concepts connected with online language teaching and learning, a survey questionnaire was
administered to the stakeholders and analysed. Additional data were collected during two rounds
of focus-group sessions, in which the Lilac research team discusses issues encountered in online
learning contexts with 10 language trainees, teachers and teaching assistants working in
secondary and tertiary education and 3 students enrolled in the Professional Master of Education
(PME) programme at the National University of Ireland, Galway (NUI, Galway).
3.2. Data Collection
An informative questionnaire made on Google Forms was purposefully designed for both
experienced language teachers and trainee teachers who have just embarked on their very first
teaching experience, and for language learners who are in transition towards the online learning
environment. A total of 38 questionnaires were collected and then scrutinised. As far as the
structure of the questionnaire is concerned, in a first background section (Section A) teachers
were asked to give information about the foreign language(s) they teach, the educational level
(primary, secondary or third) they are teaching in and whether they knew the difference between

9
blended and online learning. A second section (Section B) focused on estimating how many
teachers had already experienced teaching in online and/or blended learning environments; what
they thought the advantages and drawbacks of these two teaching contexts were and which
language skills among listening, speaking, writing and reading they found or considered most
difficult to teach. They also had to indicate which aspects of online teaching most appeal to them
but also rate, on a scale from least to most challenging, the following aspects: evaluation,
fostering interaction, time management, delivering live online classes, creating a community of
learners, devising online activities and/or other aspects they considered problematic. In addition,
they were requested to share their opinion on which skills language learners should develop in
order to transition smoothly from face-to-face to online learning. In the third and last section
(Section C), teachers were asked to self-assess their digital skills in terms of language teaching.
They first had to rate their ability to use different search methods to identify accurate and reliable
online information and/or educational resources in relation to the language(s) they teach.
Secondly, they were asked to indicate and rate their ability to produce digital learning content
through the use of multimedia presentations, audio & video recordings and online learning tools.
Finally, they had to indicate which social media they were using or would be willing to use for
language teaching and rate their ability to provide and coordinate clear and respectful online
interaction. All rating scales varied from a "1-basic” to a “5- excellent” ability. Data was also
gathered from language student in a similar manner, through questionnaires and focus group.
Student responses are not analysed here, but are occasionally referred to when a comparison with
teacher responses is deemed relevant.
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The responses we received involved mainly experienced teachers (81.8%) with some previous
but limited experience in online and blended learning, and mostly working in second (27.3%) and
third (72.7%) level education, so dealing with teenagers and mainly young adults. On the other
hand, learner responses came mostly from university students (93.3%) with just a small
percentage from secondary school students (6.7%).
Answers to the questionnaires showed a general consensus on the advantages of online teaching
and learning environments, mainly because of their wider flexibility and accessibility in terms of
space, time and audience, but also in relation to creativity and autonomy for both teachers and
students. However, results of the teachers’ questionnaire are in part consistent with those
described in [22] dealing with online teaching issues in general, and highlight numerous concerns
about online language teaching. Teachers, both novice and experienced, lamented the lack of
training specifically tailored to online language teaching, especially at a time when there is an
urgent need to move more and more classes online and explore new ways of building knowledge.
In particular, teachers identified the following aspects as the most challenging:
(a) managing online learning contexts efficiently;
(b) managing technology effectively: this includes understanding and resolving limitations
imposed by the technological tool to the teacher’s creativity (having a nice activity in mind only
to find that the technology at hand does not allow for its implementation) as well as acquiring
relevant research, organisational and time management skills to avoid spending a
disproportionate amount of time preparing online classes and activities.
(c) designing activities and modules that can help students to develop all four language skills,
with 47,6% of teachers reporting that they perceive speaking skills as the most difficult to teach
online;
(d) creating a real sense of community, understanding group dynamics and connecting with the
students (i.e. empathising with students’ feelings and perceptions); fostering interaction among

10
participants both synchronously and asynchronously; preventing isolation, thus ensuring social
presence and student engagement;
(e) assessing language learning online, giving feedback and monitoring students’ learning
process. It seems that teachers struggle to align online learning activities and assessments.
Regarding self-assessment of digital skills, answers by teachers show that they rank themselves
high (4 on a 5-point Likert scale) in relation to their ability to use different search methods to
identify accurate and reliable online information and/or educational resources. However, when it
comes to the ability to produce digital learning content, there are big gaps among respondent:
only 4.8% positioned themselves at very basic level, some at intermediate level (19%), a good
percentage (42.9%) at very good level and 33.3% at proficiency level. Answers also reveal that
most teachers make a very basic use of social media in teaching, with most responses indicating
“discussion boards” as their option. The final question referred to the ability to provide and
coordinate clear and respectful online interaction: just over a third of respondents (31.8%)
positioned themselves between 3 and 4 on a 5-point Likert scale. In line with these results,
discussions with the focus group highlighted the same issues encountered by examining the
teachers’ questionnaire, and concentrated particularly on the lack of adequate online resources
that could facilitate online language teaching and learning. Language teachers denounce a paucity
of easily readaptable or reusable online materials, something which makes lesson and course
planning even more of a time-consuming task. Table 3 summarises the issues identified by
language teachers and learners as possible elements of disturbance in online language learning
contexts.
Table 3. Language teachers’ and learners’ issues in an online learning environment.
LANGUAGE TEACHERS LANGUAGE LEARNERS
Manage online teaching and learning
contexts.
Manage online language learning.
Enforce netiquette. Comply with the netiquette.
Get lost in timing and organisation. Keep themselves highly motivated, engaged,
and organised. Lack of discipline.
Basic ability to produce digital learning content
and basic use of social media.
Basic abilities to search and identify accurate
and reliable online resources; basic abilities to
work online in an autonomous way or in a team.
Design and plan online lessons and courses. Develop the four language competences,
especially concerning speaking skills.
Feel frustrated for time demanding
concerning online materials preparation.
Feel frustrated due to the poor
connection/sounds that is particularly
annoying during synchronous classes.
Manage students’ groups dynamics. Manage groups dynamics between
classmates, and classmates and
teachers/instructors
Help students to develop the four basic language
competences, especially regarding speaking
skills.
Less focus on speaking skills, little attention to
the phonetic and prosodic aspect of language
learning.
Help students to interact with each other and
overcome the feeling of isolation.
Feel isolated and not enough supported.
Recognise a new role of the learner who has
more responsibilities.
Build a sense of a community online. Build a sense of community and interact
with each other’s. Lack of social interaction
among students.

11
Assess online: provide an immediate
feedback, monitor students’ learning
progress, prepare rubrics and tests.
Accept new forms of assessments such as
self-assessment and peer reviewing.
Reward students online. Monitor language learning progress.
Manage plagiarism issues. Electronically marked assessments have little or
no tolerance for almost correct answers.
The elements of disturbance listed in Table 3 were then analysed and grouped into five macro
areas (moving to e-learning; digital and organisational skills; language component; online
communities; assessment), which constitute the five categories on which TCs are based (table 4)
as well as the five units of each module and are graphically represented as a virtual tree (§5).
The TCs included in the Lilac modules are generally consistent with those proposed by [22] that
refer to online teaching, however some are new and are indicated in bold in Table 4 below.
Content was then designed to incorporate and deal with the TCs identified.
Table 4. Threshold concepts about online language teaching and learning.
Threshold Concepts
Online Language
Teachers
Online Language Learners
1. Transition towards e-
teaching (including
course design, lesson
planning, teacher and
course preparation)
and e-learning
(including relationship
between the teacher
and students, teaching
presence, social
presence and cognitive
presence)
1.1T An online course must be
designed to have specific mechanisms
to communicate, monitor and give
feedback to groups of students as well
as individual students.
1.2T Online course design is critical to
the success of online teaching and
learning.
1.3T Online presence, while elusive,
must be pursued.
1.4T Students need to be encouraged to
be more regulated in an online course
than in an on-campus course.
1.5T Online language teaching
requires specific approaches and
methods, not only presenting
content.
1.1L Online language
learning is not engaging and
not effective.
1.2L Students cannot learn
without the teacher being
present.
2. Technology (including
teacher-digital content,
learner-digital content
interaction) and
organisation (including
the difference from on
campus teaching and
learning)
2.1T Preparation for designing and
planning online teaching may take
longer than preparation for on-campus
teaching.
2.2T Using technologies requires a
lot of time to be exploited properly.
2.3T Using technologies restricts
creativity in developing digital
contents
2.1L Online learning
environment requires more
rules than on campus
learning.
environment require a new
role for learners who have
more responsibilities.

12
3. Language
components
(including the
strategies and
method in
developing the four
basic language
competences)
3.1T Online courses neglect the
development of speaking skills.
3.1L Online courses neglect
the development of speaking
skills.
4. Online
communities
(including teacher-learner,
learner-learner, and
learner-content interaction)
4.1T Online learning contexts
require a new mode of interaction
between language teachers, learners
and resources.
4.2T Online teaching requires
facilitating interaction, not only
presenting content.
contexts require a new mode
of interaction between
language teachers, learners
and resources.
environment fosters a feeling
of isolation.
environment neglect
interaction among learners.
5. Assessment 5.1T Online course design needs
alignment between learning activities,
assessment tasks and feedback
mechanisms to ensure students
engagement.
5.2T Online assessment increases
plagiarism.
5.1L Electronically marked
assessment are not reliable.
The Lilac modules, albeit leaving scope for repurposing most OERs, are specifically designed to
assist online language teaching and learning. In line with the parameters of our project and in
order to aid the interpretation of the threshold concepts listed in Table 4, the features of threshold
concepts were redefined in terms of online language teaching and learning, as follows.
(a) Transformative: they change the way we view online teaching and learning.
(b) Troublesome: The idea of online language teaching can be counter-intuitive to the way
we have always taught. Online language teaching and learning may seem too difficult or
too complex.
(c) Irreversible: Concepts learned about online language teaching and learning are difficult
to unlearn.
(d) Integrative: Threshold concepts about online language teaching and learning are likely to
incorporate concepts about other teaching/learning-related issues (e.g., curriculum
design, assessment).
(e) Bounded: A threshold concept about online language teaching/learning is related to an
academic's scholarly practice of teaching.
(f) Discursive: Evidence of threshold concepts about online language teaching/learning will
be demonstrated incidentally in an academic's use of language.
(g) Reconstitutive: The academic's grasp of a concept may go back and forth across stages of
being sure and not sure, as they develop, undevelop, construct, and reconstruct the
concept for themselves.

13
(h) Liminality: As the online language teacher crosses the liminal space between not
teaching online and teaching online effectively, s/he may experience some level of
stuckness. As the online language learner crosses the liminal space between not learning
online and learning online effectively, s/he may experience some level of stuckness.
5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Analysis of respondents’ answers, identification of TCs and reference to online learning and
cognitive theories determined the design structure of the Lilac modules, which progress from
basic, essential skills to more advanced competences. We used the metaphor of the tree to give a
graphic representation of the development of skills and competences related to online teaching, as
shown in Figure 1. We metaphorically conceived our online teacher as a virtual tree whose roots
are represented by the essential digital skills that teachers need to develop and constantly update
in order to transition successfully from a classroom-based to an online teaching environment.
Teachers’ digital skills are directly linked to their organisational skills, and together they make up
the nourishment needed to nurture the three branches of our tree, enhancing a teacher’s
pedagogical, social and assessor role.
As Fig.1 shows, and following the tree structure outlined above, the Lilac Teachers’ Module was
therefore devised as a five-unit module. Each unit is then divided into a number of lessons with
specific objectives, reflections and tips to help teachers overcome difficulties and challenge what
they perceive as e-teaching limits. This structure has been graphically designed as an interactive
image, our so-called Lilac Tree Map, which can be found in the module introduction and acts as
an interactive table of contents. The user can click on the single units and immediately access its
content. Below an overview of each unit.
Unit 1: Moving to e-learning addresses TCs from 1.1T. to 1.5T. It aims at laying or reinforcing
the foundations for the transition from face-to-face to online teaching environment. It comprises
of five lessons, which respectively explore: the characteristics and therefore the differences
between the two teaching & learning environments (Lesson 1); theories and methodologies
applied to the online educational context (Lesson 2) and the most effective approaches and
methods when teaching online (Lesson 3); preparing students for online learning (Lesson 4) and
basic netiquette (Lesson 5).
Unit 2: Digital and Organisational Skills addresses TCs from 2.1T to 2.3T. It comprises of three
lessons and has been purposefully designed to respond to what has been identified in the
teachers’ questionnaire as a widespread need for strong and solid organisational and time-
management skills. Lesson 1 is a brief introduction to the topic. In Lesson 2 the teachers are
given the tools to identify their current level of digitalisation in terms of digital resources and
technologies and are walked through the development of their digital competences. Lesson 3
explores more in detail the organisational and managerial skills that teachers should have when
teaching online and gives tips on how to organise the working time and space effectively.
Unit 3: Pedagogical role addresses TCs 1.2T, 1.5T, from 2.1T to 2.3T, and 3.1T. It aims at
enhancing teachers’ pedagogical skills by providing them with tools and tips to plan and
implement effective online learning activities that promote the development of the four basic
linguistic competences. The unit has therefore been designed to help teachers to overcome the
perceived limits of educational platforms and technology. Lesson 1 offers an innovative lesson
planning system, the Lilac “ping-pong planning”, which provides a structure for teachers’
synchronous and asynchronous delivery of both content and feedback and for their interaction
with online learners, while Lesson 2 and 3 focus on the four language competences, giving

14
practical tips to enhance Reading & Writing and Listening & Speaking skills respectively.
Lesson 4 provides an overview of the educational tools to be employed online.
Unit 4: Social role addresses TCs 4.1T and 4.2T. It examines the strategies that a teacher should
follow to create a strong sense of community among the learners, establish a solid teacher-student
relationship and manage the community of learners by fostering students’ interaction and
engagement both synchronously and asynchronously. It comprises 3 lessons: Lesson 1 explores
how teachers can create and also help their students to create and maintain a relaxing and healthy
learning environment; Lesson 2 focuses on the creation of online communities and on the tools to
be used; finally Lesson 3 focuses on how to support students’ learning engagement and
interaction with both content and peers.
Unit 5: Assessor role addresses TCs 1.1T, 1.5T, 3.1T, 4.1T, 4.2T, 5.1T and 5.2T, comprising
again of three lessons, explores the world of online assessment and evaluation. Lesson 1 provides
the teachers with ideas and advice on how to create new effective and appropriate online
assessments (e-portfolio, peer-assessment), while Lesson 2 gives an overview of strategies and
ways to monitor and assess students’ learning; Lesson 3 focuses on the creation of feedback
aimed at enhancing students’ performance.
Each Unit includes an end-of-unit final quiz where teachers can put themselves to the task and
assess what they have learnt so far. All the Units and Lessons have also been conceived as totally
independent and self-containing. Learners are totally free to take the course in sequential order or
jump around the units/lessons according to the topic(s) that interest(s) them more.
Figure 1. Lilac tree map

15
6. CONCLUSION
This paper outlined the creation of training modules for online language teachers as part of the
Lilac Project OERs, and the conceptual framework underpinning their design. It argued that
effective OERs need to take into account the impact of cognitive load on learners’ acquisition and
retention of knowledge, the principles of micro and macro learning for appropriate distribution of
the cognitive load, the identification of Threshold Concepts for the selection and sequencing of
content, as well as online and multimedia learning theories, in our case specifically directed to
adults.
The Lilac team identified TCs through questionnaires and focus groups and built the OERs
around them, organising content in self-contained microlearning units that nevertheless form part
of a larger macro structure and are supported by and supplemented with macrolearning content.
Acknowledging adults’ need for information that is relevant, motivating, purposeful and quickly
retrievable, we designed a learning path that can be easily personalised, while at the same time
offering the option of sequential progression. The micro level allowed us to introduce learning
objects and single skills while at the macro level we dealt with topics and more complex,
integrated skills and competences. This combined structure also allowed us to spread the
cognitive load so as to avoid load “peaks” within the module.
Whilst Lilac OERs are specifically designed for training online language teachers and learners,
we believe that they provide a template for the development of further OERs with different
objectives and stakeholders. As reliance on online content grows and its inclusion in both formal
and informal learning environments becomes nearly unavoidable, solid conceptual frameworks
for their design need to be investigated, updated and implemented so that learners are exposed to
significant and motivating learning paths that can encompass both single items of knowledge as
well as more complex information, skills and competences. It is hoped that future research will
focus also on statistical data on the impact of online OERs on retention, which in turn will further
inform design and implementation.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Lilac Project is funded by the National Forum for Enhancement for Teaching and Learning
in Higher Education. We would like to thank all the participants, teachers and students, who
helped this research project.
REFERENCES
[1] Dempsey, M. & Burke, J. (2021) Lessons Learned: The experiences of teachers in Ireland during the
2020 pandemic. Project Report. Maynooth University.
[2] Erarslan, A. (2021). English language teaching and learning during Covid-19: A global perspective
on the first year. Journal of Educational Technology & Online Learning, 4(2), 349-367.
[3] O’Sullivan, K., Clark, S., McGrane, A., Rock, N., Burke, L., Boyle, N., Joksimovic, N., Marshall, K.
(2021). A qualitative study of child and adolescent mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in
Ireland. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 18: 1062.
[4] Caffo, E.; Scandroglio, F.; Asta, L. (2020). Debate: COVID-19 and psychological well-being of
children and adolescents in Italy. Child Adolesc. Mental Health, 25: 167-168.
[5] Kilinçel, S; Kilinçel, O; Muratdagi, G., Aydin, A., Usta, M.B. (2020) Factors affecting the anxiety
levels of adolescents in home-schooling during COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey. Asia Pac.
Psychiatry, e12406.

16
[6] Karakose, T., Yirci, R., Papadakis, S. (2021). Exploring the interrelationship between COVID-19
phobia, family conflict, family-work conflict, and life satisfaction among school administrators for
advancing sustainable management. Sustainability, 13(15), 8654.
[7] Trzebiński, J.; Cabański, M.; Czarnecka, J.Z. (2020) Reaction to the COVID-19 Pandemic: The
Influence of Meaning in Life, Life Satisfaction, and Assumptions on World Orderliness and
Positivity. J. Loss Trauma, 25, 544–557.
[8] Nicora, F., McLoughlin, L., Bologna, O. (2022) Higher Education and new trends in the digitalized
labour market: broaden language students’ horizons. In Elena Domínguez Romero, Jelena Bobkina,
Carmen Herrero, Svetlana Stefanova Radoulska, Isabelle Vanderschelden (eds.), Visual literacy and
digital communication: the role of media in new educational practices. Editorial Comares, Granada,
Spain. 79-100.
[9] Hylen, J. (2006) Open Educational Resources: opportunities and challenges. OECD-CERI.
[10] D’Antoni, S. (2009). Open educational resources: Reviewing initiatives and issues. Open Learning:
The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 24(1), 3-10. doi: 10.1080/02680510802625443.
CrossRef Google Scholar
[11] Wiley D., Bliss T.J. & McEwen M. (2014) Open Educational Resources: A Review of the Literature.
In: Spector J., Merrill M., Elen J., Bishop M. (eds) Handbook of Research on Educational
Communications and Technology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-
3185-5_63
[12] Downes, S. (2007). Models for sustainable Open Educational Resources. Interdisciplinary Journal of
Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, 29-44.
[13] Beetham, H. & Sharpe R. (2019) Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: principles and practices of
design. London. Routledge.
[14] Koohang, A. & Harman, K. (2007) Advancing sustainability of Open Educational Resources in
Issues. Informing Science and Information Technology, 4, 535-544.
[15] Lindner, A. (2006) Use these tools, your mind will follow. Learning in Immersive Micromedia &
Microknowledge Environments, Research Paper for ALT-C 2006: the Next Generation.
[16] Schimdt, A. (2007) Microlearning and the knowledge maturing process: towards conceptual
foundations for work-integrated microlearning support. In Martin Linder and Peter A. Bruck (eds.):
Micromedia and Corporate Learning. Proceedings of the 3rd
International Microlearning 2007,
Innsbruck, Austria, June 2007, Innsbruck University Press, 99-105.
[17] Hug, Theo (2005) Micro learning and narration. Exploring possibilities of utilization of narrations
and storytelling for the designing of “micro units” and didactical micro-learning arrangements.
Online proceedings of the International Conference “Media in Transition 4: The Work of Stories” at
the M.I.T. in Cambridge (MA), USA, May 6-8, 2005, available at:
http://web.mit.edu/commforum/mit4/papers/hug.pdf, 2005.
[18] So, H-L., Lee, H. & Roh, S-Z. (2020) Examining the Design for Microlearning for Korean Adult
Learners. Computer-Based Learning in Context, 2(1), 40-53.
[19] Stronck, D. R. (1983) The comparative effects of different museum tours on children’s attitudes and
learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 283-290.
[20] Knowles, M. S. (1984) Andragogy in action. San Francisco CA: Josey-Bass Publisher.
[21] Creswell, J. W. (2015) Chapter 4: Specifying a purpose and research questions or hypothesis.
Educational Research Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research.
Upper Saddle, NY. Prentice Hall/Pearson Education, 109-138.
[22] Major, A. & Calandrino, T. (2018) Beyond chunking: micro-learning secrets for effective online
design. FDLA Journal: 15(2), 27-30.
[23] Sweller, J. (2014) Working memory, long-term memory, and instructional design. Journal of Applied
Research in Memory and Cognition, 5(4), 360-367.
[24] Fox, A. (2006) Microlearning for effective performance management. Talent Development, 70(4),
116-117.
[25] Kerres, M. (2007) Microlearning as a challenge for instructional design. In T. Hug (Ed) Didactics of
Microlearning, Concepts, Discourses and Example, Münster: Waxmann, 98-109.

17
[26] Buchem, I. and Hamelmann, H. (2010) Microlearning: a strategy for ongoing professional
development. E-Learning Papers: 21. http://elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media23707
[27] Hug, T. (2009) Outline of a microlearning agenda. eLearning papers: 16 www.elearningpress.ue
[28] Meyer, J. H. F., & Land, R. (2003). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: Linkages to
ways of thinking and practising within the disciplines Enhancing Teaching-Learning Environments.
Undergraduate Courses Project, Occasional Paper 4 (pp. 1-12). Edinburgh: University of
Edinburgh.
[29] Land, R., Meyer, J. H. F., Cousin, G. & Davies, P. (2005). Conclusion: Implications of threshold
concepts for course design and evaluation. In J. H. F. Meyer, & R. Land (Eds.), Overcoming barriers
to student understanding: Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge. London and New York:
Routledge. 195-206.
[30] Northcote, M., Gosselin, K., Kilgour, P., McLoughlin, C. & Boddey, C. (2017) Using threshold
concepts about online teaching to support novice online teachers: designing professional development
guidelines to individually assist academic staff (“me) and collectively guide the institution (“us”). In
H., Partridge, K. David, & J Thomas (eds), Me, Us, It! Proceedings ASCILITE2017: 34th
International Conference on Innovation, Practice and Research in the Use of Educational
Technologies in Tertiary Education (pp.328-336).
[31] Cousin, G. (2006) An introduction to threshold concepts. Planet.
[32] Kreber, C. & Kanuka, H. (2013) The scholarship of teaching and learning and the online classroom.
Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education, 32(2), 109-131.
[33] Baran, E., Correi, A., & Thompson, A. (2011) Transforming online teaching practice: critical analysis
of the literature on the roles and competencies of online teachers. Distance Education, 32(3), 421-
439.
AUTHORS
Francesca Nicora is a research assistant and teaching assistant at the University of
Galway, Ireland. Francesca holds a BA in Foreign Languages and Literatures and a MA
in Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, awarded by Università degli Studi di Pisa (Italy).
She completed a MA in E-Learning and E-Teaching Italian as a Foreign Language at the
Università per Stranieri di Siena (Italy) and a PgCERT in Teaching and Learning in
Higher Education from the Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching (CELT) at
the University of Galway. She has recently completed her Structured-PhD degree in
Italian Studies from the University of Galway. The PhD project, entitled “Prosodic training in foreign
language: a study with Hiberno-English learners of Italian“, has been chosen as the winner of the Irish
Association for Applied Linguistics postgraduate Award in 2019. Her research interests include foreign
language prosody acquisition, corpus linguistics, audiovisual translation, e-learning and e-teaching, and
open educational resources.
Oriana Bologna is currently a teaching assistant and an e-tutor in Italian at the
University of Galway and she has been working on the LILAC project as a research
assistant. Oriana holds a BA in Theories and Techniques of Interlingual Mediation and a
MA in Translation and Interpreting both awarded by Università degli Studi di Genova
(Italy). She completed a Postgraduate course (Master di II Livello) in E-Learning and
Teaching Italian as a Foreign Language awarded by Università per Stranieri di Siena
(Italy). She has also been training as an Italian teaching assistant at Universidad de
Granada (Spain). She is also an official CILS (International Certification of Italian as a Foreign Language)
examiner. Her research interests include E-learning and E-teaching, Learning Technologies, Instructional
Design, Visual Design and Universal Design for Learning.

18
Laura Incalcaterra McLoughlin, PhD, Professor, School of Languages, Literatures &
Cultures, University of Galway, Ireland. Joint Director of Centre for Applied Linguistics
and Multilingualism. Co-director of the MA in Advanced Language Skills. Director of
the Diploma in Italian Online. She teaches Italian language,translation and audiovisual
translation. She has published widely on language teaching methodology, language and
e-learning/new technologies and subtitling in language teaching and translators’
training.
She has received considerable national and international funding for language-related projects. Recent
projects include The Lilac Project (https://lilac-project.com, National Forum for the Enhancement of
Teaching & Leatning), Move-ME (http://movemeproject.eu, Erasmus+ Programme, European Union),
DigiLanguages (http://www.digilanguages.ie/ National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching &
Learning) and ClipFlair project (www.clipflair.net).

OPEN EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES FOR ONLINE LANGUAGE TEACHER TRAINING: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION

More Related Content

Similar to OPEN EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES FOR ONLINE LANGUAGE TEACHER TRAINING: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

OPEN EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES FOR ONLINE LANGUAGE TEACHER TRAINING: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION