Cultivating EAL Teachers’ Interpretive Capacity for Research Engagement

By Anwar Ahmed

Introduction

Earlier studies indicated that most EAL teachers did not engage with published research for professional growth or pedagogical innovation (Borg, 2009). However, in recent years we have seen a growing interest in teacher engagement with research (Abbott, Lee, & Rossiter, 2021; Hall, 2023). There is now a call for EAL teachers to adopt a hyphenated identity as scholar-practitioners and live within the nexus of research, theory, and practice (Douglas, 2025). Despite this shift, EAL teachers still face several challenges in engaging with research. One major problem is navigating the overwhelming volume of published work. The rapid pace and sheer quantity of today’s academic output pose a significant challenge, especially for teachers aiming to utilize research as a tool for continuous professional learning. While educators are not responsible for the proliferation of research or the abundance of theoretical and pedagogical models, they are nevertheless expected to sift through this ever-expanding literature and integrate research-based evidence into their practice.

I addressed this issue in my presentation at this year’s BC TEAL Conference. I began by sharing insights from Hall’s (2023) study, in which some English language teachers voiced frustration with the overwhelming proliferation of scholarly publications in the field. A key concern was the difficulty of determining which research-based recommendations are most relevant to their classroom practice. I then examined how the current emphasis on research productivity—driven by a neoliberal academic business model—has disrupted the scholarly ecosystem of education in general, and the field of teaching English as an Additional Language in particular. To respond to this challenge, I proposed a strategy focused on developing EAL teachers’ interpretive capacity. This approach emphasizes three key areas: creative reading of research, contextual awareness, and critical emotional literacy. I argued that cultivating this interpretive capacity can empower EAL teachers to bridge the often-cited gap between research and practice.

To cultivate teachers’ interpretive capacity, I advocate for fostering critical and reflective reading practices, where the goal is not merely to read more, but to read more strategically and meaningfully. This approach centers on the following interrelated dimensions:

First, EAL teachers can engage more deeply with research literature by moving beyond surface-level comprehension. One productive approach may be the model of critical and creative reading proposed by Ada and Campoy (2017), which consists of four interconnected phases: the descriptive phase, the personal interpretive phase, the critical/multicultural/anti-bias phase, and the creative/transformative phase. By reflecting on how research findings relate to their own experiences (interpretive phase), critically analyzing the underlying assumptions and power dynamics within the research (critical phase), and considering how to apply new knowledge to enhance their practice (transformative phase), teachers become active participants in both meaning making and professional growth. Adopting such a model of critical reading can promote personally meaningful and transformative learning. It may also encourage teachers to see themselves as reflective and empowered agents of educational change.

Second, while it may sound like a cliché, context truly is everything in education. Numerous examples exist of research-generated knowledge being inappropriately applied when removed from its original context. In my previous research (Ahmed, 2019), I found that teachers typically pay close attention to their professional context when reading and interpreting research publications. For example, one participant noted: “I think the teaching context is very important because, even if you understand research findings, you cannot use them if they do not match your context: students, books, living area, type of school, financial means and so on” (p. 183). Drawing on this and other reading strategies used by participants in my study, I conceptualized reading research as an act of attending to contextual circumstances. I recommend that EAL teachers consistently keep their classroom context in mind when engaging with research, recognizing that the context of knowledge production (e.g., the research setting) may differ significantly from the context of knowledge use (e.g., their own classrooms).

Third, emotion is a topic often overlooked in academic discourse. For a long time, research has been regarded primarily as a rational pursuit of objective “truth.” Only recently have scholars across disciplines begun to recognize the role of emotion in the construction and application of knowledge. Some language teachers in Sato and Loewen’s (2019) study mentioned that engaging with research provided them with emotional support. Additionally, teachers may experience a wide range of emotions during curriculum reforms and instructional changes. For example, Yang and Sato’s (2025) study with EFL teachers highlights the importance of supporting teachers’ emotional wellbeing in such contexts. Although research in this area remains limited, these recent studies underscore a growing need to acknowledge and explore the emotional dimensions of teachers’ engagement with research.

Conclusion

The three key concepts briefly discussed above serve as foundational principles for cultivating interpretive capacity among EAL teachers. This capacity is especially vital in an era marked by the rapid pace of research publications. Within a neoliberal academic climate that prioritizes productivity and competition, teachers seeking to engage with research may feel overwhelmed by the challenge of distinguishing what is meaningful from what is trivial amid the constant stream of scholarly output. In response, I have argued that teachers must become strategic, creative, and critical readers of research. They need to develop an interpretive capacity that allows them to identify relevant research, and to thoughtfully adapt, when necessary, and apply its findings to their specific educational contexts. To foster this capacity, I have proposed three interrelated strategies: engaging in creative and reflective reading, developing contextual awareness, and cultivating critical emotional literacy. Together, these strategies can empower teachers to engage with research in meaningful and context-sensitive ways.

---

Anwar Ahmed is Assistant Professor of Language Education as Anti-oppressive Transformation in Multilingual Settings in the Department of Language and Literacy Education at UBC’s Faculty of Education. He completed PhD at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) of the University of Toronto.

Anwar’s recent books are Exploring Silences in the Field of Computer Assisted Language Learning (Palgrave Macmillan, 2022), TESOL Teacher Education in a Transnational World: Turning Challenges into Innovative Prospects (edited with O. Barnawi, Routledge, 2021), Mobility of Knowledge, Practice and Pedagogy in TESOL Teacher Education: Implications for Transnational Contexts (edited with O. Barnawi, Palgrave Macmillan, 2021) and Knowledge Mobilization in TESOL: Connecting Research and Practice (edited, Brill, 2019).  

Anwar is a co-editor of the journal Critical Inquiry in Language Studies.

References

Abbott, M. L., Lee, K. K., & Rossiter, M. J. (2021). Research mobilization in TESL learning 

    communities: Benefits, challenges, supports, and procedures. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 67(1), 3–19. 

Ada, A. F., & Campoy, F. I. (2017). Critical creative literacy for bilingual teachers in the 21st 

    century. Issues in Teacher Education, 26(2), 115-128.

Ahmed, A. (2019). Engagement with research, teacher learning and educational 

    leadership: Towards an interpretive-ecological approach. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 22(2), 175-188.

Borg, S. (2009). English language teachers’ conceptions of research. Applied Linguistics, 

    30(3), 358-388. 

Douglas, S. R. (2025). Scholar-practitionership in EAL teaching: Engaging and 

    strengthening the field. TEAL News, Spring 2025, 12-13. 

Hall, G. (2023). Teachers’ engagement with published research: How do teachers who read 

    research navigate the field, what do they read, and why? British Council. doi.org/10.57884/B04W-E417 

Sato, M., & Loewen, S. (2019). Do teachers care about research? The research–pedagogy 

    dialogue. ELT Journal, 73(1), 1-10.

Yang, S., & Sato, M. (2025). Unlocking language teacher wellbeing amid curriculum reform: 

    A focus on emotion. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688241312961