







































 Surtees & Yamamoto 29 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

Creating an Interactive Online Orientation to Academic Practices for 

International Students 

 

Victoria Surtees 

University of the Fraser Valley 

 

Masaru Yamamoto 

University of British Columbia 

 

Abstract 

 

While universities are increasingly implementing programs to support international students’ 

language development, fewer orientation programs have sought to provide explicit guidance on 

expected academic practices in Canadian institutions. Many such academic norms—including 

the expectation to complete weekly readings, the use of first names with instructors, or 

participation grades—may be unfamiliar to students who were socialized in different academic 

cultures. This paper describes the creation of an online orientation module that introduced newly 

arrived international students to three aspects of local classroom practice: participation, preparing 

readings for class, and emailing instructors. Drawing on theories of academic discourse 

socialization, the module discusses norms (e.g., asking questions is expected) and provides 

ready-made language models for engaging in related practices (e.g., email templates). Initial 

results of a pilot with 74 incoming students suggest that these types of modules provide a 

promising avenue for supporting international student success. Details of the design process, 

including the selection of appropriate platforms and tools and the implementation of inclusive, 

accessible, and multimodal design principles, are presented. Recommendations for institutions 

wishing to develop similar support materials are also provided. 

 

Introduction 

 

Over the last decade, international student numbers have tripled in British Columbia (BC), with 

over 60,000 international students attending BC’s post-secondary institutions (Heslop, 2018). 

Given these massive increases, universities’ strategic plans for internationalization are now 

foregrounding the need to foster students’ sense of belonging and their ability to participate in 

the local academic community. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated the need 

for high-quality, accessible, and inclusive online offerings for domestic and international 

students alike. To date, studies conducted at English-speaking institutions (e.g., Heng, 2017; 

Ryan & Viete, 2009) have reported that international students often feel that the prevailing 

norms for classroom participation do not value their contributions (e.g., instructors dismiss 

international perspectives or do not make an effort to understand students’ accents). Other 

researchers (Straker, 2016; Yates & Nguyen, 2012) have noted that international students are 

often (incorrectly) perceived by instructors and others as “shy” or “uncritical” and are thereby 

implicitly positioned as deficient participants within the local learning space. Other work has 

provided a more hopeful vision, describing linguistically and culturally supportive classes in 

which international students are viewed as intellectual and cultural resources who can contribute 

their unique multicultural perspective to their local community (see for example, Morita, 2004). 

These studies raise important questions about how instructors and institutions can create 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378


 Surtees & Yamamoto 30 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

(scaffolded) opportunities for international students to meaningfully and legitimately participate 

as active and valued contributors. 

 

We propose that one way to support international students is through resources and 

discussions that help them decode the implicit norms of their classroom communities. Such 

interventions are likely to have multiple benefits: students receive explicit guidance about local 

practices and, through the discussion process, instructors and staff are afforded the opportunity to 

think critically about the cultural nature of participation in higher education in the host 

community (Murray & McConachy, 2018). In this paper, we describe the process of designing 

and implementing an online orientation module that introduced students in a one-year study 

abroad program to three communicative practices: in-class participation, preparing readings, and 

emailing instructors. Drawing on research in academic discourse socialization (Kobayashi, 

Zappa-Hollman, & Duff, 2017), we discuss the theoretical principles and tools used to design 

online activities for the project. Students’ feedback and lessons learned will also be presented. 

 

Background and Rationale 

 

The online orientation module grew out of a workshop designed to support a cohort of 

international students participating in a one-year sheltered study abroad program (the origin of 

the students and the program name are omitted to maintain confidentiality). Each year, a cohort 

of between 75 and 100 students from the same university arrives in August to take classes in 

academic writing, culture, and intercultural awareness with their cohort-mates at a post-

secondary institution in Canada. Grounded in a social and constructivist notions of learning, 

classes within the program require regular attendance and encourage small group discussion, 

group presentations, critical analysis assignments, and interaction with instructors in person and 

via email. Many of these practices differ significantly from the students’ home university 

practices, where attendance is not closely monitored, and assessment is typically exam-based. 

 

Over the years, many instructors have remarked that newly arrived students are unsure of 

how to negotiate the instructor-student relationship and that students have few strategies for 

managing the program’s demanding reading and assignment loads. Through informal 

consultations, we learned that students’ ability to succeed in the program was often tied to their 

ability to quickly take up and navigate the program’s unfamiliar classroom norms. In 2014, a 

team of instructors proposed that a workshop be developed to support students in decoding the 

implicit norms of classroom practice. The two-hour face-to-face workshop, initially developed in 

2014, focussed on the following areas: 

 

• Introducing oneself in the classroom 

• Saying no/refusing requests from peers 

• Participating in class discussions 

• Giving in-class presentations 

• Reading and class preparation strategies 

• Emailing instructors 

 

At the time of writing, the workshop had been running for five years and had received 

highly positive reviews from students, staff, and instructors. In 2019, the team received a small 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378


 Surtees & Yamamoto 31 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

grant to extend the workshop into an online module. Ultimately, a hybrid model was proposed in 

which part of the workshop would be delivered face-to-face, followed by a 30–45-minute-long 

online module that would reinforce and extend several of the topics covered in the workshop. 

This paper focuses on the online component of this project. 

 

Theoretical Framework 

 

In selecting and designing our content for the online orientation, we drew upon scholarship in 

academic discourse socialization (ADS). ADS research explores the nature and development of 

academic practices promoted in specific institutions and disciplines (e.g., presentations, in-class 

discussions, and academic writing). ADS offers insights into the socialization processes by 

which newcomers (usually students) gain the communicative competence and sociocultural 

knowledge necessary for meaningful participation in those practices, often through interaction 

with more expert members (Kobayashi et al., 2017). These processes are conceptualized as 

complex and multidirectional: experts’ practices are shaped by the behaviours and attitudes of 

novices just as novices learn from more experienced members of the academic community. 

Newcomer students’ learning trajectories are also influenced by their capacity for and interest in 

seeking out “additional resources independently to facilitate and mediate their own socialization 

into academic and other communities” (Duff & Anderson, 2015, p. 338). 

 

ADS researchers that have examined socialization of additional language speakers also 

recognize that while socialization often occurs through interaction, interaction can also be a 

potential site of struggle, especially when the values and expectations underpinning local 

language practices do not align with newcomers’ previous experiences in education (see Duff & 

Talmy, 2011). For this reason, ADS studies pay special attention to the explicit and implicit ways 

that classroom interactions shape—and are shaped by—students’ ability and willingness to 

participate in new practices and the extent to which new students become aware of the norms and 

values that underpin those practices (for a review of ADS research in Canadian contexts, see 

Duff, Zappa-Hollman, & Surtees, 2019). Findings have illustrated the ways in which 

misalignments between student and instructor expectations can negatively impact international 

students’ experiences and success (e.g., Yang 2010). Studies also point out that participants often 

lack prior experience and training in skills and knowledge necessary for fuller participation in the 

target academic discourse (e.g., Morita, 2004), calling for explicit instruction and assistance for 

various forms of oral, written, and online academic communication. The module described in 

this paper responds to that call by providing scaffolding for several practices that consistently 

posed a challenge for students in our target program: classroom participation, preparation for 

class, and emailing instructors. 

 

Target Practices: Classroom Participation and Email Exchanges 

 

Socialization into classroom participation and emailing practices have both been researched from 

an ADS perspective. Morita (2004) examined the challenges faced by three Japanese graduate 

students participating in open-ended classroom discussions at a Canadian university. Findings 

showed that students often remained silent to save face despite their desire to participate during 

whole-class conversation. Their continued silence, in turn, reinforced their positionality as 

“limited” contributors within the class, further exacerbating their reticence in the classroom. In 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378


 Surtees & Yamamoto 32 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

other words, students’ participatory challenges and their positionality were mutually influencing 

and thus co-constitutive of each other. One of Morita’s participants reported how her experience 

of classroom participation differed in supportive and unsupportive courses: in supportive classes 

she felt she was able to modify her modes of participation to adjust to academic life, while in an 

unsupportive class, she felt ignored. Morita’s findings suggest that although students may be 

aware of the norm that requires active participation, students need more support than simply 

being told that speaking up is important. 

 

Emails to instructors are another academic form of communication with which 

international students can sometimes struggle. Economidou-Kogetsidis (2011) analysed UK-

university lecturers’ perceptions of the textual features of 200 request emails written by Greek 

Cypriot university students using English as an additional language. She reported that the emails 

were characterized by significant directness marked by lack of appropriate opening and closing, 

absence or underuse of hedged language (i.e., overuse of imperatives), and misuse of address 

forms (Dr. first name). She found that students who employed direct request strategies (e.g., 

“Please email the syllabus …”) were unknowingly judged by university lecturers as abrupt and 

disrespectful (pp. 3209, 3212). Like the other authors cited in this paper, Economidou-Kogetsidis 

emphasized the need for incorporating explicit email instruction into language curricula. 

 

Taken together, ADS studies have suggested the need to not only scaffold students’ 

understanding of norms (i.e., by telling students that it is important to participate), but also the 

need to provide explicit guidance on the types of language use that correspond to local practices. 

Based on these findings, the module described in this paper was designed to provide scaffolding 

for academic practices in two ways: it explicitly states the tacit norms of various classroom 

communication practices, and it provides examples and models of language that could be used to 

engage in those practices. In the remainder of the paper, we describe our design process for the 

online orientation. 

 

Project Overview 

 

The online module was developed collaboratively by the two authors over five months beginning 

in March 2019 and was hosted on the university’s course learning management system (LMS), 

Canvas. The final version of the module is divided into six sections: an introduction, three 

subsections with activities, an overview with information for accessing additional support, and a 

feedback survey. The three subsections contain content from the face-to-face workshop that the 

team felt would benefit from additional scaffolding and would be suited to online delivery. 

Emailing was selected because written communication strategies could easily be addressed 

through asynchronous textual modes. In-class participation, including the importance of 

attendance and asking clarifying questions, was also identified as requiring additional 

reinforcement, particularly given the high stakes nature of regular participation in the program. 

Finally, strategies for preparing readings for classes (e.g., writing down main ideas and 

keywords, noting questions to ask in class) were identified as a topic that was often less engaging 

in a large group setting and could be more easily modelled through videos and activities online. 

Each of these three subsections was further broken down into a short lesson, including: 

  

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378


 Surtees & Yamamoto 33 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

• An introduction page with objectives 

• A minimum of three interactive activities (each on a separate page) 

• A self-check quiz in which participants indicate how confident they feel about each 

objective 

 

In what follows, we describe the principles used to design the activities. 

 

Design Principles for Online Activities 

 

Online modules can offer flexible, multimodal, and self-paced learning experiences (e.g., videos, 

games, and quizzes), making them an ideal choice for delivering content to large numbers of 

students who may or may not be present on campus. However, to access content, students often 

have to navigate unfamiliar online platforms, which can present a supplementary learning burden 

for students. In addition, the lack of personal interaction in online modules means that students 

who are having difficulties may not have the opportunity to ask questions. Based on discussions 

around these benefits and drawbacks, the team agreed on three key principles to guide our 

design: multimodality, accessibility, and representation. These principles, which are similar to 

those described in work on universal design for learning (CAST, 2018), reflect a growing trend 

in online design work to reduce barriers to learning and to cater to a variety of learning styles.  

 

 Multimodality. Content that is multimodal is delivered via several modes (e.g., images, 

sound, and text). We decided that not only should our content be multimodal, but learners should 

also have the opportunity to manipulate and interact with the knowledge presented by answering 

questions, exploring content in non-linear ways, and organizing new ideas (i.e., multiple modes 

of engagement). To achieve our aims, we embedded interactive videos and activities throughout 

the module. Interactive videos included embedded comprehension questions to enhance student 

interaction with the video content. Our interactive activities were created using H5P, which is a 

web-based service that allows the user to create activities, such as flash cards, drag-and-drop 

activities, interactive timelines, and image hotspots that can be embedded directly into the 

HTML code of webpages, such as pages in Canvas (www.h5p.org). 

 

Figure 1 on the next page shows an example of an H5P multiple hotspot activity 

embedded in the module. In this activity, students must find hidden “hotspots” by clicking on the 

image of an email from a student to a teacher. When the area containing inappropriate language 

is clicked, advice on how to modify the email is provided. The activity is completed when all 

hotspots have been discovered, at which point the student can click “next” to move on to the next 

section of the module. 

 

The purpose of this activity is two-fold: it raises awareness about norms (e.g., by 

explaining that demanding help is inappropriate), and it provides language models to support 

participation (e.g., “Could you give me some feedback”). This activity was the last of four in the 

“Email” section. Previous activities included: a video on reasons to email instructors, a hotspot 

activity of a sample “good” email, and a drag-and-drop activity of email openings and closings. 

Each of these activities took only a few minutes to complete. 

 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378
http://www.h5p.org/


 Surtees & Yamamoto 34 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

 
 

Figure 1. H5P multiple hotspot activity. 

 

 Accessibility. Both linguistic and technological accessibility were central to our project 

design. Firstly, it was essential that the oral and written language in our module was manageable 

in terms of both its quantity and complexity. We limited the written text to just a few sentences 

per page, employed active verbs, and used repetition strategically to expose students to key 

academic vocabulary. For instance, the word “efficiently” (a frequently used academic word) is 

repeated several times and was also repeated in the final self-quiz for this section. Figure 2 on the 

next page shows the text for an activity page from the section on preparing for class. The use of 

bullet points breaks up the reading to make it less intimidating for students. Figure 2 also shows 

a screenshot from the accompanying video about strategies for completing course readings. To 

make the video accessible, narration was recorded at a deliberately slow pace with pauses 

throughout. In addition, notes, such as the ones shown in Figure 2, are displayed to highlight the 

most important information for students. The linguistic content was also reviewed by speakers of 

English as an additional language to identify challenging words or expressions. 

 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378


 Surtees & Yamamoto 35 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

 
 

Figure 2. Interactive video on preparing readings. 

 

To enhance technological accessibility, we ensured that all content would display 

correctly across most devices (e.g., phones, tablets, and desktops) and operating systems (e.g., 

Mac OS, iOS, Windows, and Android). Cross-platform usability was also enhanced by limiting 

content on each page to reduce the need for scrolling. All content was embedded directly within 

the module to reduce any rerouting issues. The choice to use Canvas as the hosting platform was 

also driven by concerns of accessibility: all students had been granted Canvas usernames and 

passwords and would have to learn to use the platform for their coursework. These 

circumstances enabled us to reduce registration issues and provided a legitimate rationale for 

requiring students to learn a new platform. 

 

Representation. To ensure that the audience for the module (study abroad students) 

would have an opportunity to see themselves represented as legitimate and valued members of 

the campus community, we decided to include copyright-free images and clips that showed a 

variety of students, including students of colour, and to feature narrators with a variety of accents 

as narrators in our videos (e.g., American, Japanese, and British). 

  

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378


 Surtees & Yamamoto 36 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

Implementation 

 

First, we created the draft version of the activities within a digital “sandbox,” where we could 

experiment with different media and ideas. After testing the activities across devices, the module 

was migrated to the program’s shared Canvas hub, where it would be accessible to students 

during their stay (September–April). Two instructors and a staff member provided feedback. 

 

The module was introduced to students during their face-to-face orientation session the 

week before classes in September. One section of the online module (topic: in-class 

participation) was completed in the 2-hour workshop face-to-face to ensure that students were 

able to log in and locate the content. The remaining sections were assigned as homework, to be 

completed independently before the end of the following week. Students were reminded via 

email and in classes to complete the module. One of the authors was available via email for 

technical support during this period. 

 

Once the module had been completed, students filled out an anonymous online feedback 

form containing 12 questions related to interest/usefulness, accessibility, time to complete the 

module, and preferred sections/elements (see questionnaire in Appendix A). Student responses 

(n=70) were collated and qualitative responses were analyzed for recurring themes. A “response” 

was counted if at least one question was answered. The response rate was around 90% (74 

students attended the face-to-face workshop); however, these numbers are reported as 

approximate because it is impossible to know if some students completed the module or the 

survey more than once, which might have inflated the numbers. Around 75% of respondents 

indicated that they had completed all the activities while the remaining respondents admitted that 

they had completed only some of the activities. In addition, not all respondents answered all the 

questions. With those caveats in mind, the initial feedback suggests that students found the 

module to be useful, interesting, and accessible. 

 

Student Feedback 

 

Table 1 on the next page displays students’ responses on Likert questions related to overall 

usefulness of the module as well as linguistic and technological accessibility. Note that the total 

number of respondents differs slightly for each question. 

 

Overall, the results for Questions 1 and 2 show that students’ experiences with the 

module were largely positive. Most students either agreed (4) or strongly agreed (5) that the 

module was both useful and interesting. Their open-ended comments suggest that they 

specifically appreciated the enhanced accessibility and clarity made possible by the interactive 

features and video materials. For example, one student commented on the “Clear and 

understandable movies,” while another mentioned “There are some activities in the instruction. I 

like these.” These findings point to the importance of multimodality for enhancing students’ 

understanding of materials. When asked if they would like more modules on additional topics, 

the majority of students (58/61) expressed interest depending on the topic. They identified extra-

curricular activities and recycling practices as areas where they would like to learn more. 

Students’ interest in these topics demonstrates their desire to participate in all aspects of campus 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378


 Surtees & Yamamoto 37 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

life. It also indicates a relatively high level of satisfaction and engagement with materials that 

orient them to the implicit norms of the local institution. 

 

Table 1 

 

Participant Responses to Likert Questions 

 
 

1 2 3 4  5 Total Average 

Q1. The information was useful. 0 0 3 16 50 69 4.7 

Q2. The activities were interesting 0 0 8 20 40 68 4.5 

Q3. The level of English was okay for me. 0 0 10 22 34 66 4.4 

Q4. The activities worked well on my device. 0 1 9 12 45 67 4.5 

Note. To enhance linguistic accessibility, ratings were in the form of stars (i.e., 5 stars = strongly agree). 

 

With an average of 4.4, responses to Question 3 suggest that for the majority of students, 

the level of English was generally suitable. This trend was also reflected in students’ open-ended 

responses regarding their favourite features of the module, with five students commenting that 

the module was “Easy to understand/read/see.” However, 10 students rated the English level of 

the module as a “3,” indicating that some students found aspects of the module difficult to 

understand. In the qualitative comments, several students suggested that an automated subtitle 

feature would enhance their online learning experience; however, other students commented that 

they viewed the module as an opportunity to learn English (e.g., “There is no subtitles so I could 

practice listening”). These comments suggest that additional support needs to be optional to 

provide a linguistically suitable condition for students with different language proficiencies. 

 

The average rating for technological accessibility for the module was 4.5, indicating a 

generally high level of functionality across devices. However, nine students rated the module as 

a “3,” and one rated the module as “2,” indicating that they experienced some difficulties. 

Because of the absence of detailed feedback, the reason for the reduced accessibility remains 

unidentified. However, it would be advisable for program administrators to request that students 

update their operating system beforehand, or that they use a device provided by the institution to 

limit potential issues related to technology. It might also be prudent to survey students to find out 

about the devices they will be using and their ability to access high quality internet services prior 

to implementing online programming. 

 

Lessons Learned 

 

Throughout the design process and implementation, we encountered a number of stumbling 

blocks and successes, two of which are discussed here. The first challenge we faced was in 

upholding our commitment to equitable representation. The majority of copyright-free materials 

represented certain types of student population (namely White students) more often than others, 

with those portraying BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Colour) markedly less available in 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378


 Surtees & Yamamoto 38 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

the database. Very few visual materials were available that represented racial and gender 

diversity in teaching staff. Finding appropriate images often required the use of racial keywords 

(e.g., “Asian students” and “diversity on campus”), marking students of colour as “others.” The 

overrepresentation of White students and White male instructors as the default representation for 

the “student” and “instructor” categories points to ways in which mainstream media continues to 

enable English-speaking institutions to centre whiteness as the status quo (for a discussion of 

whiteness in English as an additional language teaching and learning, see Gerald, 2020). We 

agree with Gerald (2020) that it is the duty of English language educators to actively disrupt this 

status quo in order to provide a sense of safety, belonging, and legitimacy for incoming 

racialized students. Ultimately, as a result of our careful selection of copyright-free images, 

video-clips, and narrators, we were able to represent linguistic and racial diversity throughout the 

module. However, without an explicit commitment to equity from the outset, it is unlikely we 

would have arrived at the same result. 

 

The second unexpected outcome was related to delivery and impact. As mentioned in the 

implementation section, the module was introduced during a face-to-face session. This in-person 

introduction to the online content was especially helpful for securing student buy-in, as 

evidenced by the high participation rate we had from the student cohort (over 90%). What we did 

not expect was that the feedback process and face-to-face presentation would also generate buy-

in from the faculty and staff who attended. For faculty, the module served as evidence that 

students were being given tools to be more successful in their courses, which in turn made them 

feel supported. For student support personnel who attended the face-to-face seminar, the module 

was a valuable resource: they reported referring students back to its various activities during their 

one-on-one sessions. For the administrative staff (including a representative from the students’ 

home institution), exploring the module raised their awareness of expectations that might be new 

for students. In other words, while the module was originally created for the benefit of the 

students, it ultimately generated productive conversations among staff and faculty collaborators 

as well. 

 

Recommendations 

 

For our students, faculty, and staff, this module was a valuable resource. Its value resides in its 

accessibility, its integration within our local digital infrastructure and programs, and its 

responsiveness to specific needs within our context. In that sense, the exact content and design 

are likely not suited for all students or institutions. With that in mind, we have developed a list of 

more general recommendations to keep in mind when embarking on this type of project: 

 

• Keep it relevant: Select content based on the local needs of students. 

• Support not only understanding but also language: Address both what students need to 

know (academic expectations) as well as how they can use language (and other 

behaviours) to fulfill those expectations. 

• Incorporate interaction: Ensure that activities are not only text-based but also provide 

opportunities to interact with ideas and content. Make the language accessible for 

learners at a variety of levels and if possible, include (optional) subtitles for all videos. 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378


 Surtees & Yamamoto 39 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

• Make it convenient: Host content on a platform that students either already know how to 

use or will need to know how to use. Insofar as possible, ensure that content works on a 

range of devices. 

• Develop content collaboratively: Involve not only students but also staff and instructors. 

• Keep it representative: Include diverse speech models and images to provide positive 

reinforcement for incoming students. 

 

Finally, a few words of caution. It would be simple to create a module that seeks to 

uncritically acculturate international students into Western forms of participation. However, most 

internationalization strategies at BC institutions seek to create spaces that value the knowledge 

and practices that newcomers contribute to Canadian institutions. Thus, crucial to this type of 

project is the recognition that norms for classroom communication and participation are not 

common sense for most students—international or otherwise. Rather, they are profoundly 

cultural and institutional. As Murray and Connachy (2018) have suggested, academic staff and 

lecturers can also benefit by reflecting critically on their beliefs about the value and form that 

class participation might take and to what extent those beliefs reproduce colonial perspectives. 

By consulting multiple stakeholders, including the students themselves during the development 

of support resources, projects such as this one could also constitute meaningful opportunities for 

transformative discussions about institutional cultures and practices. 

 

Acknowledgements 

 

We would like to thank Dr. Reginald D’Silva for his encouragement and insights related to this 

project, as well as the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback. This project 

would not have been possible without the gracious seed funding provided by the Department of 

Language and Literacy Education at the University of British Columbia. 

 

References 

 

CAST (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from 

http://udlguidelines.cast.org  

Duff, P. A., & Anderson, T. (2015). Academic language and literacy socialization for second-

language students. In N. Markee (Ed.), Handbook of classroom discourse and interaction 

(pp. 337–352). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. 

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118531242.ch20  

Duff, P. A., & Talmy, S. (2011). Language socialization approaches to second language 

acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition 

(pp. 95–116). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203830932  

Duff, P., Zappa-Hollman, S., & Surtees, V. (2019). Research on language and literacy 

socialization at Canadian universities. Canadian Modern Language Review, 75(4), 308–

318. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.2019-0279  

Economidou-Kogetsidis, M. (2011). “Please answer me as soon as possible”: Pragmatic failure 

in non-native speakers’ e-mail requests to faculty. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(13), 3193–

3215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.06.006  

Gerald, J. (2020). Worth the risk: Towards decentring whiteness in English language teaching. 

BC TEAL Journal, 5(1), 44–54. https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v5i1.345  

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378
http://udlguidelines.cast.org/
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118531242.ch20
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203830932
https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.2019-0279
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.06.006
https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v5i1.345


 Surtees & Yamamoto 40 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

Heng, T. T. (2017). Voices of Chinese international students in USA colleges: ‘I want to tell 

them that…’. Studies in Higher Education, 42(5), 833–850. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1293873  

Heslop, J. (2018). International students in BC’s education systems: Summary of research from 

the Student Transitions Project. Retrieved from 

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/post-secondary-education/data-

research/stp/stp-international-research-results.pdf  

Kobayashi, M., Zappa-Hollman, S., & Duff, P. A. (2017). Academic discourse socialization. In 

P. A. Duff & S. May (Eds.), Language socialization (3rd ed., pp. 239–254). Cham: 

Springer. 

Morita, N. (2004). Negotiating participation and identity in second language academic 

communities. TESOL Quarterly, 38, 573–603. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588281  

Murray, N., & McConachy, T. (2018). “Participation” in the internationalized higher education 

classroom: An academic staff perspective. Journal of International and Intercultural 

Communication, 11(3), 254–3270. https://doi.org/10.1080/17513057.2018.1459789  

Ryan, J., & Viete, R. (2009). Respectful interactions: Learning with international students in the 

English-speaking academy. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(3), 303–314. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510902898866  

Straker, J. (2016). International student participation in higher education: Changing the focus 

from “international students” to “participation”. Journal of Studies in International 

Education, 20(4), 299–3318. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315316628992  

Yang, L. (2010). Doing a group presentation: Negotiations and challenges experienced by five 

Chinese ESL students of commerce at a Canadian University. Language Teaching 

Research, 14(2), 141–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168809353872  

Yates, L., & Nguyen, T. Q. T. (2012). Beyond a discourse of deficit: The meaning of silence in 

the international classroom. International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 

11(1), 22–34. 

https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/index.php/IEJ/article/view/6766/7411 

 

Appendix A 

 

Anonymous online feedback form 

 

Question Response Form 

What did you think about the module?  

• The information was useful. ☆☆☆☆☆ 

• The activities were interesting. ☆☆☆☆☆ 

How easy was it to complete the online module?  

• The level of English was okay for me. ☆☆☆☆☆ 

• The activities worked well on my device 

(e.g., laptop, tablet). 

☆☆☆☆☆ 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1293873
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/post-secondary-education/data-research/stp/stp-international-research-results.pdf
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/post-secondary-education/data-research/stp/stp-international-research-results.pdf
https://doi.org/10.2307/3588281
https://doi.org/10.1080/17513057.2018.1459789
https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510902898866
https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315316628992
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168809353872
https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/index.php/IEJ/article/view/6766/7411


 Surtees & Yamamoto 41 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 29–41 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378 

How long did it take to do the module? • Less than 10 minutes. 

• 10–20 minutes. 

• 20–35 minutes. 

• More than 35 minutes. 

Did you do all the activities? • Yes, all of them! 

• I did some activities. 

• I only did a few activities. 

Which topic did you find most useful • Participating in lectures and seminars 

• Preparing for class 

• Emailing instructors 

• None were useful 

What did you like about the online module?  

(Answer in English or in students’ first language) 

Open-ended text entry response 

What did you NOT like about the online 

module? (Answer in English or in students’ first 

language) 

Open-ended text entry response 

Do you want more online modules? 

 
• Yes, I want more online activities about 

life at the university. 

• Maybe, it depends on the topics and 

activities. 

• No, this module was enough. 

What topics would interest you most? Open-ended text entry response 

Do you have any other questions or comments? 

(Answer in English or in students’ first language) 

Open-ended text entry response 

 

 

 
The BC TEAL Journal is licensed under a 

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. 

Copyright rests with the author(s). 

 

 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.378
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

