







































Open Educational Resources for Online Language Teacher Training: Conceptual Framework and Practical Implementation


 Global Journal of Education and Allied  

Research (GJEAR) 
Volume.14, Number 7; July-2023; 

ISSN: 2837-3707 | Impact Factor: 7.80 

https://zapjournals.com/Journals/index.php/gjear  

Published By: Zendo Academic Publishing 

 

 

pg. 8 

ILLUMINATING THE VIRTUAL CLASSROOM: OER-DRIVEN LANGUAGE 

TEACHER TRAINING ANCHORED IN COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND 

THRESHOLD CONCEPTS  

 

 
1Marco Alessio Rossi, 2Isabella Maria Bianchi, 3Giovanni Luca Martini  

 

Article Info  Abstract 

Keywords:  

Online Teaching, Distance 

Education, Covid-19 Pandemic, 

Professional Development, 

Mental Health Effects 

 

 The evolution of online teaching and learning has spanned several 

decades since its inception, gaining significant momentum with the 

advent of the World Wide Web. Despite the proliferation of platforms, 

tools, and training for online content delivery, the distinct 

professionalism required for effective online teaching has not been 

widely recognized. The urgency of the COVID-19 pandemic expedited 

the transition to online education, often resulting in hastily adapted 

courses without proper planning or specialized training. This shift 

placed educators under unprecedented pressure, leading to challenges 

in managing online contexts and creating engaging learning 

environments. Concurrently, students grappled with adverse mental 

health effects, including isolation, depression, anxiety, and stress 

during home schooling. To establish a sustainable and healthy teacher-

student dynamic, strategies addressing the balance between personal 

and professional life have been emphasized. This paper underscores 

the significance of purposeful strategy development to ameliorate the 

multifaceted challenges posed by online education, aiming to foster a 

more harmonious and effective educational ecosystem. Despite its 

importance, online and distance education remain contentious topics, 

warranting comprehensive exploration and consideration. 
 

 

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 emoderators. Yet, the specific professionality 

                                                      
1 Italian Studies, School of Languages, Literatures and Cultures, University of Galway, Ireland  

 

https://zapjournals.com/Journals/index.php/gjear


Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 9 

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 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 COVID19 

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 micro- learning, 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-learningand-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].  



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 10 

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.  

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 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].  



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 11 

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  

Sociocultural 

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 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 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 12 

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 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 selfdirected learning, 

learner-driven learning, knowledge sharing, layered learning, and what we might call cumulative and scalable 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 13 

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 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 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 14 

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].  

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 

http://tcs4nots.avondale.edu.au/tcs/
http://tcs4nots.avondale.edu.au/tcs/


Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 15 

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 

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.  



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 16 

(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 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.  

  



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 17 

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.  

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.   

  



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 18 

Table 4. Threshold concepts about online language teaching and learning.  

Threshold Concepts  

  Online Language  Teachers  Online Language Learners  

1. Transition towards 

eteaching (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  

2.1L Online learning 

environment requires more 

rules than on campus 

learning.  

  

2.2L Online learning 

environment require a new 

role for learners who have 

more responsibilities.  

 contents    

 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.  
  



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 19 

  

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.  

  

  

4.1L Online learning contexts 

require a new mode of 

interaction between language 

teachers, learners and 

resources.  
  

4.2L Online learning 

environment fosters a feeling 

of isolation.  

  

4.3L Online learning 

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.  

(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. THE LILAC TREE AND THE ONLINE LANGUAGE TEACHER  

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 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 20 

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 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.   



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 21 

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  

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 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 22 

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  

Dempsey, M. & Burke, J. (2021) Lessons Learned: The experiences of teachers in Ireland during the 2020 

pandemic. Project Report. Maynooth University.  

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.  

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.  

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.  

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.  

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.  

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.  

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.  

Hylen, J. (2006) Open Educational Resources: opportunities and challenges. OECD-CERI.  

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  

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/10.1007/978-1-46143185-5_63  

Downes, S. (2007). Models for sustainable Open Educational Resources. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge 

and Learning Objects, 3, 29-44.   



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 23 

Beetham, H. & Sharpe R. (2019) Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: principles and practices of design. 

London. Routledge.  

Koohang, A. & Harman, K. (2007) Advancing sustainability of Open Educational Resources in Issues. Informing 

Science and Information Technology, 4, 535-544.  

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.  

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.  

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.   

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.  

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.  

Knowles, M. S. (1984) Andragogy in action. San Francisco CA: Josey-Bass Publisher.  

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.  

Major, A. & Calandrino, T. (2018) Beyond chunking: micro-learning secrets for effective online design. FDLA 

Journal: 15(2), 27-30.  

Sweller, J. (2014) Working memory, long-term memory, and instructional design. Journal of Applied Research 

in Memory and Cognition, 5(4), 360-367.  

Fox, A. (2006) Microlearning for effective performance management. Talent Development, 70(4), 116-117.   

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.  

Buchem, I. and Hamelmann, H. (2010) Microlearning: a strategy for ongoing professional development. E-

Learning Papers: 21. http://elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media23707  

Hug, T. (2009) Outline of a microlearning agenda. eLearning papers: 16 www.elearningpress.ue  

http://elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media23707
http://elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media23707


Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 24 

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.  

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.  

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).  

Cousin, G. (2006) An introduction to threshold concepts. Planet.   

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.  

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), 421439.  


