Effects of Adjunct Model of Instruction on EAP Learners’ Reading Comprehension Skill

Mahzad Karimi
Elahe Ghorbanchian


With the quick transition to online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is vital to take the recent development in language teaching methodology into consideration, especially the pedagogical utility of new models of English for Academic purposes (EAP). Accordingly, the main objective of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of the adjunct model in improving the overall reading comprehension skills of Iranian architecture students in online EAP courses. To this end, from the population of students studying architecture at the Isfahan University of Art, three intact classes, each with 35 sophomore students were selected. While the first class was taught by a language teacher (the Language-driven Group) and the second class received instruction from a content teacher (the Content-driven Group), the third class was taught by applying the adjunct model involving both content and language teachers. At the end of the semester, a reading comprehension test was administrated to all students. The analysis of the data through running a one-way ANOVA and post hoc analysis revealed that the students in the adjunct class outperformed their peers in the other two classes on the reading comprehension test.


Adjunct Model; EAP Classes; Online Course; Reading Comprehension

Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions. An essay on the division of expert labor. University of Chicago Press.

Allan, D. (2004). Oxford placement test. Oxford University Press.

Atai, M. R. (2002). Iranian EAP programs in practice: A study of ley methodological aspects. Sheikhbahaee Research Bulletin, 1(2), 1–15.

Atai, M. R., Babaii, E., & Taherkhani, R. (2017). Exploring Iranian EAP teachers’ pedagogic content knowledge and teaching practices, and students’ beliefs about EAP teachers’ methodology. Issues in Language Teaching, 6(1), 1–27.

Barwell, R. (2013). The academic and the everyday in mathematicians’ talk: The case of hyperbagel. Language and Education, 27(3), 207–222.

Bos, S. C., & Vaugh, S. (2009). Strategies for teaching students with learning and behavior problems. Pearson Education.

Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. B. (2003). Content-based second language instruction. University of Michigan Press.

Carrio Pastor, L. M. (2009). Content and language integrated learning: Cultural diversity. Peter Lang.

Carrio Pastor, L. M., & Perry, D. (2010). The collaborative approach in content and language integrated learning. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 23(2), 69–81.

Chuang, H. K., Joshi, R. M., & Dixon, L. Q. (2012). Cross-language transfer of reading ability: Evidence from Taiwanese ninth-grade adolescents. Journal of Literacy Research, 44(1), 97–119.

Coyle, D. (2005). Planning tools for teachers. University of Nottingham.

Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge University Press.

Cowan, J. R. (1974). English for medical students. Tehran University Press.

Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content and language integrated learning: From practice to principle. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182–204.

Diane, B. (2009). English for specific purposes in theory and practice. University of Michigan Press.

Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. (1998). Developments in ESP: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge University Press.

Flowerdew, J. (1993). An educational or process approach, approach to teaching of professional genres. ELT Journal, 27, 11–15.

Flowerdew, J., & Peacock, M. (2001). Research perspectives on English for Academic Purposes. Cambridge University Press.

Gilett, A. (2016). EAP management. In K. Hyland & P. Shaw (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of English for Academic Purposes (pp. 530–546). Routledge.

Grabe, W. (2009). Reading a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge University Press.

Granpayeh, A. (2006). A quick review of English quick placement test. Retrieved from University of Cambridge ESOL Examination: http://www.uniss.it/documenti/lingue

Hamp-Lyons, L. (2001). English for Academic Purposes. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge TESOL Guide (pp. 126–130). Cambridge University Press.

Huang, S. C. (2006). Reading English for academic purposes: What situational factors may motivate learners to read? System, 34, 371–383.

Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learner-centered approach. Cambridge University Press.

Hyland, K. & Shaw, P. (2016). The handbook of English for academic purposes. Routledge.

Iancu, M. (1993). Adapting the adjunct model. A case study. TESOL Journal, 2(4), 20–24.

Jabbari, A. A. (2014). Collocational differences in Persian and English their effect on learners’ production. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 1, 172–190.

Kampen, E. V., Admiraal, W., & Berry, A. (2018). Content and language integrated learning in the Netherlands: Teachers’ self-reported pedagogical practices. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(2), 222–236.

Karimi, S. & Dastgoshadeh, A. (2018). The effect of strategy-based instruction on EAP students’ reading performance and reading autonomy. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1–19.

Khales Haghighi, J., & Abdollahi, K. (2014). The efficacy of team teaching and station teaching in the enhancement of students’ reading comprehension in an EAP situation. The Procedia–Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 822–890.

Klinger, J. K., Voughn, S., & Boardman, A. (2007). What works for special needs learners. Teaching reading comprehension to students with learning difficulties. Guilford Press.

Kumaravadivelu, B. (2012). Individual identity, cultural globalization, and teaching English as an international language: The case for epistemic break. In L. Alsagoff, S. L. Mckay, G. Hu, & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Principles and practices for teaching English as an international language (pp. 9–27). Routledge.

Lei, S. A., Rhinehart, P. J., Howard, H. A., & Cho, J. K. (2010). Strategies for improving reading comprehension among college students. Reading Improvement, 47(1), 30–42.

Marsh, D. (2008). CLIL in primary East Asia contexts: Primary innovations in East Asia: Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines. British Council, Bangkok.

Martiarini, E. (2018). Reading for academic purposes: Problems faced by undergraduate students of visual communication design. English Language Education and Literature, 3(1), 16–26.

Mehrabi, M., & Boshrabadi, A. (2016). Does engaging with other disciplines work in EAP? Scaffolding L2 reading comprehension of Iranian law students through team teaching. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(2), 157–165.

Mohan, A. B. (1986). Language and content. Addison Wesley.

Morton, T. (2019). Teacher education in content-based language education. In S. Walsh & S. Mann (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English Language Teacher Education (pp. 169–183). Routledge.

Perin, D. (2013). Literacy skills among academically undergraduate students. Community College Review, 41(2), 118–136.

Phakiti, A. (2006). Theoretical and pedagogical issues in ESL/EFL teaching of strategic reading. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 1, 19–50.

Pritchard, M. O., & Nasr, A. Improving reading performance among Egyptian engineering students: Principles and practices. English for Specific Purposes, 23(4), 425–445.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Robinson, P. C. (1991). ESP today: A practitioner’s guide. Prentice Hall.

Sharndama, C. E., Samaila, Y., & Tsojon, I. Y. (2014). English for academic purpose: A tool for enhancing students’ proficiency in English language skills. International Journal of English Language Teaching, 1(2), 14–20.

Snow, M. A., & Brinton, D. M. (1988). Content-based language instruction: Investigating the effectiveness of the adjunct model. TESOL Quarterly, 22(4), 553–574.

Tahriri, A., & Yamini, M. (2010). On teaching to diversity: Investigating the effectiveness of MI-inspired in an EFL context. Journal of Teaching Language Skills of Shiraz University, 2(1), 166–183.

Tahririan, M., & Sadri, E. (2013). Analysis of images in Iranian EFL course books. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 137–160.

Tan, M. (2011). Mathematics and sciences teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding the teaching of language in content learning. Language Teaching Research, 15(3), 325–342.

Tavakoli, M., & Tavakol, M. (2018). Problematizing EAP education in Iran: A critical ethnographic study of educational, political, and sociocultural roots. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 31, 28–43.

Tomlinson, B. (2011). Material development in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Vosoughi, M., Ghahremani Ghajar, Susan., & Navarchi, A. (2019). Iranian vs. Non-Iranian scholars’ beliefs over collaborative EAP practices: Legitimizing English language instruction EAP courses. Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(4), 11–33.

Wette, R. (2018). Evaluating students learning in a university-level EAP unit on writing using sources. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(3), 158–177.

Wilkinson, R. (2018). Content and language integration at universities? Collaborative reflections. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(5), 607–615.

Wolff, D. (2009). Content and language integrated learning. In K.-F. Knapp & B. Seidelhofer, in cooperation with Henry Widdowson (Eds.), Handbook of foreign language communication and learning (pp. 545–572). Mouton de Gruyter.

Zarifi, A. & Asadpour, E. (2017). Exploring reading comprehension needs of Yasouj EAP students of Persian literature. The Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature, 5(1), 89–98.


Published : 2022-07-29

KarimiM., & GhorbanchianE. (2022). Effects of Adjunct Model of Instruction on EAP Learners’ Reading Comprehension Skill. Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition, 8(2), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.31261/TAPSLA.10432

Mahzad Karimi  mahzad_ka2000@yahoo.com
Islamic Azad University of Isfahan  Iran, Islamic Republic of
Elahe Ghorbanchian 
Islamic Azad University of Isfahan  Iran, Islamic Republic of

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The Copyright Holders of the submitted texts are the Authors. The Reader is granted the rights to use the material available in the TAPSLA websites and pdf documents under the provisions of the Creative Commons 4.0 International License: Attribution - Share Alike  (CC BY-SA 4.0). The user is free to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.

1. License

The University of Silesia Press provides immediate open access to journal’s content under the Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Authors who publish with this journal retain all copyrights and agree to the terms of the above-mentioned CC BY-SA 4.0 license.

2. Author’s Warranties

The author warrants that the article is original, written by stated author/s, has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author/s.

If the article contains illustrative material (drawings, photos, graphs, maps), the author declares that the said works are of his authorship, they do not infringe the rights of the third party (including personal rights, i.a. the authorization to reproduce physical likeness) and the author holds exclusive proprietary copyrights. The author publishes the above works as part of the article under the licence "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International".

ATTENTION! When the legal situation of the illustrative material has not been determined and the necessary consent has not been granted by the proprietary copyrights holders, the submitted material will not be accepted for editorial process. At the same time the author takes full responsibility for providing false data (this also regards covering the costs incurred by the University of Silesia Press and financial claims of the third party).

3. User Rights

Under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, the users are free to share (copy, distribute and transmit the contribution) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the article for any purpose, provided they attribute the contribution in the manner specified by the author or licensor.

4. Co-Authorship

If the article was prepared jointly with other authors, the signatory of this form warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to sign this agreement on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this agreement.

I hereby declare that in the event of withdrawal of the text from the publishing process or submitting it to another publisher without agreement from the editorial office, I agree to cover all costs incurred by the University of Silesia in connection with my application.