Introduction

Language teachers' cognition is a topic of increasing interest among teacher education researchers, and it is a globally studied phenomenon that seeks to discover what teachers know, believe, and practise when it comes to acquiring and teaching a second language (L2) (Borg, 2003; 2015; Farrell, 2015). Existing literature, however, indicates that language teachers' beliefs about various aspects of language teaching and learning are complex (Farrell and Ives, 2015; Orafi and Borg, 2009), and have a direct relationship to their classroom practises (Basturkmen, 2012; Rahman et al., 2018; 2019; Zheng & Borg, 2014). According to Farrell and Yang (2017), it is critical for language teachers to uncover their beliefs about language teaching and learning and their classroom practises to determine whether they are convergent or divergent. Furthermore, the importance of teacher cognition in teacher education must be recognised because it ultimately shapes the language learning environment that they attempt to create for their L2 students in the classroom (Johnson, 2015).

According to Richards (1996) L2 teachers develop their pedagogical beliefs and their own language teaching principles based on their experience, training, and understanding of the language itself. Successful L2 teachers develop their own beliefs, trends, and practises about classroom teaching over the course of their careers, which they promote in the classroom (Farrell, 2016). Davis (2003) expanded on the significance of teachers' pedagogical beliefs by stating that whatever instructors design to conduct a class stems from their long held perceptions.

The teachers have a strong tendency to shape the learning environment in the form of class activity, activity type, and so on, based on their pre-existing beliefs. Without exception, L2 instructors always provide a very distinct rationale for teaching and do their best to create a learning environment in the classroom that is conducive to learning (Richards & Lockhart, 1994). Personal values help teachers maintain highly effective teaching practises, determining the role of teachers and learners, and, most importantly, teacher-student relationships (Johnson, 1992). Effective teaching is a combination of knowledge, abilities, and attitudes, and it emphasizes the need for ongoing professional development and reflective practice in guiding teachers to continuously improve their practice and meet the different needs of their students (Richards & Lockhart, 1994). The intrinsic insights that instructors gain over the course of their teaching careers help them make instructional decisions in the classroom and motivate them to perform on merit (Richards, 1996). Teachers may even interpret teaching and set learning outcomes for students based on their prior personal values (Halkes & Deijkers, 1984). Needless to say, they have a strong tendency to judge learners' success based on their attitudes. Although teachers develop teaching principles over time, their ideologies change in the requirement of the classroom environment. As a result, a case study with an English as a foreign language (EFL) teacher is carried out to investigate the extent to which her personal principles and pedagogical beliefs about teaching differ from the reality of her classroom teaching traits.

Conceptualising teachers’ beliefs

Teachers' beliefs are based on teacher’s cognition. Teacher’s cognition in language teaching was originally defined as "wha­­­t teachers think, know, and believe" (Borg, 2003 p.81). According to Borg (2015), teacher cognition is comprised of several psychological constructs, including belief, knowledge, attitude, perception, assumption, conception, and principle. Borg's framework defines these concepts, as well as aspects of teaching and learning, that is, teachers' cognition which influences teacher’s practise in the classroom, and these practises influence teachers’ cognition (Borg, 2005). The specific component of teachers’ cognition investigated in the current study is teachers' beliefs in conjunction with their beliefs regarding L2 speaking and their teaching practises in the classroom.

Figure 1: Conceptual framework of teacher cognition. Adapted from Borg (2015).

Relationship between teachers’ stated beliefs and practices for language teaching

Richards (1996) pointed out that teachers have rational orientations toward teaching as well as personal beliefs about what constitutes classroom teaching; these lead them to try to create a specific design in their classrooms. Classroom teaching is largely shaped and operated based on what the facilitators think and believe about it. Teachers, even the people from other professions, in agreement with the beliefs they possess (Garcia & Lewis, 2014). These teaching ideologies and instincts influence their classroom decisions, procedures, and practices (Burns, 1996; Pajares, 1992; Woods, 1996).

On the other hand, teachers sometimes fail to perform according to their beliefs due to complicated issues regarding their belief systems, involving factors such as their networks of beliefs about programs, language, learners, and materials (Burns, 1996), as well as their coherent beliefs, assumptions, and knowledge about teaching and learning (Woods, 1996). While, their teaching philosophies partially change in the classroom due to the need to act upon the demand of reality, they never deviate from their core set of principles about the classroom language teachings (Phipps & Borg, 2009). Basturkmen et al., (2004) referred to “espoused theories” and “theory in use”, which suggest that some of teachers’ beliefs are mediated in practice without the teachers’ realizing it. Moreover, teachers are inclined to draw on “practical theories” rather than “technical theories” when confronted with contextual incidents in the classroom (Ellis, 1997).

Due to these various external or internal factors, teachers have difficulties in putting their new beliefs into practice, thus inconsistencies appear. The failure to actualize the new ideas can, in turn, inhibit the reshaping of belief systems. Guskey (1986) argues that only after teachers witness better teaching results through applying the new ideas in practice, teachers’ new beliefs can really replace their prior beliefs about teaching and the new set of ideologies become dominant. This indicates the bi-directional causal relationship between teachers’ beliefs and instructional experiences (Borg, 2009). Thereby, in order to reinforce the impact of teachers’ new beliefs and to regain consistency, contextual obstacles need to be removed and teachers need to be equipped with sound pedagogical knowledge and skills (Garcia & Lewis, 2014).

According to Farrell & Yang (2017), given the scarcity of existing research, the beliefs and practises of teachers of English for academic purposes (EAP), particularly their teaching of L2 speaking, are an area that needs to be explored. According to Nation & Newton (2009), one reason for the scarcity of existing research is that L2 speaking is frequently regarded as a neglected teaching skill in L2 classrooms. Farrell & Yang (2017) found inconclusive results in their study that explored EAP teachers' beliefs and practises in relation to teaching speaking. Although their research findings indicate that there was some convergence between EAP teachers' beliefs and practises when it came to teaching L2 speaking, there were some instances of divergence. This study began with the assumption that the divergence occurred as a result of the teacher's need to make certain classroom decisions based on the realities of the lesson in order to maintain a continuous instructional flow in the class. The purpose of this study is to contribute to the literature by reflecting on the beliefs and classroom practises of one EAP teacher in Bangladesh when teaching L2 speaking classes.

The following research questions have guided the current study’s data collection and analysis:

1. What are the stated beliefs of an EAP teacher in relation to teaching L2 speaking?
2. What are the EAP teachers’ observed classroom practices regarding teaching L2 speaking?
3. What is the relationship between the EAP teacher’s stated beliefs and observed classroom practices?

Methodology

This case study used primary data to explore the connection between the principles and practices of an L2 Speaking teacher. This type of investigation tracks the natural attitudes and beliefs of a teacher followed by the dissimilarity of those dynamics. All in all, case studies are proven to be successful in extending comprehension of L2 teaching (Farrell & Ives, 2015).

Participant selection

One female ESL teacher who worked in a language program as an assistant professor at a University was interviewed and observed in her class. She had undergraduate and graduate degrees in Language and Literature and ELT respectively from a private university of Bangladesh. The instructor had worked for approximately ten years in the university level EAP program at the time this research study took place. The instructor appreciated the chance to participate in the study since it allowed her to go deeper into her teaching and speaking beliefs and practices. We shared the results with the participant for member checking; so she could verify her thoughts and provide any input. After verifying the result she did not add anything else or disagree with our interpretation.

Informed consent

In this study, oral informed consent was obtained from the participant. The interviewee readily agreed to answer the interview questions. She expressed feelings for writing the answers rather than speaking them. She took two weeks and returned the written responses and told not to mention her name so we did not do it. She allowed us to observe one of her classes, but suggested that only one of us, not all, to join her class. So, our first author observed her class and recorded data on the observation protocol.

Context

This study took place in an EAP language program entitled Advanced English Skills and the course was listed in the catalogue as ENG: 102 and offered to the undergraduate students in their second semester. The course aimed to improve learners’ English to ease their academic life at Southeast University. There were around 30 registered students in the course, and they had three hours class time in each week to practice their reading, writing, grammar, listening, and speaking skills. The placement of the students in the class was not done through any test or criteria, thus there were mixed ability learners in the classroom. The teacher was given one specific curriculum plan which is followed centrally and course textbook to aid instruction.

Data collection instruments

Two different research instruments were employed to obtain evidence for this study: interviews and classroom observations. Data was collected from one 80-minute classroom observation with a subsequent 30-minute interview. The researcher conducted the interview with a semi-structured questionnaire comprised of six questions. We asked three questions related to the lesson before observing the class. Asking semi-structured questions leads to explorative qualitative data which helps to find the in-depth insights about the pressing issues (Creswell, 2012).

With the permission of the teacher, her opinions were written down and the teacher even added some notes when needed. After she was interviewed, the researchers observed her speaking lesson to document the congruence and incongruence of her beliefs in the classroom. Notes were taken and recoded beside her views which the researchers collected through an interview.

Data analysis

This intrinsic case study was conducted to find in-depth insights on three research questions which guided data collection followed by analysis. The data collected from classroom observation and in the semi-structured interview were transcribed and analysed using qualitative content analysis. The EAP teacher was interviewed with six open-ended questions before the observation had taken place (see Appendices       1 and 2). The data were analysed inductively, developing codes and themes, what Yin (2018) explained as “working your data from the ground up” (p. 217). The transcripts were scanned repeatedly for recurring themes (Creswell & Poth, 2017). Once this was concluded, they were compared with the other types of data to discover similarities (e.g., field notes from classroom observation). The themes emerged from the data derived from two cases are presented under each research question. The themes emerged from the data derived from two cases are presented under each research question.

Findings

The results of the data analysis are presented below under three themes which were developed from the research questions.

Stated beliefs of the EAP teacher in relation to teaching L2 speaking.

Table 1 is a brief overview about the EAP teacher’s beliefs in the form of teachers’ role, teaching L2 speaking, and the students’ role. Findings are outlined based on the thematic categories listed in this Table.

Table 1: EAP teacher’s stated beliefs.

The first thematic category highlighted in Table 1 is the EAP teachers' perceptions of their role as teachers. In the interview, she stated that teachers should be a “comprehensive source of input” in the classroom. For example, she stated that the teacher must design the lesson that provides learners opportunities to learn something from the class. She said that the teacher's input was required to supplement the students' need. She believed “a teacher must be unobtrusive while monitoring students' performance”. The learners would be able to be autonomous and self-reflective as a result. She stated that intervening during learners' pair or group work disrupted the natural flow of their learning. Indeed, she emphasised the disadvantages of any direct intervention in their learning process. Instead, she suggested that teachers should serve as scaffolders. An instructor, in her opinion, must provide a "comprehensive source of input-provider of differential-clear task and instruction design-facilitator-unobtrusive monitor-scaffolder, interaction-manager empowering peer-interaction and reflection-source of final feedback and input as required."

She emphasised the critical need for an interactive teaching-learning approach, claiming that it could potentially help learners improve their L2 speaking skills. To provide light feedback on learners' errors, the EAP teacher explained that if “there was a pronunciation problem that impeded understanding the message, [she] would repeat the word to signal error location, try to explain the position of the tongue and lips for the learners to drill the sound, and then ask the other students to practise voicing the sound”. She did, however, reiterate that if the errors were in grammar, she would prefer off-line feedback which the teacher provided after the class. The teacher only provided grammar feedback if the error alters the meaning.

The objective of a lesson understandably varied, but comprehensive and positive corrective feedback was never provided, hindering either on-going speaking production or individual learner-motivation. While some instantaneous pattern of indirect feedback like “echoing” is rather useful in post-speaking elicitation-stage, learner-perception of the feedback must be carefully monitored at varying developmental stages of speaking. The timing and form of feedback can either assist or inhibit the skill-development of an individual learner (Farell, 2016). She mentioned “I find off line feedback on forms is more effective than online”.

The second thematic category indicated in Table 1 is the EAP teacher’s stated beliefs regarding the actual teaching of L2 speaking. She stated “the main goal of teaching L2 speaking [was] to make the class as student-centered as possible. In general, there should be a lot of student talk and a lot less teacher talk. To create such a classroom environment, the instructor must create materials that cater to their real-life experience, culture, choice, and, most importantly, complement their learning. She also stated, “providing students with more opportunities to speak on well-known topics motivates them to express their ideas and improve their speaking skills”. Furthermore, the EAP teacher expressed her tolerance for students' first languages (L1) being used in class if not overly so; she stated: “With this [basic] level, it is inevitable to find students using L1, as long as they are using that language to help each other understand, it is okay” since the main objective of teaching L2 speaking is to make the class as student-centered as possible. To do this, the instructor needs to design materials which cater their real-life experience, culture, choice and most importantly complement their learning. She also stated that giving students more opportunities to speak on known topics certainly motivates them to express their ideas and maximise their speaking competence.

In her opinion, “a spoken class is best designed when it is student-centered, interactive, inclusive, authentic, related to real-life experience, and full of purpose-driven”. There should be pair work or group work that provoke leadership-dynamics to ensure the successful completion of a task.

The third thematic category indicated in Table 1 is EAP teacher’s stated beliefs regarding role of learners’ in a L2 speaking class. According to her, “the most important stakeholders are the students”. There is a growing importance of learner’s role. She believes… “teaching and learning of any skill is an active interactive process where both have active and equally productive roles to play”. The learners need to play active role in terms of the following:

1. Being responsive to L2 exposure in a meaningful way
2. Ensuring active and meaningful input and integration of both linguistic and functional input with existing schema and communicative competence
3. Ensuring focused, meaningful and consistent practice on regular basis
4. Getting own queries addressed through linguistic, communicative, functional and other forms of reflective input
5. Ensuring discreet-point progress through specific element-focused monitoring of own performance and developmental self-reflection
6. Relying on constant real-life application and practice

Institution, class, teachers or any other logistic supports are only there to aid learners in their learning process. Any outcome is utterly impossible if they are not being responsive to L2 exposure in meaningful way. She remarked, “[they can advance their learning by] ensuring active and meaningful input and integration of both linguistic and functional input with existing schema and communicative competence”.

She stated that the obvious role of the leaners is that “they should take initiatives for their own learning”. Though the aforementioned roles of the learners are closely linked to their success, it is not justified if they fail to use the langue in their real life situation.

EAP teachers’ observed classroom practices regarding teaching L2 speaking.

Table 2 reports a summary of observed practices in an EAP teacher’s speaking class. As Table 2 indicates, the plan that teacher executed in class did not actively include learners in the process of teaching and learning. To be more specific, the class was not student-centre though occasionally learners’ insights, thoughts and opinions were valued. The next feature complements the dark side of the former one. The teacher used group work as lone interactive pattern and rest of the time delivered lecture. That group work did not work well as it was of four members and they made few semi-groups. Moreover, the group members used their first language while they were supposed to use L2. As she focused only on one ‘interactive pattern’ which was group work, peer work or individual work were eventually left out from the class. The most important step of a successful lesson, stage-wise development in the form of a continuum with was not provided by the teacher. The plan did not include presentation-practice and production mode of language teaching and learning or any other established teaching pedagogy (Harmer, 2009). Teacher assigned topic for each group and they worked on it for 15 minutes and after they prepared the presentation, the members had spoken on the given topic before the class. In most of the cases, few of the members covered entire time slot. No fair measurement for the learners was seen as time was unequally distributed.

Source: The information in this table comes from both interviews and direct classroom observations. The frequency of various practices is defined with the help of the classroom observation notes.

Table 2: EAP teacher’s classroom practice

From the Table above, it is evident that teaching L2 speaking is in second in the peeking order. The EAP teacher’s beliefs regarding the aforementioned phenomena outline that her feelings about the importance of fluency in language teaching is completely contrastive. She intervened learners’ flow of speaking and often corrected errors in form. Even the teacher did not wait until the end of the presentation; she obstructed the spontaneity and provided corrected feedback. In fact, the feedback outweighed the presentation time of the students. No exceptional teaching style was followed by the teacher to complement students’ learning. She only assigned one group work which covered the full class time and learners were discussing the topic using both first and second language. Hardly any input for other skills was found during the lesson.

The final observed belief is learners’ role in the class and she thinks “learners necessarily need to convey meaning while they make any responses in the class”. At the time of observing her class, it was found that only few students had successful responses and multiple times the teacher helped the learners to make meaningful responses. The striking contrast was observed regarding individual work. Her perception is that learners should be given individual work as it offers a way to scrutinize learning growth though no such role was assigned to the learners. The phenomena ‘Ensuring focused, meaningful and consistent practice on regular basis did not look promising either as the learners almost turned down that possibility with their repeated reluctance to use L2 in the class.

Relationship between the EAP teacher’s stated beliefs and observed classroom practices.

Table 3 outlines a comparison between the EAP teacher’s stated beliefs and her observed classroom practices. Overall, as Table 3 indicates, her beliefs tended to slightly converge with her observed classroom practices but there were profound instances where they diverged. In particular, the observed EAP instructor’s beliefs about the teacher’s role seem to show the strongest convergence with her classroom practices which is pretty much consistent with her stated beliefs that a teacher should be a comprehensive source of input.

Furthermore, there was a convergence in regard to error correction. She stated that she would give students direct correction if it is required. She provided direct correction explicitly either to students individually or to the whole class. In terms of the EAP teacher’s beliefs about teaching L2 speaking, there was mainly convergence with her monitoring, scaffolding, feedback except for the limited occurrences observed where students were given different options to provide their learning style.

Table 3: EAP teacher’s stated beliefs and observed classroom practices.

She also commented that she likes to “keep the class student-centered though she demonstrated this belief in a very limited way”. She allowed one group work which left some space for the students and took dominant amount of number of minutes to discuss content of the lesson. The significance of peer feedback is on high though no such approach was executed to make them responsible for their own learning though failed to demonstrate it in the class. According to the observed EAP teacher, L1 can be used in the class and she demonstrated it allowing students to speak in their L1 to clarify a concept. Her preference about classroom material closely converged as she used socio-cultural appropriate materials. To execute this, she brought topics which were related to technology, social discrimination and so on.

Her expressed beliefs regarding students’ role in the classroom marginally converged and widely diverged. She felt the need of students’ self-reflection ability to take responsibility for their own learning, but there was no such time that she allowed students to do so. Students were found in some occasions to create meaningful conversations however they did not show any interest to continue the same pace of practice inside and outside the class.

Discussion

The findings of this exploratory case study show that, despite some convergences on rare occasions, the majority of EAP teachers' beliefs diverged. The beliefs she expressed during the interview were not in line with the practises she demonstrated in class.

The observed EAP teacher regards herself as a source of input during her lessons in L2 speaking class, and she tends to provide to learners' learning styles by designing a variety of levels and types of tasks. To emphasise her teaching pedagogy, the teacher stated that scaffolding learners' struggles would assist them in taking responsibility for their own learning, whereas providing input might result in a block. The EAP teacher opposed stricter monitoring but did not share the same sentiment regarding final feedback and input. She gave feedback when it was needed. For example, by repeating the errors, she signalled and located the pronunciation error. According to her, peer interaction and reflection gained enormous traction because they help measure the clan level of development for each individual learner. In relation to teaching L2 speaking, she echoed a similar tune, fluency over accuracy, and emphasised the importance of including authentic materials in the class lesson. In terms of teaching L2 speaking, her top-notch perception was a student-centered classroom. According to her observations, dynamic task design can provide an effective journey for a student-centered classroom. To emphasise the learners' role, she emphasised their interest and ability to apply learning outcomes in real-life situations.

The observed class did not explicitly replicate her beliefs, despite the fact that the few (interactive pattern and learner-center lesson) were present on a few occasions, and features such as peer feedback, measuring individual outcomes, and so on, were completely absent from the premise. Students had to adjust to the instructor's teaching style because she did not offer any variety in that regard. Students were assigned to groups for the duration of the class and asked to prepare a final presentation. Other than speaking, no other language skills were honed. She believes students should provide meaningful responses. Her belief about individual performance of learners was reversed when they were allowed to work independently. The students failed to provide any compelling evidence that they would use the language in real-life situations.

A surprising trend can be seen in her beliefs and practises, as most of her beliefs diverged while only a few converged. The greatest convergence remains in the role of teachers, which is consistent with her belief. However, in her classroom, beliefs about teaching L2 speaking and learners' roles were mostly seen as myths rather than realities. Except on rare occasions, her beliefs were completely reversed.

Previous research indicates that teachers' beliefs rarely exhibit divergence, whereas the beliefs held by this observed EAP teacher are significantly divergent, with only a few instances of convergence. Surprisingly, her perceptions of language teaching contradicted her classroom practises (see Farrell 2015; Orafi & Borg, 2009; Rahman et al., 2019). Context is important in teacher practise in the classroom. According to Farrell (2015), the classroom is a platform where instructors are required to make on-the-spot decisions in order to ensure the smooth flow of any lesson. Also, they, must do so, even if a specific component was not included in the original plan. Her lesson, to some extent, replicated Farrell's findings because she changed almost everything as the class required with change. "What is the goal of your lesson?" she was asked. She stated that she could not predict what she would plan for the class, which is consistent with previous research on implementing communicative classrooms in L2 contexts (see Rahman et al., 2018).

This could be a precursor to the disparities between her beliefs and practises in L2 speaking class. Senior (2006) stated that teachers demonstrate practises that they do not share during the interview to supplement Farrell's (2016) interpretations of teaching L2 speaking. This leads to the conclusion that, when it comes to teaching L2 speaking, teachers should prefer a reflection-in-action approach. Knezedivc (2001), on the other hand, does not let this persistent gap go unnoticed and criticises it, and he continues to believe that it is prudent to close this loophole.

According to the study's findings, the observed EAP teacher did not make a conscious effort to reflect on her beliefs about teaching English. As a result, she mostly failed or barely showcased her practise, despite the fact that it was highly context dependent. However, it is critical for language teachers to remain conscious of their beliefs and their impact on classroom practises.  Instead of allowing students' views and behaviour to continue unchecked, language teachers should be sceptical of any claim of devotion that they consider to be consistent with the current teaching paradigm. This is due to the fact that students' ideas and behaviour can have a substantial effect on their capacity to learn (Woods, 1996).

According to Borg (2005), psychological anticipation of teaching influences teachers' cognition. He even claimed that teachers are motivated and conditioned to design and plan their classroom activities based on their cognition. There is a significant overlap between their beliefs and practises (Borg, 2015). Though the findings of this study challenge the conceptual design by demonstrating that teachers' stated beliefs diverge significantly in practise. This occurs when teachers fail to put their beliefs into action. Reflective practise generally implies that teachers critically examine their beliefs about teaching and learning and thus accept full responsibility for their classroom actions because these beliefs are reflected in these classroom actions (Farrell, 2015). "Teachers are active, thinking decision-makers who make instructional choices by drawing on complex practically-oriented, personalised, and context-sensitive networks of knowledge, thoughts, and beliefs," (Borg, 2003 p.81). Nonetheless, not all language teachers are aware of their beliefs or the extent to which they are reflected on their classroom practises (Farrell, 2015).

Considering the preceding references, it is clear that the framework requires a direct link between teachers' beliefs and practises. Indeed, the framework guides teachers through the process of reflecting on their philosophy, principles, theory, practise, and beyond practise. However, this study differs from many established ideas in that the instructor is unaware of her own insights and practises. These disparities can be bridged by increasing awareness of stated and unstated beliefs, as well as classroom practises (Farrell, 2015). Aside from awareness, there are some external and internal factors that contribute to this inconsistency, which should be investigated further in the future.

Conclusion

This exploratory case study examines an EAP teacher's stated beliefs and classroom practise when it comes to teaching L2 speaking. The study's findings show a divergence to a minimal margin between EAP teachers' beliefs and practises when it comes to teaching L2 speaking, though there were some convergences on a few occasions. The findings are highly unlikely because previous studies show an opposite trend for the same unit, though this is very context specific and cannot be generalised. According to the findings of my investigation, the significant divergence was caused by the teachers' lack of awareness as well as their failure to cater to the realities of the lesson in order to maintain the class's continuous instructional flow. This study was not designed to demonstrate the best practises for teaching L2 speaking, but rather to encourage communication and reflection on a teacher's beliefs and classroom practises. We can help ensure optimal learning conditions for students by raising awareness about teaching beliefs and potential practises. The findings of this study may not be generalizable because they were based on a single case study, but they can be used as an example in similar contexts.

References

Basturkmen, H. (2012). Review of research into the correspondence between language teachers’ stated beliefs and practices. System, 40(2), 282–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2012.05.001

Basturkmen, H., Loewen, S., & Ellis, R. (2004). Teachers’ stated beliefs about incidental focus on form and their classroom practices. Applied Linguistics, 25(2), 243-272. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.243

Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81–109. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444803001903

Borg, S. (2005). Teachers’ cognition in language teaching. In K. Johnson (Ed.), Expertise in Second Language Learning and Teaching (pp.190-209). https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230523470_10

Borg, S. (2009). Introducing language teacher cognition. University of Leeds.

Borg, S. (2015). Teacher cognition and language education. Bloomsbury.

Burns, A. (1996). Starting all over again: from teaching adults to teaching beginners. In D. Freeman & J. C. Richards (Eds.),Teacher learning in language teaching (pp. 154-176). Cambridge University Press.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4^thed.) Pearson.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4^th  ed.). Sage.

Davis, A. (2003). Teachers’ and students’ beliefs regarding aspects of language learning. Evaluation and Research inEducation, 17(4), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500790308668303

Ellis, R. (1997). SLA research and language teaching. Oxford University Press.

Farrell, T. S. C. (2015). Promoting teacher reflection in second language education: A framework for TESOL professionals. Routledge.

Farrell, T. S. C. (2016). The teacher is a facilitator: reflecting on ESL teacher beliefs through metaphor analysis. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 4(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2016.20374

Farrell, T. S. C., & Ives, J. (2015). Exploring teacher beliefs and classroom practices through reflective practice: A case study.Language Teaching Research, 19(5), 594–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814541722

Farrell, T. S. C., & Yang, D. (2017). Exploring an EAP teacher’s beliefs and practices in teaching L2 speaking: A case study. RELC Journal, 50(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688217730144

Garcia, J. A., & Lewis, T. E. (2014). Getting a grip on the classroom: From psychological to phenomenological curriculum development in teacher education programs. Curriculum Inquiry, 44(2), 141–168. https://doi.org/10.1111/curi.12042

Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher, 15(5), 5-12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015005005

Halkes, R., & Deijkers, R. (1984). Teachers' thinking criteria. In R. Halkes & J. K. Olson (Eds.), Teacher thinking: A new perspective on persisting problems in education. Swets & Zeitling.

Harmer, J. (2009). The practice of English language teaching (4^th ed.). Longman.

Johnson, K. E. (1992). The relationship between teachers' beliefs and practices during literacy instruction for non-native speakers. English Journal of Reading Behavior, 24(1), 83-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862969209547763

Johnson, K. E. (2015). Reclaiming the relevance of L2 teacher education. The Modern Language Journal, 99(3), 515-528.https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12242

Knezedivc, B. (2001). Action research. IATEFL TTEdSIG Newsletter, 1, 10– 12.

Nation, I. S. P., & Newton, J. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. Routledge.

Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543062003307

Phipps, S., & Borg, S. (2009). Exploring tensions between teachers’ grammar teaching beliefs and practices. System, 37(3), 380–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.03.002

Rahman, M. M., Johan, M., Selim, S. M. M., Singh, M. K. M., & Shahed, F. H. (2019). Teachers' beliefs and practices of implementing secondary English curriculum reform in Bangladesh: A phenomenological study. Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(2), 591-608. http://dx.doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2019.16.2.9.576

Rahman, M. M., Singh, M. K. M., & Pandian, A. (2018). Exploring ESL teacher beliefs and Classroom Practices of CLT: A Case Study. International Journal of Instruction, 11(1), 295-310. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11121a

Richards, J. C. (1996). Teachers' maxims in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 30(2), 281-296. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588144

Richards, J. C., & Lockhart, C. (1994). Reflective teaching in second language classrooms. Cambridge University Press

Senior, R. (2006). The experience of language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Woods, D. (1996). Structure and process in ESL teaching. Cambridge University Press

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage.

Zheng, X., & Borg, S. (2014). Task-based learning and teaching in China: Secondary school teachers’ beliefs and practices. Language Teaching Research, 18(2), 205–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813505941