From Generalization to Personalization: Designing a Personalized ESP Teaching Model in a Vietnames Private Unversity Context
Abstract
In response to the increasing demand for learner-centered and digitally integrated English instruction, this study investigates the design of personalized English for Specific Purposes (ESP) teaching model at a Vietnamese private university. Employing a convergent mixed-methods approach, the research collected quantitative data from 287 ESP students and qualitative data from eight ESP instructors at Dai Nam University. The study was guided by three research questions addressing learner perceptions, contextual constraints, and predictive factors of support for personalized learning.
Findings revealed strong student support for personalized ESP instruction, particularly when aligned with career goals and delivered through flexible, technology-enhanced formats. Multiple regression analysis showed that motivation and career alignment were the strongest predictors of student receptivity to personalization, followed by technology use. Instructor interviews highlighted pedagogical openness to personalization, but also pointed to structural constraints such as rigid curricula and limited institutional support. Technology-including AI-powered tools and LMS platforms - was seen as a key enabler of scalable personalization.
Drawing on the L2 Motivational Self System, Constructivist Learning Theory, and Universal Design for Learning, the study proposes a context-sensitive, five-stage teaching model integrating learner profiling, differentiated content delivery, and adaptive feedback. The findings offer theoretical and practical insights for transitioning ESP instruction from generalized to personalized formats in Vietnamese higher education and comparable international contexts.
References
2. Belcher, D. (2006). English for Specific Purposes: Teaching to perceived needs and imagined futures in worlds of work, study, and everyday life. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 133–156. https://doi.org/10.2307/40264514
3. Benson, P. (2013). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning (2nd ed.). Routledge.
4. Bray, B., & McClaskey, K. (2015). Personalized learning: A guide for engaging students with voice, choice, and ownership. Corwin Press.
5. Bulger, M. (2016). Personalized learning: The conversations we're not having. Data & Society Research Institute.
6. CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org
7. Doan, T. T. (2021). Challenges in implementing learner-centered teaching in ESP classrooms at Vietnamese universities. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 37(2), 45–59.
8. Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9. Gynther, K. (2016). Design framework for an adaptive MOOC enhanced by blended learning. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 14(1), 15–30.
10. Hall, T., Strangman, N., & Meyer, A. (2003). Differentiated instruction and implications for UDL implementation. National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum.
11. Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
12. Hyland, K. (2009). Teaching and researching writing (2nd ed.). Routledge.
13. Kim, H. J., Hong, A. J., & Song, H. D. (2018). The roles of academic engagement and digital readiness in students’ academic achievement in online learning environments. Educational Technology & Society, 21(1), 27–37. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26273880
14. Le, H. T. (2022). Needs analysis in designing ESP curriculum for non-English majors at a Vietnamese university. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 38(4), 95–111.
15. Nguyen, T. M. H., & Hamid, M. O. (2015). Educational policy borrowing in a globalized world: A case study of CEFR in a Vietnamese university. English Teaching: Practice & Critique, 14(1), 60–74. https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-02-2015-0014
16. Nguyen, T. N., & Vo, M. T. (2021). Exploring EFL teachers' use of LMS for learner engagement in Vietnam. Asian Journal of Education and E-Learning, 9(2), 83–91.
17. Pham, L. T., & Nguyen, D. M. (2020). Digital tools in tertiary ESP classrooms: A study of current practices and student attitudes. Vietnam Journal of Education, 5(3), 12–20.
18. Pane, J. F., Steiner, E. D., Baird, M. D., & Hamilton, L. S. (2015). Continued progress: Promising evidence on personalized learning. RAND Corporation.
19. Reinders, H. (2014). Personalization and autonomy in language learning. In M. Thomas & H. Reinders (Eds.), Contemporary task-based language teaching in Asia (pp. 95–111). Bloomsbury.
20. Teo, T. (2011). Factors influencing teachers’ intention to use technology: Model development and test. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2432–2440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.008
21. Tomlinson, B. (2017). SLA research and materials development for language learning. Routledge.
22. Ushioda, E. (2011). Motivating learners to speak as themselves. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivating learners, motivating teachers (pp. 11–24). Cambridge University Press.
23. VanLehn, K. (2011). The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist, 46(4), 197–221.
24. Vietnam Ministry of Education and Training. (2021). Chuyển đổi số trong giáo dục đại học đến năm 2025, định hướng đến 2030 [Digital Transformation Plan in Higher Education]. Hanoi: MOET.
25. Vu, H. M., & Hoang, T. N. (2020). Matching ESP course content with students' future job requirements: A case study at a Vietnamese university. International Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 321–338. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13421a
26. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
27. Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education: Learning, teaching and administration. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
