In part two of ‘are we still language teachers?’ I’m joined in the studio by Thuy Thai and Charles Lam from the University of Leeds. Thuy and Charles argue for the continued relevance of language proficiency in education and in the role of EAP. We also examine the broadening scope of ‘academic skills’ that has come to include AI literacy, and raising awareness among students about things like overreliance and ethical use.

We discuss Thuy’s research into green traffic lights, and give thoughts on the precedents and pitfalls of cognitive offloading, revisiting territory from earlier episodes with Danny Liu and Michael Gerlich. Thuy and Charles also give their take on the findings of the notorious MIT study.

Thuy Thai is a lecturer in English for Academic Purposes at the Language Centre, School of Languages, Cultures and Societies at the University of Leeds. She has a background in academic language instruction, test and assessment development and student support. She previously worked at Leeds Trinity University as a student achievement adviser, where she supported diverse student cohorts in navigating academic challenges and developing effective study strategies. Earlier in her career, she served as a test development researcher at the University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University-Hanoi. Alongside her research role, she also developed and taught EAP courses, helping students gain the academic language needed for success in Vietnam’s higher education.

Charles Lam is a Lecturer in English for Academic Purposes in the Language Centre, School of Languages, Cultures and Societies at University of Leeds. He graduated at Purdue University in the US. Prior to joining Leeds, he taught linguistics and EAP for several years in Hong Kong. His teaching interests lie in academic communications in STEM. Currently he co-leads Academic Literacies for Biological Sciences and Language for Engineering. His research includes corpus linguistics and digital humanities.

Kosmyna, N., Hauptmann, E., Yuan, Y. T., Situ, J., Liao, X. H., Beresnitzky, A. V., and Maes, P. (2025). Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt when Using an AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.08872.

Today I’m in conversation with Paul Breen, Senior Digital Learning Developer at UCL to get his take on how EAP and ‘hub’ disciplines should be adapting in the wake of AI. We often hear about the need to ‘embrace’ AI, so we try to unpack what this actually means.

EAP practitioners and learning developers are often looked at as the ones to help students navigate the demands and conventions of academia, so who better than to set students straight on what constitutes appropriate use, what a purple traffic light means on an assignment brief and the myriad capabilities and limitations of Chat GPT. But how many EAP teachers feel qualified to deal with these issues? Paul and I talk about this and a range of other topics, such as how EAP teachers from the past would react to today’s EAP, the need for language proficiency, translanguaging, the relevance of certification, and more.

Paul Breen is Senior Digital Learning Developer and Lecturer in EAP at UCL Centre for Languages and International Education. His research interests are in educational technology, language and identity and social justice. He is the author of Developing Educators in the Digital Age.

Further reading

Breen, P. (2018). Developing Educators for the Digital Age: A Framework for Capturing Knowledge in Action. London: University of Westminster Press.

Today I'm talking with Danny Liu about assessment in the age of AI. So far, the idea of a 'traffic light' approach to assessment has been gaining traction in higher education in response to the widespread availability of generative AI. Using the traffic light metaphor, assignments are colour coded according to the level of AI use deemed to be permissible. However, as these systems rely solely on student self report on the level of AI use, Danny argues that there is a danger that they lose their value as valid assessment tools.

Danny talks us through the two-lane approach to assessment that has been adopted at the University of Sydney, distinguishing between 'Lane One' supervised assessments aimed at measuring student capability and 'Lane Two' assessments that encourage learning and engagement with AI. We talk through the process of making structural assessment changes, responses from academics, retaining student engagement, and a range of other topics.

Danny is a molecular biologist by training, programmer by night, researcher and faculty developer by day, and educator at heart. A multiple international and national teaching award winner, he works at the confluence of artificial intelligence, student engagement, and educational technology. A Professor of Educational Technologies at the University of Sydney, he co-chairs the University's AI in Education working group, and leads the Cogniti.ai initiative that puts educators in the driver's seat of AI.

Find Danny on Linkedin at https://www.linkedin.com/in/dannydotliu/ and check out the University of Sydney’s AI for Educators resource page at https://canvas.sydney.edu.au/courses/63765

Corbin, T., Dawson, P. and Liu, D. (2025). Talk is cheap: why structural assessment changes are needed for a time of GenAI. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, pp. 1–11. Available at: doi: 10.1080/02602938.2025.2503964.

Liu, D. (2025). A "two lane" approach to assessment in the age of AI: Balancing integrity with relevance. Digitally Enhanced Education Webinars. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf8-b1H3qOU [accessed 16th May 2025]

Liu, D., and A. Bridgeman. (2023). 'What to Do about Assessments If we Can’t out-Design or out-Run AI? Teaching@Sydney. Available at: https://educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au/teaching%40sydney/what-to-do-about-assessments-if-we-cant-out-design-or-out-run-ai/