Advertisement

Instructional Language Use in Environmental Science Classroom

  • Fay ChenEmail author
Chapter
Part of the English Language Education book series (ELED, volume 8)

Abstract

The language used in an EMI classroom falls into two major kinds: language of the target discipline and instructional language. This chapter examines how the latter is used in EMI classroom lectures within the discipline of environmental science. While the subject of instructional language has been extensively explored in English language teaching, research-based instructional strategies for EMI have yet to receive proper attention. Informed by transcriptions from classroom observations, this chapter recommends a framework for teaching which can be deployed by EMI instructors. Organizationally, instructional language use will be discussed in terms of three fundamental lesson segments: routines, such as explaining learning goals and classroom rules; teaching of content knowledge; and scenarios enacted on the spot to encourage student engagement, entertain, and foster teacher/student relationships.

Keywords

International Student Science Classroom English Proficiency Classroom Observation Student Survey 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2006). Language and the experience of learning university physics in Sweden. European Journal of Physics, 27, 553–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity. London, UK: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  3. Christie, F. (1997). Curriculum macrogenres as forms of initiation into a culture. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 134–160). London, UK/New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
  4. Dearden, J. (2015). English as a medium of instruction—A growing global phenomenon. Oxford, UK: University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  5. Gardner, P. L. (1972). ‘Words in Science’: An investigation of non-technical vocabulary difficulties amongst form I, II, III and IV science students in Victoria. Melbourne, VIC: Australian Science Education Project.Google Scholar
  6. Li, D. C. S. (2008). Understanding mixed code and classroom code-switching: Myths and realities. New Horizons in Education, 56, 75–87.Google Scholar
  7. Lynch, T. (2015). International students’ perceptions of university lectures in English. International Student Experience Journal, 3(1), no page. Retrieved from http://isejournal.weebly.com/uploads/1/6/3/1/16311372/isej_028.01.15_tony.pdf
  8. Matthews, M. R. (1998). Introductory comments on philosophy and constructivism in science education. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), Constructivism in science education (pp. 1–10). Dordretcht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Morell, T., Garcia, M., & Sanchez, I. (2008). Multimodal strategies for effective academic presentation in English for non-native speakers. In R. Monroy & A. Sanchez (Eds.), 25 years of applied linguistics in Spain: Milestones and challenges (pp. 557–568). Murcia, Spain: Universidad de Murcia.Google Scholar
  10. Oyoo, S. O. (2012). Language in science classrooms: An analysis of physics teachers’ use of and beliefs about language. Research in Science Education, 42, 849–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Poon, A. Y. K. (2013). Will the new fine-tuning medium-of-instruction policy alleviate the threats of dominance of English-medium instruction in Hong Kong? Current Issues in Language Planning, 14(1), 34–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Schleppegrell, M. R. (2007). The linguistic challenges of mathematics teaching and learning: A research review. Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 23(2), 139–159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10573560601158461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Scott, P. H., Mortimer, E. F., & Aguiar, O. G. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90(4), 605–631. doi: 10.1002/sce.20131.
  14. Veel, R. (1997). Apprenticeship into scientific discourse. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 161–195). London, UK/New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
  15. Veel, R. (1999). Language, knowledge and authority in school mathematics. In F. Christie (Ed.), Pedagogy and the shaping of consciousness: Linguistic and social processes (pp. 185–216). London, UK: Cassell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Cheng Kung UniversityTainanTaiwan

Personalised recommendations