http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7608-179X
Abstract
As English-medium instruction (EMI) spreads around the world, university teachers and students who are non-native speakers of English (NNS) need to put much effort into the delivery or reception of content. Construction of scientific meaning in the process of learning is already complex when instruction is delivered in the first language of the teachers and students, and may become even more challenging in a second language, because science education depends greatly on language. In order to identify important pedagogical functions that teachers use to deliver content and to present different ways to realise each function, a corpus of lectures related to science and engineering courses was created and analysed. NNS teachers and students in science and engineering involved in EMI higher education can obtain insights for delivering and listening to lectures from the Online Corpus of Academic Lectures (OnCAL).
1. Introduction
The ability to attract international students and the pressure to raise international ranking are some of the reasons (Coleman Citation2006; Evans and Morrison Citation2011) that the adoption of English-medium instruction (EMI) in higher education is growing at a significant speed (Wächter and Maiworm Citation2008). EMI has been particularly effective in European universities for attracting international students (Bologna Process Citation2010; Doiz, Lasagabaster, and Sierra Citation2013). However, when both teachers and students are non-native speakers of English (NNS), the learning process becomes much more difficult than when it occurs in the native language. Effective learning is possible only under certain conditions (Marton, Runesson, and Tsui Citation2004), and the process of meaning making in science relies strongly on the language spoken in the classroom (Mortimer and Scott Citation2003). In addition to the spoken language, the aid of other modes like diagrams and gestures is also used by teachers and students in the construction of scientific meaning in a science classroom (Kress et al. Citation2001), but spoken language is usually present even when other modes are exploited. Therefore, when implementing EMI in higher education in a country where English is not the mainstream language, it is important to be aware of which aspects of classroom discourse have pedagogical relevance and require special attention.
2. The importance of language in science and engineering education
The view of Wellington and Osborne (Citation2001, 1) that ‘paying more attention to language is one of the most important acts that can be done to improve the quality of science education’ agrees with what many other science education researchers say: language in science matters. For example, Yore (Citation2004) argues that language is important for scientists not only because ‘scientists who communicate well are successful in gaining support from members of their own communities, funding agencies, and the wider society’, but also because scientific knowledge is not just accumulation of irrefutable results. Before a new finding becomes well-established scientific knowledge, a long process occurs: hypotheses are proposed, evidence that refutes or supports the hypotheses is gathered, and a sequence of arguments and claims follows. In such a process, the importance of language becomes evident from the sequence of written and spoken communication events that take place among members of a scientific community. Noguchi (Citation2006) analysed how review articles contribute in the establishment of scientific knowledge and also states that ‘the audience plays a central role in the acknowledgement of a scientific discovery. The dissemination of this knowledge, or “facts,” requires language as a means of communication’. Citing Gross (Citation1990, 203), she reminds us that ‘facts are by nature linguistic–no language, no facts’ (19). Lemke (Citation1990) gives more details about the role of language in science:
Learning science means learning to talk science. It also means learning to use this specialized conceptual language in reading and writing, in reasoning and problem solving, and in guiding practical action in the laboratory and in daily life. It means learning to communicate in the language of science and act as a member of the community of people who do so. ‘Talking science’ means observing, describing, comparing, classifying, analyzing, discussing, hypothesizing, theorizing, questioning, challenging, arguing, designing experiments, following procedures, judging, evaluating, deciding, concluding, generalizing, reporting, writing, lecturing, and teaching in and through the language of science. (1)
Lemke (Citation1990) focuses on features of the discourse used in science classrooms, which is where students are first exposed to the language of school science, and develop the basis for later achievement of fluency in the language of science.
Analysing the role of language in the construction of scientific meaning in science classrooms, Tsui (Citation2004) argues that the teacher needs to create a space where learning is possible (the space of learning) and clearly present the object of learning (the concrete topic to be understood) through effective language:
The meanings that learners assign to the object of learning depend on a host of things. The teacher can affect these meanings through examples and analogies, through the stories that he tells, and the contexts that he brings in. The meanings will also depend on the personal experiences that the learners bring to bear on the object of learning. Together, all of these meanings constitute the semantic dimension of the space of learning, of which language plays a central role. (140)
If teaching and learning through the language of science pose demands in the first language of teachers and students (Seah, Clarke, and Hart Citation2014), it would certainly be more demanding in a second language, especially in relation to listening to lectures (Thompson Citation2003). For example, Evans and Morrison (Citation2011) reported that first-year students in Hong Kong had difficulties in adapting to a second language environment. An investigation of the effects of the medium of instruction on student performance in learning physical concepts led Airey and Linder (Citation2008, Citation2009) to recommend that teachers encourage students to ask questions during or after class, give out lecture materials in advance, and support their oral explanations with more visual illustrations. Tan and Lan (Citation2011) reported on the challenges faced by teachers and students in Malaysia around 2003, when EMI was adopted. As for challenges faced by NNS teachers, Deroey (Citation2012) argued that instructors especially need to know how to mark their classroom discourse so that students would know what to listen for. Klaassen and De Graaff (Citation2001) noticed that NNS teachers in the Netherlands needed to develop effective teaching skills when using English and at the same time be aware of the language difficulties that NNS students may have when learning through English. In Denmark, Thøgersen and Airey (Citation2011) found that a very experienced, English-fluent Danish professor teaching the same content in English and Danish, spoke more slowly and used a more formal style with English. Special courses like the ‘Classroom Practice and English-Medium Pedagogy’ offered in Spain (Ball and Lindsay Citation2013) have become available for NNS teachers, but this type of in-service training has not yet spread widely in higher education. Ball and Lindsay (Citation2013) suggested that this lack of in-service support in higher education may be due to the fact that pedagogical skills have not been required for a successful university career, but also pointed out that the attention being paid to such skills recently indicates that teachers involved in EMI are becoming more aware of the need to develop these skills.
Researchers in the emergent CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) movement share the view that the science teacher also teaches the language of science (see, e.g. Llinares, Morton, and Whittaker Citation2012). CLIL occurs when a student learns content in a language different from both his/her first-language and the mainstream language: content and language are learned simultaneously. When EMI is implemented in higher education at countries where English is not the mainstream language, most of the science teachers and students would be NNS and are likely to need language support to various extents, depending on the individual.
In order to raise the awareness in teachers and students of the pedagogical relevance of some linguistic features of university lectures, and thus support the quality of instruction and effective learning in EMI around the world, we have developed the Online Corpus of Academic Lectures (OnCAL), which is a database of transcriptions of university lectures delivered at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Stanford University. Since its creation in 2012 (Kunioshi et al. Citation2012), the functionality of OnCAL has been extended (Kunioshi et al. Citation2013), and it now offers samples of sentences uttered by instructors for specific pedagogical functions (Kunioshi et al. Citation2014). In this paper, we describe how the pedagogical functions were identified based on the literature, and how support on science pedagogy can be obtained from OnCAL. Our main purpose is to offer through OnCAL concrete examples of how a teacher can intervene positively in the construction of scientific meaning ‘through examples and analogies, through the stories that he tells, and the contexts that he brings in’ (Tsui Citation2004, 140). NNS students will also, hopefully, be able to comprehend lectures better, as they may develop a deeper understanding of the relationship between classroom spoken language and teacher pedagogical intentions by exploiting OnCAL.
3. Methods: corpus building
Transcriptions of lectures on courses related to basic science lectures were downloaded from MIT Opencourseware (MIT OCW, http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm) and those related to engineering lectures from Stanford Engineering Everywhere (SEE, http://see.stanford.edu/). The Creative Commons License allows use of both MIT OCW and SEE contents as long as these are ‘shared alike’ (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/legalcode). Some relevant data related to the transcriptions that were downloaded from MIT OCW and SEE, and uploaded to OnCAL, are shown in . Detailed data related to each single lecture are available online (http://www.oncal.sci.waseda.ac.jp/lists.aspx). As of April 2015, the total number of lecture transcripts uploaded to OnCAL is 430; the corpus comprises 3.5 million words, which correspond to a total lecture time (calculated from the length of the video recordings) of 395 hours.
Table 1. List of courses with lectures uploaded to OnCAL (as of April 2015).
4. Identifying and using pedagogical functions
When first released, OnCAL was a searchable online database of university lecture transcriptions which allowed users to find sentences that contained any word(s) of interest to the user (Kunioshi et al. Citation2012). Just after its first release, in a workshop introducing OnCAL to Japanese teachers in science and engineering, who were preparing for teaching through English, it was observed that when inputting search words, the teachers did not think of discourse markers such as ‘the reason why', but rather searched for technical terms. It became obvious that such users were not aware of the importance of investigating rhetorical ways of explaining content when preparing for teaching through English. Therefore, OnCAL was later revised to enable users to see example sentences for a set of linguistic functions such as ‘explaining’ or ‘recalling’ (Kunioshi et al. Citation2013). To implement this feature into OnCAL, we identified expressions that were typical of each linguistic function. We registered the typical expressions in the OnCAL system, and sentences containing them could be displayed when the relevant linguistic function was selected. In this way, users did not need to input a specific word to find example sentences that were relevant to a specific linguistic purpose (Kunioshi et al. Citation2013). Recently, OnCAL was further revised and the expressions registered were modified in a way that ‘pedagogical functions’ can be searched, to allow users to easily find example sentences for a particular pedagogical purpose (Kunioshi et al. Citation2014). is a list of the pedagogical functions registered in the OnCAL system, as of April 2015. The expressions registered for each pedagogical function work as anchors, to which the surrounding text used to realise the function is attached.
Table 2. List of pedagogical functions identified in university lectures (as of April 2015).
For example, when the pedagogical function ‘ClassManagement’ is selected and the ‘Search’ button is pressed, sentences that contain the registered phrase ‘a couple of announcements’ are displayed, as shown in . The text that surrounds ‘a couple of announcements’ realises the function, as in the following sequence (hereafter, the expressions registered as anchors are shown in bold):
All right. A couple of announcements. First of all, the next homework is due on Monday at 5:00 p.m. So you can either turn it in to class on Monday or just put it in the box. And the next thing is we're gonna pass out the exams and solutions right now. I'm gonna put them on this desk, and I think they're ordered in some way. (Excerpt from a SEE artificial intelligence class)
Figure 1. Example sentences for the pedagogical function.
And you have a material that is an insulator. And I think you will appreciate why that is in a moment, but I want to bring Boltzmann's law to bear on the issue of electronic structure in extended networks like we are talking about today. (Excerpt from a MIT OCW chemistry class)
Teachers may use the pedagogical function ‘ScientificFacts’ for describing relevant historical events that have occurred in the development of a scientific concept. These stories are used to illustrate a phenomenon to be explained, or to describe how theory developed. ‘Discovered’, ‘invented’, etc. are registered as anchors for texts such as the following:
And Maxwell –who was credited for this extra term that he added to Ampere's Law, the displacement current term, was able to predict that electromagnetic waves should exist, he predicted the existence of radio waves, which were later discovered by Hertz, and that was a great victory for the theory. (Excerpt from a MIT OCW physics class)
The chromosomal makeup, I'll use another word just so we could expand our vocabulary this morning, the chromosomal makeup is often called the karyotype, that is to say the constellation of chromosomes that one can see at mitosis under the microscope. Keep in mind, as we've said before, that during the interphase of the cell cycle, chromosomes are essentially invisible, but during the metaphase of mitosis they become condensed, and on that occasion, individuals noticed a 9–22 translocation. (Excerpt from a MIT OCW biology class)
‘Example|Alternatives’ is used by teachers for giving examples or showing alternative ways of interpreting, seeing, etc., as in:
And then rising up again to theta is equal to pi over two. Do you see that? This is another way of displaying this property. This is at constant R –and varying theta. (Excerpt from a MIT OCW mathematics class)
The pedagogical function ‘Visuals’ is a manifestation of the multimodality of the science classroom (Kress et al. Citation2001; Lemke Citation2004; Roth Citation2004). The teacher's spoken discourse develops with the aid of other modes such as diagrams, figures, formulas, and gestures. ‘And here you see’ and other expressions that include deictics (here, there, this, etc.) are registered as anchors:
I have here a very special flute, open on both sides, and here you see the two holes. We will first close the two. That gives us the lowest frequency … (Excerpt from a MIT OCW physics class)
Zero to N minus one is N terms. Raise it to the nth power, divided by the thing that's getting raised to the power, one minus the thing that's getting raised to the power. It's no problem with the denominator here because K is different from L, and K minus L is always less than N, so these are distinct. This is never equal to one down below. (Excerpt from a SEE mathematics class)
‘Cause|Effect’ is a pedagogical function that is used frequently in a science classroom (Ogborn et al. Citation1996). This is because the construction of scientific meaning involves understanding the reasons why phenomena occur. Expressions like ‘and the reason why’ or ‘as a result’ are examples of anchors occurring many times, like the one shown below.
So, let's work that out of why it's this. Let's take a voltage on – well, that's a wire, the capacitor; there's a common voltage y on all of these things, okay. As a result, a current flows here, here and here and the total current that flows out of the capacitor is minus the sum of these currents. (Excerpt from a SEE mathematics class)
‘Conditions’ is used when teachers explain ranges of validity. ‘And only if’ and ‘assuming that’ are examples of anchors that give hits such as the following:
What that means is you have pure acetic acid. And then you dissolve it in water and bring it up to a total volume such that the concentration was 0.1 molar, assuming that none of it had been ionized yet. (Excerpt from a MIT OCW chemistry class)
‘Analogy’ is another important pedagogical function needed for explaining abstract concepts in terms of existing experience (Heywood and Parker Citation2010, 39). Although analogies can also mislead due to their limitations (Wilbers and Duit Citation2006) they can also be very effective when used properly in the classroom. Anchors registered for ‘Analogy’ are expressions such as ‘is like a’ or ‘can think of this as a’, which give hits such as that shown below:
What did you call contours curves that formed that pattern? A saddle point. You called this a saddle point because it was like the center of a saddle. It is like a mountain pass. Here you are going up the mountain, say, and here you are going down, the way the contour line is going down. And this is sort of a min and max point. A maximum if you go in that direction and a minimum if you go in that direction, say. Without the arrows on it, it is like a saddle point. (Excerpt from a MIT OCW mathematics class)
‘ThoughtExperiment’ may also be useful in a science classroom for eliciting from the students predictions about the results of an imaginary experiment. Thought experiments can be used to disconfirm a hypothesis through generation of conflicts, or to guide positive modifications of a hypothesis (Stephens and Clement Citation2012). Teachers may use thought experiments in the classroom just because a real experiment is not possible, but we believe that the main purpose is to elicit thinking by the students, to help students have a clearer picture of the concepts being explained. As anchors, expressions like ‘suppose that’ or ‘let's imagine’ are registered, and an example sentence is shown below:
Gravity is a conservative force. It's very clear. Suppose that I do the work –that I go from A to B in some very strange way. Then it is very clear that the work that I would have done would be plus mgh, because my force, of course, is exactly in the opposite direction as gravity. (Excerpt from a MIT OCW physics class)
Emphasising important points in an explanation can be considered an important pedagogical function, which we called ‘Emphasis’. Some anchor phrases are ‘have to be careful’ and ‘notice that’. The following is an example text:
And, by the definition of standard cell potentials that I gave you over there, you can see that what we are getting now, because the electron flow is reversed, our sign is reversed, and so our E zero for the reaction Ag+ plus an electron going to silver is equal to 0.8 volts positive. Notice that the zinc-zinc2+ couple was negative with respect to the standard hydrogen electrode, but because the electron flow is reversed for silver plus silver redox couple, we now have a positive potential relative to the standard hydrogen electrode. (Excerpt from a MIT OCW chemistry class)
The pedagogical function ‘Question’ has been widely investigated. Questions can be used for various pedagogical purposes such as eliciting thinking, checking comprehension, classroom management, or to bring a topic to the students’ focal awareness (Tsui et al. Citation2004). Sentences containing ‘what about the’ or ‘why are’, for example, and ending with ‘?’ will appear when the OnCAL user selects ‘Question’ and press ‘Search’. In combined searches, the searches will be automatically restricted to sentences that end with ‘?’ and contain a word beginning with ‘wh’ or ‘how’, for example.
Recently, when OnCAL was shown in its present form to a few Japanese teachers and students, they stated that they were convinced that OnCAL will help them in their needs. It seemed, though, that they still needed assistance on how to make searches and sort the results efficiently, or how to interpret the search results. This article will help all users that are not familiar with corpora on similar issues. As for requests, some of the users commented that linking the search results to the respective portions of the videos for checking pronunciation or for visualisation of the situation (teacher gestures and movements, type of classroom activity, etc.) would be a desirable further help. This is one of the functionalities that deserve consideration when an eventual new version of OnCAL is released. To obtain further feedback, we expect that users use the link ‘ContactUs’ on the OnCAL homepage for posting comments or requests.
OnCAL is still under development and in the near future more pedagogical functions may be added, more anchor expressions may be registered to each pedagogical function, or pedagogical functions that have related purposes may be put under a parent category, but already in the current state, OnCAL offers, as described in this work, many linguistic possibilities which can be useful for NNS teachers in science and engineering. Also, NNS students, when preparing for learning science through English, may find support for listening comprehension, by knowing in advance expressions that teachers use frequently to realise specific pedagogical purposes.
5. Conclusion
To aid NNS teachers and students in dealing with the spoken language used in science classrooms, we developed an online interface for searching through a corpus of lecture texts for expressions used to deliver such information. Transcripts of lectures from courses related to basic science lectures were downloaded from MIT Opencourseware and those related to engineering lectures were downloaded from Stanford Engineering Everywhere, and uploaded to the Online Corpus of Academic Lectures (OnCAL, http://www.oncal.sci.waseda.ac.jp/). Pedagogical functions were identified and typical expressions used frequently in each pedagogical function were registered in the system to allow users to find example sentences for each pedagogical purpose without the need to know in advance what to search for. When a user searches for a word/expression in a specific pedagogical function, the search is automatically restricted to sentences that contain a set of words/expressions registered for this type of search. Based on feedback from users and further analysis of the corpus, the interface may be revised with pedagogical functions being added or changed, more anchor expressions being registered, or pedagogical functions that have related purposes being put under a parent category to better meet user needs. Still, in the present form OnCAL can already offer useful insights to teachers and students in science and engineering that need to prepare for delivering or listening to lectures in English.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their gratitude to the instructors and staff who delivered the lectures, recorded, transcribed, uploaded the materials, and built MIT Opencourseware (MIT OCW) and Stanford Engineering Everywhere (SEE); their hard work and generosity in making such valuable data available to the world deserve recognition from all who benefit from the data.
About the authors
Nílson Kunioshi, an engineer and professor in the Faculty of Science and Engineering, Waseda University, teaches technical writing to undergraduate and graduate students while conducting research on simulation of chemical reactions. He was involved during four years in the implementation of a science and engineering programme delivered in English at Waseda University.
Judy Noguchi is now working as Dean and Professor of English at the Faculty of Global Communication of Kobe Gakuin University. With a background in chemistry (B.S./B.A.), TESL (M.Ed.), and applied linguistics (Ph.D.), she has been involved in teaching English for Specific Purposes (ESP) to undergraduate and graduate students in pharmacy, medicine, science, and engineering. She has developed ESP courses, textbooks, and e-learning materials.
Kazuko Tojo is a native Japanese speaker and professor at Osaka Jogakuin College, where she teaches English for Academic Purposes and ESP. Her research interests include genre-based curriculum and textbook development for Japanese English as a Second Language (ESL) students. She is also involved in English teacher training programmes.
Hiroko Hayashi, a native Japanese speaker, has taught JSP (Japanese for Specific Purposes) to international graduate engineering students at Osaka University for more than 10 years. Her current interests are on the influence of technical English on technical Japanese and of general Japanese on the technical English of Japanese speakers.
Additional information
Funding
References
- Airey, J., and C. Linder. 2008. “Bilingual Scientific Literacy? The Use of English in Swedish University Science Courses.” Nordic Journal of English Studies 7: 145–161.
- Airey, J., and C. Linder. 2009. “A Disciplinary Discourse Perspective on University Science Learning: Achieving Fluency in A Critical Constellation of Modes.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 46 (1): 27–49. doi: 10.1002/tea.20265
- Ball, P., and D. Lindsay. 2013. “Language Demands and Support for English-Medium Instruction in Tertiary Education. Learning from a Specific Context.” In English-medium Instruction at Universities, edited by A. Doiz, D. Lasagabaster, and J.M. Sierra, 44–61. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
- Bologna Process. 2010. The Bologna Process Independent Assessment. The first decade of working on the European Higher Education Area. Volume 2, Case studies and appendices. Accessed June 22, 2011. http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/2010_conference/documents/
- Christie, F. 2002. Classroom Discourse Analysis: A Functional Perspective. Open Linguistics Series, R. Fawcett (ed.). London: Continuum.
- Coleman, J. 2006. “English-medium Teaching in European Higher Education.” Language Teaching 39(1): 1–14. doi: 10.1017/S026144480600320X
- Deroey, K. L. B. 2012. “What They Highlight is … ”: The Discourse Functions of Basic Wh-clefts in Lectures.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes 11 (2): 112–124. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2011.10.002
- Doiz, A., D. Lasagabaster, and J. M. Sierra, eds. 2013. English-medium Instruction at Universities. Introduction. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
- Evans, S., and B. Morrison. 2011. “The Student Experience of English-Medium Higher Education in Hong Kong.” Language and Education 25 (2): 147–162. doi: 10.1080/09500782.2011.553287
- Gross, A. 1990. The Rhetoric of Science. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
- Heywood, D., and J. Parker. 2010. The Pedagogy of Physical Science. Dordrecht: Springer Science.
- Klaassen, R. G., and E. De Graaff. 2001. “Facing Innovation: Preparing Lectures for English-Medium Instruction in a Non-native Context.” European Journal of Engineering Education 26 (3): 281–289. doi: 10.1080/03043790110054409
- Kress, G., T. Charalampos, C. Jewitt, and J. Ogborn. 2001. Multimodal Teaching and Learning. New York: Continuum.
- Kunioshi, N., J. Noguchi, K. Tojo, and H. Hayashi. 2012. “OnCAL, the Online Corpus of Academic Lectures, an English Language Support System for University Science and Engineering Instructors.” In International Session & AEESEAP Workshop 2012 Proceedings, Annual Conference of Japanese Society for Engineering Education, 70–75.
- Kunioshi, N., J. Noguchi, K. Tojo, and H. Hayashi. 2013. “Language Support for Teachers and Students in Engineering via a Lecture Corpus Interface.” In Proceedings of the 19th European Symposium on Languages for Special Purposes, 380–385.
- Kunioshi, N., J. Noguchi, K. Tojo, and H. Hayashi. 2014. “Identifying Pedagogical Functions in University Science and Engineering Lectures.” Presented at New Perspectives in Science Education 2014, http://conference.pixel-online.net/NPSE/files/npse/ed0003/FP/0194-SSE162-FP-NPSE3.pdf
- Lemke, J. L. 1990. Talking Science: Language, Learning, and Values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
- Lemke, J. L. 2004. “The Literacies of Science.” In Crossing Borders in Literacy and Science Instruction, edited by E.W. Saul, 33–47. Arlington: National Science Teachers Association Press.
- Llinares, A., T. Morton, and R. Whittaker. 2012. The Roles of Language in CLIL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Marton, F., U. Runesson, and A. B. M. Tsui. 2004. “The Space of Learning.” In Classroom Discourse and the Space of Learning, edited by F. Marton and A.B.M. Tsui, 3–40. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Mortimer, E. F., and P. H. Scott. 2003. Meaning-making in Secondary Science Classrooms. Buckingham: Open University Press.
- Noguchi, J. 2006. The Science Review Article: An Opportune Genre in the Construction of Science. Bern: Peter Lang.
- Ogborn, J., G. Kress, I. Martins, and K. McGillicuddy. 1996. Explaining Science in the Classroom. Buckingham: Open University Press.
- Reiner, M., and J. Gilbert. 2000. “Epistemological Resources for Thought Experimentation in Science Learning.” International Journal of Science Education 22 (5): 489–506. doi: 10.1080/095006900289741
- Roth, W.-M. 2004. “Gestures: The Leading Edge in Literacy Development.” In Crossing Borders in Literacy and Science Instruction, edited by E.W. Saul, 48–67. Arlington: National Science Teachers Association Press.
- Scott, P. H., E. F. Mortimer, and J. Ametller. 2011. “Pedagogical Link-Making: A Fundamental Aspect of Teaching and Learning Scientific Conceptual Knowledge.” Studies in Science Education 47 (1): 3–36. doi: 10.1080/03057267.2011.549619
- Seah, L. H., J. D. Clarke, and C. E. Hart. 2014. “Understanding the Language Demands on Science Students From an Integrated Science and Language Perspective.” International Journal of Science Education 36 (6): 952–973. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2013.832003
- Stephens, A. L., and J. J. Clement. 2012. “The Role of Thought Experiments in Science and Science Learning.” In Second International Handbook of Science Education, edited by B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin, and C. J. McRobbie, 157–175. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Tan, M., and O. S. Lan. 2011. “Teaching Mathematics and Science in English in Malaysian Classrooms: The Impact of Teacher Beliefs on Classroom Practices and Student Learning.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes 10 (1): 5–18. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2010.11.001
- Thøgersen, J., and J. Airey. 2011. “Lecturing Undergraduate Science in Danish and in English: A Comparison of Speaking Rate and Rhetorical Style.” English for Specific Purposes 30 (3): 209–221. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2011.01.002
- Thompson, S. E. 2003. “Text-structuring Metadiscourse, Intonation and the Signalling of Organisation in Academic Lectures.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2 (1): 5–20. doi: 10.1016/S1475-1585(02)00036-X
- Tsui, A. B. M. 2004. “The Semantic Enrichment of the Space of Learning.” In Classroom Discourse and the Space of Learning, edited by F. Marton and A.B.M. Tsui, 139–164. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Tsui, A. B. M., F. Marton, I. A. C. Mok, and D. F. P. Ng. 2004. “Questions and the Space of Learning.” In Classroom Discourse and the Space of Learning, edited by F. Marton and A.B.M. Tsui, 113–137. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Wächter, B., and F. Maiworm. 2008. English-taught Programmes in European Higher Education. Bonn: Lemmens.
- Wellington, J., and J. Osborn. 2001. Language and Literacy in Science Education. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
- Wilbers, J., and R. Duit. 2006. “Post-festum and Heuristic Analogies.” In Metaphor and Analogy in Science Education, edited by P.J. Aubusson, A.G. Harrison, and S.M. Ritchie, 37–49. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Yore, L. D. 2004. “Why do Future Scientists Need to Study the Language Arts?” In Crossing Borders in Literacy and Science Instruction, edited by E.W. Saul, 71–94. Arlington: National Science Teachers Association Press.