uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Publications (10 of 123) Show all publications
de Winter, J. & Airey, J. (2020). What makes a good physics teacher?: Views from the English stakeholder community. Physics Education, 55(1), Article ID 015017.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>What makes a good physics teacher?: Views from the English stakeholder community
2020 (English)In: Physics Education, ISSN 0031-9120, E-ISSN 1361-6552, Vol. 55, no 1, article id 015017Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

When qualifying as a secondary school physics teacher in England, the statutory guidance is generic and very little subject-specific detail is offered. There is a lack of a clear, shared understanding of the subject-specific attributes that newly-qualified physics teachers are expected to have. This exploratory study reports the findings of a questionnaire that asked various stakeholders—including physics teachers, trainees and teacher trainers—to identify what they regard as the attributes of a 'good' physics teacher. From our analysis we present a set of attributes of a good physics teacher and consider how these may be grouped into themes that could provide a way to explore these expectations. We pay particular attention to the subject-specific, and consider how our findings align with the existing literature base.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Bristol, UK: , 2020
Keywords
physics, teacher education
National Category
Other Physics Topics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-397847 (URN)10.1088/1361-6552/ab5215 (DOI)
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2015-01891
Available from: 2019-11-26 Created: 2019-11-26 Last updated: 2019-11-28Bibliographically approved
Volkwyn, T. S., Airey, J., Gregorcic, B. & Linder, C. (2019). Demonstrating The Role Of Transduction In The Teaching And Learning Of Science: The Case Of Students Learning About Magnetic Field. In: : . Paper presented at The 13th European Science Education Research Association, 26-30 August, 2019, Bologna, Italy. Bologna, Italy: ESERA
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Demonstrating The Role Of Transduction In The Teaching And Learning Of Science: The Case Of Students Learning About Magnetic Field
2019 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In this study we video-filmed upper-secondary physics students working with a laboratory task designed to help them learn about the Earth’s magnetic field. Students worked in pairs with a hand-held magnetometer to determine the direction of the Earth’s magnetic field. As the magnetometer is moved, the x, y and z components of the Earth’s magnetic field are displayed on a computer screen. The students were simply instructed to find the direction of the Earth’s magnetic field and mark this direction using a red paper arrow. A full multimodal transcription of the student interaction was made. In our analysis the central role of transduction (defined as the movement of semiotic material from one mode or semiotic system to another) became clear. Three separate transductions of meaning were identified. The first—transduction of the meaning potential in the room to the computer screen by themagnetometer—allowed students to interact with the invisible magnetic field. Then, as the students worked together, their coordination of resources was transducted to the red paper arrow. This allowed the students to display the results of their work in a persistent representation. The arrow then functioned as a coordinating hub for the final discussion, which resulted in transductionof meaning into student gestures. We suggest that this final transduction offers the possibility for teachers to check student learning. In conclusion, we recommend that teachers should think carefully about the resources provided in a task and the transductions that are expected to occur. The selection of a persistent resource as a coordinating hub may be useful. We also suggest that teachers should look for student transductions in their classrooms as confirmation that learning is taking place. In our analysis, when teachers noticed such transductions this often led to fruitful teacher/student discussions about the phenomenon at hand.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Bologna, Italy: ESERA, 2019
Keywords
physics, representations, physics devices, laboratory work in science, transduction
National Category
Other Physics Topics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-355413 (URN)
Conference
The 13th European Science Education Research Association, 26-30 August, 2019, Bologna, Italy
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2016-04113
Available from: 2019-10-01 Created: 2019-10-01 Last updated: 2019-10-15Bibliographically approved
Volkwyn, T., Airey, J., Gregorcic, B. & Heijkenskjöld, F. (2019). Transduction and Science Learning: Multimodality in the Physics Laboratory. Designs for Learning, 11(1), 16-29, Article ID 118.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Transduction and Science Learning: Multimodality in the Physics Laboratory
2019 (English)In: Designs for Learning, ISSN 1654-7608, Vol. 11, no 1, p. 16-29, article id 118Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In this paper we discuss the role of transduction in the teaching and learning of science. We video-filmed pairs of upper-secondary physics students working with a laboratory task designed to encourage transduction (Bezemer & Kress, 2008). The students were simply instructed to use a hand-held electronic measurement device (IOLab) to find the direction of the Earth’s magnetic field and mark its direction using a paper arrow.

A full multimodal transcription of the student interaction was made. In our analysis of this transcription we identify three separate transductions of meaning. In particular, we observed that student transduction of meaning to the paper arrow allowed it to function as both a persistent placeholder for all the meaning making that had occurred up until that point and as a coordinating hub for further meaning making.

Our findings lead us to recommend that teachers interrogate the set of resources necessary for appropriate disciplinary knowledge construction in the tasks they present to students. Here, teachers should think carefully about whether the introduction of a persistent placeholder would be useful and in that case what this placeholder could be. We also suggest that teachers should think about what persistent resource may function as a coordinating hub for the students.

Finally, we suggest that teachers should be on the lookout for student transductions to new semiotic resources in their classrooms as a sign that learning is taking place. We claim that the constraining and complementary nature of transduction offers a good opportunity for teachers to check student understanding, since disciplinary meanings need to be coherent across semiotic systems (modes).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: Stockholm University Press, 2019
Keywords
disciplinary affordance; pedagogical affordance; transduction; coordinating hub; placeholder; critical constellation; multimodal discourse analysis
National Category
Other Physics Topics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-380379 (URN)10.16993/dfl.118 (DOI)
Funder
Swedish Research Council, VR 2016-04113
Available from: 2019-03-27 Created: 2019-03-27 Last updated: 2019-04-02Bibliographically approved
de Winter, J. & Airey, J. (2019). What is a ‘good’ physics teacher? Views from the English education community.. In: : . Paper presented at 2019 PhysTEC Conference. Boston, Massachusetts, March 2, 2019 - March 3, 2019..
Open this publication in new window or tab >>What is a ‘good’ physics teacher? Views from the English education community.
2019 (English)Conference paper, Poster (with or without abstract) (Refereed)
Keywords
physics teacher education
National Category
Other Physics Topics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-397854 (URN)
Conference
2019 PhysTEC Conference. Boston, Massachusetts, March 2, 2019 - March 3, 2019.
Available from: 2019-11-26 Created: 2019-11-26 Last updated: 2019-11-29Bibliographically approved
Larsson, J., Airey, J., Danielsson, A. & Lundqvist, E. (2018). A Fragmented Training Environment: Discourse Models in the Talk of Physics Teacher Educators. Research in science education
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A Fragmented Training Environment: Discourse Models in the Talk of Physics Teacher Educators
2018 (English)In: Research in science education, ISSN 0157-244X, E-ISSN 1573-1898Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

This article reports the results of an empirical study exploring the discourses of physics teacher educators. We ask how the expressed understandings of a physics teacher education programme in the talk of teacher educators potentially support the identity construction of new teachers. Nine teacher educators from different sections of a physics teacher programme in Sweden were interviewed. The concept of discourse models was used to operationalise how the discourses of the teacher education programme potentially enable the performance of different physics teacher identities. The analysis resulted in the construction of four discourse models that could be seen to be both enabling and limiting the kinds of identity performances trainee physics teachers can enact. Knowledge of the models thus potentially empowers trainee physics teachers to understand the different goals of their educational programme and from there make informed choices about their own particular approach to becoming a professional physics teacher. We also suggest that for teacher educators, knowledge of the discourse models could facilitate making conscious, informed decisions about their own teaching practice.

Keywords
Teacher education, Physics, Discourse, Identity
National Category
Educational Sciences Physical Sciences Gender Studies
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-370078 (URN)10.1007/s11165-018-9793-9 (DOI)
Available from: 2018-12-18 Created: 2018-12-18 Last updated: 2019-11-19Bibliographically approved
Airey, J. (2018). A Social Semiotic Approach to Teaching and Learning Science. In: : . Paper presented at Plenary Speaker, Research day, Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Stockholm University. Stockholm
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A Social Semiotic Approach to Teaching and Learning Science
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

A social semiotic approach to teaching and learning science.

In this presentation I will discuss the application of social semiotics to the teaching and learning of university science. Science disciplines leverage a wide range of semiotic resources such as graphs, diagrams, mathematical representations, hands on work with apparatus, language, gestures etc. In my work I study how students learn to integrate these resources to do physics and what teachers can do to help them in this process. Over the years, a number of theoretical constructs have been developed within the Physics Education Research Group in Uppsala to help us to better understand the different roles semiotic resources play in learning university physics. In this presentation I will explain some of these terms and give examples of their usefulness for teasing out how learning is taking place.

References

Airey, J. (2006). Physics Students' Experiences of the Disciplinary Discourse Encountered in Lectures in English and Swedish. Licentiate Thesis. Uppsala, Sweden: Department of Physics, Uppsala University., 

Airey J. (2009). Science, Language and Literacy. Case Studies of Learning in Swedish University Physics. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 81. Uppsala  Retrieved 2009-04-27, from             http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=9547

Airey, J. (2014) resresentations in Undergraduate Physics. Docent lecture, Ångström Laboratory, 9th June 2014 From http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-226598

Airey, J. (2015). Social Semiotics in Higher Education: Examples from teaching and learning in undergraduate physics In: SACF  Singapore-Sweden Excellence Seminars, Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research in Higher Education (STINT) , 2015 (pp. 103). urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-266049. 

Airey, J. & Linder, C. (2015) Social Semiotics in Physics Education: Leveraging critical constellations of disciplinary representations ESERA 2015 From http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn%3Anbn%3Ase%3Auu%3Adiva-260209

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (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.

Airey, J. & Linder, C. (2017) Social Semiotics in Physics Education : Multiple Representations in Physics Education Springer 

Airey, J., & Eriksson, U. (2014). A semiotic analysis of the disciplinary affordances of the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram in astronomy. Paper presented at the The 5th International 360 conference: Encompassing the multimodality of knowledge, Aarhus, Denmark. 

Airey, J., Eriksson, U., Fredlund, T., and Linder, C. (2014). "The concept of disciplinary affordance"The 5th International 360  conference: Encompassing the multimodality of knowledge. City: Aarhus University: Aarhus, Denmark, pp. 20.

Eriksson, U. (2015) Reading the Sky: From Starspots to Spotting Stars Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.

Eriksson, U., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Redfors, A. (2014). Who needs 3D when the Universe is flat? Science Education, 98(3), 412-442. 

Eriksson, U., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Redfors, A. (2014). Introducing the anatomy of disciplinary discernment: an example from astronomy.European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(3), 167‐182. 

Fredlund 2015 Using a Social Semiotic Perspective to Inform the Teaching and Learning of Physics. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.

Fredlund, T., Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2012). Exploring the role of physics representations: an illustrative example from students sharing knowledge about refraction. European Journal of Physics, 33, 657-666.

Fredlund, T, Airey, J, & Linder, C. (2015a). Enhancing the possibilities for learning: Variation of disciplinary-relevant aspects in physics representations. European Journal of Physics

Fredlund, T. & Linder, C., & Airey, J. (2015b). Towards addressing transient learning challenges in undergraduate physics: an example from electrostatics. European Journal of Physics. 36055002. 

Fredlund, T. & Linder, C., & Airey, J. (2015c). A social semiotic approach to identifying critical aspects. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies2015 4:3 , 302-316 

Fredlund, T., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Linder, A. (2014). Unpacking physics representations: Towards an appreciation of disciplinary affordance. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res., 10(020128). 

Gibson, J. J. (1979). The theory of affordances The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception(pp. 127-143). Boston: Houghton Miffin.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as a social semiotic. London: Arnold.

Linder, C. (2013). Disciplinary discourse, representation, and appresentation in the teaching and learning of science. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1(2), 43-49.

Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.

Mavers, D. Glossary of multimodal terms  Retrieved 6 May, 2014, from http://multimodalityglossary.wordpress.com/affordance/

van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Introducing social semiotics. London: Routledge. 

Wu, H-K, & Puntambekar, S. (2012). Pedagogical Affordances of Multiple External Representations in Scientific Processes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(6), 754-767.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: , 2018
Keywords
Social Semiotics, Disciplinary affordance, Pedagogical affordance, Critical constellations, Disciplinary discernment
National Category
Other Physics Topics Didactics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-353457 (URN)
Conference
Plenary Speaker, Research day, Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Stockholm University
Funder
Swedish Research Council, VR 2016-04113
Available from: 2018-06-13 Created: 2018-06-13 Last updated: 2018-06-15Bibliographically approved
Airey, J. (2018). Building on higher education research - How can we take a scholarly approach to teaching and learning. In: : . Paper presented at Stockholms universitets lärarkonferens 2018 — universitetslärare i en föränderlig värld. Aula Magna, Stockholms University, Stockholm
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Building on higher education research - How can we take a scholarly approach to teaching and learning
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Aula Magna, Stockholms University, Stockholm: , 2018
Keywords
SoTL, university teaching, Scholarship
National Category
Didactics Other Physics Topics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-343425 (URN)
Conference
Stockholms universitets lärarkonferens 2018 — universitetslärare i en föränderlig värld
Available from: 2018-02-27 Created: 2018-02-27 Last updated: 2018-03-01Bibliographically approved
Airey, J. (2018). Disciplinary Literacy: A Research Overview. In: : . Paper presented at Symposium 2018 Litteraciteter och flerspråkighet, Stockholm, 11-12 oktober 2018.. Stockholm
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Disciplinary Literacy: A Research Overview
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The tentative title of the presentation is "Disciplinary Literacy: A Research Overview". I will be presenting in English and discussing various aspects of disciplinary literacy such as bilingual disciplinary literacy, multimodal disciplinary literacy and different visions of disciplinary literacy in terms of the different sites that disciplinary literacy is developed for (academy, workplace and society). I will also discuss the mismatch between different literacies for different disciplines and how this can play out in practice.

References

Airey, J. (2003). Teaching University Courses through the Medium of English: The current state of the art. In G. Fransson, Å.  Morberg, R. Nilsson, & B. Schüllerqvist(Eds.), Didaktikensmångfald(Vol. 1, pp. 11-18). Gävle, Sweden: Högskolani  Gävle.

Airey, J. (2004). Can you teach it in English? Aspects of the language choice debate in Swedish higher education. In Robert.   Wilkinson (Ed.), Integrating Content and Language: Meeting the Challenge of a Multilingual Higher Education(pp. 97-108).   Maastricht, Netherlands: Maastricht University Press. 

Airey, J. (2006). Närundervisningsspråketblirengelska[When the teaching language is changed to English]. Språkvård, 2006(4),   20-25.

Airey, J. (2006). Physics Students' Experiences of the Disciplinary Discourse Encountered in Lectures in English and Swedish.   Licentiate Thesis. Uppsala, Sweden: Department of Physics, Uppsala University. 

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2007). Disciplinary learning in a second language: A case study from university physics. In Robert. Wilkinson   & Vera. Zegers(Eds.), Researching Content and Language Integration in Higher Education(pp. 161-171). Maastricht:   Maastricht University Language Centre. 

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2008). Bilingual scientific literacy? The use of English in Swedish university scienceprogrammes. Nordic   Journal of English Studies, 7(3), 145-161.  Retrieved from http://ojs.ub.gu.se/ojs/index.php/njes/issue/view/24

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (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. 

Airey, J. (2009). Estimating bilingual scientific literacy in Sweden. International Journal of Content and Language Integrated   Learning, 1(2), 26-35. 

Airey J. (2009). Science, Language and Literacy. Case Studies of Learning in Swedish University Physics. ActaUniversitatis  Upsaliensis. Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 81. Uppsala Retrieved 2009-04-27, from   http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=9547

Airey, J. (2010). Närundervisningsspråketändrastill engelska[When the teaching language changes to English] Omundervisning  påengelska(pp. 57-64). Stockholm: HögskoleverketRapport 2010:15R

Airey, J. (2010a). The ability of students to explain science concepts in two languages. Hermes - Journal of Language and   Communication Studies, 45, 35-49.

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2010).Tvåspråkigämneskompetens? En studieavnaturvetenskapligparallellspråkighetisvenskhögre  utbildningIn L. G. Andersson, O. Josephson, I. Lindberg, & M. Thelander(Eds.), SpråkvårdochspråkpolitikSvenska  språknämndensforskningskonferensiSaltsjöbaden2008(pp. 195-212). Stockholm: Norstedts.

Airey, J. (2011a). Talking about Teaching in English. Swedish university lecturers' experiences of changing their teaching language.   Ibérica, 22(Fall), 35-54. 

Airey, J. (2011b). Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education: Disciplinary Literacy and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning   Dynamic content and language collaboration in higher education: theory, research, and reflections(pp. 57-65). Cape Town,   South Africa: Cape Peninsula University of Technology.

Airey, J. (2011c). The Disciplinary Literacy Discussion Matrix: A Heuristic Tool for Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education.   Across the disciplines, 8(3), unpaginated. Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/clil/airey.cfm

Airey, J. (2011d). The relationship between teaching language and student learning in Swedish university physics. In B. Preisler, I.   Klitgård, & A.  Fabricius(Eds.), Language and learning in the international university: From English uniformity to diversity   and hybridity(pp. 3-18). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Airey, J. (2012). “I don’t teach language.” The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden. AILA Review, 25(2012), 64–79. Airey, J. (2013). Disciplinary Literacy. In E. Lundqvist, L. Östman, & R. Säljö(Eds.), Scientific literacy – teoriochpraktik

   (pp. 41-58): Gleerups.

Airey, J. (2014) Representations in Undergraduate Physics. Docent lecture, ÅngströmLaboratory, 9th June 2014 From   http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-226598

Airey, J. (2015). From stimulated recall to disciplinary literacy: Summarizing ten years of research into teaching and learning in   English. In SlobodankaDimova, Anna Kristina Hultgren, & Christian Jensen (Eds.), English-Medium Instruction in European   Higher Education. English in Europe, Volume 3(pp. 157-176): De GruyterMouton.

Airey, J. (2016). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) and English for Academic Purposes (EAP). In Hyland, K. &   Shaw, P. (Eds.), RoutledgeHandbook of English for Academic Purposes. (pp. 71-83) London: Routledge.

Airey, J. (2017). CLIL: Combining Language and Content. ESP Today, 5(2), 297-302. 

Airey, J., & Larsson, J. (2018). Developing Students’ Disciplinary Literacy? The Case of University Physics. In K.-S. Tang & K.   Danielsson(Eds.), Global Developments in Literacy Research for Science Education: Springer.

Airey, J., Lauridsen, K., Raisanen, A., Salö, L., & Schwach, V. (in press). The Expansion of English-medium Instruction in the Nordic   Countries. Can Top-down University Language Policies Encourage Bottom-up Disciplinary Literacy Goals? Higher Education.   doi:10.1007/s10734-015-9950-2

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2006). Language and the experience of learning university physics in Sweden. European Journal of Physics,   27(3), 553-560.

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2008). Bilingual scientific literacy? The use of English in Swedish university scienceprogrammes. Nordic   Journal of English Studies, 7(3), 145-161.

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (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.

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2011). Bilingual scientific literacy. In C. Linder, L. Östman, D. Roberts, P-O. Wickman, G. Ericksen, & A.   MacKinnon (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy(pp. 106-124). London: Routledge.

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2017). Social Semiotics in University Physics Education. In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit, & H. E. Fischer (Eds.),   Multiple Representations in Physics Education(pp. 95-122). Cham, Switzerland: Springer

Gerber, Ans, Engelbrecht, Johann, Harding, Ansie, & Rogan, John. (2005). The influence of second language teaching on   undergraduate mathematics performance. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 17(3), 3-21. 

Klaassen, R. (2001). The international university curriculum: Challenges in English-medium engineering education: Doctoral Thesis,   Department of Communication and Education, Delft University of Technology. Delft. The Netherlands.

Kuteeva, M., & Airey, J. (2014). Disciplinary Differences in the Use of English in Higher Education: Reflections on Recent Policy   Developments  Higher Education, 67(5), 533-549. doi:10.1007/s10734-013-9660-6

Lehtonen, T., & Lönnfors, P. (2001). Teaching through English: A blessing or a damnation? Conference papers in the new millenium.    Retrieved from http://www.helsinki.fi/kksc/verkkojulkaisu/2_2001_8.html

Linder, A., Airey, J., Mayaba, N., & Webb, P. (2014). Fostering Disciplinary Literacy? South African Physics Lecturers’ Educational   Responses to their Students’ Lack of Representational Competence. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science   and Technology Education, 18(3), 242-252. doi:10.1080/10288457.2014.953294

Neville-Barton, P., & Barton, B. (2005). The relationship between English language and mathematics learning for non-native   speakers.   Retrieved from http://www.tlri.org.nz/pdfs/9211_finalreport.pdf

Thøgersen, J., & Airey, J. (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. 

Vinke, A. A. (1995). English as the medium of instruction in Dutch engineering education. Doctoral Thesis, Department of   Communication and Education, Delft University of Technology. Delft, The Netherlands.

Vinke, A. A., Snippe, J., & Jochems, W. (1998). English-medium content courses in Non-English higher education: A study of   lecturer experiences and teaching behaviours. Teaching in Higher Education, 3(3), 383-394.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: , 2018
Keywords
Disciplinary literacy, multilingualism, undergraduate science, disciplinary differences
National Category
Didactics Specific Languages
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-364428 (URN)
Conference
Symposium 2018 Litteraciteter och flerspråkighet, Stockholm, 11-12 oktober 2018.
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2015-01891
Available from: 2018-10-26 Created: 2018-10-26 Last updated: 2018-10-29Bibliographically approved
Airey, J. (2018). EMI, CLIL, EAP:What’s the difference?. In: : . Paper presented at Study Abroad, EMI, and Formal Instruction. Barcelona
Open this publication in new window or tab >>EMI, CLIL, EAP:What’s the difference?
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

EMI, CLIL, EAP: What’s the difference?

Abstract

In this presentation I will examine the differences between the terms EMI (English Medium Instruction, CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning and EAP (English for Academic Purposes). I will also discuss what it means to become disciplinary literate in a first, second and third language.

References

Airey, J. (2009). Estimating bilingual scientific literacy in Sweden. International Journal of Content and Language Integrated   Learning, 1(2), 26-35. 

Airey J. (2009). Science, Language and Literacy. Case Studies of Learning in Swedish University Physics. ActaUniversitatis  Upsaliensis. Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 81. Uppsala Retrieved 2009-04-27, from   http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=9547

Airey, J. (2010). Närundervisningsspråketändrastill engelska[When the teaching language changes to English] Omundervisning  påengelska(pp. 57-64). Stockholm: HögskoleverketRapport 2010:15R

Airey, J. (2010a). The ability of students to explain science concepts in two languages. Hermes - Journal of Language and   Communication Studies, 45, 35-49. 

Airey, J. (2011a). Talking about Teaching in English. Swedish university lecturers' experiences of changing their teaching language.   Ibérica, 22(Fall), 35-54. 

Airey, J. (2011b). Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education: Disciplinary Literacy and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning   Dynamic content and language collaboration in higher education: theory, research, and reflections(pp. 57-65). Cape Town,   South Africa: Cape Peninsula University of Technology.

Airey, J. (2011c). The Disciplinary Literacy Discussion Matrix: A Heuristic Tool for Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education.   Across the disciplines, 8(3), unpaginated. Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/clil/airey.cfm

Airey, J. (2011d). The relationship between teaching language and student learning in Swedish university physics. In B. Preisler, I.   Klitgård, & A.  Fabricius(Eds.), Language and learning in the international university: From English uniformity to diversity   and hybridity(pp. 3-18). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Airey, J. (2012). “I don’t teach language.” The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden. AILA Review, 25(2012), 64–79. Airey, J. (2013). Disciplinary Literacy. In E. Lundqvist, L. Östman, & R. Säljö(Eds.), Scientific literacy – teori och praktik (pp. 41-58): Gleerups. 

Airey, J. (2015). From stimulated recall to disciplinary literacy: Summarizing ten years of research into teaching and learning in   English. In SlobodankaDimova, Anna Kristina Hultgren, & Christian Jensen (Eds.), English-Medium Instruction in European   Higher Education. English in Europe, Volume 3(pp. 157-176): De GruyterMouton.

Airey, J. (2016). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) and English for Academic Purposes (EAP). In Hyland, K. &   Shaw, P. (Eds.), RoutledgeHandbook of English for Academic Purposes. (pp. 71-83) London: Routledge.

Airey, J. (2017). CLIL: Combining Language and Content. ESP Today, 5(2), 297-302. 

Airey, J., & Larsson, J. (2018). Developing Students’ Disciplinary Literacy? The Case of University Physics. In K.-S. Tang & K.   Danielsson(Eds.), Global Developments in Literacy Research for Science Education: Springer.

Airey, J., Lauridsen, K., Raisanen, A., Salö, L., & Schwach, V. (2017). The Expansion of English-medium Instruction in the Nordic   Countries. Can Top-down University Language Policies Encourage Bottom-up Disciplinary Literacy Goals? Higher Education.   doi:10.1007/s10734-015-9950-2

Duff, P.A. (1997). Immersion in Hungary: an ELF experiment. In R. K. Johnson & M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion education:   International perspectives(pp. 19-43). Cambridge, UK: CUP.

European Commission. (2003). Promoting Language Learning and Linguistic Diversity: An Action Plan 2004 – 2006.   http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2003:0449:FIN:EN:PDF

Kuteeva, M., & Airey, J. (2014). Disciplinary Differences in the Use of English in Higher Education: Reflections on Recent Policy   Developments  Higher Education, 67(5), 533-549. doi:10.1007/s10734-013-9660-6

Linder, A., Airey, J., Mayaba, N., & Webb, P. (2014). Fostering Disciplinary Literacy? South African Physics Lecturers’ Educational   Responses to their Students’ Lack of Representational Competence. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science   and Technology Education, 18(3), 242-252. doi:10.1080/10288457.2014.953294

Marsh, Herbert. W., Hau, Kit-Tai., & Kong, Chit-Kwong. (2000). Late immersion and language of instruction (English vs. Chinese) in   Hong Kong high schools: Achievement growth in language and non-language subjects. Harvard Educational Review, 70(3),   302-346. 

Met, M., & Lorenz, E. B. (1997). Lessons from U.S. immersion programs: Two decades of experience. In R. K. Johnson & M. Swain   (Eds.),Immersion education: International perspectives(pp. 243-264). Cambridge, UK: CUP.

Thøgersen, J., & Airey, J. (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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Barcelona: , 2018
Keywords
CLIL, EMI, EAP, higher education
National Category
Learning General Language Studies and Linguistics Other Physics Topics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-373498 (URN)
Conference
Study Abroad, EMI, and Formal Instruction
Available from: 2019-01-14 Created: 2019-01-14 Last updated: 2019-01-21Bibliographically approved
Volkwyn, T., Airey, J., Gregorcic, B. & Heijkenskjöld, F. (2018). Multimodal Transduction in Upper-secondary School Physics. In: : . Paper presented at International Science Education Conference (ISEC) 2018. 21 June 2018 National Institute of Education, Singapore.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Multimodal Transduction in Upper-secondary School Physics
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In this study we video-filmed upper-secondary physics students working with a laboratory task designed to encourage transduction (Bezemer & Kress 2008) when learning about coordinate systems.

 

Students worked in pairs with an electronic measurement device to determine the direction of the Earth’s magnetic field. The device, IOLab, can be held in the hand and moved around. The results of this movement are graphically displayed on a computer screen as changes in the x, y and z components of the Earth’s magnetic field. The students were simply instructed to use the IOLab to find the direction of the Earth’s magnetic field and mark its direction using a red paper arrow.

 

A full multimodal transcription of the student interaction was made (Baldry & Thibault 2006). In our analysis of this transcription, three separate transductions of meaning were identified—transduction of meaning potential in the room to the computer screen, transduction of this meaning to the red arrow, and finally transduction into student gestures. We suggest that this final transduction could not have been made without the introduction of the arrow, which functioned as a coordinating hub (Fredlund et al 2012).

 

We recommend that teachers should carefully think about the resources in a task that may function as a coordinating hub and should also look for student transductions in their classrooms as confirmation that learning is taking place.

 

References

Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183-198.

Airey, J. (2009). Science, language, and literacy: Case studies of learning in Swedish university physics (Doctoral dissertation, Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis). http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=9547 

Airey, J. (2015). Social Semiotics in Higher Education: Examples from teaching and learning in undergraduate physics In: SACF Singapore-Sweden Excellence Seminars, (STINT) , 2015 (pp. 103). urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-266049.

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (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.

Airey, J. & Linder, C. (2015) Social Semiotics in Physics Education: Leveraging critical constellations of disciplinary representations ESERA          2015 From http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn%3Anbn%3Ase%3Auu%3Adiva-260209

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2017). Social Semiotics in University Physics Education. In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit, & H. E. Fischer (Eds.), Multiple Representations in Physics Education (pp. 95-122). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

Baldry, A., & Thibault, P. J. (2006). Multimodal Transcription and Text Analysis. London: Equinox Publishing.

Bezemer, J., & Kress, G. (2008). Writing in multimodal texts: a social semiotic account of designs for learning. Written Communication, 25(2),           166-195.

Fredlund, T., Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2012). Exploring the role of physics representations: an illustrative example from students sharing knowledge about refraction. European Journal of Physics, 33, 657-666.

Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.

Lemke, J. L. (1998). Teaching all the languages of science: Words, symbols, images, and actions. In Conference on Science Education in Barcelona.

Selen, M. (2013). Pedagogy meets Technology: Optimizing Labs in Large Enrollment Introductory Courses. Bulletin of the American Physical      Society58. http://meetings.aps.org/Meeting/APR13/Session/C7.3

Volkwyn, T., Airey, J., Gregorčič, B., & Heijkenskjöld, F. (2016). Multimodal transduction in secondary school physics 8th International Conference on Multimodality, 7th-9th December 2016. Cape Town, South Africa. Retrieved from http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-316982.

Volkwyn, T., Airey, J., Gregorčič, B., Heijkenskjöld, F., & Linder, C. (2018). Physics students learning about abstract mathematical tools when engaging with “invisible” phenomena. PERC proceedings 2018 https://www.compadre.org/per/perc/proceedings.cfm.

Volkwyn, T., Airey, J., Gregorčič, B., & Heijkenskjöld, F. (submitted). Learning Science through Transduction: Multimodal disciplinary meaning-making in the physics laboratory. Designs for Learning.

Wu, H-K, & Puntambekar, S. (2012). Pedagogical Affordances of Multiple External Representations in Scientific Processes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(6), 754-767.

Keywords
disciplinary affordance, pedagogical affordance, magnetic field, meaning potential, semiotic resource, multimodal, transduction, coordinating hub
National Category
Other Physics Topics Didactics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-354706 (URN)
Conference
International Science Education Conference (ISEC) 2018. 21 June 2018 National Institute of Education, Singapore
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2016-04113
Available from: 2018-06-21 Created: 2018-06-21 Last updated: 2018-06-28Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0003-3244-2586

Search in DiVA

Show all publications