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

Direct link
BETA
Publications (10 of 117) Show all publications
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: 2018-12-19Bibliographically 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
Airey, J. & Simpson, Z. (2018). Multimodal Science and Engineering Teaching: Perspectives from 8ICOM. In: 9ICOM - Complete Book Of Abstracts: . Paper presented at 9th International Conference on Multimodality,University of Southern Denmark, August 15-17, 2018. Odense, Denmark.: Syddansk Universitet
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Multimodal Science and Engineering Teaching: Perspectives from 8ICOM
2018 (English)In: 9ICOM - Complete Book Of Abstracts, Odense, Denmark.: Syddansk Universitet, 2018Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Multimodal Science and Engineering Teaching: Perspectives from 8ICOM

The previous international conference on multimodality – 8ICOM – featured two sessions devoted to multimodal, social semiotic approaches to science teaching and learning (c.f. Halliday1978; van Leeuwen 2005, Airey & Linder 2017). What the papers in these sessions shared was the argument that such perspectives on science, and science teaching, can, at least in part, respond to calls to ‘democratize’ science education by recognising diverse sets of semiotic resources and, in so doing, seeking to address impediments to equal participation (Burke et al., 2017). 

The 8ICOM science sessions were particularly noteworthy given the backdrop against which 8ICOM had been organised. In the months leading up to the conference, South Africa (and Cape Town, in particular) had experienced campus unrest aimed at ‘decolonizing’ higher education in that country. As part of this movement, the phrase #ScienceMustFall briefly trended on social media. This emanated from the claim that ‘science’ is a western, colonial construct that needs to be dismantled and replaced with the teaching of indigenous, African knowledge. Although the #ScienceMustFall slogan has since departed from the wider public consciousness, the questions it raises nonetheless remain: why, and how, should science be taught?  Is science more than just a western colonial construction and, if so, why? And, what can the concept of multimodality offer by way of answering these questions? 

In this paper, we offer an overview of the multimodal science papers presented in the two sessions at 8ICOM in the light of these questions. This is done with a view to assessing where the multimodality community finds itself regarding science education, and how it might address questions of the legitimacy of western science in the future. It is thus an attempt, as the conference theme suggests, to ‘move the theory forward’.      

References

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, Sweden.:   http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A173193&dswid=-4725.

Airey, J. (2012). “I don’t teach language.” The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden.AILAReview, 25(2012), 64–79.

Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology Education, 20(2), 157-173.

Lindstrøm, C. (2011) Analysing Knowledge and Teaching Practices in Physics. Presentation 21 November 2011. Department of   Physicsand Astronomy Uppsala University, Sweden.

Martin, J. R. (2011). Bridgingtroubled waters: Interdisciplinarityand what makes it stick, in F. Christie and K. Maton, (eds.),   Disciplinarity. London: Continuum International Publishing, pp. 35-61.

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

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Odense, Denmark.: Syddansk Universitet, 2018
Keywords
Science, colonialism, science as modelling, multimodality
National Category
Other Physics Topics Didactics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-364423 (URN)
Conference
9th International Conference on Multimodality,University of Southern Denmark, August 15-17, 2018
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2016-04113
Available from: 2018-10-26 Created: 2018-10-26 Last updated: 2018-11-02Bibliographically approved
de Winter, J. & Airey, J. (2018). The views of pre-service physics teachers on the role of mathematics in the teaching and learning of physics. In: : . Paper presented at Physics Education Research Conference, August 1, 2018 - August 2, 2018 in Washington D.C..
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The views of pre-service physics teachers on the role of mathematics in the teaching and learning of physics
2018 (English)Conference paper, Poster (with or without abstract) (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Mathematics is commonly seen as playing a fundamental role in the understanding of undergraduate physics. However, this role poses challenges for teaching physics at lower levels. In England, increased formal assessment of mathematical skills in national physics examinations has made many teachers (re)consider this issue and their classroom practice.This qualitative study explores how English physics teachers view the physics/mathematics relationship. Our data consists of questionnaires and follow up interviews with an entire cohort of pre-service teachers training at an English university (n=13). Analysis included a line of enquiry on the tension between the value of mathematics in undergraduate physics and its value for teaching physics at school level.There was considerable variation across respondents, some seeing mathematics as integral to understanding school physics, whilst others prioritised conceptual understanding over mathematical formalism. Many noted how their views had changed during training, raising questions for those involved in physics teacher preparation.

National Category
Other Physics Topics Didactics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-357311 (URN)
Conference
Physics Education Research Conference, August 1, 2018 - August 2, 2018 in Washington D.C.
Available from: 2018-08-14 Created: 2018-08-14 Last updated: 2018-08-17Bibliographically approved
Airey, J. (2018). Using variation and unpacking to help students decode disciplinary-specific semiotic resources. In: 9ICOM - Complete book of abstracts: . Paper presented at 9th International Conference on Multimodality, University of Southern Denmark, August 15-17, 2018.. Odense, Denmark.: Syddansk Universitet
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Using variation and unpacking to help students decode disciplinary-specific semiotic resources
2018 (English)In: 9ICOM - Complete book of abstracts, Odense, Denmark.: Syddansk Universitet, 2018Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In this presentation I will describe a social semiotic approach (Halliday 1978; van Leeuwen 2005) to the multimodal teaching and learning of a discipline that takes variation theory (Marton & Booth 1997; Runesson 2005) as its theoretical framing. Following Airey and Linder (2017:95) I define social semiotics as “the study of the development and reproduction of specialized systems of meaning making in particular sections of society”

 

Learning at university level involves coming to understand the ways in which disciplinary-specific semiotic resources can be coordinated to make appropriate disciplinary meanings (Airey & Linder 2009). Nowhere is this more true than in undergraduate physics where a particularly wide range of semiotic resources such as graphs, diagrams, mathematics and language are essential for meaning making.  In order to learn to make these disciplinary meanings, students need to discover the disciplinary affordances(Fredlund et al. 2012, 2014; Airey & Linder 2017) of the semiotic resources used in their discipline. 

 

Fredlund et al. (2015) propose a three-stage process that lecturers can use to help their students:  

 

1. Identify the disciplinary relevant aspects needed for a particular task. 

2. Select semiotic resources that showcase these aspects. 

3. Create structured variation within these semiotic resources to help students notice the disciplinary relevant aspects and their relationships to each other.

 

However, many disciplinary specific semiotic resources have been rationalized to create a kind of disciplinary shorthand(Airey 2009). In such cases the disciplinary relevant aspects needed may no longer be present in resources used, but are rather implied. In such cases the resources will need to be unpacked for students (Fredlund et al. 2014).  Such unpacking increases the pedagogical affordance of semiotic resources but simultaneously decreases their disciplinary affordance. 

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. 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. (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). 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”The5th International 360   conference: Encompassing the multimodality of knowledge. City: Aarhus University: Aarhus, Denmark, pp. 20.

Eriksson, U. (2015) Reading the Sky: From Starspotsto Spotting Stars Uppsala:ActaUniversitatisUpsaliensis.

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. 

Fredlund2015 Using a Social Semiotic Perspective to Inform the Teaching and Learning of Physics. ActaUniversitatisUpsaliensis.

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 appresentationin 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. 

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

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.

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
Odense, Denmark.: Syddansk Universitet, 2018
Keywords
Social semiotics, physics, variation, pedagogical affordance, disciplinary affordance
National Category
Other Physics Topics Didactics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-364421 (URN)
Conference
9th International Conference on Multimodality, University of Southern Denmark, August 15-17, 2018.
Projects
VR-2016-04113
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2016-04113
Available from: 2018-10-26 Created: 2018-10-26 Last updated: 2018-11-02Bibliographically approved
Airey, J. (2017). CLIL: Combining Language and Content. ESP Today, 5(2), 297-302
Open this publication in new window or tab >>CLIL: Combining Language and Content
2017 (English)In: ESP Today, ISSN 2334-9050, Vol. 5, no 2, p. 297-302Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Keywords
Review, ESP, CLIL
National Category
Specific Languages Didactics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-335576 (URN)10.18485/esptoday.2017.5.2.9 (DOI)
Note

Review of: Tarja Nikula, Emma Dafouz, Pat Moore and Ute Smit (Eds.). CONCEPTUALISING INTEGRATION IN CLIL AND MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION (2016), Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Available from: 2017-12-07 Created: 2017-12-07 Last updated: 2018-01-13Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0003-3244-2586

Search in DiVA

Show all publications