Logo: to the web site of Uppsala University

uu.sePublications from Uppsala University
Change search
Refine search result
1234567 1 - 50 of 1536
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Adams, Jennifer
    et al.
    University of Calgary.
    Avraamidou, Lucy
    University of Gronigen.
    Bayram-Jacobs, Dury
    Radboud University.
    Boujaoude, Saouma
    Bryan, Lynn
    Christodoulou, Andri
    Couso, Digna
    Danielsson, Anna
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Dillon, Justin
    Erduran, Sibel
    Evagorou, Maria
    Goedhart, Martin
    Kang, Nam-Hwa
    Kaya, Ebru
    Kayumova, Shakhnoza
    Larsson, Johanna
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Martin, Sonya
    Martinez Chico, Maria
    Marzabal, Ainoa
    Savelsbergh, Elwin
    Siry, Christina
    van de Laar, Bart
    Wals, Arjen
    Wei, Bing
    Wilmes, Sara
    Zembal-Saul, Carla
    The Role of Science Education in a Changing World2018Report (Other academic)
  • 2.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Att skriva i alla ämnen i tidiga skolår2020In: Skrivundervisningens grunder / [ed] Karin Forsling och Catharina Tjernberg, Malmö: Gleerups Utbildning AB, 2020, p. 57-74Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 3.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Curriculum studies of mother-tongue education in Swedish: Introductory remarks2012In: Education Inquiry, E-ISSN 2000-4508, ISSN 2000-4508, Vol. 3, no 4, p. 471-475Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 4.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Det naturvetenskapliga ämnesspråket2012In: Skriv! Les! 1, Trondheim: Akademika forlag, 2012, p. 29-44Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 5.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Det ämnesspecifika skrivandet i naturvetenskapliga ämnen2016In: Skolverkets modul: Att genomföra systematiska undersökningar: Del 6: Att dokumentera undersökningar / [ed] Skolverket, Stockholm: Skolverket , 2016, p. 1-11Chapter in book (Other academic)
    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 6.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    Uppsala University, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Curriculum Studies.
    ”I NO skriver man bara så man förstår.” Men hur skriver man, och hur förstår man? Expansioner och textrörlighet i elevtexter.2007Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Att lära sig ett nytt ämnesområde innebär även att lära sig det språk som används inom det området. Tidigare forskning visar att det är nödvändigt att lära sig att skriva inom till exempel de olika naturvetenskapliga genrerna för att bli en kompetent elev inom detta område (se t ex Halliday & Martin 1993, Wignell, 1998).

     

    I denna presentation vill jag närmare diskutera expansioner i texter skrivna av elever i skolår 5 och 8 i NO och SO-ämnena. Genom expansioner byggs semantiska relationer mellan händelser genom satser som definierar (’alltså’, ’med andra ord’), bygger ut (’och’, ’men’) eller specificerar (’sen’, ’för att’) den inledande satsen (Halliday & Matthiessen 2004).  Expansioner har diskuterats som en viktig del av den vetenskapliga diskursen, både i sig själva och även som ett uttryck för elevernas förståelse av vad de skriver (Keys 1999). I presentationen diskuterar jag graden av expansioner i texterna i relation till hur eleverna talar om sina texter, deras textrörlighet. Det visar sig bland annat att framför allt högpresterande elever har en högre textrörlighet i de texter som även har en högre grad av expansioner.

  • 7.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Läsandet och sammanhanget.: Läspositioner i olika ämnen i skolan.2014In: Mötesplatser.: Texter för svenskämnet. / [ed] Ann Boglind, Per Holmerg och Anna Nordenstam, Lund: Studentlitteratur AB, 2014, p. 47-64Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 8.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    Uppsala University, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Curriculum Studies.
    Om skrivande i naturorienterande ämnen: "Hon skrev upp vad vi skulle ha med på labbrapporten och sen så skrev vi det. Så var det inte så mycket mer än så."2010In: Symposium 2009: genrer och funktionellt språk i teori och praktik / [ed] Mikael Olofsson, Stockholm: Stockholms universitets förlag , 2010, p. 176-188Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    I kapitlet diskuteras en undersökning om elevers skrivande i naturorienterande ämnen, hur texterna ser ut och hur eleverna talar om de texter de skrivit. Resultaten diskuteras i relation till sådant som ämnesspråk och förståelse.

    Download full text (pdf)
    FULLTEXT01
  • 9.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Languages, Department of Linguistics and Philology. Uppsala University, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Curriculum Studies.
    Skrivande i NO-ämnet: en forskningsinventering och ett par svenska exempel2004In: Andra nationella konferensen i svenska med didaktisk inriktning. Göteborg 8-9 januari 2004., 2004Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Åsa af Geijerstam diskuterar i sin artikel "Skrivande i NO-ämnet" elevers skrivande utifrån olika aspekter. Hon redovisar data från projektet Elevers möte med skolans textvärldar och tar sin utgångspunkt i bland annat kognitiva, konstruktivistiska och sociokulturella perspektiv. Vidare problematiserar af Geijerstam elevers skrivande i NO-ä,mnen utifrån frågor om anknytningar till textkulturer och utifrån frågor om dialogens betydelse i detta sammanhang.

  • 10.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    Uppsala University, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Curriculum Studies.
    Specificering, utveckling eller bara en massa tillägg? Om expansionsrelationer i PIRLS-provetsinformativa texter2009Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Att uttrycka exempelvis kausalitet, hänvisningar till tid och plats, exemplifieringar eller motsatsförhållanden är något som ofta diskuteras som centralt för en ”lyckad” text. Det visar sig dock att elever gör detta i varierande grad, och att graden av sammanhang i texterna i hög grad varierar med textaktiviteten (af Geijerstam, 2006). Det är också relevant att undersöka hur relationer av detta slag uttrycks i texter elever möter i test. I denna presentation fokuseras de informativa texter som ingår i läsförståelseprovet PIRLS 2006.

    Expansionsrelationer som uttrycks i texten samt vilka funktionella relationer som finns mellan satser diskuteras. Analysen av sammanhang i texten utgår från Hallidays system för satskoppling (Halliday 2004), och kompletteras med analys av de funktionella relationerna mellan enheterna (Mann & Thompson 1988, Evensen 2005).

  • 11.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Vem gör, vem är och vem upplever?: En analys av processer och deltagare i tidigt narrativt skolskrivande.2014In: Mångfaldens möjligheter.: Litteratur- och språkdidaktik i Norden. / [ed] Peter Andersson, Per Holmberg, Anna Lyngfelt, Anna Nordenstam och Olle Widhe, Göteborg: Göteborgs universitet, 2014, p. 99-114Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 12.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Folkeryd, Jenny
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Utveckling av metaspråk för tidigt skolskrivande2020In: Grænsegængere og grænsedragninger i nordiska modersmålsfag / [ed] N. Elf, T. Høegh, K. Kabel, E. Krogh, A. Piekut, & H. Rørbech, Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag, 2020, p. 277-295Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [sv]

    I kapitlet undersöks och diskuteras metaspråkets roll för att lärare ska kunna diskutera elevers texter, och i förlängningen kunna skapa goda förutsättningar för alla elevers utveckling av olika typer av skrivande. Lärares samtal om informativa texter skrivna i tidiga skolår undersöktes. Samtalen fördes före och efter en fortbildning om språkliga resurser för att uttrycka, fördjupa och skapa ett sammanhängande innehåll samt för att skapa en relation till en läsare. Den största skillnaden mellan lärarnas samtal före och efter fortbildningen fanns i samtal om hur texterna relaterar till en läsare, där en stor ökning av den metaspråkliga repertoaren syntes. I avslutande textdiskussioner utvecklar lärare också de metaspråkliga begreppen i högre grad genom exemplifieringar och förklaringar i relation till den text som kommenteras, vilket tyder på att metaspråket börjar systematiseras.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 13.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Folkeryd, Jenny
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Liberg, Caroline
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Linguistically based scales for assessment of young students’ writing2022In: Writing & Pedagogy, ISSN 1756-5839, E-ISSN 1756-5847, Vol. 13, no 1-3, p. 227-265Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This study addresses the question of how different aspects of students’ writing achievement can be recognised and evaluated. We developed a linguistically based framework for criteria-based assessment, anchored in a functional view of language and language learning. The framework was used to determine what traits characterise texts at different Proficiency Groups based on comparative judgement and what traits characterise texts assessed differently. Altogether, 100 texts (written by students ages 6–9) representing four text genres were assessed and ranked using both comparative judgement (holistic assessment) and criteria-based analysis. The results indicate that texts generally are assessed as stronger (i.e., placed in a higher Proficiency Group) when comparative judgement is used than what the assessment of a specific language resource indicates. The results also indicate that assessment differences might be a result of different quality expectations for different genres. This points towards the need for genre- and subject-specific assessment criteria to scaffold students in their emergent disciplinary writing development.

  • 14.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Folkeryd, Jenny W.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Enkel/utvecklad/välutvecklad elevtext i biologi, hur bedömer vi det?2014In: Bedömning i svenskämnet årskurs 7-9 / [ed] Gustaf Skar & Michael Tengberg, Natur och kultur, 2014Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 15.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Folkeryd, Jenny W.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Fel- men på olika sätt.: En analys av elevers felaktiga svar enligt PIRLS-provet.2013In: Läsning / [ed] Gustav Skar & Michael Tengberg, Stockholm: Natur och kultur, 2013Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 16.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Folkeryd, Jenny W.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Hallesson, Yvonne
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Languages, Department of Scandinavian Languages.
    Visén, Pia
    Stockholms universitet, Institutionen för språkdidaktik.
    Ämnesspecifikt textarbete i samhällskunskap – mer än bara begrepp2020Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 17.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Hort, Sofia
    Mälardalens universitet.
    Textens funktion viktig när nybörjare lär sig skriva2023In: Svenskläraren, ISSN 0346-2412, Vol. 2, p. 19-21Article in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 18.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Runeson, Jenny
    Nilholm, Claes
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Östman, Leif
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Ingelshed, Lena
    Att skriva faktatext i fyran2017In: Undersöka och utveckla undervisning.: Professionell utveckling för lärare. / [ed] Almqvist, Jonas, Hamza, Karim, Olin, Anette, Lund: Studentlitteratur AB, 2017, p. 67-84Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 19.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Wiksten Folkeryd, Jenny
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Fel men rätt på något sätt?: En analys av elevers nollsvar enligt PIRLS-provet.2013In: Läsning!: Svensklärarföreningens årsskrift 2013 / [ed] Gustaf Skar och Michael Tengberg, Stockholm: Natur och kultur, 2013, p. 37-55Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 20.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Wiksten Folkeryd, Jenny
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Läsande och skrivande i olika ämnen2019In: Att bli lärare i svenska / [ed] Caroline Liberg och Jon Smidt, Stockholm: Liber, 2019, p. 89-101Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 21.
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Wiksten Folkeryd, Jenny
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Hallesson, Yvonne
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Languages, Department of Scandinavian Languages.
    Raattamaa Visén, Pia
    Institutionen för ämnesdidaktik, Stockholms universitet.
    Förutsättningar för ämnesspecifik läsförståelse i samhällskunskap i grundskolan2023In: Educare, ISSN 1653-1868, E-ISSN 2004-5190, no 2, p. 114-147Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper deepens the understanding of conditions for students' subject-specific reading comprehension created through different ways of working with reading in civic education, and the support students thus get to read verbal texts. Motivation for the study is found in an increasing need for knowledge about reading in various school subjects, and theoretical foundation is found in New Literacy Studies and disciplinary literacy. Video recordings were analyzed from lessons in three different schools and six different classes (ca 100h in total). The schools worked with reading in different ways, two schools used different models for teaching reading and one school did not use any particular model. The material was analyzed using thematic content analysis. Seven different functions for reading were identified together with reading materials. Furthermore, we analyzed which text levels were in focus. Results show that the classrooms where teachers work according to special models give clearer support to read and comprehend longer coherent verbal texts by using this type of texts and working with them through a variety of functions for reading activities, activities general for several subjects as well as more subject specific activities.

    Download full text (pdf)
    af Geijerstam m.fl. 2023
  • 22.
    Aguirre, Susanna
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Vi var inga medmänniskor, vi var motmänniskor: - stereotypisering av den manliga invandraridentiteten i svensk ungdomslitteratur2010Independent thesis Advanced level (professional degree), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
    Abstract [sv]

    Syftet med denna uppsats är att medvetandegöra stereotypiska framställningar av manliga karaktärer med invandrarbakgrund, skrivna av författare som vuxit upp som första eller andra generationens invandrare. Som utgångspunkt har jag använt mig av läroplanens mål som pekar på att litteratur ska erbjuda varierade och positiva bilder av andra kulturer, samt hjälpa eleven att skapa en trygg identitet. I min studie har jag gjort en kvalitativ textanalys av tre böcker samt även avskilt fenomenet ”invandrarlitteratur” som en diskurs där jag har upptäckt att diskursen i sig generar fördomar genom att efterhängsna termer och klassificeringar tenderar att leva kvar. De slutsatser jag har kommit fram till är att stereotyper till stor del lever kvar i karaktärernas porträttering, både när det gäller beskrivningen av deras motiv och hur de hanterar konflikter. Karaktärerna tenderar att antingen beskrivas som våldsutövare eller som offer för olyckliga omständigheter vid konflikter, och de hamnar ofta i typsituationer där de sällan beskrivs välja den ”rätta” vägen. Min slutsats är att även om litteraturen har utvecklats och idag erbjuder mer komplexa personporträtt av ungdomar med invandrarbakgrund tenderar ändå karaktärerna att stereotypifieras i olika situationer.

    Download full text (pdf)
    FULLTEXT01
  • 23.
    Ahde, August
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Byhlin, Christoffer
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Att göra som och vara en medborgare: En kvalitativ intervjustudie om en samhällsdidaktisk utmaning2023Independent thesis Advanced level (professional degree), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 24.
    Ahl, Linda Marie
    et al.
    Department of Education, Uppsala University Blåsenhus, von Kraemers Allé 1, Uppsala Sweden.
    Helenius, Ola
    Department of Pedagogical, Curricular and Professional Studies, University of Gothenburg Gothenburg Sweden.
    Aguilar, Mario Sánchez
    CICATA Legaria, Instituto Politécnico Nacional Mexico City Mexico.
    Jankvist, Uffe Thomas
    Danish School of Education, Aarhus University https://dx.doi.org/1006 Aarhus Denmark.
    Misfeldt, Morten
    Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark.
    Prytz, Johan
    Department of Education, Uppsala University Blåsenhus, von Kraemers Allé 1, Uppsala Sweden.
    Implementation Research in Mathematics Education: A Systematic Mapping Review2023In: Implementation and Replication Studies in Mathematics Education, ISSN 2667-0135, Vol. 3, no 2, p. 135-199Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    We present the results of a systematic literature review of research articles that self-identify as describing the implementation of innovations from mathematics education research in educational practice. We classified 103 articles according to study type, the type of teaching/learning phenomenon the implementation targeted, and whether the innovation carrier was a curriculum reform, professional development, or a curriculum resource. We found that interest in implementation research increased from a modest number of published studies prior to 2003 to a peak in 2021. Other results highlight that projects that targeted teaching in line with the U.S. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics process standards were dominant when curricular reform acted as a carrier. Planning and design aspects of such projects were rarely reported, and projects were rarely discussed theoretically. Instead, such projects were commonly researched by studying teachers’ reform enactment. We discuss the consequences of this imbalance.

  • 25.
    Ahlberg, Kerstin
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education.
    Visual literacy i klassrummet: En studie av elevers visuella praktiker i bild, svenska och NO2017Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Master (Two Years)), 20 credits / 30 HE creditsStudent thesis
    Abstract [sv]

    Syftet med denna studie är att utifrån elevernas perspektiv undersöka vilken visual literacy som förväntas i ämnena bild, svenska och NO i grundskolans årskurs 4-6. Frågeställningarna fokuserar vilka visuella praktiker eleverna deltar i och vilken literacy som kommer till uttryck i dessa praktiker, hur eleverna förhåller sig och vilket stöd de erbjuds när de hanterar visuellt material.

    Teoretiskt utgår studien från områdena Visuell kultur och New literacy studies, men den vilar också på socialsemiotisk forskning och teorier om multimodalitet. Inom New literacy studies undersöks textpraktiker, i detta arbete är det elevernas visuella praktiker som studeras, dvs. när eleverna läser och skapar bilder i undervisningen.

    Metodologiskt bygger studien på visuell etnografi, där forskningsmaterialet producerats genom deltagande observation i fyra klasser på mellanstadiet. Fotografier, observationsanteckningar och utskrifter av intervjuer med fyra elevgrupper utgör underlaget för analysen.

    Analysen visar att eleverna deltar i flera olika visuella praktiker inom ramen för de studerade ämnena. Det handlar om att skapa bilder eller digitala presentationer, men också om att läsa texter med visuellt material eller att se streamade filmer. Dessa praktiker uppvisar både likheter och skillnader. Sammanfattningsvis får eleverna möjligheter att lära om material och tekniker, använda och kommunicera med bilder, men undervisas i mindre mån i att analysera visuella uttryck. Undersökningen görs mot bakgrund av det ökade bildflödet i samhället. Om eleverna ska bli visuellt litterata krävs att alla ämnen tar ansvar för att behandla de visuella material som används i undervisningen. För bildämnets del betyder det också att lärarna måste ta den kommunikativa inriktningen på allvar och öva eleverna inte bara i att skapa bilder, utan också i att analysera och kritiskt granska de bilduttryck de möter.  

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 26.
    Ahlholm, Martin
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Fysikattityder hos gymnasieelever?: Trender bland intresse för fysik och fysikattityder bland svenska gymnasieelever2013Independent thesis Advanced level (professional degree), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
    Abstract [en]

    Empirical research has shown that there are clear links between the interests, attitudes, and studentsuccess. The aim of the survey, which is the foundation of this report, was to measure how theinterest in physics and attitudes towards physics and physics education differs between the differentyears in upper secondary school. Maryland Physics Expectations (MPEX) Survey has been used tomeasure the attitudes. The questionnaire was answered by 605 respondents from technology andnatural science program from two upper secondary schools in central Sweden. Interest in physics islow on the investigated schools and it tends to become lower through the ages. Overall, there aremore unfavorable responses of the different attitude dimensions in third grade than in first grade. Concept is the dimension that has the most unfavorable response in both the second and third grade.In order to increase the conceptual understanding of upper secondary school students, shouldconceptual understanding be offered a greater part of the teaching. Examining conceptualunderstanding in homework assignments and tests are also preferable.

    Download full text (pdf)
    Ahlholm_Martin_(2013)_Fysikattityder_hos_gymnasieelever
  • 27.
    Ahlin, Alexander
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Social and Economic Geography.
    Framställningen av Kina i geografiläroböcker: En kvalitativ textanalys2019Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
    Abstract [sv]

    Syftet med denna studie var att analysera hur en utomeuropeisk kultur, Kina, framställs i läroböcker i geografi för grundskolans senare år. Studien utgick från Edward Saids teori om orientalism. I studien togs tidigare läroboksforskning upp, vars resultat visar på att det förekommer stereotyper, fördomar och förenklingar i läroböcker. I tidigare forskning visas också på hur både elever och lärare ofta uppfattar läroböcker som objektiv faktakälla. För att besvara studiens syfte så skapades frågeställningar om, och i sådant fall på vilket sätt, det gick att se spår av orientalism och traditionell gestaltning av Kina, dess kultur och befolkning i läroböckerna. Studien använde sig av metoden kvalitativ textanalys som innebär en närläsning och tolkning av texterna som är föremål för analysen. Resultaten från analysen visar att det går att tolka spår av orientalism i läroböckerna. Resultaten bekräftar därmed delvis resultat som tidigare forskning visat. Resultaten öppnar för vidare och fortsatt analys av läroböcker, exempelvis i större omfattning eller över andra skolämnen för att avgöra om liknande resultat går att få och att därmed en generalisering av resultaten kan göras av läroböcker i ett större perspektiv. 

  • 28. Ahmad, Bassam
    et al.
    Bunar, Nihad
    Riad, Tomas
    Forslund, Anneli
    af Geijerstam, Åsa
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Education. Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Languages, Department of Linguistics and Philology.
    Svenska som andraspråk på språkintroduktion2019In: Didaktisk utvecklingsdialog: Lärares och skolledares professionella utveckling / [ed] Anette Olin, Jonas Almqvist, Karim Hamza, Lisbeth Gyllander Torkildsen, Lund: Studentlitteratur AB, 2019, p. 67-84Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 29.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Stockholm University.
    A Social Semiotic Approach to Teaching and Learning Science2018Conference paper (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.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 30.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Building on higher education research - How can we take a scholarly approach to teaching and learning2018Conference paper (Other academic)
    Download full text (pdf)
    SoTL
  • 31.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics, Physics Didactics. Physics Education Research.
    Can you teach it in English? The Language Choice Debate in Swedish Higher Education.2004In: Integrating Content and Language: meeting the challenge of a multilingual higher education: proceedings of the ICL Conference, October 23-25 2003 / [ed] Robert Wilkinson, Maastricht: Universitaire Pers Maastricht , 2004, p. 97-108Conference paper (Refereed)
    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 32.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    CLIL: Combining Language and Content2017In: ESP Today, ISSN 2334-9050, Vol. 5, no 2, p. 297-302Article in journal (Refereed)
    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 33.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Stockholm University, Sweden.
    Disciplinary Affordance vs Pedagogical Affordance: Teaching the Multimodal Discourse of University Science2017Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Disciplinary Affordance vs Pedagogical Affordance: Teaching the

    Multimodal Discourse of University Science

    The natural sciences have been extremely successful in modeling some specific aspects

    of the world around us. This success is in no small part due to the creation of generally

    accepted, paradigmatic ways of representing the world through a range of semiotic

    resources. The discourse of science is of necessity multimodal (see for example Lemke,

    1998) and it is therefore important for undergraduate science students to learn to

    master this multimodal discourse (Airey & Linder, 2009). In this paper, I approach the

    teaching of multimodal science discourse via the concept of affordance.

    Since its introduction by Gibson (1979) the concept of affordance has been debated by a

    number of researchers. Most famous, perhaps is the disagreement between Gibson and

    Norman (1988) about whether affordances are inherent properties of objects or are

    only present when perceived by an organism. More recently, affordance has been

    drawn on in the educational arena, particularly with respect to multimodality (see

    Fredlund, 2015 for a recent example). Here, Kress et al (2001) have claimed that

    different modes have different specialized affordances.

    In the presentation the interrelated concepts of disciplinary affordance and pedagogical

    affordance will be presented. Both concepts make a radical break with the views of both

    Gibson and Norman in that rather than focusing on the perception of an individual, they

    refer to the disciplinary community as a whole. Disciplinary affordance is "the agreed

    meaning making functions that a semiotic resource fulfills for a disciplinary community".

    Similarly, pedagogical affordance is "the aptness of a semiotic resource for the teaching

    and learning of some particular educational content" (Airey, 2015). As such, in a

    teaching situation the question of whether these affordances are inherent or perceived

    becomes moot. Rather, the issue is the process through which students come to use

    semiotic resources in a way that is accepted within the discipline. In this characterization

    then, learning can be framed in terms of coming to perceive and leverage the

    disciplinary affordances of semiotic resources.

    In this paper, I will discuss: the disciplinary affordances of individual semiotic resources,

    how these affordances can be made “visible” to students and how the disciplinary

    affordances of semiotic resources are ultimately leveraged and coordinated in order to

    make science meanings.

    References:

    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. (2011b). 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. (2013). Disciplinary Literacy. In E. Lundqvist, L. Östman, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Scientific literacy – teori och praktik (pp. 41-58): Gleerups.

    Airey, J. (2014) Representations 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. (2016). Undergraduate Teaching with Multiple Semiotic Resources: Disciplinary Affordance vs Pedagogical Affordance.   Paper presented at 8icom. University of Cape Town, Cape Town.

    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.

    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: Multiple Representations in Physics Education   Springer. pp 85-122

    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. 36 055002.

    Fredlund, T. & Linder, C., & Airey, J. (2015c). A social semiotic approach to identifying critical aspects. International Journal for   Lesson and Learning Studies 2015 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.

    Hodge, R. & Kress, G. (1988). Social Semiotics. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    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

    Lo, M. L. (2012). Variation theory and the improvement of teaching and learning (Vol. 323). Gothenburg: Göteborgs Universitet.

    Marton, F. (2015). Necessary conditions of learning. New York: Routledge.

    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/

    Thibault, P. (1991). Social semiotics as praxis. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    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.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 34.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Stockholm University; Linneaus University.
    Disciplinary Literacy: A Research Overview2018Conference paper (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.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 35.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Disciplinary Literacy: Theorising the Specialized Use of Language and other Modes in University Teaching and Learning2018Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Disciplinary Literacy: Theorising the Specialized Use of Language and other Modes in University Teaching and Learning

    Abstract

    In this presentation I use the work of Basil Bernstein (Bernstein, 1990, 1999, 2000)to discuss the role of disciplinary differences in university teaching and learning.  Drawing from my own work on the theme of disciplinary literacy (Airey, 2012, 2013; Airey & Linder, 2008, 2011)I argue that all university lecturers are teachers of disciplinary literacy—even in monolingual settings. 

    I define disciplinary literacy as appropriate participation in the communicative practices of the discipline(Airey, 2011a, 2011b)and suggest that disciplinary literacy is developed for three specific sites (academy, workplace and society).  I will illustrate the multilingual and multimodal nature of disciplinary literacy with empirical evidence from a comparative study of the disciplinary literacy goals of Swedish and South African physics lecturers (Linder, Airey, Mayaba, & Webb, 2014). 

    Finally, I will conclude by demonstrating how two of Bernstein’s dichotomies: disciplinary knowledge structures (hierarchical vs horizontal) and disciplinary classification (singular vs region) can be used together with the disciplinary literacy triangle to better understand the literacy goals of particular disciplines 

    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. (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 – teoriochpraktik

       (pp. 41-58): Gleerups. 

    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. (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

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

    Bolton, K., & Kuteeva, M. (2012). English as an academic language at a Swedish university: parallel language use and the ‘threat’ of   English. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33(5), 429-447. 

    Gee, J. P. (1991). What is literacy? In C. Mitchell & K. Weiler(Eds.), Rewriting literacy: Culture and the discourse of the other(pp.   3-11). New York: Bergin & Garvey. 

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

    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

    Lea, Mary R., & Street, Brian V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher   Education, 23(2), 157-172. 

    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:10.1080/10288457.2014.95329

    Lindström, C. (2011). Analysingknowledge and teaching practices in physics. Presentation 21 November 2011 Invited speaker:   Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University, Sweden. 

    Martin, J. R. (2011). Bridging troubled waters: Interdisciplinarityand what makes it stick. In F. Christie & K. Maton(Eds.),   Disciplinarity(pp. 35-61). London: Continuum International Publishing. 

    Norris, Stephen P., & Phillips, Linda M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science  Education, 87(2), 224-240. 

    Roberts, D. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy: Threats and opportunities. In S. K. Abell& N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook  of research on science education(pp. 729-780). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Salö, L. (2010). Engelskaellersvenska? En kartläggning av språksituationen inom högre utbildning och forskning [English or Swedish? A survey of the language situation in higher education and research]. Stockholm: Språkrådet. 

    Swales, J., & Feak, C. (2004). Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan

    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.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 36.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    EAP, EMI or CLIL?: (English for Academic Purposes, English Medium Instruction or Content and Language Integrated Learning)2016In: Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes / [ed] Hyland, K. & Shaw, P., Milton Park: Routledge, 2016, p. 71-83Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 37.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    From stimulated recall to disciplinary literacy: Summarizing ten years of research into teaching and learning in English2015In: English-Medium Instruction in European Higher Education / [ed] Dimova, S. Hultgren, A-K. Jensen, C., Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton , 2015, p. 157-176Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Abstract

    This chapter summarizes my research work in Swedish higher education in the area of teaching and learning in English. Sweden makes for a particularly interesting case study since there are high levels of English competence in the general population and a large percentage of university courses have traditionally been taught through the medium of English.

    The work I have done falls into three broad categories:  University learning in English, University teaching in English and Disciplinary differences in attitudes to English language use.

    Over the years I have used a range of data collection techniques including video recordings of lectures, semi-structured interviews, questionnaires and stimulated recall. The research work is almost exclusively qualitative in nature adopting a case study approach.

    References

    Airey, John. 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, 97–108. Maastricht, Netherlands: Maastricht University Press.

    Airey, John. 2009a. Estimating bilingual scientific literacy in Sweden. International Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning 1. 26–35.

    Airey, John. 2009b. 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.

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

    Airey, John. 2010b. När undervisningsspråket ändras till engelska [When the teaching language changes to English]. Om undervisning på engelska[On teaching in English], Rapport 2010:15R. 57–64. Stockholm: Högskoleverket.

    Airey, John. 2011a. The Disciplinary Literacy Discussion Matrix: A Heuristic Tool for Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education. Across the disciplines 8. Unpaginated.

    Airey, John. 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, 57–65. Cape Town, South Africa: Cape Peninsula University of Technology.

    Airey, John. 2011c. Talking about Teaching in English. Swedish university lecturers' experiences of changing their teaching language. Ibérica 22. 35–54.

    Airey, John. 2012. “I don’t teach language.” The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden. AILA Review 25. 64–79.

    Airey, John. 2013. Disciplinary Literacy. In Eva Lundqvist, Leif Östman & Roger Säljö (eds.), Scientific literacy – teori och praktik. 41–58. Stockholm: Gleerups.

    Airey, John & Cedric Linder. 2006. Language and the experience of learning university physics in Sweden. European Journal of Physics 27. 553–60.

    Airey, John & Cedric Linder. 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, 161–71. Maastricht: Maastricht University Language Centre.

    Ball, Phil & Diana Lindsay. 2013. Language demands and support for English-medium instruction in tertiary education: Learning from a specific context. In Aintzane Doiz, David Lasagabaster & Juan Manuel Sierra (eds.), English-medium instruction at universities: Global challenges, 44–61. Bristol/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters.

    Barton, Bill & Pip Neville-Barton. 2003. Language Issues in Undergraduate Mathematics: A Report of Two Studies. New Zealand Journal of Mathematics, 32, 19–28.

    Barton, Bill & Pip Neville-Barton. 2004. Undergraduate mathematics learning in English by speakers of other languages. Paper presented to Topic Study Group 25 at the 10th International Congress on Mathematics Education, July, 2004.

    Bernstein, Basil. 1999. Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology Education 20. 157–73.

    Bloom, B. S. 1953. Thought processes in lectures and discussions. Journal of General Education 7. 160–69.

    Bergmann, Jonathan, & Aaron Sams. 2012. Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day. Moorabbin, Australia: Hawker Brownlow Education.

    Calderhead, J. 1981. Stimulated recall: A method for research on teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology 51. 211–17.

    Chambers, Francine. 1997. What do we mean by fluency? System 25. 535–44.

    Cots, Josep Maria. 2013. Introducing English-medium instruction at the University of Lleida, Spain: Intervention, beliefs and practices. In Aintzane Doiz, David Lasagabaster & Juan Manuel Sierra (eds.), English-medium instruction at universities: Global challenges, 106–128. Bristol/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters.

    Council of Europe. 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. Cambridge University Press. http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_EN.pdf (accessed 16 June 2014).

    Duff, Patricia. 1997. Immersion in Hungary: an ELF experiment. In Robert K. Johnson & Merrill Swain (eds.), Immersion education: International perspectives, 19–43. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Doiz, Aintzane, David Lasagabaster & Juan Manuel Sierra. 2011. Internationalisation, multilingualism and English-medium instruction. World Englishes 30. 345–359.

    Educational Testing Service. 2004. Mapping TOEFL, TSE, TWE, and TOEIC on the Common European Framework. (2004). http://www.besig.org/events/iateflpce2005/ets/CEFsummaryMarch04.pdf (accessed 7 May 2008).

    Flowerdew, John (ed.). 1994. Academic listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Garrison, D. Randy & Heather Kanuka. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education 7(2), 95–105.

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

    Haglund, Björn. 2003. Stimulated recall. Några anteckningar om en metod att genererar data [Stimulated recall. Notes on a method of data generation]. Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige 8. 145–57.

    Hincks, Rebecca. 2005. Computer support for learners of spoken English: Doctoral Thesis. School of Computer Science and Communication. KTH. Stockholm. Sweden.

    Hincks, Rebecca. 2010. Speaking rate and information content in English lingua franca oral presentations. English for Specific Purposes 29. 4–18.

    Jensen, Christian, & Jacob Thøgersen. 2011. Danish university Lecturers’ attitudes towards English as the medium of instruction. Ibérica 22. 13–34.

    Klaassen, Renate. 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.

    Kormos, Judit & Mariann Dénes.2004. Exploring measures and perceptions of fluency in the speech of second language learners. System 32. 145–164

    Kuteeva, Maria & John Airey. 2014. Disciplinary differences in the use of English in higher education: Reflections on recent language policy developments. Higher Education 67(5). 553–549.[CJ1] 

    Lehtonen, Tuula & Pearl Lönnfors. 2001. Teaching through English: A blessing or a damnation? Conference papers in the new millenium. University of Helsinki Language Centre.

    Liebscher, Grit & Jennifer Dailey-O'Caine. 2005. Learner code-switching in the content-based foreign language classroom. The Modern Language Journal 89. 234–47.

    Linder, Anne, John Airey, Nokhanyo Mayaba & Paul Webb. Forthcoming. Fostering Disciplinary Literacy? South African Physics Lecturers’ Responses to their Students’ Lack of Representational Competence. African Journal of Research in Mathematics Science and Techmology Education.

    Maiworm, Friedhelm & Bernd Wächter (eds.). 2002. English-language-taught degree programmes in European higher education, Trends and success factors. (ACA papers on International Cooperation in Education.) Bonn: Lemmens Verlags & Mediengesellschaft.

    Marsh, Herbert. W., Kit-Tai Hau & Chit-Kwong Kong. 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. 302–46.

    Marsh, Herbert. W., Kit -Tai Hau & Chit-Kwong Kong. 2002. Multilevel causal ordering of academic self-concept and achievement: Influence of language of instruction (English compared with Chinese) for Hong Kong students. American Educational Research Journal 39. 727–63.

    Martin, James R. 2011. Bridging troubled waters: Interdisciplinarity and what makes it stick.  In Frances Christie & Karl Maton (eds.), Disciplinarity: Functional Linguistic and Sociological Perspectives, 35–61. London: Continuum International Publishing.

    Met, Miriam & Eileen B. Lorenz. 1997. Lessons from U.S. immersion programs: Two decades of experience. In Robert K. Johnson & Merrill Swain (eds.), Immersion education: International perspectives, 243–64. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Mežek, Špela. 2013. Advanced second-language reading and vocabulary learning in the parallel-language university. PhD thesis. Department of English, Stockholm University.

    Moschkovich, Judit. 2007. Using two languages when learning mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics 64. 121–44.

    Neville-Barton, Pip & Bill Barton. 2005. The relationship between English language and mathematics learning for non-native speakers. http://www.tlri.org.nz/pdfs/9211_finalreport.pdf (accessed 21 Sept. 2005).

    Swedish Ministry of Education and Research. 2001. Den öppna högskolan [The open university]. Utbildningsdepartementet Prop. 2001:02.

    Tatzl, Dietmar. 2011. English-medium masters’ programmes at an Austrian university of applied sciences: Attitudes, experiences and challenges. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 10. 252–270.

    Thøgersen, Jacob & John Airey. 2011. Lecturing undergraduate science in Danish and in English: A comparison of speaking rate and rhetorical style. English for Specific Purposes 30. 209–21.

    Towell, Richard, Rodger Hawkins & Nives Bazergui. 1996. The Development of Fluency in Advanced Learners of French. Applied Linguistics 17. 84–119.

    Üstünel, Eda & Paul Seedhouse. 2005. Why that, in that language, right now? Code-switching and pedagogical focus. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 15. 302–25.

    Vinke, Adriana 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: Department of Communication and Education, Delft University of Technology.

    Vinke, Adriana A., Joke Snippe & Wim Jochems. 1998. English-medium content courses in Non-English higher education: A study of lecturer experiences and teaching behaviours. Teaching in Higher Education 3. 383–94.

    Wächter, Bernd & Friedhelm  Maiworm. 2008. English-taught programmes in European higher education. The picture in 2007. Bonn: Lemmens.

    Werther, Charlotte, Louise Denver, Christian Jensen & Inger M. Mees. 2014. Using English as a medium of instruction at university level in Denmark: the lecturer's perspective. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 35. 443–462.

    Wignell, Peter. 2007. Vertical and horizontal discourse and the social sciences. In Frances Christie & James R. Martin (eds.), Genre and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and School, 184–204. London: Cassell.

    Willig, Ann C. 1985. A meta-analysis of selected studies on the effectiveness of bilingual education. Review of Educational Research 55. 269–318.

    Zonneveld, Marjolein. 1991. Studeren in Engelstalige, multiculturele situaties. Een exploratieve studie naar mogelijke effecten van integratie van MSc-en regulier onderwijs aan de Landbouwuniversiteit [Studying in English-medium, multicultural situations]: Wageningen, University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Agricultural Educational Theory.

  • 38.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Stockholm University.
    Learning and Sharing Disciplinary Knowledge: The Role of Representations2017Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Learning and Sharing Disciplinary Knowledge: The Role of Representations.

    Abstract

    In recent years there has been a large amount of interest in the roles that different representations (graphs, algebra, diagrams, sketches, physical models, gesture, etc.) play in student learning. In the literature two distinct but interrelated ways of thinking about such representations can be identified. The first tradition draws on the principles of constructivism emphasizing that students need to build knowledge for themselves. Here students are encouraged to create their own representations by working with materials of various kinds and it is in this hands-on representational process that students come to develop their understanding.

    The second tradition holds that there are a number of paradigmatic ways of representing disciplinary knowledge that have been created and refined over time. These paradigmatic disciplinary representations need to be mastered in order for students to be able to both understand and effectively communicate knowledge within a given discipline.

    In this session I would like to open up a discussion about how these two ways of viewing representations might be brought together. To do this I will first present some of the theoretical and empirical work we have been doing in Sweden over the last fifteen years. In particular there are three concepts that I would like to introduce for our discussion: critical constellations of representations, the disciplinary affordance of representations and the pedagogical affordance of representations.

    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) Representations 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. 36 055002.

    Fredlund, T. & Linder, C., & Airey, J. (2015c). A social semiotic approach to identifying critical aspects. International Journal for   Lesson and Learning Studies 2015 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.

    National Research Council. (2012). Discipline Based Education Research. Understanding and Improving Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.

    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.

     

     

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 39.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Lecturing in English: Comparing fluency and content in L1 and L22013Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In recent years there has been a noticeable trend in many countries towards teaching university courses in English. However, from a research perspective, difficulties in obtaining comparative data have meant that little is known about what happens when lecturers change teaching language in this way.

     

    The work presented here follows eighteen lecturers of various disciplines from two Swedish universities who are in the process of changing their teaching language to English. The lecturers were all participants on a teaching in English training course (7.5 ECTS). As part of the course the lecturers gave ten-minute mini-lectures in their first language in a subject area that they usually teach. The following week, the lecturers gave the same lectures again in English.

     

    The lecture transcripts were analysed in terms of the content presented and comparative fluency. The majority of the lecturers present very similar content in both languages. However, all the lecturers speak more slowly and have shorter runs and more hesitations in their English lectures. There are a number of important differences in the ways in which lecturers dealt with this ‘slowing down’ in English, ranging from making changes to their pedagogical approach to running over time or cutting off the whole end of the lecture.

     

    In earlier studies lecturers who regularly teach in English suggest they do not notice much difference when teaching in one language or another. However, qualitative analysis of the 18 lecturers’ course reflections (approximately 60 000 words) shows that they were acutely aware of their limitations when teaching in English.

     

    This analysis provides further insights into the experiences of lecturers who are in the process of changing teaching language and a number of pedagogical recommendations are made.

     

    Keywords

    Parallel-language education, university lecturing, ESP, ELF, medium of instruction, fluency, speaking rate, mean length of runs.

  • 40.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics, Physics Didactics. Physics Education Research.
    När undervisningsspråket blir engelska2006In: Språkvård, ISSN 0038-8440, no 4, p. 20-25Article in journal (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Engelska blir vanligare och vanligare som undervisningsspråk i högre utbildning. Vad händer med ämnesinlärningen när undervisningsspråket blir engelska? John Airey har undersökt svenska fysikstudenter. Det behövs många goda råd för att undervisningen ska fungera.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 41.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Physics Education Research2020Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Abstract

    In this presentation I will briefly describe the history of physics education research (PER), explain my own research interests and suggest the alternative discipline-based education research as an alternative to pedagogy or didactics when dealing with training courses for univerity lecturers.

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

      https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58914-5_5

    Airey, J., & Eriksson, U. (2019). Unpacking the Hertzsprung-Russell Diagram: A Social Semiotic Analysis of the Disciplinary and   Pedagogical Affordances of a Central Resource in Astronomy, Designs for Learning, 11(1), 99–107. DOI:   https://doi.org/10.16993/dfl.137

    Airey, J., Grundström Lindqvist, J. & Lippmann Kung, R. (2019). What does it mean to understand a physics equation? A study of   undergraduate answers in three countries. In McLoughlin, E., Finlayson, O., Erduran, S., & Childs, P. (eds.), Bridging   Research and Practice in Science Education: Selected Papers from the ESERA 2017 Conference.. Pp. 225–239.   Contributions from Science Education Research. Cham: Springer International Publishing.                  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17219-0_14

    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. & Linder, C., & Airey, J. (2015). A social semiotic approach to identifying critical aspects. International Journal for   Lesson and Learning Studies 2015 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.

    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.

    Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhammer, G. (1992). Force Concept Inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30(3), 141-158’

    National Research Council. (2012). Discipline Based Education Research. Understanding and Improving Learning in   Undergraduate Science and Engineering. Washington DC: The National Academies Press

    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.

    Download full text (pdf)
    Physics Education Research
  • 42.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Representations in Undergraduate Physics2014Other (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Representations in undergraduate physics

    Problem solving is one of the most important parts of undergraduate physics education, yet a huge body of international research has clearly shown that simply being able to solve a set of physics problems correctly is not a good indicator of students having attained appropriate physics understanding. Grounded in a comparison of the way experts and novices solve problems, the research focus has gradually shifted towards the importance of representational competence in solving physics problems.Physicists use a wide range of representations to communicate physics knowledge (e.g. mathematics,  graphs, diagrams, and spoken and written language, etc.). Many of these representations are highly specialized and have been developed and refined into their present form over time. It is the appropriate coordination of these different representations that allows complex physics meanings to be made and shared. Experienced physicists naturally maintain coherence as they move from one representation to the next in order to solve a physics problem. For students, however, learning to appropriately use physics representations in this way is a challenging task. This lecture addresses the critical role that representations play in undergraduate physics education. The research that has been carried out in this area will be summarized and a number of theoretical constructs that have been developed in the Division of Physics Education Research will be presented and illustrated using empirical data. The consequences of this research work for the teaching and learning of undergraduate physics will be discussed.

    Download full text (pdf)
    docent
  • 43.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Research on physics teaching and learning, physics teacher education, and physics culture at Uppsala University2017Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    This project compares the affordances and constraints for physics teachers’ professional identity building across four countries. The results of the study will be related to the potential consequences of this identity building for pupils’ science performance in school. The training of future physics teachers typically occurs across three environments, the physics department, the education department and school (during teaching practice). As they move through these three environments, trainees are in the process of building their professional identity. However, what is signalled as valuable for a future physics teacher differs considerably in different parts of the education. In educational research, professional identity has been used in a variety of ways (See for example overviews of the concept in Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; and Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004). In this project we draw on the work of Sfard and Pruzak (2005) who have defined identity as an analytical category for use in educational research. The project leverages this concept of identity as an analytical tool to understand how the value-systems present in teacher training environments and society as a whole potentially affect the future practice of trainee physics teachers. For identities to be recognized as professional they must fit into accepted discourses. Thus the project endeavours to identify discourse models that tacitly steer the professional identity formation of future physics teachers. Interviews will be carried out with trainee physics teachers and the various training staff that they meet during their education (physics lecturers, education lecturers, school mentors). It has been suggested that the perceived status of the teaching profession in society has a major bearing on the type of professional identity teachers can enact. Thus, in this project research interviews will be carried out in parallel across four countries with varying teacher status and PISA science scores: Sweden, Finland, Singapore and England. These interviews will be analysed following the design developed in a pilot study that has already carried out by the project group in Sweden. The research questions for the project are as follows: In four countries where the societal status of the teaching profession differs widely: What discourse models are enacted in the educational environments trainee physics teachers meet? What are the potential affordances and constraints of these discourse models for the constitution of physics teacher professional identities? In what ways do perceptions of the status assigned by society to the teaching profession potentially affect this professional identity building? What are the potential consequences of the answers to the above questions for the view of science communicated to pupils in school? In an extensive Swedish pilot study, four potentially competing discourse models were identified: these are: the critically reflective teacher, the practically well-equipped teacher, the syllabus implementer and the physics expert. Of these, the physics expert discourse model was found to dominate in both the physics department and amongst mentors in schools. In the physics expert discourse model the values of the discipline of physics dominate. Thus, the overarching goal of physics teaching is to create future physicists. In this model, the latest research in physics is seen as interesting and motivating, whereas secondary school subject matter is viewed as inherently unsophisticated and boring—something that needs to be made interesting. The model co-exists with the three other discourse models, which were more likely to be enacted in the education department. These other models value quite different goals such as the development of practical skills, reflective practice, critical thinking and citizenship. We claim that knowledge of the different discourse models at work in four countries with quite different outcomes on PISA science will useful in a number of ways. For teacher trainers, a better understanding of these models would allow informed decisions to be taken about the coordination of teacher education. For prospective teachers, knowledge of the discourse models at work during their education empowers them to question the kind of teacher they want to become.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 44.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Stockholm University.
    Semiotic Resources and Disciplinary Literacy2017Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Semiotic Resources and Disciplinary Literacy

    Project leader: John Airey, Reader in Physics Education Research, Uppsala University

    Type of funding: Four-year position as Research Assistant

    Contact details: john.airey@physics.uu.se

     

    Abstract

    In this research project we focused on the different semiotic resources used in physics (e.g. graphs, diagrams, language, mathematics, apparatus, etc.). We were interested in the ways in which undergraduate physics students learn to combine the different resources used in physics in order to become “disciplinary literate” and what university lecturers do to help their students in this process. Comparative data on the disciplinary literacy goals of physics lecturers for their students was collected at five universities in South Africa and four universities in Sweden.

    One of the main contributions of the project concerned what we termed the disciplinary affordance of a semiotic resource, that is, the specific meaning-making functions a particular resource plays for the discipline. We contrasted these meaning-making functions with the way that students initially viewed the same resource.

    We proposed two ways that lecturers can direct their students’ attention towards the disciplinary affordances of a given resource. The first involves unpacking the disciplinary affordance in order to create a new resource with higher pedagogical affordance. Our second proposal involved the use of systematic variation in order to help students notice the disciplinary relevant aspects of a given resource. A total of 19 articles/book chapters were published as a direct result of this funding.

    Selected publications

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

    Airey, J. (2013). Disciplinary Literacy. In E. Lundqvist, L. Östman & R. Säljö (Eds.), Scientific literacy – teori och praktik (pp. 41-58). Lund: Gleerups.

    Eriksson, U., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Redfors, A. (2014). Introducing the Anatomy of Disciplinary Discernment An example for Astronomy. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(3), 167-182. 

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

    Fredlund, T., Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2015). Enhancing the possibilities for learning: variation of disciplinary-relevant aspects in physics representations. European Journal of Physics. 36, (5), 055001.

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

    Fredlund, T., Linder, C. Airey, J., & Linder, A.  (2014) Unpacking physics representations: Towards an appreciation of disciplinary affordance. Physical Review: Special Topics Physics Education Research 10, 020129

    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.

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

     

    Download full text (zip)
    fulltext
  • 45.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Social Semiotics in Higher Education: Examples from teaching and learning in undergraduate physics2015In: SACF Singapore-Sweden Excellence Seminars, Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research in Higher Education (STINT) , 2015, p. 103-Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Social semiotics is a broad construct where all communication in a particular social group is viewed as being realized by the use of semiotic resources. In social semiotics the particular meaning assigned to these semiotic resources is negotiated within the group itself and has often developed over an extended period of time. In the discipline of physics, examples of such semiotic resources are; graphs, diagrams, mathematics, language, etc. 

    In this presentation, social semiotics is used to build theory with respect to the construction and sharing of disciplinary knowledge in the teaching and learning of university physics. Based on empirical studies of physics students, a number of theoretical constructs have been developed in our research group. These constructs are: disciplinary affordance, disciplinary discourse, discursive fluency, discourse imitation and critical constellations. I will present these constructs and examine their usefulness for problematizing teaching and learning with multiple representations in higher education.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 46. Airey, John
    Teaching and Learning in English: The experiences of students and teachers2014Conference paper (Other academic)
    Download full text (pdf)
    Airey 2014
  • 47.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    The Concept of Affordance in the Teaching and Learning of Undergraduate Science2018Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The Concept of Affordance in Teaching and Learning Undergraduate Science 

     

    John Airey 

    Physics Education Research Group

    Department of Physics and Astronomy

    Uppsala University

    Sweden

     

    And   

     

    Department of Mathematics and Science Education

    Stockholm University

    Sweden

    Since its introduction by Gibson (1979)the concept of affordance has been debated by a number of researchers. Most famous, perhaps is the disagreement between Gibson and Norman(1988)about whether affordances are inherent properties of objects or are only present when perceived by an organism. More recently, affordance has been drawn on in the educational arena, particularly with respect to multimodality (see Fredlund, 2015 for a recent example). 

    In the presentation the interrelated concepts of disciplinary affordance and pedagogical affordance will be presented. Both concepts make a radical break with the views of both Gibson and Norman in that rather than focusing on the perception of an individual, they refer to the disciplinary community as a whole. Disciplinary affordance is "the agreed meaning making functions that a semiotic resource fulfills for a disciplinary community". Similarly, pedagogical affordance is "the aptness of a semiotic resource for the teaching and learning of some particular educational content" (Airey, 2015). As such, in a teaching situation the question of whether these affordances are inherent or perceived becomes moot. Rather, the issue is the process through which students come to use semiotic resources in a way that is accepted within the discipline. In this characterization then, learning can be framed in terms of coming to perceive and leverage the disciplinary affordances of semiotic resources. 

    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) resresentationsin 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. 

    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 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. 

    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.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 48.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. School of Languages and Literature Linnæus University, Sweden.
    Undergraduate Teaching with Multiple Semiotic Resources: Disciplinary Affordance vs Pedagogical Affordance2016Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Since its introduction by Gibson (1979) the concept of affordance has been discussed at length by a number of researchers. Most famous, perhaps is the disagreement between Gibson and Norman (1988) about whether affordances are inherent properties of objects or are only present when perceived by an organism. More recently, affordance has been drawn on in the educational arena, particularly with respect to multimodality (see Fredlund et al 2015 for a recent example). Here, Kress et al (2001) have claimed that different modes have different specialized affordances. In this paper the interrelated concepts of disciplinary affordance and pedagogical affordance are discussed. Both concepts make a radical break with the views of both Gibson and Norman in that rather than focusing on the perception of an individual, they refer to the disciplinary community as a whole. Disciplinary affordance is "the agreed meaning making functions that a semiotic resource fulfils for a disciplinary community". Similarly, pedagogical affordance is "the aptness of a semiotic resource for the teaching and learning of some particular educational content" (Airey 2015). As such, the question of whether these affordances are inherent or perceived becomes moot. Rather, the issue is the process through which students can come to see semiotic resources in a way that corresponds to the disciplinary affordance accepted within the discipline. The power of the term, then, is that learning can now be framed as coming to perceive the disciplinary affordances of semiotic resources. In this paper I will briefly discuss the history of the term affordance, define the terms disciplinary affordance and pedagogical affordance and illustrate their usefulness in a number of educational settings.

    References

    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. (2011b). 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. (2013). Disciplinary Literacy. In E. Lundqvist, L. Östman, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Scientific literacy – teori och praktik

       (pp. 41-58): Gleerups.

    Airey, J. (2014) Representations 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. (2016). Undergraduate Teaching with Multiple Semiotic Resources: Disciplinary Affordance vs Pedagogical Affordance.   Paper presented at 8icom. University of Cape Town, Cape Town.

    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.

    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. (in press) Social Semiotics in University Physics Education: Multiple Representations in Physics Education   Springer.

    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. 36 055002.

    Fredlund, T. & Linder, C., & Airey, J. (2015c). A social semiotic approach to identifying critical aspects. International Journal for   Lesson and Learning Studies 2015 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.

               Hodge, R. & Kress, G. (1988). Social Semiotics. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    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

    Lo, M. L. (2012). Variation theory and the improvement of teaching and learning (Vol. 323). Gothenburg: Göteborgs Universitet.

    Marton, F. (2015). Necessary conditions of learning. New York: Routledge.

    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/

               Thibault, P. (1991). Social semiotics as praxis. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    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.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 49.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Understanding Disciplinary Differences in Content and Language Integrated Learning: A Disciplinary Literacy Approach.2013Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Abstract

    In recent years there has been a noticeable trend in many countries towards teaching university courses in English. However, from a research perspective, difficulties in obtaining data have meant that relatively little is known about what happens to disciplinary teaching and learning when the medium of instruction changes in this way.

     

    In this presentation I have been asked to give a brief overview of the research background in the area of teaching and learning in English, and to present some of the results from my PhD and Post-doc. work. These results are divided into two types:

     

    • Research into student learning experiences when taught in English
    • Research into lecturer behaviour when changing teaching language to English

     

    A number of pedagogical issues will be raised and recommendations made.

     

    References

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

    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  Available from http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=9547

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

    Airey, J. (2011). The Disciplinary Literacy Discussion Matrix: A Heuristic Tool for Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education. Across the disciplines, 8(3).

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

    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.

  • 50.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Stockholm University.
    Using variation and unpacking to help students decode disciplinary-specific semiotic resources2018In: 9ICOM - Complete book of abstracts, Odense, Denmark.: Syddansk Universitet, 2018Conference paper (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.

    Download full text (pdf)
    Presentation
1234567 1 - 50 of 1536
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf