Disciplinary differences in the use of English John Airey Department of Languages Linnaeus University, Sweden University Physics Education Research Group Uppsala University, Sweden

Disciplinarity Each discipline has different goals and different ontological and epistemological assumptions Ontology A set of assumptions about the nature of reality and existence Epistemology A set of assumptions about how knowledge is obtained John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Disciplinary knowledge structures Bernstein (1999) classified disciplinary knowledge structures as hierarchical or horizontal Hierarchical knowledge structures Progress by integration of new knowledge with existing knowledge Horizontal knowledge structures Progress by introducing new perspectives that do not need to be coherent with existing perspectives John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Disciplinary knowledge structures Hierarchical knowledge structures can be viewed as developing an agreed “language” Horizontal knowledge structures can be viewed as introducing new ”languages”

John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Progression in knowledge structures

L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 hierarchical

L5+1

horizontal Martin (2011)

John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Disciplinary knowledge structures hierarchical knowledge structure

“warring triangles”

horizontal knowledge structure

L1 L2 L3 L4 L5... physics

biology

science

linguistics

sociology

social science

history

literary studies

humanities

Adapted from Martin (2011) and Wignell (2004) John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Disciplinary differences and language Kuteeva & Airey (2013) Show a disciplinary bias in attitudes to English language use based on Bernstein’s knowledge structures Least objection to English Natural sciences

Most objection to English Social sciences

Humanities and Arts

John Airey Universitat Jaume I

English language PhD theses 100 80 60 %

40 20 Upp.

Kon.

Rel.

His.

Geo.

Etn.

Lit.

Ark.

Spr.

Sam.

Eko.

Fil.

Tek.

Med.

Mat.

Nat.

0

Salö (2010:24) John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Teaching in English 70%  

60%  

50%  

40%   All/almost  all   None/almost  none  

30%  

20%  

10%  

0%   Science  

Social  Science  

Law  

Humanities  

Adapted from Bolton & Kuteeva (2012)

John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Everyone is a language teacher! Northedge (2002) claims that the fundamental role of a university lecturer is to introduce students to the specialist discourse of the discipline. Building on this, Airey (2012) argues all teachers are to some extent language teachers even in monolingual settings.

John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Disciplinary Literacy

The goal of any degree programme is the development of disciplinary literacy. Airey (2011b)

John Airey Universitat Jaume I

What is disciplinary literacy?

Disciplinary literacy refers to the ability to appropriately participate in the communicative practices of a discipline.

John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Disciplinary Literacy

Disciplinary literacy is developed for three sites society, workplace and the academy

John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Disciplinary Literacy Triangle

Society

Academy

Workplace

Disciplinary Literacy Triangle

Society

Each of these sites places different demands on language Academy

Workplace

International and local

Each site has the potential to be divided into an international and a local form. Creates different language demands The international forms will almost certainly involve some English, whilst the local forms probably involve one or more other languages.

Disciplinary Literacy

Society L2

L3

L1

Academy

Workplace

Parallel language use In the Nordic countries the concept of parallel language use is widespread. Two or more languages used alongside each other at universities. Does parallel mean doing everything in all languages? What do we want students to be able to do in each language? John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Summary Each discipline has its own knowledge structure. These knowledge structures do not appear to be language−neutral. Each discipline fosters a unique form of disciplinary literacy for three sites: Society, Academy and Workplace. The demands placed on language in these three sites are very different. John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Conclusion A top down, “one-size-fits-all” language policy that deals with language in anything more than a ”general recommendations” sense will be problematic. Need locally decided, disciplinary-specific decisions about what to teach in which language(s)

John Airey Universitat Jaume I

Questions?

John Airey Universitat Jaume I

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. (2011). 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. (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. Airey, J. (2012). “I don’t teach language.” The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden. AILA Review, 25(2012), 64–79. Airey, J. (2013). Disciplinary Literacy. In E. Lundqvist, L. Östman & R. Säljö (Eds.), Scientific literacy – teori och praktik (pp. 41-58): Gleerups. 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. Kuteeva, M., & Airey, J. (2013). Disciplinary Differences in the Use of English in Higher Education: Reflections on Recent Policy Developments Higher Education, DOI 10.1007/s10734-013-9660-6. Martin, J. R. (2011). Bridging troubled waters: Interdisciplinarity and what makes it stick. In F. Christie & K. Maton (Eds.), Disciplinarity (pp. 35-61). London: Continuum International Publishing. Salö, L. (2010). Engelska eller svenska? 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.