Frequency and framing keywords in EMI: A comparison of two lecturers

IF 1.6 2区 文学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Joseph Siegel
{"title":"Frequency and framing keywords in EMI: A comparison of two lecturers","authors":"Joseph Siegel","doi":"10.1016/j.linged.2025.101422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>English medium instruction (EMI) courses can present challenges for both lecturers and students. The lecturer’s planning and delivery of lecture content, especially in terms of spoken output, has rarely been investigated. This study focused on an analysis of two university lectures from different disciplines. In pre-lecture discussions with the researcher, lecturers had indicated a set of key concepts and important words that they expected the students to recognize and learn more about during the lectures. Based on those lists, the lecture transcripts were scrutinized in terms of keyword frequency as well as in relation to Sinclair and Coulthard’s (1975) framework for understanding classroom discourse and speaker output, which allowed patterns of keyword use within lecture discourse to be identified. Comparative results from the analysis showed keywords being more frequent in the Sociology lecture than in the Robotics class. In terms of patterns of lecturer output, the majority of keywords were included in the categories “Informative” and “Comment”; however, quantitative and proportional differences in these patterns were also observed. Practical advice for EMI lecturers in relation to keyword frequency and framing is offered to account for language proficiency levels of teachers and/or students in similar higher education contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47468,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics and Education","volume":"87 ","pages":"Article 101422"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistics and Education","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0898589825000403","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

English medium instruction (EMI) courses can present challenges for both lecturers and students. The lecturer’s planning and delivery of lecture content, especially in terms of spoken output, has rarely been investigated. This study focused on an analysis of two university lectures from different disciplines. In pre-lecture discussions with the researcher, lecturers had indicated a set of key concepts and important words that they expected the students to recognize and learn more about during the lectures. Based on those lists, the lecture transcripts were scrutinized in terms of keyword frequency as well as in relation to Sinclair and Coulthard’s (1975) framework for understanding classroom discourse and speaker output, which allowed patterns of keyword use within lecture discourse to be identified. Comparative results from the analysis showed keywords being more frequent in the Sociology lecture than in the Robotics class. In terms of patterns of lecturer output, the majority of keywords were included in the categories “Informative” and “Comment”; however, quantitative and proportional differences in these patterns were also observed. Practical advice for EMI lecturers in relation to keyword frequency and framing is offered to account for language proficiency levels of teachers and/or students in similar higher education contexts.
EMI中的频率与框架关键词:两位讲师之比较
英语媒介教学(EMI)课程对教师和学生都提出了挑战。演讲者对演讲内容的计划和传递,特别是在口语输出方面,很少被调查。本研究着重分析了两所大学不同学科的讲座。在课前与研究者的讨论中,讲师已经指出了一组他们希望学生在讲座中认识和学习更多的关键概念和重要词汇。在这些列表的基础上,根据关键词频率以及辛克莱和库特哈德(1975)关于理解课堂话语和演讲者输出的框架,对演讲文本进行了仔细审查,从而确定了演讲话语中关键词使用的模式。对比分析结果显示,社会学课堂上的关键词使用频率高于机器人课堂。从讲师的输出模式来看,“信息”和“评论”类别中包含的关键词居多;然而,这些模式的数量和比例差异也被观察到。为EMI讲师提供了有关关键词频率和框架的实用建议,以说明类似高等教育背景下教师和/或学生的语言熟练程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Linguistics and Education encourages submissions that apply theory and method from all areas of linguistics to the study of education. Areas of linguistic study include, but are not limited to: text/corpus linguistics, sociolinguistics, functional grammar, discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis, conversational analysis, linguistic anthropology/ethnography, language acquisition, language socialization, narrative studies, gesture/ sign /visual forms of communication, cognitive linguistics, literacy studies, language policy, and language ideology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信