Professional and Academic English, Volume 29, Number 2

Journal of the IATEFL English for Specific Purposes Special Interest Group WHITE PANTONE 213 C ISSN 2520-2545 Vol. 29 No 2 December 2022 Copyright Notice Copyright for whole issue IATEFL 2022. IATEFL retains the right to reproduce part or all of this publication in other publications, including retail and online editions as well as on our websites. Contributions to this publication remain the intellectual property of the authors. Anyrequests to reproduce a particular article should be sent to the relevant contributor and not IATEFL. Articles which have first appeared in IATEFL publications must acknowledge the IATEFL publication as the original source of the article if reprinted elsewhere. Published by IATEFL, 2-3 The Foundry, Seager Road, Faversham, ME13 7FD, UK. www.iatefl.org Disclaimer Views expressed in Professional and Academic English are not necessarily those of the editor(s), of the IATEFL ESPSIG, of IATEFL or its staff or trustees. Contributions Professional and Academic English encourages the submission of previously unpublished articles on topics of significance to its readers. If you wish to contribute, you should first send the Editor-in-Chief an outline of the proposed article. If you are interested in reviewing a book for Professional and Academic English, contact the Editor-in-Chief at [email protected]. Editor-in-Chief Dr Katalin Egri Ku-Mesu University of Leicester, United Kingdom Editors Dr Mona Syrbe Rykkyo University, Japan Dr Veronico Tarrayo University of Santo Tomas, Philippines Editorial Board Dr Mahdi Aben Ahmed Jubail English Language and Preparatory Year Institute, Saudi Arabia Dr Sharif Alghazo University of Jordan, Jordan Patricia Lorena Bustos Gonzalez Universidad de los Andes, Colombia Dr Elis Kakoulli Constantinou Cyprus University of Technology, Cyprus Simon Cotterill Birmingham City University, United Kingdom Dr Victor Guillen Solano University of Sheffield, United Kingdom Michelle Joubert University of the Free State, South Africa Andrew Northern Imperial College London, United Kingdom Martin Percy University of Westminster, United Kingdom Dr Jemma Prior Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy Anna Whinnett Norwich Institute for Language Education (NILE), United Kingdom Layout design © Express Publishing, 2022 Price £4.50, free for ESPSIG members http://espsig.iatefl.org www.iatefl.org Journal of the IATEFL English for Specific Purposes Special Interest Group Vol. 29 No 2 December 2022 ISSN 2520-2545 5 Contents Errata Professional and Academic English, Vol.29, No.1 ....................................................................................6 Articles Karla de Lima Guedes Practitioners’ teaching preferences from an online English for Academic Purposes pre-sessional programme: what worked, what didn’t, and what’s promising .............. 7 Maria Christoforou University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context ...... 23 Mayada Tawfik Zaki A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities .......................................... 49 From the classroom Victoria Rowe SMASHing it in the classroom! ........................................................................................................... 67 Book review Agnieszka Dudzik Review of English for Radiographers .................................................................................................. 71 6 ERRATA Errata Professional and Academic English, Vol. 29, No. 1 It has come to our attention that some errors were made in Vol.29, No.1 of Professional and Academic English, for which we apologise and would like to make the following corrections. Page 13 In Jolanta Hudson’s article entitled ‘Becoming an online EAP teacher: An autoethnographic reflection on teaching remotely during the coronavirus pandemic,’ the last paragraph of Section 4.3.1 is an erroneous duplication of the last paragraph of Section 3.2 (p. 11) and should be disregarded. Page 49 Stephen Kapala’s correct details are as follows: Affiliation: Mejiro University, Japan E-mail: [email protected] 7 Practitioners’ teaching preferences from an online English for Academic Purposes pre-sessional programme: what worked, what didn’t, and what’s promising 1 Introduction Developments in digital communication and educational technologies have had a significant impact on education, including the way people communicate, access and disseminate knowledge, collaborate, learn and teach. These developments have also had a great impact on the teaching of foreign languages, including English, in the last decades (Demouy et al., 2016; Golonka et al., 2014; Kukulska-Hulme, 2009; Li, 2018, 2020; Son, 2018; Son & Windeatt, 2017 to name a few). Such changes have been intensified and advanced since the COVID-19 pandemic as educators around the world had to move online very quickly, and many have continued working in online, blended, or hybrid formats even after lockdown has ended. In March 2020, English for Academic Purposes (EAP) providers in the UK were tasked with the challenge of moving to remote classes and many EAP practitioners had to lead, coordinate, and teach remotely on pre-sessional programmes for the first time. Pre-sessional programmes are EAP courses offered to international students who speak English as a Before the COVID-19 pandemic, English for Academic Purposes (EAP) pre-sessional programmes used to be exclusively delivered in-person at UK universities using fairly traditional teaching and learning methods. When the coronavirus lockdown happened in 2020, such courses had to be swiftly re-designed for students who were all around the world and tutors from around the UK. Most of these EAP practitioners were unfamiliar with online education but had to quickly upskill and adapt their pedagogy to their new Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT) contexts. This study looks at one pre-sessional programme and discusses the experiences of and reflections from its practitioners in terms of what teaching and learning activities or approaches they felt worked well online and which ones they felt are best suited for in-person environments. Data were collected from pre-sessional practitioners (n = 63) via an online questionnaire. Results show a preference for more individual and reflective activities to take place online, such as running tutorials, giving individual feedback, supporting students to develop their writing skills, watching lectures and taking notes; and for group activities, such as discussions and group work, and student monitoring to take place in person. Karla de Lima Guedes University of Southampton United Kingdom email: K.De-Lima-[email protected] ABSTRACT ARTICLES 8 Practitioners’ teaching preferences from an online English for Academic Purposes pre-sessional programme: what worked, what didn’t, and what’s promising ARTICLES 8 second language (L2) and who have not met the English language entry requirement for the university degree which they have applied to. Most UK universities offer both year-long and summer intensive pre-sessional programmes to students who need to improve their English and wish to gain an insight into academic life and principles before beginning their studies. Furthermore, as a consequence of the growth of internationalisation (see de Wit & Altbach, 2021), the number of international students joining universities in anglophone countries, including in the UK (HESA, 2022), has grown drastically, and so has the number of EAP presessional programmes as a consequence of this increase. Before the pandemic, pre-sessional programmes used to be exclusively delivered in-person using fairly traditional classroom-based language teaching methods, and students had to be in the UK to attend classes. Similarly, many EAP tutors, who teach throughout the country and world during term time, used to have to move to the pre-sessional location for the duration of the course they were teaching on. In 2020, however, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, such courses had to be quickly re-designed for students who were in lockdown all around the world and for online delivery from around the UK as most of the EAP practitioners were located in (or had to move to) different parts of the country. As a result of this move to remote learning, many EAP tutors, coordinators and academic leads found themselves teaching online or designing a programme for online delivery for the first time. This meant that they had to quickly re-think EAP teaching practices and develop their digital pedagogy, literacy and skills. This situation presented an opportunity to look at the practitioners’ experiences of teaching academic English online in the context of a pre-sessional programme in one British higher education (UKHE) institution. It is still too early to know the long-lasting impact of Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT) on English as a second language (ESL) education, but some researchers believe that some of the challenges caused by ERT could be turned into affordances, and that what we have learnt from these two years will re-shape language education in the future (Akbana et al., 2021; Pusey & Nanni, 2021). As universities come back from the coronavirus pandemic to deliver in-person, online, blended and/or hybrid presessional courses, it is important to understand what type of teaching or learning could work best in each teaching scenario. Therefore, this research seeks to answer the following research questions (RQ): • RQ: What teaching and learning activities or practices do Emergency Remote Teaching EAP practitioners believe to be more effective when delivered online or in-person in the context of a pre-sessional programme in UKHE? 2 Methodology This research is a discovery -led intrinsic case study that used qualitative data collection and analysis to describe, explore, and explain a context (see Cohen et al., 2017; Stake, 2005). The findings reported in this paper are part of a larger case study that examined a pre-sessional programme in terms of its EAP practitioners’ experiences during ERT. A qualitative case study 9 ARTICLES Practitioners’ teaching preferences from an online English for Academic Purposes pre-sessional programme: what worked, what didn’t, and what’s promising 9 research approach was chosen as it allows for the study to make meaning of people’s lives and experiences in a specific real-world environment (Yin, 2010) and it can be defined studying one case (or a number of cases) in detail using methods and data that seem appropriate (Punch, 2009) to answer the proposed RQ. In educational case study research, a case can be a particular student or teacher, an exchange, a lesson, a classroom, an educational programme, a school, a district, an educational policy, or provision. For this study, the case refers to a specific UKHE pre-sessional programme. According to Wieviorka (1992), a case needs to contain two elements: (i) a practical unit or subject, such as a school, and (ii) an analytical frame or the object, which refers to what a researcher is looking at that makes the subject interesting. Following Wieviorka’s (1992) case study framework, the chosen presessional and its practitioners are the subject, and their experiences and preferences when teaching EAP in the online programme are the object. 2.1 Context The context used for this study was a pre-sessional programme offered by a UKHE institution that comprised of intensive 16-, 11or 6-week long pre-sessional courses. These used to be offered in-person pre-covid, but delivery and assessments had to be re-designed once the university went into lockdown. Pre-sessional students were allocated to groups of 16-18 students according to their field of study (e.g. Business, Arts, Engineering, Education) and linguistic levels (e.g. students who were .5 band lower in their IELTS1 scores than what they needed for their degrees were allocated to the 6-week course). In this pre-sessional programme, EAP practitioners are often allocated to teach or coordinate groups they have some expertise in, but this is not always the case. They also focus on teaching or coordinating students’ development of academic speaking and listening skills or reading and writing skills. In the year of data collection, EAP tutors took part in a one-week induction led by the pre-sessional coordinators and academic leads prior to teaching. During this period, they had to familiarise themselves with the course syllabus and structure, teaching materials, assessments and the expectations of these, academic and support teams, and university platforms and systems. And with so much to be covered, there was little time left for online teaching training (approximately 2 hours out of a 5-day induction). 2.2 Participants and data collection A questionnaire was designed for the participants to complete that had the following goals and question types: (i) to create the EAP practitioners’ profiles from open and closed factual questions and (ii) to have an overview of their online EAP teaching experiences from open and closed behavioural questions. The participants were chosen through non-probabilistic purposive sampling, the questionnaires were self-administered online, and this study’s qualitative data is taken from the practitioners’ answers to one of the questionnaire’s openended questions, which was ‘based on your experience, what activities and practices are best done online or in-person when teaching academic English?’. ____________________________ 1 International English Language Testing System (https://www.ielts.org/for-test-takers/how-ielts-is-scored). 16 Practitioners’ teaching preferences from an online English for Academic Purposes pre-sessional programme: what worked, what didn’t, and what’s promising ARTICLES Seminar discussions have a core pedagogic function in UKHE but not necessarily in other academic cultures and discussion behaviours and expressions of disagreement can be different across cultures (Aguilar, 2016; Donnelly, 2019; Frambach et al., 2014). For this reason, the skills needed to successfully participate in group seminar discussions are part of most pre-sessional syllabi in the UK. This means that students need to express themselves clearly, practise the use of discussion language and turn-taking, understand the value of actively listening to their peers, be open and tolerant towards opposite viewpoints, critically analyse and question others’ standpoints, practise building arguments and counter-arguments, and appropriately refer to the sources used. It is a challenging multitasking activity to do in a L2 and requires the participants to feel comfortable expressing their viewpoints and challenging each other. Such comradeship can be more challenging online, in particular in a short intensive course such as the pre-sessional. Below is a quote from one of the practitioners that discusses the importance of trust and camaraderie in group discussions. In face-to-face interaction, I think it is easier to teach some areas of ‘thinking’ (e.g. planning and criticality through discussions, posters and group work), to develop trust and camaraderie through communicative oral work, and to emphasise the importance of students’ contributions to ongoing learning (e.g. by making a point that an idea is essential for others, and why). (C004) Thirdly, lack of familiarity with online teaching pedagogy. The COVID-19 pandemic forced many educators, including pre-sessional practitioners, to quickly move their teaching and assessments online without being familiar with distance education. This rushed and unplanned transition led to ERT (Hodges et al., 2020) as opposed to planned and reflected teaching practices based on digital pedagogy research and methods. And as expected, many tutors tried to replicate traditional teaching models and move their tried and tested in-person activities and approaches online. I think most activities done in a classroom can be replicated online, though it seems to take more time than in a classroom. From the reverse perspective, there are a lot of online activities that can’t be done as effectively in a classroom, e.g. forums, working on shared documents (T042) This replication approach caused by ERT was not only used in EAP contexts in the UK but throughout the world. A review of this shift towards digital teaching and learning was conducted by Barber et al. (2020), and one of their reflections was that ‘technology cannot just be bolted onto existing teaching material’ (p. 10). Moving forward, educators must focus on how students learn and adopt a ‘pedagogy-first’ approach in their digital practice instead of attempting to replicate in-person teaching online (ibid.). Teaching online needs rethinking, not replicating the traditional. If practitioners teach online with the same expectations they have for in-person education (e.g. the time that takes to plan a course or a task, the needed number of contact hours, or how students should engage with tutor and peers), this can have a negative impact on their teaching and attitudes towards online learning, and what activities they perceive to be more effective or fruitful online. Lastly, academic speaking tasks were seen as more challenging to do online, in particular when done synchronously. Data suggests that this is likely due to tutors being less familiar 17 ARTICLES Practitioners’ teaching preferences from an online English for Academic Purposes pre-sessional programme: what worked, what didn’t, and what’s promising with developing students’ speaking skills online. There were also technical considerations including whether there was sufficient internet bandwidth to support effective interactions. Oral interactions also involve elements that are more challenging when moved online, such as the use of eye contact, body language, and turn-taking. Synchronous speaking tasks demand higher bandwidth, more audial and visual exposure, and less preparation and thinking time to understand and use the target language, which can be more intimidating and challenging for students. Therefore, more time and training are needed for all parties to feel more comfortable and confident with how these tasks differ from in-person communications. 3.2.2 Student monitoring Another theme present in the in-person discussion was student monitoring. Over a tenth of the participants talked about monitoring students as they completed individual or group tasks. These monitoring quotes sometimes referred to students’ learning and understanding, e.g. concept checking, language accuracy and fluency, and assessing whether activities are taking place as planned, and learning objectives are being met. A further set of comments referred to observing students’ learning behaviours, such as focus and engagement. A few of the practitioners mentioned that it is easier to monitor students in person as they can walk around the classroom listening to students and easily identify the ones who need help. Classes which involve working in small breakout groups or pairs are better face-toface because it is easier to monitor the discussions, and for students to ask for help. (T037) In the online classroom, however, monitoring can be quite different. Some of the participants felt that it is not only more difficult for tutors to spot the students who need help but also that ‘students are less likely to ask for help’ online (T019). At times this is because students might be working in breakout rooms and tutors cannot see all students at the same time. Further, the same participant argued that ‘it is harder for the tutor to notice if someone is struggling, especially when they have cameras off’ (Ibid.). Therefore, online teachers must operate in different ways to ensure that students are confident with the learning tasks and are making progress whilst also identifying students who have questions or are falling behind. Two participants highlighted that online monitoring is indeed different but can be done effectively if activities are well-structured and students are closely monitored. One example given was to provide clear questions, provide the learning outcomes when running group tasks or discussions, and have students reflect on whether they have achieved these. There were also advantages to online classroom monitoring cited in the data, and one of them is that it can be less intrusive, more personal, and generate more detailed feedback. The participant below, for example, talked about how tutors can decide how much to interfere. Small group work can be managed very efficiently and monitored closely [online]. The teacher can decide how much involvement they have in discussion and their physical presence may not be as intrusive as it is for some students in a classroom setting. (T033) 18 Practitioners’ teaching preferences from an online English for Academic Purposes pre-sessional programme: what worked, what didn’t, and what’s promising ARTICLES Tutors can then observe a discussion (with their cameras and audio off) and take notes on students’ performance without interrupting them or making them conscious that the teachers are present. When teaching online, tutors also have more feedback options to choose from. For instance, they can decide on whether they want to provide feedback to each group after the task, interrupt each discussion when feedback is needed, message a student privately immediately or post-discussion, take notes whilst moving into breakout rooms for general feedback to be given to the group as a whole, or even ask students to record their discussion so more detailed feedback can be given after class. The fact that tutors could not see all students on screen simultaneously seemed to be a key factor for their dislike for online monitoring, as exemplified by the tutor below. Group discussions are best done face-to-face, especially when students can’t turn their cameras on in an online environment. (T024) At the time of data collection, most practitioners and students were new to online communication and were not used to having their cameras on when in an online classroom. Some studies have shown that using cameras in online meetings is positively correlated to feelings of fatigue (Fauville et al., 2021; Wiederhold, 2020), therefore, ‘virtual meeting fatigue’ could be one of the reasons why students were not turning their cameras on. These studies, however, focused on participants who had to be present in synchronous online meetings for most of the day. Pre-sessional students, on the other hand, only needed to participate in synchronous sessions for up to three hours a day. Privacy and concern about personal appearance are other reasons why students might choose not to turn their cameras on (Castelli & Sarvary, 2021). Also, in online classes where the majority of students turn their cameras on (or off), it tends to become the classroom norm (ibid.). Not having cameras on during a language classroom can have a negative impact on communication and the development of academic speaking skills, and can lead to the increase of social and learning disconnection amongst students. However, through building a supportive community of practice from early on in the programme, it is possible to increase students’ motivation to switch cameras on and therefore help tutors monitor students more closely online. Research has shown that this can be done through using compassionate communication strategies, such as focusing on others, enhancing inclusivity, listening attentively, and being aware of helpful group behaviours (Jayasundara et al., 2022). In the in-person data, participants often used terms such as ‘unplanned’ and ‘interactive’ as opposed to ‘structured’ and ‘organised’ when talking about online teaching preferences. The former were activities that tutors were more likely to want to do or adapt spontaneously whilst the latter required more preparation. Collaborative activities, such as technologyenhanced collaborative writing, despite being a group activity and present in the in-person activity examples, were significantly more salient when participants talked about activities that worked more effectively online. This is likely to be because when writing collaboratively, learners need to regularly reflect and edit their work and have the goal of producing one joint piece. In addition, web technologies can best support collaborative tasks and make asynchronous collaborative writing more accessible. 19 ARTICLES Practitioners’ teaching preferences from an online English for Academic Purposes pre-sessional programme: what worked, what didn’t, and what’s promising 4 Conclusion This study aimed to find out what teaching and learning activities or practices from Emergency Remote Teaching these EAP practitioners believed to be more effective when delivered online rather than in person, in the context of a pre-sessional programme in the UK. Data demonstrated a preference for more individual and reflective activities to take place online, such as running tutorials, giving individual feedback, supporting students to develop their writing skills and working collaborative on their writing, watching lectures and taking notes; and for synchronous group interaction activities, such as discussions and group work, and student monitoring to take place in-person. The tutors’ preferences and attitudes towards online EAP teaching seemed to depend on their familiarity with online education, level of experiences teaching (and learning) online, digital teaching pedagogical practices and the tools used to mediate these. When asked what concerns they had with teaching EAP online, many gave examples of trying to replicate online what they used to do in person but were frustrated that it did not work. They therefore concluded that learning in the online pre-sessional was not comparable to on-campus learning. In order for the practitioners to feel more confident with teaching online, it is important that they are exposed to digital pedagogies and given the opportunity to experience and reflect on different online teaching and learning methods and techniques. Results suggest language teaching and learning practices and activities that could be considered when designing future pre-sessional courses using online or blended environments. In a blended context, for instance, findings indicate a split in skills or activities that could be best designed for the online or in-person learning environments. This could be particularly important as UK universities have started offering pre-sessional courses on campus again but with more online elements than pre-pandemic. Many HE institutions have also carried on offering online pre-sessionals, so having an understanding of what areas tutors need better support with and which teaching and learning activities need to be better developed for online delivery are important for learning design, tutor induction and training. Even though participants were invited to take the questionnaire halfway through the programme and reminded again before the end of their teaching contract, some answered immediately whilst others did it at the end of the pre-sessional courses. Therefore, the time when they answered the questionnaire and what they were teaching that week or day could have played a role on the experiences and activities they chose to share (i.e. priming effect). Therefore, this data can be interpreted as preliminary thoughts and suggestions, and further qualitative data needs to be collected for a better understanding of the practitioners’ teaching experiences online during and post-pandemic and their attitudes towards the use of online technologies in this specific educational context. Lastly, online language learning can require more close monitoring, such as regularly checking if students have done any pre-lesson tasks if using a flipped learning model, messaging students to check how they are getting on, and using a continuous evaluation system with formative assessments for learning. It also requires creating a supportive environment where students feel comfortable helping each other, using the target language, and asking for tutor help when needed. Therefore, fostering a community of practice early 20 Practitioners’ teaching preferences from an online English for Academic Purposes pre-sessional programme: what worked, what didn’t, and what’s promising ARTICLES on in the programme and having smaller group sizes can improve student monitoring and the development of students’ speaking skills. In addition, a strong community of practice can help students feel comfortable and confident to turn their cameras on and engage in the synchronous sessions. Building in time in the programme for community building, using compassionate communication strategies, sharing of digital pedagogical practices, and having plenty of time to experiment with the technology are key to building tutors’ confidence in teaching online, and therefore generating better tutor well-being and student learning experiences. References Aguilar, M. (2016). Seminars. In K. Hyland, & P. Shaw (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of English for academic purposes (pp. 335–347). Routledge. https://doi-org.soton.idm.oclc. org/10.4324/9781315657455 Ahmad, S. Z. (2016). The flipped classroom model to develop Egyptian EFL students’ listening comprehension. English Language Teaching, 9(9), 166–178. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt. v9n9p166 Akbana, Y. E., Rathert, S., & Ağçam, R. (2021). Emergency remote education in foreign and second language teaching. Turkish Journal of Education, 10(2), 97–124. https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.865344 Alger, M., & Eyckmans, J. (2022). “I took physical lessons for granted”: A case study exploring students’ interpersonal interactions in online synchronous lessons during the outbreak of COVID-19. System, 105, 102716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102716 Amiryousefi, M. (2019). The incorporation of flipped learning into conventional classes to enhance EFL learners’ L2 speaking, L2 listening, and engagement. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 13(2), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2017.1394307 Barber, M., Bird, L., Fleming, J., Titterington-Giles, E., Edwards, E., & Leyland, C. (2020). Gravity assist: Propelling higher education towards a brighter future – Digital teaching and learning review (pp. 1–160). The Office for Students. https://www.officeforstudents.org. uk/publications/gravity-assist-propelling-higher-education-towards-a-brighter-future/ Birch, D., & Volkov, M. (2007). Assessment of online reflections: Engaging English second language (ESL) students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(3). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1254 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. SAGE. Castelli, F. R., & Sarvary, M. A. (2021). Why students do not turn on their video cameras during online classes and an equitable and inclusive plan to encourage them to do so. Ecology and Evolution, 11(8), 3565–3576. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7123 Chen, W. (2019). An exploratory study on the role of L2 collaborative writing on learners’ subsequent individually composed texts. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 28(6), 563–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00455-3 Chen, W. (2021). Understanding students’ motivation in L2 collaborative writing. ELT Journal,75(4), 442–450. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccab027 Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Taylor & Francis Group. 21 ARTICLES Practitioners’ teaching preferences from an online English for Academic Purposes pre-sessional programme: what worked, what didn’t, and what’s promising de Wit, H., & Altbach, P. G. (2021). Internationalization in higher education: Global trends and recommendations for its future. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 5(1), 28–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2020.1820898 Demouy, V., Jones, A., Kan, Q., Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Eardley, A. (2016). Why and how do distance learners use mobile devices for language learning? The EuroCALL Review, 24(1),10. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2016.5663 Donnelly, A. (2019, December 13). Intercultural disagreement and knowledge construction in EAP seminar discussions. EAP in the North, Glasgow. https://eprints.gla.ac.uk/205514/ Earnshaw, Y. (2017). Navigating turn-taking and conversational repair in an online synchronous course. Online Learning Journal, 21(4), 315–336. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i4.1029 Elabdali, R. (2021). Are two heads really better than one? A meta-analysis of the L2 learning benefits of collaborative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 52, 100788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100788 Fauville, G., Luo, M., Queiroz, A. C. M., Bailenson, J. N., & Hancock, J. (2021). Zoom exhaustion & fatigue scale. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 4, 100–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100119 Fong, L. S. (2012). Benefits of collaborative writing for ESL advanced diploma dtudents in the production of reports. US-China Education Review, 4, 396–407. Frambach, J. M., Driessen, E. W., Beh, P., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2014). Quiet or questioning? Students’ discussion behaviors in student-centered education across cultures. Studies in Higher Education, 39(6), 1001–1021. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2012.754865 Garcia, A. C., & Baker Jacobs, J. (1999). The eyes of the beholder: Understanding the turn-taking system in quasi-synchronous computer-mediated communication. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 32(4), 337–367. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973rls3204_2 Golonka, E. M., Bowles, A. R., Frank, V. M., Richardson, D. L., & Freynik, S. (2014). Technologies for foreign language learning: A review of technology types and their effectiveness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(1), 70–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.700315 HESA. (2022, October 2). Where do HE students come from? Higher Education Statistics Agency. https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/students/where-from Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020, March 27). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remoteteaching-and-online-learning Jayasundara, J. M. P. V. K., Gilbert, T., Kersten, S., & Meng, L. (2022). How UK HE STEM students were motivated to switch their cameras on: A study of the development of compassionate communications in task-focused online group meetings. Education Sciences, 12(5), 317. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12050317 Kim, J., Park, H., Jang, M., & Nam, H. (2017). Exploring flipped classroom effects on second language learners’ cognitive processing. Foreign Language Annals, 50(2), 260–284. https:// doi.org/10.1111/flan.12260 Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2009). Will mobile learning change language learning? ReCALL, 21(2), 157–165. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344009000202 Lee, G., & Wallace, A. (2018). Flipped learning in the English as a foreign language classroom: Outcomes and perceptions. TESOL Quarterly, 52(1), 62–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.372 Li, M. (2018). Computer-mediated collaborative writing in L2 contexts: An analysis of empirical research. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(8), 882–904. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1465981 22 Practitioners’ teaching preferences from an online English for Academic Purposes pre-sessional programme: what worked, what didn’t, and what’s promising ARTICLES Li, M. (2020). Multimodal pedagogy in TESOL teacher education: Students’ perspectives. System, 94, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102337 Liu, J., & Sadler, R. W. (2003). The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 193–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00025-0 McDonough, K., De Vleeschauwer, J., & Crawford, W. (2018). Comparing the quality of collaborative writing, collaborative prewriting, and individual texts in a Thai EFL context. System, 74, 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.02.010 Meredith, J. (2019). Conversation analysis and online interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 52(3), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2019.1631040 Morgan, H. (2014). Focus on technology: Flip your classroom to increase academic achievement: Hani Morgan, Editor. Childhood Education, 90(3), 239–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2014.912076 Punch, K. F. (2009). Introduction to research methods in education. SAGE Publications. Pusey, K., & Nanni, A. (2021). EAP in a time of crisis: Preliminary perspectives on emergency remote teaching. English Australia Journal, 37(2), 5–19. Rajabi, P., Mahmoodi, K., & Hosseini, S. A. (2021). Flipped classroom model and itsimpact on Iranian EFL learners’ classroom anxiety and listening performance. Computer-Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 22(3), 1–16. Ritchie, M., & Black, C. (2012). Public internet forums: Can they enhance argumentative writing skills of second language learners? Foreign Language Annals, 45(3), 349–361. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2012.01203.x Roussel, S. (2011). A computer assisted method to track listening strategies in second language learning. ReCALL, 23(2), 98–116. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344011000036 Sánchez-Gómez, M. C., Pinto-Llorente, A. M., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2017). The impact of wikis and discussion boards on learning English as a second language. A mixed methods research. Digital Education Review, 32, 35–59. Son, J.-B. (2018). Technology in English as a foreign language (EFL) teaching. Teaching and Technology. Son, J.-B., & Windeatt, S. (2017). Language teacher 4ducation and 6echnology: Approaches and practices. Bloomsbury Academic. https://www-bloomsburycollections-com.soton.idm. oclc.org/book/language-teacher-education-and-technology-approaches-and-practices/ Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case etudies. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. (pp. 443–466). SAGE Publications. Wiederhold, B. K. (2020). Connecting through technology during the coronavirus disease 2019 Ppandemic: Avoiding “zoom fatigue”. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 23(7), 437–438. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2020.29188.bkw Wieviorka, M. (1992). Case studies: History or sociology? In C. C. Ragin, & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What ss a case?: Exploring the foundations of social inquiry. Cambridge University Press. Yin, R. K. (2010). Qualitative research from start to finish. Guilford Press. Karla de Lima Guedes has been a Senior Teaching Fellow in the Academic Centre for International Students (ACIS) since 2011 and is a PhD researcher in the Web Science Institute and School of Education, both at the University of Southampton. Her research looks at presessional stakeholders’ experiences with and attitudes towards online EAP education. Amongst other things, she holds a CELTA, a BA in Linguistics and Phonetics, an MA in Applied Linguistics for Language Teaching, and an MSc in Web Science. Author biography 23 ARTICLES 23 University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context 1 Introduction Literacy pedagogies in the 90s embraced the cultural and linguistic diversity that emerged worldwide, responding to the fast-changing social and economic conditions that prevailed due to global capitalism (New London Group, 1996). Since then, the affluent multimedia technologies and the accelerated speed of these technological innovations have permeated not only people’s private and work lives but also educational contexts. Consequently, the hybridity of digital electronic texts created meaning-making opportunities from various modes such as videos, texts, movie clips, images, and the like (Luke, 2000). The concept of multiliteracies, first coined by the pioneering proposal of the New London Group (New London Group, 1996), involved the reshaping of pedagogical boundaries of the literacy curriculum to respond to the socioeconomic, political, and professional demands worldwide. The complexity caused by the cultural and linguistic diversity, as well as the multimodality in various forms of meaning representation and communication called for the redesigning of Visual manifestations of meanings can provide an important means of creativity in educational contexts. In fact, the unprecedented technological advancements and their multimodal affordances have enriched the visual communicational landscape, initiating more interactive literacy practices for students to enter a transformative process of meaningmaking, design multimodal texts, and remake new representations of the world. This qualitative study explores the concepts of transmediation, transformation, and design as seen in university students’ meaning-making and representation of course content projected through digital semiotics in a technology-enhanced language course. Specifically, it interprets the semiotic modes from the students’ visual/multimodal designed texts and analyses transmediation from visual to verbal modes to see the multiplication of meaning in the move across signs. Data were collected through multimodal analysis and semi-structured interviews with six Fine Arts students in an English-for-Specific-Purposes (ESP) course conducted exclusively online due to the pandemic. Thematic analysis pertains to the interview as an ongoing, dynamic performance of the sign-makers’ strong sense of subjectivity and world representation. An important revelation is the prevalence of the written mode in the digital context, which points to the discourses that permeate digital production within academic contexts and which are part of the available designs that speak of established social rationalities and familiar representations. Maria Christoforou University of Cyprus Cyprus email: [email protected] ABSTRACT 24 University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context ARTICLES 24 the curriculum agenda (Jewitt, 2008a). The pedagogy of multiliteracies highlights the need for a more productive, active, and transformative meaning-making process for students, which opens new horizons for them to design their learning experience. In fact, the what of the multiliteracies framework focuses on the centralisation of the students’ agency in designing their own learning, and what Kress (2000) proposed as socially, culturally, and historically formed individuals who will become the remakers, the transformers, and the reshapers of their learning process. This is the shift from the Available designs – the findable resources individuals use to create meaning in a specific culture, context, and conventions of meaning-making, to the Designing – the transformative act of work produced with Available designs in representing the world to oneself or others’ representations of it. Finally, the new texts of Designing, The Redesigned, will reproduce novel ways of meaning and exert a dynamic play of subjectivity (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009). The concept of design is fundamental for this study since students draw upon a variety of digital semiotic modes, and they design their own representations of meanings in an ESP (i.e., English for Fine Arts) course in the following four thematic units: (a) Fine Arts, (b) Art Movements, (c) Virtual Reality and Art, and (d) Video games and Art, as portrayed on their project websites. ESP, or Language for Specific Purposes (LSP), was developed in the 1970s with the emergence of communicative language teaching. ESP aimed to address the language needs of people preparing to enter specialised or academic professional fields. The focus was to deviate from more traditional approaches to language learning, which adhered to the memorisation of grammatical rules and vocabulary, and to focus on more functional uses of language as a tool for communication (Nunan, 2004). Teaching literacy as communication was built on Halliday’s (1978) notion of language as social semiotic, according to which language learning is learning how to mean, a process that takes into account other semiotic systems, apart from language, in a sociocultural context. As outlined at the beginning of this section, the pioneering proposal from the New London Group (1996) asked for a pedagogy shift to respond to the socioeconomic, political, and professional demands worldwide, also as a result of the new technologies (Cope & Kalantzis, 2000). In general, Web 2.0 technologies have enabled the user-generated publication of multimodal artifacts as well as the transition from constructivist-based creations of meanings to a more fertile social constructivist-based context. The latter situates knowledge socially and does not only provide meaning-making interpretations of content by the audience, but it also places learners within an interactive community (Warschauer & Grimes, 2007). Research has shown that technology-enhanced environments have fostered more learner-centred opportunities, allowing students more control over what they learn and enhancing individual learning experiences (Kessler, 2018). Shaped and outlined by the affordances of new, innovative technologies, new forms of a wide range of literacy practices emerge, allowing for the creation of new texts with various semiotic modes such as video, audio, and the like, and the generation of new discourse structures (Ware, 2017). It is a fact that new technologies have enabled the supremacy of visual representation, with some concepts becoming more easily accessible on the screen (Jewitt, 2005), while the visual representation of learning content produced by digital technologies has been proven to communicate subject matter better and improve students’ understanding (Papageorgiou & Lameras, 2017). Based on the affordances of the technologies mentioned above and the current growing high-tech and divergent workplace environments, it is deemed necessary for educators to offer ESP students the opportunity to practise not only their linguistic repertoire but also their cultural repertoire and harness new ways of meaning-making that would help them enter more transformative learning experiences. 25 ARTICLES University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context 25 The current study analyses transmediation from the digital multimodal texts (websites) that students represent to the verbal modes they communicate to explain their choices through their interview with the author. Transmediation is the translation of semiotic content from one mode to another and, as a process of transformation, is conducive to knowledge generation and learning (K. A. Mills, 2011). It is important to analyse how the students’ representation of meanings of course content in their work is qualitatively different in the interview and how that emerges through the movement across the two semiotic systems (Hull & Nelson, 2005; Unsworth, 2007). It is pertinent to examine the act of transformation and the re-making of course content through students’ representations (the redesigned) and how that leads to new meaning reconstruction and transformed subjectivity. This study aims to explore further the issue of multimodality and the territory of social semiotic orientation to meanings in its intersection with the teaching and learning of foreign language (FL) in tertiary education and in an ESP context in particular. 2 Literature review The multimodal representation and communication of meanings is not new since modes such as gesture, speech, and images have always been used in meaning-making. However, digital technologies have enabled the configuration of new forms of meanings and extended the multimodality of texts. We are witnessing the predominance of a visual and multimodal culture within a multimedia landscape through which people navigate and construct multiple meanings. From an educational perspective, heavy reliance on writing is estimated as problematic and contentious since students can now design their own texts, which contributes to how they construct knowledge and fundamentally changes how they acquire new knowledge (Jewitt, 2005). As for ESP, it has been proven that students can become more engaged in the learning process through technology since the latter is integral in the social, economic, and political transition (Kakoulli Constantinou & Papadima-Sophocleous, 2020) occurring in this domain now. 2.1 Digital tools used in the domain of FL teaching and learning The unprecedented technological advancements have made digital tools increasingly available for FL teaching and learning. In their review of Web 2.0 technologies in second/ foreign language learning, Wang and Vásquez (2012) noted how the pedagogical implementation of these tools poses a positive environment for students to progress in a foreign language, but admitted that more research was needed on how the tools produce specific language learning outcomes. In their review on the effectiveness of technologies for FL, Golonka et al. (2014) highlighted the need for more empirical research on the key factors that enhance the effectiveness of technology in FL learning, and not so much on the description of the digital tools. Parmaxi and Zaphiris (2016) developed a Web 2.0 corpus within five years (2009-2013), delineating the use of Web 2.0 tools in second/foreign language classrooms. Their corpus consisted of blogs, wikis, social networking sites (SNSs), digital artifacts-sharing platforms, and a combination of the above. As for skills, their work highlighted multiple skills such as speaking and writing, as well as promoting group interaction, intercultural awareness, and autonomous learning, and the like. Concerning Facebook, and blogs (Dizon & Thanyawatpokin, 2018), research has shown that students’ writing fluency was ameliorated despite Facebook being used primarily for recreational purposes. N. Mills (2011) also revealed the multiple affordances of SNSs since students can acquire knowledge, collaborate, produce, and share content, while the combination of some technologies, such as wiki drafts and chats, can initiate meaningful interactions among learners for language development (Elola & Oskoz, 2010). Currently, the cutting-edge of 32 University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context ARTICLES Website 4 Figure 5: Website of Student 4 Student 4 designed a website (Figure 5) with the free version of the Wix template. The website did not contain any pages; scrolling down the site, one could find all thematic units with an accompanying image and a short, written paragraph. Website 5 Figure 6: Website cover (Student 5) 33 ARTICLES University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context Figure 7: Music videos on the website Student 5 designed a Google Site (Figure 6) using an art-related and personal photo to welcome the audience. Scrolling down the cover page, one could find some music video clips from the student’s favourite artists (Figure 7). Website 6 Figure 8: Website cover (Student 6) Student 6 also resorted to designing a Google Site (Figure 8). There was no profile photo on the introductory page, but there was a short, written paragraph that welcomed the audience and a YouTube video called What is art?. Each thematic unit was represented on a different page. 34 University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context ARTICLES 4.1 MMDA of the websites MMDA (and social semiotic theory) is an approach that recognises the partiality of language in the process of meaning-making, in the sense that it cannot provide a full account of meaning since other modes must be given recognition, e.g., gestures, images, music, and the like (Kress, 2012). Applying MMDA on the students’ websites, one can discern a verbocentric tendency of meaning representation. Despite the students’ artistic background and exposure to multimedia technologies and rich technological, representational resources in the ESP course, as designers, they tend to rely more on stable systems. Student 1 – Website 1 As shown in Figure 1, Student 1 designed a website, which relies heavily on written language as the most preferred mode of communication. One would expect more depictions of visual representations, static images, or videos, but instead, representation is mostly achieved through writing. According to Kress and van Leeuwen (2006), weighing the visual clues of composition, such as salience, colour contrasts, balance, and the like, is a subjective process that could justify the fact that the website seems to be unfinished. As a semiotic mode on its own, colour can fulfil all three metafunctions simultaneously (Kress & van Leeuwen, 2006) since, as discussed earlier, ideally, it clearly states the strict mood of the designer, and interpersonally, it creates a distance between the designer and the viewer because the contrasting colours (light green and black) intensify the gap between these two individuals. Moreover, the absence of framing accentuates the sense of separation and individuality the designer (student) wishes to display. It is also evident that in Website 1, Fine Arts and Art Movements are placed within the artistic, cultural community Student 1 belongs to. For Fine Arts, there is information on the student’s “favourite medium of expression”, which is a form of personal investment. However, the student also relied on written language as a semiotic mode to represent content for Virtual Reality and Art and Video Games and Art. The conditions caused by the pandemic and the lack of personal testing with the VR equipment could have influenced the semiotic choices of Student 1 on those thematic units. Despite the multiplicity of available semiotic resources, there is a dearth of modes on the website concerning the two technological innovations and their relation to art. Meaning-making occurs mostly through writing. Specifically, in Video Games and Art, the student enhances the written piece with another written quote from the TIME website; according to which, video games are indeed a collision of art and science. Student 2 – Website 2 Student 2 was the sole student whose website revealed a strong sense of agency as a designer. There is an intense portrayal of herself through action (Figures 2, 3, and 9). Various interconnected modes representing her meanings are used, such as personal photos and drawings. Despite occasional short written sentences, the visual semiotic modes realise what the student does not say in words. 35 ARTICLES University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context Figure 9: Student 2 working under COVID-19 conditions In Figure 9, she portrays herself as the actor involved in a narrative process (a nontransactional reaction). Instead of writing about the act of drawing using action verbs, their pictorial equivalent, the vector, links the student with the phenomenon (Kress & van Leeuwen, 2006). Ideationally, Student 2 represents what ‘what goes in the world’ (Jewitt, 2005, p. 18) through the visual representation of herself wearing a mask due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Figure 10: The representation of the thematic unit ‘Virtual Reality and Art’ by Student 2 36 University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context ARTICLES Figure 11: ‘Video Games and Art’ by Student 2 Figure 12: Representation of the game ‘Property Brothers’ 37 ARTICLES University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context During the designing phase of Virtual Reality and Art, the student as a meaning-maker draws upon a very interesting cultural convention, that of the responsibility of artists to ‘put people away from their daily reality’, which is an element she seems to have inherited from the artistic culture she belongs to (Kalantzis et al., 2016, p. 222). As for the final unit Video Games and Art, there are only minor instances of written sentences. By opposition, she is actively involved in the semiotics of the video game (Gee, 2003) and enters a more visual procedural representation of how it is played. Students 3, 5, and 6 – Websites 3, 5, and 6 Even though Students 3, 5, and 6 attempted to integrate multiple modes to represent their meanings, there is a common verbocentric tendency protruding from their designs. Figure 13: Verbocentrism in ‘Video Games and Art’ (Student 3)’ 38 University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context ARTICLES Figure 14: The prevalent mode of writing in ‘Art Movements’ (Student 5)’ Figure 15: Reliance on written language in ‘Art Movements’ (Student 6) 39 ARTICLES University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context Student 4 – Website 4 Figure 16: Semiotic deviation between the visual and written mode (Student 4) The students’ design decisions reveal that the pictures mean more when they are set beside a written text rather than the text meaning more when juxtaposed with the picture (Lemke, 1998). Ideationally, this presents the verbocentric nature of the students’ cultural community (Siegel, 1995), and interpersonally, it reveals the students’ position and preference for writing as a semiotic mode. Even though Student 6 used her own painting as a new element that would depict her desired meanings (Kress, 2009), she also enhanced it with long, written paragraphs. Similarly, in Figure 14, Student 5 presents the written text as the most salient part at the top section of the page with a very strict representation of meanings. In reality, the depiction of meanings seems rather perfunctory in the sense that it is formally conservative and pertains to the established values (Kress & van Leeuwen, 2006) the students have of academic contexts. 40 University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context ARTICLES Student 4 uses a unique pattern for representing meaning, which is more of a blog or a diary entry with the same consistent pattern. Specifically, her interest is condensed into a combination of an image depicting painting materials at the top, with a brief, written text at the bottom. Looking at the semiotic relation between image and writing in Figure 16, there is a semiotic deviation. Ideationally, the image does not represent the surrealistic world of Dali, and surprisingly, she has not engaged with her own painting in Art. Textually, the visual mode does not indicate surrealism or correspond to her written message. The interpersonal metafunction finds the viewer in a distant position from the portrayed meanings because of the problematic semiotic relation between the two modes. Even though the written text is given lesser priority in favour of images in online contexts (Kress, 2009), in this case, writing is necessary for the realisation and understanding of meanings. 4.2 Thematic analysis of the interviews Thematic analysis of the transcribed data showed an inconsistency between the translation from the representation of meanings through the website and the communication of meanings from the interviews, portraying a strong sense of agency on behalf of the students when using the verbal modes. Table 2 shows the most common themes that emerged from the transcribed data. Codes Category • Students portrayed themselves and their paintings intensely in the representative articulation of meanings. • Students aimed to problematise viewers with their work. • Students liked the designing opportunity. Agency Table 2: The most common themes emerging from thematic analysis The interviews revealed the students’ strong sense of agency. Particularly, Student 1 says: I have always used art to express certain things. Ever since I was young, I had a speaking difficulty, I was dyslexic, so the first thing I learnt to do was draw rather than speak. Even today, I might be out with friends for coffee, and not be able to express something verbally. (Excerpt 1) Student 1 has a strong visual background whose website, however, relies heavily on written language as the most preferred mode of representation. For Fine Arts, the student uses his own painting and writes about his “favourite medium of expression”: ‘I like using still-life elements in my paintings so the pencil can help me with that. There’s a dark shade and a 41 ARTICLES University students’ transformation of meanings within an ESP digital context light shade’ (Excerpt 2). The “dark” and “light” shades the student mentions are in accordance with the textual elements (dark and light colours) that were used for the design of the website. What is interesting to see, though, are the discourses on what constitutes an artistic creation: I don’t have a favourite Art Movement because I never thought of studying about the history of art, the movements, and all that. Leonardo da Vinci used a term, ‘minimum forte’ if I’m not mistaken, to do minimalistic things and very fast sketches. I may have been influenced by that because as you see, my work seems unfinished but to me it is finished. (Excerpt 3). When asked why there are no visual representations for Virtual Reality and Fine Arts and Video Games and Art, the student explained: ‘I didn’t think it was necessary to use any pictures or videos, or maybe it just didn’t occur to me’ (Excerpt 4). Student 2 reveals a strong sense of agency as a designer/sign maker, which is evident in her work, showing encoded meanings of independence and creativity through her personal pictures and drawings (see Figures 9-12). When asked about her personal visual involvement in the project, she acknowledges: ‘Well, art is “my art”. We need to use our own pictures to show to the world that we made these and, in some cases, it’s good to show the process of creation’ (Excerpt 5). Student 2 also refers to the importance of visual representation: When I draw, I always want to problematise with my designs. I want people to understand my designs, and if they don’t, I want them to interpret them in their own way. (Excerpt 6) Student 6 also reinforces this: My purpose was to communicate with the viewers of my website; to pose questions, to make them think about art, about what constitutes art. I don’t mind if people give their own interpretations of my art because we are all different, we think differently, we have a different aesthetic taste. (Excerpt 7) Verbally, the students show a more dynamic performance of meaning representation not seen on their websites. Despite the multimodal semiotic toolkit they seem to possess for creating their designs, some still need to realise the extent to which their designs are influenced by already-familiar written representations. Student 5 acknowledges: ‘Isn’t that what we’ve been taught to do? I’m used to it now. I usually write longer paragraphs’ (Excerpt 8), a statement that adheres to a more conventional literacy model. She also acknowledges the saturated nature of being taught mainly through written modes since a young age and demonstrates a more critical stance towards literacy education today, questioning its status: It is sad to teach children through one mode, it’s just not right. This goes against all beliefs and against everything education should stand for. It’s not democratic. Students should be able to choose between modes and find the one they feel more comfortable with. (Excerpt9) 49 ARTICLES 49 A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities 1 Introduction Argumentation is a process that can enhance critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and conceptual change, which are currently major concerns in the educational environment and research (e.g., Nippold et al., 2020). It encompasses within social interaction in which participants form and evaluate arguments (Bates, 2019; Costley & Lange, 2016). In recent research, the quality of arguments is highly related to learning, conceptual thinking, and profound content (Jin et al., 2020). Through argumentative essays, students gain better conceptual understanding of a social or a historical problem than writing a narrative or an expository essay (Wiley & Voss, 1999). Students can learn ‘the social construction of knowledge’ (Jonassen & Kim, 2010, p. 440) and get involved in reflection and higher cognitive skills (Nippold et. al., 2020). In addition to being a motivating task for students (Chinn, 2006), it is considered an essential skill in all educational disciplines. Students can be assigned to write an argumentative essay or join an argumentative discussion after ‘reading a case, encountering a problem, or studying an issue’ (Jonassen & Kim, 2010, p. 449) or even reading a story (Nippold et al., 2020). The present study investigates a corpus of argumentative discourse of synchronous online forums, academic essays, and oral debates for the use of complex argumentation quality and critical thinking. Participants were undergraduate students (N= 54) enrolled in a 12week module of English for Academic Purposes (EAP). Qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis were applied. All data were transcribed and coded qualitatively according to a modified model based on Toulmin’s (1958) framework of rhetorical structure. Then the results of argumentation categories were calculated using ANOVA. Findings reveal the highest influence of synchronous online forums on the production of claims, grounds, elaboration, and evidence; oral debates, followed by online forums on the frequency of rebuttals; and essays on the occurrence of backing and academic references. Pedagogical implications then highlight how synchronous online forums can be used in the rhetoric and composition EFL classroom for both the use of language and critical thinking, suggesting mind maps as another convenient tool for argumentation discussions. Mayada Tawfik Zaki Cairo University Egypt email: [email protected]om ABSTRACT 50 A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities ARTICLES 1.1 Theoretical background Argumentation, according to Aristotle, can have either a rhetorical or a dialectical function. The rhetorical argumentation is a monologue that concerns only the author’s or speaker’s opinion, whereas the dialectical argumentation is a dialogue between two opponents (Driver et al., 2000). A rhetorical argument involves the arguer and the audience and is described as monological that aims at convincing others with a point of view without any consideration of their position or point of view. One significant model of rhetorical argumentation is Toulmin’s (1958). The model suggests six components for a sound argument as follows: ‘(a) claim, (b) grounds, (c) warrants that connect grounds to claim, (d) backing for warrants, (e) rebuttals, (f) modal qualifiers (e.g., “most,” “probably,” “possibly”)’ (Nussbaum, 2011, p. 85). An example for each component is provided by Toulmin (1958) as follows: 1. Harry is likely a British subject (claim), because: 2. he was born in Bermuda (grounds), and 3. people born in Bermuda generally are British subjects (warrant), 4. on account of the following British statutes (backing for warrant), 5. unless he became a naturalized American or both his parents were aliens (rebuttals). 6. So the conclusion that he is a British subject is only likely (modal qualifier) and is not certain. The conclusion is subject to exception. (as cited in Nussbaum, 2011, p. 85) The more the elements provided in a text, the stronger the argument is, especially grounds as arguments need to be supported by at least one reason (Angell, 1964). Moreover, people usually tend to provide more support for their own position than in a counterargument (Stein & Bernas, 1999). Thus, supporting reasons were stressed by educators as an element of good writing skills. Dialectical argumentation, on the other hand, is a type that characterizes an argument between two opponents in a dialogue or a discussion and aims at settling differences of opinion. Such resolution of opinions can take the form of convincing the opposite side with one claim or reaching a compromise between claims, and this may occur among individuals or groups (Driver et al., 2000). It is a dialogue based on counterarguments (Naussbaum, 2011; Walton, 1996). Pragma-dialectics (Van Eemeren & Grootendorst, 1992) is a model that suggests four phases for critical discussions: ‘(1)Confrontation, (2)Opening, (3)Argumentation, (4)Conclusion’ (p. 281). In the confrontation stage, arguers show their claims. In the opening stage, people start to accept the rules of the argument. In the argumentation stage, opponents provide counterarguments and challenge the opposite claims. Finally, in the concluding stage, opponents decide on the winner and the loser of the argument. The present study applies Toulmin’s (1958) model to observe the quality of arguments in the three examined academic tasks. However, Toulmin’s (1958) model cannot comprise both sides of an argument as it considers only the arguer’s side, neglecting the opponent’s point of view (Leitao, 2001), a matter which is covered by adding components from the model of pragma-dialectics (Van Eemeren & Grootendorst, 1992; Van Eemeren et al., 1996). This study bridges this gap via the addition of supporting components to Toulmin’s model (1958) to 51 ARTICLES A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities meet the needs of the examined dialogic tasks, the oral debate, and the online forum. Accordingly, investigated components encompass conclusion, grounds of rebuttals, grounds of claims, elaboration, evidence, and academic references as additional components to Toulmin’s (1958) model. 1.2 Cognitive elaboration in online educational arguments Due to the extensive application of digital modes in education, researchers have been concerned with the relationship amongst argumentative discourse, digital modalities, and cognitive skills, finding a positive correlation between the quality of arguments and higher levels of knowledge construction in online contexts (Fu et al., 2016; Shukor et al., 2014). A higher quality of argumentation is accompanied with higher levels of students’ engagement in asynchronous online forums through discussions that demanded knowledge construction rather than only knowledge sharing where students only focused on supporting one approach of the argument neglecting rebuttals and evidence (Nippold et al., 2020; Fu et al., 2016). Groups of undergraduate students who worked on higher levels of knowledge construction in online discussions used arguments and justifications and asked questions that required elaboration more than the groups who worked on a lower level of knowledge construction relying only on elaborating information, asking questions, and commenting on previous remarks (Shukor et al., 2014). For an online discussion to have a high quality of interaction, posts should demand negotiation, interpretation, and thinking. They should be responsive (Duvall et al., 2020) via including more elaboration and evidence (Nippold et al., 2020). 1.3 Argumentation in essays, online forums, and face-to-face discussions In an observation of students’ patterns of argumentation in a 20-minute online argumentative writing, Maulyda et al. (2021) found that students followed three patterns of argumentation that included four and five elements of Toulmin’s (1958) model, respectively. The first was a claim, followed by ground or data, supported by a warrant, and followed by backing. The second was ground, claim, qualifier which is a modal verb or an expression of certainty, and a warrant. The third pattern comprised five elements, including a rebuttal expressing a weakness in the author’s own position and is labeled as exceptions by the researchers. The pattern was formed of ground, claim, warrant, backing, and possible rebuttal (exceptions). As regards argumentation patterns in oral discussions, Dia et al. (2020) analyzed deductive, inductive, and mixed reasoning, as well as the degree of rhetoric whether full, half, or little according to Toulmin et al.’s (1979) model that includes six elements: data, stance, basic truth, support, modality, and refutation. Results showed that speakers used different degrees of rhetoric according to their role in the discussion. The moderator of the discussion used the elements data and rebuttal only in his argument, thus categorized as little rhetoric and did not comply with the order of elements in Toulmin et al.’s (1979) model. The presenter provided semi-rhetoric deductive reasoning pattern formed of three elements, namely data, modality, and rebuttal; and speakers produced a full rhetoric pattern including the six elements in the model. Jin et al. (2020) examined the influence of blended learning via the observation of students’ argumentative discourse through face-to-face discussions and collaboratively written essays. Results showed that students focused on content, evidence, reasons, and claim 52 A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities ARTICLES extraction in the face-to-face discussions, which also promoted rebuttals and involved negotiations aiming at reaching an agreement on a claim. Criticism and improvement suggestion were the major patterns of interaction in 100% of online posts by Spanish students in an English translation module. The posts were, however, introduced by salutation and praise as hedges for argumentation (Fernandez-Polo & Cal-Varela, 2018). In the academic context, a comparison of asynchronous online discussions and face-to-face discussions (Joiner et al., 2008; Wang & Woo, 2007) revealed that face-to-face discussions instigated more intensive arguments, faster responses, inference of conclusions (Wang & Woo, 2007), frequent occurrence of transactional questions, and higher strategic sequence of responses and counterclaims (Joiner et al., 2008). In another comparison with collaborative essay writing, face-to-face discussions stimulated more reasons and evidence from students (Jin et al., 2020). Therefore, an analysis of English as a foreign language learners’ argumentation in online forums in comparison with academic essays and oral debates is highly needed in order to find out how online forums can be employed and how effective they are in the academic classroom compared to traditional academic written and oral tasks. The synchronicity of online forums may allow many of the synchronous features of the oral debate while still owning the pace of idea integration in written discourse. The difference in the dialogic and monologic structures of the three academic tasks may as well influence students’ attempts in providing strong rhetoric. 1.4 Importance of the study The spread of online multimodal modes of discourse in the educational context has urged the need to investigate their impact on students’ critical thinking compared to traditional written and oral modes of communication. Extensive research compares discourse of different modalities, oral and written (e.g., Ädel, 2010), online and written (e.g., Hewing & Coffin, 2007), and online and oral (e.g., Joiner et al., 2008). However, none of these studies analyzes discourse in the three modalities, oral, written, and multimodal, simultaneously under the influence of the same topics, participants, and context. This stresses the demand for research that can set the three modalities on a continuum revealing the similarities and differences in discourse. In the academic context, critical thinking and argumentation quality are two highly significant factors. The use of one model of analysis such as Toulmin’s (1958) is not comprehensive of the rhetorical and dialogic features of argumentation. Thus, the present study adds complementary supporting components such as ground for rebuttals to Toulmin’s model (1958), elaboration, evidence, conclusion, and academic references in order to meet the requirements of academic tasks and to combine both monologic and dialogic argumentation structures. Finally, the observation should lead to critical findings that should be considered for the design and assessment of academic tasks, particularly of online modalities and curricula of academic English, critical thinking, and rhetoric courses. 53 ARTICLES A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities 1.5 Research question The study answers the following question: What are the differences in the quality of argumentative discourse amongst the three tasks: academic essays, synchronous online forums, and oral debates? 1.6 Definition of constructs and components 1.6.1 Construct of argumentation quality Quality of arguments is relevant to how strongly the author’s stance is well supported and expressed. Operationally, quality of arguments is measured via the percentage of frequency per total utterances of the components of Toulmin’s (1958) model: claims, grounds for claims, rebuttals, warrants, backing and supporting components represented in grounds for rebuttals, conclusions, concessions, in addition to elaboration, evidence, and academic references. 1.6.2 Argumentation components 1. A claim is a standpoint or an opinion that acts as the first step in an argument to be put forward (Van Eemeren et al., 1996). 2. A ground comprises the main ideas and facts used to support the claim. 3. Grounds for claims indicate the main ideas and facts used to support the claim in an argument as in the second utterance in the following sample from a student’s argument supporting death penalty: ‘of course, death penalty is a must (CL). It allows the law to control those people who kills innocent people (LGR).’ 4. A warrant is the third step in the argument that is formed of justification for the occurrence of the ground supporting the claim. It acts as a bridge between the data and the claim (Van Eemeren et al., 1996). 5. A backing is a statement that provides support for or information on the warrant. 6. A rebuttal is a statement of counterargument and disagreement that shows the claim or grounds are not true. 7. Grounds for rebuttals represent the code for main ideas and facts that were used by students to support their rebuttals against opponents’ claims. 8. A conclusion is a summary of the claims and grounds supporting a position in the argument. 9. An elaboration is a statement that has a reason, an explanation, or a definition. 10. An evidence is a statement that consists of statistics or an example. 11. An academic reference is a credible source of information used to enhance the credibility and strength of a position in an argument. 54 A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities ARTICLES 2 Method 2.1 Participants The participants were 54 undergraduate students enrolled in the third-level module of English for Academic Purposes (EAP) at the British University in Egypt. The students were enrolled in the faculties of engineering, economics, business, and pharmacy. Their ages ranged from 17 to 21 years old, and included 33 females and 21 males. All students were placed in this module after passing all the required exams of a previous level module that included a final 500-word opinion essay and upper-intermediate level reading passages. Direct placement in the module was based on their scores in the Oxford Placement Test 2 (Allan, 2004), with an equivalence of 5.5 score on the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) test. 2.2 Task designs 2.2.1 Essay Prompts of argumentative topics had different forms in research. Pyun (2003) observing interaction in online and face-to-face discussions asked participants to write their preference of two different choices ending the question with “which one do you prefer?”(p. 50), while in an investigation of students’ argumentative writing, Lu (2011) stated the prompt as “some people think that education is a lifelong process, while others don’t agree. Write an essay to state your own opinion.” (as cited in Wen et al., 2005, p. 11). Nussbaum and Kardash (2005) applied two different methods of instruction for writing persuasive essays. One prompt directly asked students to express their opinion about a topic, whereas the other provided reading passages on the two positions of the arguments. Findings showed that when provided with readings, students used more counterarguments, consequently displaying a better quality of arguments. In the present study, hence, the argumentative prompt for the essay, online forum, and oral debate exposed two opposing views and a question about their preference in addition to requiring evidence from readings on their assigned topics and their position in the arguments. The module objectives aimed at teaching argumentation and critical thinking to undergraduate students studying EAP. The duration was 12 weeks, during which the students were required to write two argumentative five-paragraph essays and two oral debates. The final project of the semester included a 1000-word argumentative essay supported by academic readings. The essay structure included paragraphs that support the claim and others that included counterarguments and refutations. 2.2.2 Oral debate The oral debate was a collaborative task that required two mini groups of two or three members, each supporting a different position in an argument that requires preparation and reading academic references. 55 ARTICLES A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities 2.2.3 Online forum According to Bates (2019), synchronicity is one significant difference between physical and distant classrooms since face-to-face discussions are always synchronous in contrast to most online discussions. In this study, online forums were conducted synchronously in order to avoid the influence of synchronicity while comparing modality effect on discourse. An online forum is defined as a ‘text-based collaborative dialogue’ that allows ‘collaborative construction of knowledge’ (Coskun & Arslan, 2014, p. 276), and high cognitive skills (Nippold et al., 2020) such as critical thinking and evaluation (Bates, 2019; Burgess, 2009; Guan et al., 2006). It is recommended that they are graded for content, not for participation only (Bates, 2019; Jeong, 2004). In order to stimulate critical thinking, prompts can include a ‘real world problem’ (Hall, 2015, p. 25) that requires two or more clearly stated opposing positions (DeLoach & Greenlaw, 2007). Accordingly, students in the current study were divided into two opposing groups of four to six each before the discussion. A synchronous online forum was assigned on the same topic of their argumentative essays. The task was conducted in the university computer lab during class sessions using Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment 2 (Moodle 2) (Büchner, 2011). The structure used was a ‘single simple discussion’ in order to display the posts in the form of a threaded discussion. The prompt demanded at least two posts for each student, not less than six lines for each. Instructions did not direct the students to use academic resources in the online forums in order not to force an academic formal style of language and better explore students’ language-style preferences and inclinations in the use of the online task. 2.2.3.1 MOODLE as a learning management system Several methods of instruction were used to promote interaction in online arguments. These methods included learning management systems such as ‘Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment’ (Coskun & Arslan, 2014, p. 275) (MOODLE), which enhanced synchronous and asynchronous interaction through providing both chats and forums that can promote common elaboration, construction of arguments, and sharing artifacts among participants. It is also used for fragmentation of courses aiming at applying microlearning strategies (Javorcik & Polasek, 2019). In the online context, students can share documents and artifacts that allow other participants to visualize their arguments (Sadita et al., 2020). Furthermore, in online platforms, learners can have access to rich sources of information as they can share links to websites or glossaries and visualize material in their dialogic arguments (Bates, 2019). 2.3 Data analysis procedures Students’ oral debates were recorded in their English classes, and copies of their synchronous online forums and academic essays were saved on a laptop. The academic essays were entered into turnitin.com for scrutinizing any percentage of plagiarism. The data of 12 groups of 54 students were the focus of analysis. The analyzed data, accordingly, were composed of 54 academic essays, 137 online-forum posts, and 12 recordings of 5 hours and 2 minutes of oral debates. 56 A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities ARTICLES 2.3.1 Linguistic analysis Recorded oral debates of 12 groups formed of 54 students were transcribed to result in 25869 words. The academic essays and the online forums were already typed by the students and counted as 54304 words for the essays and 10432 for the online forums. All the data of the three tasks (the online forum, the oral debate, and the academic essay) were broken into T-units, resulting in 2857 T-units for the academic essays, 2139 T-units for the oral debates, and 691T-units for the synchronous online forums. The data were then coded for the observed argument components: claim, grounds, grounds of claims, rebuttals, grounds of rebuttals, warrants, backing, elaboration, evidence, conclusion, and academic references. The coded transcripts were entered into the Systematic Analysis of Language Transcripts (SALT; Miller & Chapman, 2003) software guide (one transcript per student per task) for checking the coding and for counting the raw number of each coded component in the entered transcript. 2.3.2 Statistical analysis All codes were counted for frequency to be then calculated for percentages over the total number of utterances per text of each student. The percentages were then inserted into a spreadsheet in preparation for inferential statistics of a repeated measures analysis of variance – one-way ANOVA – to find differences between the means of frequency for each indicator in the two examined tasks. 3 Results Quality of students’ arguments in the three tasks was examined via the observation of argumentation components mentioned in Toulmin’s model (1958) and the extra components highlighting additional criteria for the evaluation of the strength of academic arguments. The components investigated were claims, rebuttals, grounds, grounds for claims, grounds for rebuttals, warrants, backing, conclusion, elaboration, evidence, and academic references. Each component was calculated for percentage of frequency to the total number of utterances per student’s text in order to control the variation in the total number of utterances amongst the three tasks under investigation. The total number of utterances was 2857 for the academic essays, 2139 for the oral debates, and 691 for the synchronous online forums. Results of the ANOVA test revealed statistically significant differences across task groups for all components, except for two, as follows: claims, F(2, 159)=19.90, p=0.00; rebuttals with F(2, 159) = 12.86, p = 0.00; grounds, F(2, 159) = 39.49, p = 50.00; grounds of claims, F(2,159)=31.04, p=0.00; warrants, F(2, 159)=19.60, p =0.00; conclusions, F(2, 159)=13.77, p = 0.00; elaboration, F(2, 159)=28.75, p = 0.00; evidence, v2, 159)= 513.27, p= 0.00; academic references, F(2, 159)= 11.56 , p=0.00. Not statistically significant results for all groups were revealed for grounds of rebuttals, F(2, 159) = 2.15, p = 0.12, and backing, F(2,159)= 51.24, p=0.29. 57 ARTICLES A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities Component Essay Online Forum Oral Debate Claims M. 14.21 11.34 5.89 SD 8.8 6.04 5.61 Rebuttals M. 6.63 10.4 14.43 SD 4.01 10.1 8.57 Grounds M. 16.75 34.26 18.19 SD 6.29 15.89 9.78 Grounds for claims M. 8.73 23.09 7.04 SD 6.12 17.36 8.21 Grounds for rebuttals M. 8.02 11.17 11.15 SD 5.5 12.07 8.48 Warrants M. 12.25 20.17 11.16 SD 4.75 10.61 8.04 Backing M. 7.4 6.55 5.4 SD 4.73 7.69 7.11 Conclusions M. 5.76 2.86 2.65 SD 3.38 3.95 2.91 Elaborations M. 13.74 29.85 16.23 SD 5.09 16.82 10.72 Evidence M. 12.39 19.47 10.7 SD 5.98 13.11 7.53 Academic references M. 9.93 5.57 2.98 SD 6.9 10.09 4.82 Statistically significant variation among task groups Table 1: Differences of Percentage Scores among Tasks (n=54 per group) A post hoc Tukey-Kramer test (p = 0.05) then revealed where the differences lie between pairs of tasks. Results revealed similar relations for five components: grounds, grounds of claims, warrants, elaboration, and evidence; where the online forum had a statistically significant difference with both the academic essay and the oral debate recording the highest mean of frequency as well (see Table 1); while, the academic essay and the oral debate recorded closer means of frequency that did not reveal any statistical significance (see Table 1). The post hoc Tukey Krammer test (0.05) for claims highlighted a non-statistically significant difference between the essay and the online forum since both had very close means being much higher than the oral debate, which had a statistically significant difference with both tasks (see Table 1). 64 A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities ARTICLES References Ädel, A. (2010). Just to give you kind of a map of where we are going: A taxonomy of metadiscourse in spoken and written academic English. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9(2), 69-97. https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.218 Allan, D. (2004). Oxford placement test 2 (New edition). Oxford University Press. Angell, R. B. (1964). Reasoning and logic. Appleton-Century-Crofts. Bagheri, M., & Zenouzagh, Z. M. (2021). Comparative study of the effect of face-to-face and computer-mediated conversation modalities on student engagement: Speaking skill in focus. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 6(5), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-020-00103-0 Bates, A. W. (2019). Teaching in a digital age (2nd ed.). Tony Bates Associates Ltd. Büchner, A. (2011). Moodle 2 administration (2nd ed.). Packt Publishing. Burgess, M. L. (2009). Using WebCT as a supplemental tool to enhance critical thinking and engagement among developmental reading students. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 39(2), 9-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2009.10850316 Chinn, C. A. (2006). Learning to argue. In A. M. O’Donnell, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & G. Erkens (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology (pp. 355–383). Erlbaum. Coskun, A., & Arslan, A. (2014). Moodling English language education. Education, 134(3), 275-282. Costley, J., & Lange, C. (2016). The relationship between social presence and critical thinking: Results from learner discourse in an asynchronous learning environment. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 89-108. DeLoach, S. B., & Greenlaw, S. A. (2007). Effectively moderating electronic discussions. The Journal of Economic Education, 38(4), 419-434. https://doi.org/10.3200/JECE.38.4.419-434 Dia, E. E., Suyono, HS., E., HS., S. (2020). Rhetoric patterns of Toulmin in class discussion arguments: Universitas Negeri Malang. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(12B), 8514-8527. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098237X(200005)84:3%3C287::AID-SCE1%3E3.0.CO;2-A Duvall, M., Matranga, A., & Silverman, J. (2020). Designing for and facilitating knowledgebuilding discourse in online courses. Information and Learning Sciences, 121(7/8), 487-501. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0081 Fernandez-Polo, F. J., & Cal-Varela, M. (2018). A structural analysis of student online forum discussions. In F. J. D. Perez, & M. A. M. Moreno (Eds.), Languages at the crossroads: Training, accreditation and context of use (pp. 189-200). Universidad de Jaen. Fu, E. L. F., Aalst, J. V., & Chan, C. K. K. (2016). Toward a classification of discourse patterns in asynchronous online discussions. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 11, 441-478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-016-9245-3 Guan, Y., Tsai, C., & Hwang, F. (2006). Content analysis of online discussion on a seniorhigh-school discussion forum of a virtual physics laboratory. Instructional Science, 34, 279-311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-3345-1 Hall, R. A. (2015). Critical thinking in online discussion boards: Transforming an anomaly. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 81(3), 21-27. Hewings, A., & Coffin, C. (2007). Writing in multi-party computer conferences and single authored assignments: Exploring the role of writer as thinker. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(2), 126-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2007.04.002 Javorcik, T., & Polasek, R. (2019). Transformation of e-learning into microlearning: New approach to course design. AIP Conference Proceedings 2116, 060016. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5114051 65 ARTICLES A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities Jeong, A. (2004). The combined effects of response time and message content on growth patterns of discussion threads in computer supported collaborative argumentation. Journal of Distance Education, 19, 36-53. Jin, T., Su, Y., & Lei, J. (2020). Exploring the blended learning design for argumentative writing. Language Learning and Technology Forum, 24(2), 2334. Joiner, R., Jones S., & Doherty J. (2008). Two studies examining argumentation in asynchronous computer mediated communication. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 31(3), 243-255. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437270802416848 Jonassen, D. H., & Kim, B. (2010). Arguing to lean and learning to argue: Design justifications and guidelines. Educational Technology Research Development, 58, 439457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9143-8 Leitao, S. (2001). Analyzing changes in view during argumentation: A quest for method. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 2(3), Article 12. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-2.3.907 Lu, X. (2011). A corpus based evaluation of syntactic complexity measures as indices of collegelevel ESL writers’ language development. TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 36-62. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.240859 Maulyda, M. R., Septiadi, R., Radha, R., Budiharjo, A., & Wulandari, N. P. (2021). Argumentation patterns of Toulmin students during online lectures in the pandemic. Kajian Linguistik dan Sastra, 6(1), 72-83. https://doi.org/10.23917/kls.v6i1.12018 Miller, J. F., & Chapman, R. S. (2003). SALT: Systematic Analysis of Language Transcripts [Computer software]. University of Wisconsin-Maison, Waisman Research Center, Language Analysis Laboratory. Nippold, M. A., LaFavre, S., & Shinham, K. (2020). How adolescents interpret the moral messages of fables: Examining the development of critical thinking. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 63(4), 1212-1226. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_JSLHR-19-00168 Nussbaum, E. M. (2011). Argumentation, dialogue theory, and probability modeling: Alternative frameworks for argumentation research in education. Educational Psychologist, 46(2), 84106. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.558816 Nussbaum, E. M., & Kardash, C. M.(2005). The effects of goal instructions and text on the generation of counterarguments during writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 157-169. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.157 O’halloran, K. (2011). Investigating argumentation in reading groups: Combining manual qualitative coding and automated corpus analysis tools. Applied Linguistics, 32(2), 172–196. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amq041 Pyun, O. C. (2003). Effects of networked language learning: A comparison between synchronous online discussions and face to face discussions (Unpublished PhD thesis). The Ohio State University, USA. Sadita, L., Hirashim, T., Hayashi, Y., Furtado, P. G. F., Junus, K., & Santoso, H. B. (2020). The effect of differences in group composition on knowledge transfer, group achievement, and learners’ affective responses during reciprocal concept mapping with the Kit-Build Approach. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 15(13). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-020-00133-9 Shukor, N. A., Tasir, Z., Der Meijden, H. V., & Harun, J. (2014). Exploring students’ knowledge construction strategies in computer supported collaborative learning discussions using sequential analysis. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 17(4), 216-228. Stein, N. L., & Bernas, R. (1999). The early emergence of argumentative knowledge and skill. In J. Andiessen, & P. Corrier (Eds.), Foundations of argumentative text processing (pp. 97-116). Amsterdam University Press. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press. Toulmin, S., Richard, R., & Allan, J. (1979). An introduction to reasoning. Macmilllan Publishing Company. 66 A corpus analysis of argumentation quality across modalities ARTICLES Van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, communication and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Erlbaum. Van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Henkemans, F. S., Blair, J. A., Johnson, R. H., Krabbe, E. C. W., Plantin, C., Walton, D. N., Willard, C. A., Woods, J., & Zarefsky, D.(1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory: A historical backgrounds and contemporary developments. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Walton, D. N. (1996). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Wang, Q., & Woo, L. H. (2007). Comparing asynchronous online discussions and face to face discussions in a classroom setting. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 272-286. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00621.x Wen, Q., Wang, L., & Liang, M. (2005). Spoken and written English corpus of Chinese learners. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. Wiley, J., & Voss, J. F. (1999). Constructing arguments from multiple sources: Tasks that promote understanding and not just memory for text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 301-311. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.301 Wilson B., Hamann, K., & Pollock, P. H. (2014). Spill-over effects in online discussions: Assessing the effectiveness of student preceptors. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 11(1), 15-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2013.848178 Dr Mayada Tawfik Zaki has a PhD in Applied Linguistics from Cairo University and an MA in TESOL from the American University in Cairo. She is currently a researcher and a peer reviewer for academic journals. She has been teaching English for academic purposes and EFL for twenty years at international universities in Egypt, including the British University in Egypt. Her research has focused on syntactic complexity in EFL learners, discourse analysis, online discourse, and the development of language proficiency levels. Her conference presentations have addressed formative and performance assessments, flipped classroom strategies, interaction and identity in online courses, argumentation in EAP, and local versus global literacies. Author biography 67 SMASHing it in the classroom! International students frequently ask about opportunities for practising their English, improving their speaking skills and building their confidence. They often arrive in class with a low self-esteem which can result in limited classroom participation. It is this that needs to be addressed. One area of the learning journey which students ask for is ‘natural’ conversation, and ‘to sound like a native speaker’. I tell them that ‘how’ they sound is part of their identity and informs the interlocutor more about who they are as individuals. Their ‘voice’ is their identity and as long as they can be understood that is what is important. The term language café is often used to describe a group of individuals coming together to practise their language skills with others. According to Needler (2017), language cafés are seen ‘as a site of wider cultural integration’. Conversation cafés and speaking clubs are common occurrences for students to be able to have a sense of belonging in a student community of like-minded people. An article by Polo-Pérez (2020) discusses the role language cafés play within an educational setting and how they can inform and develop students’ identities. She considers them ‘significant social contexts for multilingual identity performance and development’ (Polo-Pérez, 2020). According to Braxton et al. (2000, as cited in Assaf et al., 2019, p. 1), ‘active learning includes different activities such as debates, role-playing, cooperative learning, and discussions.’ ‘Based on student-selected areas of interest’ (Casy, 2008, as cited in Assaf et al., 2019, p. 1), such active learning can become a prominent feature in clubs. Becoming involved in such clubs contributes to students’ learning and, as a result, they learn far more (Chang, 1990; Huang & Chang, 2004, both as cited in Assaf et al., 2019, p. 1). In 2019, I was inspired by my daughter’s first year at school. They ran an occasional session for 30 minutes in the afternoons before pick-up time, inviting parents, legal guardians and grandparents to take part in an activity chosen by the teacher. The session was known as SMASH (Stay Meet And Share), and the activities ranged from reading a book with your child to making a Christmas decoration. After having been to a couple of these sessions, I Victoria Rowe University of Southampton United Kingdom email: V.L[email protected] FROM THE CLASSROOM 68 SMASHing it in the classroom! FROM THE CLASSROOM noticed the benefits behind them. It allowed parents, legal guardians and grandparents to be actively engaged in their child’s learning development and to have the opportunity to have an insight into the teaching and classroom practice. Based on my experience at my daughter’s school, I decided to set up the SMASH club for my university students. My students are intrigued by the term ‘SMASH’, and when told what it stands for, they come to this session with an idea in mind to share an experience or show the group what they have been doing. Assaf et al. (2019), ELT instructors at a private Syrian university (Arab International University), conducted a survey to establish students’ needs and to focus on their motivation when learning English. It was revealed that the majority of students preferred more interactive methods of learning English. Therefore, Assaf et al. (2019) chose to set up an English language club in order to meet the needs of their students. Conversation cafés and events are usually run by the Students’ Union; however, without a familiar face to lead or facilitate the sessions, students often withdraw or do not turn up. The idea of the SMASH club is to avoid this and to encourage students to talk openly in a natural environment about topics close to their heart. As Polo-Pérez (2020) notes, within these language cafés institutional constraints do not exist, i.e. the role of teacher and student are absent. Until the pandemic, the club itself took place in the University café every Wednesday afternoon. It was an opportunity to Stay for a while, Meet other students And SHare stories and experiences with one another. Some students came prepared with personal items to show us, such as chopsticks, and demonstrated how they should be used. The students were happy to be able to bring something from their home to the café table. This club aims to bring students together from different disciplines across the university. It gives students an opportunity outside of their timetabled classes to meet other like-minded students. Without a doubt, it builds up their confidence enormously, and to see them walk away smiling and knowing they have been part of a ‘natural’ conversation is priceless. It is important that a comfortable setting be found where students feel able to talk to others without feeling nervous or ‘silly’. Speaking to others in a second language can be a daunting experience for many. Therefore, finding a niche for them to fit into and benefit from both socially and academically is crucial. The SMASH club allows this to happen and gives them a sense of belonging to a community with likeminded people. Such a club provides the students with ‘motivational tools’ (Assaf et al., 2019). The principles of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) can be addressed in these speaking clubs. They provide a platform for students to come together from not only culturally but also socially and educationally different backgrounds. Tavares (2021) investigated international students’ experiences at a Canadian university and found that even though the university was committed to EDI issues, the students still felt distanced from the community. Their intercultural awareness was limited due to limited university-led activities and social interaction with their peers. It can be said that such an initiative as the SMASH club may help to raise a greater awareness of the issues international students face when entering higher education. Since the start of the pandemic, the way we teach and learn has changed and so has the dynamics of the SMASH club. We moved the weekly session online, using Microsoft Teams as our learning platform. One advantage of this was for other students to join the session from other programmes of study across the University. Students on the year-long pre-sessional 69 FROM THE CLASSROOM SMASHing it in the classroom! programme consequently met new friends. I used breakout rooms to enable students to recreate a smaller conversation setting to chat to one another. As we know, larger groups can often be intimidating and daunting. It was difficult to replicate what we had in 2019, but by using the ‘chat’ facility on Teams, as well as the emoticons and images, students were able to comment on topics for discussion and send messages to each other. I even used Microsoft Forms to set up a quiz where students had to decide the correct answer. This went down well and engaged the students at the start of the session and encouraged conversation to flow naturally. Whether in-person or online, motivating and engaging language learners requires learnercentred activities (Dörnyei & Csizér, 1998, as cited in Assaf et al., 2019, p. 1). ‘Differentiation and allowing learners to choose the materials according to their own interest is crucial for students’ success [and] could foster intrinsic motivation’ (Bell, 2010, as cited in Assaf et al., 2019, p. 1). A recent study by Abduvasiyevna and Rashid Qizi (2022) highlights the fact that speaking clubs are able to develop the spoken discourse of learners who possess an upper intermediate level of English at university. Observations and questionnaires were used in this study to reveal that the majority of students who participate in these speaking clubs acquire noticeable improvement not only in their speech but also in their pronunciation, fluency and vocabulary. The internationalisation of education at universities has developed over the years. The UK and the USA account for a significant part of the global international student population. International students from Asia make up the largest group enrolled in education outside their countries; this equates to 53% of the overall international student population (OECD1 2016, as cited in Yu & Moskal, 2019). In the past 10 years, the number of international students in the UK has grown steadily. Among all international students in the country, the number of Chinese students – 91,215 (HESA2 , 2017, as cited in Yu & Moskal, 2019) – goes far beyond that of any other nationality. Current research has shown that there is usually ‘a strong desire to achieve contact, friendship, and social engagement among international students with the host nationals’ (Yu & Moskal, 2019). Social contact has generally been recognised as ‘an important factor contributing to international students’ emotional wellbeing and successful adjustment’ (Yang, 2016, as cited in Yu & Moskal, 2019). It is, therefore, paramount that such opportunities as the SMASH club be recognised and taken up. As has been already discussed, this can provide the contact, friendship, pastoral support and social engagement international students are searching for, particularly among the Asian community. It provides a social dimension to academic life. These conversation clubs can not only motivate proficient users of a language, but they can also encourage the weak learners to take part in natural conversations and develop and improve their spoken discourse. The SMASH club is, without a doubt, a learner-centred space which allows students to recognise their own learning needs and discover the problems they encounter as learners. It is an initiative which is aimed at international students, ____________________________ 1 OECD – Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2 HESA – Higher Education Statistics Agency 70 SMASHing it in the classroom! FROM THE CLASSROOM providing sessions on topics of interest to them and raising awareness of cultural issues in their country and at their university. The intention is for students to share their experiences with others and to inform others about their own cultures, traditions and interests. The SMASH club creates an informal learning environment which caters for all international students at different levels and provides them with a ‘natural’ platform for conversation supported by a facilitator. References Abduvasiyevna, K. N., & Rashid Qizi, U. D. (2022). Developing speaking skills through organizing speaking clubs. Pindus Journal of Culture, Literature, and ELT, 2(3), 37-40. https://literature.academicjournal.io/index.php/literature/article/view/290 Assaf, D. A., Al-Dammad, A., & Khorsheed, R. (2019). Effects of creating an English language club on intermediate learner’ attitudes and linguistic achievement. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 9(1), 40-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0901.06 Needler, C. (2017). Language cafes as a site of wider cultural integration. Europe Now Journal. https://www.europenowjournal.org/2017/01/31/language-cafes-as-a-site-of-widercultural-integration/ Polo-Pérez, N. (2020). (Re)constructing imagined identities in language cafes: An ethnographic inquiry. Imagining Better Education: Conference Proceedings 2019. Durham Research Online, https://dro.dur.ac.uk/31550/ Tavares, V. (2021). Feeling excluded: International students experience equity, diversity and inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.2008536 Yuh, Y., & Moskal, M. (2019). Missing intercultural engagements in the university experiences of Chinese international students in the UK. Comparative and International Education, 49(4), 654-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2018.1448259 Victoria Rowe is a Senior Language Teaching Fellow at the Academic Centre for International Students (ACIS), University of Southampton. Her research interests include English for academic purposes (EAP), English for specific academic purposes (ESAP), communicative language teaching (CLT) and learner autonomy. Author biography Reviewed by Agnieszka Dudzik Medical University of Białystok Poland email: [email protected].pl 71 English for Radiographers is part of the Polish medical publishing house MediPage series on medical English in specific professional environments. The coursebook, published in 2020, is designed for both prospective and practising radiographers seeking to develop the language skills that are relevant to their work context. The book is an important addition to the existing English for Medical Purposes published material and fills a gap in the field of English for radiography. BOOK REVIEW Review of English for Radiographers Urszula Swoboda-Rydz, MediPage, 2020 ISBN 978-83-66632-11-0 72 Review of “English for Radiographers” BOOK REVIEW The coursebook is organised into sixteen thematic units, all focusing on a relevant area of professional knowledge and practice. The first eight units, which serve as a review of the major systems of the human body, primarily introduce learners to medical terms pertaining to anatomy and physiology as well as radiographic positioning. Significantly, students are familiarised with the basics of medical terminology and, by learning the most common medical prefixes and suffixes, provided with the tools needed for unlocking the meaning of new lexical items. Thus, English for Radiographers helps learners to build the skills and language which they can subsequently draw upon in the course of study and beyond. Moreover, Polish translations of selected medical terms are provided throughout the coursebook to aid in the accurate understanding of specialised terminology and to ensure that learners fully grasp specific lexical meanings. Units 9-16 of the book focus on the language needed to describe important areas of radiography, including roles and responsibilities, radiation safety and protection as well as X-ray, CT, MRI, ultrasound, radiation therapy and other procedures. The materials included in the book appear up to date and reflect contemporary medical knowledge and practice and recent advances in medical imaging technologies. Importantly, in all of the units, students are introduced to the target work environment and provided with ample opportunity to practise patient communication in scenarios that they are likely to encounter in their professional environments. To this end, the coursebook exploits a number of communicative tasks, including role-plays replicating real-life medical interactions in which students practise asking questions, instructing patients, giving advice or explaining procedures. Each unit of English for Radiographers follows a relatively linear sequence beginning with a warm-up activity to activate students’ prior knowledge of specific medical topics, which is followed by reading material and vocabulary work. Most texts or pre-reading activities are complemented by graphic elements, including copies of authentic radiographic images, which encourage learners to both share and expand their knowledge of the content area. Reading comprehension tasks are followed by vocabulary work in which new items are presented in a meaningful context. Lexis-oriented activities not only introduce professional terminology, which is essential within the context of communicating with other healthcare professionals, but they also focus on patient-oriented language. This allows learners to bridge the terminology gap between healthcare professionals and patients and to apply the relevant terms appropriately in clinical practice. Moreover, it is essential to emphasise that the modular structure of English for Radiographers means that the course can be easily adapted to fit different teaching contexts, as trainers can choose thematic units that are most relevant for their students. Significantly, the coursebook concludes with an answer key, which means that it can also be used as a resource for independent study. English for Radiographers is a great resource for improving specialist English language knowledge of learners working in or preparing to enter the world of medical imaging. The greatest strength of the book lies in its careful selection of content, which seems highly relevant and useful in equipping learners with the vocabulary, language and skills that are required when working in radiography. It helps professional and student radiographers to develop the skills and language required in work-related situations, from giving preparation instructions through positioning patients to providing post-procedure information. While the Polish translations of medical terms suggest that the coursebook is primarily intended for Polish speakers, the book’s target audience could extend to a more global one due to the usefulness of the language it presents. Its careful selection of content aimed at preparing learners to perform effectively in a variety of clinical scenarios makes the book a truly 73 BOOK REVIEW Review of “English for Radiographers” valuable title in the medical English landscape. I strongly recommend this coursebook to both students and qualified radiographers seeking to develop the discipline-specific language of medical imaging and the care process. Dr Agnieszka Dudzik, PhD, is an Assistant Professor and Head of the Department of Foreign Languages at the Medical University of Białystok, Poland. Her fields of interest include English for Specific Purposes, Communicative Language Teaching, and the nature of doctorpatient communication. Her research interests lie in the area of English for Medical Purposes (EMP) training, with particular emphasis on the teaching of medical communication skills. Author biography