Tahereh Movahhedi; Amir Sarkeshikian; Mohammad Golshan
Abstract
Although critical English for academic purposes (CEAP) has grown theoretically, more research is needed to explore it in more depth. This sequential mixed-methods study primarily aimed to examine whether the CEAP and traditional English for academic purposes (EAP) have different impacts on Iranian university ...
Read More
Although critical English for academic purposes (CEAP) has grown theoretically, more research is needed to explore it in more depth. This sequential mixed-methods study primarily aimed to examine whether the CEAP and traditional English for academic purposes (EAP) have different impacts on Iranian university students' English reading comprehension, and (if yes) whether it is discipline-specific. This study also intended to explore how traditional EAP students’ preferences aligned with the CEAP principles. To this end, a sample of 100 Iranian university students of computer sciences and architecture with intermediate level of English proficiency was initially selected through convenience sampling. They were then randomly assigned to two control groups and two experimental groups, consisting of 25 participants each. Then, two piloted researcher-made reading tests were administered to all groups as a pre-test. The experimental computer sciences and architecture groups were taught using the CEAP pedagogy. Hence, the syllabus was negotiated based on the CEAP principles. The control computer sciences and architecture groups received the traditional EAP as their placebos. They were taught the curricular textbooks. After the treatment, all groups were asked to complete their posttests. Two-way ANOVA results indicated that the CEAP groups significantly outperformed the traditional EAP groups on the posttests. It was also found that the effect of the CEAP pedagogy was not discipline-specific. Additionally, the results of qualitative data analysis revealed a lack of preference for the traditional EAP programs among the interviewees in favor of the CEAP. Implications are offered for EAP teachers, students, and material developers.
Reza Bagheri Nevisi; Mahmood Safari; Rasoul Mohammad Hosseinpur; Reyhaneh Mousakazemi
Abstract
Recent research favors specific academic word lists over a general academic word list for preparing university students to read and publish academic papers in English. Although researchers have developed word lists for various disciplines, some academic fields do not enjoy a well-developed technical ...
Read More
Recent research favors specific academic word lists over a general academic word list for preparing university students to read and publish academic papers in English. Although researchers have developed word lists for various disciplines, some academic fields do not enjoy a well-developed technical word list. The present study aimed at developing and evaluating a specific academic word list for political sciences. A 3.5-million-word corpus of political sciences research articles was created and analyzed in order to develop the Politics Academic Word List (PAWL). The list consists of 2000 word families which were selected across and beyond the BNC/COCA word list based on frequency and range criteria. The word families enjoying an aggregate frequency of a hundred or more in the corpus and a minimum frequency of 10 in at least four of the seven sub-corpora were incorporated into the word list. The PAWL accounted for over 88% of the running words in the Politics Academic Corpus (PAC) and outperformed the list of GSL plus AWL words in coverage by 3 percent, despite containing 556 fewer word families. The study corroborates the value of a subject specific word list as a more fruitful source for academic vocabulary learning. Pedagogical implications and suggestions for further research are discussed.
