Individual needs |
Testing
|
University Context |
Programs/Access/
Support
|
Program Needs
Prof. & T.A.
|
Professor Attitude |
Student Attitude |
Time |
Technical vocabulary
Feedback
Time (processing, use, application)
Integration (C2 vs. socialization)
Language vs. academic environment -integration
-strategic |
Background
Diagnostic -
(strategic + language in technical communications L1/L2)
H.S. -- L2 students have no place to go.
-- L1have no language support
Filter out -
Queens’ – L1 and L2 take English lang. test
-- How does it work?
Admission requirements (access)– TOEFL versus EAP and ESP and high school |
Class size:
- large (Carleton)
- small (Queen’s)
80 (Queen’s) vs. 320 (Carleton)
- Carleton attrition 320/24
Profs. – heavy workload
(need to be cloned into 6 to go to “TA lab to set the tone”)
Prof. - noticing C's in class correlate with students from particular culture
Carleton – 2 nd choice university after Toronto vs. Queen’s – 90’s average
Carleton- provides positive support (E.g.; ESL, EAP, Engineering Communication course, WTS)
Queen’s-lack of support |
EAP, ESP
Mothering, gender (female) – time
Discipline Specific
Male dominated
Strategies + language development
Logical connections-academic
success/ background
Critical thinking –EAP (self-evaluation/
reflections)
Making sense
Opinions- C2
Compensatory strategies – only work at a certain level of language
Coop -- 3-tier system:
- coop students (super bright)
- L1 students
- L2 students |
Prof. needs:
- many presentations, reports, group work
TA issues – NNS; gender; flexibility to hire TA's
- Diagnostic test
- H.S. student support
Technical course (vocabulary)
Intro to Communications for L2 students (terminology and technical knowledge)
Engineering Communication course - 1 st year vs. 4 th year
needs/ requirements
- in 4 th year shy, use presentations.
L1 & L2 interaction
Feedback |
Help (welcome students) vs. “Sink or Swim” (don't help students) philosophy
Importance of communication (workplace)
High Road (more presentations, visits to classes) vs. Low Road.
Compensate for low language skills with marks (Queen's) |
Hardworking – L2 students
Motivated vs. lazy students
Strategic vs. non-strategic L2
Frustration
Stress
Anger
Uncomfortable presenting
L1 students’ expectations change over time
L2 students-thankful for what learned later
“’TAs expectations” – bias, gender, L2, C2
“Expectations”
L2 students who have the language think they do need the Engineering Communication course (Carleton) |
Cost
Feedback
Increased interaction
Speed (critical in academic success)
- Coop
- Small classes
- processing with EAP & Communications
L2 students need more time
Scaffolding -- Teachers/
Professors need to scaffold for L2 students
Technical Course |
