LAC presentation

1. Language
Across the Curriculum
30 March 2021

2. PRESENTERS
 Dr Hanlie Dippenaar, senior lecturer (IP & SPFET), Dept of
English, Faculty of Education, CPUT
 Prof An de Moor – Language policy advisor University of
Leuven (Brussels), University of Applied Sciences Odisee,
policy advisor to the Flemish Minister of Education, Belgium
 Ms Linda Manashe, Courseware Developer, Centre for
Innovative Educational Technology (CIET), CPUT
 Dr Candice Livingston - Research coordinator, senior
lecturer, Faculty of Education, CPUT, SA Project leader
‘Training the Teachers of the Future: Language Policy and
Literacy Development ’
 Mrs Elma Fleischmann, Math Literacy lecturer (SPFET) ,
Faculty of Education, CPUT

3.  Hanlie Dippenaar – Welcome and background to the
project
 An de Moor – Language policy and Language across
the Curriculum
 Linda Manashe – Multilingual glossaries
 Candice Livingston – Research in the project
 Elma Fleischmann - Practical application in the Maths
classroom
 Hanlie Dippenaar - Concluding comments
 Q & A
PROGRAMME

4. Training the Teachers of the Future: Language
Policy and Literacy Development
• International collaborative project CPUT x Howest
(Prof Johan Anker & Gerti Wouters)
• Five HEIs: University of Gent, University of Applied
Sciences in Odisee , Howest Hogeschool,
(Belgium), CPUT, UWC (Dept of Linguistics - PhD
student)
• Develop a comprehensive programme for the
integration of Language across the curriculum
(LAC) and Disciplinary Literacy (DL) in B Ed
programme
• An de Moor provided training for whole programme

5. Rationale
• Language Across the Curriculum (LAC),
Disciplinary Literacy (DL) for teaching every
subject across the curriculum.
• No language effectively learnt without a context.
• Language and content closely interrelated.
• Teachers use language to explain concepts and
content to learners.
• Learners use language to internalise and
demonstrate the knowledge they have acquired
(Lucas, 2011).

6. Background
• HELTASA 2020
• An exploratory study - Integration of
Language across the curriculum (LAC)
and Disciplinary Literacy (DL)
• Identified needs of lecturers and students
at a Faculty of Education
• Recommendations for the way forward

7. An De Moor - Language policy advisor
30 March 2021
Language
Across the Curriculum

8. An De Moor
1. Introduction
2. Measuring = knowing
3. LDT
8
Framework

9. An De Moor 9
21st century skills: information- & communications society
Impact of language profiency on study success
Gap between daily language use, and academic and professional
language skills (reading, listening, writing and speaking)
Socially diverse student intake
> active support
> inclusive language policy
Why pay attention to language
competences?

10. 90% coverage ratio
Knowing the importance of lexical __, many second language researchers have __ to develop
__ computational methods with which to measure it. Such methods attempt to __ the
practical and theoretical questions about lexical __ common in second language acquisition
and to help better define the construct. Despite these efforts, reliable methods for measuring
lexical __ have been difficult to develop due largely to the number of lexical features inherent
in vocabulary knowledge. __, recent studies that investigated human judgments of lexical __
using computational methods have shown promise. The current study __ these efforts by
using human analytic judgments of lexical __ for common lexical features (e.g. human
judgments of __ accuracy, word frequency, word specificity) to predict __ judgments of lexical
__. Such an analysis can provide a richer understanding of which elements of the lexicon are
most predictive of lexical __ by __ human intuition to assess lexical __ as compared to relying
on computational algorithms. Information __ from such an analysis can inform definitions of
lexical __ and build on previous investigations that have examined this complex construct.
An De Moor 10

11. Knowing the importance of lexical proficiency, many second language researchers have
striven to develop valid computational methods with which to measure it. Such methods
attempt to address the practical and theoretical questions about lexical proficiency
common in second language acquisition and to help better define the construct. Despite
these efforts, reliable methods for measuring lexical proficiency have been difficult to
develop due largely to the number of lexical features inherent in vocabulary knowledge.
Nonetheless, recent studies that investigated human judgments of lexical proficiency
using computational methods have shown promise. The current study furthers these
efforts by using human analytic judgments of lexical proficiency for common lexical
features (e.g. human judgments of collocation accuracy, word frequency, word specificity)
to predict holistic judgments of lexical proficiency. Such an analysis can provide a richer
understanding of which elements of the lexicon are most predictive of lexical proficiency
by tapping into human intuition to assess lexical proficiency as compared to relying on
computational algorithms. Information gleaned from such an analysis can inform
definitions of lexical proficiency and build on previous investigations that have examined
this complex construct.
An De Moor 11
90% coverage ratio

12. How many words do you have to know?
12
Reading goal Coverage
ratio
Demands on
vocabulary
Reading for fun
Detailed understanding
98% 8,000 – 9,000 most
frequent word families
Adequate
understanding of a text
95% 5,000 most frequent
word families
Elke Peters, KU Leuven, Engels in het HO; Nation 2006.
• Highly educated native speakers > 20,000 word families
• In a lesson of 1 hour 8,000 – 10,000 words reach the student!
An De Moor

13. An De Moor 13
Vocabulary knowledge
= predictor for academic success
Strong correlation between vocabulary and
- reading ability / text comprehension
- listening ability / listening comprehension
- writing skills

14. Academic language skills and
achievement
An De Moor 14
Language is the vehicle or
instrument that enables the
understanding of how
knowledge is structured and
how meaning is negotiated
(Van Dyk, 2015)

15. Language policy is essential
Operational targets for:
15

16. An De Moor
1. Introduction
2. Measuring = knowing
3. LDT
16
Framework

17. An De Moor 17
Research KUL: the predictive validity of a
practical, low-stakes, web-based academic
reading and vocabulary screening test
24,781 students of the Association KU Leuven were tested

18. An De Moor 18
Language proficiency of students in
higher education is DECLINING
• De Vries & Van der Westen, 2008; Jansen, 2008; Berckmoes & Rombouts,2009; De
Wachter & Heeren, 2014; van Koeven & Smits, 2016; De Moor & Colpaert, 2019
Weak but significant relation with
study success
• De Wachter & Heeren, 2014
Language test results: conclusion

19. An De Moor 19
BOTTLENECKS

20. 0,0% 10,0% 20,0% 30,0% 40,0% 50,0% 60,0% 70,0% 80,0% 90,0% 100,0%
Foutief gebruik van scheidbare werkwoorden
Foutief gebruik van voornaamwoorden
Foutief gebruik van lidwoorden
Congruentiefouten
Beperkt woordenschatgebruik
Foutief gebruik van voegwoorden
Onaangepast register
Foutief gebruik van voorzetsels
Foutief gebruik van woordtekens
Foutieve meervoudsvorming
Foutieve werkwoordspelling
Fouten open / gesloten lettergreep
Afgebroken zinnen
Weinig afwisseling
Foutieve woordvolgorde
Totale afwezigheid van tekststructuur
Geen alinea's
Gebrek aan basisstructuur
CorrectheidWoordenschatWoordniveauZinsniveau
Tekstniveau
Figuur 1: Gemiddelden per foutencategorie
Top 3
Lack of structure in texts
Inappropriate lang. register
Limited ac. vocabulary
20
Main bottlenecks
Research
Huis van het Nederlands Brussel, VLEKHO, HONIM, VUB, Erasmushogeschool Brussel in 2006-2007
An De Moor

21. In short
An De Moor 21
“The development of the language proficiency of students is the
responsibility of everyone involved in education, and not only from the
language teacher or the student himself. [...]
Moreover, experience has taught us that remediation that is
integrated into the curriculum has a positive effect on the motivation
of the students.”
(Van Houtven & Peeters, 2014); (Hebbrecht, Depoorter, & Delbaere, 2008; Kuiken, 2014;
Beijer, Panday, & Haijer, 2014; Van Gorp & Verheyden, 2005; Cajot, 2014)

22. To conclude
An De Moor 22
"The big gain in recent years is that it is accepted
university-wide that working on language proficiency
[...] is related to the study results.“
(Beijer, Panday, & Haijer, 2014)

23. To conclude
An De Moor 23
"The big gain in recent years is that it is accepted
university-wide that working on language proficiency
[...] is related to the study results.“
(Beijer, Panday, & Haijer, 2014)
Students do no make the transfer between what
they have learned in language classes and what they
need in subject lessons & for their future profession.

24. An De Moor
1. Introduction
2. Measuring = knowing
3. LDT
24
Framework

25. Biggest bottlenecks
1. Missing basic
structure
2. Register errors
3. Limited vocabulary
4. Incorrect use of
prepositions
5. Congressional errors
6. Wrong pronouns and
references
NDN -TOL 03/10/2012

26. Biggest bottlenecks
• Both language and subject
lecturers have to work on this
1. Missing basic
structure
2. Register errors
3. Limited vocabulary
• A task for the language
specialist
4. Incorrect use of
prepositions
5. Congressional errors
6. Wrong pronouns and
references
NDN -TOL 03/10/2012

27. Every lecturer
= a language-conscious lecturer
27
AUCH!
No, you
mean
‘OUCH!’

28. What is LDT?
28
 Attention to spelling or grammar
 Lesson English in a lesson of Mathematics
 Only important for language teachers
 Something extra
... NOT
An De Moor

29. What is LDT?
29
 A teaching methodology
 Important for all subject
lecturers
 Result: better transfer of subject
content (integration)
 Attention to the language of
teaching
 Diversity is the norm
(weak ánd STRONG)
An De Moor

30. 30
An De Moor
Definition of LDT
LDT is a way of teaching in which every
lecturer (including the non-language
lecturer) explicitly plays a role in
stimulating and supervising the process
of language development of students ”
(based on van der Westen, 2009)

31. Context Interaction
Language
support
31
An De Moor
Language Developing Teaching = 3 pillars

32. Context Interactie
Language
support
Main target: integration of content and language
 purposefully looking at the subject with language glasses
 being aware of cognitively demanding language
 working on student language development
32
An De Moor

33. 33
Pillar 1: context
• Connect with prior knowledge
• Connect with the world of students
• Connect with the work field
• Give concrete examples
• Frame lesson in a larger lesson unit
• Create provocative and challenging
environments
An De Moor

34. 34
Pillar 2: interaction
How do students learn in an active way during class?
= This means more than simply asking questions
= Create a safe climate for interaction
= Build in thinking time and concept check
= Make connections explicit, learn how to formulate
thoughts
Deep level learning = writing/talking about the content of a lesson
An De Moor

35. Pillar 3: Language support
35
 What are the language challenges of the lesson?
 Which language skills are expected of the students?
 How are students supported to acquire the course
material and to get started with it?
An De Moor
= Language feedback on applied language learning strategies
= Visual language support
= Language learning strategies
= Clear instructions

36. Pillar 3: Language support
 Schematic representation of subject matter
 Speaking or writing frame, especially for complex
verbal information
An De Moor 36

37. Ensure coordination and mutual reinforcement for a
shared language practice:
• through cross-departmental tasks
• through team teaching and exchange of good
practices, e.g. for the use of abstract instruction
language
• through joint checklists for a common approach and
follow-up of crucial language skills by the entire
teacher team
Effective language stimulation
measures
37
An De Moor

38. An De Moor 38

39. Language conscious team of lecturers
Proficient and motivated students ready for
the linguistic requirements of the academic
and professional field
Students have more study success
An De Moor 39
Results > LDT

40. An De Moor 40

41. Every lecturer
= a language-conscious lecturer
41
AUCH!
No, you
mean
‘OUCH!’

42. An De Moor - International week Odisee
42

43. References
43
• De Wachter, L., Heeren, J., Marx S. & Huyghe, S. (2013). Taal: een noodzakelijke, maar
niet de enige voorwaarde tot studiesucces. De correlatie tussen de resultaten van een
taalvaardigheidstoets en de slaagcijfers bij eerstejaarsstudenten aan de KU Leuven.
Levende Talen Tijdschrift, 14(4), 28-36.
• Hajer, M. & Meestringa, T. (2009). Handboek taalgericht vakonderwijs. Bussum: Coutinho.
• Herelikxa C. & Verhulst S. (2014). Rapport Nederlands in het hoger onderwijs, een
verkennende literatuurstudie naar taalvaardigheid en taalbeleid. Nederlandse Taalunie.
[beschikbaar in pdf].
• Nation, I. (2006). How Large a Vocabulary Is Needed For Reading and Listening? The
Canadian Modern Language Review, 63,1 (September), 59-82.
• Van den Branden K. (2010). Taalbeleid in het hoger onderwijs, In E. Peters & T. Van
Houtven (red.) Taalbeleid in het hoger onderwijs: de hype voorbij? (pp. 213-223). Leuven:
Acco.
An De Moor

44. CPUT Online Multilingual
Glossaries
(CIET & Fundani-Language Unit)
Linda Manashe

45. CPUT Online Multilingual
Glossaries
(CIET & Fundani-Language Unit)
UWC Student Learning and Language Presentation
30 March 2021

46. Outline
• Introduction
• Producing glossaries
• Website accessibility

47. Multilingual Glossaries
• The online MLG project started in 2012 at Fundani (ETU)
• The project aims provide academic support to students.
• Stakeholders involved in the project include: Lecturers, Students, Faculty
Language Coordinators, CPUT Language Specialists, External Linguists, and
Industry Personnel.
• Current online multilingual glossaries: Biotechnology, Ecology, Horticulture,
Microbiology, Nutrition, Sociology, Law of Contracts, Family Law, Maritime
Studies, Architectural Technology, Public Relations, Foundation of Nursing
Practice , Mental Health, Primary Care Psychiatry.

48. Producing Glossaries

49. Website Accessibility
mlg.cput.ac.za

50. Website Accessibility Cont.
mlg.cput.ac.za
English Afrikaans isiXhosa
Legalsubjects
Legalsubjectsarenaturalorjuristic
personsuponwhomthelawhas
conferredlegalpersonality,inother
words,theyarethebearersofrightsandduties.
Regspersoon
Regspersoneisnatuurlikeofjuridiesepersone
aanwiediewetregspersoonlikheidtoegewys
het,met
anderwoorde,hulleisdiedraersvanregteen
pligte.
Oogunyaziwe
Abantunamaqumrhuabanamagunya
abawanikwangumthetho.
Naturalperson
Naturalpersonsareacategoryoflegalsubjects
thatreferstoallhumanbeings.
Natuurlikepersoon
Natuurlikepersoneis’nkategorieregspersone
watnaallemenseverwys.
Abantu
Nguyenawuphinaumntu.
Juristicperson
Juristicpersonsareacategoryoflegalsubjects
thatreferstoassociationsandbodiesother
thanhumanbeings,e.g.:companies.
Juridiesepersoon
Juridiesepersoneis‘nkategorieregspersone
watverwysnaverenigingsenliggamebuiten
mense,
bv.maatskappye.
Amaqumrhu,iimanyanonemibutho
Ngawonawaphinaamaqumrhu,iimanyano
nemibutho,enamagunyaewanikwa
ngumthetho,hayiumntu.

51. Research
• Needs analysis (2018) - 2 X BA students, 2 X MA students
• Interviews, lecture observations and document analysis
• Case studies and focus groups – Skryfhulp, Text Trainer and the
development of checklists, Multilingual Glossaries, Disciplinary literacy
and Disciplinary reading and an E-learning platform for teaching
multilingualism
• PhD – integration of LAC across the curriculum (collaboration between
CPUT, University of Ghent and UWC)
• 1 X M.Ed on the uptake of lecturers
• Development of a LAC manual for staff (will include checklists,
multilingual glossary links and case study scenarios)
• Cross-institutional article development

52. OUTPUTS
• 2 X BA (2018)
• 2 X MA (2018)
• Academic exchange (2018, 2019 and 2020)
• Two articles (2020)
• Four articles in the pipeline
• A symposium (2020)
• Conference attendance (HELTASA 2020)
• Organising an international conference in 2022
• E learning platform for multilingualism
• 4 videos for LAC already created by Odisee for SA use. Aim to make our own
before the end of the project
• A LAC manual for lecturers (translated into the three official languages of
the Western Cape)
• Numerous staff training opportunities throughout the 4 years

53. Disciplinary Literacy
in teaching Mathematical Literacy
Elma Fleischmann

54. Disciplinary Literacy
in teaching Mathematical Literacy
Background – why and what
Mathematical Literacy vs Mathematics
The ‘gap’
Filling the ‘gap’
Way forward

55. Background – Why ML?
Background ML vs Maths The ‘gap’ Filling the ‘gap’ Way forward
Only 24% passed some
form of Maths
•Previously 40% of learners chose
HG or SG Mathematics
•60% of those passed
New Curriculum –
Mathematical Literacy
•Give opportunities to ALL learners
•Every day numeracy (Cell phone
contracts, taxes etc)
•Computers and 21st century

56. Background – What is ML?
Background ML vs Maths The ‘gap’ Filling the ‘gap’ Way forward
basic mathematical content
authentic real-life contexts
familiar and unfamiliar problems
decision making and communication
integrated content and/or problem solving skills

58. The ‘gap’
Background
ML vs
Maths
The
‘gap’
Filling
the ‘gap’
Way
forward
Reading ‘feels’ important
CAPS
•Does not explicitlyrefer to reading or how learnersshouldbe taught to read
•Only ‘reading of’
Diagnostic report 2019 – teachers should:
•Giveattention to terminology
•“Enhance learners’skillsin accuratelyinterpretingspecificquestions and using
informationthat is relevant”

59. Types of text
• Narrative
(Scenario)
• Symbols
• Graphs
• Tables
• Sketches
•
•
Proble
m
Types of text
• Narrative
(Scenario)
• Symbols
• Graphs
• Tables
• Sketches
•
•
Solution
Literacy – gap between problem and solution

60. Types of text
• Narrative
(Scenario)
• Symbols
• Graphs
• Tables
• Sketches
•
•
Problem
Types of text
• Narrative
(Scenario)
• Symbols
• Graphs
• Tables
• Sketches
•
•
Solution
decoding
transfer
meta-
cognition
integration
Literacy – gap between problem and solution

61. Reading – Filling the ‘gap’
• Reading is used to ‘make meaning’ (Duke & Pearson, 2002)
• Making connections between prior knowledge and what is read
(Massey & Riley, 2012)
• Reading and comprehension interconnected (Duke & Carlisle,
2014)
• Subject specific – disciplinary literacy (Anker
, 2020)
• Make learners part of the discourse in the subject (Shanahan &
Shanahan, 2014)
Background ML vs Maths The ‘gap’ Filling the ‘gap’ Way forward

62. Principles
Teaching reading in the content areas
(Billmayer &
Barton, 1998)
Background ML vs Maths The ‘gap’ Filling the ‘gap’ Way forward
Constructivism
Prior
knowledge
Metacognition
Reading AND
writing
Social process

63. What to do? Practically…
• Explicitly modelilng how to read…
• … and what I think while I read
• Giving time for interaction with the text
• Focus on the language of the subject
• Conversation about reading and the implications for
teachers
• Group where professor Johan Anker (reading expert) lead
discussions with subject experts (Art, Education, Life
Sciences, etc.)
z
Background MLvsMaths The‘gap’ Filling the‘gap’ Wayforward

64. Multi-layered Model of Language Development
Provision (the MMLDP) (reference?)
• 1: Universities provide generic essay writing support reading
comprehension strategies.
• 2: Academic Language Learning (ALL) staff in a centralised unit:
generic and/or individual student support in writing of
assignments or addressing specific problem areas.
• 3: Collaboration between ALL staff and discipline specific
lecturers: support through guest lectures, workshops,
development of materials, designing of rubrics, joint research
into subject specific literacy.
• 4: Language integrated into subject discipline content, subject
lecturer trained in generic and specific language skills.
Collaboration of reading specialist and subject lecturer.

65. LEVEL 1 & LEVEL 2
•Scaffold a generic academic reading programme across the
four years of the Bachelor of Education degree.
•Develop multilingual academic vocabulary glossaries in the
content subjects.
•Encourage students to independent practice of LAC skills.
•Generic support to be offered by reading specialists in the
faculty.
•Generic support and individual student support in academic
reading and writing assignments by ALL.
• Addressing specific problem areas of students, eg the
development of academic vocabularies.
•

66. LEVEL 3
•Assist lecturers in development of LAC materials,
designing of rubrics and checklists.
• Joint staff research on discipline specific literacy.
•Focus on LAC and DL as pedagogical methodology in
all content subjects.
•Develop students’ conceptual literacy and discourse
competence in all domains of language use (reading,
writing, listening and speaking).

67. LEVEL 4
•Ongoing Faculty support of lecturers.
•Development of a multilingual LAC programme
integrated into discipline and subject content areas.
•A language development policy across the
curriculum in the Faculty integrated across the four
years of B Ed.
•Link between language, learning and
comprehension explicit and implicit in the
curriculum.

68. ENVISAGED OUTCOME
•Integrated scaffolded generic reading comprehension
strategy programme.
•Staff development in supporting LAC and DL in specific
subject groups with literacy specialists –collaborative
approach.
•Development of multilingual glossaries in all content
subjects across the four years of the Bachelor of
Education degree.
•E - learning platform for multilingualism

69. CONCLUSION
•Multilingual context of Faculty of Education requires
integrated approach to LAC and DC, address academic
language needs of all students.
•Development of sustained LAC and DL in the curricula.
•Extended to LAC as writing strategy.
•Effective integration of LAC in the Faculty of Education.

70. Questions

71. Thank
You