Research Paper
Discourse Analysis
Ali Akbar Farahani; Ali Geravand
Abstract
Having active participation in today’s more universally-networked research community through publishing in valid English journals has become delicate for the most populated contemporary users of English as a foreign language known as ‘ESP writers. This challenge is typically experienced in ...
Read More
Having active participation in today’s more universally-networked research community through publishing in valid English journals has become delicate for the most populated contemporary users of English as a foreign language known as ‘ESP writers. This challenge is typically experienced in ESP authors’ variation in employing the generic move patterns in the overall structure of the academic research articles (RAs) ‘Conclusions’ sections, probably caused by heterogeneity in ‘English’ across the authors’ discipline-specific fields of expertise. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to analyze the organizational moves/steps of the RAs ‘conclusions’ to examine any significant difference/s in the discipline-specific authors’ writing styles in terms of the ‘type’ and ‘frequency’ of the moves/steps under study. To this end, 160 randomly selected RAs conclusions (RACs) from eight academic disciplines equally representing the hard sciences and soft sciences, were comparatively analyzed based on a conflated ESP move analysis model of Yang and Allison (2003), and Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008). The results of the study obtained from the Frequency counts, Chi-square tests and the Effect Size measure revealed statistically significant differences between the frequency of moves/steps of the RACs in both discipline-specific groups of sciences; in addition, it was found that generic move patterns of the RACs did not strictly follow the proposed model. However, Pedagogical and practical implications along with suggestions for further studies are presented.
Research Paper
Teacher Education
Kiyana Zhaleh; Hamed Zandi
Abstract
Classroom justice, an under-investigated topic in language education, has been brought under focus in this study. Employing a qualitative research design, we took conceptual metaphor as both the theoretical framework and data analysis tool. Accordingly, 51 Iranian English as a foreign language (EFL) ...
Read More
Classroom justice, an under-investigated topic in language education, has been brought under focus in this study. Employing a qualitative research design, we took conceptual metaphor as both the theoretical framework and data analysis tool. Accordingly, 51 Iranian English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers were selected via snowball sampling to express their beliefs about (in)justice by creating a metaphor/simile. The aim was to discover EFL teachers’ conceptualization of metaphors of classroom (in)justice. The participants took a metaphor completion task (e.g., classroom justice is like …… because ……). Data analysis involved gathering, inductively coding, and classifying linguistic metaphors. Three elements were identified for each response, namely, the topic, vehicle, and ground. Then, conceptual categories were formed based on thematically grouping vehicles. Findings indicated reflection of the multidimensional conceptualization of classroom justice based on the organizational justice theory in many created metaphors; reference to emotional, psychological, and learning consequences of (in)justice in many other metaphors; and many pairs of opposite metaphors. These findings have implications for teacher education programs to employ metaphor as a useful tool to promote teachers’ reflection about classroom (in)justice; raise awareness of second/foreign language (L2) teachers about both issues of justice and injustice and their potential consequences for students’ wellbeing and educational outcomes; and train teachers for practical strategies of implementing justice principles in the instructional context as a way to address their professional development needs for becoming a quality L2 teacher and acting fairly in classroom.