maintenance procedures Professional Ethics and Attitudes
- Show communicative skills and adaptable knowledge in English with regard to the varied communication situations at sea.
- Consider advantages and drawbacks
with different refrigerants, when, for example, converting to a new refrigerant
- Compare and evaluate different
maintenance strategies
6. Correctly interpret operating manuals; describe an onboard procedure.
8. Notify appropriate parties of repairs.
1) Model Course 7.02: 1.1.3 Operating principles of ship power installations and refrigeration 2) Model Course 7.02: 1.1.1 Thermodynamics and heat transmission
3) Model Course 7.02: 1.2.2 Operation and maintenance of auxiliary machinery, including auxiliary boiler plant 4) Model Course 7.02: 3.1.1 Organize safe maintenance and repair procedures
5) Model Course 7.02: 1.1.4 Physical and chemical properties of fuels and lubricants 6) Model Course 7.02: 1.2.1 Operation and maintenance of marine diesel engines
4. Conclusions
An internationally successful maritime training requires improved ME pedagogies applying to, as we can see, three main conditions all of which not entirely surprising, clutching into the concept of contextualization:
1. The currently theoretical teaching approach to Maritime English must take a more practical, multidimensional, context-based orientation specific for the profession, based on relevant maritime contexts and professional communities and easily recognizable for the students.
2. Language and technical content instructors and professionals need to collaborate not only nationally but also internationally, in order to join competencies in the design of relevant teaching and learning environments, which contextualize STCW requirements and motivate students.
3. MET institutions need to contextualize Maritime English teaching and learning activities to promote a lifelong transformative approach to learning processes and transferable knowledge applicable in multidimensional maritime environments.
Globally compatible MET programmes can be developed if we can match graduate attributes laid down in internationally aligned programme aims and objectives. For this, language and content instructors must align their teaching (Biggs, 2009), not only within the programme, not only across curricula, but across borders, when constructing contextual learning, creatively transferring and transforming pedagogical, technical and cultural conceptions for the benefit of a strong professional identity specific for the maritime setting. The currently engaging academic discourse with regard to these aspects encourages such collaboration and the Chalmers example shows that cross-curricular integration at programme level is not only possible, but also appreciated filling the conditions of a contextual teaching and learning perspective. This does not, however, fill the gap between theory and practice and the accountability of globally compatible ME training lies, unfortunately, not solely in the progressively aligned aims and objectives of one MET institution. Instructors must therefore find means to balance variation and facilitate collaboration and support cross borders, so that ME pedagogies can grow in the international environment that will engage our students in their professional life.
References:
1. Biggs J, Thang C (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University 3rd edition. Maidenhead: McGraw- Hill/Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press
2. Bloom B S (ed.) (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, the classification of educational goals – Handbook I: Cognitive Domain New York: McKay
3. Bolhuis S (2003). Towards process oriented teaching for self-directed lifelong learning: a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) [327-347] [www.elsevier.com/locate/learninstruction] 4. Bryman A (2004). Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press
5. Byram et al (2001). Developing Intercultural Competence in Practice. Multilingual Matters. Limited
6. Carlsson C J (2010). International Student Collaboration on Culture and Communication. Proceedings of the 18th Conference of Maritime Lecturers’ Association. Shanghai 2010.
7. Cole C. et al (2007). Maritime English Instruction – ensuring instructor’s competence. Ibérica 14 (2007). [123-148]
8. Cole C, Trenkner P (2009). The Yardstick for Maritime English STCA assessment purposes. IAMU Journal 6 (1), [13-28]. Tokyo: IAMU.
9. Cole C, Trenkner P (2010). Raising the Maritime English Bar: the STCW Manila Amendments and their impact on maritime English. Proceedings Maritime English Conference IMEC 22, [3-16]. Alexandria: Arab Academy for Science, Technology and Maritime Transport.
10. Crawley, E., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., & Brodeur, D. (2007). Rethinking Engineering Education: the CDIO approach. New York: Springer
11. Demirel E, Ziarati R (2010) Cadets views on undergoing maritime education and training in English. Proceedings of the 18th Conference of Maritime Lecturers’ Association. Shanghai 2010.
12. Dublin Descriptors (2004). European Union Education and Culture. Lifelong Learning Programme. Bologna Process. National Framework of Qualifications. Draft 1.31 Joint Quality Initiative informal group.
13. Eliasson J, Gabrielli A (2011). Language taught as language used: integrating Maritime English in the teaching of Mechanical Engineering. Proceedings International maritime English Conference IMEC23, [114- 119]. Constanta: Constanta Maritime University
14. Esin H, Boryana G (2009). Maritime English Teaching Approach. Proceedings International Science Conference 2009. ”Economics and Society development on the Base of Knowledge” Bulgaria *6-8] Volume V Nautical & Environmental Studies
15. Illeris K, (2007). Lärande. Lund: Studentlitteratur
16. Gustafsson M (2011). Academic literacies approaches for facilitating language for specific purposes. Ibérica 22, 2011 [101-122]
17. Kreber C (2002). Teaching Excelence, Teaching Expertise and the Scholarship of Teaching. Innovative Higher Education Vol 27 Nr 1 Fall 2002 [5-23]
18. Pritchard B (2011). On some aspects of mobility teaching Maritime English. Proceedings International maritime English Conference IMEC23, [5-16]. Constanta: Constanta Maritime University
19. Rust C (2002). The Impact of Assessment on Student Learning. Active Learning in Higher Education 2002 - 3 [ 145]. SAGE Publications [http://alh.sagepub.com]
20. Short V A (2006). Maritime English valuing a common language. The Journal of the Nautical Institute October 2006. Supplement to Seaways.
21. Trenkner P (2010). The need to mind your language. Nautilus International Telegraph February 2010 [27] [nautilus.org]
22. Van Kluijven P (2009). Speaking up for seafarers. Nautilus International Telegraph December 2009 [31] [nautilus.org]
23. Wenger E (1998). Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning and Indentity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Author’s Bio-Note
Annamaria Gabrielli – MSc in Education, lecturer at Chalmers University of Technology, Centre for Language and Communication, teaching Maritime English at the Marine Engineering Programme since 2009, chiefly involved in the development of integrated courses upholding the improvement of constructive alignment. Cecilia Gabrielii – PhD in Chemical Engineering, lecturer at Chalmers University of Technology, teaching at the Marine Engineering Programme at the Department of Shipping and Marine Technology, supervisor of the PhD project in the area of Maritime Energy System Modelling.
Henrik Pahlm – MSc in Shipping and Marine Technology. Chief Engineer. Lecturer at Chalmers University of Technology, teaching at the Marine Engineering Programme at the Department of Shipping and Marine
Cardeño A. Ralph, Consolacion C. Unabia, Don Vicente C. Real Negros Oriental State University Republic of the Philippines