The linguistic challenges faced by students studying language-based subjects e.g. law and history compared to those studying mathematics and physics emerged during my interviews with the student participants.
Abe explained his preference for scientific / mathematical formulae and equations rather than reading and writing English prose. Formulae and equations provide him with helpful scaffolding and context for the lesson. He differentiates between the use of equations and diagrams:
‘I don’t prefer words. …I have bad wid the words I prefer equation, diagram but equation is more precise.’ [Abe. Interview Term 1]
In my classroom observations, I compare the teaching styles employed by two of Abe’s physics teachers:
I noticed that Prof B relied heavily on diagrams to present the models of the complex and abstract topic of Relativity.
Prof A spoke very little but wrote very long and complex equations on the board.
Both were visual constructs not relying on English language. I also reflect on Abe’s comments in our interview:
136 Abe drew a fine distinction between the efficacy of diagrams and the precision of equations (which he preferred because he found them to be more accurate). Abe admitted that he had a problem with English prose and that equations were his preferred method of learning.’
Both physics teachers were using English as a second language. They spoke with strong accents and relied on diagrams and equations to transmit subject content to their students. Their use of written and spoken English was minimal. I also include at this point comments made by Sid’s finance teacher, an Italian national, which are germane to this issue as he discusses the language of mathematics:
‘…when it comes to finance there’s so much that is spoken by equations on a board. Everything is always written down by equations you have on the board. So if you’re missing out on the sentence then that doesn’t really matter because what you have to understand is the flow, the logic flow of the equation’ [Interview: Lecturer 5 /Sid]
He eloquently describes the transmission of information through internationally recognised symbols when he comments ‘…there is so much spoken by equations on a board’ and how ‘…missing a sentence doesn’t really matter’ because the equation provides the ‘flow of logic’ which appears to stand alone and does not require commentary using complex academic English language.
The reliance on equations to explain a mathematical concept was illustrated to perfection by a group of Chinese students whom I observed during this particular class. I comment in my field notes:
Some Chinese students were using their mobile phones to photograph the equations on the board when the teacher had left the room.
137 ‘I’m the messiest person [writing] on the board!’ [Lecturer 5 / Sid]
Wendy comments that the language of mathematics provides a great advantage to the students in understanding the content of the lesson compared to those, like her, who are studying language-based subjects with challenging academic vocabulary:
‘My friend who study something about maths or that kind of thing I think is easier than studying like me because I think it just is the math. …it’s not a difficult vocabulary and they can they can learn from the book and I think they they don’t have any problem with with this thing but for me if you don’t understand in the class it mean you totally don’t understand anything because the lecturer might think different things from the book’ [Wendy: Reflections Term 3]
Supporting the views of Abe and Sid’s finance teacher, Wendy describes how the vocabulary of maths is not challenging and students can refer to the text books. However, she contrasts this with her experience of studying history. She emphasises the importance of understanding the content of the lectures as the teacher might present an alternative interpretation to that depicted in the text book.
I asked Abe whether he had a problem understanding complex scientific vocabulary: ‘Actually no because we already use these vocabulary in Thailand. Like ‘thermion’, ‘black hole’ er er ‘dimension’… everything almost everything is is in this [English] language. We will laugh if someone try to translate it (laugh). Some people that make Thai dictionary they try to translate that [Scientific] word and we think “what, it doesn’t make sense” (laugh). [Abe: Reflections. Interview Term 3]
In this excerpt, Abe illustrates how prior knowledge of specialist scientific vocabulary is a great advantage. Many of the scientific terms are used globally and Abe is already familiar with them from his education in Thailand. He laughs when he refers to attempts to produce a dictionary of scientific terms translated into Thai ‘…it doesn’t make sense’.
138 Later, in the same interview, Abe provides a clear example of how he finds the symbolic nature of mathematics helpful in understanding the content of a lecture and how using academic English is not challenging:
‘In this field it doesn’t matter much for for English for if you know equation you know mathematics that’s all. I can say I sometime I don’t get what professor say but but with the equation and with something he write on the board oh ok …I know what he mean. …The language you you use in the course, as you saw, it it just ….‘thus’, ‘therefore’ and the that kind of word not complicate stuff.’ [Abe: Reflections. Interview Term 3]
Abe refers to physics lectures I had observed. He explains how simple terms such as ‘thus’ and ‘therefore’ are used to link strings of equations. He comments that he finds the academic English easy and agrees in the interview that the context provided by the equations makes understanding this abstract topic easier.
In my field notes I comment that although the academic language might be ‘simple’ the subject content is abstract and complex. Abe reinforces this view by commenting on the exclusivity of the ‘language of physics’ which is not shared by ‘the others’:
‘It’s physics language … if the people outside area come to read this tech … it’s aliens language. But for us it’s just normal language, everyone know that yeh’. [Abe: Reflections. Interview Term 3]
This view of an exclusive ‘alien language’ is supported by Morgan (1998: 90) who addresses the inclusion of symbols in academic texts as ‘…one way in which the author claims authority as an expert member of the mathematical community’ and ‘…as with the use of specialist vocabulary …there is an assumption that the reader will be a member of the same community, sharing the ability to interpret the symbolic language’.
139 Abe’s physics teacher also supports this view of Abe’s ‘alien language’ during our
interview:
‘…we speak our own language and er we only understand each other (laugh). It’s much easier to express er the erm the ideas using the blackboard than to speak to them [students].’ [Lecturer 02 Physics /Abe]
I comment in my field notes on my interview with Abe:
Abe refers to his familiarity with the technical language of physics which to others may seem like an alien language! He seems to segregate the physics community from ‘people outside area’ because of their [scientific] ‘foreign language’!
He finds academic science language familiar but has difficulty with other forms of written English. Does Abe relish the exclusivity of the scientific community with its ‘alien language’? The use of ‘alien’ may imply a removal from the norm /standard. Is he possibly, in a fanciful way, comparing himself (as a physicist) to an extra-terrestrial exotic being set apart from lesser/primitive inhabitants of earth / within the university community?’
His phrase ‘but for us’ refers to the select group of scientists with which Abe identifies. In effect, Abe identifies with and inhabits two minority groups or cultures within the university community; the physics group who study this particular abstract topic and the ethnic minority Thai student group.