Polysemy and context: teachers' classroom language for understanding physical science

[摘要] A debate in South Africa on learner performance in Physical Science inevitably leads to theissue of proficiency in the language of learning and teaching (LoLT). The researcher is of theopinion that general understanding of the meaning of proficiency in LoLT usually refers tothe ability to read and write well in that language which happens to be English in the majorityof South African high schools. As low as 7% of the South African school going populationregard themselves as English speaking (Department of Basic Education, 2010). The status ofEnglish as lingua franca has caused parents and teachers to believe that it is in the interest oflearners to be taught in English (Wildsmith-Cromarty & Gordon, 2009). This view resultedthat the debate on proficiency includes amongst others, opinions of those who propagatehome language teaching and those who call for English as the preferred medium ofinstruction.This research contributes to the debate on proficiency by pointing to the important contributionthat the science teacher can make to enculturate learners into the language of school science. Thefact that both English First Additional Language learners (EFALs) as well as English HomeLanguage learners (EHLs) struggle to understand Physical Science (Probyn, 2015) is indicative ofthe important role that the science teacher can play in assisting learners to understand PhysicalScience. In lieu of this, teachers are encouraged to focus on vocabulary building as well as themanner in which LoLT is employed to construe science knowledge. This is a functional viewof language, namely, that language is used to convey a particular meaning hence the languagediffers across registers. Michael Halliday (1993) is credited for the development of a systemicfunctional linguistic view on language.This study analysed two teachers’ classroom languages from a Systemic FunctionalLinguistic (SFL) perspective with specific emphasis on the register variables field and mode.Results show that LoLT was perceived as transparent when learners are EHLs and considereda barrier to learning Physical Science if learners are EFALs. In both cases, teachers seemedunable to enculturate learners into the language of school science when used to conveyscience meaning. An absence of that focus is what Bernstein called an 'invisible pedagogy

[发布机构] University of the Witwatersrand