Joining up the dots

1. Developing an institution-wide framework to support international students’ acquisition of academic literacies • anneli.williams@glasgow.ac.uk • Joining up the dots

2. http://www.littlethings.com/house-mall-highway-refuse-move/ • Our home in Central Services

4. http://assets.inhabitat.com/wpcontent/blogs.dir/1/files/2012/03/DSC_0084.jpghttp://assets.inhabitat.com/wpcontent/blogs.dir/1/files/2012/03/DSC_0084.jpg • The move to SMLC

5. http://www.mymodernmet.com/profiles/blogs/do-ho-suh-bridging-homehttp://www.mymodernmet.com/profiles/blogs/do-ho-suh-bridging-home • It could have been worse

7. Student Learning Service inundated with students with language needs • Academic staff reluctant to take on international students – impact on recruitment (?) • Increase in number of international students facing disciplinary action for cheating (?) • Outcry following attempts to remove bilingual dictionaries from exam rooms • A crisis emerges…

8. What is UoG currently offering? • What are other Russell Group Universities doing? • What do international students think they need? • What do support staff think is needed? • What do academic teaching/lecturing staff think is needed? • EAS is asked to investigate

9. Jones, Bonanno & Scouller (2001) • An ALL model for reference

10. What is the UoG currently offering? • Document analysis • What are other Russell Group – and BALEAP accredited - Universities offering? • Websearch (36 institutions) • What do international students, support staff & academic teaching staff think is needed? • Focus groups • Methodology

11. Resource for in-sessional teaching declines through academic year: from 6.5 FTE in semester one to 0.5 in spring to 0.0 in summer • Resource for credit-bearing vs optional support roughly 4:1 • Credit-bearing provision highly regarded & well attended provided it is compulsory • Uptake of optional credit-bearing provision declines over time but students who remain enrolled experience the course as useful • Analysis of our current provision

12. Students respond more favourably to writing and listening skills instruction that is related to their discipline than to instruction that is more ‘generic’ in nature • Students respond favourably to ‘generic’/mixed discipline classes in speaking and pronunciation

13. Most Universities deliver support via a ‘Language Centre’ or EAS equivalent unit • 1/3 provide credit-bearing options • 1/3 of the universities surveyed offer both academic support to all students & in-sessional support for non-native speakers through a single service • These institutions offer a wider range of options (both generic and college/programme-specific) in a greater variety of formats than the average on offer across the 36 institutions surveyed • Analysis of provision elsewhere

14. Wide variation in the number of generic options provided (0 – 40+) with an average 4 to 5 • Most institutions offer some version of the basic skills based template used at UoG, but there is a wide variety of other options branching off from this • Differentiated by level of study: 1/3 fairly comprehensive; 1/3 offered a more limited selection of options by level of study, with additional specific provision for PGR students a common feature • Those who offer fewer generic options tend to focus on delivery for and within subject areas • Generic options

15. Most universities (33 of the 36) offer some form of subject-specific English language support. • 8-10 universities structure options broadly by faculty or college. • Remainder specify options relating to specific programmes of study or a mix of faculty/college based options plus options integrated within specific programmes of study. • Adjunct/Integrated/Embedded

16. About half offer workshops • The majority (32) offer courses • The majority (29) offer some form of one-to-one • Most common pattern of delivery was a combination of courses and one-to-one tutorials (offered by 15) • followed by provision delivered via all three formats effectively allowing students to build a bespoke programme for themselves (12) • Format of delivery

17. Everyone else is doing it better! • Other institutions offer more English language support provision • It’s more discipline specific • It’s more integrated • It’s more flexible • Key message?

18. 21 Students • 9 PGRs and 12 PGTs • Students from all four colleges • 10 nationalities • 10 Support staff • Director of Teaching & Learning service • Effective Learning Advisors & International Student Learning Officers • Subject librarian • Marketing, Recruitment & Internationalisation rep • 16 Lecturing staff • All levels & colleges represented • Deans of L & T • Focus group participants

19. What do you know about the kind of English language support that is available at the University? • What do international students need most help with? • What is the best way of delivering English language support? • What do you think helps or prevents international students from accessing English language support services? • Focus group questions

20. All three groups consulted were broadly in support of the following points: • More support for English language development is required. • Existing learning support provision needs to be better coordinated. • Information about services should be presented in a more coherent manner through a variety of channels. • A variety of modes of delivery should be used: courses of varying length, workshops, one-to-one tutorials and online resources. • Focus group findings

21. Sufficient differences among the needs of students in the four Colleges to warrant differentiation of EAP support by College • Courses and workshops need to be scheduled to fit around students’ other commitments. • English for Academic Purposes (EAP) provision should be made available to all students. • Better integration of home and international students could be achieved via support for student lead ‘third space’ activities.

22. UoGstaff also highlighted the need for: • Clearer communication with staff, current students and prospective students re: • level of English language proficiency represented by the students’ entry score • amount of further study required • level of proficiency that can be realistically achieved. • Institutional commitment to adapting practices to ensure that all students and staff have the skills to communicate in a multicultural environment.

23. Replace the existing ‘generic’ courses with provision more tailored to the needs of students in each College by appointing an ‘Academic English Development Advisor’ (AEDA) for each College. • AEADs to develop and deliver EAP services in liaison with Student Learning Service, subject librarians and subject academics. • AEDAs to be situated in the Student Leaning Service to work alongside Effective Learning Advisors to develop and deliver a mix of provision, including one-to-one tutorials and online resources, with a focus on integrating provision within courses and programmes where possible. • Recommendations

24. To promote intercultural communication skills and student engagement appoint an ‘International Student Engagement’ officer (1.0 FTE) to support the development of networks and events for both home and intentional students. • Duties could include: • delivering workshops on intercultural communication • working with student volunteers to devise activities recognised via HEAR • providing support for SRC initiatives including Conversational English Project and Culture Club • developing peer-assisted study support (PASS) • providing guidance and training for peer-proof readers

25. Yes, we need in-sessional provision that is • More discipline-specific • More integrated • More flexible • But what we really need is… • Key message?

26. ...a more integrated learning community! http://parabuild.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/building-houses.html

27. Becher, T. (1994). The Significance of Disciplinary Differences. Studies in Higher Education, 19(2), pp. 151-161. • Briguglio, C., & Watson, S. (2014). Embedding English language across the curriculum in higher education: A continuum of development support. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 37(1), pp. 67-74. • Dunworth, K., Drury, H., Kralik, C. and Moore, T. (2014). Rhetoric and Realities: On the development of university-wide strategies to promote student English language growth. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 36 (5), pp. 520-532. • Dunworth, K. (2013). In-course student English language development. In Five years on: English language competence of international students (pp. 52–74). Outcomes Report June 2013. Discussion Paper 2. Australian Education International and International Education Association of Australia. Retrieved from https://www.ieaa.org.au/documents/item/54 • Fenton-Smith, B., & Humphreys, P. (2015). Language specialists' views on academic language and learning support mechanisms for EAL postgraduate coursework students: The case for adjunct tutorials. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, pp. 40-55. • References

28. Goldingay, S., Hitch, D., Ryan, J., Farrugia, D., Hosken, N., Lamaro, G., Macfarlane, S. (2014). "The university didn't actually tell us this is what you have to do": Social inclusion through embedding of academic skills in first year professional courses. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(1), pp. 43-53. • Gunn, C., Hearne, S., and Sibthorpe, J. (2011). Right from the start: A rationale for embedding academic literacy skills in university courses. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 8(1) pp. 6-12. • Jones, E., & Killick, D. (2013). Graduate attributes and the internationalized curriculum: Embedding a global outlook in disciplinary learning outcomes. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(2), pp.165-182. • Jones, E., & Killick, D. (2013). Graduate attributes and the internationalized curriculum: Embedding a global outlook in disciplinary learning outcomes. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(2), pp.165-182. • Lea, M. & Street, B. (1997) Perspectives on Academic Literacies: an institutional approach. Swindon: Economic and Social Research Council. • Lea, M. and Street, B. (1998) Student Writing in Higher Education: an Academic Literacies Approach. Studies in Higher Education, 11 (3), pp. 182–199.

29. Northedge, A. (2003). Enabling participation in academic discourse. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(2), 169-180. • Palmer, L., Levett-Jones, T., Smith, R., & McMillan, M. (2014). Academic literacy diagnostic assessment in the first semester of first year at university. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(1), pp. 67-78. • Sheridan, V. (2011). A holistic approach to international students, institutional habitus and academic literacies in an Irish third level institution. Higher Education, 62(2), pp.129-140. • Wingate, U. (2007). A framework for transition: Supporting ‘Learning to learn’ in higher education. Higher Education Quarterly, 61(3), pp. 391-405. • Uhrig, K. (2012) Business and legal case genre networks: two case studies. English for Specific Purposes, 3(2), pp.127-136. • Wingate, U. (2007). A framework for transition: Supporting ‘Learning to learn’ in higher education. Higher Education Quarterly, 61(3), pp. 391-405.