Reviewing EAP instruction research: What learning transfers, and how far?

1. Mark Andrew James Arizona State University Mark.A.James@asu.edu www.drmjames.info Reviewing EAP instruction research: What learning transfers, and how far?

2. Background • A basic goal of EAP instruction is that students transfer EAP learning to other courses. • Transfer can be difficult to promote. • There is evidence that EAP learning can transfer; but, there is little detail about its circumstances (e.g., what kind, where). • This lack of detail is important because: • ... academic contexts where we expect transfer to occur are complex: Activities may be similar to EAP instruction, or may be very different. • ... the transfer we expect is complex: It can vary in the kind of learning, the impact, and the demand on students.

3. Purpose and procedure • The purpose of this project was to generate a clearer picture of learning transfer in EAP education. • The procedure involved doing a detailed analysis of existing research in EAP contexts. • A tool called the transfer taxonomy was used to analyze the research. • ... this tool was developed about 10 years ago by psychology researchers (Barnett & Ceci); • ... to demonstrate it, they analyzed a collection of transfer studies outside EAP education.

4. The 9-dimension transfer taxonomy (Barnett & Ceci, 2002) • The first 3 dimensions are about the kind of learning transfer: • specificity (e.g., specific facts/procedures vs. general principles) • performance change (i.e., quality/accuracy vs. speed vs. approach) • memory demands (i.e., hints/instructions vs. spontaneous) • The other 6 dimensions are about transfer distance, i.e., whether transfer is near or far in terms of: • knowledge domain (i.e., topics); • physical context (i.e., location, people); • temporal context (i.e., time); • functional context (i.e., purpose, e.g., get grades, make friends); • social context (i.e., collaborative vs. individual); • modality (i.e., format, e.g., multiple choice, essay).

5. The 9-dimension transfer taxonomy (Barnett & Ceci, 2002) • Chen and Klahr (1999) reported that elementary school students were able to transfer an ability to design science experiments. • specificity = general (i.e., a strategy for research design) • performance change = accuracy (i.e., the design has to be correct) • memory demand = low (i.e., students judge an example as good) • knowledge domain = far (i.e., mechanics vs. cooking) • physical context = near (i.e., both in school) • temporal context = far (i.e., test 7 months after teaching) • functional context = near (i.e., both academic) • social context = near (i.e., both individual) • modality = far (i.e., hands-on vs. paper-and-pencil test)

6. Choosing EAP research to analyze • Research that has evidence of transfer from EAP instruction to students’ other courses lacks sufficient detail for the taxonomy. • ... but, research that has evidence of EAP instruction leading to transfer across activities (rather than across courses) does have sufficient detail for the taxonomy. • ... for example, in a study by Halenko and Jones (2011), EAP students who received 6 hours of instruction on strategies for making appropriate requests (e.g., asking for help in a library) transferred that learning to a subsequent discourse completion test. • ... a detailed picture of transfer across activities will improve understanding of where transfer may be expected across courses.

7. Choosing EAP research to analyze • 41 studies were analyzed. These studies: • were conducted in EAP settings; • used experimental or quasi-experimental research designs, and showed that instruction had led to learning that students could demonstrate (i.e., evidence of transfer); • were published in peer-reviewed journals or books; • provided enough detail about the research design that they could be analyzed with the transfer taxonomy.

8. Analyzing the EAP research: An example • In a study by Halenko and Jones (2011), EAP students were able to transfer strategies for making appropriate requests. • specificity = general (i.e., a strategy for making requests) • performance change = quality (i.e., response judged appropriate) • memory demand = high (i.e., open-ended activities) • knowledge domain = near (i.e., both everyday campus life) • physical context = near (i.e., both part of a course) • temporal context = near (i.e., testing immediately after teaching) • functional context = near (i.e., both academic) • social context = far (i.e., collaborative vs. individual) • modality = near (i.e., both open-ended activities)

9. Findings • What kind of transfer occurred? • in 20 studies, transfer was specific (e.g., pronunciation, word knowledge) and in 23 studies it was general (e.g., grammar rules, reading/writing skills); • in 39 studies, transfer involve improvement in accuracy/quality, in 2 studies speed, and in 2 studies approach; • in 20 studies, low memory demands, and in 33 studies, high memory demands. • How far was the transfer? • across the 41 studies, far transfer occurred most with modality (50%), temporal context (29%), social context (20%), knowledge domain (17%), physical context (17%), functional context (0%); • 17% of studies had no far transfer, 68% had far transfer on 1 or 2 dimensions, and the rest had far transfer on 3 or 4 dimensions.

10. Interpretation • Instruction can result in transfer with EAP students. • Transfer can involve various learning outcomes (e.g., specific and general). • Transfer can have a positive impact on the quality of students’ work; but, it’s uncertain if transfer can influence the speed of students’ work or the way students approach their work. • Transfer can occur in situations that place minimal demands on students’ memories (i.e., recognition), but also situations that place greater demands on students’ memories (i.e., recall). • Transfer can occur across varying distances.

11. Implications • Future research might build on these findings by addressing questions such as: • whether general knowledge (e.g., grammar rules, reading/writing strategies) transfers farther than specific knowledge (e.g., phonemes, words); • whether learning transfers when the distance is far on most or all of the taxonomy’s dimensions. • Educators might build on these findings by (a) designing EAP instruction to be similar to students’ other courses in as many ways as possible, and (b) being cautious about expecting transfer when EAP instruction differs from target contexts in numerous ways.

12. ... thank you! • Feel free to contact me with any remaining questions/comments: Mark.A.James@asu.edu • Presentation recording and slides can be downloaded at: www.drmjames.info