Open Collections

UBC Graduate Research

Towards a systemic functional model for improving adult EAP students' academic lecture comprehension Gradin, Christopher P. Aug 31, 2011

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
42591-Gradin_C_LLED_Grad_Paper_2011.pdf [ 12.52MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 42591-1.0077994.json
JSON-LD: 42591-1.0077994-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 42591-1.0077994-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 42591-1.0077994-rdf.json
Turtle: 42591-1.0077994-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 42591-1.0077994-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 42591-1.0077994-source.json
Full Text
42591-1.0077994-fulltext.txt
Citation
42591-1.0077994.ris

Full Text

TOWARDS A SYSTEMIC FUNCTIONAL MODEL FOR IMPROVING ADULT EAP STUDENTS' ACADEMICLECTURE COMPREHENSIONbyCHRISTOPHER P. GRADIN B.A.,. University of British Columbia, 2008 A GRADUATING PAPER SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF EDUCATIONInTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Language & Literacy EducationWe accept this Graduating Paper as conforming To the required standardTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August, 20111ContentsAcknowledgements............................................................................................................................. 3Chapter 1: A Review of the Literature............................................................................................... 4The Problem......................................................................................................................................... 4L2 Listening Comprehension................................................................................................................5Academic L2 Listening.......................................................................................................................... 6Genre Theory...................................................................................................................................... 11Genre Theory in Three Traditions......................................................................................................12Systemic Functional Linguistics..........................................................................................................13Register in SF L ..................................................................................................................................... 14Genre in SF L ........................................................................................................................................ 17The Genre of Academic Lectures.......................................................................................................17Pedagogical Implications.....................................................................................................   19Chapter 2: Discourse Analysis & Pilot Study.................................................................................... 20Pilot Study............................................................................................................................................20The Knowledge Framework............................................................................................................... 20Participants..........................................................................................................................................22Situations.............................................................................................................................................23Procedures...........................................................................................................................................24Pre-Test..........................................................................................................................................25Instructional session 1 ...................................................................................................................25Instructional session 2 ...................................................................................................................25Post-Test........................................................................................................................................ 27Chapter 3: Results.............................................................................................................................. 28Data Analysis..................................................................................................................................28Pre-Test Results.............................................................................................................................28Post-Test Results........................................................................................................................... 29Topical Knowledge Rubric.............................................................................................................31Feedback & Questionnaire................................................................................................................. 35Chapter 4 ............................................................................................................................................ 37Difficulties & Limitations....................................................................................................................37Conclusions..........................................................................................................................................38References...........................................................................................................................................40Appendix A .........................................................................................................................................43Appendix B ..........................................................................................................................................45Appendix C ..........................................................................................................................................46Appendix D ..........................................................................................................................................50Appendix E ..........................................................................................................................................54Appendix F ..........................................................................................................................................612AcknowledgementsSo many people assisted in this project that it would be impossible to thank them all; however, I would like to give special note of thanks to:- ■ Lee Gunderson for his tremendous support. This study would not have been completed without his guidance and encouragement.Dianne Fouladi for her infectious enthusiasm for TESL, and her constant support in both my academic and professional pursuits.Bill McMichael for his mentorship and friendship.Ling Shi for her encouragement and feedback on my writing.Maureen Kendrick for offering advice when I needed it most.Ryuko Kubota for teaching me to see my role as a professional educator from important perspectives.Margot Filipenko for her supportive feedback and input on the importance of genres.Michael Galli for his sound advice, both professional and personal.My professors, classmates, and colleagues for creating an engaging, challenging community of practice.My students present and past from whom I have learned so much.Finally, my parents, Akiko and Larry, for their enduring support and patience.3Chapter 1 IntroductionIn this chapter I will discuss the difficulties international students face as a consequence of current models within post-secondary education. Following this, I will explore the literature on L2 listening and Academic L2 listening comprehension. Finally, I will give an overview of Genre Theory and look at the potential benefits of using a Systemic Functional linguistics approach to explicitly teaching genre conventions for adult EAP students' lecture listening comprehension.The ProblemFor a great number of EFL students, successfully meeting the requirements of high-stakes gateway tests, such as TOEFL or IELTS, evokes a sense of security that they have developed the communicative competence necessary to be competitive members of academic communities where English is the language of instruction. Unfortunately, students are often surprised to learn that achieving the minimum test score required for admittance into Western post-secondary institutions does not prepare them for the role implicit expectations and cultural schema play in successful academic performance. One potential cause of this problem is the traditional sink-or-swim environment in many post-secondary classrooms. According to Hyland (2003), this environment "presupposes a knowledge of genre outcomes" that advantages L I students who have been socialized into mainstream cultural values (p.18). For any ESL or international student faced with understanding lectures at an academic level, this inductive, "discovery-based approach" (p.18) to instruction leaves them at a tremendous disadvantage. In order to empower non-native students to achieve at a comparable level to their native English speaking counterparts, they must be given access to the cultural capital that native speakers possess.Access to cultural capital, which facilitates an ability to predict the stages of a text, is especially important for academic listening comprehension due to the fact that oral transmission of information4remains the predominant paradigm in tertiary education (Young 1994). The importance of awareness ofform for comprehension is investigated in a study by Carrell (1987):"...rhetorical form is a significant factor, more important than content, in the comprehension of the top-level episodic structure of a text and in the comprehension of the event sequences and temporal relations among events."(Carrell 1987, p.476)Although Carrell's study focuses on narrative reading comprehension, the significance of the positive correlation between awareness of textual organization and comprehension suggests that form could also play an important role in spoken mode comprehension. In terms of academic lecture comprehension, because students cannot reference a transcript of the lecture while listening, the macro-organization, or stages, of academic lectures needs to be explicitly taught as well as the specific syntactic conventions and lexical choices that realize each stage. In addition, students need to be provided with a means of identifying the discursive signals that mark transitions between stages of a lecture.In order to best equip students to face the complex cognitive, linguistic, and cultural demands of understanding academic lectures, a genre-based approach to teaching English for academic purposes would be effective. In genre-based pedagogy, language is seen as a social semiotic system; as a result, emphasis is placed on the functionality of discursive units that are realized through lower level syntactic and lexical choices. Learning through explicit instruction of the discursive organization of academic lectures acts to scaffold students' growing awareness of the communicative goals of a unit of discourse and their ability to identify how these goals are achieved linguistically.Research in the area of listening comprehension in English for Academic Purposes has focused on bottom-up approaches to teaching listening, such as exact repetition to facilitate automaticity in word recognition (Vandergrift 2007), as well as top-down approaches, such as pre-listening as a means of building students' prior knowledge; however, there is little research in the area of explicit genre instruction as a listening comprehension strategy. Furthermore, although research in genre-basedapproaches has made considerable contributions to academic writing, there are few examples in the literature of applications of genre-based instruction for the purpose of improving students' listening comprehension.For the purposes of this study, it is necessary to review the literature in three sections: L2 listening comprehension, L2 academic lecture comprehension, and genre theory.L2 Listening ComprehensionTraditionally, studies in listening comprehension have focused on the five areas of study in linguistic theory: pragmatics, semantics, syntax, lexis, and phonology (Flowerdew, 1994). Much of the research in L2 listening comprehension has investigated cognitive dimensions of the listening process. In his state-of-the-art report, Vandergrift (2007) identifies two cognitive processes that are the focus of many studies, top-down and bottom-up processes (Lynch & Mendelsohn 2002; Rost 2002; Flowerdew & Miller 2005). He explains further that "listeners favour top-down processes when they use context and prior knowledge (topic, genre, culture and other schema knowledge stored in long-term memory) to build a conceptual framework for comprehension" (2007). In order to develop these organizers, researchers suggest the use of pictures, video clips, key vocabulary presentations, class discussions, cultural information, and question previews. Tyler (2001), found that providing the topic, allowing students to build a conceptual framework prior to the listening activity, nearly eliminated the differences between L I and L2 listeners working memory consumption; furthermore, that L2 working memory consumption without prior access to the topic was much higher than that of L I listeners. Academic L2 ListeningThe area of academic listening has not received a great deal of attention to date; however, there is a growing body of knowledge targeting second language lecture comprehension specifically.Studies conducted within this area investigate a wide range of factors that contribute to successful L2 lecture comprehension. One such topic is lecturing styles. For example, researchers identify thedifferences in how lecturers present the content information. Studies of this kind have found that the lecturers tend to adopt either a conversational, reading, or rhetorical style and that this choice impacts L2 listening comprehension (Dudley-Evans 1981; cited in Flowerdew 1994).Other areas of interest in L2 lecture comprehension are lexico-grammatical features, speech rate, and accent. These studies (Griffiths 1990; Conrad 1989; Bilbow 1989) are designed to reveal what causes students of English to have difficulty comprehending academic lectures, and to make recommendations aimed at improving the comprehensibility of lectures given to non-native speakers. One noteworthy study (Richards 1983) incorporates the knowledge base of listening comprehension into a taxonomy of micro-skills L2 learners need for academic listening comprehension. These are:1. Ability to identify purpose and scope of lecture2. Ability to identify topic of lecture and follow topic development3. Ability to recognized role of discourse markers of signaling structure of a lecture4. Ability to recognize key lexical items related to subject/topic5. Ability to deduce meanings of words from context6. Ability to recognize function of intonation to signal information structure (e.g.pitch, volume, pace, key).(Richards 1983)There have been four main approaches to research on second language lecture comprehension: a discourse analysis approach, a psycholinguistic approach, a learner strategies approach, and an ethnographic approach (Flowerdew & Miller, 2010).The discourse analysis approach has aimed to provide ESL teachers with models for developing instructional materials by describing the organization and structure of lecture discourse. Most studies in this area (Coulthard & Montgomery 1981; Murphy & Candlin 1979) are continuations of the Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) model of classroom discourse Towards an Analysis of Discourse: the English used by Teachers and Pupils; however, a few more recent studies have looked at discourse structuring devices, such as "lexical phrases" and "point-driven" organization (DeCarrico & Nattinger 1988).7The psycholinguistic approach (Griffiths 1990) addresses the issues of language processing and delivery rate in second language lecture comprehension.In the learner strategies approach (O'Malley, Chamot, & Kupper 1989), both effective and less effective listeners are studied in order to determine the strategies essential for L2 lecture comprehension. The aim here is to help weaker listeners develop and employ the same strategies used by more effective listeners.Finally, the ethnographic approach (Benson 1989) investigates ESL students' actual listening activities through note-taking, interviews, and lecture recordings. In a noteworthy case study by Benson(1989), it was found that the learner did not focus his attention on the acquisition of new facts, but rather on processes relating to both the teacher as well as the lecture material. Benson identifies these processes as "the reduction of incoming linguistic data, the making of new connections within already familiar concepts, and an identification with the teacher's viewpoint" (p. 421).More recent studies have offered models for listening to lectures in a second language as well as Teaching Learning cycles designed to scaffold students' development. In her 2002 study, Miller presents a new model for lectures in a second language, the LSL model. Miller's model incorporates four themes: the multi-dimensional context of lectures in a second language; lecturer intention and student interpretation; the negative cycle of expectation; and the establishment of communities of learners and practice.8LANGUAGEFigure 1. Miller's LSL prism model Adapted from (Miller 2002)Of particular interest to the present study is that Miller centers her four themes on the notion of genre. The implications of this model, according to Miller, are to employ team-teaching, to teach the language of the discipline as well as the discipline, to encourage interaction in lectures, to make use of the community of learners, and to induct students into the community of practice (Miller 2002). Although Miller does not directly advocate the use of genre models to guide student development, she recommends that EAP students focus specifically "on the type of English they need to follow their courses, and which will eventually allow them to join their community of practice" (Miller 2002, p.160; emphasis added).Vandergrift (2004) offers a listening instruction cycle that emphasizes the importance of metacognitive strategies in developing listening comprehension.9Stage of Listening InstructionPlanning/predicting stageL. Once students know topic and text type, they predict types o f information and possible words they may hear.First verification stage2. Students verify initial hypotheses, correct as required,and note additional information understood.3. Students compare what they have written with peers,modify' as required, establish what needs resolution and decide on details that still need special attention.Second verification stage4. Students verify points of disagreement, makecorrections, and write down additional details understood.5. Class discussion in which all contribute toreconstruction o f  the text’s main points and most, pertinent details, interspersed with reflections on how students arrived at the meaning o f  certain words or parts o f the text.Final verification stage6. Students listen for information that they could notdecipher earlier in the class discussion.Reflection stage7. Based on discussion o f strategies used to compensatefor what was not understood, students write goals for next listening activity.Related Metacognitive Strategies1. Planning and directed attention2. Monitoring3. Monitoring, planning, and selective attention4. Monitoring and problem solving5, Monitoring and evaluation6. Selective attention and monitoring7. EvaluationAdapted from (Vandergrift 2004)In the "planning/predicting" stage of listening, Vandergrift directs students' attention toward the genre of the text, though not labeled as such: "once students know topic and text type, they predict types of information and possible words they may hear" (Vandergrift 2004, p.11). In this stage, Vandergriftrecognizes the power of knowing "text type" for predicting content or sequence in listening tasks, echoing the position of other scholars (Young 1994; Carrell 1987); however, as the first stage of Vandergrift's model, the notion of "text type" is given no explanation. "Once students know topic and text type" is a significant leap that downplays the importance and complexity of how a genre is10established. In order for students to make use of Vandergrift's staged metacognitive strategies approach to teaching listening, the notion of "text type" needs to be unpacked.Genre TheoryGenre theory offers a number of potential benefits to L2 listeners. As a communicative approach to language learning, the focus of work in this area is to identify the communicative functions of discourse in situated contexts and use this knowledge to assist language learners. This top-down approach offers learners a different perspective, one that both allows students to avoid the pitfalls of bottom-up lexico-grammatical focusing, and provides them with insight into what is expected by their instructors. Despite these benefits, there has been a great deal of debate surrounding the explicit teaching of genre features.Critics of genre theory have asserted that explicitly teaching students to follow genre features is far too prescriptive an approach (Purcell-Gates, Duke, & Martineau, 2007). Proponents of genre theory (Halliday 1985; Christie 1999, 2002; Johns 2002; Thompson, S. 1994; Thompson, G. 2004; Martin 1999, 2007; Butt et. al. 2000; Martin & Rose 2007; Christie & Martin 1997) have responded that "genre knowledge is itself the result of socially situated language practices, reflecting community norms and expectations. These norms are not static but change to reflect changing sociocognitive needs and contexts" (Martin et al., 1987). Another critique of genre theory is that teaching conventionalized genre features reinforces existing power hierarchies and denies students the right to decide how they wish to express themselves. In response to these points, genre theorists assert that "to not teach the forms and structures of the different academic genres ... actually denies students choice in that it limits their knowledge of language forms appropriate to different given situations" (Purcell-Gates et al., 2007).Despite the ongoing discussion regarding the value of genre theory, genres are useful in teaching L2 learners for several reasons:111. They offer a principled way to identify and focus upon different types of English texts, providing a framework in which to learn features of grammar and discourse.2. They offer students a sense of the generic models that are regularly revisited in an English-speaking culture, illuminating ways in which they are adapted or accommodated in long bodies of text in which several distinct genres may be found.3. They offer the capacity for initiating students into ways of making meaning that are valued in English-speaking communities.4. Because they permit all these things, they also form a potential basis for reflecting on and critiquing the ways in which knowledge are information are organized and constructed in the English language.(Christie, 1999, p.762)Genre Theory in Three TraditionsThe literature on genre-based pedagogy is divided into three schools (Hyon 1996; Christie 1999),the Sydney School, English for Specific Purposes (ESP)/English for Academic Purposes (EAP), and The New Rhetoric. Hyon (1996) groups ESP/EAP and the Sydney School together as areas that have developed instructional frameworks for genre-based pedagogy. The New Rhetoric, on the other hand, provides descriptions of the functions and contexts of genres in academic and professional discourse communities, but does not offer an instructional framework. Proponents of the New Rhetoric () posit that raising consciousness about genres is "empowering, potentially freeing the reader from the assumptions, interpretations and ideologies that have been tacitly at play," though "such consciousness is not itself a means of enabling learners to acquire such genres" (Freedman, 1994, p.205). Although each school has its own theoretical underpinnings and goals, Johns (2002) outlines eight principles shared by the three schools.1. Texts are socially constructed2. Texts are purposeful, and their functions are at least partially determined by the context and community long before the writer (or reader) begins to process them.3. Some genres, like some language registers, are valued more than others within a community.4. Textual conventions are often subject to community constraints, and the writer needs to consider working within these boundaries.5. The grammar of expository texts, including, the metadiscourse, is functional6. What is present, and absent, in texts, such as content and augmentation, is often regulated by a community or the particular context in which the text is operating.127. Genres are ideologically driven.8. The language of texts, whether it be vocabulary, grammar, metadiscourse, or other feature, should never be taught separately from rhetorical considerations(Johns, 2002, p.12-13)Systemic Functional LinguisticsIn order to take advantage of its rich description of language, the Systemic Functional Linguistics (hereafter SFL) approach to genre instruction will be utilized in this study. Martins (1984) defines genre as all "staged, goal oriented, social processes." Because these processes are not static, "genre descriptions attempt to capture the general meaning potential we select from when we use a text to achieve a social purpose in our culture" (Butt, Fahey, Feez, Spinks, & Yallop, 2000).Figure 2. Language as the realization of social context Figure 3. Register, Genre, and MetafunctionsAdapted from (Martin, 1997, p.4-5) Figure 2 represents the relationship between social context and language from an SFLperspective. Language as the realization of social context means that social context and languagecomprise one another in a cyclical, co-creating, co-realizing relationship. This relationship is furtherelaborated in Figure 3 in which we can see genre located within the social context circle. The languagecircle has been subdivided into register and language. Register is comprised of the three aspects ofcontext of situation, Field, Tenor, and Mode, while Language is comprised of the three Metafuntions.13Register in SFLRegister is defined by Halliday (1985) as "variation according to use." In other words, specific linguistic resources are used in specific contexts; these variations can be encapsulated within the three aspects of context of situation. 'Field' refers to what is being talked about, 'Tenor' to the relationship between people involved in the communication, and 'Mode' to the function of language in the exchange (Thompson, 1996). Changes in any of the aspects of context of situation will indicate a change in register.Each of the three aspects of context of situation described above relates to a metafunction of language; Field to the ideational metafunction, Tenor to the Interpersonal metafunction, and Mode to the Textual metafunction. Within the Ideational metafunction, language is used to represent experience; within the Interpersonal metafunction, to encode interaction; and within the Textual metafunction, to organize our experience (Butt et al., 2000).Register changes can be identified through an analysis of the choices a speaker makes with regard to transitivity, theme, mood, and modality (Christie & Martin 1997). Transitivity choices refer to selections that speakers make from process types that are realized in verbal groups; participant roles that are realized in nominal groups; and circumstances that are realized in prepositional phrases and adverbial groups. An example of some common process types are:Material:we made our presentationActor Process: material GoalMental:you should consider ThisSenser Process: cognition PhenomenonBehavioural:we are writing a paper about ChinaBehaver Process: behavioural Range Circumstance: Matter14Verbal:The clock SayertellsProcess: verbalthe time Verbiagevery accurately Circumstance: Manner: QualityRelational:It 's an islandCarrier Process: Intensive AttributeExistential:Once upon a time there were three bearsCircumstance: Location: time Process: existential ExistentAdapted from (Christie & Martin 1997)By no means an exhaustive list of process types, the above examples show how different process types are identified. In addition to labeling the different process types, participants in the processes are given labels specific to each process type; by labeling both participants in relation to the process, it is possible to distinguish the range of possible participant roles for each process type. Additional information about what can co-occur with a particular process comes from Circumstances, which provide circumstantial information about the process.Tracking the process types and their participant roles in classroom discourse is an important tool for analyzing the experiential meanings in discourse. For example, Christie and Martin (1997) identify two registers at work in classroom discourse: 'first order' or 'regulative' register that focuses on types of behaviours in the classroom, and 'second order' or 'instructional' register that focuses on the 'content' of the lecture. The following are examples of instructional register taken from Christie and Martin (1997):right okay now we are going to start our theme next weekActor Process: material Goal Circ: Loc: Timeyou 've got to follow the instructionsActor Process: material Range15you 'II be making an exact replica of a catapultActor Process: material GoalThe first two examples show how the regulative register is realized. The participant role Actor focuses on the students, and the material processes that follow focus on their behaviour. The last example follows this pattern with the students' behavior as the focus of the process; however, the goal is a content specific lexical item, and therefore a realization of the instructional register. This final example highlights the interplay of the two registers that frequently occurs in classroom discourse.Choices in mood (interpersonal metafunction) refer to the speech roles taken up by the speaker and the listener expressed through making demands or offers (Christie & Martin 1997). Due to the relative roles of students and teachers, these mood choices are a useful tool for signaling the movement between the regulative and instructional registers. Additional interpersonal resources that can be utilized to follow the interplay between classroom registers are modality and Person.e.g. So we've got to do a lot of concentrating.Well today we've got another simple story...I want you to listen to this story...If you don't have a pen would you collect those please?Adapted from (Christie & Martin 1997)In the first example, the teacher uses modality to convey the importance of the upcoming activity. In the second example, the first person plural is used to build solidarity with the students, and in the third example, the first person singular is used by the teacher to indicate what is expected of the students. The final example is the teacher's use of the second person to direct students' behaviour.Finally, thematic progressions through a text can be tracked in order to follow shifts in register; this is part of the textual metafunction. Halliday refers to theme as the "point of departure for the message" of the clause (Halliday 1994). The theme is the first position within an English clause, which in terms of the textual metafunction, has two constituents: the theme and the rheme, where the rheme is "whatever is not the theme" (Christie & Martin 1997). The typical topical progression is for new16information to appear in the rheme of a clause and then to appear as the theme of the subsequent clause. Both textual and interpersonal themes are common in classroom thematic progression, primarily in the 'teacher talk' or teacher's monologic speech. Tracking the thematic progression throughout discourse is useful to reveal who controls the theme, to what ends, and the overall organization of the lesson.Genre in SFLIn the SFL tradition, the ways in which different registers relate to one another through variations made in Field, Tenor, and Mode, mirrors the way different genres relate to one another through variation in 'texture.' Textural features are the 'phases' of social process that serve as constituents of a Genre (Christie & Martin 1997). For example, from the perspective of Field (register), the instructions for conducting an experiment illustrate how to actually do the experiment; it serves as a procedural recount of the experiment for the purposes of performing it. From the perspective of genre, these instructions are related to the range of procedural texts that have similar stages and phases, such as recipes, directions, instruction manuals. This sequence of stages and phases is the texture of the genre which likely will include phases such as 'description of purpose,' followed by 'sequence of commands,' and 'lists of materials' (Christie & martin 1997).The Genre of Academic LecturesIn her 1994 study "University Lectures -  macro-structure and micro-structure," Young argues for the six dominant phases that appear across disciplines in academic settings. She defines a phase as a "strand of discourse that recurs discontinuously throughout a particular language event and, taken together, structure that event" (Young 1994, p.165). According to Young, a phase is a "very delicate statement of register realization" (Young 1990). The activities involved in a specific type of discourse can be identified through approaching language in terms of metafunctional choices. Identifying thesetmetafunctional choices, as well as the patterns of choices throughout that constitute the organization of17a text, is difficult to do when approaching discursive structure in terms of introduction, body, andconclusion. Young argues that these three common organizational units are insufficient to capture thecomplexity of phases that recur in academic lecture discourse across disciplines."a lecture involves more than an introduction, conclusion, and end; rather, there is a discontinuous recurrence of activities, such as explanations, exemplifications, summarizing, evaluating, and announcing of new directions"(Young 1994)With this complex constellation of potential phases in mind, the conventional pattern of beginning- middle-end appears insufficient to track the functional shifts that occur during an academic lecture; furthermore, it suggests that "there are many beginnings, many middles and many ends" (Young 1994, p.165).In order to track the complex shifting that occurs in monologic lecture discourse, Young identifies two important levels of distinction necessary for conducting a phase analysis: the macro­structure, which is aimed at revealing phase patterns and the micro-structure, which is aimed at tracking phase markers (Young 1994). With these tools. Young proposes a schema of monologic discourse at the tertiary level from her analysis of a small corpus.Young argues for six phases that are most likely to occur in an academic lecture: Interaction, Theory/Content, Examples, Discourse Structuring, Conclusion, and Evaluation.In the Interaction phase, the lecturer maintains contact with the audience to reduce the distance between speaker and listener, and to ensure that the content is being understood. This is accomplished by posing and answering questions. In the Theory/Content phase, the lecturer presents the theories, models, and definitions that are necessary for understanding the content of the lecture. In the Examples phase the theoretical concepts presented in the Theory/Content phase are illustrated with concrete examples. The final three phases of academic lectures are considered metadiscoursal in that these phases comment on the discourse itself. The Discourse Structuring phase involves announcement18of the direction that the lecture will take. In the Conclusion phase, elements of the content are identified and classified in order to focus on their interrelationships. Finally, the Evaluation phase involves reinforcement of the other phases through evaluation of the information presented (Young 1994). Young's argument for the existence of theses six phases and the interplay between them in tertiary level lectures is based on the analytical tools presented earlier of metafunctional choices made by the lecturer.Pedagogical ImplicationsBy identifying and explicitly teaching adult ESL/EAP students the macro-structures at work in an academic lecture, students will enter into lecture discourse with an awareness of the schema of tertiary level lecturing. This awareness will enable them to correctly identify the participant roles at a given moment in a lecture, allowing them to interact appropriately; furthermore, armed with the schema of academic lectures, students will be able to predict both content as well as stages of the lecture. This increase in awareness will afford students greater comprehension than the traditional beginning-middle-end paradigm currently does.With the ever increasing number of non-native English speaking students studying abroad, providing these learners with the schematic structure of the academic lecture genre will enable international students to be more competitive with their native English speaking counterparts. A move towards SFL genre-based pedagogy would essentially be explicit socialization into the academic culture, of which language is one of the systems of meaning-making. The SFL approach to language and EAP counters the predominant 'sink-or-swim' model that is ubiquitous in post-secondary English programs and could serve as a pedagogical response to the rapid internationalization of schools in English- speaking countries.19Chapter 2Discourse Analysis and Pilot StudyThe aim of the present study was to investigate the potential affordances of genre theory as an additional approach to researching second language lecture comprehension. It is my hope to address current issues and questions in L2 listening research by drawing on the robust description of language offered by SFL. Through explicit teaching of the relationship between language choices and register choices, students in the present study will be shown how to identify genres by recognizing the specific linguistic choices of language and register used in academic lectures.The results of this SFL discourse analysis of phases within the academic lecture genre will be used to develop a pedagogy for teaching academic listening comprehension to adult learners of English for academic purposes. Because each field has its own language conventions, a single topic area was chosen that aligns with the interests of the potential participant population in order to encourage participation in the project.Pilot StudyThe pilot study made use of two theoretical frameworks: Genre theory in the Systemic Functional Linguistics tradition (specifically, Young's aforementioned phase analysis), and Bernard Mohan's Knowledge Framework.The Knowledge FrameworkThe Knowledge Framework is described as a framework for activities and their relation to discourse (Mohan, 1986). I have chosen Mohan's framework as a tool teachers can use to bridge the complex linguistic relationships encapsulated within discourse semantics with the practice of teaching students to identify linguistic cues that refer to these higher levels of organization. In Mohan's words, "First and second language learners have difficulty with the presentation of theoretical, academic20knowledge, since this knowledge is usually presented in verbal exposition, in textbooks and lectures. For the framework to be useful, therefore, it needs to help students gain access to theoretical knowledge" (Mohan, 1986, p.74).In the present study, notions of Genre conventions and phases within a text (SFL) are positioned as the 'macro,' or 'top-down' level of linguistic structure. In other words, patterns of organization, specifically the six ubiquitous phases as identified in Young's study (1990), are seen as the highest order of structure in the academic lecture. Teaching students that these phases exist, however, is likely not enough to enable them to accurately identify the phases as they occur and recur throughout a text of considerable length and in academic register. In order to empower students with the skills to identify phases, Mohan's Knowledge Framework (hereafter KF), offers the 'micro,' or 'bottom-up' linguistic cues that signal the occurrence of their respective phases.Mohan's KF categorizes the discourse markers needed to identify phases into six Thinking Skills: Classification, Principles, and Evaluation on the generic level, and Description, Sequence, and Choice in the specific level. These Thinking Skills are further arranged into three Knowledge Structures:Declarative Knowledge, including the Thinking Skills of Classification/Description; Procedural Knowledge, including the Thinking Skills of Principles/Sequence; and Structural Knowledge, including the Thinking Skills of Evaluation/Choice. See Appendix B for more detail on the organization on the KF.There appears to be a level of overlap here between the two approaches to discourse analysis. I have summarized this in the table below:Young's Phasal Analysis of Academic LecturesMohan's Knowledge FrameworkPhases: Thinking Skills:Interaction (interrogatives)Theory/Content Classification, PrinciplesExamples Description, SequencingDiscourse Structuring Sequencing (metadiscoursal)21Conclusion Evaluation, ChoiceEvaluation Evaluation, ChoiceTable 1In the above table, I have grouped the Classification and Principles Thinking Skills together in correspondence with the Theory/Content phase in SFL terminology; the Description and Sequence Thinking Skills are analogous to SFL's Examples phase; and the Evaluation and Choice Thinking skills align with the Conclusion and Evaluation phases. Two phases did not have a clear analog in KF terms: the Interaction phase and the Discourse Structuring phase. I have added 'interrogatives' as a means of describing Interaction, and have modified the Sequence Thinking Skill to have a metadiscoursal variant in order to discuss Discourse Structuring in KF terms.The above relationship between Young's (1990) phasal analysis and Mohan's KF serves as the foundation of the instructional sessions in the present study.ParticipantsThe participants were chosen based on achievement of a score of 5 -  6.9 on the International English Language Testing System (hereafter IELTS). This level of competence was required in order to coordinate participant levels with level 500 students at a local post-secondary technical institute. Students in level 500 at this post-secondary institute have a listening proficiency well within 'Stage IT of the Canadian Language Benchmarks (hereafter CLBs). According to the description provided at http://www.language.ca/pdfs/clb_adults.pdf, students in Stage II will be designated a Benchmark level of between 5 and 8. At Benchmark level 5, student listening comprehension is generally described as broad and gist oriented of oral discourse in "moderately demanding contexts of language use on everyday personally relevant topics" (CLB 2000 p.74). At the most developed level of Stage II, students with Benchmark level 8 "can comprehend main points, details, speaker's purpose, attitudes, levels of formality and styles in oral discourse in moderately demanding contexts of language use" (CLB 200022p.74). With an IELTS score of between 5 and 6.9, participants approached for this study fall between 6-7 of the CLBs; for additional description of listening proficiencies within Stage II, see Appendix A.The first volunteer will be referred to as 'Julie,' a pseudonym chosen by her. Julie Is a Taiwanese speaking Chinese female, who holds a Bachelor's Degree from a university in Taiwan. After completion of her language studies, Julie plans to pursue a graduate degree at a Canadian post-secondary institution.The second volunteer's chosen pseudonym is 'Rose.' Rose is a Kurdish and Arabic speaking Turkish female, who holds a Bachelor's degree from a Turkish University. Rose plans to pursue a Master's degree in Business Administration at a Canadian post-secondary institution.SituationsPre-tests, post-tests, and instructional sessions were conducted in locations and at times convenient for the participants. Due to incompatibility between schedules, meetings had to be conducted separately rather than as a group as was originally planned. Close attention was paid to the manner of facilitation and instruction during these sessions in order to minimize any potential influence caused by differences in delivery of material.Each session was conducted at a local public library. Private study rooms were used in order to maximize focus and privacy during both the instructional sessions as well as testing sessions. In addition, participants were provided with headphones during testing sessions, as well as access to volume controls. Other controls, such as pausing or 'scrubbing' backwards to replay sections was strictly prohibited and closely monitored.Students were asked to be available for 5 hours of contact time, two 1 hour sessions for the pre/post-tests, as well as two 1.5 hour instructional sessions. These sessions were scheduled twice a week for a total of two weeks of participation in the data collection process.23Procedures Pre-TestDuring the first meeting, participants were given a brief overview of the day's plan as well as the sessions to come. Following this, each participant was asked to watch a lecture from www.ted.com and take notes, www.ted.com is an online resource that offers video-on-demand of talks given before an audience in a conference setting. On the website, TED is described as "a nonprofit devoted to Ideas Worth Spreading." Each speaker is required to deliver his or her message in a maximum of 18 minutes in an innovative and engaging way. This website was chosen as a resource for the pre-test and post-test of the present study due to the contemporary nature of the topics discussed, the academic format of the delivery (lecture), as well as the length of the talks. Before watching the lecture, participants were informed that they would need to use their notes to answer comprehension questions in the subsequent pre-test. With a length of 14 minutes 48 seconds, participants had approximately 45 minutes to answer comprehension questions on the pre-test.As topic material for the pre-test, I chose the TED lecture "The Future of Business is the 'Mesh'" by Lisa Gansky (2011). In this lecture, Gansky discusses the concept of 'share platforms' and how they are revolutionizing business. Gansky also provides numerous examples of businesses that employ 'meshy' strategies in their business plan. One key example Gansky discusses is Zipcar, a car-sharing initiative that offers a cars-on-demand service.Questions on the pre-test were derived from an analysis of the transcript of Gansky's lecture, which was done using Atlas ti. The coding used in the analysis used the six phases identified by Young(1990), as well as the six Thinking Skills developed by Mohan (1986). Questions were designed to target information from the phases that occur in the lecture. For example, a Theory/Content question is "What is the opportunity and the challenge with mesh businesses?" An example of an Interaction question is24"Gansky asks her audience 3 direct questions and waits for a response. What were they?" For the complete list of questions in the pre-test see Appendix C.Instructional Session 1In the second meeting with each participant, I held an instructional session with the goal of defining what phases are and which ones are common in academic lectures. In the first ten minutes of the session, together with each participant, we brainstormed based on the prompt: "what comes to mind when you think about the organization of an essay? How about a lecture? Are they the same or different? What makes them the same or different?" During this discussion, graphic organizers representing the traditional 'introduction-body-conclusion' format of academic essays was used. In the 80 minutes following this discussion, I presented each participant with an introduction to the concept of phases, introduced Mohan's KF, and discussed the relationship between the two frameworks. All handouts used in Instructional Session 1 can be seen in Appendix E.Instructional Session 2In Instructional Session 2 ,1 reviewed the foundations presented in Instructional Session 1. Following this, using the transcript of the Gansky lecture from the pre-test, participants were shown how to conduct a transitivity analysis of Processes, Participant roles, and Circumstances. Because the notion of transitivity is complex and would likely leave students more confused than enlightened, the theoretical underpinnings of the analysis were not discussed. Instead, participants were encouraged to determine the type of process used in an utterance and consider "who is doing what to whom" as a means of exploring the participant roles. Table 2 below summarizes the relationship between the transitivity analysis and the frameworks discussed above.25Young's Phasal Mohan's SFL Transitivity AnalysisAnalysis of KnowledgeAcademic FrameworkLecturesPhases: Thinking Skills: Process Type Participants CircumstancesInteraction (interrogatives)Theory/Content Classification,PrinciplesRelational/Existential Carrier/Attibute, ExistentExamples Description,SequencingBehavioural/Material Behaver/Range MatterDiscourseStructuringSequencing(metadiscoursal)Verbal Sayer/Verbiage Manner:QualityConclusion Evaluation, Choice Mental Sensor/PhenomenonEvaluation Evaluation, Choice Mental/Relational Sensor/Phenomenon Carrier/AttributeTable 2For example, if an utterance contained two nominal groups linked by a Relational/Existential process such as 'to be,' then the Thinking Skill being used must be Classification or Principles. Once these Thinking Skills have been identified, participants can confidently determine that the lecture is in the Theory/Content phase. To demonstrate how another phase could be identified, if the participant could recognize that the process of a statement such as "I think ..." is a Mental process, or that the process of a statement such as "it is important" is Relational, then the Thinking Skills Evaluation or Choice could be identified, and the phase, therefore, as Evaluation.Once each participant had a grasp of the processes involved, i.e. to use transitivity information (SFL) in conjunction with discourse markers (KF) to identify the Thinking Skill and thereby identify the phase, a discourse analysis aimed at phase identification was undertaken. This process began with careful scaffolding through the introduction of the lecture. Although this was admittedly a great deal of information to absorb in a short time, each participant conducted a surprisingly accurate analysis of the26phases with less and less assistance as the session progressed. See Appendix F for a complete Phasal analysis of the Gansky transcript using the approach outlined above.Post-TestMuch like the pre-test, the post-test involved watching a lecture and taking notes. Participants were informed that their notes would again be the only resource they could use in during the comprehension test. The procedure followed in the pre-test was closely followed again in the post-test; participants watched the lecture with headphones, had control of the volume levels, but were not allowed to scrub forwards or backwards.In order to control for changes in topic, and to some extent vocabulary, I chose another TED lecture that discusses themes presented in the Gansky lecture. Entitled "Yochai Benkler on the new open-source economics" (2005), Benkler discusses collaborative projects, such as Wikipedia and Linux, and how they represent the "next stage in human organization."Both the pre-test and post-test lectures are expected to present significant comprehension difficulties for participants; however, because the goal of EAP programs is to ready international students for challenging aural educational environments, authenticity was deemed a more important factor in lecture selection than clarity or speed of speech.27Chapter 3IntroductionIn this chapter, I will discuss the results collected from the pre-test, instructional sessions, and pos-test. Data will be analyzed in terms of total comprehension, individual phase awareness, as well as the relationship between individual phase awareness and topical knowledge.Data AnalysisIn this section, I take a quantitative approach, comparing pre-test and post-test scores in general and for each phase. Afterwards, I use a rubric designed for assessing topical knowledge, which was adapted from a template developed by Bachman and Palmer (1996).Pre-Test ResultsTables 4 and 5 summarize the pre-test scores for Julie and Rose. Judging from the overall scores, Julie with 36% and Rose with 22%, the pre-test clearly presented challenges to both participants.Participant 1 (Julie)Phase QuestionNumbersScore %Interaction 9 0.5/3 16%Theory/Content 2,3,4,5,6,7,8 7/17 41%Examples 10,11,12,13,14 2.5/10 25%Discourse Structuring 1 0.5/2 25%Conclusion 19,20 1/4 25%Evaluation 15,16,17,18 5/10 50%Total: 16.5/46 36%Table 3Julie's scores reveal a weakness in the Interaction phase as well as some difficulty following the lecture through the Examples, Discourse Structuring, and Conclusion phases. Julie's strength was her ability to follow the Theory/Content phase of the lecture. Although still not reaching 50% of comprehension for Theory/Content, Julie appears to have significantly less difficulty following the28lecture through this phase. Similarly, with a total of 50% comprehension, Julie exhibits adequate listening skills within the Evaluation phase.With only a 22% overall comprehension score on the pre-test, Rose appears to struggle across most phases and with more severity.Participant 2 (Rose)Phase QuestionNumbersScore %Interaction 9 1/3 33%Theory/Content 2,3,4,5,6,7,8 5.5/17 32%Examples 10,11,12,13,14 2/10 20%Discourse Structuring 1 1/2 50%Conclusion 19,20 0.5/4 13%Evaluation 15,16,17,18 0/10 0%Total: 10/46 22%Table 4In the above table, it is clear that Rose has the most difficulty following the Evaluation phase, with a comprehension score within this phase of 0% across 4 questions. Like Julie, Rose's results for the Conclusion and Examples phases are quite low, again representing potential points of weakness in her overall listening competence. Rose's scores for the other phases are also low; however, she exhibits strength in her ability to listen in the Discourse Structuring phase, with a score of 50%.Post-Test ResultsTable 5 summarizes the post-test results for Julie. Although her overall listening comprehension score is identical to her pre-test score, there are a number of interesting differences in her scores when looked at by individual phase.Participant 1 (Julie)Phase QuestionNumbersScore %InteractionTheory/Content 2,3,4 1.5/6 25%29Examples 5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,148.5/20 43%Discourse Structuring 1 1/2 50%Conclusion 16 0.5/1 50%Evaluation 15 0.5/5 10%Total: 12/33 36%Table 5Julie's score for Theory/Content was her strongest phase in the pre-test; however, in the post-test we see a drop from 41% (across 7 questions developed to test comprehension in this phase) to 25% (across 3 questions). In addition, Julie's post-test score in the Evaluation phase fell from 50% in the pre-test to 10%. Although these drops in scores are significant, there are also significant differences in improvement of listening comprehension scores across other phases. Julie's pre-test scores for the Examples, Discourse Structuring, and Conclusion phases were all 25%; however, in the post-test, these have doubled in all cases but the Examples phase, which shows a 18% increase listening comprehension.Table 6 summarizes the post-test results from Rose. Although her overall comprehension score increase from 22% to 26%, Rose had a number of scores drop significantly.Participant 2 (Rose)Phase QuestionNumbersScore %InteractionTheory/Content 2,3,4 1/6 17%Examples 5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,146.5/20 33%Discourse Structuring 1 0.5/2 25%Conclusion 16 0/1 0%Evaluation 15 0.5/5 10%Total: 8.5/33 26%Table 6One of the most significant differences between Rose's Pre-test and Post-test scores can be seen in her Theory/Content phase result. Her score for this phase dropped by almost a half, to 17%. Other phases that exhibited a drop in comprehension score were the Discourse Structuring and Conclusion phase. The Discourse Structuring phase score was halved to 25%, and the Conclusion phase30score dropped from 13% in the pre-test to 0% in the post-test. The drop in these scores is likely a consequence of the lack of Theory/Content phase understanding exhibited by the participant. Only the Evaluation and Examples phases show an increase in scores. Rose's Examples phase score rose from 20% in the pre-test to 33% in the post-test. In addition, Rose's Evaluation phase score rose from 0% to 10%. Although Rose's overall score in the post-test appears to be an improvement over the score in the pre­test, when the individual phase scores are compared, it appears she has more decreases in listening comprehension than increases.To further investigate the implications of the scores presented above, I have chosen to adapt a rubric developed by Bachman and Palmer (1996).Topical Knowledge RubricI have employed Bachman and Palmer's rubric for assessing topical knowledge because it is designed to focus on semantic appropriateness rather than on the use of appropriate vocabulary, grammaticality, or other form-focused skill. Since I am interested in improving content understanding through a macro/micro approach, this rubric can aid in the assessment of participants content understanding. Table 7 below is the rubric in its unmodified state.Level of Ability/MasteryDescription Range Accuracy4 -Complete Evidence of complete knowledge of relevant topical informationEvidence of unlimited range of relevant topical informationEvidence of complete accuracy throughout range3 -  Extensive Evidence of extensive knowledge of relevant topical informationWide, few limitations Good accuracy throughout range2 -  Moderate Evidence of moderate knowledge of relevant topical informationMedium Moderate to good accuracy of knowledge within range1 -  Limited Evidence of limited knowledge of relevant topical informationSmall, test taker deals only with a small portion of assigned topicPoor, moderate, or good accuracy within range310 -  Zero No evidence of knowledge of relevant topical informationZero, test taker demonstrates no knowledge of assigned topicNot relevantTable 7 (Adapted from Bac iman & Palmer (1996))Using Bachman and Palmer's rubric as a model, I have incorporated their scoring system and descriptions into a rubric that identifies percentiles that correspond to score, as well as the 6 target phases.In the rubric adapted for the purposes of the present study, the percentage of the scores for each phase was calculated. I then used these percentages to determine a total topical knowledge score out of a total of 24 in the case of the pre-test, and 20 in the case of the post-test.Participant 1 (Julie) Pre-TestPhase 4 -  Complete 3 -  Extensive 2 -  Moderate 1 -  Limited 0 -  Zero75-100% 50-75% 25-50% ~25% 0%Interaction 16%Theory/Content 41%Examples 25%Discourse Structuring 25%Conclusion 25%Evaluation 50%Total: 8/24 = 33%Table 8Julie's pre-test scores fell mainly in the '1-Limited' category; however, she did have two percentages that fell within the '2-Moderate' category for topical knowledge; namely the scores for the Theory/Content phase and the Evaluation phase. Julie's topical knowledge score works out to a total of 8 points out of a possible 24. This equals a topical knowledge percentage of 33%. When compared against her overall listening comprehension score, Julie's topical knowledge score is 3 percentage points32lower. These scores suggest that, in Julie's case, her phasal awareness is directly correlated with her topical knowledge.In contrast to the pre-test topical knowledge assessment, Julie's scores for each phase fell mainly in the '2-Moderate' category. The two scores that saw the most dramatic decline, those corresponding to the Theory/Content phase and the Evaluation phase, fell within the '1-Limited' category of the topical knowledge assessment.Post-TestPhase 4 -  Complete 75-100%3 -  Extensive 50-75%2 -  Moderate 25-50%1 -  Limited •'■25%0 -  Zero 0%InteractionTheory/Content 25%Examples 43%Discourse Structuring 50%Conclusion 50%Evaluation 10%Total: 8/20 = 40%Table 9This equals a total topical knowledge score of 8 points out of a total of 20, a percentage of 40. When compared with her pre-test topical knowledge score, Julie's post-test score represents an increase of 7 percentage points in her overall topical knowledge assessment. In Julie's case, although she saw significant reductions in overall listening comprehension scores within two of the phases, namely Theory/Content and Evaluation, her other scores improved enough to significantly improve her topical knowledge score.In the case of Rose, her pre-test scores were evenly divided between the '1-Limited' category and the '2-Moderate' category. This works out to a pre-test topical knowledge score of 9 points out of a33total 24. As a result, Rose's topical knowledge percentage is 36. This is significantly higher, 14 percentage points, than the 22% she earned for her overall listening comprehension on the pre-test.Participant 2 (Rose) Pre-TestPhase 4 -Complete 3 -  Extensive 2 -  Moderate 1 -  Limited 0 -  Zero75-100% 50-75% 25-50% ~25% 0%Interaction 33%Theory/Content 32%Examples 20%Discourse Structuring 50%Conclusion 13%Evaluation 0%Total: 9/24 = 36%Table 10Rose's percentages for individual phases in the post-test were considerably lower than those in the pre-tests. This is reflected in the topical knowledge score she earned for her post-test result, 5 points out of a total of 20. Her total percentage for the topical knowledge is 25%. When compared with her overall listening comprehension score for the post-test, they differ by only a single percentage point These results suggest that Rose's phasal awareness is directly correlated with her topical knowledge.Post-TestPhase 4 -  Complete 3 -  Extensive 2 -  Moderate 1 -  Limited 0 -  Zero75-100% 50-75% 25-50% ~25% 0%InteractionTheory/Content 17%Examples 33%Discourse Structuring 25%Conclusion 0%Evaluation 10%Total: 5/20 = 25%34The findings of this pilot study suggest two things; first, that raising a student's awareness of the phases that recur throughout academic lectures by explicitly teaching them improves their overall listening comprehension, and second that a student's awareness of these phases is positively correlated with topical knowledge. However, a number of circumstances may have had an impact on the scores discussed above. These factors will be discussed further in a later section.Feedback & QuestionnaireIn this section, I would like to take a qualitative look at the feedback students provided on the post-study questionnaire and verbally during the instructional sessions.Both Julie and Rose agreed that they would use the concepts studied in this project in the future. In addition, they both said that they would recommend the macro/micro approach used in this study to others. Question 3 of the questionnaire was "was the concept of Phases useful in following the organization of the lectures you watched? If so, how? If not, why not?" Julie answered:"Yes, the lecturer presents some examples to illustrate ideas. In addition, he evaluates his opinion in the end of the lecture..."Rose's answer to question 3 was:"Yes, they are useful, but I think a person needs practice them to organize what he watches."Question 4 read "was the Knowledge Framework an effective way to follow changes in Phases throughout the lecture? If so, how was it effective? If not, why wasn't it effective? Julie's wrote:"Yes I can easily recognize which part is example, which part is theory by listening to the signal words."Rose's answer to this question was:Table 1135"Yes, it was effective, because you can determine which part is important to write and take note about it."Both Julie and Rose appeared engaged and open to the methods employed in this pilot study. Julie did not include any negative comments in her feedback; however, she did exclaim "difficult" at several stages of the Instructional Sessions. Rose, on the other hand, was always eager to learn new methods, but made it clear she believed it would take a lot of practice to master the discourse analysis practice in Instructional Session 2.36Difficulties & LimitationsAs mentioned above, the methods used in this study are supported by the data; however there are a number or limitations that must be considered.First of all, the procedure involving note-taking as a means of gathering information for the pre and post-tests was not structured. Since the participants involved have studied the Cornell note-taking strategy in their EAP courses, each was given note-taking sheets that were organized following the Cornell system; however, no explicit instruction was given as to how they were expected to collect notes. Each participant was only told that their notes were the only tool they could use to complete the pre and post-tests. It is possible that the scores recorded in this pilot study would have been different had each participant been given the questions before hand and instructed to complete the test while listening to the lecture. Testing was not done this way in order to simulate an authentic learning environment in which information is transmitted verbally, and the onus is on each student to listen for and record salient points.Another factor that may have influenced the outcome of this pilot study is the design of the test itself. Because each test was designed based on the content of each lecture, controlling for difficulty of concepts was difficult. Rather than choose two equally difficult lectures, I chose to control for the topic as a means of limiting problems arising from gaps in vocabulary or background knowledge in one topic but not the other. The result of this decision was that one phase. Interaction, was omitted from the post-test. Although Benkler does engage the audience directly at points in the lecture, the responses are not clearly audible and not reiterated by Benkler making it difficult to include questions about these interactions on the post-test.The number of questions corresponding to each phase was also difficult to control for. Ideally, there would have been equal weighting and an equal number of questions relating to each of the sixChapter 437phases in the pre-test and the post-test. Unfortunately, this was not possible and in some cases thedifference was significant. For example, in the post-test, Benkler provides numerous examples ofcompanies and organizations that represent the 'next level of human organization.' As a result, therewere far more questions about examples in the post-test than there were in the pre-test. In addition,some phases had only one question in the post-test which gave them a substantially higher weighting inthe overall mark than the groups of questions for the corresponding phase in the pre-test.Finally, Benkler's speech pattern is far less succinct than Gansky's. Gansky speaks clearly anddirectly; Benkler, on the other hand, embeds numerous asides in his statements. For example, midwaythrough his talk, Benkler says:"So we've got communications and computation capacity in the hands of the entire population, and we've got human creativity, human wisdom, human experience -  the other major experience, the other major input. Which unlike simple labor -  stand here turning this lever all day long -  is not something that's the same or fungible among people."I would argue that this statement is a little hard to follow for native speakers of English, and certainly confusing for those struggling to learn academic content through verbal transmission in a second language learning environment.ConclusionsProviding EAP students with the cultural capital they need, specifically the conventions of oral transmission of information, is an essential step in the process of internationalization of educational institutions. In order for international students to compete in the high stakes environment of tertiary education, they need explicit instruction of the discursive organization of academic lectures. If teachers scaffold students' awareness of the communicative goals of phases within academic lectures by teaching them how to identify the linguistic cues that realize these phases, students will likely see an improvement in their listening comprehension, and therefore, a better ability to excel when studying abroad.38The findings of this pilot study are promising and suggest that explicit instruction of phases and the linguistic cues that signal them can be a benefit to EAP students' academic listening comprehension. Julie saw a considerable increase in her topical knowledge assessment, and Rose saw her overall listening comprehension score improve. Both participants are from different L I backgrounds and come from different traditions of schooling, which adds a level of validity to the findings of the present study. Although these results are promising for improving EAP students' academic listening comprehension, because this pilot study is a double case study, the findings cannot be generalized to encompass the entire EAP community. The model employed in this pilot study, however, served as an effective way to scaffold the participants' learning of academic lecture genre conventions.39References:Bachman, L. & Palmer, A. (1996). Language Testing in Practice: designing and developing useful language test. Oxford University Press. NY.Benkler, Yochai. "Yochai Benkler on the new open-source economics."http://www.ted.com/talks/vochai benkler on the new open source economics.html TEDGIobal 2005. July 2005; posted April 2008. Accessed September 2011.Benson, M. J. (1989). The Academic Listening Task: a case study. TESOL Quarterly. Vol. 23, No. 3. September.Bilbow, G. T. (1989). Towards an Understanding of Overseas Students' Difficulties in Lectures: a phenomenographic approach. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 13(2), 85-99.Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S., Spinks, S., &Yallop, C. (2000). Using Functional Grammar: An Explorer's Guide. National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research. Macquarie University, Sydney."Canadian Language Benchmarks 2000." Citizen and Immigration Canada.http://www.language.ca/pdfs/clb adults.pdf. Accessed September 2011.Carrell, P. L. (1987). Content and Formal Schemata in ESL Reading. TESOL Quarterly. 21,461-481.Christie, F. (1999). Genre Theory and ESL Teaching. TESOL Quarterly. Vol. 33, No. 4. Winter.Christie, F. & Martin, J. R. (1997). Eds. Genre and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and School. Cassell. London.Christie, F. (2002). Classroom Disourse Analysis: a functional perspective. Continuum. New York.Colthard, M. & Montgomery, M. (1981). The Structure of Monologue. Studies in Discourse Analysis. Coulthard & Montgomery (Eds.), 31-39. Routledge and Kegan paul. London.Conrad, L. (1989). The Effects of Time-Compressed Speech on Native and EFL Listening Comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 11,1-16.Cross, J. (2009). Effects of Listening Strategy Instruction on news Videotext Comprehension. Language Teaching Research. 13(2). 151-176.DeCarrico, J. & Nattinger, J. R. (1988). Lexical Phrases for the Comprehension of Academic Lectures. English for Specific Purposes. 7, 91-102.Ferris, D. & Tagg, T. (1996). Academic listening/speaking tasks for ESL students: Problems, suggestions, and implications. TESOL Quarterly, 30, 297-317.Ferris, D. & Tagg, T. (1996). Academic Oral Communication Needs of EAP Learners: what subject-matter instructors actually require. TESOL Quarterly, 30(1). 31-58.40Flowerdew, J. (1994). Research of relevance to second language lecture comprehension: An overview. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives. 7-29. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Flowerdew, J. (1993). Content-Based Language Instruction in Tertiary Settings. English for Specific Purposes. Vol.12.121-138. Pergamon Press.Flowerdew, J. & Miller, L. (1996). Lecturer Perceptions, Problems and Strategies in Second Language lectures. Regional English Language Centre Journal. Vol. 27, No. 1. June.Flowerdew, J. & Miller, L. (1995). On the Notion of Culture in L2 Lectures. TESOL Quarterly. 29(2) 345- 373.Flowerdew, J. & Miller, L. (1992). Student Perceptions, Problems and Strategies in Second Language Lecture Comprehension. Regional English Language Centre Journal. 23(2), 60-80.Gansky, Lisa. "The future of business is the "mesh.""http://www.ted.com/talks/lisa gansky the future of business is the mesh.html TED@MotorCity. January 2011; posted February 2011. Accessed September 2011.Griffiths (1990). Speech Rate and NNS Comprehension: a preliminary study in time-benefit analysis. Language Learning. 40(3), 311-366.Gunderson, L. (2007). English-Only Instruction and Immigrant Students in Secondary Schools: a critical examination. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Mahwah, NJ.Halliday, M. A. K. & Hassan, R. (1985). Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social- Semiotic Perspective. Geelong, Vic.: Deakin University Press. (Republished by Oxford University Press, 1989.)Hyland, K. (2006). English For Academic Purposes: an advance resource book. Routledge. New York, NY.Johns, A. (2002). Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. NJ.Hyon, S. (1996). Genre in Three Traditions: implications for ESL. TESOL Quarterly.Martin, J. & Rose, D. (2007). Working with Discourse: meaning beyond the clause. Continuum. London.Martin, J.R. (1999). Mentoring semiogenesis: 'genre-based' literacy pedagogy. Pedagogy and theShaping of Consciousness: Linguistic and Social Processes, F. Christie (Ed.). Cassell, London, 123- 155.Miller, L. (2002). Towards a Model for Lecturing in a Second Language. Journal for English for Academic Purposes. 1. Pp. 145-162.Mohan, B. A. (1986). Language and Content. Addison-Wesley Publishing; Massachusetts.Murphy, D. F. & Candlin, C. N. (1979). Engineering Lecture Discourse and Listening Comprehension. Practical Papers in English Language Education. 2,1-79. University of Lancaster.41Purcell-Gates, V., Duke, N., Martineau, J. (2007). Learning to Read and Write Genre-Specific Text: roles of authentic experience and explicit teaching. Reading Research Quarterly. Vol. 42, No. 1. January/February/March, pp. 8-45.Thompson, G. (2004). Introducing Functional Grammar. Oxford University Press Inc. New York, NY.Thompson, S. (1994). Frameworks and Contexts: A Genre-Based Approach to Analysing Lecture Introductions. English for Specific Purposes. Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 171-186. Pergamon.Vandergrift, L. (2007). Recent Developments in Second and Foreign Language Listening Comprehension Research. Language Teaching. 40,191-210. Cambridge University Press.Vandergrft, L. (2004). Listening to Learn or Learning to Listen? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 24, pp. 3-25. Cambridge University Press.Young, L. (1990). Language as Behaviour, Language as Code: a study of academic English. John Benjamins Publishing Company.Young, L. (1994). University Lectures: macro-structure and micro-features. Academic Listening: research perspectives. Flowerdew, J. (Ed.) Cambridge University Press. 159-176.42Appendix ACanadian Language Benchmarks 2000: Adult LearnersStage II: Intermediate Proficiency (Listening)Level 5: Initial Intermediate Proficiency Level 6: Developing Intermediate Proficiency• Learner can follow very broadly and with some effort the gist of oral discourse in moderately demanding contexts of language use (e.g., face to face formal and informal conversations, audio tapes and radio broadcasts) on everyday personally relevant topics and at a slower to normal rate of speech.• Can understand simple exchanges: conceptualized short sets of common daily instructions and directions; direct questions about personal experience and familiar topics; routine (simple, repetitive, predictable) media announcements.• Can understand a range of common vocabulary and a very limited number of idioms.• Often requests repetitions.• Can follow simple short predictable phone messages, but has limited ability to understand on the phone.•Learner can follow the main ideas and identify key words and important details in oral discourse in moderately demanding contexts of language use (face to face formal and informal conversations, audio tapes and radio broadcasts) on relevant topics and at a slower to normal rate of speech.• Can understand a range of common vocabulary and a limited number of idioms.• Can follow contextualized discourse related to common experience and general knowledge.• Can understand conceptualized short sets of instructions and directions.• May still frequently request repetition.• Can follow simple short predictable phone messagesLevel 7: Adequate Intermediate Proficiency Level 8: Fluent Intermediate Proficiency• Learner can comprehend main points and most important details in oral discourse in moderately demanding contexts of language use.• Can follow most formal and informal conversations on familiar topics at a descriptive level, at a normal rate of speech, especially as a participant.• Can understand an expanded inventory of concrete and idiomatic language.• Can understand more complex indirect questions about personal experience, familiar topics and general knowledge.• Learner can comprehend main points, details, speaker's purpose, attitudes, levels of formality and styles in oral discourse in moderately demanding contexts of language use.• Can follow most formal and informal general conversations, and some technical, work-related discourse in own field at a normal rate of speech.• Can follow discourse about abstract and complex ideas on a familiar topic.• Can comprehend an expanded range of concrete, abstract and conceptual language.• Can determine mood, attitudes and feelings.43• Sometimes requires slower speech, repetitions and rewording.• Can understand routine work-related conversation.• Can follow short predictable phone messages on familiar matters; has problems following unknown details on unfamiliar matters.• Has difficulty following a faster conversation between nativeSpeakers• Can understand sufficient vocabulary, idioms and colloquial expressions to follow detailed stories of general popular interest.• Can follow clear and coherent extended instructional texts and directions.• Can follow clear and coherent phone messages on unfamiliar and non-routine matters.• Often has difficulty following rapid, colloquial/idiomatic or regionally accented speech between native speakers.44Appendix BDECLARATIVE PROCEDURAL STRUCTURALClassification Principles EvaluationDefiningGroupingCause/EffectGuessesRules/StrategiesAppreciatingCriticizingEvaluatingDiscourse that groups or defines:- kinds of- types of- J s  made up of_Discourse that explains or predicts the how and why of things; the rules:- is caused by- results in- is due to- if _ then- when _ then- Consequently- as a result ofDiscourse that evaluates, judges, ranks:- is better than- is worse than- consider- think about- pros/cons- any words describing opinion or preferenceDescription Sequence ChoiceComparing/ContrastingDescribingLocatingChronological orderInstructionsChangesStating opinions Making decisions Giving reasons for choicesDiscourse that describes, measures, or compares:-similar to- different than- almost the same as- longer/shorter/taller, etc- adjectives- adverbs- "while X is y, Z is W"- "on the other hand"Discourse that notes cycles, processes orders, and steps:- first of all, second, next, finally- in conclusion- during, after, earlier, later, before, while, initially, in the endDiscourse that expresses choice:- modal verbs- in my opinion -1 think that...-1 choose...-1 prefer...-1 would rather...45Appendix CPre-Test J Academic Lecture ComprehensionLisa Gansky: The future of business1. What is the topic of the talk?2. What is the "mesh" Gansky talks about?3. Gansky identifies several factors that have given rise to the mesh. What are they?4. What does investment in web and mobile technologies allow us to do?5. What 3 things does the classic mesh company bring together?466. What is the opportunity and the challenge with mesh businesses?7. What do "pop-up" stores create?8. How can we create a better economic situation and a better environmental situation for each other?9. Gansky asks her audience 3 direct questions and waits for a response. What were they?1. 2.3.10. Transportation, wine & food, and entertainment are all examples of what?11. Why does the speaker use Zipcar as an example?4712. How is Whipcar different from Zipcar?13. What are some examples of platforms as invitations?14. Gansky gives an example of transit data being displayed at a coffee shop in Portland. What is this an example of?15. What was clever about the way Zipcar packaged car sharing?16. The speaker believes that Zipcar got "a lot right." What did the people at Zipcar fundamentally understand?17. Why does Lisa Gansky believe that it is imperative for Zipcar and other mesh companies to be like a concierge service?18. Gansky speaks about a "fabulous opportunity" that exists across the U.S. now. What is this opportunity?19. According to Gansky, at what stage of development is the trend towards mesh companies?20. What do the mesh and the platform we build allow entrepreneurs to do?49Appendix D Pre-Test KEYLisa Gansky: The future of businessAcademic Lecture Comprehension1. What is the topic of the talk? (Discourse Structuring)-The 'mesh' is the future of business.-It is shared ownership, or the de-personalization o f ownership.2. What is the "mesh" Gansky talks about? (Theory/Content)-A fundamental shift in our relationship with stuff, with the things in our lives.-Access to certain kinds o f goods and services trumps ownership o f them.-The pursuit of better things easily shared.3. Gansky identifies several factors that have given rise to the mesh. What are they? (Theory/Content)-(1) the recession -  align value w/true cost-(2) population growth + density into cities -  more people, smaller spaces less stuff-(3) climate change - reduce-(4) distrust o f big brands-(5) more connected to people than ever4. What does investment in web and mobile technologies allow us to do? (Theory/Content) -To engage in really new + interesting ways-To be connected and create all kinds o f platforms and systems505. What 3 things does the classic mesh company bring together? (Theory/Content)-(1) our ability to connect to each other-(2) ability to find  things in time + space-(3) access to get goods + services is more convenient + less costly in many cases than owning them6. What is the opportunity and the challenge with mesh businesses? (Theory/Content)-to make sharing irresistible7. What do "pop-up" stores create? (Theory/Content)-perishability-urgency8. How can we create a better economic situation and a better environmental situation for each other? (Theory/Content)-sharing failures as well as successes9. Gansky asks her audience 3 direct questions and waits for a response. What were they? (interaction)1. -experienced car sharing/bike sharing?2. -%/day average person uses a car?3. -heard of pop-up stores/shops?5110. Transportation, wine & food, and entertainment are ail examples of what? (Examples) -our long tradition o f sharing11. Why does the speaker use Zipcar as an example? (Examples)-largest car sharing company in the world12. How is Whipcar different from Zipcar? (Examples)-Whipcar: people who aren't using their car can rent it out -Zipcar: own a fleet of cars13. What are some examples of platforms as invitations? (Examples)-Craigslist-iTunes-iPhone developers network -Facebook14. Gansky gives an example of transit data being displayed at a coffee shop in Portland. What is this an example of? (Examples)-cities as platforms-inviting participation/sharing15. What was clever about the way Zipcar packaged car sharing? (Evaluation)-sexy cars, fresh, aspirational, "Zipster"-targeted universities -nice experience52-clean, reliable, worked16. The speaker believes that Zipcar got "a lot right." What did the people at Zipcar fundamentally understand? (Evaluation)-info company, not a car company-types of cars, services, accessories available17. Why does Lisa Gansky believe that it is imperative for Zipcar and other mesh companies to be like a concierge service? (Evaluation)-because we give them so much info, and they are entitled to really see how it is that we're moving. They are in good shape to anticipate what we're going to do next.18. Gansky speaks about a "fabulous opportunity" that exists across the U.S. now. What is this opportunity? (Evaluation)-to really focus trust and attention19. According to Gansky, at what stage of development is the trend towards mesh companies?(Conclusion)-very beginning20. What do the mesh and the platform we build allow entrepreneurs to do?(Conclusion)-define, refine, scale, test things, be in conversation with people, listen53Appendix EInstructional Session 1StudentObjectives:Students Will Be Able To:Content - Define what Phases are and which ones are common in academic lectures.Language Discourse genre: Academic LecturesOrganization/Coherence: Elicitation of schemata, Teacher focused discussion, scaffolding of student-centered activity, Teacher focused discussionCohesion/Discourse M arkers: Students will identify discourse markers used in specific Thinking Skills that realize their respective Phases.G rammar: Relational, Material, Mental ProcessesVocabulary: Discourse, Phase, classification, principles, evaluation,description, sequence, choiceResources and Materials - Video: TED Talks: Lisa Gansky: The Future o f business is the “mesh” http://www.ted.com/talks/lisa ganskv the future of business is the mesh.htmlLesson Plan:Time/duration: Activities:Introduction:5 min (1) Brainstorm: ‘What comes to mind when you think about the organization of an essay? How about a lecture? Are they the same or different? What makes them the same or different”5 min (2) Graphic Organizer: Traditional three-part essay structure.Activities/tasks:20 min (3) Introduction to Phases5430 min 20 min 10 min- handout: “Phases In Academic Lectures”(4) Introduction to the Knowledge Framework- handouts: - “Introducing the Knowledge Framework: Six Thinking Skills”- “The Knowledge Framework”(5) Relationships: Thinking Skills & Phases- handout: “Relationships: Thinking Skills & Phases”(6) Analysis- handout: “Transcript: The Future of Business is the ‘Mesh’”Closure:(7) Reiterate affordances of using the KF and Phases for understanding organization of academic lectures.Field Notes & Observations:55Phases in Academic LecturesIntroduction:In this instructional session, we will look at two ways to help us see the organization common to academic lectures. The first approach focuses on the functional purpose of sections in the lecture; the second approach focuses on the way lecturers use language, and how we can use this information to identify the functional purposes common in academic lectures.Warm Up/Discussion:• What comes to mind when you think about the organization of an essay?• How about for a lecture?• Are they different or the same?• What makes them different or the same?Phases:In her 1994 study "University Lectures -  macro-structure and micro-structure," Lynne Young argues for the six dominant phases that appear across disciplines in academic settings. She defines a phase as a "strand of discourse that recurs discontinuously throughout a particular language event and, taken together, structure that event" (Young 1994, p.165).According to Young, a phase is a "very delicate statement of register realization" (Young 1990). The activities involved in a specific type of discourse can be identified through approaching language in terms of metafunctional choices. Identifying these metafunctional choices, as well as the patterns of choices throughout that constitute the organization of a text, is difficult to do when approaching discursive structure in terms of introduction, body, and conclusion.Young argues that these three common organizational units are insufficient to capture the complexity of phases that recur in academic lecture discourse across disciplines."o lecture involves more than an introduction, conclusion, and end; rather, there is a discontinuous recurrence o f activities, such as explanations, exemplifications, summarizing, evaluating, and announcing o f new directions"(Young 1994)With this complex constellation of potential phases in mind, the conventional pattern of beginning-middle-end appears insufficient to track the functional shifts that occur during an56academic lecture; furthermore, it suggests that "there are many beginnings, many middles and many ends" (Young 1994, p.165).In order to track the complex shifting that occurs in monologic lecture discourse, Young identifies two important levels of distinction necessary for conducting a phase analysis: the macro-structure, which is aimed at revealing phase patterns; and the micro-structure, which is aimed at tracking phase markers (Young 1994). With these tools, Young proposes a schema of monologic discourse at the tertiary level from her analysis of a small corpus.Young argues for six phases that are most likely to occur in an academic lecture:InteractionTheory/ContentExamplesDiscourse StructuringConclusionEvaluation.In the Interaction phase, the lecturer maintains contact with the audience to reduce the distance between speaker and listener, and to ensure that the content is being understood. This is accomplished by posing and answering questions.In the Theory/Content phase, the lecturer presents the theories, models, and definitions that are necessary for understanding the content of the lecture.In the Examples phase the theoretical concepts presented in the Theory/Content phase are illustrated with concrete examples.The Discourse Structuring phase involves announcement of the direction that the lecture will take.In the Conclusion phase, elements of the content are identified and classified in order to focus on their interrelationships.The Evaluation phase involves reinforcement of the other phases through evaluation of the information presented.57Introducing the Knowledge Framework: Six Thinking SkillsIntroduction:So, how can we know when a particular phase is occurring? To identify the phases, we need an analytical tool to help us. Our analytical tool should use linguistic cues to help us identify phases. There is a tool we can use that does this! It is called "The Knowledge Framework."Let's look at an overview of the Knowledge Framework:Declarative Procedural StructuralGeneric Classification Principles EvaluationSpecific Description Sequence ChoiceOrganization:Knowledge Structure Thinking SkillDeclarative Knowledge Classification/DescriptionProcedural Knowledge Principles/SequenceStructural Knowledge Evaluation/ChoiceGeneric Classification/Principles/EvaluationSpecific Description/Sequence/ChoiceOk, so now that we understand how the Knowledge Framework is organized, let's look at the details. Pay close attention to the linguistic cues that are contained in each Thinking skill. These are the clues that will help us identify the Phases of academic lectures.~See Handout "The Knowledge Framework"58The Knowledge FrameworkKS DECLARATIVE PROCEDURAL STRUCTURALTH SK Classification Principles EvaluationGEFUNCT10N- Defining- Grouping- Cause/Effect- Guesses- Rules/Strategies- Appreciating- Criticizing- EvaluatingN Discourse that groups or Discourse that explains or Discourse that evaluates,E defines: predicts the how and why judges, ranks:R L of things; the rules:1 A - kinds of - is better thanC N -  types of - is caused by -  is worse thanG -  J s  made up of_ - results in - considerU - is due to - think aboutA -  if _  then -  pros/consG -  when _then -  any words describingE -  Consequently opinion or preference-  as a result ofDescription Sequence ChoiceF□ -  Comparing/Contrasting -  Chronological order -  Stating opinionsN -  Describing -  Instructions -  Making decisionsCj -  Locating -  Changes -  Giving reasons for1 choicesS ONPr Discourse that describes, Discourse that notes cycles, Discourse that expressesEC 1measures, or compares: processes orders, and steps: choice:1LA -  similar to -  first of all, second, next, -  modal verbsF■ N -  different than finally -  in my opinion1 G -  almost the same as -  in conclusion - 1 think that...C U -  longer/shorter/taller, etc -  during, after, earlier, later, - 1 choose...A -  adjectives before, while, initially, in - 1 prefer...G -  adverbs the end - 1 would rather...E -  "while X is y, Z is W"-  "on the other hand"59Relationships: Thinking Skills & PhasesHow can we use the linguistic cues in the Knowledge Framework to identify Phases in a lecture? In the below table, Thinking Skills are listed along with the phases that use these skills.Phases: Thinking Skills:InteractionTheory/Content Classification, Description, Principles, SequencingExamples Classification, DescriptionDiscourse Structuring SequencingConclusion Evaluation, ChoiceEvaluation Evaluation, ChoiceSteps for using this powerful analytical tool:1. Scan the transcript for examples of the linguistic cues we have looked at so far.2. Once you have found examples, decide which Thinking Skills are being used.3. Now look at a larger section of text, maybe even an entire paragraph. Which Thinking Skills did you identify? Dos these Thinking Skills suggest one of the six Phases common in academic lectures?4. Identify the Phase of the section of text you are looking at.Once the Phases have been identified for an entire lecture, it is possible to see how the lecture is organized.Let's look at the transcript of the lecture by Lisa Gansky, "The Future of Business is the Mesh."Apply the steps given above. Are you surprised at the way the lecture is structured? How is it the same or different than what you expected?60Appendix FDiscourse Analysis: Gansky Transcript Codes:Phases KFinteraction INTERROGATIVES/METADISCOURSE(PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES)theory/content CLASSIFICATION/PRINCIPLESexamples DISCRIPTION/SEQUENCEdiscourse structuring SEQUENCE(METADISCOURSAL)conclusion EVAL/CHOICEevaluation EVAL/CHOICEAtlas ti Screenshots:I'm speaking to you about what I call the "mesh." It's essentially a fundamental shift in our relationship with stuff, with the things in our lives. And it's starting to look at — not always and not for everything — but in certain moments of time access to certain kinds of goods and service will trump ownership of them. And so it's the pursuit of better things easily shared. And we come from a long tradition of sharing. We've shared transportation. We've shared wine and food and other sorts of fabulous experiences in coffee bars in Amsterdam. We've shared other sorts of entertainment — sports arenas, public parks, concert halls, libraries, universities. All these things are share platforms, but sharing ultimately starts and ends with what I refer to as the mother of all share platforms.And as I think about the mesh and 1 think about, well what's driving it, how come it's happening now, I think there's a number of vectors that I want to give you as background. One is the recession — that the recession has causedI S3 ClASSIFICATiOli S3  discourse structuring S3 PRINCIPLES S3 SEQUENCE(META.DISCOURSAL)theory/contentS3 DESCRIPTION S 3  examplesC  l AS I I FTFlS i FO dClASIACFTiS3 theory/contentS3 discourse structuringS EOUEN CEfMETADIS COU R5ALJIS3 PRINCIPLES theory/content61us to rethink our relationship with the things in our lives relative to the value — so starting to align the value with the true cost. Secondly, population growth and density into cities. More people, smaller spaces, less stuff.Climate change. We're trying to reduce the stress in our persona! iives and in our communities and on the planet. Also, there’s been this recent distrust of big brands, global big brands, in a bunch of different industries. And that's created an opening. Research is showing here, in the States, and in Canada and Western Europe that most of us are much more open to local companies, or brands that maybe we haven't heard of. Whereas before, we went with the big brands that we were sure we trusted. And last is that we're more connected now to more people on the planet than ever before — except for if you're sitting next to someone.(Laughter)The other thing that's worth considering is that we've made a huge investment over decades and decades, and tens of billions o f dollars have gone into this investment that now is our inheritance. It's a physical infrastructure that allows us to get from point A to point B and move things that way. It's also, Web and mobile allow  us to be connected and create all ;kinds of platforms and systems. And the investment of those technologies and that infrastructure is really our inheritance. It allows us to engage in really new and interesting ways.And so for me, a mesh company, the classic mesh company, brings together these three things: our ability to connect to each other — most of us are walking around with these mobile devices that are GPS-enabled and Web- enabled — allows us to find each other and find things in time and space. And third is that physical things are readable on a map — so restaurants, a variety of venues, but also with GPS and othertechnology like RFID and it continues’ interaction!f INTERROGATIVES.WETADiSCOURSE (PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES)f t  s c S Af t  evaluationISSf CLASSIFICATION PRINOPLES f t  theory/contentf t  DESCRIPTION f t  examplesf t  PRINCIPLES { J  theory/contentI f t  DESCRIPTION f t  examples62to  expand beyond  that, w e  can a lso  track th ings th a t are m oving, lik e  a car, a tax icab , a tra n s it system , a box tha t's  m ov ing  th rough t im e  and space. And  so th a t se ts  up fo r  m aking access to  ge t goods and serv ices m ore  co nven ien t and less co stly  in m any cases than  o w n ing  them .For exam p le , I w an t to  use Z ipcar. How  m any p eo p le  here  have e xpe rien ced  car sharing o r b ike  sharing? W ow , tha t's  great. O kay, thank  you . Basica lly  Z ipcar is  th e  largest car sharing company in  th e  w orld . They d id  n o t in ven t car sharing. Car sharing  was actua lly  in ven ted  in Europe. O ne  o f th e  fou n d e rs  w en t to  Sw itze rland , saw  it im p lem en ted  som ep lace , said, “W ow , th a t looks rea lly  coo l. I th in k  w e  can do  th a t in  Cam bridge ," b rough t it  to  C am bridge and th ey  started — tw o  w om en  — Robin  Chase  be ing  th e  o th e r person  w h o  started it. Z ip ca rg o tso m e  rea lly  im p o rtan t th ings right. First, th e y  rea ily  u nderstood  tha t a brand is a vo ice  and a product is a souven ir. A n d  so th ey  w e re  very  c le ve r abou t th e  w ay  tha t they  packaged car sharing. They m ade it sexy. Theym ade it fresh. They m ade it asp ira tiona l. If you  w e re  a m em ber o f  th e  c lub, w hen  you 're  a m em be r o f a club, you 're  a Z ipster. The cars they  p icked  d idn 't lo ok  like  ex-cop  cars th a t w e re  ho llo w ed  ou t o r som e th ing . They p icked these  sexy cars. They ta rgeted  to  u n ive rs it ie s . They m ade sure th a t th e  dem og raph ic  fo r  w ho  th e y  w e re  ta rgeting  and th e  car w as a ll m atching. It w as a ve ry  n ice experience . A nd  th e  cars w e re  clean  and re iiab le , and it  a il w orked .A n d  so from  a brand ing  perspective , th e y  go t a  lo t  r ig h t  But th e y  understood  fundam en ta lly  th a t th e y  are no t a car com pany. They understand th a t th ey  are an in fo rm ation  com pany. Because w hen  w e  buy a car w e  go to  th e  de a le r once, w e  have an in te raction , and w e 're  chow  -  u su a lly a s  q u ick ly  as poss ib le .If:But w hen  you 're  sha ring  a car and you have a car share serv ice, you  m ight use an E.V. to  com m ute, you  get a truck because you 're  do ing  a hom e project.W hen  you pick you r aun t up at th e  a irpo rt you  get a sedan. A nd  you 're  go ing to  th e  m ounta ins to  ski, you  get d if fe re n t accessories put on th e  car fo r do ingi63th a t so rt o f  th ing . M ean w h ile , th e se  guys are s itt in g  back, co lle c t in g  a ll sorts o f  data abou t o u r  beh av io r and h ow  w e  in te ra ct w ith  th e  se rv ice . A n d  so it's n o t o n ly  an o p t io n  fo r  th em , bu t I b e lie ve  it 's  im p e ra tive  fo r  Z ip ca r and o th e r m esh com pan ies to  actua lly  ju s t w o w  us, to  be  lik e  a conc ie rge  serv ice .Because w e  g ive  th em  so m uch in fo rm a tion , and th e y  a re  e n t it le d  to  rea lly  see  how  it  is  th a t w e 're  m ov ing, th e y 're  in  re a lly  good shape  to  a n tic ip a te  w ha t w e 're  go ing to  w an t next.And  so  w ha t percen t o f th e  day  d o  you  th in k  th e  average person  uses a car?iiW hat percentage o f  th e  t im e ?  A n y  guesses? Those  a re  re a lly  v e ry  good. I w as im ag in ing  it  w a s  lik e  20 pe rcen t w h en  I f irs t s tarted , th e  n u m b e r across th e  U.S. and W este rn  Europe is e ig h t percen t. A nd  so  bas ica lly  even  i f  you  th in k  it 's 10 percent, 90 percen t o f  th e  t im e , som e th in g  th a t costs us a io t o f  m oney — pe rsona lly , and  a lso  w e  o rgan ize  o u r  c it ie s  a round it  and a ll so rts  o f  th ing s  —m90 pe rcen t o f  th e  t im e  it 's s itt in g  around. So fo r  th is  reason, I th in k  on e  o f  th e■ili!=' s  FcoAevaluation4 3  PRINCIPLES 43  tluoiy/content4 3  interaction4 3  IfrrERROGATOES/METADISCOLIRSE (PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES!4 3  PRINCIPLES- 43  theory/content4 3  EVAL 4 3  evaluationo th e r th e m e s  w ith  th e  m esh is e s se n t ia lly  tha t, i f  w e  squeeze  hard on  th ing s  th a t w e 've  th row n  away, th e re 's  a lo t o f  v a lu e  in  th ose  th ings. W ha t se t up w ith  Z ip c a r - Z ip c a r  s ta rted  in 2000.In th e  la s t year, 2010, tw o  ca r com pan ies  s tarted , o n e  tha t's  in  th e  U.K. ca lled  W b ipCar, and th e  o th e r one, Re layR ides, in  th e  U.S. T hey 're  both  p ee r-to -p ee r car sharing serv ices, because th e  tw o  th ings tha t rea lly  w o rk  fo r  car sha ring  is, one, th e  car has to  be  ava ilab le , and tw o , it 's  w ith in  one  o r tw o  b locks o f w h e re  you  stand. W e ll th e  car th a t's  on e  o r  tw o  b locks from  y o u r hom e  o r yo u r o ff ice  is p robab ly  you r ne ighbor's  car, and  it's p robab ly  a lso  ava ilab le . So p eo p le  have crea ted th is  bus iness. Z ipcar s ta rted  a decade e a r lie r  in  2000. It to o k  them  six years to  get 1,000 cars in serv ice . W h ipCar, w h ich  sta rted  A p r il o f last year, it  to o k  them  s ix  m onths to  ge t 1,000 cars in  th e  se rv ice . So rea lly  in te res ting . P eop le  are m aking anyw here  b e tw een  200 and 700 do lla rs  a m onth  le tt in g  th e ir  ne ighbors use th e ir c a r  w h e n  th ey 're  n o t u s ing  it. So it 's43 MsaupnoK43 examples43  DESCRIPTION 4 5  examples43  CLASSIFICATION 43  PRINCIPLES S i  theory/content4 3  examples 4 3  SEQUENCE42  PZAI 43  evaluation Rj 'TV riASSIFli'ATinN64l ik e  vaca tion  ren ta ls  fo r  cars. S ince I'm he re  -- and I hope som e p e o p le  in th e  aud ience  are in the  car bus iness — (Laughter) — I'm th in k ing  that, com ing  from  the  techno logy  s ide  o f  th ings -- w e  saw  cab le -ready  TVs and W iF i-re ady  no tebooks -  it w ou ld  be  rea lly  great if, any m inu te  now , y ou  guys cou ld  start ro llin g  share-ready cars o ff. Because it  ju s t crea tes m ore  f le x ib il ity . It a llow s  us as ow ners to  have o th e r op tion s . A nd  I th in k  w e 're  go ing  th e re  anyway.The opp o rtun ity  and th e  cha llenge  w ith  m esh bus inesses -- and those  are businesses like  Z ipcar o r N e tf lix  tha t are fu ll m esh bus inesses, o r o th e r ones w he re  you have a lo t o f  th e  car com pan ies, car m anufacturers, w h o  are beg inn ing  to  o f fe r  th e ir  ow n car share sen/ices as w e ll as a second f lan ke r brand, o r as re a lly  a te s t, I th in k  — is  to  m ake sharing  ir re s is t ib le . W e  have experiences  in ou r liv e s  ce rta in ly  w h e n  sha ring  has b een  ir re s is t ib le . It's ju st, how  do  w e m ake th a t recu rren t and  sca le it?  W e  know  a lso , because  w e 're  connected in  soc ia l ne tw orks, th a t it 's  easy to  c reate d e lig h t in o n e  lit t lep lace. It's contag ious because w e 're  a ll connected  to  each o the r. So if  I have a te r r if ic  e xpe rie n ce  and i T w ee t it, o r I t e l l f iv e  p e o p le  s tand ing  n ex t to  m e, n ew s trave ls. The opp o s ite , as w e  know , is a lso  true , o fte n  m ore  true .So  h e re  w e  have LudoTruck, w h ich  is  In L A ., do ing  th e  th in g s  th a t gou rm e t fo o d  tru cks do , and th e y 'v e  ga the red  q u ite  a fo llo w in g . In gene ra l, and m aybe, again, it's because  i'm  a tech  en trep reneu r, I lo o k  at th ing s  as p la tfo rm s. P la tfo rm s are  in v ita tion s . So crea ting  C ra ig s lis t o r  iTunes and th e  iP ho ne  d e v e lo p e r ne tw o rk , th e re  a re a ll th e se  n e tw o rks  -  Facebook as w e ll. These p la tfo rm s in v ite  a ll so rts  o f d e v e lo p e rs  and a ll sorts o f p e o p le  to  com e w ith  th e ir  ideas and th e ir  o p p o rtu n ity  to  c reate and ta rge t an a p p lica tio n  fo r  a particu la r aud ience . A nd  honestly , it 's fu ll o f  su rp rises. Because I do n 't th in k  any o f  us in th is  room  co u ld  have p red ic ted  th e  sorts  o f  a p p lica tio n s  tha t have happened  at Facebook, a round Facebook, f o r  exam p le , tw o  years ago, w hen  M ark announced  th a t th e y  w e re  go ing  to  go w ith  a p la tfo rm .M i65So in  th is  way, 1 th in k  th a t c it ie s  are p la tfo rm s, and ce rta in ly  D e tro it is a p la tfo rm . The in v ita tio n  o f  b r ing ing  m akers and a rt is ts  and en trep reneu rs, it  rea lly  h e lp s  s t im u la te  th is  f ie ry  c re a tiv ity  and h e lp s  a c ity  to  th r ive , i t ’s  in v it in g  pa rtic ipa tion . A nd  c it ie s  have, h is to rica lly , in v ite d  a ll so rts  o f partic ipa tion . N ow  w e 're  saying th a t th e re 's  o th e r op t io n s  as w e ll.  So fo r  exam p le , c ity  dep a rtm en ts  can o p e n  up tran s it data. G oog le  has m ade ava ilab le  tran s it data API. A nd  so th e re 's  a bou t seven  o r e ig h t c it ie s  a lready  in th e  U.S. tha t have p rov ided  th e  tran s it data, and d if fe re n t d e ve lop e rs  are bu ild in g  app lica tions. So I w as hav ing a co ffe e  in Portland , and h a lf o f a la tte  in and th e  lit t le  board in  th e  cafe a ll o f  a sudden  starts sho w in g  m e tha t th e  next bus is com ing in  th re e  m inu tes  and th e  tra in  is com ing  in 16 m inu tes . And so it 's  re lia b le , rea l data th a t's  r igh t in m y face, w he re  I am , so I can f in ish  the  latte.There 's th is  fabu lous  o pp o rtu n ity  w e  have across th e  U.S. now : abou t 21percent o f vacant com m erc ia l and in d u str ia l space. That space is  no t v ita l. The areas a round it  lack v ita lity  and v ib rancy  and engagem ent. There 's th is  th in g  — how  m any p eo p le  here  have heard o f pop -up  s to res  o r pop -up  shops?  Oh, great. So I'm a b ig  fan o f  th is . A nd  th is  is a ve ry  m eshy  th ing . Essen tia lly , th e re  are a ll so rts  o f  restau ran ts  in O akland, n ea r w h e re  I liv e . There 's  a pop -up  gene ra l s to re  e v e ry  th ree  w eeks, and th e y  d o  a fan ta s tic  jo b  o f m ak ing  a ve ry  socia l e ven t happen ing  fo r  food ies. Super fun, and it happens in a ve ry  tran s itiona l ne ighbo rhood . Subsequen t to  that, a fte r it 's  been  go ing fo r  about a year now , th e y  actua lly  s ta rted  to  le a se  and create and extend . An  area that was edgy-artsy is now  starting  to  becom e  much co o le r and engage a lo t m ore p eop le . So th is  is an exam p le . The C rafty  Fox is th is  w om an  w ho 's  in to  crafts, and she  doe s  th e se  pop -up  crafts fa irs  a round London. But th e se  sorts  o f th ings are happen ing  in m any d if fe re n t  env ironm en ts. From  m y perspective , one  o f th e  th ing s  pop -up  s to re s  d o  is c rea te  p e r ish ab ility  and urgency. It creates tw o  o f  th e  fa v o r ite  w o rd s  o f any b u s in essp e rson : so ld  out. A nd  th e: :66■op p o rtu n ity  to  re a lly  fo cu s  tru s t  and a tte n t io n  is  a  w o n d e rfu l th ing .So a lo t  o f  w h a t w e  see  in  th e  m esh, and  a lo t  o f  w h a t w e  have in  th e  p la tfo rm : ;th a t w e  b u ilt  a llo w s  us to  d e f in e , re f in e  and  sca le . It a llo w s  us to  te s t  th in g s  as an e n tre p reneu r, to  go  to  m arket, to  be  in  co nve rsa tion  w ith  p e o p le , lis te n , | :re f in e  so m e th in g  and go back. It's v e ry  cost e ffe c t iv e , and it 's  v e ry  m eshy. The in fra stru ctu re  en a b le s  that. ntI  ■ ■ i , ' n  iIn c los ing , and as w e 're  m ov ing  to w a rd s  th e  end , I ju s t a lso  w a n t to  encou rage  -  and I'm w il l in g  to  share  m y fa ilu re s  as w e ll,  th ough  no t from  th e  stage.I'-ij?:;?!:(Laughter) I w o u ld  ju s t lik e  to  say th a t on e  o f  th e  b ig  th ing s, w h en  w e  lo o k  at w as te  and w h e n  w e  lo o k  a t w ays th a t w e  can re a lly  be g ene rou s  and co n tr ib u te  to  each o th e r, bu t a lso  m ove  to  c rea te  a b e t te r  e co n o m ic  s itu a t io n  and a b e t te r en v iro n m e n ta l s itu a t io n , is  b y  sha r in g  fa ilu re s . A n d  on e  q u ick  e xam p le  is V e lib , in  2007, cam e fo rw a rd  in  Paris w ith  a ve ry  b o ld  p ro p o s it io n , a v e ry  b ig  b ik e  sharing  se rv ice . T hey  m ade a lo t o f  m istakes. They had som e  j_.n um be r o f b ig  successes. Bu t th e y  w e re  v e ry  tran spa rent, o r th e y  had  to  be, in  th e  w ay  th a t th e y  e xposed  w h a t w o rked  and d id n 't  w o rk . A n d  so  B.C. in Barce lona  and B -cyc ie  and B oris  B ikes  in  London — n o  o n e  has had to  rep ea t th e  ve rs io n  l.O sc re w -u p sa n d  e x p e n s iv e  le a rn in g  exe rc ise s  th a t h app ened  in Paris. So th e  op p o rtu n ity  w h e n  w e 're  co nn e cted  is a lso  to  share fa ilu re s  andW e 're  a t th e  ve ry  b eg inn ing  o f  so m e th in g  th a t, w h a t w e ’ re  se e in g  and th e  w ay  th a t m esh co m p an ie s  a re  com ing  fo rw ard , is in v it in g , it 's  engag ing, bu t it 's  v e ry  early . I have  a w e b s ite , it 's  a d ire c to ry , and it  s ta rted  w ith  a b o u t 1,200 com pan ies , and in  th e  la s t tw o  and a h a lf  m on ths  it 's  up to  a bou t 3,300 com pan ies . A nd  it  g row s on a v e ry  reg u la r d a ily  basis. But it 's  v e ry  m uch at th e  beg inn ing .S c I ju s t  w an t to  w e lco m e  a ll o f  you  o n to  th e  r ide . A n d  th ank  you  ve ry  m uch. (App lause)67

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.42591.1-0077994/manifest

Comment

Related Items