Perspectives interculturelles et interlinguistiques sur le discours académique – Crosscultural and Crosslinguistic Perspectives on Academic Discourse. Volume 1

The Department of French Studies of the University of Turku (Finland) organized an International Bilingual Conference on Crosscultural and Crosslinguistic Perspectives on Academic Discourse from 2022 May 2005. The event hosted specialists on Academic Discourse from Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Spain, and the USA. This book is the first volume in our series of publications on Academic Discourse (AD hereafter). The following pages are composed of selected papers from the conference and focus on different aspects and analytical frameworks of Academic Discourse. One of the motivations behind organizing the conference was to examine and expand research on AD in different languages. Another one was to question to what extent academic genres are culturebound and language specific or primarily field or domain specific. The research carried out on AD has been mainly concerned with the use of English in different academic settings for a long time now – mainly written contexts – and at the expense of other languages. Alternatively the academic genre conventions of English and English speaking world have served as a basis for comparison with other languages and cultures. We consider this first volume to be a strong contribution to the spreading out of researches based on other languages than English in AD, namely Finnish, French, Italian, Norwegian and Romanian in this book. All the following articles have a strong link with the French language: either French is constitutive of the AD corpora under examination or the article was written in French. The structure of the book suggests and provides evidence that the concept of AD is understood and tackled to varying degrees by different scholars. Our first volume opens up the discussion on what AD is and backs dissemination, overlapping and expansion of current research questions and methodologies. The book is divided into three parts and contains four articles in English and six articles in French. The papers in part one and part two cover what we call the prototypical genre of written AD, i.e. the research article. Part one follows up on issues linked to the 13 Research Article (RA hereafter). Kjersti Fløttum asks wether a typical RA exists and concentrates on authors’ voices in RA (self and other dimensions), whereas Didriksen and Gjesdal’s article focuses on individual variation of the author’s voice in RA. The last article in this section is by Nadine Rentel and deals with evaluation in the writing of RA. Part two concentrates on the teaching and learning of AD within foreign language learning, another more or less canonical genre of AD. Two aspects of writing are covered in the first two articles: foreign students’ representations on rhetorical traditions (Hidden) and a contrastive assessment of written exercices in French and Finnish in Higher Education (Suzanne). The last contribution in this section on AD moves away from traditional written forms and looks at how argumentation is constructed in students’ oral presentations (Dervin and Fauveau). The last part of the book continues the extension by featuring four articles written in French exploring institutional and scientific discourses. Institutional discourses under scrutiny include the European Bologna Process (Galatanu) and Romanian reform texts (Moilanen). As for scientific discourses, the next paper in this section deconstructs an ideological discourse on the didactics of French as a foreign language (Pescheux). Finally, the last paper in part three reflects on varied forms of AD at university (Defays). We hope that this book will add some fuel to continue discussing diverse forms of and approches to AD – in different languages and voices! No need to say that with the current upsurge in academic mobility, reflecting on crosscultural and crosslinguistic AD has just but started.

Towards the Best A++ Rating Productivity of Research and Teaching in Finnish Universities

Tämän tutkimusraportin suomenkielinen versio on osoitteessa: http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-29-4509-2

Thinking Outside the Box: Enhancing Science Teaching by Combining (Instead of Contrasting) Laboratory and Simulation Activities

The focus of the present work was on 10- to 12-year-old elementary school students’ conceptual learning outcomes in science in two specific inquiry-learning environments, laboratory and simulation. The main aim was to examine if it would be more beneficial to combine than contrast simulation and laboratory activities in science teaching. It was argued that the status quo where laboratories and simulations are seen as alternative or competing methods in science teaching is hardly an optimal solution to promote students’ learning and understanding in various science domains. It was hypothesized that it would make more sense and be more productive to combine laboratories and simulations. Several explanations and examples were provided to back up the hypothesis. In order to test whether learning with the combination of laboratory and simulation activities can result in better conceptual understanding in science than learning with laboratory or simulation activities alone, two experiments were conducted in the domain of electricity. In these experiments students constructed and studied electrical circuits in three different learning environments: laboratory (real circuits), simulation (virtual circuits), and simulation-laboratory combination (real and virtual circuits were used simultaneously). In order to measure and compare how these environments affected students’ conceptual understanding of circuits, a subject knowledge assessment questionnaire was administered before and after the experimentation. The results of the experiments were presented in four empirical studies. Three of the studies focused on learning outcomes between the conditions and one on learning processes. Study I analyzed learning outcomes from experiment I. The aim of the study was to investigate if it would be more beneficial to combine simulation and laboratory activities than to use them separately in teaching the concepts of simple electricity. Matched-trios were created based on the pre-test results of 66 elementary school students and divided randomly into a laboratory (real circuits), simulation (virtual circuits) and simulation-laboratory combination (real and virtual circuits simultaneously) conditions. In each condition students had 90 minutes to construct and study various circuits. The results showed that studying electrical circuits in the simulation–laboratory combination environment improved students’ conceptual understanding more than studying circuits in simulation and laboratory environments alone. Although there were no statistical differences between simulation and laboratory environments, the learning effect was more pronounced in the simulation condition where the students made clear progress during the intervention, whereas in the laboratory condition students’ conceptual understanding remained at an elementary level after the intervention. Study II analyzed learning outcomes from experiment II. The aim of the study was to investigate if and how learning outcomes in simulation and simulation-laboratory combination environments are mediated by implicit (only procedural guidance) and explicit (more structure and guidance for the discovery process) instruction in the context of simple DC circuits. Matched-quartets were created based on the pre-test results of 50 elementary school students and divided randomly into a simulation implicit (SI), simulation explicit (SE), combination implicit (CI) and combination explicit (CE) conditions. The results showed that when the students were working with the simulation alone, they were able to gain significantly greater amount of subject knowledge when they received metacognitive support (explicit instruction; SE) for the discovery process than when they received only procedural guidance (implicit instruction: SI). However, this additional scaffolding was not enough to reach the level of the students in the combination environment (CI and CE). A surprising finding in Study II was that instructional support had a different effect in the combination environment than in the simulation environment. In the combination environment explicit instruction (CE) did not seem to elicit much additional gain for students’ understanding of electric circuits compared to implicit instruction (CI). Instead, explicit instruction slowed down the inquiry process substantially in the combination environment. Study III analyzed from video data learning processes of those 50 students that participated in experiment II (cf. Study II above). The focus was on three specific learning processes: cognitive conflicts, self-explanations, and analogical encodings. The aim of the study was to find out possible explanations for the success of the combination condition in Experiments I and II. The video data provided clear evidence about the benefits of studying with the real and virtual circuits simultaneously (the combination conditions). Mostly the representations complemented each other, that is, one representation helped students to interpret and understand the outcomes they received from the other representation. However, there were also instances in which analogical encoding took place, that is, situations in which the slightly discrepant results between the representations ‘forced’ students to focus on those features that could be generalised across the two representations. No statistical differences were found in the amount of experienced cognitive conflicts and self-explanations between simulation and combination conditions, though in self-explanations there was a nascent trend in favour of the combination. There was also a clear tendency suggesting that explicit guidance increased the amount of self-explanations. Overall, the amount of cognitive conflicts and self-explanations was very low. The aim of the Study IV was twofold: the main aim was to provide an aggregated overview of the learning outcomes of experiments I and II; the secondary aim was to explore the relationship between the learning environments and students’ prior domain knowledge (low and high) in the experiments. Aggregated results of experiments I & II showed that on average, 91% of the students in the combination environment scored above the average of the laboratory environment, and 76% of them scored also above the average of the simulation environment. Seventy percent of the students in the simulation environment scored above the average of the laboratory environment. The results further showed that overall students seemed to benefit from combining simulations and laboratories regardless of their level of prior knowledge, that is, students with either low or high prior knowledge who studied circuits in the combination environment outperformed their counterparts who studied in the laboratory or simulation environment alone. The effect seemed to be slightly bigger among the students with low prior knowledge. However, more detailed inspection of the results showed that there were considerable differences between the experiments regarding how students with low and high prior knowledge benefitted from the combination: in Experiment I, especially students with low prior knowledge benefitted from the combination as compared to those students that used only the simulation, whereas in Experiment II, only students with high prior knowledge seemed to benefit from the combination relative to the simulation group. Regarding the differences between simulation and laboratory groups, the benefits of using a simulation seemed to be slightly higher among students with high prior knowledge. The results of the four empirical studies support the hypothesis concerning the benefits of using simulation along with laboratory activities to promote students’ conceptual understanding of electricity. It can be concluded that when teaching students about electricity, the students can gain better understanding when they have an opportunity to use the simulation and the real circuits in parallel than if they have only the real circuits or only a computer simulation available, even when the use of the simulation is supported with the explicit instruction. The outcomes of the empirical studies can be considered as the first unambiguous evidence on the (additional) benefits of combining laboratory and simulation activities in science education as compared to learning with laboratories and simulations alone.

Using Moodle to provide added value in the teaching of a software development course

The rate of adoption and use of learning management systems to support teaching and learning processes in academic institutions is growing rapidly. Universities are acquiring systems with functionalities that can match with their specific needs and requirements. Moodle is one of the most popular and widely deployed learning management systems in academic institutions today. However, apart from the system, universities tend to maintain other applications for the purpose of supplementing their teaching and learning processes. This situation is similar to Lappeenranta University of Technology (LUT), which is our case study in this project. Apart from Moodle, the university also maintains other systems such as Oodi, Noppa and Uni portal for the purpose of supporting its educational activities. This thesis has two main goals. The first goal is to understand the specific role of Moodle at LUT. This information is fundamental in assessing whether Moodle is needed in the university’s current teaching and learning environment. The second aim is to provide insights to teachers and other departmental stakeholders on how Moodle can provide added value in the teaching of a software development course. In response to this, a Moodle module for a software development course is created and the underlying features are tested. Results of the constructive work proposed some improvements through (i) the use of Moodle for in-class surveys, (ii) transfer of grades from Moodle to Oodi, (iii) use of Moodle in self-study courses and MOOCs, (iv) online examinations, and (v) Moodle integrations with third party applications. The proposed items were then evaluated for their utility through interviews of five expert interviews. The final results of this work are considered useful to LUT administration and management specifically on ways that Moodle can bring changes to the university at managerial, economical and technical level. It also poses some challenges on platform innovations and research.

Building the ‘Digital’ Library: Routes to Managing our Institutional Digital Learning, Teaching and Research Assets Together

Presentation at Open Repositories 2014, Helsinki, Finland, June 9-13, 2014

Evaluating land-use related environmental impacts of biomass value chains for decision-support : Comparison and testing of methodologies proposed for environmental life cycle assessment

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is one of the most established quantitative tools for environmental impact assessment of products. To be able to provide support to environmentally-aware decision makers on environmental impacts of biomass value-chains, the scope of LCA methodology needs to be augmented to cover landuse related environmental impacts. This dissertation focuses on analysing and discussing potential impact assessment methods, conceptual models and environmental indicators that have been proposed to be implemented into the LCA framework for impacts of land use. The applicability of proposed indicators and impact assessment frameworks is tested from practitioners' perspective, especially focusing on forest biomass value chains. The impacts of land use on biodiversity, resource depletion, climate change and other ecosystem services is analysed and discussed and the interplay in between value choices in LCA modelling and the decision-making situations to be supported is critically discussed. It was found out that land use impact indicators are necessary in LCA in highlighting differences in impacts from distinct land use classes. However, many open questions remain on certainty of highlighting actual impacts of land use, especially regarding impacts of managed forest land use on biodiversity and ecosystem services such as water regulation and purification. The climate impact of energy use of boreal stemwood was found to be higher in the short term and lower in the long-term in comparison with fossil fuels that emit identical amount of CO2 in combustion, due to changes implied to forest C stocks. The climate impacts of energy use of boreal stemwood were found to be higher than the previous estimates suggest on forest residues and stumps. The product lifetime was found to have much higher influence on the climate impacts of woodbased value chains than the origin of stemwood either from thinnings or final fellings. Climate neutrality seems to be likely only in the case when almost all the carbon of harvested wood is stored in long-lived wooden products. In the current form, the land use impacts cannot be modelled with a high degree of certainty nor communicated with adequate level of clarity to decision makers. The academia needs to keep on improving the modelling framework, and more importantly, clearly communicate to decision-makers the limited certainty on whether land-use intensive activities can help in meeting the strict mitigation targets we are globally facing.