1. An interactive critique of Parkinson J and Adendorff RD (2004). The use of popular science articles in teaching scientific literacy. (English for Specific Purposes 23(4):379-396)
First Published 27 May 2009. Minor changes 11 December 2009
To avoid talking in the abstract I have chosen an article in the flagship journal of ESP, which is readily available free of charge online. I have interacted with it and showed up some of the absurdities of taking a Constructivist position. En route I many times criticise the authors for making sweeping statements - unjustified generalisations. In other words, the authors repeatedly fail to address the question of validity. I also present a more detailed and nuanced continuum from Ultra-specialised texts to the most popular texts.
2. Detailed commentary on a constructivist article: class discussion notes. First published 7 January 2010
I was tired of just teaching about constructivism. My classes needed to engage with some content so that they would see that I was not inventing what I was teaching, and so that they would engage with a text. So I took short extracts from Parkinson & Adendorff (2004). I provide my commentary.
3. Identifying technical vocabulary. An assessment of the views of
TM Chung and P Nation (2003, 2004). First draft. Published 5 January 2010
Chung and Nation provide a four step scale for identifying technical words. I heavily criticise this scale because it adds to the existing confusion and fails to provide a solution. In addition, despite the professional expertise of Cheng she has misunderstood some basic biology. File: chung-nation.pdf
4. Publication manual of the American Psychological Association, 6th edition 2009. First published 2 July 2010
The world famous guide is fully evaluated, and applied to theses in linguistics. Yes, I will be recommending it to my students, and I will be expecting my doctoral students to work through the study guide and tests, but only with the heavy qualifications detailed in this review.