The potentials for incidental vocabulary acquisition from listening to computer science academic lectures: a higher education corpus-based case study from Macau.

Abstract

Universities in non-Anglophone countries are increasingly implementing English as the medium of instruction (EMI) lectures. There seems to be an assumption that students' performance on standardized English examinations can be equated with the lexical knowledge needed to comprehend EMI lectures regardless of discipline. For unknown words students encounter, it is assumed that they can be picked up through listening to these lectures. This potential for students to acquire unknown words incidentally while listening to these lectures has yet to be fully explored. This study addresses the potential of students incidentally acquiring vocabulary from listening to EMI lectures through corpus analyses of computer science lectures at one public university in Macau. Taking into consideration frequency, range, and lecturer explanation, corpus analyses of the transcripts of 28 computer science lectures (40 h 36 min) were conducted to determine the lexical knowledge needed for students to comprehend the lectures. The potential number of words these students could acquire through listening to the lectures was also uncovered through further analyses. Results showed that L2 students need to have receptive knowledge of the most frequent 3,000 word families plus proper nouns and marginal words to reach beyond 95% lexical coverage. To reach 98% lexical coverage, 5,000 word families are needed. Considering frequency, range, and teacher explanation, we concluded that 30 new words could reasonably be incidentally acquired after listening to the 28 lectures. These results indicate a need for EMI lecturers to consider the lexical knowledge of students and whether additional pedagogical techniques (i.e., vocabulary explanation) should be employed in content classrooms when lectures are delivered in English, especially for specialized fields such as computer science. Our results also draw attention to the importance of field specific vocabulary and the potential pitfalls of using blanket English language admissions criteria when admitting students to different academic programs.