The Language Development (LD) programme at UAL is focused on helping students who speak English as an additional language (EAL) to develop the language skills required to be successful on their courses (UAL, 2025). However, LD is available to everyone, and I draw on the often quoted – (and sometimes misquoted as Ding, (2019) notes) assertion that academic language is ‘no one’s mother tongue’ and is remote from the language which is actually spoken by the vast majority of the population in day to day life (Bourdieu and Passerson, 1995, p.8). This is especially true with language required at postgraduate level. From reading around this topic, I am reflecting on the language that I use to communicate threshold concepts, the multiple meanings this language holds and my own socialization into the language of academic discourse as learner (Bond, 2016).
One term that I frequently use with learners is ‘looking for tensions in the literature,’ this I owe to my tutor Paul whose teaching on the MSc International Public Policy at Queen Mary University of London embedded this notion in my understanding of a key purpose of literature review. I include this image (see fig 1) which for me illustrates what to articulate between the schools of thought in a given field of study; a tug of war is meant to represent the friendly nature of this critical discourse – it is a game that we as academics need to play – the argument is academic not ad hominem. I also reflect that other lexis I frequently use when referring to framing the literature is illustrating the drama and making a compelling narrative; this lexicon owes more to my background as an actor and writer.
Fig.1 “I will not play tug o’ war; I’d rather play hug o’ war” – Shel Silverstein, Where the Sidewalk Ends. (Crockett, 2017). #1
Some key lexis that I explore with learners is frame and framing, these are concepts that I learned about myself at postgraduate level study in the field of public policy and International Relations, where a frame can be understood as the definition of a policy’s image (Cairney, 2011) and framing a process of messaging where both producers and receivers ‘transform information into a meaningful whole.’ (Van Gorp, 2002; Fischer, 2003, p.144). However, perhaps the most memorable learning experience for me was an online lecture podcast by Paul Cairney (2015) which explores the different ways that we can understand this meaning through visual representation (see figure 1 and 2 below).
Fig.2 Framing as deciding which part of the world on which to focus. (Cairney, 2015)
Fig 2. A timber frame, to highlight the structure of a discussion which is crucial but often unseen and taken for granted. (Cairney, 2015).
It is from the latter that I draw inspiration in trying to help my postgraduate fashion business learners visualize theoretical frameworks with this image (see fig 4).
Fig 4. Framework of Flatiron Building, Circa 1901. (Designing Buildings, 2020)
To further emphasize this idea, and to help students access the threshold concept of foundations underpinning assumptions I use the illustration of our building at LCF and the steel formwork which underpins it (see slides in Appendix). Reflecting again on this choice of image – perhaps I owe this to my dad – an engineer who worked on designing the steel frame formwork for this kind of construction.
Thinking reflexively: the way I see the things – ontologically #2 – and how this is manifest in language – comes via multiple roots and routes, to draw on Stuart Hall, (Hall, Segal and Osbourne, 1997) #3, and this cultural positionality informs my pedagogy. This is a theme that I would like to explore further with fellow practitioners, as well as my own learners, to understand the relationship between the language we learn and the language we teach.
Appendix:
Foundations underpinning a construction.pptx
End notes:
#1. There are many Google images available, but I have chosen one that uses real people, and these people are mainly not white Caucasian, because I believe that the images that I present to my learners should be more representative of the learners themselves.
#2. This language will be explored further in reflective blog 3.
#3. The work Stuart Hall will be explored further in reflective blog 4.
Reference List:
Bond, B, (2016) The importance of language for learning. Available at: https://teachingexcellence.leeds.ac.uk/opinion-the-importance-of-language-for-learning/ (Accessed on 13.03.25)
Cairney, P., (2015) Policy Concepts in 1000 Words: Framing. Available at: https://paulcairney.wordpress.com/2015/11/02/policy-concepts-in-1000-words-framing/ (Accessed on 13.03.25)
Cairney, P., (2011), Understanding Public Policy: Theories and Issues, Basingstoke Hamps: Palgrave Macmillan
Crocket, Z. (2017) A History of Tug-of-War Fatalities. Available at: https://priceonomics.com/a-history-of-tug-of-war-fatalities/
Designing Buildings (2020) Skeleton frame Available at: https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Skeleton_frame (Accessed on 13.03.24)
Hall, S., Segal, L., and Osbourne, P. (1997) ‘Stuart Hall Culture and Powe,’ Radical Philosophy, 086, Nov/Dec 1997, pp. 24–41. (pdf) Available at https://www.radicalphilosophy.com/interview/stuart-hall-culture-and-power (Accessed on 13.03.25)
UAL (2025) English Language Development for students. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/study-at-ual/language-centre/english-language-development-for-ual-students (Accessed on 13.03.25)
Van Gorp, B., (2002), ‘The Implementation of Asylum Policy: Which Frame Dominates the Debate,’ European Consortium for Policy Research, Joint Sessions, Grenoble France (6th -11th April 2002)