This is all interesting to me.  I need to ask which is more beneficial: taking 
the time to learn english well or taking the time to learn and add a skill to 
your analytical toolbox?  Also if is science is to become a greater part of 
society shouldn't english speaking scientists take the time to learn a second 
language?  The majority of humans and don't speak english.  I'm also willing to 
bet that most scientists don't speak english.  Just some thoughts to stir the 
pot.
Cheers.
Daniel 
________________________________________
From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news 
[ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Akwasi Asamoah [asamoa...@outlook.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 11:36 AM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] language exam for Ph.D. students?

Dear Ash,
Yes, math and computer skills are more critical requirements for science but 
some reasonable level of basic standard English is also very crucial. Often 
poor, inappropriate or complex language hugely drain comprehension out of our 
science and engineering. I do believe that though GRE, TOEFL, IELTS and their 
like can be an efficient mens of assessing English Proficiency, they do not in 
themselves constitute effective means of testing proficiency in scientific or 
technical communication. Thus, why communication requirements like english 
translation of and/or quizzing on peer-reviewed publications may come in handy 
as addition means of further ascertaining true technical or scientific 
proficiency.
I mean if we are to be truly honest with ourselves, one does not have to have 
such high verbal aptitude to read, critique and communicate scientific and 
technical facts. it may be agreed that sometimes high verbal aptitude breeds 
costly liberties with the English language (as is often with inexperienced 
so-called 'native speakers'). The more they try to prove their nativeness in 
language, the more they are likely to be needlessly verbose to the erosion of 
understanding. Often, scientific and technical papers are rejected purely on 
the basis of strange English language, as though the the non-native author (s) 
suddenly invented their own English language for their paper.
Thus, I think our English proficiency tests should aim to test more of reliable 
indicators of adequate knowledge of standard basic English by way of basic 
english grammar (concord), lexis and structures, and comprehension than the 
testing of high verbal aptitude which often throws science and engineering in 
ambiguity and haywire.
Scientific and/or technical communication is not exactly the same as the 
English literature as is known or approved by native speakers. Thus, 
prospective recruiters would need to find a more effective way of assessing 
proficiency in technical and/or scientific communication for successful 
completion of early career research work.
Akwasi
> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 16:50:45 +0000
> From: ashley.ballant...@umontana.edu
> Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] language exam for Ph.D. students?
> To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
>
> Just to be fair we should implement an exam to ensure that all graduate 
> students are fluent in at least one computer language- regardless of native 
> language!  I would argue that logical computer syntax is more critical than 
> illogical English syntax to one's future success in science.
>
> ash
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news 
> [mailto:ECOLOG-L@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of David Inouye
> Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 4:38 PM
> To: ECOLOG-L@listserv.umd.edu
> Subject: [ECOLOG-L] language exam for Ph.D. students?
>
> I know Univ. of NC still had a requirement in mid-1970s as I had to take an 
> exam then, and my son had to take one at Duke in the 1990s.
> Are there still any Ph.D. programs that require students take a language 
> exam?  Typically students had to read a paper in the chosen language, and 
> then answer questions about it posed by a faculty member or committee to 
> confirm comprehension. So just a reading requirement, not spoken.
>
> David Inouye

Reply via email to