ESP Practitioner Professionalization through Apprenticeship of Practice: the Case of Two Iranian ESP Practitioners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
English for specific purposes (ESP), the popular catchphrase of presently English language teaching programs, has been investigated from different perspectives. However, there have been occasional forays in to the role of ESP practitioner as one of the most distinctive features in the literature. In addition to fulfilling the usual role of a language teacher, ESP practitioner may be required to deal with administrative, personnel, cross-cultural, interdisciplinary, curricular, and pedagogical issues that may be unfamiliar to general English teachers (Hutchinson & Waters 1990; Koh 1988; Robinson 1991; Waters 1994). Consequently, those practitioners who have passed the thorny way of professionalization would be great assets for the teachers who are new to the ESP programs. Moreover, lack of an independent disciplinary status for ESP worsens the issue. Drawing on the interview data and observational evidence, present study investigates the route of professionalization of two Iranian ESP teachers in the particular context of Petroleum University of Technology (PUT) in Ahwaz. What they say are critically analyzed in the context and emerging guidelines are categorized accordingly. It is hoped that findings grounded minimally in this particular ESP context will act as broad guidelines that bestow a more academic image to the general English teacher-ESP teacher change in the present ‘no man land’ of Iranian ESP teaching programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".