Search

Forsome language educators, communicative-style language teaching, by definition, entails viewing the use of the learners’ first language (L1) as counterproductive to the learning process or as an unfortunate but sometimes necessary recourse. However, recent research has shown that L1 use can serve important cognitive, communicative, and social functions in communicative foreign and second language (L2) classrooms (Turnbull and Dailey-O’Cain, 2009; see also Butzkamm and Caldwell, 2009). The current article documentsanattitudinalsurveyof29‘native-Englishspeaker’teachersataJapaneseuniversitywhere theexclusiveuseofthetarget language is promoted as a key feature of the optimal foreign language learning environment. Results indicated that, contrary to the officialpolicy,manyteachersbelievedthatselectiveuseofthestudents’L1,bytheteacherorbystudents,couldenhanceL2learning in various ways within a communicative framework. The authors argue that teachers and students themselves are best placed to determine, based on the immediate context of the classroom, what constitutes optimal use of the target language and the L1. 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Objective To investigate the relationship between numeracy and the accuracy of side effect risk estimation following the presentation of information about a medicine via the Cancer Research UK (CR-UK) patient information website. Methods 591 website users were presented with information in different formats about the risks of side effects from taking tamoxifen. Participants estimated the risk of each side effect, provided other subjective ratings about the information and completed a numeracy task. Results Regardless of presentation format, numeracy was correlated with the accuracy of three side effect risk estimates. People with cancer and tamoxifen users showed stronger correlations for all side effect estimates. In addition, numeracy was positively related to the perceived influence of the information on the decision to take the medicine and was negatively related to ratings of satisfaction with the information. Conclusion People with a lower numeracy level make larger errors in interpreting medicines side effect risk information. Practice implications Pharmacists, other health professionals and patient information websites should ensure they provide clear explanations of risk, particularly to people with low numeracy, and assess their understanding of those explanations. Future research into risk communication should take account of numeracy level, to investigate the impact of different formats.

Library science textbooks typically recommend scholarly book reviews as a good source of information about recently published books and other items that may be suitable for purchase. Less attention, however, has been paid to the value of scholarly book reviews as a way for academic librarians to stay current in their areas of specialization or to learn about unfamiliar areas. This article shows that a careful analysis of scholarly book reviews can provide a wealth of knowledge about significant issues in a variety of academic subjects and fields. Results are based on a proof-of-concept questionnaire sent to experts in the fields of Popular Music and Southern Literature, who evaluated two overviews of their fields written entirely from the information contained in scholarly book reviews.