Deborah Acosta-Sánchez
Why Language Matters in STEM Education
Tinta regada
12 – octubre de 2026
…Part of STEM is to be inclusive in thoughts and findings, therefor it should also be inclusive to languages.
***When it comes to language and STEM, many may feel that there is little correlation between the two. This misconception is problematic, as language is the bridge to knowledge: it ensures that thoughts and findings are voiced, clarified, and that they are received (or at least expressed) as intended. It is key to cross-examine their results with individuals from different countries and knowledge systems (Raupp).
Primarily, language is applied in STEM by scientists within their field. While this is done often, but not always, by individuals who speak the same language, this includes a communication aspect, in which words and their meanings are used to share ideas with others over a specific subject. When using it to share thoughts and ideas with fellow scientists, a certain level of in-group language often develops. This results in specific vocabulary words, jargon, the use of scientific names (in Latin, e.g.), and in formal spoken language. This on its own requires a mastery of speech unlike any other, since to be involved in these types of fields, one must select and distinguish the correct words to describe theories and phenomena that may not exist in other fields. It is something that may quickly become second nature for those in STEM, and that scientists may take for granted once they are in this type of environment.
Yet, as second nature as it may be, scientists should very much be aware of this shift in language, especially when preparing to share their studies with those outside of STEM fields. Language changes depending on context and the group receiving the information, therefor they need to adapt it in a way that is feasible and that properly translates their raw findings to a more casual tone, or perhaps even a professional but interdisciplinary tone (Raupp). Scientists must not only prevent themselves from using specific jargon to describe their work or findings – but also find words that are used more within the public and that describe or mean the same thing as the scientific term commonly used. To a certain extent, this can be seen as a way of code-switching, since the scientist would actively be conscious of what they are saying or presenting and how (they would probably also have to account for how they interact with others through body language and image).
Due to this, there is a power in the ability to code-switch and dominate different communication styles. It is a skill that is not often recognized, but it should, as having the resources and the abilities to decide what information is shared and how determines how knowledge is received (Wilmot et al.). That unspoken (and sometimes spoken) power is one that scientists need to approach with care, as the only way the public will learn from their findings is if they understand it, which is necessary in for findings that can be helpful to everyone (such as information over health or the planet). If people feel a linguistic or cultural disconnect with the studies and findings presented to them, they may not take them as seriously or even pay less attention. This starts with language and how ideas are expressed, because it is not just about what is spoken, it is about the meaning of the information delivered (Raupp; Wilmot et al.).
And this all occurs in the case of communicating in the same language. What happens when a different language must be considered in STEM? The rules do not change much when it comes to presenting data. In order for people of different backgrounds to participate, if translation is a tool, it needs to be done well; and other cultural aspects must be considered. Scientists must think about how their data and findings could be received or even implemented in different settings, and vice versa. There is already a standard in place to consider this: The American Councils on the Teaching of Foreign Languages’s “World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages” (Crum; ACTFL). These standards are referred to as the 5Cs and include communication, cultures, connections, comparisons, and communities. Each of the following have a certain goal. There is communication which ensures that information is shared effectively, and that learners can correctly analyze the information they are receiving in another language. There is also an exchange of ideas and perspectives of different communities (i.e., Cultures). Connections are all about the diversity of knowledge across disciplines and in different cultures. Comparisons bring insight to the nature of language in relation to the contrasts between differing communities. Then there are communities, which posits an active participation both at global and local context for students, so that they may gain experience over what they have learned (ACTFL).
The idea of these standards is to consider the cultural and linguistic differences that students of all stages must learn to share their findings with the world. It prepares them for a situation where interacting with other languages in their studies, regardless of filed, is the norm. Attention to these can open doors to an intercultural environment where studies that often go unrecognized could be shared at a global level (Crum; ACTFL).
As a graduate student at the University of Puerto Rico-Mayagüez, I have witnessed how an intercultural academic environment develops knowledge across languages. While all students are required to take English courses throughout their bachelor’s degree, the reality is that it is more than a requirement: it is an immersion to a different language and culture. It is not uncommon for some courses to be taught in English, regardless of their subject, and for some of the material assigned to students to be in English while the class is primarily taught in Spanish. Outside the classroom, some students socialize in English and are familiar with North American culture, even when some may have never been to the United States. In this sense, in comparison to other universities, students here endowed with translingual perspectives within their studies, as it is part of the institutional infrastructure. One could argue that the University of Puerto Rico-Mayagüez is a case example of what the five C’s of the World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages strive to accomplish.
However, this does bring another issue that cannot be ignored when it comes to creating a standardization of communication. If one language is used to represent everyone, and it is “the language of science,” in this case being English, STEM fields have strict limits on the type of knowledge that may be developed, especially when research is done by scientists whose first language is not English (Drubin and Kellogg). The limitations of monolingual practices in STEM prevent certain studies from being widely published and from participating in more popular journals. It also creates privileges for researchers from certain backgrounds, which is an additional cultural limitation. The point here is not to eradicate the use of English in STEM as a connection to different studies, it is to question its sole use and eradicate the assumption that everyone is comfortable with just using English. Part of STEM is to be inclusive in thoughts and findings, therefor it should also be inclusive to languages. This leads to the question: how would inclusivity of all languages in STEM look like, and are there some who would oppose it?
The best way to ensure the inclusion of language in STEM fields is perhaps by promoting the inclusion of language learning in different contextual settings, and ideally with additional languages. This would be to ensure that there is a multilingual and multicultural aspect in STEM, but also so that scientists may be aware of other international studies in STEM. This inclusion can also make it clear what scientists are working towards and what issues they are aspiring to solve for different communities. Implementing ideas similar to the 5Cs could just be the beginning for creating more opportunities, with the implementation of such a standard one can only imagine what other opportunities will arise and hope that it will create a deep appreciation of the world around them.
Works cited:
ACTFL. “World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages.” ACTFL Language Connects, n.d..
Crum, Sibel. “Second Language Teaching With STEM.” Frontiers in Education, vol. 7, June 2022, https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.903804.
Drubin, David G, and Douglas R Kellogg. “English as the universal language of science: opportunities and challenges.” Molecular biology of the cell vol. 23,8 (2012): 1399. doi:10.1091/mbc.E12-02-0108
Raupp, Andrew B. “Language Matters: How Focusing on Linguistics Promotes STEM Literacy.” Medium, Age of Awareness, 2 Apr. 2023, https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/language-matters-how-focusing-on-linguistics-promotes-stem-literacy-3f518ffa259f.
Wilmot, Kirstin, et al. “Science and Language, Knowledge and Power.” South African Journal of Science, vol. 119, no. 11/12, Nov. 2023, https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2023/16909.
