critical discourse analysis in education pdf

Encyclopedia of Language and Education pp 810–825 Cite as

Critical Discourse Analysis in Education

• Rebecca Rogers 4  
• Reference work entry

2233 Accesses

1 Citations

Introduction: The Emergence of Critical Discourse Analysis in Educational Research

Education researchers from around the globe have turned to critical discourse analysis (CDA) as a way to describe, interpret, and explain important educational problems. CDA is an interdisciplinary set of theoretical and analytic tools applied to the study of the relationships between texts (spoken, written, multimodal, and digital), discourse practices (communicative events), and social practices (society‐wide processes) (Blommaert and Bulcaen, 2000 ; Collins, 2004 ; Fairclough, 1993 ; Luke, 1995 /1996). Luke ( 2002 ) defines CDA as a “a principled and transparent shunting back and forth between the microanalysis of texts using various tools of linguistic, semiotic, and literary analysis of social formations, institutions, and power relations that these texts index and construct” (p. 100). CDA focuses on how language as a cultural tool mediates relationships of power and privilege in social interactions,...

• Critical Race Theory
• Critical Discourse Analysis
• Discourse Practice
• Literacy Curriculum
• Systemic Functional Linguistic

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Critical Language Awareness is the social action dimension of CDA. CLA is the ultimate aim of socially committed CDA.

Ailwood, J. and Lingard, B.: 2001, ‘The endgame for national girls’ schooling policies in Australia?’, Australian Journal of Education 45(1), 9–22.

Google Scholar  

Anderson, G.: 2001, ‘Disciplining leaders: A critical discourse analysis of the ISLLC National Examination and Performance Standards in educational administration’, International Journal of Leadership in Education 4(3), 199–216.

Article   Google Scholar  

Armitage, R.: 2005, Measuring Up: Discursive and Material Effects of Testing Times on Parents and Children , Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of South Australia.

Barker, C. and Galasinski, D.: 2001, Cultural Studies and Discourse Analysis , Sage, London.

Beach, R.: 1997, ‘Critical discourse theory and reader response: How discourses constitute reader stances and social contexts’, Reader 37, 1–26.

Bernstein, B.: 1996, Pedagogy, Symbolic Control, and Identity: Theory, Research, and Critique , Taylor & Francis, Bristol, PA.

Billig, M.: 1999, ‘Conversation analysis and the claims of naivety’, Discourse & Society 10(4), 572–576.

Blommaert, J.: 2004, Discourse: A Critical Introduction , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Blommaert, J. and Bulcaen, C.: 2000, ‘Critical discourse analysis’, Annual Review of Anthropology 29, 447–466.

Bloome, D. and Carter, S.: 2001, ‘Lists in reading education reform’, Theory into Practice 40, 150–157.

Brown, D. and Kelly, J.: 2001, ‘Curriculum and the classroom: Private and public spaces’, British Journal of Sociology of Education 22(4), 501–518.

Burns, L. and Morrell, E.: 2005, ‘Critical discourse analysis in literacy research’, 54th Yearbook of the National Reading Conference Yearbook , Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 132–143.

Chouliaraki, L.: 1998, ‘Regulation in progressivist pedagogic discourse: Individualized Teacher‐pupil talk’, Discourse & Society 9(1), 5–32.

Chouliaraki, L. and Fairclough, N.: 1999, Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis , Edinburgh University Press, Scotland.

Christie, F.: 2002, Classroom Discourse Analysis: A Functional Perspective , Continuum Press, New York.

Collins, J.: 2001, ‘Selling the market: Educational standards, discourse and social inequality’, Critique of Anthropology 21(2), 143–163.

Collins, J.: 2004, ‘Foreward’ in FR. Rogers (ed.), An Introduction to Critical Discourse  Analysis in Education , Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, xxi–xxv.

Collins, J. and Blot, R.: 2003, Literacy and Literacies: Texts, Power, and Identity , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Comber, B.: 1997, ‘Managerial discourses: Tracking the local effects on teachers’ and students’ work in literacy lessons’, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 18(3), 389–407.

Comber, B.: 2006, Literacy Curriculum for ‘At‐Risk’ Children: Discursive Practices and Material Effects , http://www.unisa.edu.au/hawkeinstitute/cslplc/documents/Foratriskchildren.pdf .

Comber, B. and Thompson, P.: 2001, ‘Critical literacy finds a place: Writing and social action in a low income Australian grade 2/3 classroom’, The Elementary School Journal 101 (4), 451–464.

Corson, D.: 2000, ‘Emancipatory leadership’, International Journal of Leadership in Education 3(2), 93–120.

Coulthard, R. and Coulthard, M.: 1996, Texts and practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis , Routledge, New York.

Davis, J.: 1997, ‘Educational reform and the babel (babble) of culture: Prospects for the standards of foreign language learning’, Modern Language Journal 81(2), 151–163.

Egan‐Robertson, A.: 1998, ‘Learning about culture, language, and power: Understanding relationships among personhood, literacy practices, and intertextuality’, Journal of Literacy Research 30(4), 449–487.

Ensor, P.: 2004, ‘Contesting discourses in higher education curriculum restructuring in  South Africa’, Higher Education 48, 339–359.

Fairclough, N.: 2003, Analyzing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research , Routledge, London.

Fairclough, N. (ed.): 1992, Critical Language Awareness , Longman Group, UK.

Fairclough, N.: 1993, Discourse and Social Change , Polity Press, Cambridge, UK.

Fairclough, N.: 1995, Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language , Longman, New York.

Fairclough, N. and Wodak, R.: 1997, ‘Critical discourse analysis’, in T. van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as social interaction , Sage, London, 258–284.

Flowerdew, J.: 1999, ‘Description and interpretation in critical discourse analysis’, Journal of Pragmatics 31(8), 1089–1099.

Foucault, M.: 1972, The Archeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language , Pantheon Books, New York (Original work published 1969).

Foucault, M.: 1979, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison . Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, UK.

Foucault, M.: 1981, History of Sexuality , Volume 1, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, UK.

Gee, J.: 1992, The Social Mind: Language, Ideology and Social Practice . Bergin & Garvey, New York.

Gee, J.P.: 1996, Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses (second edition), Taylor & Francis, London.

Gee, J.P.: 1999, An Introduction to Discourse Analysis , Routledge, New York.

Gee, J.P.: 2004, ‘Discourse analysis: What makes it critical?’, in R. Rogers (ed.), An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis in Education , Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 19–50.

Gumperz, J.: 1982, Discourse Strategies , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Halliday, M.A.K.: 1985, Spoken and Written Language , Deakin University Press, Geelong, UK.

Halliday, M.A.K. and Hasan, R.: 1989, Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language as a Social‐Semiotic Perspective , Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

Heberle, V.: 2000, ‘Critical reading: Integrating principles of critical discourse analysis and gender studies’, Illha do Desterro: A Journal of Language and Literature 38, 115–138.

Heffernan, L. and Lewison, M.: 2005, ‘What's lunch got to do with it? Critical literacy and the discourse of the lunchroom’, Language Arts 83(2), 107–117.

Hinchman, K. and Young, J.P.: 2001, ‘Speaking but not being heard: Two adolescents negotiate classroom talk about text’, Journal of Literacy Research 33(2), 243–268.

Hodge, R. and Kress, G.: (1979/1993), Language as Ideology (second edition), Routledge, London.

Hughes, G.: 2001, ‘Exploring the availability of student scientist identities within curriculum discourse: An anti‐essentialist approach to gender‐inclusive science’, Gender and Education 13(3), 275–290.

Hymes, D.: 1972, ‘Models of the interaction of language and social life’, in J. Gumperz and D. Hymes (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics , Blackwell Press, New York, 35–71.

Janks, H.: 1999, ‘Critical Language Awareness, journals, and student identities’, Language Awareness 8(2), 111–122.

Johnson, T. and Avery, P.G.: 1999, ‘The power of the press: A content and discourse analysis of the United States history standards as presented in selected newspapers’, Theory and Research in Social Education 27(4), 447–471.

Kapp, R.: 2004, ‘ ‘Reading on the line’: An analysis of literacy practices in ESL classes in a South African Township Model’, Language and Education 19(3), 246–263.

Keating, M.: 2005, ‘The person in the doing: Negotiating the experience of self’, in D. Barton and K. Tusting (eds.), Beyond Communities of Practice: Language, Power, and Social Context , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T.: 1995, Reading Images: Grammar of Visual Design , Routledge, London.

Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T.: 2001, Multimodal Discourse: The Models and Media of Contemporary Communication , Hodder Arnold, London.

Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M.: 2004, New Literacies: Changing Knowledge and Classroom Learning , Open University Press, New York.

Lefebvre, H.: 1974, The Production of Space , Blackwell Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Lewis, C.: 2006, ‘ “What's discourse got to do with it?” A meditation on critical discourse analysis in literacy research’, Research in the Teaching of English 40(3), 355–361.

Lewis, C.: 2005, ‘Rethinking race and identity: Discussions of Multicultural literature in a teacher study group’, presentation at the National Reading Conference , Miami, FL.

Liu, Y.: 2005, ‘The construction of cultural values and beliefs in Chinese language textbooks: A critical discourse analysis’, Discourse 26(1), 15–30.

Luke, A.: 1995/1996, ‘Text and discourse in education: An introduction to critical discourse analysis’, Review of Research in Education 21, 3–48.

Luke, A.: 1997, ‘The material effects of the words: Apologies, “stolen children” and public discourse’, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 18(3), 343–368.

Luke, A.: 2002, ‘Beyond ideology critique: Critical discourse analysis’, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 22, 96–110.

Luke, A.: 2004, ‘Notes on the future of critical discourse studies’, Critical Discourse Studies 1(1), 149–152.

Magalhaes, I.: 2005, ‘Interdiscursivity, gender identity and the politics of literacy in Brazil’, in M.M. Lazar (ed.), Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Gender, Power and Ideology in Discourse , Palgrave Mcmillan, Houndsmill, Basingstoke.

Martinez‐Roldan, C.: 2005, ‘Examining bilingual children's gender ideologies through critical discourse analysis’, Critical Inquiry in Language Studies: An International Journal 2(3), 157–178.

McNair, J.: 2005, ‘Innocent though they may seem … A critical race theory analysis of  Firefly and Seesaw Scholastic book club order forms’, paper presented at the meeting of the National Reading Conference , Miami, FL.

Michaels, S.: 1981 ‘ “Sharing time”: Children's narratives styles and differential access to literacy’, Language and Society 10(4), 423–442.

Moje, E.B.: 1997, ‘Exploring discourse, subjectivity, and knowledge in chemistry class’, Journal of Classroom Interaction 32(2), 35–44.

Myers, G.: 1996, ‘Out of the laboratory and down to the bay: Writing in science and technology studies’, Written Communication 13(1), 5–43.

Nichols, S.: 2006, ‘From boardroom to classroom: Tracing a globalised discourse on thinking through internet texts and teaching practices’, in K. Pahl and J. Rowells (eds.), Travel Notes from the New Literacy Studies, Multilingual Matters, Canada , 173–194.

Nichols, S.: 2006, ‘From boardroom to classroom: Tracing a globalised discourse on thinking through internet texts and teaching practices’, in K. Pahl and J. Rowells (eds.) Travel Notes from the New Literacy Studies , Multilingual Matters, Ltd., Canada, 173–194.

Oakes, J.: 1986, Keeping Track: How Schools Structure Inequality , Yale University Press, Connecticut.

Orellana, M.: 1996, ‘Negotiating power through language in classroom meetings’, Linguistics and Education 8(4), 335–365.

Peace, P.: 2003, ‘Balancing power: The discursive maintenance of gender inequality by wo/men at university’, Feminism and Psychology 13(2), 159–180.

Pennycook, A.: 2001, Critical Applied Linguistics: A Critical Introduction , Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.

Powell, R.P.: 2004, ‘Critical discourse analysis and composition studies: A study of presidential discourse and campus discord’, College Composition and Communication 55(3).

Price, S.: 1999, ‘Critical discourse analysis: Discourse acquisition and discourse practices’, TESOL Quarterly 33(3), 581–595.

Rampton, B.: 2001, ‘Critique in interaction’, Critique of Anthropology 21(1), 83–107.

Rogers, R.: 2002, ‘A critical discourse analysis of the special education process’, Anthropology and Education Quarterly 33(2), 213–237.

Rogers, R.: 2003, A Critical Discourse Analysis of Family Literacy Practices: Power in and out of Print , Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.

Rogers, R.: 2004, An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis in Education , Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.

Rogers, R. and Mosley, M.: 2006, ‘Racial Literacy in a second grade classroom: Critical race theory, whiteness studies, and literacy research’, Reading Research Quarterly 41(4), 462–495.

Rogers, T., Tyson, C., and Marshall, E.: 2000, ‘Living dialogues in one neighborhood: Moving toward understanding across discourse and practices of literacy and schooling’, Journal of Literacy Research 32(1), 1–24.

Rogers, R., Berkes, E., Mosley, M., Hui, D., and O‐Garro, G.: 2005, A critical review of critical discourse analysis’, Review of Research in Education 75(3), 365–416.

Schegloff, E.: 1999, ‘ “Schegloff's texts” as “Billig's data”: A critical reply’, Discourse & Society 10(4), 558–572.

Schleppegrell, M.: 2004, The Language of Schooling: A Functional Linguistics Perspective , Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

Scollon, R. and Scollon, S.: 2003, Discourses in Place: Language in the Material World , Routledge, London.

Silverstein, M. and Urban. G. (eds.): 1996, Natural Histories of Discourse University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Sinclair, J. and Coulthard, M.: 1975, Toward an Analysis of Discourse , Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

Smitherman, G. and van Dijk, T.: 1988, Discourse and Discrimination , Wayne State University Press, Detroit.

Stevens, L.: 2003, ‘Reading first: A critical policy analysis’, The Reading Teacher 56(7), 662–668.

Teo, P.: 2000, ‘Racism in the news: A Critical Discourse Analysis of news reporting in two Australian newspapers’, Discourse & Society 11(1), 7–49.

Tong, J.W.: 2005, ‘Buy the book before Christmas': Participants’ capitalization on cultures in a Hong Kong classroom’, presentation at the International Conference on Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory into Research November 15–18 2005 , University of Tasmania, Australia.

Van Dijk, T.: 2004, Critical context studies , paper presented at the First International Conference on Critical Discourse Analysis , Valencia, Spain.

van Dijk, T. (ed.): 1997, Discourse as Social Interaction , Sage, London.

van Dijk, T.: 1993, ‘Principles of critical discourse analysis’, Discourse & Society 4(2), 249–283.

van Leeuwen, T.: 1999, Speech, Music, and Sound , Palgrave Macmillan, UK.

van Sluys, K., Lewison, M., and Flint, A.: 2006, ‘Researching critical literacy: A critical study of analysis of classroom discourse’, Journal of Literacy Research 38(2), 197–233.

Webb, S.: 2005, Navigating the “third space”: Positioning and being positioned in classroom discourse , paper presented at the National Reading Conference , Miami, FL.

Widdowson, H.G.: 1998, ‘The theory and practice of critical discourse analysis’, Applied Linguistics 19(1), 136–151.

Wodak, R. and Meyer, M.: 2001, Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis , Sage, London.

Wodak, R., Meyer, M., Titscher, R, and Vetter, E.: 2000, Methods of Text and Discourse Analysis , Sage, London.

Wodak, R., Cillia, R., Reisigl, M., and Liebhart, K.: 1999, The Discursive Construction of National Identity , University Press, Edinburgh.

Woodside‐Jiron, H.: 2004, ‘Language, power, and participation: Using critical discourse analysis to make sense of public policy’, in R. Rogers (ed.) An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis in Education , Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 173–206.

Yiemkutitavorn, S.: 2005, ‘English and its power in the Thai discourse’, presentation at the International Conference on Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory into Research November 15–18 , University of Tasmania, Australia.

Young, L. and Harrison, C. (eds.): 2004, Systemic Functional Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis: Studies in Social Change , Continuum Press, New York.

Young, J.P.: 2000, ‘Boy talk: Critical literacy and masculinities’, Reading Research Quarterly 35(3), 312–337.

Young, P.: 2001, ‘Roads to travel: A historical look at The Freedman's Torchlight – An African American contribution to 19th century instructional technologies’, Journal of Black Studies 31(5), 671–698.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Teaching and Learning, College of Education, University of Missouri St. Louis, 369 Marillac Hall, St Louis, USA

Rebecca Rogers

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania, 19104-6216, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Nancy H. Hornberger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer Science+Business Media LLC

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Rogers, R. (2008). Critical Discourse Analysis in Education. In: Hornberger, N.H. (eds) Encyclopedia of Language and Education. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_61

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_61

Publisher Name : Springer, Boston, MA

Print ISBN : 978-0-387-32875-1

Online ISBN : 978-0-387-30424-3

eBook Packages : Humanities, Social Sciences and Law

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Critical Discourse Analysis in Education: A Review of the Literature, 2004 to 2012

This article reviews critical discourse analysis scholarship in education research from 2004 to 2012. Our methodology was carried out in three stages. First, we searched educational databases. Second, we completed an analytic review template for each article and encoded these data into a digital spreadsheet to assess macro-trends in the field. Third, we developed sche-mata to interpret the complexity of research design. Our examination of 257 articles reveals trends in research questions, the theories researchers find useful, and the kinds of interactions that capture their attention. We explore areas in the field especially ripe for debate and critique: reflexivity, decon-structive–reconstructive stance toward inquiry, and social action. We compare the findings with an earlier review published in 2005, reflecting on three decades of critical discourse analysis in education research.

Related Papers

Tarik Ait Hssaine

Phương Dung

education policy analysis archives

Rachael Gabriel

This article introduces the first of a two-part Special Issue on Discourse Perspectives and Education Policy. This first special issue is focused on critical discourse analysis and education policy. Within this article, we provide a brief overview of discourse analysis generally and critical discourse analysis specifically. We highlight some of the ways in which policy researchers have applied the theories and methods associated with CDA and note the methodological and substantive contributions of this work. Then, we provide an overview of the six papers included within this special issue, noting each paper’s key points and explicit links to policy. We conclude by pointing to future directions for research at the intersection of education policy and discourse studies.

Zouheir Maalej

Sovicheth Boun

Trevor Warburton

This article explores the use of Critical Discourse Analysis in truth-telling in education research. I argue that without critical reflexivity Critical Discourse Analysis can become a means of reinforcing and reinscribing some of the same dominant discourses that we critique. Here I suggest the recognition that in the role of teacher and researcher we are also caught up in dominant discourses. As such we need to include our own discourse use (both teaching and writing) in our analysis and critique. In doing so we can more effectively use CDA for truth-telling. To illustrate I present two sample analyses from a social justice oriented action research course for secondary preservice mathematics teachers. I include my own use of discourse in the analysis both as the teacher of the course and then critique my written analysis of the same class.

Kate Anderson , Doris Warriner

Discourse analysis as a method of inquiry has improved our collective understanding of teaching and learning processes for at least four decades. This chapter provides some historical context for understanding the emergence of discourse analysis within educational research, describes some of the different ways that discourse analysis continues to be used and useful in educational research, and synthesizes scholarship that has influenced how discourse analysis has enhanced educational research. It explores key contributions in the study of discourse, including how underlying social systems shape (and are shaped by) interaction, how identities are constructed in and through talk, the relationship between interaction and learning in both formal and informal educational contexts, and how embodiment, multimodality, and virtual spaces offer new sites of analysis, which raises important questions about what new modes of communication imply for discursive methods of research and representation. It also covers four major approaches to discourse analysis in education – anthropological, narrative, classroom-based, and critical – and shows that the study of language and discourse in education has blossomed into a dynamic and interdisciplinary endeavor. Although educational researchers using discourse analysis as a method/tool of inquiry continue to wrestle with questions of context, definitions of “text,” and notions of discourse, this approach to inquiry remains extremely useful and influential. After describing recent advances in the study of discourse within educational research and the problems and challenges that remain, the chapter concludes with a discussion of future directions and suggests recommended additional reading.

Nordic Journal of English Studies

Encarnacion Hidalgo Tenorio

Journal of Education Policy

Kate Anderson

Discourse has featured in studies of educational policy as an analytic and methodological tool, theoretical frame, realm of implication, and even a foundational definition of educational policy itself (e.g.) Despite the centrality of discourse as a frame for exploring educational policy and its implications, the ways that discourse is defined or operationalized in educational policy research are often left implicit which can lead to murky relations to larger ontoepistemological questions of how we construct findings from data as well as the nature of policy. In this interpretive analysis, we synthesize a corpus of 37 peer-reviewed journal articles that bring together educational policy and analyses of discourse from varying theoretical and methodological perspectives in order to better understand the breadth and scope of how discourse is defined and operationalized in studies of educational policy, including in ways that are sometimes incommensurate with authors' stated theoretical and methodological positions. After first laying the theoretical groundwork for analyses of discourse in the field of educational policy, we then illustrate how discourse analysis is used differently, and sometimes inconsistently, within contested paradigmatic landscapes. We conclude with an argument for discussions across theoretical frameworks and methodological paradigms about how the concept of discourse lends itself to different epistemological vantage points on educational policy.

RELATED PAPERS

ines varela

Cellular Immunology

Nikos Papadogiannakis

Antoine de Kom

Open Forum Infectious Diseases

Carlos Starling

Edwin Ramirez Asis

ade armando

IOSR Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering

Prilozi / Makedonska akademija na naukite i umetnostite, Oddelenie za biološki i medicinski nauki = Contributions / Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Section of Biological and Medical Sciences

nikolina basic-jukic

Hetal Mandalaywala

Advances in Bioscience and Biotechnology

Genaro Ortiz

JOURNAL OF STRESS PHYSIOLOGY & …

Acta Theriologica

Joaquim Gosálbez

Jurnal Zarah

Infectious Diseases

Sharon Weissman

International Journal of computing Algorithm

International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport

Thomas Kourtessis

L'Évolution Psychiatrique

Françoise Domine

MAKARA of Science Series

Prof. Dr. Sumi Hudiyono, PWS

AIP Conference Proceedings

Hendra Susanto

2016 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI)

Dr. Fevrier Valdez

Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter

David alejandro Caraballo Rodrigues

Physics Letters B

Natasha Sharma

Raman Sankar

Energy & Fuels

Harold Schobert

Frontiers in Chemistry

Juan Stockert

See More Documents Like This

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

LINGUISTIK TERAPAN

• For Readers
• For Authors
• For Librarians
• Announcements

The PDF file you selected should load here if your Web browser has a PDF reader plug-in installed (for example, a recent version of Adobe Acrobat Reader ).

If you would like more information about how to print, save, and work with PDFs, Highwire Press provides a helpful Frequently Asked Questions about PDFs .

Alternatively, you can download the PDF file directly to your computer, from where it can be opened using a PDF reader. To download the PDF, click the Download link above.

Fullscreen Fullscreen Off

• There are currently no refbacks.