Pub Date : 2021-07-14DOI: 10.1177/07410883211028853
Lieke Holdinga, T. Janssen, Gert Rijlaarsdam
Source-based writing is a common but difficult task in history and philosophy. Students are usually taught how to write a good text in language classes. However, it is also important to address discipline-specificity in writing, a topic likely to be taught by content teachers. In order to design discipline-specific writing instruction, research needs to identify which reading and writing activities during the source-based writing process affect students’ thought process quality and text quality, as assessed by content teachers. We conducted a think-aloud study with 15 (11th grade) students who performed two source-based writing assignments, each representative of its discipline. From the data, we derived 11 activities, which we analyzed for duration, frequency, and time of occurrence. Results showed that the disciplines required different approaches to writing. For philosophy, the writing process was dominant and influenced quality, leading us to conclude that philosophical thinking and writing are intertwined. For history, the planning process appeared to be paramount, but it influenced text quality only and not the quality of the thought process. In other words, historical thinking and writing appear to be separate processes. Our findings can be used to develop strategy instruction that reinforces better writing, adapted to discipline-specific writing processes.
{"title":"The Relationship Between Students’ Writing Process, Text Quality, and Thought Process Quality in 11th-Grade History and Philosophy Assignments","authors":"Lieke Holdinga, T. Janssen, Gert Rijlaarsdam","doi":"10.1177/07410883211028853","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883211028853","url":null,"abstract":"Source-based writing is a common but difficult task in history and philosophy. Students are usually taught how to write a good text in language classes. However, it is also important to address discipline-specificity in writing, a topic likely to be taught by content teachers. In order to design discipline-specific writing instruction, research needs to identify which reading and writing activities during the source-based writing process affect students’ thought process quality and text quality, as assessed by content teachers. We conducted a think-aloud study with 15 (11th grade) students who performed two source-based writing assignments, each representative of its discipline. From the data, we derived 11 activities, which we analyzed for duration, frequency, and time of occurrence. Results showed that the disciplines required different approaches to writing. For philosophy, the writing process was dominant and influenced quality, leading us to conclude that philosophical thinking and writing are intertwined. For history, the planning process appeared to be paramount, but it influenced text quality only and not the quality of the thought process. In other words, historical thinking and writing appear to be separate processes. Our findings can be used to develop strategy instruction that reinforces better writing, adapted to discipline-specific writing processes.","PeriodicalId":47351,"journal":{"name":"Written Communication","volume":"38 1","pages":"544 - 586"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/07410883211028853","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45284690","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-08DOI: 10.1177/07410883211027949
M. Castelló, Anna Sala-Bubaré, Marta Pardo
The present study used a longitudinal mixed-method design to investigate the relationship between post-PhD researchers’ writing conceptions and their experiences, scholarly trajectory, and networking capabilities. A total of 134 Spanish post-PhD researchers answered the Post-PhD Experience—Survey scales on Academic Writing and Social Support. One year later, a subsample of 21 participated in retrospective multimodal interviews, in which visual methods (Journey and Network Plots) were applied to analyse their writing trajectories during this period of time. The person-centred analysis revealed three post-PhD profiles regarding writing conceptions and evidenced differences among them in the way they participate in the research community and interact with other researchers. Qualitative results suggest the post-PhD researchers in each profile position themselves in the community differently and subsequently engage in distinctive writing experiences. The study provides evidence of how writer profiles appear to mediate trajectories and networking, something not evident when using only sectional designs. Relational agency is revealed to be an important aspect of productive writers. Pedagogical implications are discussed, particularly the need to promote writers’ awareness on how their writing conceptions intertwine with their strategic management of research writing practices in different contexts.
{"title":"Post-PhD Researchers’ Trajectories and Networking: The Mediating Role of Writing Conceptions","authors":"M. Castelló, Anna Sala-Bubaré, Marta Pardo","doi":"10.1177/07410883211027949","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883211027949","url":null,"abstract":"The present study used a longitudinal mixed-method design to investigate the relationship between post-PhD researchers’ writing conceptions and their experiences, scholarly trajectory, and networking capabilities. A total of 134 Spanish post-PhD researchers answered the Post-PhD Experience—Survey scales on Academic Writing and Social Support. One year later, a subsample of 21 participated in retrospective multimodal interviews, in which visual methods (Journey and Network Plots) were applied to analyse their writing trajectories during this period of time. The person-centred analysis revealed three post-PhD profiles regarding writing conceptions and evidenced differences among them in the way they participate in the research community and interact with other researchers. Qualitative results suggest the post-PhD researchers in each profile position themselves in the community differently and subsequently engage in distinctive writing experiences. The study provides evidence of how writer profiles appear to mediate trajectories and networking, something not evident when using only sectional designs. Relational agency is revealed to be an important aspect of productive writers. Pedagogical implications are discussed, particularly the need to promote writers’ awareness on how their writing conceptions intertwine with their strategic management of research writing practices in different contexts.","PeriodicalId":47351,"journal":{"name":"Written Communication","volume":"38 1","pages":"479 - 511"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/07410883211027949","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43958816","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-08DOI: 10.1177/07410883211028230
J. Coleman
Within literacy, rhetoric, and composition (LRC) studies, composing practices have been studied as an embedded feature of life, one that manifests histories, imagination, and identities through acts of writing. Likewise, in queer LRC studies, the capacity to write with queer rhetorical agency or to recognize the impossibility of composing queer subjectivity has been tied to the living. Scholars have yet to consider with adequacy, however, the ways in which writing is equally bound up with the dead, with ghosts, histories, and ancestors that animate the imagination and attendant composing practices. Tracing the historically rooted speculative composing practices (HRSCPs) of an inquiry group of nine queer composers, this article spotlights queer ancestors as speculative resources for imagining and then composing alternative rhetorics of queer futurity. Specifically, this article details how three queer composers, Coyote (they/them), Helen (she/her), and Margarita (they/them), restory the imagination, happiness, and reality with the ancestors, doing so to challenge the trope of queer unhappy endings attached to realist genres. This article concludes by inviting LRC studies to explore how HRSCPs might be integrated into future research and pedagogy and thereby pursue healing for communities long marginalized within the field.
{"title":"Restorying With the Ancestors: Historically Rooted Speculative Composing Practices and Alternative Rhetorics of Queer Futurity","authors":"J. Coleman","doi":"10.1177/07410883211028230","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883211028230","url":null,"abstract":"Within literacy, rhetoric, and composition (LRC) studies, composing practices have been studied as an embedded feature of life, one that manifests histories, imagination, and identities through acts of writing. Likewise, in queer LRC studies, the capacity to write with queer rhetorical agency or to recognize the impossibility of composing queer subjectivity has been tied to the living. Scholars have yet to consider with adequacy, however, the ways in which writing is equally bound up with the dead, with ghosts, histories, and ancestors that animate the imagination and attendant composing practices. Tracing the historically rooted speculative composing practices (HRSCPs) of an inquiry group of nine queer composers, this article spotlights queer ancestors as speculative resources for imagining and then composing alternative rhetorics of queer futurity. Specifically, this article details how three queer composers, Coyote (they/them), Helen (she/her), and Margarita (they/them), restory the imagination, happiness, and reality with the ancestors, doing so to challenge the trope of queer unhappy endings attached to realist genres. This article concludes by inviting LRC studies to explore how HRSCPs might be integrated into future research and pedagogy and thereby pursue healing for communities long marginalized within the field.","PeriodicalId":47351,"journal":{"name":"Written Communication","volume":"38 1","pages":"512 - 543"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/07410883211028230","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42512018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-28DOI: 10.1177/07410883211010166
S. Madden, Sandra L. Tarabochia
Writing and communication researchers are in the early stages of developing procedures for reusing and maximizing the analytical potentials of qualitative data. Contributing to this effort, we critically reflect on our methodological decision-making process in developing innovative procedures for cross-analyzing two distinct studies. Our reflection responds to the need for published guidance on how to undertake methodological adaptation, the lack of which limits opportunities for other researchers to develop new study procedures to address complex problems. By discussing how and why we made particular methodological choices and adaptations in our collaborative study of faculty and doctoral student writers, we propose collaborative secondary data analysis as a fruitful avenue for qualitative writing researchers and show its potential to enact richer and more equitable research designs.
{"title":"Untangling Methodological Commitments in Writing Research: Using Collaborative Secondary Data Analysis to Maximize Interpretive Potentials of Qualitative Data","authors":"S. Madden, Sandra L. Tarabochia","doi":"10.1177/07410883211010166","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883211010166","url":null,"abstract":"Writing and communication researchers are in the early stages of developing procedures for reusing and maximizing the analytical potentials of qualitative data. Contributing to this effort, we critically reflect on our methodological decision-making process in developing innovative procedures for cross-analyzing two distinct studies. Our reflection responds to the need for published guidance on how to undertake methodological adaptation, the lack of which limits opportunities for other researchers to develop new study procedures to address complex problems. By discussing how and why we made particular methodological choices and adaptations in our collaborative study of faculty and doctoral student writers, we propose collaborative secondary data analysis as a fruitful avenue for qualitative writing researchers and show its potential to enact richer and more equitable research designs.","PeriodicalId":47351,"journal":{"name":"Written Communication","volume":"38 1","pages":"447 - 476"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/07410883211010166","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41683096","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-21DOI: 10.1177/07410883211007870
Calvin Pollak
Scholars in discourse studies have defined legitimation as the justification (and critique) of powerful institutions and their practices. In moments of crisis, legitimation tactics often shift. This article considers how such shifts are incited by unauthorized information leaks. Leaks, I argue, constitute freshly available texts that reveal privileged institutional information presented in a specialized rhetorical style. To explore how leaks are harnessed by institutional critics, I examine the 2013 Snowden/National Security Agency (NSA) crisis. Combining corpus analysis with discourse analysis, I explore how Snowden’s NSA leaks affected the online writing of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). I also consider overlaps between the rhetorical patterns in the leaked NSA documents and those in the ACLU’s post-leaks writing. Findings from my analysis of legitimation and style categories suggest that, prior to the leaks, ACLU writers primarily used a character- and narrative-based style to delegitimize the NSA’s policies as illegal and secretive, and to push for their reform. After the leaks, though, the ACLU mainly used an informationally dense style rife with academic terms and vocabularies of strategic action, portraying NSA surveillance as massive and complex. As the documents moved from the NSA’s secret, technical discourses to public, critical discourses, the latter came to resemble the former rhetorically. These findings raise crucial questions about how critics can make use of leaks without necessarily relegitimizing institutional power.
{"title":"Legitimation and Textual Evidence: How the Snowden Leaks Reshaped the ACLU’s Online Writing About NSA Surveillance","authors":"Calvin Pollak","doi":"10.1177/07410883211007870","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883211007870","url":null,"abstract":"Scholars in discourse studies have defined legitimation as the justification (and critique) of powerful institutions and their practices. In moments of crisis, legitimation tactics often shift. This article considers how such shifts are incited by unauthorized information leaks. Leaks, I argue, constitute freshly available texts that reveal privileged institutional information presented in a specialized rhetorical style. To explore how leaks are harnessed by institutional critics, I examine the 2013 Snowden/National Security Agency (NSA) crisis. Combining corpus analysis with discourse analysis, I explore how Snowden’s NSA leaks affected the online writing of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). I also consider overlaps between the rhetorical patterns in the leaked NSA documents and those in the ACLU’s post-leaks writing. Findings from my analysis of legitimation and style categories suggest that, prior to the leaks, ACLU writers primarily used a character- and narrative-based style to delegitimize the NSA’s policies as illegal and secretive, and to push for their reform. After the leaks, though, the ACLU mainly used an informationally dense style rife with academic terms and vocabularies of strategic action, portraying NSA surveillance as massive and complex. As the documents moved from the NSA’s secret, technical discourses to public, critical discourses, the latter came to resemble the former rhetorically. These findings raise crucial questions about how critics can make use of leaks without necessarily relegitimizing institutional power.","PeriodicalId":47351,"journal":{"name":"Written Communication","volume":"38 1","pages":"380 - 416"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/07410883211007870","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42291818","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-09DOI: 10.1177/07410883211006038
S. Finkenstaedt-Quinn, N. Polakowski, Brenda K. Gunderson, G. Shultz, A. Gere
While many STEM faculty believe Writing-to-Learn to be an effective instructional tool, instructional barriers such as the time and effort required to provide substantive feedback to their students limit the use of writing in STEM classrooms. Incorporating peer review and revision into the writing process can help mitigate these barriers while additionally supporting the learning process. This study presents an analysis of a Writing-to-Learn assignment that incorporates peer review and revision into a large introductory statistics course, where this study specifically focused on whether engaging with these processes results in changes in how students write about the content targeted by the assignment. Our results demonstrate that students made content-focused revisions between drafts that increased the amount of content they explained correctly. Additionally, our study provides evidence that students benefit from reading peers’ work in a content-focused peer review and revision process. Overall, this study shows that incorporating peer review and revision into writing assignments focused on developing content knowledge provides students with substantive feedback and enhances students’ conceptual learning.
{"title":"Utilizing Peer Review and Revision in STEM to Support the Development of Conceptual Knowledge Through Writing","authors":"S. Finkenstaedt-Quinn, N. Polakowski, Brenda K. Gunderson, G. Shultz, A. Gere","doi":"10.1177/07410883211006038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883211006038","url":null,"abstract":"While many STEM faculty believe Writing-to-Learn to be an effective instructional tool, instructional barriers such as the time and effort required to provide substantive feedback to their students limit the use of writing in STEM classrooms. Incorporating peer review and revision into the writing process can help mitigate these barriers while additionally supporting the learning process. This study presents an analysis of a Writing-to-Learn assignment that incorporates peer review and revision into a large introductory statistics course, where this study specifically focused on whether engaging with these processes results in changes in how students write about the content targeted by the assignment. Our results demonstrate that students made content-focused revisions between drafts that increased the amount of content they explained correctly. Additionally, our study provides evidence that students benefit from reading peers’ work in a content-focused peer review and revision process. Overall, this study shows that incorporating peer review and revision into writing assignments focused on developing content knowledge provides students with substantive feedback and enhances students’ conceptual learning.","PeriodicalId":47351,"journal":{"name":"Written Communication","volume":"38 1","pages":"351 - 379"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/07410883211006038","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43315018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-09DOI: 10.1177/07410883211005558
M. Ryan, M. Khosronejad, G. Barton, L. Kervin, D. Myhill
Writing requires a high level of nuanced decision-making related to language, purpose, audience, and medium. Writing teachers thus need a deep understanding of language, process, and pedagogy, and of the interface between them. This article draws on reflexivity theory to interrogate the pedagogical priorities and perspectives of 19 writing teachers in primary classrooms across Australia. Data are composed of teacher interview transcripts and nuanced time analyses of classroom observation videos. Findings show that teachers experience both enabling and constraining conditions that emerge in different ways in different contexts. Enablements include high motivations to teach writing and a reflective and collaborative approach to practice. However, constraints were evident in areas of time management, dominance of teacher talk, teachers’ scope and confidence in their knowledge and practice, and a perceived lack of professional support for writing pedagogy. The article concludes with recommendations for a reflexive approach to managing these emergences in the teaching of writing.
{"title":"A Reflexive Approach to Teaching Writing: Enablements and Constraints in Primary School Classrooms","authors":"M. Ryan, M. Khosronejad, G. Barton, L. Kervin, D. Myhill","doi":"10.1177/07410883211005558","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883211005558","url":null,"abstract":"Writing requires a high level of nuanced decision-making related to language, purpose, audience, and medium. Writing teachers thus need a deep understanding of language, process, and pedagogy, and of the interface between them. This article draws on reflexivity theory to interrogate the pedagogical priorities and perspectives of 19 writing teachers in primary classrooms across Australia. Data are composed of teacher interview transcripts and nuanced time analyses of classroom observation videos. Findings show that teachers experience both enabling and constraining conditions that emerge in different ways in different contexts. Enablements include high motivations to teach writing and a reflective and collaborative approach to practice. However, constraints were evident in areas of time management, dominance of teacher talk, teachers’ scope and confidence in their knowledge and practice, and a perceived lack of professional support for writing pedagogy. The article concludes with recommendations for a reflexive approach to managing these emergences in the teaching of writing.","PeriodicalId":47351,"journal":{"name":"Written Communication","volume":"38 1","pages":"417 - 446"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/07410883211005558","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47500491","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-01DOI: 10.1177/0741088320986554
Mohammad Nowbakht, T. Olive
This study examined the role of error-type and working memory (WM) in the effectiveness of direct-metalinguistic and indirect written corrective feedback (WCF) on self error-correction in first-language writing. Fifty-one French first-year psychology students volunteered to participate in the experiment. They carried out a first-language error-correction task after receiving WCF on typographical, orthographic, grammatical, and semantic errors. Results indicated that error-type affected the efficacy of WCF. In both groups, typographical error-correction was performed better than the others; orthographic and grammatical error-correction were not different, but both were corrected more frequently than semantic errors. Between-group comparisons showed no difference between the two groups in correcting typographical, orthographic, and grammatical errors, while semantic error-correction was performed significantly better for the direct group. Results revealed that WM was not involved in correcting typographical, orthographic, and grammatical errors in both groups. It did, however, predict semantic error-correction only in response to direct-metalinguistic WCF. In addition, the processing component of WM was predictive of semantic error-correction in the direct WCF group. These findings suggest that error-type mediates the effectiveness of WCF on written error-correction at the monitoring stage of writing, while WM does not associate with all WCF types efficacy at this stage.
{"title":"The Role of Error Type and Working Memory in Written Corrective Feedback Effectiveness on First-Language Self Error-Correction","authors":"Mohammad Nowbakht, T. Olive","doi":"10.1177/0741088320986554","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088320986554","url":null,"abstract":"This study examined the role of error-type and working memory (WM) in the effectiveness of direct-metalinguistic and indirect written corrective feedback (WCF) on self error-correction in first-language writing. Fifty-one French first-year psychology students volunteered to participate in the experiment. They carried out a first-language error-correction task after receiving WCF on typographical, orthographic, grammatical, and semantic errors. Results indicated that error-type affected the efficacy of WCF. In both groups, typographical error-correction was performed better than the others; orthographic and grammatical error-correction were not different, but both were corrected more frequently than semantic errors. Between-group comparisons showed no difference between the two groups in correcting typographical, orthographic, and grammatical errors, while semantic error-correction was performed significantly better for the direct group. Results revealed that WM was not involved in correcting typographical, orthographic, and grammatical errors in both groups. It did, however, predict semantic error-correction only in response to direct-metalinguistic WCF. In addition, the processing component of WM was predictive of semantic error-correction in the direct WCF group. These findings suggest that error-type mediates the effectiveness of WCF on written error-correction at the monitoring stage of writing, while WM does not associate with all WCF types efficacy at this stage.","PeriodicalId":47351,"journal":{"name":"Written Communication","volume":"38 1","pages":"278 - 310"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0741088320986554","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48010666","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-01DOI: 10.1177/0741088320986364
Claire W. Jo
Language learning is context-dependent and requires learners to employ different sets of language skills to fulfill various tasks. Yet standardized English as a foreign language assessments tend to conceptualize English proficiency as a unidimensional construct. In order to distinguish English proficiency as separate context-driven constructs, I adopted a register-based approach to investigate academic English proficiency (i.e., specific set of language skills that support academic literacy) and general English proficiency (i.e., wide range of language skills undifferentiated by context that are measured by traditional assessments) as separate predictors of overall essay quality. In the study, students completed a general English proficiency assessment and an academic language proficiency assessment, and essays were coded for academic writing features at the lexical, syntactic, and discourse levels. Beyond the contribution of academic writing features and general English proficiency, academic English proficiency emerged as a significant contributor to essay quality. Findings suggest that academic English proficiency scores more precisely identified a subset of academic language skills that is relevant to essay writing. The article concludes by discussing implications for strategic writing instruction that articulates the key expectations of academic writing used in and beyond school contexts.
{"title":"Exploring General Versus Academic English Proficiency as Predictors of Adolescent EFL Essay Writing","authors":"Claire W. Jo","doi":"10.1177/0741088320986364","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088320986364","url":null,"abstract":"Language learning is context-dependent and requires learners to employ different sets of language skills to fulfill various tasks. Yet standardized English as a foreign language assessments tend to conceptualize English proficiency as a unidimensional construct. In order to distinguish English proficiency as separate context-driven constructs, I adopted a register-based approach to investigate academic English proficiency (i.e., specific set of language skills that support academic literacy) and general English proficiency (i.e., wide range of language skills undifferentiated by context that are measured by traditional assessments) as separate predictors of overall essay quality. In the study, students completed a general English proficiency assessment and an academic language proficiency assessment, and essays were coded for academic writing features at the lexical, syntactic, and discourse levels. Beyond the contribution of academic writing features and general English proficiency, academic English proficiency emerged as a significant contributor to essay quality. Findings suggest that academic English proficiency scores more precisely identified a subset of academic language skills that is relevant to essay writing. The article concludes by discussing implications for strategic writing instruction that articulates the key expectations of academic writing used in and beyond school contexts.","PeriodicalId":47351,"journal":{"name":"Written Communication","volume":"38 1","pages":"208 - 246"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0741088320986364","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43032681","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-01DOI: 10.1177/0741088320983364
Michael Carter
Scholars in the field of writing and rhetorical studies have long been interested in professional writing and the ways in which experts frame their research for disciplinary audiences. Three decades ago, rhetoricians incorporated stasis theory into their work as a way to explore the nature of argument and persuasion in scientific discourse. However, what is missing in these general arguments based on stasis are the particular arguments in science texts aimed at persuasion. Specifically, this article analyzes arguments from the stasis of value in introductions of science research articles. This work is grounded in the Classical topoi, or topics, cataloging types of arguments and identifying seven topoi. I analyzed 60 introductions from articles in three different science journals, totaling the number of value arguments and arguments comprising the topoi. Findings yielded different proportions in types of arguments, sharp disparities among the journals, and widespread use of value arguments. The broader issue at work in this article is how scientists make a case for the importance of their research and how these findings might inform writing and argumentation in the sciences.
{"title":"The Construction of Value in Science Research Articles: A Quantitative Study of Topoi Used in Introductions","authors":"Michael Carter","doi":"10.1177/0741088320983364","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088320983364","url":null,"abstract":"Scholars in the field of writing and rhetorical studies have long been interested in professional writing and the ways in which experts frame their research for disciplinary audiences. Three decades ago, rhetoricians incorporated stasis theory into their work as a way to explore the nature of argument and persuasion in scientific discourse. However, what is missing in these general arguments based on stasis are the particular arguments in science texts aimed at persuasion. Specifically, this article analyzes arguments from the stasis of value in introductions of science research articles. This work is grounded in the Classical topoi, or topics, cataloging types of arguments and identifying seven topoi. I analyzed 60 introductions from articles in three different science journals, totaling the number of value arguments and arguments comprising the topoi. Findings yielded different proportions in types of arguments, sharp disparities among the journals, and widespread use of value arguments. The broader issue at work in this article is how scientists make a case for the importance of their research and how these findings might inform writing and argumentation in the sciences.","PeriodicalId":47351,"journal":{"name":"Written Communication","volume":"38 1","pages":"311 - 346"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0741088320983364","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48673539","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：