Academic Writing Pedagogies: Adopting Best Practices
for Mastering Research Genres in English
Helán Robert
Abstract
This paper investigates the main approaches to teaching academic writing to university students of
English as a foreign language. The investigation takes as its points of departure the text (the endproduct
of writing), the process (the stages of writing), and practice (the social dimension of writing).
Several recommendations are offered for the effective implementation of these approaches in learning
to write research genres.
Key words: academic writing, text, process, practice
Introduction
The field of academic writing in the context of English as a foreign language
draws on and has been influenced by theories from a range of disciplines such as
linguistics, rhetorical studies, composition studies, genre studies, creative writing,
and discourse analysis, among others. Each discipline has foregrounded or
backgrounded different aspects of academic writing, resulting in “(i)ts complex,
multifaceted nature (that) constantly evades adequate description and explanation”
(Hyland 2009: 1). However, thanks to different theoretical frameworks, different
analytical methods, and different research emphases, educators have at their
disposal multiple approaches to teaching academic writing.
Following Hyland’s (2009) classification, three general approaches to teaching
academic writing are discussed, each one focusing on a specific facet of writing.
Firstly, the end product of writing, i.e. the text, is the foundation on which the
pedagogic use of writing templates, specialized corpora, and move analysis are
based. Secondly, the writing process is taken as a point of departure to acquaint
students with strategies for the different stages of the process of text creation (such
as pre-writing, writing, and post-writing). Finally, the social dimension of writing is
invoked to better understand the crucial role the audience, or the imagined reader,
can play in influencing the style students need to adopt when writing for academic
purposes.1
Textual Approaches
Text-based approaches lend themselves nicely to demonstrating to the
students of academic writing important lexico-grammatical and rhetorical features of
texts. These textual features can be sufficiently generalized across different genres
and disciplines, resulting in models or templates for different language functions
common in academic writing such as expressing disagreement with previously
1
In addition to the above mentioned approaches, Paltridge et al. (2009) also recognize a content-driven approach,
genre approach, and critical approach to second language academic writing.
published studies and their authors (see figure 1 below for an example of a
template).
The major advantage of templates in the academic writing classroom is that
they provide a supporting scaffold to students in the form of patterns for expressing
thoughts, leading to clearer and more meaningful writing. Another benefit lies in the
generative quality of templates, helping students with generating ideas and thoughts
about a specific topic.
Figure 1. Disagreement template (taken from King 2007: 20)
As has been discussed above, templates help students with expressing
important functions in academic texts. As far as the structure of academic texts is
concerned, academic writing instructors can familiarize students with moves, or
structural units with a specific purpose. Move analysis was first introduced by Swales
(1990), who illustrated these moves on the introduction section of research articles.
He proposed a three-move schema for article introductions known as the Create a
Research Space (CARS) model, with Move 1 – Establishing a territory, Move 2 –
Establishing a niche, and Move 3 – Occupying the niche. For an example of the
CARS model applied and adapted to the introduction section of medical case reports,
see figure 2 below (Helán 2011).
Figure 2. Moves in the introduction section of medical case reports 2
2
Medical case report taken from: http://www.jmedicalcasereports.com/content/2/1/118 (retrieved in 2012)
There is a range of useful activities based on the Swalesian three-move
structure. Students can be assigned to look for this structure in articles which they
find important in their field. By analyzing model academic articles of their choice, they
can begin to understand the implicit rules of effective writing, which are valid across
different disciplines. Interesting discussions can ensue in case the texts digress from
the expected structure or they exhibit disciplinary differences such as in social as
opposed to natural sciences. In addition, students are encouraged to include moves
in their texts that they would not otherwise think of by themselves, thus enhancing
the effectiveness of their writing.
Using specialized corpora built with a specific aim in mind, such as to increase
the chance of being accepted to a conference, is another textual approach students
find particularly useful. By building small corpora of specific texts (such as academic
articles from a certain journal and on a certain topic), students can immediately see
the conventions of language use in context. With the help of various text analysis
tools such as TextSTAT (text statistics)3
or Adtat (Adelaide text analysis tool)4
, they
can search the corpora, which are extremely helpful in clarifying the usage and
terminology in a specific discipline, journal, genre, or part-genre (e.g., introductions of
research articles). In addition, fine-tuned lexico-grammatical norms can be revealed,
such as the use of definite, indefinite, and zero articles (see figure 3 below for the
usage of the word present in medical case reports, using TextSTAT).
Figure 3. Concordances with co-text for the verb present as displayed in TextSTAT
Process-Based Approaches
While textual approaches have been developed around the end-product of
writing, i.e. the text, process-based approaches deal with strategies for the individual
3
http://neon.niederlandistik.fu-berlin.de/en/textstat/ (retrieved in 2012)
4
http://www.adelaide.edu.au/red/adtat/ (retrieved in 2012)
stages of the writing process, i.e. the initial pre-writing stage, the middle stage of
writing down the thoughts, and the final post-writing stage. Shulman’s POWER
writing process (see figure 4 below), standing for prepare, outline, write, edit, and
rewrite (cited in Paltridge et al 2009: 68), aptly summarizes the specific steps
inherent in the three stages. To make their writing more manageable and less
intimidating, students should be working on one step at a time. As the process tends
to be recursive and exploratory rather than linear and straightforward, it is important
for the students to become aware of this non-linearity and complexity and adapt their
writing accordingly.
Figure 4. The stages and steps of the POWER writing process
Multiple strategies have been developed for each stage of the writing process,
drawing on creative writing and expressivist view of writing. The use of specific
techniques from the field of creative writing can contribute enormously to students’
development of writing abilities. It is claimed (e.g., Pazderníková 2009) that fantasy
and imagination play a crucial role in scientific disciplines. While scientific work is
based on convergent thinking of the left hemisphere, creative work comes from the
right hemisphere, involving divergent thinking. Both types of thinking can complement
each other in the process of composing academic texts.
For the pre-writing stage of the writing process, a technique called free writing
(Elbow 1973) or automatic text (Pazderníková 2009) can be used to prepare students
for the writing they need to do. The technique is based on the notion that writing is a
complex process requiring a strict separation of the composing stage from the
revising stage. Attempting to manage both at the same time can lead to slow
progress in writing or even a failure to stay motivated and keep writing. The idea
behind the concept of free writing is to become accustomed to daily writing and form
a habit of it. An alternative to free writing may include focused free writing, in which
the writing is restricted to a specific topic, helping students generate ideas about it.
The following is an extract of a free writing carried out as a possible warm-up activity
in an academic writing lesson (taken from Elbow 1973: 1-7):
“I think I’ll write what’s on my mind, but the only thing on my mind right now is
what to write for ten minutes. I’ve never done this before and I’m not prepared
in any way--the sky is cloudy, how’s that? now (sic) I’m afraid I won’t be able
to think of what to write when I get to the end of the sentence--well, here I am
at the end of the sentence--here I am again, again, again, again, at least I’m
still writing...”
Another activity helping students brainstorm ideas about a specific topic has
been referred to as clustering (Pazderníková 2009). Clustering is a strategy that
allows students to organize their ideas, making connections between different
perspectives and views. It is particularly useful when dealing with complex, multifaceted
topics that cannot easily be organized into lists. See figure 5 for an example
of this technique.
Figure 5. Clustering activity for the topic of being politically correct5
In learning to write, students should not only be taught about the lexicogrammar,
style, and structure of a specific genre, but they should also be
encouraged to think about and reflect on their own writing process in terms of what
works for them and what does not. A suitable activity which explores students’ ways
of writing is based on drawing or sketching the writing process they go through in
composing texts. Academic writing instructors can demonstrate the activity by
showing the students the sketches of their own writing process.
Many other activities and strategies adapted from the field of creative writing
can be used for the development of the specific stages of the writing process – for a
detailed description, see Pazderníková (2009). Some of the examples include: for
and against (listing arguments for and against choosing a specific topic for
researching), a letter written to one’s academic text, and an acrostic (i.e., a type of
writing in which the first letter of each line in the text forms a word or a message –
see below figure 6 – translated from Pazderníková ibid: 121).
Reality in novels is an ambiguous notion
Even a bit vague
And still I have decided to use it
Lacking a better way of expression
Imagination is also a bit confusing word
Therefore I’ll have to look in a dictionary
Yearning for some clarification of the notions
Figure 6. An acrostic for the key word reality
5
Taken from http://english405idi.blogspot.cz/2012_11_01_archive.html (retrieved in 2013)
Social-Practice Approaches
While textual approaches are concerned with the immediate co-text (the
textual environment preceding and following a particular word, sentence, or
paragraph) and process approaches with the composing situation, social-practice
approaches are oriented towards “the purposes, goals and uses that the completed
text may eventually fulfill” (Hyland 2009: 29). In other words, social-practice
approaches take into account the potential reader or audience.
What has additionally been stressed in social-practice approaches is that
academic writing should be viewed as a communal activity. As Harris states: “We
write (...) as members of communities whose beliefs, concerns, and practices both
instigate and constrain, at least in part, the sorts of things we can say. Our aims and
intentions in writing are thus not merely personal, idiosyncratic, but reflective of
communities to which we belong” (1989: 12). What academics write is thus
circumscribed, both in form and content, by tacit rules and rhetorical conventions of
disciplinary discourse communities. Adherence to these implicit norms enables
authors to gain access to, win acceptance by and maintain membership of their
respective discourse communities.
The notion of discourse community was coined by Swales (1990), who
regards it as crucial for the understanding of the factors impacting on the way
academics compose their texts. He proposes several defining features of discourse
communities relating to their common goals, participatory mechanisms, exchange of
information, specific genres, specialized terminology, and level of expertise.
However, the notion has come under criticism for neglecting the dynamic nature of
discourse communities. Furthermore, the notion appears to be somewhat restrictive
and definitive although such communities are often heterogeneous and diverse, with
different degrees of participation of their members (such as expert versus novices)6
.
Classroom application of the notion of discourse community can consist in
emphasizing the social dimension of writing. This can be done by teaching students
to anticipate the potential interests, understandings, and needs of the audience (i.e.,
the discourse community) to whom they are writing. To become a member of a
discourse community, students should be in contact with the academic world. They
should have knowledge of the topics and issues deemed important and current in
their disciplines. They should develop the skill to use conventionalized language
acceptable in their respective disciplines. Least but not last, they should take on the
role (and identity) of a researcher, displaying disciplinary knowledge in terms of
current theories and methods, rhetorical and linguistic conventions, and established
and successful practices.
One way of scaffolding students’ initiation into their respective discourse
communities is to encourage them to take on the role of an experienced,
authoritative writer. This can be done using an activity called syntactic borrowing or
skeleton writing (Kamler and Thomson 2006). The activity may be useful to novice
doctoral students who can benefit from undertaking identity work in terms of
language typical for expert or seasoned academics in their disciplines. The activity is
based on imitating established language models such as common formulas, typical
rhetorical moves, and balanced modesty versus self-assurance. The activity
(adapted from Kamler and Thomson ibid.) consists of three stages: (1) students
identify and underline important rhetorical patterns in authoritative texts from their
6
Various other notions concerning the communal perspective on writing have been introduced such as speech
community, interpretive community, and community of practice.
disciplines, (2) they add synonymous expressions to some of the underlined words to
avoid word-for-word copying, and (3) they write a paragraph using the skeleton and
synonyms. See figure 7 for a demonstration of the activity.
Figure 7. Demonstration of skeleton writing (taken from Helán 2012)
Conclusion
This paper described the main academic writing pedagogies, or better referred
to as approaches to teaching academic writing, namely the textual, process, and
social-practice approaches. Each approach was demonstrated by specific activities
regarded as exemplary instances of best practices. Firstly, the textual approaches
were viewed as sources of models of conventionalized lexico-grammar and rhetoric,
the former being exemplified via templates and the latter by structural move analysis.
In addition, the usefulness of building corpora of specialized academic texts and the
effectiveness of using text analysis tools were discussed. Secondly, process-based
approaches were outlined, drawing on creative writing and expressivist view of
writing. Activities such as free writing, clustering, and creating an acrostic were
debated, helping students generate ideas for writing. Finally, the social-practice
approach was described, emphasizing the communal perspective on academic
writing, with an exemplification of skeleton writing – an activity focusing on student
identity work as a researcher. All three approaches contribute to the development of
students’ academic writing abilities in English as a foreign language.
References
ELBOW, P. Writing Without Teachers. New York: Oxford University Press, 1973, 209 p.
ISBN 0-19-512016-7.
HARRIS, J. The Idea of Community in the Study of Writing. In: College Composition and
Communication. 1989, vol. 40 (1), p. 11 – 22.
HELÁN, R. Disciplinary Writing for Publication in English: Empowering and Equipping EFL
Doctoral Students with Writing Skills and Tools. In: Kaščáková, E., and K. Mihoková.
FORLANG: Cudzie jazyky v akademickom prostredi. Periodický zborník vedeckých
príspevkov vydaný pri priležitosti 60. výročia založenia Technickej univerzity
v Košiciach a Katedry jazykov. Košice: Technická univerzita v Košiciach, 2012, p. 39-
47. ISBN 978-80-553-0982-8.
HELÁN, R. Helping Medical Students Write: Genre Analysis of Medical Case Reports. In:
Kaščáková, E., and M. Zvirinský. FORLANG Cudzie jazyky v akademickom prostredi.
Košice: Technická univerzita v Košiciach, 2011, p. 75-85. ISBN 978-80-553-0743-5.
HYLAND, K. Teaching and Researching Writing. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2009,
263 p. ISBN 978-1-4082-0505-1.
KAMLER, B., P. THOMSON. Helping Doctoral Students Write. Pedagogies for Supervision.
Oxon and New York: Routledge, 2006, 173 p. ISBN 978-0-203-96981-6.
KING, K. B. Writing Template Book. The MICHIGAN Guide to Writing Well and Success on
High-Stakes Tests. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2007, 97 p. ISBN
978-0-472-03193-1.
PALTRIDGE, B. et al. Teaching Academic Writing. An Introduction for Teachers of Second
Language Writers. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2009, 187 p. ISBN
978-0-472-03334-8.
PAZDERNÍKOVÁ, P. Tvůrčí psaní a vědecká práce. Využití tvůrčích technik při přípravě,
psaní a prezentaci odborného textu. Dizertační práce. (Creative Writing and Scientific
Work. The Use of Creative Techniques for Preparation, Writing and Presentation of
Scientific Text. Dissertation.) Brno: Masarykova univerzita, 2009, 328 p.
SWALES, J. M. Genre Analysis. English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1990, 260 p. ISBN 978-0-521-33813-4.
Contact: Mgr. Robert Helán, Ph.D.
Masarykova univerzita, Centrum jazykového vzdělávání na Lékařské fakultě,
Kamenice 5, 625 00 Brno, Česká republika
E-mail: rhelan@med.muni.cz