Confronting MA students’ and seminar teachers’ diverse agendas concerning academic literacy development through an EAP writing course

Magdalena Trepczyńska

Abstract


Academic courses aim to develop kinds of literacy that are significantly different from what students know from other contexts. Mastering ways of constructing knowledge in scholarly disciplines in a foreign language poses a considerable challenge, not only for the uninitiated. The challenge is none the less small for English for Academic Purposes (EAP) writing instructors as the currently observed diversity of student populations in master’s programs compels them to revise some of their long-standing assumptions and practices. The article reports on a study aiming to compare MA seminar teachers’ and beginner MA students’ perceptions of writing needs and an EAP course expectations and suggests how the responses can be used constructively in writing pedagogy.


Keywords


EAP, academic writing courses, academic literacy, MA level writing needs, student and teacher expectations

Full Text:

PDF

References


Angélil-Carter, S. (2000). Stolen language. Plagiarism in writing? New York, NY: Longman. DOI: org/10.4324/9781315840185.

Hadley, G. (2015). English for Academic Purposes in neoliberal universities: A critical grounded theory. London: Springer. DOI: org/10.1007/978-3-319-10449-2.

Hyland, K. (2018). Sympathy for the devil? A defense of EAP. Language Teaching, 51(3), 383-399. DOI: org/10.1017/s0261444818000101.

Ivanić, R. (1998). Writing and identity. The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: org/10.1075/swll.5.

Johanson, R. (2001). The self-reported perspectives regarding academic writing among Taiwanese Graduate Students Specializing in TEFL. Paper presented at Texas Foreign Language Education Conference, Austin, TX, March 23-24.

Morton, J., Storch, N., & Thompson, C. (2015). What our students tell us: Perceptions of three multilingual students on their academic writing in first year, DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.007.

Pomerantz, A., & Kearney, E. (2012). Beyond ‘write-talk-revise-(repeat)’: using narrative to understand one multilingual student’s interactions around writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21 (3), 221-238. DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.05.013.

Pennycook, A. (2001). Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. DOI: 10.4324/9781410600790.

Sowden, C. (2003). Understanding academic competence in overseas students in the UK. ELT Journal, 57(4), 377-385. DOI: 10.1093/elt/57.4.377.

Spack, R. (1988). Initiating ESL students into the academic discourse community: How far should we go? TESOL Quarterly, 22(1), 29-52. DOI: 10.2307/3587060.

Swales, J. (1997). English as tyrannosaurus rex. World Englishes, 16(3), 373-382. DOI: 10.1111/1467-971x.00071.

Tait, J. (1999). Multiple perspectives on academic writing needs. Paper presented at 33rd Annual TESOL Convention, NY, March 1999.

Thompson, C. H. (2009). Plagiarism, intertextuality and emergent authorship in university students' academic writing. PORTAL, 6(1). DOI:10.5130/portal.v6i1.775.

Wolsey, T. D. (2010). Complexity in student writing: The relationship between the task and vocabulary uptake. Literacy Research and Instruction, 49(2), 194-208. DOI: 10.1080/19388070902947360.

Wolsey, T. D., Lapp, D., & Fisher, D. (2012). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions: An inquiry into academic writing. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55(8), 714-724. DOI: 10.1002/jaal.00086.

Yeh, C.C. (2009). Student Perceptions of an EFL Undergraduate Research Writing Project. RELC Journal, 40, 314-332. DOI: 10.1177/0033688209343863.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/lsmll.2019.43.3.127-139
Date of publication: 2019-11-14 10:37:33
Date of submission: 2019-03-23 17:54:20


Statistics


Total abstract view - 880
Downloads (from 2020-06-17) - PDF - 425

Indicators



Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Magdalena Trepczyńska

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.