helmut gruber birgit huemer markus rheindorf institut für sprachwissenschaft e-mail:...

Helmut GruberBirgit Huemer

Markus RheindorfInstitut für Sprachwissenschaft

E-mail: [email protected]

Teaching Academic Writing: On the advantages and disadvantages of developing a writing course for students in a ‚blended learning‘ environment.

Birgit Huemer, Markus Rheindorf, Helmut Gruber




IntroductionPrevious Research:• Academic Writing at the University (1999/2000, University of

Economics Vienna, Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures, and Department of Linguistics – both University of Vienna, funded by the Austrian National Bank)

• Genre, Habitus and academic Writing (2001-2004, University of Vienna, Department of Linguistics, funded by the Austrian National Bank and the Austrian Science Foundation)

– Theoretical background: Academic literacies and Writing in the Disciplines approach

Current Research Project:• Developing a Writing Course for Austrian Students (2006-

2008, University of Vienna, Department of Linguistics, funded by the Austrian Science Foundation as project L179-G03, http://www.univie.ac.at/linguistics/Schreibprojekt

http://www.univie.ac.at/linguistics/personal/helmut/Schreibprojekt/en/index.htm








Introduction

Overview:• Background Information• Overall course design• Entrance Modul• Modul 1• Modul 2• Didactic concept: ‘blended learning’• Advantages and disadvantages of ‘blended learning’




Data

• 34 student term papers written in four academic disciplines –Business studies–Business Psychology–Linguistics–Social and Economic History

• Interviews & questionnaires with staff (3) and students (34)• Participant observation of 3 seminars - notes and audio-

recordings• Peer feedback given by student groups (1)• Written staff comments and feedback during or after their

grading

Helmut Gruber

Änderung




Research method

• Previous project–Qualitative analysis of selected linguistic features (generic macro-structure, rhetorical structure, metacommunication, argumentation, intertextuality,modality, lexis/terminology)–Quantitative analysis for all categories and subcategories, cross tabulatingeach category with discipline and grade received

• Current project–Qualitative analysis (detailled), selection of prototypes –Didactic concept–Developing course material, designing website–Teaching two courses at the department of Lingustics and the department

of Social and Economic History–Evaluating courses and material used–Redesign

Helmut Gruber

Änderung




Theoretical basis

• Textanalysis–SFL approach of genres in academic discourse (Martin 1992, 1997, 1999, Eggins &

Martin 1997, Veel 1997, Levin, Fine & Young 2001): generic macro-structure–Rhetorical Structure Theory (Mann & Thompson 1986, 1987, 1988, Mann, Matthiessen & Thompson 1992)–Argumentation (Kelly & Bazermann 2003, Graefen 2002)–Intertextuality (Jacobs 1999)–Metacommunication (Hyland 1997, 1998a+b, 1999, Fandrych & Graefen 1999,

Graefen, 2000)–Modality (Hyland 1998a, Butler 1990, Halliday 1993, 1994)–Lexis/terminology (Ehlich 1995, 2000; Ehlich & Steets, 2003b)

• Academic literacies approach (Jones et al., 1999; Lea & Street, 1998; Lillis, 2000): social theory of literacy (social practices, domains of lifes, power relationships, cultural practices)

• Writing across the curriculum (WAC) & Writing in the disciplines (WID) (Russel, 2002)

Helmut Gruber

Änderung




Didactics: Newly formulated didactic domains

• General criteria of academic writing• Differences between everyday language and the language of

science/academia• Structure/make-up of a seminar paper• Connecting text segments• Perspective (quoting, paraphrasing, summarizing, referencing,

evaluating)• Explication and argumentation




Linguistic Features Didactic categories

Generic macro-structure, rhetorical structure

The structure of a seminar paper, connecting text-segments, argumentation

Metacommunication The structure of a seminar paper, connecting text-segments, general criteria of academic writing

Intertextuality Perspective (quotation, reference, etc.)

Argumentation Explication and argumentation

Modality Difference between the language of everyday life and scientific language, argumentation

Lexis Difference between the language of everyday life and scientific language

Didactics: Reconceptualising analytical categories




Didactics: Building a modular course design

Entrance module

Module 1

Module 2

Evaluation

Writing Basics, Differences between everyday language and the language of science, general criteria of writing process / web-based

Focus on writing: discipline-specific aspects of text structure, quotation and reference, argumentation / face-to-face and web-based exercises, online forum, i.e. blended learning




Entrance Modul

Content• Basic knowledge of academic writing and the writing process

Design• Implementation: e-learning platform of Vienna university (Bb-Vista)• Test module• Open questions• Multiple choice questions• Short assignments• Text sample (introduction)• Duration: about 1 hour

Purpose• Evaluation of students’ previous writing experiences and competence• Recommendation of specific parts of Module 1 in case of

shortcomings




Entrance Modul




Modul 1: Website

Content• Basic knowledge of academic writing: (General criteria of academic

writing, difference between the language of everyday life and scientific language, the structure of a seminar paper, connecting text-segments, quotation and reference, explication and argumentation)

• Aimed at students from the faculty of Arts and Humanities

Design• Hypertext (Html, no flash)• Independent of e-learning platform (Bb Vista) but integrated• Structured by topics • Three page-levels (each with a prototypical page concept)• Focus on written language, framed short paragraphs• Pictures are just illustrative (main page and first level)• Functional Icons: • Functional grapics, tables• Text examples from authentic students‘ texts, no exercises




Website Modul 1: main pagehttp://www.univie.ac.at/linguistics/personal/helmut/Schreibprojekt/Kurs/Modul1/index.htm

http://www.univie.ac.at/linguistics/personal/helmut/Schreibprojekt/Kurs/Modul1/index.htm




Website Modul 1: first sub-level




Website Modul 1: second sub-level




Website Modul 1: third sub-level




Modul 2: ‚blended learning‘

Content• Discipline specific writing course: Difference between the

language of everyday life and scientific language, the structure of a seminar paper, connecting text-segments, quotation and reference, explication and argumentation

Concept• Face to face + online exercises: 5 sessions of face-to-face

teaching (every two weeks), web-based tasks in the intervals between sessions

Design• e-learning platform of the University of Vienna (Bb Vista)




The e-learning platform Bb Vista




Online exercises

Type of activities• Describing, detecting, modifying, classifying, grading and

sequencing, writing, rewriting, discussing, giving feedback

Available tools• Assignment tool• Wiki• Discussion Forum




Assignment tool




Wiki




Online Forum




Advantages

• Collaborative work on texts (tracking text versions)• Peer groups• One forum for each topic• Learning to give feedback• Learning to write drafts – rewriting• Anonymous feedback possible• Available 24 hours• Integration of external links (Website Modul 1)




Disadvantages

• Assignment tool for all exercises: writing, copy and paste, no drag and drop, no other tools for exercises available

• Few text formating possibilities• WIKI tool: unclear structure• No video upload• Unclear navigation structure• Scholars can only use the tools the lecturer has selected• Back-button does not work• Additional workload for lecturer: Email, moderation of

online forum




Thank you

helmut gruber birgit huemer markus rheindorf institut für sprachwissenschaft e-mail:...

Documents