publish perish as an instruction-end learning opportunity
DESCRIPTION
A curriculum for technical academic writing, based on pragmatic considerations of publication. Seven years in implementation.TRANSCRIPT
Publish or perish as an instruction-end learning opportunity
Lawrie HunterKochi University of Technology
http://lawriehunter.com
Publish or perish as an instruction-end learning opportunity The strong external constraints placed on the technical academic writing program reported here demand a highly pragmatic approach to curriculum and instructional design. External constraints, plus the intense nature of technical doctorate research, do not allow sufficient time for grammar study to any useful extent. However, the small size of the semi-annual cohort makes a number of innovative curriculum interventions feasible. Central learner needs were identified as (1) practical writing skills for the creation of publishable papers; (2) a support network to enable learner navigation through the mentor/editor writing center decision matrix; and (3) a writing program to prepare the learner for work with support personnel and to build composition skills (analytical skills centered around argument and coherence skills focusing on readability) for the learner's professional future. Within the above program, grammar was made a peripheral concern; argument the center of readability work; and witting mimicry of model language a major tool. Emphasis was placed on meta-language to enable learners to take a 'witting client' position in interactions with support services. To date more than half of the participants have made use of the writing center services; among those, more than half have achieved semi-autonomy in the writing of research papers in their niche topic areas. These results suggest that the readability curriculum may have broader applicability.
No need to take notes :^o
You can download this powerpoint(and many more)
from
http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/or
http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/or
http://www.slideshare.net/rolenzo
4
Dimensions of Media Object Compehensibility
Lawrie HunterKochi University of Technologyhttp://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/
KUT
Island of Shikoku
Background
1982, 1987: Technical rewriter, Techwrite, Tokyo
1990-now: Freelance academic rewriter, Japan
1996-now: Super translation team member-Japanese construction ministry-World Water Forum Kyoto-Interviews editor, Information Design Jnl.
1998- Referee, CATaC conferences1999- Editorial team, JALTCALL conferences2004- Editorial board, Web Based Communities2009- Referee, CALL journal
InstructorMathematics
EFL
Assoc. ProfessorEFL
Intercultural Comm.
ProfessorEFL CALL
EFL Critical thinkingESP technical writing
EAP for engineers
7
CONSTRAINTS
8
KUT TAW scenario
Since 2002: - Japanese government scholarships
- for foreign students - in technical doctoral programmes.
! Graduation requirements:
- 2+ refereed papers in top journals- dissertation in English
Further L2 acquisition to the point of near-independence during the study period is NOT a realistic strategy.
SCENARIO
ESPESP
EAPEAP
EAPHUMANITIES
EAPHUMANITIESTAWTAW
EXEX EYEY EZEZ
English for specific purposesEnglish for academic purposesTechnical academic writing
11
1 Found problem: highly constrained TAW2 Needs analysis: learner profile3 Framing: possible solutions
OUTLINE
12
Found problemFound problem: constrained TAWNeeds analysis: learner profileFraming: possible solutions
How to maximize TAW functionality?
-language instruction?-pragmatic writing instruction?-mimicry training?-argumentation instruction?
-learner use of editor service?-learner use of mentor service?
13
Found problemFound problem: constrained TAWNeeds analysis: learner profileFraming: possible solutions
How to maximize TAW functionality?
-language instruction?-pragmatic writing instruction?-mimicry training?-argumentation instruction?
-learner use of editor service?-learner use of mentor service?
What is the core issue here?
-how to maximize publication success?-how to maximize ongoing growth?
14
NEEDS
Learnerprofile
TAWobjectives
Variable English skill/knowledgeVariable intrinsic motivation
Uniform high extrinsic motivationHigh anxiety about research/completion
High anxiety about conference presentation
Communicative competenceWriting supportConference presentation supportRP how-toRP supportTAW skill to independence
Degreeprogramme
demands3-year limit2 refereed papers in EnglishDissertation in English
Needs analysisFound problem: constrained TAWNeeds analysis: learner profileFraming: possible solutions
EAP best practiceKey factors in successful academic performance
Reading
Understanding the main idea of one’s readingReaching valid conclusionsMaking critical evaluations of contentComprehending significant detailUnderstanding explicitly stated informationDetecting inferences between the lines
Writing
OrganizationSummarizationWell-formed sentencesVocabularyUsageResearch skillsEconomy ClarityProviding sufficient evidenceGrammaticalCorrectly punctuatedAbility to use 'standard' academic discourseKnowing what your tutor-examinee values (and giving it to him/her)
Taken from Ginther, A. and Grant, L. (1996) A review of the academic needs of native English-speaking college students in the United States. Research monograph series MS-1. Princeton, NJ: Educational
Testing ServiceBanerjee, D. and Wall, D. (2006) Assessing and reporting performances on pre-sessional EAP courses: Developing a final assessment checklist and investigating its validity. Journal of English for academic
purposes 5(2006) 50-69.
Found problem: constrained TAWNeeds analysis: learner profileFraming: possible solutions
TAW writing: needs analysis
Knowledge
Niche grammar structures
Niche rhetorical structures
General register repertoires
(distinguishing formal academic from
informal academic)
Research Paper text structure and
information structure
Language skills
Argument sequencing
Info-structuredsentence generation
Mimicry of model language
NOTICING
Facilities
Concordance & collocation resources
Modelresearch papers
(annotated*)
*c.f. Brown and Brown’s ‘annotation’
18
SOLUTIONS
Possible solutionsMaximization of TAW functionality
1 Editor/mentor prep2 Pragmatic language curriculum3 Strategic language curriculum
- Note: all of these hinge on argument and accessibility
Found problem: constrained TAWNeeds analysis: learner profileFraming: possible solutions
2007curriculum
2009curriculum
PhD English writing classes: editor's eye curriculum
Textbook: How Academic Writing Works (2nd edition) by Hunter, KUT Press.Required also: Science Research Writing by Glasman-Deal, Imperial College Press.Former textbook: Academic Writing for Graduate Students by Swales and Feak (U. of Michigan Press)
Key concepts:
1. How to write to the standard of the target journal.
2. How to write maximally readable Formal Academic English.
3. How to use the writing techniques in model papers. (cf. noticing) Support is given in checking English quality in model papers.
4. How to communicate with a writing mentor or editor.
5. How to correct one's English using mentor feedback. How to check that an editor has not damaged the meaning in the paper.
24
REFRAME
Reframing: learner:instructor becomes client:advisor
Language knowledge Language skills Task modes
Technical
Writing II
Language structures vs. information structures
Text structures: G-S, P-P-S, ....
Registers
Using text structures
Summarizing
Data commentary
Using lexical units to show info structuresEditing through a checklist
Write-edit-rewrite (uncoded to coded)
Information structure mapping
Swales & Feak exercises
Research
Writing
Ambiguity
Readability (stress position, topic position)
Rhetorical moves: framing, relationships, cohesionRP structureRP lexical units
Language features in RP sections
Optimizing readability-subject-verb proximity
-single function for 1 unit of discourse
-emphasis at syntactic closure points
Avoiding ambiguity
Creating, maintaining cohesion
Use, application of register knowledge
Write-edit-rewrite (uncoded to coded)
Readability work
Swales & Feak exercises
Reframing: learner:instructor becomes client:advisor
Language knowledge Language skills Task modes
Technical
Writing II
Language structures vs. information structures
Text structures: G-S, P-P-S, ....
Registers
Using text structures
Summarizing
Data commentary
Using lexical units to show info structuresEditing through a checklist
Write-edit-rewrite (uncoded to coded)
Information structure mapping
Swales & Feak exercises
Dossier collection work
Research
Writing
Ambiguity
Readability (stress position, topic position)
Rhetorical moves: framing, relationships, cohesion
RP structure
RP lexical units
Language features in RP sections
Optimizing readability-subject-verb proximity
-single function for 1 unit of discourse
-emphasis at syntactic closure points
Avoiding ambiguity
Creating, maintaining cohesion
Use, application of register knowledge
Write-edit-rewrite (uncoded to coded)
Readability work
Swales & Feak exercises
Dossier manipulation
27
STYLE DOSSIER
WORK
Dossier collection tasksA. Research writing register models
B. Informal discussion register models
C. Glossary
Dossier collection tasksA. Research writing register models - EEK!
B. Informal discussion register models
C. Glossary
(EEK: take a look in the horse’s mouth)
Reframing: client:advisor becomes user:consultant
Language knowledge Language skills Task modes
Technical
Writing II
Language structures vs. information structures
Text structures: G-S, P-P-S, ....
Registers
Using text structures
Summarizing
Data commentary
Using lexical units to show info structuresEditing through a checklist
Write-edit-rewrite (uncoded to coded)
Information structure mapping
Swales & Feak exercises
Dossier collection work
Research
Writing
Ambiguity
Readability (stress position, topic position)
Rhetorical moves: framing, relationships, cohesion
RP structure
RP lexical units
Language features in RP sections
Optimizing readability-subject-verb proximity
-single function for 1 unit of discourse
-emphasis at syntactic closure points
Avoiding ambiguity
Creating, maintaining cohesion
Use, application of register knowledge
Write-edit-rewrite (uncoded to coded)
Readability work
Swales & Feak exercises
Dossier manipulation
Claim: when we add dossier work, no additional knowledgeor skills are required
32
LEARNERAS CLIENT
Hunter's 2-page Edit System
editor corrects errors
for a finished paper
basicallyno learning
coded feedback
1-2 pagesat a time
much learning
Editingservice
Coded feedback
editor corrects errors
for a finished paper
no client effort
type of error is marked
editor asks questions
client must correct the problems
Uncoded feedback
no rejections by journals
1322-pageedits
70 hoursediting
2009 at KUT:Hunter's consulting
50 hours discussion
The clientmust have:
CompletedTW2
and RWcourses
Minimum requirements for 2-page editing service
Enough time until deadline
(2+ weeks)
Editing service: entry criteria
Academic editing client attributes:
Makes few grammar errors.Can identify native-like rhetorical flow.Can identify perfectly unambiguous text.Consistently learns from error correction (coded/uncoded).Wants to learn from error correction.Writes well by mimicry.Does not decay with time away from English.Has a sense of argument.Writes unambiguous text by logic/puzzle-solving.Can identify meaning damage in rewrites.
NB: learners with the converse of the above positive attributes exist in large(r) numbers.
Entry Setting Final user success
Strong enough
grammar knowledge and composition skill
Some
grammar knowledge and composition skill
Insufficient
grammar knowledge and composition skill
time constraints
latent development
minor/no development
Independent writer
Model-using independent writer
Model-using aided writer
Heavily aided writer
Ongoing mentored writer
Ghost-written writer
Self-assess strategy tool
Methodology frame
1. In this kind of work, first the 'user' must know -the tools and objects involved-how to talk about them.
.
Entry Setting Final user success
Strong enough
grammar knowledge and composition skill
Some
grammar knowledge and composition skill
Insufficient
grammar knowledge and composition skill
time constraints
latent development
minor/no development
Independent writer
Model-using independent writer
Model-using aided writer
Heavily aided writer
Ongoing mentored writer
Ghost-written writer
Methodology frame
Hunterthe style dossier approach
METHODOLOGY
1. In this kind of work, first the 'user' must know -the tools and objects involved-how to talk about them.
2. Second, time and again the user must articulate anew his/her coursethrough the strategy network from entry to final user success.
Entry Setting Final user success
Strong enough
grammar knowledge and composition skill
Some
grammar knowledge and composition skill
Insufficient
grammar knowledge and composition skill
time constraints
latent development
minor/no development
Independent writer
Model-using independent writer
Model-using aided writer
Heavily aided writer
Ongoing mentored writer
Ghost-written writer
Methodology frame
Methodology frame1. In this kind of work, first the 'user' must know
-the tools and objects involved-how to talk about them.
2. Second, time and again the user must articulate anew his/her coursethrough the strategy network from entry to final user success.
3. This ongoing rearticulation consists of -self observation of success and time constraints -calculation of learning objective achievement probability*.
*Not everyone will learn to write 'from scratch' well and even those who could learn to do so may not have sufficient short-term (or even long-term) time.
Entry Setting Final user success
Strong enough
grammar knowledge and composition skill
Some
grammar knowledge and composition skill
Insufficient
grammar knowledge and composition skill
time constraints
latent development
minor/no development
Independent writer
Model-using independent writer
Model-using aided writer
Heavily aided writer
Ongoing mentored writer
Ghost-written writer
Methodology frame1. In this kind of work, first the 'user' must know
-the tools and objects involved-how to talk about them.
2. Second, time and again the user must articulate anew his/her coursethrough the strategy network from entry to final user success.
3. This ongoing rearticulation consists of -self observation of success and time constraints -calculation of learning objective achievement probability*.
4. Native rewriter resource availability/affordability are also key factors in deciding strategy.
Entry Setting Final user success
Strong enough
grammar knowledge and composition skill
Some
grammar knowledge and composition skill
Insufficient
grammar knowledge and composition skill
time constraints
latent development
minor/no development
Independent writer
Model-using independent writer
Model-using aided writer
Heavily aided writer
Ongoing mentored writer
Ghost-written writer
45
SUMMARY
SummaryScenario constraintsLearner timeLearner variabilityResearch topic granularityRP genre granularityQuality of available modelsNative rewriter availability/affordability
SummaryScenario constraintsLearner timeLearner variabilityResearch topic granularityRP genre granularityQuality of available modelsNative rewriter availability/affordability
CompromisesPragmatic strategiesLearner revisioned as client, then as userInstructor revisioned as advisor, then as consultant
SummaryHunter
the style dossier approachMETHODOLOGY
Scenario constraintsLearner timeLearner variabilityResearch topic granularityRP genre granularityQuality of available modelsNative rewriter availability/affordability
CompromisesPragmatic strategiesLearner revisioned as client, then as userInstructor revisioned as advisor, then as consultant
Task arrayGrammar workInformation structure mappingRegister workRP lexis workWrite-rewriteDossier work
49
PERFUNCTORYCONCLUSION
50
Inconclusive conclusion
How to balance
Linguistic bottom-up constructionand
the scaffolding of noticing?
51
Inconclusive conclusion
How to balance
Linguistic bottom-up constructionand
the scaffolding of noticing?
Occam’s razor
Wikipedia: Bertrand Russell’s "a form of Occam's Razor" which was "Whenever possible, substitute constructions out of known entities for inferences to unknown entities."
Thank you so much
for your kind attention.
Please download this ppt from
http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/or
http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/or
http://www.slideshare.net/rolenzo-and write to me.
Lawrie HunterKochi University of Technology
SourcesHunter
the style dossier approachSTRUCTURE
Banerjee, D. and Wall, D. (2006) Assessing and reporting performances on pre-sessional EAP courses: Developing a final assessment checklist and investigating its validity. Journal of English for academic purposes 5(2006) 50-69.
Ferris, D. (2002) Treatment of error in second language student writing. University of Michigan Press.
Ginther, A. and Grant, L. (1996) A review of the academic needs of native English-speaking college students in the United States. Research monograph series MS-1. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Glasman-Deal, H. (2010) Science research writing. Imperial College Press.Gopen, G.D. & Swan, J.A. (1990) The Science of Scientific Writing. American Scientist 78 550-558.
http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/23947Harwood, N. (2006) What do we want EAP teaching materials for? Journal of English for Academic
Purposes 4 (2005) 149-161.Hunter, L. (2009)) How academic writing works. (2nd edition). KUT Press.Hunter, L. Online resource for English for Academic Purposes:
http://del.icio.us/rolenzo/eapKoutsantoni, D. (2006) Rhetorical strategies in engineering research articles and research theses:
Advanced academic literacy and relations of power. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 5 (2006) 19-36.
Liu, M. & Braine, G. (2005) Cohesive features in argumentative writing produced by Chinese undergraduates. English for specific purposes 24 (2005)
Rowley-Jolivet, E. & Carter-Thomas, S. (2005) Genre awareness and rhetorical appropriacy: Manipulation of information structure by NS and NNS scientists in the international conference setting. System 33 (2005) 41-64.
Swales, J.M.. and Feak, C.B. (2004) Academic writing for graduate students: essential tasks and skills (2nd ed.). University of Michigan Press.
Swales, J.M.. and Feak, C.B. (2001) English in Today's Research World: A Writing Guide. University of Michigan Press.