Much of the research on academic writing has been based on specific features that the concept arises. According to this issue, Mac Donald (1994) asserts that “a general academic register, a formal style, a proficiency in language use, the ability to integrate information from other sources, and [knowledge of] the types of genres academic writing deals with” (as citied in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p 10) are key characteristics to acknowledge academic writing.
In particular, journal entries, critical incidents, journal articles and vignettes among others, can be cited as examples of academic writing when they follow the conventions previously mentioned. Different types of expository texts in formal writing can be found in a variety of contexts, such as the Internet, books, magazines and so forth.
The role of citations is believed to perform a significant part as well. “[O]riginal ideas and expressions are the acknowledged property of their creators (as is the case with a patent for an invention).” (p. 125) (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p. 18). Not only plagiarism is avoided but also ideas are supported by other author’s words, conferring value and status to thoughts and opinions.
Academic writing is closely related to professional growth. As Pintos and Crimi (2010) state, this type of writing is considered as a construction rather than a translation processs in which knowledge is generated and created through new concepts and ideas. Interaction between new specific content and formal schemas of academic discourse is a significant process to help people grow in their professions.
Reference
Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). Unit 3: Academic writing. Retrieved September 2010, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=7392
martes, 30 de noviembre de 2010
Reflections on discourse communities
Broadly speaking, a discourse community is a group of people who share distinguishing features. Kutz (1997) argues that “its members agree on a particular knowledge, equal purposes, common relationships and similar attitudes and ideas” (cited in Kelly-Kleese, 2001, p.1). In this line of thought, Bizzel (1992) states that a discourse community “is a group of people who share certain language-using practices [that] can be seen as conventionalized”(as cited in Kelly-Kleese, 2001, p.1).
Community colleges can be an example of a discourse community. At this point, Kelly Kleese (2004) outlines that “members of a two-year college discourse communities share understandings about how to communicate knowledge and achieve shared purposes, and they exhibit a flow of discourse that has a particular structure and style (. . .)” (p.2). Specifically, students in a community college share a communicative competence in terms of language, knowledge and skills.
Discourse communities are often described as “little ecosystems” as Porter (1992) named them (as cited in Kelly Kelly-Kleese, 2001, p. 2). If this particular type of community were isolated, people would not be able to interact with other communities which is one of its main characteristics. Likewise, there are not any limits but permeable boundaries that make discourse communities flexible and constituted to coexist within the society.
References
Kelly-Kleese, C.(2001) Editor’s choice: An open memo to Community College Faculty and Administrators. Community College review. Retrieved September 2010, from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/ mi_m0HCZ/is_1_29/ai_77481463
Kelly-Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA Community College Review: Community college scholarship and discourse. Community College review. Retrieved September 2010, from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/ mi_m0HCZ/is_1_32/ai_n6361541
Academic writing
Community colleges can be an example of a discourse community. At this point, Kelly Kleese (2004) outlines that “members of a two-year college discourse communities share understandings about how to communicate knowledge and achieve shared purposes, and they exhibit a flow of discourse that has a particular structure and style (. . .)” (p.2). Specifically, students in a community college share a communicative competence in terms of language, knowledge and skills.
Discourse communities are often described as “little ecosystems” as Porter (1992) named them (as cited in Kelly Kelly-Kleese, 2001, p. 2). If this particular type of community were isolated, people would not be able to interact with other communities which is one of its main characteristics. Likewise, there are not any limits but permeable boundaries that make discourse communities flexible and constituted to coexist within the society.
References
Kelly-Kleese, C.(2001) Editor’s choice: An open memo to Community College Faculty and Administrators. Community College review. Retrieved September 2010, from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/ mi_m0HCZ/is_1_29/ai_77481463
Kelly-Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA Community College Review: Community college scholarship and discourse. Community College review. Retrieved September 2010, from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/ mi_m0HCZ/is_1_32/ai_n6361541
Academic writing
lunes, 29 de noviembre de 2010
Outlines of academic writing
Academic writing issues are sometimes disregarded by some discourse communities which need to apply academic conventions in intellectual contexts. As Myles (2002) argues, “[a]cademic writing requires conscious effort and much practice in composing, developing and analyzing ideas”(p. 1). As a result, writing of this type must be fostered and trained agreeing on one the possible writing styles. In this article, the American Psychological Association (APA) style will be used to research some of the key aspects of academic writing.
The use of quotations is an extremely important resource so as to show a substantial level of research as well as a great deal of credibility. Analysing Myles (2002), it seems that direct quotations reveal different perspectives and voices to the reader. For instance, when citing Kutz, Groden & Zamel (1993), Myles (2002) states that the nature of academic writing often confuses students, “particularly those who bring with them a set of conventions that are at odds with those of the academic world they are entering” (p. 2).
Omissions and insertions are also considered useful techniques of acknowledging sources. When it is a need to adapt other authors’ voices to the context in which new ideas are developed, omissions and insertions of paragraphs, words or letters play a fundamental role. According to Pintos & Crimi (2010), an omission is “used in writing to indicate that a part of the original text has been omitted within a quoted passage” (p. 22). To cite an example, in Myles’s (2002) article, an omission is appreciated when she cites Mc Laughlin (1988) commenting that transfer errors can occur because “[L]earners lack the necessary information in the second language or the attentional capacity to activate the appropriate second-language routine” (p. 7).
Taking into consideration different structures of introductory phrases is also a key point in examining linguistic aspects of academic writing. Particularly, Pintos & Crimi (2010) define introductory phrases as “expressions composed by the source and the main idea.” (p. 21). Therefore, if Myles´s (2002) article is considered, it is possible to cite a variety of structures such as “The Flower and Hayes (1980, 1981) model focuses on (...)” (p. 2); “According to the researchers (...)” (p. 3) and “Schumann (1998) argues that (...)” (p.7) among other examples.
In-text citations cannot be ignored when studying academic writing features. Short and block quotations either using direct or indirect writing are found throughout Myles’ s (2002) article. For instance, an example of a short paraphrased quotation could be “[i]n structuring information, the writer uses various types of knowledge, including discourse knowledge, understanding of audience, and sociolinguistic rules (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990)”( p. 6). Although there is a considerable variety of quotations, paraphrasing seems to be the most common since Myles’s (2002) attention is not focused on years of publication or authors, but on valuable ideas.
Similarly, the use of reporting verbs show a management of the diverse academic writing strategies that Myles (2002) uses so as to depict a detailed picture of her own ideas. Thus, she utilizes diverse verbs in structures such as “ In fact, Bereiter and Scardamalia criticize (...)” (p. 3); “[t]he authors discuss (...) (p.3) as well as “O’Malley and Chamot have differentiated (...)” (p.7). As previously mentioned, through Myles’s (2002) writing, it can be noticed her unambiguous concepts and fluency of ideas through varied language.
Broadly speaking, Myles’s (2002) work seems to show a clear scenario of an interesting piece of writing following academic conventions. Scrutinising her article may motivate the correct understanding of APA style so as to improve academic writing in the context of different fields. All in all, the fact of analysing and developing ideas should be organised neatly and orderly for the correct interpretation of messages in a variety of discourse communities.
Reference
Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing process and error analysis in student texts. TESL-EJ, 6, 2, 2002. Queen’s University. Retrieved October 2010, from
from http://www-writing.berkeley.edu/TESl-EJ/ej22/a1.html.
Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). Unit 3: Academic writing. Retrieved September 2010, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=7392
The use of quotations is an extremely important resource so as to show a substantial level of research as well as a great deal of credibility. Analysing Myles (2002), it seems that direct quotations reveal different perspectives and voices to the reader. For instance, when citing Kutz, Groden & Zamel (1993), Myles (2002) states that the nature of academic writing often confuses students, “particularly those who bring with them a set of conventions that are at odds with those of the academic world they are entering” (p. 2).
Omissions and insertions are also considered useful techniques of acknowledging sources. When it is a need to adapt other authors’ voices to the context in which new ideas are developed, omissions and insertions of paragraphs, words or letters play a fundamental role. According to Pintos & Crimi (2010), an omission is “used in writing to indicate that a part of the original text has been omitted within a quoted passage” (p. 22). To cite an example, in Myles’s (2002) article, an omission is appreciated when she cites Mc Laughlin (1988) commenting that transfer errors can occur because “[L]earners lack the necessary information in the second language or the attentional capacity to activate the appropriate second-language routine” (p. 7).
Taking into consideration different structures of introductory phrases is also a key point in examining linguistic aspects of academic writing. Particularly, Pintos & Crimi (2010) define introductory phrases as “expressions composed by the source and the main idea.” (p. 21). Therefore, if Myles´s (2002) article is considered, it is possible to cite a variety of structures such as “The Flower and Hayes (1980, 1981) model focuses on (...)” (p. 2); “According to the researchers (...)” (p. 3) and “Schumann (1998) argues that (...)” (p.7) among other examples.
In-text citations cannot be ignored when studying academic writing features. Short and block quotations either using direct or indirect writing are found throughout Myles’ s (2002) article. For instance, an example of a short paraphrased quotation could be “[i]n structuring information, the writer uses various types of knowledge, including discourse knowledge, understanding of audience, and sociolinguistic rules (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990)”( p. 6). Although there is a considerable variety of quotations, paraphrasing seems to be the most common since Myles’s (2002) attention is not focused on years of publication or authors, but on valuable ideas.
Similarly, the use of reporting verbs show a management of the diverse academic writing strategies that Myles (2002) uses so as to depict a detailed picture of her own ideas. Thus, she utilizes diverse verbs in structures such as “ In fact, Bereiter and Scardamalia criticize (...)” (p. 3); “[t]he authors discuss (...) (p.3) as well as “O’Malley and Chamot have differentiated (...)” (p.7). As previously mentioned, through Myles’s (2002) writing, it can be noticed her unambiguous concepts and fluency of ideas through varied language.
Broadly speaking, Myles’s (2002) work seems to show a clear scenario of an interesting piece of writing following academic conventions. Scrutinising her article may motivate the correct understanding of APA style so as to improve academic writing in the context of different fields. All in all, the fact of analysing and developing ideas should be organised neatly and orderly for the correct interpretation of messages in a variety of discourse communities.
Reference
Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing process and error analysis in student texts. TESL-EJ, 6, 2, 2002. Queen’s University. Retrieved October 2010, from
from http://www-writing.berkeley.edu/TESl-EJ/ej22/a1.html.
Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). Unit 3: Academic writing. Retrieved September 2010, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=7392
Suscribirse a:
Comentarios (Atom)