JISCMail - EATAW Archives

Dear Dr Hilsdon,

Thank you for this call. A community sourced critical review is an interesting concept and please see my initial contribution below.

Best regards,

Peter

Peter Levrai

University Teacher of English, University of Turku

PhD Candidate, University of the Basque Country

https://www.linkedin.com/in/peterlevrai/

https://developeap.weebly.com

Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in higher education, 23(2), 157-172.

This paper advocates in favour of an academic literacy approach to supporting student writing, moving away from surface level concerns like grammar and lexis and grappling with deep issues of how knowledge is expressed in different fields of study and in different genres of text. It is recognised there is great variety in expectations of student writing across disciplines and from tutor to tutor and that even when tutors use common language, like “argumentation”, what is meant by that and how it is evidenced in writing can be very different, meaning students need to ‘course switch’, adapting their writing practices to meet the differing expectations of tutors of different courses. The study in the paper found a deficit model was in place, with the tutor very much as the authoritative voice and the student producing writing which needed to be fixed. The authors argue this approach needs to be adapted, adopting a more critical stance of academic practices and how students can be supported in learning them.

The appeal of this paper stems from my interest in collaborative learning. Of particular interest is the concept of course switching. One of the concerns in collaborative learning is that of differing expectations amongst tutors of how students behave in a collaborative task and how that collaboration can be evidenced and measured. This can lead to confusion among students, being unsure what is expected of them and collaboration is certainly an area that would benefit from more reflection amongst tutors.

Reading this paper encourages reflection on our feedback practices to student writing, both in terms of how we give feedback (expert to novice or as a co-creator) and the explicitness of our feedback. Sensitivity to the challenges facing students when dealing with different tutors with different expectations should also encourage more discussion with colleagues to try and appreciate and articulate what we are looking for in ‘good’ writing, perhaps leading to the appreciation there are different, equally valid ways of writing and expressing knowledge.

Gourlay, L. (2009). Threshold practices: becoming a student through academic literacies. London review of education, 7(2), 181-192.

Gourlay examines how students transition into university, which can be an emotionally challenging process, changing from novice newcomers into more confident members of the university. She questions the applicability of the concept of communities of practice to Higher Education contexts, favouring the concept of ‘liminality’, which recognises that students need to engage in threshold practices during their transition and that during this process they may experience emotional destabilisation, uncertainty and ambiguity. Her study shows how writing can be an important aspect of a student transitioning into believing they belong at university. Writing can be a challenging process, where students may be unsure of what is expected of them, but can also provide a turning point into belonging when receiving positive feedback or a successful grade.

What particularly stood out from this paper was the critique of the communities of practice when it comes to Higher Education, particularly in terms the limited interactions between tutor and student, which problematises the idea of ‘mutual engagement’ where the novice can learn working alongside the expert. This is an area where EAP can play an important role, helping the student through the academic writing process and offering that mutual engagement through formative feedback. It is also an area where collaborative writing assignments can help students navigate new ways of writing, providing a social as well as academic support network, so they can pass through threshold practices together.

It’s an interesting paper to remind us of the difficulties students may face transitioning into university life and that we need to be explicit in terms of our expectations and of what is required of them. It also raises the importance of feedback for students in helping them gauge how they are doing and to let them feel the legitimacy of their work, recognising not only where they could improve things but also the areas they are doing well. The research methodology, particularly the visual element to help students express how they feel about their status at university, could also be something we, as EAP practitioners, could fold into our practice.

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 at 16:57, John Hilsdon <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Dear Colleagues

Community-sourced, critical review of literature on academic literacies

In relation to our recent call for papers for a special edition of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education (JLDHE), to be published in November 2019 on academic literacies, we hope we can encourage you to post publicly in reply to this email over the next month (or to us privately if you prefer) offering either

your comments on any one or more of the items in the suggested reading list below

and/or

your suggestions for additional texts related to academic literacies and associated debates that you think others may find useful or interesting

We are hoping to stimulate conversation (hence our preference for you to reply to the list) that will yield material for what will become an edited, community-sourced, critical review of literature on academic literacies that we can publish in the special edition. All contributors will be credited in the published paper. So, what we would like from you, by 30^th April 2019, is comment on items in the existing list below and/or recommendations, critiquing or drawing to the attention of colleagues other texts or resources relevant to academic literacies. We’d like each contributor to write:

•                    A summary of the content of your chosen text (in about 3 - 5 sentences).

•                    Why you were inspired to recommend or comment on it (again, approx. 3 - 5 sentences).

•                    What/Why your colleagues could gain from reading /viewing/using it (length ditto).

We very much hope you will be inspired to contribute!

Texts to comment on:

Archer, A. (2006). A multimodal approach to academic ‘literacies’: Problematising the visual/verbal divide. Language and Education, 20(6), 449-462.

Goodfellow, R. (2005). Academic literacies and e-learning: A critical approach to writing in the online university. International Journal of Educational Research, 43(7-8), 481-494.

Gourlay, L. (2009). Threshold practices: becoming a student through academic literacies. London review of education, 7(2), 181-192.

Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in higher education, 23(2), 157-172.

Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (2006). The ‘academic literacies’ model: Theory and applications. Theory into practice, 45(4), 368-377.

Lillis, T., & Scott, M. (2007). Defining academic literacies research: Issues of epistemology, ideology and strategy. Journal of applied linguistics, 4(1), 5-32.

Murray, N., & Nallaya, S. (2016). Embedding academic literacies in university programme curricula: a case study. Studies in Higher Education, 41(7), 1296-1312.

Russell, D. R., Lea, M., Parker, J., Street, B., & Donahue, T. (2009). Exploring notions of genre in ‘academic literacies’ and ‘writing across the curriculum’: Approaches across countries and contexts.

Wingate, U., & Tribble, C. (2012). The best of both worlds? Towards an English for Academic Purposes/Academic Literacies writing pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education, 37(4), 481-495.

Wingate U. (2015) Academic Literacy and Student Diversity. The Case for Inclusive Practice, Multilingual Matters, Bristol.

On behalf of the joint editorial board

Sarah Brewer [log in to unmask]

Steven Briggs [log in to unmask]

Christopher Drew [log in to unmask]

Sue Eccles [log in to unmask]

Andy Hagyard [log in to unmask]

John Hilsdon [log in to unmask]

Christina Howell-Richardson [log in to unmask]

Mick Kavanagh [log in to unmask]

Maria Kukhareva [log in to unmask]

Malone, Cathy [log in to unmask]

Craig Morley [log in to unmask]

Gita Sedghi [log in to unmask]

Alicja Syska [log in to unmask]

John Wrigglesworth [log in to unmask]

Dr John Hilsdon

National Teaching Fellow

Editor JLDHE

This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, University of Plymouth accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. University of Plymouth does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form.
_________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe login to https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=EATAW You find the 'Unsubscribe' button in the blue 'Options bar'