University of Adelaide, Australia AssrRAcr This article tries to make a case for how teachers can shape college students' critical thinking and self voicing in the wdting classroom. Both critical thinking and self voicing help students produce written texts that represent their own original ideas and authorial voices. In doing so, writing teachers should assigr students writing tasks which cater to that goal.
Mar 03, · Critical Academic Writing and Multilingual Students. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, Summary: “In the discussion that follows, I will demonstrate how we can help students negotiate the structures of writing in terms of the ideological, cultural, and social concerns that matter to them. Academic writing is conducted in several sets of forms and genres, normally in an impersonal and dispassionate tone, targeted for a critical and informed audience, based on closely investigated knowledge, and intended to reinforce or challenge concepts or vetconnexx.com usually circulates within the academic world ('the academy'), but the academic writer may also find an audience outside via. Overall, this aricle is structured into four key discussion issues on (1) critical thinking and self voicing in academic writing; (2) benefits of incorporating critical thinking and self voicing into academic writing; (3) pedagogical tasks designed to tap students' critical thinking and self voicing; and (4) possible challenges of implementing these pedagogical tasks in the classroom.
Critical EAP is appealing pedagogically because of its restive questioning of discourse norms, though at times it is seen by some as reactionary.
By focusing on the acquisition of dominant norms, Pragmatic EAP has clear goals, but it often fails to adequately recognize differences in community practices. The Critical Pragmatic approach is illustrated by activities for postgraduate and research students which centre on the use of personal pronouns.
Introduction It is often the case that the practice of academic writing is so poorly understood by both teachers and students alike that for many, it remains shrouded in mystery cf. In this paper, we attempt to demystify this process, first by examining several approaches in the teaching of English for Academic Purposes EAPand then by discussing an approach that might be the most helpful for a majority of EAP teachers working with graduate and postgraduate learners.
The potential of our solution will be illustrated later in this paper as we consider a number of graduate-level pedagogic activities that focus on personal pronouns in academic writing.
Pragmatic EAP, Critical EAP, and Critical Pragmatic EAP While we would concede with Canagarajah that Critical Pedagogy cannot be reified and viewed as a settled body of thought, we have chosen, albeit simplistically, to distinguish between three approaches to the teaching of academic writing: Pragmatic EAP is concerned with teaching students the dominant academic discourse norms, i.
Pragmatic EAP, then, does not question desirability of reinforcing these norms. Rather than obliging the academy to adapt to L2 students' rhetorical styles, Pragmatic EAP expects international students to adapt to the critical academic writing canagarajah 1999 of the Anglo-American academy.
Critical EAP, on the other hand, is concerned with 'critiquing existing educational institutions and practices, and subsequently transforming both education and society' Hall See also Benesch ; Giroux ; Pennycook a, critical academic writing canagarajah 1999, Most of the existing academic practices in Critical EAP are viewed with suspicion: From this standpoint, Pragmatic EAP encourages learners to become passive and accommodating, while a critical pedagogy is founded on a view of learners as intellectuals, as researchers and as active participants in social struggles, not just passively receiving knowledge and advice, but searching for understandings which will be of direct use to them, which will open up new fields of vision and new perspectives, and provide a basis for their own emancipatory and transformatory action.
Critical Pragmatic EAP attempts to reconcile these seemingly diametrically opposed approaches. After considering options, they may choose to carry out demands or challenge them.
On the one hand, Critical Pragmatic EAP acknowledges that students should be exposed to dominant discourse norms, in line with Pragmatic EAP; while on the other hand, like Critical EAP, it stresses that students have choices and should be free to adopt or subvert the dominant practices as they wish.
Critical Pragmatic EAP therefore has two objectives: While on the one hand…I need to help students meet the criteria for 'success' as they are defined within particular institutional contexts, as a critical educator I need also to try to change how students understand their possibilities and I need to work towards changing those possibilities.
I am not, therefore, advocating a laissez-faire approach to language forms that encourages students to do as they like, as if English language classrooms existed in some social, cultural and political vacuum.
Rather I am suggesting that first, we need to make sure that students have access to those standard forms of the language linked to social and economic prestige; second, we need a good understanding of the status and possibilities presented by different standards; third, we need to focus on those parts of language that are significant in particular discourses; fourth, students need to be aware that those forms represent only one set of particular possibilities; and finally, students also need to be encouraged to find ways of using the language that they feel are expressive of their own needs and desires, to make their own readings of texts, to write, speak and listen in forms of the language that emerge as they strive to find representations of themselves and others that make sense to them, so that they can start to claim and negotiate a voice in English.
The need both to give students access to the dominant discourse conventions and to respect cultural and rhetorical difference is called 'a classic tension in critical approaches to education' Pennycook In work on critical literacy, for example, this tension emerges in the differences between those who primarily emphasise access to the cultures of power, and those who emphasise the exploration of difference.
To summarize, we can place the three approaches to the teaching of EAP on the following cline: While, for instance, we agree with much of what Beneschsays about pedagogy, our concept of Critical EAP is far purer and a less pragmatic form than what Benesch may have in mind.
It will be argued that both pedagogies provide valuable insights, and that by standing midway between purer forms of Critical and Pragmatic EAP, Critical Pragmatism may be able to provide practitioners with the best of both worlds.
Every time a student sits down to write for us, he has to invent the university for the occasion—invent the university, that is, or a branch of it, like history or anthropology or economics or English.
The student has to learn to speak our language, to speak as we do,[…] to work within fields where the rules governing the presentation of examples or the development of an argument are both distinct and, even to a professional mysterious. The student has to appropriate or be appropriated by a specialized discourse, and he has to do this as though he were easily and comfortably one with his audience, as though he were a member of the academy or an historian or an anthropologist or an economist; he has to invent the university by assembling and mimicking its language….
He must learn to speak our language. Or he must dare to speak it or to carry off the bluff, since speaking and writing will most certainly be required long before the skill is "learned". And this, understandably, causes problems.
The fact, for instance, that the academy cannot be viewed as a homogeneous entity is overshadowed by the silhouette of various subdisciplines. Indeed, a number of studies conducted more recently have confirmed that academic discourse varies enormously e. It is neither monolithic nor homogeneous; it consists of a plethora of disciplinary and subdisciplinary variations e.
All of this suggests that Bartholomae may be right to assume that academic discourse is poorly understood, since even to an established academic it is 'mysterious'. This results in the problematization of another assumption of Pragmatic EAP—that there are units of discourse which are describable, and which we can teach students.
If academic prose is indeed a mystery, it will not yet have been adequately described by applied linguists. Practitioners will then experience difficulties knowing what to teach and the priority accorded specific items of language may be skewed.
Finally, Bartholomae hints that lecturers' expectations of their students are unrealistic: Most of our students never complete the journey.
Mimicking expert practices rather than truly 'learning' them allows students to, in effect, 'assume privilege[s] without having any…[L]earning…becomes more a matter of imitation or parody than a matter of invention or discovery' Bartholomae Bartholomae himself, then, problematizes many of the assumptions which less thoughtful advocates of pragmatism may overlook.
With reference to Bartholomae's concept of students imitating expert practices, the assumption here is that students are striving to imitate their tutors' academic discourse.While we would concede with Canagarajah () that Critical Pedagogy cannot be reified and viewed as a settled body of thought, we have chosen, albeit simplistically, to distinguish between three approaches to the teaching of academic writing: Pragmatic EAP, Critical EAP, and Critical Pragmatic EAP.
Critical Academic Writing and Multilingual Students (The Michigan Series on Teaching Multilingual Writers) by A. Suresh Canagarajah (). Brief description of the presentation: The presentation will be an echo from my blog post here vetconnexx.com Critical Academic Writing and Multilingual Students explains what it means to commit to an academic pedagogy, in terms of form, self, content, and community—and what it can accomplish in the L2 writing classroom.
It's a guide for writing teachers who wish to embark on a journey toward increased critical awareness of the role they play, or potentially could play, in the lives of their students.
‘academic discourse community’, while others have identiﬁed discourse communities within the academy, for example, palaeontologists or political scientists. Academic writing is conducted in several sets of forms and genres, normally in an impersonal and dispassionate tone, targeted for a critical and informed audience, based on closely investigated knowledge, and intended to reinforce or challenge concepts or vetconnexx.com usually circulates within the academic world ('the academy'), but the academic writer may also find an audience outside via.