This paper reports on a pilot course responding to facilitating academic writing for an academic writing program implemented at a provincial key university in China. Taken from an activity theoretical perspective, it discusses the practical experience collected during a pilot process of designing, implementing, and assessing a genre-based approach to facilitating graduate students’ academic writing and assessing their academic writing competence. It argues that it is essential to take varied student interests into account in the structuring, delivery, and assessment to ensure academic success and that EAP programs are fruitful places for nurturing academic writing.
AboulsoudS. H. (2011). Formative versus summative assessment. Education for health, 24(2), 651.22081662
2.
AllenD.KaranasiosS.SlavovaM. (2011). Working with activity theory: Context, technology, and information behavior. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(4), 776–788.doi:10.1002/asi.21441
BarkhuizenG. P. (1998). Discovering learners’ perceptions of ESL classroom teaching/learning activities in a South African context. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), 85–108.doi:10.2307/3587903
5.
BasturkmenH.LewisM. (2002). Learner perspectives of success in an EAP writing course. Assessing Writing, 8(1), 31–46.doi:10.1016/S1075-2935(02)00032-6
6.
BelcherW. (2009). Writing your journal article in 12 weeks: A guide to academic publishing success. Sage Publications.
7.
BernsteinO.BodkerS. (2003). Activity theory. InCarrollJ. (Ed.), HCI models, theories, and frameworks: Toward a multidisciplinary science (pp.291–324). Morgan Kaufmann.
8.
BrookeM.MonbecL.TilakaratnaN. (2019). The analytical lens: Developing undergraduate students’ critical dispositions in undergraduate EAP writing courses. Teaching in Higher Education, 24(3), 428–443.doi:10.1080/13562517.2018.1534822
9.
CaiL. J. (2013). Students’ perceptions of academic writing: A needs analysis of EAP in China. Language Education in Asia, 4(1), 5–22.doi:10.5746/LEiA/13/V4/I1/A2/Cai
10.
CampionG. C. (2016). ‘The learning never ends’: Exploring teachers’ views on the transition from General English to EAP. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 23(3), 59–70.doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2016.06.003
11.
CargillM.O’ConnorP. (2013). Writing scientific research articles: Strategies and steps (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
12.
CollinsK. M. T.OnwuegbuzieA. J. (2007). A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research. The Qualitative Report, 12, 281–316.
13.
CrosthwaiteP. (2018). Does EAP writing instruction reduce L2 errors? Evidence from a longitudinal corpus of L2 EAP essays and reports. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 56(3), 315–343.
14.
EngeströmY. (1993). Developmental studies of work as a testbench of activity theory: The case of primary care medical practice. InChaiklinS.LaveJ. (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp.64–103). Cambridge University Press.
15.
EngeströmY. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. InEngeströmY.MiettinenR.Punamäki-GitaiR.-L. (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp.1–19). Cambridge University Press.
16.
EngeströmY. (2000). From individual action to collective activity and back: Developmental work research as an interventionist methodology. InLuffP.HindmarshJ.HeathC. (Eds.), Workplace studies: Recovering work practice and information system design (pp.150–166). Cambridge University Press.
17.
EngeströmY. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.doi:10.1080/13639080020028747
18.
FreakC.SwalesJ. M. (2009). Telling a research story: Writing a literature review[The Michigan series in English for academic & professional purposes]. University of Michigan Press.
19.
GederaD. S. P.WilliamsP. J. (2016). Activity theory in education: Research and practice. Sense Publishers.
20.
GrantS. (2017). Implementing project-based language teaching in an Asian context: A university EAP writing course case study from Macau. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 2(1), 1–13.doi:10.1186/s40862-017-0027-x
21.
GravetterF. J.ForzanoL.-A. B. (2009). Research methods for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). CA Wadsworth Cenage Learning.
22.
HarnessM.Yamagata-LynchL. C. (2016). Systemic tensions in American teacher unions. InGederaD. S. P.WilliamsP. J. (Eds.), Activity theory in education: Research and practice (pp.71–85). Sense Publishers.
23.
HylandK. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(3), 148–164.doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.005
24.
JouY. (2017). Hidden challenges of tasks in an EAP writing textbook: EAL graduate students’ perceptions and textbook authors’ responses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 30(2), 13–25.doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2017.10.001
LiY.MaX.ZhaoJ.HuJ. (2020). Graduate-level research writing instruction: Two Chinese EAP teachers’ localized ESP genre-based pedagogy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 43(1), 1–15.doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100813
32.
LockleyJ. (2016). Teachers designing classroom curriculum through the lens of cultural- historical activity theory. InGederaD. S. P.WilliamsP. J. (Eds.), Activity theory in education: Research and practice (pp.183–198). Sense Publishers.
33.
MaR. (2019). Advanced academic literacy development: A case study of a successful Chinese doctoral student. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 32(2), 207–222.doi:10.1080/07908318.2018.1540633
34.
MachiL.McEvoyB. T. (2012). The literature review: Six steps to success (2nd ed.). Corwin Press.
35.
NowellL. S.NorrisJ. M.WhiteD. E.MoulesN. J. (2017). Thematic analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 160940691773384.doi:10.1177/1609406917733847
36.
OakeyD. (2020). Phrases in EAP academic writing pedagogy: Illuminating Halliday’s influence on research and practice. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 44(100810), 100829.doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100829
37.
PeacockM. (2001). Language learning strategies and EAP proficiency. InFlowerdewJ.Pea- cockM. (Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp.268–285). Cambridge University Press.
38.
RaymondP. M.Des BrisayM. (2000). An EAP course for Chinese MBA students. TESL Canada Journal, 17(2), 29.doi:10.18806/tesl.v17i2.891
39.
RoebuckR. (2000). Subjects speak out: How learners position themselves in a psycholinguistic task. InLantolfJ. (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp.79–96). Oxford University Press.
40.
RomanoF. (2019). Grammatical accuracy in EAP writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 41(4), 100773.doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100773
41.
Sidman-taveauR.Karathanos-aguilarK. (2015). Academic writing for graduate-level English as a second language students: Experiences in education. The CATESOL Journal, 27(1), 27–53.
42.
StraussP.MooneyS. (2017). Assessment for learning: Capturing the interest of diverse students on an academic writing module in postgraduate vocational education. Teaching in Higher Education, 22(3), 288–303.doi:10.1080/13562517.2016.1248389
43.
SwalesJ.FeakC. B. (2012). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills (3rd ed., Michigan series in English for academic & professional purposes). University of Michigan Press.
44.
SwalesJ. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
45.
TianJ.LowG. D. (2012). To what extent are postgraduate students from China prepared for academic writing needed on UK master’s courses?Language, Culture and Curriculum, 25(3), 299–319.doi:10.1080/07908318.2012.734313
46.
TingM. (2017). Challenges of English for academic purposes in Asia. Journal of Foreign Language Education and Technology, 2(2), 36–53.
47.
van LierL. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective. InLantolfJ. (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp.245–260). Oxford University Press.
48.
WangW. (2017). Learner characteristics in an EAP thesis-writing class: Looking into students’ responses to genre-based instruction and pedagogical tasks. English for Specific Purposes, 47(1), 52–60.doi:10.1016/j.esp.2017.04.002
49.
WilmotK. (2018). Designing writing groups to support postgraduate students’ academic writing: A case study from a South African university. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 55(3), 257–265.doi:10.1080/14703297.2016.1238775
50.
WingateU. (2012). Using academic literacies and genre-based models for academic writing instruction: A ‘literacy’ journey. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(1), 26–37.doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2011.11.006
51.
WordenD. (2018). Mediation and development of a novice L2 writing teacher’s pedagogical content knowledge of genre. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 34(3), 12–27.doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2018.02.005
52.
XuF. (2019). Learning the language to write for publication: The nexus between the linguistic approach and the genre approach. InHabibieP.HylandK. (Eds.), Novice writers and scholarly publication: Authors, mentors, gatekeepers (pp.117–134). Palgrave Macmillan.
53.
YanP. (2015). Feasibility research on an EAP course for science and engineering students in China. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(12), 2497–2503.doi:10.17507/tpls.0512.09
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
