Approaching academic reading

Reading has been regarded not only as a cognitive activity but also as a social process which provides students with the necessary input to start writing in academic contexts (Ferris & Hedgcock, 1998). Therefore, a close integration of reading and writing could be effective in the academic discourse community. In order to explain and explore the reading-writing connection in a second or foreign language, Bloor (1985) developed four different approaches to academic reading: the psychological, linguistic, content-oriented and pedagogically-oriented approaches which can be connected to real-life examples (as cited in Jordan, 1997).
In the psychological approach, students work with the processes involved in reading through simple word recognition and interpretation (Bloor, 1985). Contextual guessing is a technique that reflects this approach since learners are involved in working out the meaning of unfamiliar words by looking at the surrounding words or situation. Making inferences also has to do with the psychological approach since students work on the process of reading between the lines to understand what is meant but not stated in a text.
As regards the linguistic approach, Bloor (1985) explains that learners are involved in grammar practice activities as attention is given to the words and sentences of a text. For instance, when teachers correct a composition or students make peer-correction, they read a text analyzing the grammatical structure of all sentences. A further example could be when students are asked to discover rules themselves by focusing on the words and ideas of a given text.
Concerning the content-oriented approach, students are provided with a specific purpose for reading which may motivate them to read if it is of their interest (Bloor, 1985). A real-life example is Facebook, a social website where many people read about their friends’ personal experiences and interests in order to be connected with them. Recipes are also concrete examples of this approach since we read them in order to prepare and cook food, that is, for a special purpose.
According to Bloor (1985), students use self-access materials at their own paces in the pedagogical-oriented approach. The magazine we may read while waiting for an appointment is a simple illustration of this approach. We usually discover that it contains an article that interests us, so we skim it because we do not have time to read it in detail. Another real-life example is when we quickly look through articles on the internet to ascertain whether they contain information on the topic we are researching.
To sum up, academic reading can be approached in different ways when teaching writing in academic purposes. Bloor (1985) provides us with four alternative approaches which can be easily applied to real-life situations inside and outside the classroom. Indeed, the complete integration of the four approaches defined by Bloor (1985) can be of main concern for the teaching of academic writing.


References

Jordan, R. R. (1997). English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Ferris, D. and Hedgcock, J. S. (1998). Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and practice. London, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Teaching academic English

Purpose: To provide a broad overview of English for academic purposes and relate it to study skills following Jordan’s (1997) description.

Thesis: EAP deals with those communication skills in English such as abilities, techniques and strategies which are used for study purposes in formal education systems (ETIC, 1975; cited in Jordan, 1997)

Audience: English teachers, post-graduate students and tutors.


I. First recorded use of the term: 1994

II. Range of settings
A. Higher education studies
B. Pre-departure courses
1. Sessions
a. pre-sessional (full time)
b. in-sessional (part time)
2. Contents
a. formal teaching programs
b. self-access situations
c. distance-learning materials
d. CALL (computer-assisted language learning) programs

III. Coverage
A. English Teaching for No Obvious Reason (TENOR) / English for General Purposes (EGP)
B. English for Specific Purposes (ESP)
1. English for Occupational (EOP) /Vocational (EVP) /Professional Purposes (EPP)
2. English for Academic Purposes (EAP)
a. English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP)
(1) common core subjects
(2) study skills
b. English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP)
(1) particular academic subjects


References

Jordan, R. R. (1997). English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Teachers’ professional development and instruction

Professional development is usually regarded as relevant for the improvement of teachers’ instructional practices. By developing and relating certain principles and interpretations through a variety of discourse markers, Howley and Howley (2005) regarded the concept of “professional development” as a way to improve teaching and acknowledged its importance in rural schools and districts (para.2).
According to Howley and Howley (2005), teaching and instructional practices, which are improved by professional development, could result in students’ successful learning. Therefore, students’ educational achievements depend on the quality of instruction and professional development of their teachers. This belief is supported not only by educators, but also by policymakers, those educational leaders who have the power to guide and determine the courses of actions to be taken at a national level.
Teachers’ professional development can be featured by some approaches which are founded on principles of organizational learning. One of these approaches is the “data-based improvement” which is based on effective strategies that teachers can implement in their classrooms since they aim at successful management of a class (Howley & Howley, 2005, Data-based improvement, para.1). Howley and Howley (2005) have noted that “some improvement strategies involve educators in the establishment of standards and benchmarks followed by an ongoing process of assessment and classroom-level reform” (Data-based improvement, para.1).
In order to create a logically constructed piece of work, Howley and Howley (2005) make use of a variety of discourse markers which can be classified according to their functions. Connectors such as “moreover”, “in addition” and “furthermore” are used to add information while “however” and “nevertheless” emphasize a contrast, and “despite” and “even though” make a concession. “For instance”, “such as” and “for example” are highly used to introduce examples in the article, whereas “as a result” and “therefore” are employed to express logical consequence.
In brief, Howley and Howley (2005) succeeded in writing an in-depth article which clearly states a closed relationship between educators’ professional development and their quality of instruction. In addition, they featured teachers’ professional development and also usefully explored the concept in the rural circumstance.


References

Howley, A., & Howley, C.B., (2005). High-quality teaching: Providing for rural teachers’ professional development. The Rural Educator. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4126/is_200501?ai_n13591361

Defining discourse community

Many researchers and theorists, like Candlin (1997), Bizzel (1992) and Harris (1989), have described the concept of discourse community following different views and taking into account significant factors. Swales (1990) belongs to this group of experts since he was able to provide some basic criteria to define discourse communities. According to Swales, these groups should meet some requirements such as common goals, high level of expertise, specialized terminology, specific genres, information exchange and participation.
Every discourse community should share certain objectives and interests as well as a certain level of expertise (Swales, 1990, p. 24). In order to illustrate this point, Kelly-Kleese (2004) indicates that the members of community colleges “have, over time, developed a common discourse that involves shared knowledge, common purposes, common relationships, and similar attitudes and values” (The Community College as a Discourse Community, para.2). Indeed, Kelly-Kleese’s (2004) study of community colleges clearly demonstrates the social nature of discourse communities.
For Swales (1990), the members of a discourse community should be intercommunicated and give information and feedback through participatory mechanisms (p. 26). Examples of these mechanisms are the journals or virtual systems of communication which can be used to recall, share, and respond to one another’s experiences (Blanton, Simmons, & Warner, 2001; cited in Hoffman-Kipp, Artiles, & Lopez Torres, 2003). Wenzlaff and Wieseman (2004) also refer to the importance of interactions in a discourse community and cite Putman & Borko (2000) when stating that “the community… changes through the ideas and ways of thinking that its new members bring to the discourse” (Teacher Learning in a Collaborative Culture, para.2).
The use of specific genres and highly specialized terminology in a discourse community is also considered relevant by Swales (1990). Kelly-Kleese (2004) refers to these requirements when describing the large discourse community of higher education and pointing out that universities share their academe’s definitions, professional terminology and modes of discourse with community colleges and other institutions of higher education (para.2).
In conclusion, Swales’ (1990) basic criteria for discourse communities have been useful to recognize and test the academy literacy in the practices of some social groups. Furthermore, many researchers and theorists have supported Swales’ theory of discourse community by applying it to the research study of some communities such as those formed by school teachers and professionals of higher education.

References

Hoffman-Kipp, P., Artiles, A. J., & Lopez Torres, L. (2003). Beyond reflection: teacher learning as praxis. Theory into Practice. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NQM/is_3_42/ai_108442653

Kelly-Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA community college review: community college scholarship and discourse. Community College Review. Retrieved October2007, from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_32/ai_n6361541

Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wenzlaff, T. L., & Wieseman, K. C. (2004). Teachers need teachers to grow. Teacher Education Quarterly. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200404/ai_n9349405