An Academic Summary

 Wikipedia for Academic Writing

In the article “Writing for the World: Wikipedia as an introduction to Academic Writing ” (Tardy, 2010), the author describes Wikipedia as a tool for developing  academic writing skills for writers of a second language (L2), and hence he produces a research project based on the electronic encyclopedia for undergraduate writing students.

According to Tardy (2010), paraphrasing, summarizing, citing sources, researching are necessary skills for academic writing; and also their level of difficulty grows for L2 writers, as he states “…students need to learn to paraphrase and summarize –skills that tend to be more difficult in a second language” (p. 12). The author proposes developing these skills by means of writing an article that meets the requirements needed to be edited and published in Wikipedia. In order to achieve this, L2 students are led through eight different steps as it follows: “examining Wikipedia, gathering information, outlining and paraphrasing, drafting, revising, formatting sources, polishing, and publishing” (p. 14).

To conclude, Wikipedia research project  not only represents a source for developing and practicing academic literacy skills, but also it provides L2  writers with the opportunity of addressing a worldwide audience and enjoying  “the satisfaction of seeing their work published on a high-traffic global website” (Tardy, 2010, p.18).   

  

References

Tardy, C. M. (2010).  Writing for the world: Wikipedia as an introduction to Academic Writing.

     English Teaching Forum, 1, pp. 12-19, 27.  Retrieved October 2012, from

     http://exchanges.state.gov/englishteaching/forum/archives/docs/10-48-1-c.pdf 

    

A Discourse Community

Discourse Community Features

The purpose of this paper is to provide evidence to support Swales’ (1990) basic criteria to recognize a discourse community as such. Thus, considering Swales’ view, a discourse community (DC) is defined as a group of people whose members share goals, participatory mechanisms, information exchange, community-specific genres, highly specialized terminology and a general level of expertise. All these characteristics constitute a particular discourse that becomes conventionalized by the social interactions or language uses of a group.

Following the stated criteria, Hoffman-Kipp, Artiles and Lopez Torres (2003) stress the importance of interaction as a medium for reflection, and common goals as “teachers interact with colleagues in goal-directed activities that require communication and the exchange of ideas where reflection itself is not contained wholly in the mind of the individual but it is “distributed” through the sign systems and artifacts that are embedded in the social activity of the school community” (“Situated  Learning  discourse community,” ¶ 11).

A community college can be regarded as a DC since “its members have, over time, developed a common discourse that involves shared knowledge, common purposes, common relationships, similar attitudes and values, share understandings about how to communicate their knowledge and achieve their shared purposes, and a flow of discourse that has a particular structure and style” (Kutz, 1997, as cited in Kelly-Kleese, 2001, ¶ 4).

Information exchange and feedback are central features of DCs. In this sense, journal editors and peer reviewers must provide opportunities for community members to share their perspectives and experiences (Kelly-Kleese, 2004). Wenzlaff and Wieseman (2004) focus on a collaborative culture in which teachers can learn from one another as peers.

Regarding community-specific genres, Kelly-Kleese (2004) point out that assessment is the key to legitimize a DC for its members must understand the accepted writing conventions and the standards set to evaluate their work. In reference to this, communication competence plays an important role since it is defined as “what one must know in order to use language appropriately in particular discourse communities” (Kutz, 1997, as cited in Kelly-Kleese, 2004, “Communicative Competence,” ¶ 12).

From all the evidence stated previously, it can be concluded that discourse communities have certain features that define them in accordance with Swales’ (1990) criteria.  Therefore, interaction,  shared knowledge, exchange of information, and community-specific genres  are some of the characteristics for a group to be identified as a discourse community.

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. (2001). Editor’s Choice: An Open Memo to Community

College Faculty and Administrators. Community College Review. Retrieved

October 2007, 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

October 2007, from

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_32/ai_n6361541

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

Introduction

This blog is intended to share ideas and reflect upon Academic Writing among post graduate students -teachers and translators of English who are currently reading EAP (English for Specific Purposes) at CAECE University in Argentina.
Sharing and working collaboratively will ensure to build up a Discourse Community leading to embark on a programme to develop the necessary skills required for the process of writing academically. Certainly a long journey, but well worth going on so as to grow professionally.
Dear reader should you make any comments or give any piece of advice, feel free to do so. 
You are kindly invited to join the fascinating world of Academic Writing.