Abstract
Two surveys were conducted at the University of Canberra in 1992 to seek the views of faculty on issues regarding academic writing. The first survey sought to ascertain what criteria faculty employ when marking student writing. It asked faculty to indicate the importance of certain key features in the writing of university students. These key features were: Content, Argument, Style, Organisation, Communicative Ability, Vocabulary, Use of Literature and Punctuation. Faculty were requested to rank the importance of aspects of each of the nine key features.The second survey asked faculty to assess an actual assignment written by an overseas student, using the structure of the nine key features of writing as above. Faculty were invited to indicate the strengths and weaknesses of the assignment which they were assessing.
The aim of the surveys was to better inform teachers of English for Academic Purposes (EAP) classes, who prepare overseas students for study at university. EAP teachers need to know the expectations of faculty, in order to give overseas students a realistic view of what faculty expect from their assignments and the kinds of weaknesses which faculty find in overseas students’ writing.
The survey found that content-related features such as Content, Argument, Organisation and Communicative Ability were considered more important than form features such as Punctuation, Grammar, Style and Vocabulary. Use of Literature was found to be a very important feature in some faculties but not in all. Surprisingly, Style was the feature which evoked the greatest variety of responses from faculty; however, in general faculty agreed that Style had to be appropriate to the topic or task, rather than there being a set format for academic writing.
From a factor analysis of data, four underlying principles for academic writing were derived. These principles were: relevance, appropriacy, accuracy and clarity. Thus, academic writing, according to the faculty surveyed, should be:
1) relevant to the topic and to the internal argument of the assignment;
2) appropriate in the style, tone and use of literature;
3) accurate in its vocabulary, grammar and referencing system.
4) clear in its argument and organisation of ideas.
For the most part, faculty responded favourably to the overseas student assignments, which were assessed in the second questionnaire. Faculty indicated that the main weakness in overseas student writing was in their argument.
The surveys also found differences between different Faculties in the importance they place on these key features. It was postulated that the Science Faculties (Applied Science, Environmental Design and Information Science and Engineering) would be fairly similar in their views on writing, as would the Humanities Faculties (Communication, Education and Management). This was found to be only partly true. The views of Information Science and Engineering faculty were found to be more similar in many of their attitudes to the views of the Humanities faculty. However, in some ways, their views were unique and unlike any other Faculty. In particular, Information Science and Engineering faculty place little emphasis on writing as a method of assessment and, perhaps as a consequence, even less on the use of literature in writing
From the survey, it also appeared that, in general, faculty make some allowances for the fact that overseas students are L2 speakers. They tend to overlook mechanical errors so long as the content is acceptable.
| Date of Award | 1993 |
|---|---|
| Original language | English |
| Supervisor | Don Phillips (Supervisor) |
Cite this
- Standard