INTERDISCIPLINARY COMPARISON OF POST GRADUATE STUDENTS FOR ACADEMIC WRITING PROFICIENCY IN ENGLISH
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/1q3b2e67Keywords:
Academic Writing skills;, English as a second language, Interdisciplinary comparison;, Postgraduate StudentsAbstract
The importance of writing skill multiplies as soon as the learners become part of learning communities at higher education level. It is mainly because, the competence level of ESL (English as a second language) students is gauged through their academic writing skill. Their task to prove their worth becomes harder as it demands full command in writing research papers, argumentative essays, term papers, and analysis reports etc.The writing modules are ideally designed and implemented but as far as their outcomes are concerned, they are found mostly unfulfilled. In order to dig out the reasons, many studies are conducted and have reached to the conclusion that the nature of discipline impacts on academic writing style in addition to other multiple reasons. Therefore, a causal comparative study with 3x5factorial design was employed to investigate the impact of disciplinary factors on the academic writing proficiency in English of postgraduate(PG) learners in a Public Sector university. Taking the population of total 49 disciplines at the university, three of them were selected purposively; Education, Science and Engineering as representatives of major faculties. A test comprised of five major writing skills; Syntacticstructure, Lexical features, Paraphrasing, Coherence and Precision, was designed and conducted parallelly on the post graduate students of the three disciplines. The comparison was drawn by applying ANOVA for main effects and interactions of independent variable (discipline) and dependent variable (academic writing skills) were calculated. It was found that significant discrepancies were present in the Academic writing proficiency of the post graduate students due to the diverse nature and needs of their disciplines. The study holds substantial implications for teaching academic writing skills exclusively in diverse disciplines.
Downloads
References
1. Zhu, J., Rosset, S., Tibshirani, R., & Hastie, T. J. (2004). 1-norm support vector machines. In Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 49-56).
2. Nesi, H., & Gardner, S. (2012). Genres across the disciplines: Student writing in higher education. Cambridge University Press.
3. 3.Wright, L. J. (2008). Writing science and objectification: Selecting, organizing, and decontextualing knowledge. Linguistics and Education, 19(3), 265-293.
4. Dehnad, A., Bagherzadeh, R., Bigdeli, Sh., Hatami, K., &Hoseini, F., (2010). Syllabus revision: a needs analysis study. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1307-1312.
5. Munoz-Luna, R. (2015). Main ingredients for success in L2 academic writing: Outlining, drafting and proofreading. PloS one, 10(6), e0128309.
6. Chomsky, N. (1956). Three models for the description of language. IRE Transactions on information theory, 2(3), 113-124.
7. Meara, P. (2005). Lexical frequency profiles: A Monte Carlo analysis. Applied linguistics, 26(1), 32-47.
8. Bhagat, R., &Hovy, E. (2013). What is a paraphrase?. Computational Linguistics, 39(3), 463-472.
9. Duggleby, S. J., Tang, W., &Kuo-Newhouse, A. (2016). Does the Use of Connective Words in Written Assessments Predict High School Students’ Reading and Writing Achievement? .Reading Psychology, 37(4), 511-532.
10. Ševo, I., & Avramović, A. (2016). Convolutional neural network based automatic object detection on aerial images. IEEE geoscience and remote sensing letters, 13(5), 740-744.
11. Pourshahian, B., Gholami, R., Vaseghi, R., & Rezvani Kalajahi, S. A. (2012). Needs of an ESL context: A case study of Iranian graduate students. World Applied Sciences Journal, 17(7), 870-873.2581-4281 Vol).
12. Hyland, K. (2006). Disciplinary differences: Language variation in academic discourses. In K. Hyland & M. Bondi, (Eds.), Academic Discourse across Disciplines (pp. 17-45). Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang.
13. Biber, D. (2006). University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers (Vol. 23). John Benjamins Publishing.
14. Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2010). Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(1), 2-20. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeap.2010.01.001
15. Baer, J.D., Cook, A.L. and Baldi, S. (2006). The literacy of America’s college students. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
16. Bartlett, T. (2003). Why Johnny can’t write, even though he went to Princeton. Chronicle of Higher Education, 49 (17), A39-A40.
17. Staples, S., Egbert, J., Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2016). Academic writing development at the university level: Phrasal and clausal complexity across level of study, discipline, and genre. Written Communication, 33(2), 149-183.
18. Pourbahram, S. M. R. (2018). An Interdisciplinary Assessment Of Needs In Esp (Doctoral dissertation, Ph. D Degrees Explored. International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Scientific Research (IJAMSR) ISSN: 2581-4281 Vol).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
