On writing academic projects

Abstract

The article reports the results of a study on the effects of implementing a new approach to instructing university level students (under- and post graduates) to write academic projects and project proposals. The authors highlight the issue of effective academic writing and share their experience in working on a course for learners interested in acquiring professional English language competencies. The approach offered is based on analyzing pattern phrases typical of English academic writing and using recurring sequences to perform different discourse functions while reviewing literature, reporting on methodology etc.; it also provides guidance for students on structuring their works. Finally, the benefits of implementing the new approach in teaching practice are discussed.

academic writing research discourse

Аннотация

В статье рассматриваются возможности обращения к новому подходу в обучении старшекурсников и аспирантов писать научные проекты на английском языке. Предлагаемый подход, основанный на использовании характерных для стиля современного англоязычного научного письма речевых оборотов, выполняющих различные дискурсивные функции при обзоре литературы, описании методологии исследования и т.п., способствует эффективному развитию навыков профессионального письменного общения.

Students can be invited to add other synonyms (also from their wordlists), to discuss the possibility of replacing lexical items by similar ones, and to finish their phrases. The method is based on the sentence structure analysis which facilitates identifying patterns common for different parts of academic projects / proposals since the functional categorisation adopted correlates with a particular task in the process of writing introduction, main body and conclusion. Compact blocks of pattern phrases Further this term along with recurrent sequences will be used to define word combinations frequently employed in academic discourse. thus obtained and presented in a convenient tabular form are easier to work with since the search could be reduced considerably and instead of choosing from a long list (at times approaching 100 phrases) offered in a corresponding section of Academic Phrasebank students need to `process' about 10 times less amount of information; four or five blocks per a project unit proves suffice to cope with the task like writing a conclusion. Moreover, the procedure helps students to grasp different sentence structures and synonymous expressions used to perform similar functions. Thus the approach described could be rendered more flexible and teachable. Moreover, it adds several elements, namely the classification of recurrent sequences with respect to particular functions of writing academic projects and the analysis of sentence structures.

To illustrate those features the sets of recurrent sequences correlating with actual lines of the project preparation were discussed and practiced. The classification though to a certain extent arbitrary was rather flexible. The following examples referring to the work on writing literature reviews can illustrate the approach offered.

Task 1. Supply a clustering idea (in Russian) summarising the essence of the pattern phrases grouped in each block; it might amount to an unfinished sentence. Write them out on a separate sheet of paper so that finally you 'll have a complete list ordered in a logical sequence - to facilitate further practice [7, p.19-20].

1.

2.

3.

4.

The task of supplying a clustering idea in Russian proved rather helpful; instead of word for word translating each pattern phrase in a block students focused on the broader content trying to convey the essence of the message to be conveyed. Since the method walked students step-by-step through the conventional stages of the research process they could make a detailed plan for each stage of the project work relying on those `block headlines'. Their task was to pick out recurrent sequences they thought appropriate, add the necessary terms to complete the phrases, organise them logically and make the final product coherent. That proved suffice for low level students whose primary goal was to abandon the habit of seeking out English equivalents to common Russian expressions. As a rule, they gradually came to realise that the very choice of pattern phrases is determined by a certain logical organisation relying on culture specific ways of reasoning and structuring. Of course, upper level students, more competent and creative, were invited to introduce greater variety and detail within the frames set.

The course in general was organised with respect to the skills to be developed. Different tasks pertaining to vocabulary work aimed at developing language awareness were introduced along with extension activities for consolidation and further practice; they were largely based on rendering and independent writing, analysing and evaluating examples of their fellow students' academic projects.

The experimental course approbation has undergone 3 stages. The first piloting project launched in 2008 targeted 96 sociology students 90% of whose written works appeared to meet the necessary requirements. However, external experts from London School of Economics attending the final exam pointed to two main drawbacks, namely to a certain structural imbalance of the academic projects (so characteristic of the Russian academic style) and the lack of rigorously formalised assessment criteria.

Thus, before embarking on the next stage (2009 - 2010) the necessary changes based on experts' recommendations were introduced. Making students aware of the existing requirements with respect to the composition of projects proved one of the most obvious and possibly easiest tasks. Having grasped those peculiarities, students soon mastered the accepted norms of logical organisation, proper paragraphing, the use of discourse markers and the like. Special efforts were taken to explain existing cross-cultural differences between English and Russian academic discourse. The task of instructing students to be tentative while expressing criticism proved to be most time consuming because straightforwardness is very typical of the Russian communicative style.

The other issue concerning assessment resulted in creating a list of criteria based on British and American sources and adapted to the needs of the Russian audience (see App. 2). At the examinations 95% of 400 students' works were assessed positively and approved by another external expert invited by HSE authorities from Manchester; some variants of those proposals were published (Kuzmenkova, 2010). The new criteria elaborated revealed another essential feature of the approach under study concerning plagiarism. The requirement to use a certain proportion of pattern phrases corresponding to particular discourse function within the frame set banned the option of copying fragments from other authors' works. Moreover, the demand to present electronic versions of the projects for them to be stored in the department's library enabled identification of the cases of plagiarism.

During the third stage (2011 - 2012) the focus was shifted to postgraduates, false beginners being of prime concern. The analysis of their progress during 6 months of tuition (2 hours a week) emphasized the necessity to turn to rendering. Sets of extracts from academic texts were designed for rendering from Russian into English; to simplify the task of finding appropriate equivalents (without turning to word for word translation) learners were advised to consider the corresponding blocks of recurrent sequences. As a result, they could get a detailed plan to rely on while writing a proposal as those extracts were thematically organised and illustrated the actual use of the pattern phrases already discussed.

The proposals completed by the group of 10 false beginners majoring in electronics surpassed our expectations. After the tedious process of redrafting, their works (performed within a limited two page format) contained a good proportion of the lexical material considered and revealed logic and coherence. For the first encounter with academic writing it was a 100% success; all participants demonstrated visible efforts to start thinking in English and use the language appropriate for the purpose.

Thus, it can be assumed that five years of implementing the approach under study demonstrated its positive effects especially on pre-intermediate (and lower level) students training.

In conclusion, it should be mentioned that the number of students who need competence in EAP to become fully-fledged members of the academic community is now increasing dramatically. For them fluency in the norms of writing acceptable by the English academic culture is a prerequisite. Helping these students not only to develop academic writing skills but also to adapt themselves with the above norms is a challenging task to be pondered by language teachers. The results of the study formed the basis for the course for learners interested in acquiring professional English language competencies. It provides a framework for reporting on original scientific research that has been lacking in the Russian academy. The step-by-step method employed walks students through the conventional research process aiding them to be adequately understood in English. It appears that the issues discussed can help to teach students make their academic papers acceptable for publication in the international format.

Appendix 1. The classification of recurrent sequences

1. The literature review: positive comments.

2. The literature review: the theoretical and empirical parts.

3. The literature review: critical evaluation.

4. Methodology.

5. The results anticipated.

6. Introduction: the background of the study.

7. Introduction: the problem statement and scope of the study.

8. Introduction: the professional significance of the study.

9. Conclusions.

10. Abstracts.

11. Dealing with terminology and defining key concepts.

12. Handling arguments and examples.

Appendix 2. Criteria for evaluating written projects