TOP-DOWN OR BOTTOM-UP? EMPLOYING A MIDDLE-GROUND APPROACH IN DESIGNING A UK ACADEMIC WRITING COURSE FOR ADVANCED CHINESE GRADUATES

Ivo Ganchev

DOI Number
https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP2002095G
First page
095
Last page
110

Abstract


This article documents the academic writing course design process for advanced Chinese learners aiming to pursue postgraduate degrees in business-related fields at their respective target universities in the UK. Four holders of BA degrees in the social sciences from second tier universities in Beijing were tested, surveyed and observed in detail to design a non-terminal twenty-hour pre-sessional writing course (ten two-hour sessions) to assist in their preparation for postgraduate study. All students held offers from Russell Group universities in the UK and had covered the IELTS requirement (6.5-7.0) for admission there prior to signing up for the EAP course discussed in this paper. The aim of the course is to enhance the students’ academic skills and improve their performance in the following year when they attend UK universities. The course design process is informed by two sets of principles, incorporating both a top-down and a bottom-up perspective. The former is framed within an understanding of EAP as academic, rather than language training. The latter is based on needs analysis of student-specific weaknesses explored through the use of a questionnaire, a diagnostic writing test and in-class observations. Both perspectives feed into the course goals and objectives which serve as a basis for the course rationale. Aiming to bridge the gap between Chinese undergraduate and UK postgraduate study, the course combines textbooks with authentic materials and formative with summative assessment. Reflections on major constraints and limitations are provided throughout the process. This documented case of academic writing course design aims to reveal challenges faced by EAP practitioners working with UK and Chinese institutions, and to present a middle ground approach to resolving tensions between top-down and bottom-up pressures in the context of course design for advanced Chinese graduates.


Keywords

EAP, UK, China, course development, needs analysis, writing

Full Text:

PDF

References


Alexander, O., Argent, S., and Spencer, J. 2008. EAP Essentials: A Teacher’s Guide to Principles and Practice. Reading: Garnet Publishing.

Ardi, P. 2017. Promoting learner autonomy through schoology m-learning platform in an EAP class at an Indonesian University. Teaching English with Technology, 17 (2), 55-76.

Badger, R. and White, G. 2000. A Process Genre Approach to Teaching Writing. ELT Journal, 54, 153-160.

Block, D. 1991. Some Thoughts on DIY Materials Design. ELT Journal. 45(3), 211–217.

Bonanno, H. and Jones, J. 2007. The MASUS procedure: Measuring the Academic Skills of University Students, A Diagnostic Assessment. University of Sydney: Learning Centre Publications.

Braakmann, N. 2016. The link between crime risk and house prices – Evidence from UK street-level data. Urban Studies, 54(8), 1990-2007.

Brown, J. D. 1995. The Elements of Language Curriculum: A Systematic Approach to Program Development. Boston, Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle.

Bülent, A. and Stoller, F. 2005. Maximizing the benefits of project work in foreign language classrooms. English Teaching Forum, 43(4), 10–21.

Coxhead, A. 2000. A New Academic Word List, TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213-238.

Denzin, NK. 1978. Sociological Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Dörnyei, Z. and Ushioda, E. 2011. Teaching and researching motivation (2nd Ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education.

Egbert, J. 2003. A study of flow theory in the foreign language classroom. The Modern Language Journal. 87(4), 499–518.

Fleming, N. and Mills, C. 1992. Not Another Inventory, Rather a Catalyst for Reflection. To Improve the Academy, 11, 137-155.

Gardner, P. and Winslow, J. 1983. Present and Proposed Methods of Determining the Needs of Students in Public Sector Identifying Language Needs. In: Richterich, R. (Ed.). Case Studies in Identifying Language Needs. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 69-78.

Grant, S. 2017. Implementing project-based language teaching in an Asian context: a university EAP writing course case study from Macau. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 2(4), 1-13.

Graves, K. 2000. Designing Language Courses: A Guide for Teachers. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Hamp-Lyons, L. 2005. English for Academic Purposes. Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning. UK: Routledge, 89-105.

Johns, A. 1990. L1 Composition Theories: Implications for Developing Theories of L2 Composition. In: B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom. New York: Cambridge University Press, 24-36.

Klimova, B. 2015. Designing an EAP Course. Social and Behavioural Sciences, 191, 634-638.

Lethaby, C. and Harries, P. 2015. Learning Styles and Teacher Training: Are We Perpetuating Neuromyths?. ELT Journal, 70, 16–25.

Lockett, A. 1999. From the general to the specific: What the EAP tutor should know about academic discourse? in Bool, H. and Luford, P. Academic standards and expectations: The role of EAP, Nottingham: Nottingham University Press, 49–58.

LSE (London School of Economics and Political Science). 2017. Lecture 3. Cultivating the Virtues of Globalization. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZcTiMFwZ6o (Accessed: 10 Nov, 2019)

Lynch T. 1988. Peer evaluation in practice. In: A. Brookes and P. Grundy (Eds.), Autonomy and Individualisation in Language Learning. ELT Documents 131. London: MEP / British Council, 119-25.

Lynch T. 2013. Not just talking: Conversation and perceived progress in international students’ informal language learning. International Student Experience Journal, 1(2): 1-8.

Mauranen, A. 2006. A Rich Domain of ELF: The ELFA Corpus of Academic Discourse. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 5(2), 145-159.

Maas, C. 2017. Receptivity to learner-driven feedback in EAP. ELT Journal, 71(2), 127-140.

McEnery, T., Xiao, R. and Tono, Y. 2006. Corpus-Based Language Studies: An Advanced Resource Book. London: Routledge.

Nesi, H. 2008. Corpora & EAP. In: LSP: Interfacing Language with other Realms: Proceedings of the 6th Languages for Specific Purposes International Seminar. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

Harmer, J. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Essex, UK: Longman.

Harwood, N. 2005. What do we want EAP teaching materials for? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(2): 149-161.

Hewings, M. 2012. Cambridge Academic English C1 Upper Intermediate Student's Book: An Integrated Skills Course for EAP. Italy: Cambridge University Press.

Hyland, K. 1990. A Genre Description of the Argumentative Essay. RELC Journal, 21, 66-78.

Kashef, S. 2014. Toward a Learning-centred EAP Instruction: An Attempt to Change Students’ Reading Attitude. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(1), 39-45.

Nunan, D. 1988. Syllabus Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nunan, D. 1993. Task-based syllabus design: selecting, grading and sequencing tasks. In: Crookes, G., Gass, S. (Eds.). Tasks in a Pedagogical Context: Integrating Theory and Practice. Cleveland, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Unlu, Z. and Wharton, S. 2015. Exploring classroom feedback interactions around EAP writing: A data based mode. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 17, 24-36.

Schmitt, D. and Schmitt, N. 2005. Focus on Vocabulary: Mastering the Academic Word 1st Edition. Pearson Education ESL.

Seviour, M. 2015. Assessing Academic Writing on a Pre-sessional EAP course: Designing Assessment which Supports Learning. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 18, 84-89.

Spack, R. 1988. Initiating ESL Students into the Academic Discourse Community: How Far Should We Go? TESOL Quarterly, 22(1), 29-52.

Stoller, F. 1999. Time for Change: A Hybrid Curriculum for EAP Programs. TESOL Journal, 8, 9-13.

Swales, J. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Boston: Cambridge University Press.

Swales, J. 1995. The Role of the Textbook in EAP Writing Research. English for Specific Purposes, 14, 3-18.

Tardy, C. 2004 The role of English in scientific communication: lingua franca or Tyrannosaurus rex? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 3(3), 247-269.

Thornbury, S. (2013). S is for Student-centered. Online video clip. Youtube, 22 May. Web. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rl_n2jm0fJY (Accessed: 20 Nov 2019)

West, R. 1994. Needs Analysis in Language Learning. Language Teaching. 27(1), 1-19.

Zemach, D. and Rumisek, L. 2005. Academic Writing from Paragraph to Essay. Oxford: Macmillan.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP2002095G

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN 2334-9182 (Print)
ISSN 2334-9212 (Online)