Article published In:
Australian Review of Applied LinguisticsVol. 43:1 (2020) ► pp.79–99
Writing for engineering
A comparison of student and industry texts
Professional engineers must move easily between concretization and abstraction in written communication, while
remaining rooted in the context of the particular engineering problem to be solved. Engineering programmes often seek to use a
replicated professional situation in order to prepare students for the workplace; however, there are questions as to how a
decontextualized task prepares students for the language and knowledge requirements of the field. This paper reports on the
findings of a Master’s research project, which investigated this issue through a comparison of two sets of engineering feasibility
studies: publicly available industry texts and English as an Additional Language (EAL) student texts from a Master’s engineering
program. The findings show that while the corpora have some similarities, there are differences that suggest that the student
texts are less bound to the concrete reality of their project, which has implications for those working in disciplinary and
professional literacies.
Keywords: engineering education, engineering communication skills, professional writing, Systemic Functional Linguistics, Legitimation Code Theory
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Methodology
- 3.Findings
- 4.Discussion
- 5.Conclusion
-
References
References (24)
Australian Education International (AEI). (2010). International graduate outcomes and employer perceptions. Canberra: AEI.
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity: Theory, research, critique (revised edition). Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Pub Inc.
Community Energy for Goulburn (CE4G). (2016). A study into the feasibility of a community owned solar farm in Goulburn NSW. The Goulburn Group. Retrieved from [URL]
Curry, M. J., & Hanauer, D. (Eds.). (2014). Language, literacy and learning in STEM education: Research methods and perspectives from applied linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 
Engineers Australia. (2016). Stage 1 competency for professional engineers. Retrieved from [URL]
Gardner, S. (2012). Genres and registers of student report writing: An SFL perspective on texts and practices. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 111, 52–63.
Goodman, N., Muster, T., De Silva, K., Sanguansri, P., Hall, M., & Toze, S. (2014). Feasibility study for increasing water recycling at the Kellogg plant, Botany, NSW. Brisbane: Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence. Retrieved from [URL]
Gwilliams, L., & Fontaine, L. (2015). Indeterminacy in process type classification. Functional Linguistics, 2(8), 1–19.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.
Hanifan, R. (2014). Concise dictionary of engineering: A guide to the language of engineering. Switzerland: Springer.
Hao, J. (2015). Construing Biology: An ideational perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Hionis, D., Cornish, S., Trezise, F., & Murphy, R. (2015). Moonambel water supply feasibility study. MWH, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved from [URL]
Luzon, M. J. (2005). Genre analysis in technical communication. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(3), 285–295.
Maton, K. (2014). Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. London: Routledge.
(2016). Building knowledge about knowledge building. In K. Maton, S. Hood, & S. Shay (Eds.), Knowledge-building: Educational studies in Legitimation Code Theory (pp. 1–23). London: Routledge.
Maton, K., & Doran, Y. J. (2017). SFL and code theory. In T. Bartlett & G. O’Grady (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 605–618). London: Routledge.
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. London: Continuum.
(2008). Genre relations: Mapping culture. London: Equinox.
McKenna, B. (1997). How engineers write: An empirical study of engineering report writing. Applied Linguistics, 18(2), 189–211.
Van Der Wijngaart, B., Pemberton, C., & Herring, D. (2009). Wind Power Concept Study Report. Australia: Wind Power Concept Study Working Group.
Wolff, K. (2013). ‘Reservoirs’ and ‘Repertoires’: Epistemological and discursive complexities in multidisciplinary engineering practice. Journal of Academic Writing, 3(1), 84–94.
(2017). The manufacturing sector’s response to the lack of appropriate technical expertise in South Africa. In B. Collier-Reed (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fourth Biennial Conference of the South African Society for Engineering Education (pp. 439–441). Cape Town: South African Society for Engineering Education.
Wolff, K., & Luckett, K. (2013). Integrating multidisciplinary engineering knowledge. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(1), 78–92.
Wolmarans, N. (2016). Inferential reasoning in design: Relations between material product and specialised disciplinary knowledge. Design Studies, 45(A), 92–115.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Simpson-Smith, Claire
2024. Recontextualising the teaching learning cycle within engineering education to improve the development of written communication skills. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education 29:1 ► pp. 30 ff. 
Mehta, Nikhil K. & Sumi Jha
2021. Facilitation of team communication skill among engineers: an empirical study. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning 11:2 ► pp. 435 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.