This chapter explores how academic engineers write for publication, focusing on “invention” – that is, moments when writers identify the research results they want to present and decide on the arguments they want to make in an article. A key finding presented is that beyond the well-documented role of graphics in displaying research results, graphics also play a crucial heuristic role in invention. This finding emerged from an ethnographic study of three engineering research groups, which entailed the analysis of a range of qualitative data to offer perspectives on the experiences of academic engineers writing for publication. Drawing on this research, the chapter documents that in developing texts for publication, engineers often begin with the graphic results of data analysis to identify findings and begin to craft arguments. Further, in research group and informal meetings, engineers invoke the notion of storytelling through graphics as they socialize their group members into the practices of research dissemination via posters and articles.
(2002). Mentoring engineering graduate students in professional communications: An interdisciplinary workshop approach. American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference Proceedings, Montreal, Quebec, 11835–11849.
Amare, N., & Manning, A
(2007) The language of visuals: Text + graphics = Visual rhetoric tutorial. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 50(1), 57–70.
Archer, A.H
(2006) A multimodal approach to academic ‘literacies’: Problematizing the visual/verbal divide. Language and Education, 20(6), 449–462.
Bakhtin, M
(1986) The problem of speech genres. In C. Emerson & M. Holquist (Eds.), Speech genres and other late essays (trans. V.W. McGee). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Barton, D. & Tusting, K
(2005) (Eds.) Beyond communities of practice: Language, power, and social context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bawarshi, A
(2003) Genre and the invention of the writer: Reconsidering the place of invention in composition. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.
Bazerman, C
(1980) A relationship between reading and writing: The conversational model. College English, 41, 656–61.
Bazerman, C
(1988) Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Bennett, K
(2009) English academic style manuals: A survey. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8, 43–54.
Bezemer, J. & Kress, G
(2008) Writing in multimodal texts: A social semiotic account of designs for learning. Written Communication, 25(2), 166–195.
Blakeslee, A
(1997) Activity, context, interaction, and authority: Learning to write scientific papers in situ. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 11(2), 125–169.
Charmaz, K
(2006) Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Chiu, Y.-H
(2011) Exploring non-native science scholars’ perspectives of writing for publication in English. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 20(3), 469–476.
Curry, M.J
(2003) Skills, access, and “basic writing”: A community college case study from the United States. Studies in the Education of Adults, 35(1), 5–18.
Curry, M.J
(2011) “Where there is no laundry”: Review of five books on writing for publication. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 1–4. Doi:
Curry, M.J
(2014) Graphics as invention heuristics in writing for publication by academic engineers. In M. J. Curry & D. Hanauer, (Eds.), Language, literacy, and learning in STEM Education: Research methods and perspectives from applied linguistics (pp. 87–106). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Curry, M.J. & Lillis, T
(2010) Making academic publishing practices visible: Designing research-based heuristics to support English-medium text production. In N. Harwood (Ed.), Language teaching materials: Theory and practice (pp. 322–345). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Curry, M.J. & Lillis, T
(2013) A scholar’s guide to getting published in English: Critical choices and practical strategies. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Dicks, B., Flewitt, R., Lancaster, L. & Pahl, K
(2011) Multimodality and ethnography: Working at the intersection. Qualitative Research, 11, 227–237.
Gimenez, J. & Thondhlana, J
(2012) Collaborative writing in engineering: Perspectives from research and implications for undergraduate education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 37(5), 471–487.
Graves, H
(2005) Rhetoric in (to) science: Style as invention in inquiry. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Hanauer, D
(2006) Scientific discourse: Multimodality in the science classroom. London: Continuum.
Hanauer, D
(2009) Science and the linguistic landscape: A genre analysis of representational wall space in a microbiology laboratory. In E. Shohamy & D. Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery (pp. 287–301). New York, NY: Routledge.
Harwood, N
(2005) What do we want EAP teaching materials for? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4, 149–161.
Hawhee, D
(2002) Kairotic encounters. In J. M. Atwill & J. M. Lauer (Eds.), Perspectives on rhetorical invention (pp. 16–35). Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Press.
Hutto, D
(2007) Graphics and invention in engineering writing. Technical Communication, 54(1), 88–98.
Kamler, B. & Thomson, P
(2008) The failure of dissertation advice books: Toward alternative pedagogies for doctoral writing. Educational Researcher, 37(8), 507–514.
Knorr-Cetina, K
(1981) The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Koutsantoni, D
(2006) Rhetorical strategies in engineering research articles and research theses: Advanced academic literacy and relations of power. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(1), 19–36.
Kress, G
(2011) ‘Partnerships in research’: Multimodality and ethnography. Qualitative Research, 11: 239–260.
LaFevre, K
(1987) Invention as a social act. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Latour, B. & Woolgar, S
(1979) Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lauer, J
(2004) Invention in rhetoric and composition. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press.
Lea, M. & Street, B.V
(2006) Student writing in higher education: an academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2): 157–72.
Leydens, J. & Olds, B
(2007) Publishing in scientific and engineering contexts: A course for graduate students. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 50(1), 45–56.
Li, Y.Y
(2002) Writing for international publication: The perceptions of Chinese doctoral researchers. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 12, 179–193.
(2001) Student writing: Access, regulation and desire. London: Routledge.
Lillis, T
(2003) An ‘academic literacies’ approach to student writing in higher education: Drawing on Bakhtin to move from critique to design. Language and Education, 17(3), 192–207.
Lillis, T
(2008) Ethnography as method, methodology, and “deep theorizing”: Closing the gap between text and context in academic writing research. Written Communication, 25(3), 353–388.
Lillis, T.M. & Curry, M.J
(2006) Professional academic writing by multilingual scholars: interactions with literacy brokers in the production of English-medium texts. Written Communication, 23(1), 3–35.
Lillis, T.M. & Curry, M.J
(2010) Academic writing in a global context: The politics and practices of publishing in English. London: Routledge.
Lillis, T. & Scott, M
(2007) Defining academic literacies research: issues of epistemology, ideology and strategy. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 5–32.
Lloyd, P
(2000) Storytelling and the development of discourse in the engineering design process. Design Studies, 21, 357–373.
Luzon, M.J
(2005) Genre analysis in technical communication. IEEE Explore, 285–295.
Mathison, M
(2000) “I don’t have to argue my design – the visual speaks for itself”: A case study of mediated activity in an introductory mechanical engineering course. In S. Mitchell & R. Andrew (Eds.), Learning to argue in higher education (pp. 74–84). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
Nathan, M. & Petrosino, A
(2003) Expert blind spot among preservice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 905–928.
Odell, L. & Swersey, B
(2003) Reinventing invention: Writing across the curriculum without WAC. Language & Learning across the Disciplines, 6(3): 38–53.
Poe, M., Lerner, N., & Craig, J
(2010) Learning to communicate in science and engineering: Case studies from MIT. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Rymer, J
(1988) Scientific composing processes: How eminent scientists write journal articles. In D. A. Joliffe (Ed.), Writing in academic disciplines (pp. 211–250). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Selzer, J
(1983) The composing processes of an engineer. College Composition and Communication, 34(2), 178–187.
Shaw, P
(2010) Research reports in academic and industrial research. In M. F. Ruiz-Garrido, J.C. Palmer-Silveira & I. Fortanet-Gómez (Eds.), English for professional and academic purposes (pp. 73–87). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Shehzad, W
(2006) How to end an introduction in a computer science article: A corpus-based approach. In E. Fitzpatrick (Ed.) Language and computers, corpus linguistics beyond the word: Corpus linguistics from phrase to discourse (pp. 227–241). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Swales, J
(1990) Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E
(1998) Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Winsor, D
(1992) What counts as writing? An argument from engineers’ practice. Journal of Advanced Composition, 12(2), 337–347.
Winsor, D
(1994) Invention and writing in technical work: Representing the object. Written Communication, 11(2), 227–250.
Cited by
Cited by 8 other publications
Canagarajah, Suresh
2018. English as a spatial resource and the claimed competence of Chinese STEM professionals. World Englishes 37:1 ► pp. 34 ff.
2019. Investigating invisible writing practices in the engineering curriculum using practice architectures. European Journal of Engineering Education 44:1-2 ► pp. 71 ff.
le Roux, Kate, Malebogo Ngoepe, Corrinne Shaw & Brandon Ian Collier-Reed
2022. Language and disciplinary literacies for accessing, learning and communicating meaning: students’ experiences of the transition from school to first-year undergraduate engineering. European Journal of Engineering Education 47:6 ► pp. 1144 ff.
Minakova, Valeriya & Suresh Canagarajah
2023. Monolingual ideologies versus spatial repertoires: language beliefs and writing practices of an international STEM scholar. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 26:6 ► pp. 708 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 april 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.