Article published in:
Multi-Dimensional Analysis, 25 years on: A tribute to Douglas Biber
Edited by Tony Berber Sardinha and Marcia Veirano Pinto
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 60] 2014
► pp. 273–296

Chapter 4.1 Expanding Multi-Dimensional analysis with qualitative research techniques

| Portland State University, USA
This research describes a case study from engineering education that explores the potential for integrating Multi-Dimensional (MD) analysis into mixed methods research so that MD analyses can address more specific educational problems. The study investigates a specific problem in civil engineering: the mismatch between students’ writing skills and the demands of writing in the workplace. An MD analysis compares a small number of registers of student and practitioner writing, applying the dimensions of variation in English from Biber (1988). Data from interviews with students, faculty, and practitioners are used to interpret the MD findings more fully, assess the importance of the findings, and refine the teaching applications. The two methods together result in a stronger study than either would alone.
Published online: 31 July 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.60.09con
References
Artemeva, N
(2008) Toward a unified social theory of genre learning. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 22(2), 160-185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Asención-Delaney, Y., & Collentine, J
(2011) A multi-dimensional analysis of a written L2 Spanish corpus. Applied Linguistics, 32(3), 299-322. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beer, D., & McMurrey, D
(2005) A guide to writing as an engineer (2nd Ed.). New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Berthouex, P.M
(1996) Honing the writing skills of engineers. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 122(3), 107-110. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Besterfield-Sacre, M., Shuman, L.J., Wolfe, H., Atman, C.J., McGourty, J., Miller, R.L., Olds, B.M., & Rogers, G.M
(2000) Defining the outcomes: A framework for EC-2000. IEEE Transactions on Education, 43(2), 100-110. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D
(1986) Spoken and written textual dimensions in English: Resolving the contradictory findings. Language, 62(2), 384-414. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1988) Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006) University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., & Burges, J
(2001). Historical shifts in the language of women and mean: Gender differences in dramatic dialogue. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional studies (pp.157-170). Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
Biber, D., & Conrad, S
(2009) Register, genre, and style. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Conrad, S., Reppen, R., Byrd, P., & Helt, M
(2002). Speaking and writing in the university: A multi-dimensional comparison. TESOL Quarterly, 36(1), 9-48. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2003) The authors respond: Strengths and goals of multi-dimensional analysis. (Response to M. Ghadessy). TESOL Quarterly, 37(1), 151-155. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blakeslee, A
(2001) Bridging the workplace and the academy: Teaching professional genres through classroom-workplace collaborations. Technical Communication Quarterly, 10(2), 169-192. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ceylan, T
(2005) Thinking and writing in engineering education. In Proceedings, 2005, American Society for Engineering Education IL/IN Sectional Conference .
Connor-Linton, J
(1988) Author style and worldview: A comparison of texts about American nuclear arms policy. In S. Conrad, & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional studies (pp. 84-93). Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
Conrad, S
(1996) Investigating academic texts with corpus-based techniques: An example from biology. Linguistics and Education, 8(3), 299-326. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2001) Variation among disciplinary texts: A comparison of textbooks and journal articles in biology and history. In S. Conrad, & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional studies (pp. 94-107). Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
Conrad, S., & Biber, D
(2001) Multi-dimensional methodology and the dimensions of register variation in English. In S. Conrad, & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional studies (pp.13-42). Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
Conrad, S., Pfeiffer, T., & Szymoniak, T
(2012) Preparing students for writing in civil engineering practice. In Proceedings, 2012, American Society for Engineering Education Conference and Exposition .
Douglas, D.M., Johnston, C.R., Caswell, D.J., & Eggermonth, M
(2004). Writing in the engineering design lab: How problem based learning provides a context for student writing. Proceedings, 2004, American Society for Engineering Education Conference and Exposition .
Gardner, S
(2008) Integrating ethnographic, multidimensional, corpus linguistics and systemic functional approaches to genre description: An illustration through university history and engineering assignments. In E. Steiner & S. Neumann (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th European Systemic Functional Linguistics Conference and Workshop 23rd-25th July 2007 , Saarbrücken, Germany .
Ghadessy, M
(2003) Comments on Douglas Biber, Susan Conrad, Randi Reppen, Pat Byrd, and Marie Helt’s ‘Speaking and writing in the university: A multi-dimensional comparison.’ A reader reacts. TESOL Quarterly, 37(1), 147-150. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hirsch, D., Smith, H., Birol, G., Yalva, B., Casler, J., Anderson, J., & Troy, J
(2005) Establishing school-wide standards for engineering writing. Proceedings, 2005, American Society for Engineering Education Conference and Exposition .
Johnson, R.B., & Onwuegbuzie, A.J
(2004) Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nesi, H., & Gardner, S
(2012) Genres across the disciplines: Student writing in higher education. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Orr, T
(2006) Introduction to the special issue: Insights from corpus linguistics for professional communication. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 49(2), 213-215. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reave, L
(2004) Technical communication instruction in engineering schools. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 18(4), 452-490. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rey, J
(2001) Changing gender roles in popular culture: Dialogue in Star Trek episodes from 1966 to 1993. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional studies (pp. 138-156). Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Tenopir, C., & King, D.W
(2004) Communication patterns of engineers. New Jersey, NJ: IEEE Press/John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Van Rooy, B
(2008) A multi-dimensional analysis of student writing in Black South African English. English world-wide, 29(3), 268-305. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Winsor, D
(1996) Writing like an engineer: A rhetorical education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2000) Writing power: Communication in an engineering center. New York, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Xiao, Z., & McEnery, A
(2005). Two approaches to genre analysis: Three genres in modern American English. Journal of English Linguistics, 33(1), 62-82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 9 other publications

Conrad, Susan
2017. A Comparison of Practitioner and Student Writing in Civil Engineering. Journal of Engineering Education 106:2 ► pp. 191 ff. Crossref logo
Conrad, Susan
2018. The Use of Passives and Impersonal Style in Civil Engineering Writing. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 32:1 ► pp. 38 ff. Crossref logo
Hardy, Jack A.
2015.  In Corpora and Discourse Studies, ► pp. 155 ff. Crossref logo
Jin, Bixi
2018. A Multidimensional Analysis of Research Article Discussion Sections in the Field of Chemical Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 61:3 ► pp. 242 ff. Crossref logo
Jin, Bixi
2021. A Multi-Dimensional Analysis of Research Article Discussion Sections in an Engineering Discipline: Corpus Explorations and Scientists’ Perceptions. SAGE Open 11:4 ► pp. 215824402110504 ff. Crossref logo
Pan, Fan
2018. A multidimensional analysis of L1–L2 differences across three advanced levels. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 36:2 ► pp. 117 ff. Crossref logo
Sardinha, Tony Berber
2020. A historical characterisation of American and Brazilian cultures based on lexical representations. Corpora 15:2 ► pp. 183 ff. Crossref logo
Sardinha, Tony Berber, Carlos Kauffmann & Cristina Mayer Acunzo
2014. A multi-dimensional analysis of register variation in Brazilian Portuguese. Corpora 9:2 ► pp. 239 ff. Crossref logo
Sardinha, Tony Berber & Marcia Veirano Pinto
2017. American television and off-screen registers: a corpus-based comparison. Corpora 12:1 ► pp. 85 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 may 2022. 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.