Article published in:
Learner Corpora in Language Testing and Assessment
Edited by Marcus Callies and Sandra Götz
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 70] 2015
► pp. 59–84

Data commentary in science writing

Using a small, specialized corpus for formative self-assessment practices

| Lund University
| Chalmers University of Technology
Data commentary, the verbal comment on visual material, is a complex area in science writing; yet, few studies in academic writing focus on it. This chapter presents an approach to the teaching and learning of data commentary in ESP writing within the science disciplines involving direct application of a small, specialized corpus of data commentaries drawn from published research articles and master’s theses, all annotated for rhetorical moves. We exemplify how formative self-assessment practices of data commentaries can be developed from corpus-informed computer-assisted learning activities combining top-down discourse analysis with bottom-up corpus analysis, and outline a methodology for self-assessment practices. Our approach illustrates how a specialized corpus and purposefully crafted learning activities can assist students in continuous self-assessment practices. Such facilitation is of crucial value today as pedagogical and curricular developments in science education increasingly emphasize students’ awareness of communicative practices.
Published online: 09 April 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.70.03nor
References
Ädel, A
2010 Using corpora to teach academic writing: Challenges for the direct approach. In Corpus-Based Approaches to English Language Teaching [Research in Corpus and Discourse], M.C. Campoy-Cubillo, B. Belles-Fortuño & M.L. Gea-Valor (eds), 39–55. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Basturkmen, H
2009 Commenting on results in published research articles and masters dissertations in language teaching. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 8(4): 241–251. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Berkenkotter, C. & Huckin, T.N
1995 Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication: Cognition/Culture/Power. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bhatia, V.K
2004 Worlds of Written Discourse: A Genre-Based View. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Bhatia, V.K., Langton, N.M. & Lung, J
2004 Legal discourse: Opportunities and threats for corpus linguistics. In Discourse in the Professions: Perspectives from corpus linguistics [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 16], U. Connor & T.A. Upton (eds), 203–231. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, F. & Pazzaglia, R
2007 Student writing of research articles in a foreign language: Metacognition and corpora. In Corpus Linguistics 25 Years on [Language and Computers 62], R. Facchinetti (ed.), 259–287. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Biber, D., Connor, U. & Upton, T.A
(eds) 2007 Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 28]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blåsjö, M
2011 From percentage to prediction: University students meeting a parallel language of visuals and numerals. Ibérica 22: 123–140.Google Scholar
Bloch, J
2009 The design of an online program for teaching about reporting verbs. Language Learning and Technology 13(1): 59–78.Google Scholar
Boud, D. & Molloy, E
2013 Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38(6): 698–712. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brett, P
1994 A genre analysis of the results section of sociology articles. English for Specific Purposes 13(1): 47–59. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chang, C. & Kuo, C
2011 A corpus-based approach to online materials development for writing research articles. English for Specific Purposes 30(3): 222–234. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Charles, M
2007 Reconciling top-down and bottom-up approaches to graduate writing: Using a corpus to teach rhetorical functions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 6(4): 289–302. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012 ‘Proper vocabulary and juicy collocations’: EAP students evaluate do-it-yourself corpus building. English for Specific Purposes 31(2): 93–102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Conrad, S
2011 Variation in corpora and its pedagogical implications. Interview with Susan Conrad. In Perspectives on Corpus Linguistics [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 48], V. Viana, S. Zyngier & G. Barnbrook (eds), 47–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Feez, S
2002 Heritage and innovation in second language education. In Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives, A.M. Johns (ed.), 43–72. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Fløttum, K., Dahl, T. & Kinn, T
2006 Academic Voices. Across Languages and Disciplines [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 148]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Flowerdew, L
2004 The argument for using English specialized corpora. In Discourse in the Professions: Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 16]. U. Connor & T.A. Upton (eds), 11–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 Corpus-Based Analyses of the Problem-Solution Pattern: A Phraseological Approach [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 29]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 Using a corpus for writing instruction. In The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics, A. O’Keeffe & M. McCarthy (eds), 444–457. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Geisler, C
1994 Literacy and expertise in the academy. Language and Learning Across the Disciplines 1(1): 35–57.Google Scholar
Gibbs, G. & Simpson, C
2004–5. Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education 1: 3–31.
Gilquin, G., Granger, S. & Paquot, M
2007 Learner corpora: The missing link in EAP pedagogy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 6(4): 319–335. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Granger, S
2003 The International Corpus of Learner English: A new resource for foreign language learning and teaching and second language acquisition research. TESOL Quarterly 37(3): 538–546. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Granger, S., Meunier, F., & Dagneaux, E
2002 The International Corpus of Learner English. Handbook and CD-ROM. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar
Guinda, C.S
2011 Integrating approaches to visual data commentary: An exploratory case study. In Researching Specialized Languages [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 47], V. Bhatia, P. Sánchez Hernández & P. Pérez-Paredes (eds), 115–138. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012 Proximal positioning in students’ graph commentaries. In Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres, C.S. Guinda & K. Hyland (eds), 166–183. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K
2000 Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
2008 Genre and academic writing in the disciplines. Language Teaching 41(4): 543–562. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, C
2007 Towards a critical understanding of the teaching of discipline-specific academic literacies: Making the tacit explicit (Kenton Special Issue). Journal of Education 41: 59–81.Google Scholar
Johns, A.M
2008 Genre awareness for the novice academic student: An ongoing quest. Language Teaching 41(2): 237–252. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kanoksilapatham, B
2005 Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. English for Specific Purposes 24(3): 269–292. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 Rhetorical moves in biochemistry research articles. In Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 28], D. Biber, U. Connor & T.A. Upton (eds), 73–119. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kearney, S
2013 Improving engagement: The use of ‘authentic self- and peer-assessment for learning’ to enhance the student learning experience. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38(7): 875–891. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kress, G
2010 Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Krishnamurthy, R. & Kosem, I
2007 Issues in creating a corpus for EAP pedagogy and research. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 6(4): 356–373. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kosem, I
2008 User-friendly corpus tools for language teaching and learning. In Proceedings of the 8th Teaching and Language Corpora Conference, A. Frankenberg-Garcia (ed.), 183–192. Lisbon: Associação de Estudos e de Investigação do ISLA-Lisboa.Google Scholar
Lee, D. & Swales, J.M
2006 A corpus-based EAP course for NNS doctoral students: Moving from available specialized corpora to self-compiled corpora. English for Specific Purposes 25(1): 56–75. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lemke, J
1998 Multiplying meaning: Visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text. In Reading Science: Critical and Functional Perspectives on Discourses of Science, J.R. Martin & R. Veel (eds), 87–113. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Liu, Y. & Owyong, Y.S.M
2011 Metaphor, multiplicative meaning and the semiotic construction of scientific knowledge. Language Sciences 33(5): 822–834. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Luzón, M.J
2009 The use of we in a learner corpus of reports written by EFL engineering students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 8(3): 192–206. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Martin, J.R. & Rose, D
2012 Learning to Write/Reading to Learn: Genre, Knowledge and Pedagogy in the Sydney School: Scaffolding Democracy in Literacy Classrooms. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Nicol, D
2009 Assessment for learner self-regulation: Enhancing achievements in the first year using learning technologies. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 34(3): 335–352. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nicol, D. & Macfarlane-Dick, D
2006 Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education 31(2): 199–218. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nordrum, L., Evans, K. & Gustafsson, M
2013 Comparing student learning experiences of in-text commentary and rubric-articulated feedback: Strategies for formative assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38(8): 919–940. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
O’Donovan, B., Price, M. & Rust, C
2004 Know what I mean? Enhancing student understanding of assessment standards and criteria. Teaching in Higher Education 9(3): 325–35. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
O’Donnell, M
2008 The UAM corpus tool: Software for corpus annotation and exploration. In Applied Linguistics Now: Understanding Language and Mind / La Lingüística Aplicada Hoy: Comprendiendo el Lenguaje y la Mente, C.M. Bretones Callejas, S. Salaberri Ramiro, E. García Sánchez, M.E. Cortés de los Ríos, M.S. Cruz Martínez, J.F. Fernández Sánchez, J.R. Ibáñez Ibáñez, N.P. Honeyman & B. Cantizano Márquez (eds), 1433–1447. Almería: Universidad de Almería.Google Scholar
O’Halloran, K.L
2005 Mathematical Discourse: Language, Symbolism and Visual Images. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Peters, S
2011 Asserting or deflecting expertise? Exploring the rhetorical practices of master’s theses in the philosophy of education. English for Specific Purposes 30(3): 176–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Poe, M., Lerner, N. & Craig, J
2010 Learning to Communicate in Science and Engineering: Case Studies from MIT. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Posteguillo, S
1999 The schematic structure of computer science research articles. English for Specific Purposes 18(2): 139–158. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, M.S., Stoller, F.L., Costanza-Robinson, Molly S. & Jones, J.K
2010 Write Like a Chemist. A Guide and Resource. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Römer, U
2011 Corpus research applications in language teaching. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 31: 205–225. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roth, W.-M
2013 Data generation in the discovery sciences – learning from practices in an advanced research laboratory. Research in Science Education 43(4): 1617–1644. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roth, W.-M., Pozzer-Ardenghi, L. & Han, J.Y
2005 Critical Graphicacy: Understanding Visual Representation Practices in School Science. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Sadler, D.R
1989 Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science 18: 119–144. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Samraj, B
2008 A discourse analysis of master’s theses across disciplines with a focus on introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7(1): 55–67. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, J.M
2001 Preface. In Small Corpus Studies and ELT: Theory and Practice [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 5], M. Ghadessy, A. Henry & R.L. Roseberry (eds), vii–xv. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C.D., Worsfold, K., Davies, L., Fisher, R. & McPhail, R
2013 Assessment literacy and student learning: The case for explicitly developing students ‘assessment literacy’. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38(1): 44–60. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stoller, F.L. & Robinson, M.S
2013 Chemistry journal articles: An interdisciplinary approach to move analysis with pedagogical aims. English for Specific Purposes 32, 45–57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Swales, J.M
1990 Genre Analysis. English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Swales, J.M. & Feak, C.B
2004 Academic Writing for Graduate Students. Essential Tasks and Skills, 2nd edn. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
2012 Academic Writing for Graduate Students. Essential Tasks and Skills, 3rd edn. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, P. & Tribble, C
2001 Looking at citations: Using corpora in English for Academic Purposes. Language Learning and Technology 5(3): 91–105.Google Scholar
Upton, T.A. & Cohen, M.A
2009 Discourse analysis. An approach to corpus-based discourse analysis: The move analysis as example. Discourse Studies 11(5): 585–605. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weber, J.J
2001 A concordance- and genre-informed approach to ESP essay writing. ELT Journal 55(1): 14–20. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wharton, S
2012 Epistemological and interpersonal stance in a data description task: Findings from a discipline-specific learner corpus. English for Specific Purposes 31(4): 261–270. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Williams, I.A
1999 Results section of medical research articles. English for Specific Purposes 18(4): 347–366. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Flowerdew, Lynne
2020. The Academic Literacies approach to scholarly writing: a view through the lens of the ESP/Genre approach. Studies in Higher Education 45:3 ► pp. 579 ff. Crossref logo
Jin, Bixi
2018. Rhetorical Differences in Research Article Discussion Sections of High- and Low-Impact Articles in the Field of Chemical Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 61:1 ► pp. 65 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.