A Comparative Study of the Criteria Employed by Academic and Workplace Professionals in Evaluating Business Correspondence

A Comparative Study of the Criteria Employed by Academic and Workplace Professionals in Evaluating Business Correspondence

The study was motivated by dissatisfaction expressed by employers in the private sector in Malaysia about recent graduates' ability to write in English. In the light of these complaints, the study aimed to investigate the potential gaps between the criteria applied by workplace professionals an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Puvenesvary, Muthiah
Format: Thesis
Language:eng
eng
Published: 2003
Subjects:
PE English
Online Access:https://etd.uum.edu.my/1676/1/Puvenesvary__Muthiah.pdf
https://etd.uum.edu.my/1676/2/1.Puvenesvary__Muthiah.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my-uum-etd.1676
record_format uketd_dc
institution Universiti Utara Malaysia
collection UUM ETD
language eng
eng
topic PE English
spellingShingle PE English
Puvenesvary, Muthiah
A Comparative Study of the Criteria Employed by Academic and Workplace Professionals in Evaluating Business Correspondence
description The study was motivated by dissatisfaction expressed by employers in the private sector in Malaysia about recent graduates' ability to write in English. In the light of these complaints, the study aimed to investigate the potential gaps between the criteria applied by workplace professionals and academics in the evaluation of business correspondence in an ESL context. Despite the extensive literature in the area of English for Specific Purposes, there is limited research that investigates the criteria of good writing as viewed by workplace professionals and by ESL teachers. Three conceptual frameworks were used to inform the study: New Rhetoric genre theory, Systemic Functional genre theory and English for Specific Purposes (ESP) genre theory. The theme of the study is that context determines the evaluation of the texts produced in a particular environment, and that this has implications for the teaching of ESP. The study was carried out in the context of an English for Business course in a tertiary institution in Malaysia. The subjects of the study were ESL teachers teaching the English for Business course and bank officers in Kuala Lumpur. Two types of business correspondence were used in the study: memoranda and replies to letters of complaint. The data for the study were collected using the verbal protocol methodology, and interviews. In the study, both bankers and teachers were trained to provide verbal protocols in their respective contexts. They both evaluated memoranda and replies to letters of complaint generated under test conditions by undergraduates pursuing the English for Business course. The bankers and teachers were also interviewed in order to establish the link between their working contexts and the views they had about the texts they evaluated. The findings of the study revealed that context is integral to text production and evaluation. The bankers' judgements of the texts they evaluated were largely influenced by their banking context. Similarly, the teachers' judgements of the texts were influenced by their academic context. The findings are discussed in light of their implications for the teaching and assessment of ESP courses. The thesis also provides a critical review of the methodology used and gives suggestions for future research.
format Thesis
qualification_name Ph.D.
qualification_level Doctorate
author Puvenesvary, Muthiah
author_facet Puvenesvary, Muthiah
author_sort Puvenesvary, Muthiah
title A Comparative Study of the Criteria Employed by Academic and Workplace Professionals in Evaluating Business Correspondence
title_short A Comparative Study of the Criteria Employed by Academic and Workplace Professionals in Evaluating Business Correspondence
title_full A Comparative Study of the Criteria Employed by Academic and Workplace Professionals in Evaluating Business Correspondence
title_fullStr A Comparative Study of the Criteria Employed by Academic and Workplace Professionals in Evaluating Business Correspondence
title_full_unstemmed A Comparative Study of the Criteria Employed by Academic and Workplace Professionals in Evaluating Business Correspondence
title_sort comparative study of the criteria employed by academic and workplace professionals in evaluating business correspondence
granting_institution University of Melbourne
granting_department Faculty of Communication and Modern Languages
publishDate 2003
url https://etd.uum.edu.my/1676/1/Puvenesvary__Muthiah.pdf
https://etd.uum.edu.my/1676/2/1.Puvenesvary__Muthiah.pdf
_version_ 1747827187425214464
spelling my-uum-etd.16762013-07-24T12:12:45Z A Comparative Study of the Criteria Employed by Academic and Workplace Professionals in Evaluating Business Correspondence 2003 Puvenesvary, Muthiah Faculty of Communication and Modern Languages Department of Linguistics and Applied Linguistics PE English The study was motivated by dissatisfaction expressed by employers in the private sector in Malaysia about recent graduates' ability to write in English. In the light of these complaints, the study aimed to investigate the potential gaps between the criteria applied by workplace professionals and academics in the evaluation of business correspondence in an ESL context. Despite the extensive literature in the area of English for Specific Purposes, there is limited research that investigates the criteria of good writing as viewed by workplace professionals and by ESL teachers. Three conceptual frameworks were used to inform the study: New Rhetoric genre theory, Systemic Functional genre theory and English for Specific Purposes (ESP) genre theory. The theme of the study is that context determines the evaluation of the texts produced in a particular environment, and that this has implications for the teaching of ESP. The study was carried out in the context of an English for Business course in a tertiary institution in Malaysia. The subjects of the study were ESL teachers teaching the English for Business course and bank officers in Kuala Lumpur. Two types of business correspondence were used in the study: memoranda and replies to letters of complaint. The data for the study were collected using the verbal protocol methodology, and interviews. In the study, both bankers and teachers were trained to provide verbal protocols in their respective contexts. They both evaluated memoranda and replies to letters of complaint generated under test conditions by undergraduates pursuing the English for Business course. The bankers and teachers were also interviewed in order to establish the link between their working contexts and the views they had about the texts they evaluated. The findings of the study revealed that context is integral to text production and evaluation. The bankers' judgements of the texts they evaluated were largely influenced by their banking context. Similarly, the teachers' judgements of the texts were influenced by their academic context. The findings are discussed in light of their implications for the teaching and assessment of ESP courses. The thesis also provides a critical review of the methodology used and gives suggestions for future research. 2003 Thesis https://etd.uum.edu.my/1676/ https://etd.uum.edu.my/1676/1/Puvenesvary__Muthiah.pdf application/pdf eng validuser https://etd.uum.edu.my/1676/2/1.Puvenesvary__Muthiah.pdf application/pdf eng public Ph.D. doctoral University of Melbourne Akar, D., & Louhiala-Salminen, L. (1999). Towards a new genre: A comparative study of business faxes. In F. Bargiela-Chiappini & C. Nickerson (Eds.), Writing business: Genres, media and discourses. (pp.207-226).New York: Pearson Educated Ltd. Afflerbach, P., & Johnston, P.(1984). Research methodology: On the use of verbal reports in reading research. Journal of Reading Behaviour, 16(4), 307-323. Anderson, P. V. (1985). What survey tells us about work. In L. Odell & D. Goswami (Eds.), Writing in nonacademic settings. (pp. 3-83). New York: Guilford Press. Askehave, I., & Swales, J.M. (2001). Genre identification and communicative purpose: A problem and a possible solution. Applied Linguistics, 22 (2), 195-212. Bachman, L. J., Sigband, N.B., & Hipple, T. W. (1987). Successful business English. London: Scott, Foresman and Company. Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal, 54 (2), 153-160. Bakhtin, M.M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M.M. Bahktin. (M. Holquist & C.T. Emerson, Trans) M. Holquist (Eds). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. (C. Emerson & M. Holquist & V. W., Trans) McGee (Eds.). Austin,TX: University of Texas Press. Bamforth, R. (1993). Process versus genre: Anatomy of a false dichotomy. Prospect, 8 (2), 89-99 Barabas, C. (1995). Technical writing in a corporate culture: A study of the nature of information. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Barber, C. L. (1988/1962). Some measurable characteristics of modern scientific prose (1962). In J. Swales (Ed.), Episodes in ESP: A source and reference book on the development of English for Science and Technology(pp.1-16) New York: Prentice Hall. Bargiela-Chiappini, F., & Nickerson, C. (1999). Business writing as social action. In F. Bargiela-Chiappini & C. Nickerson (Eds.), Writing business: Genres, media and discourses. (ppl-32). New York: Pearson Education Ltd. Bazeman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press. Bazerman, C. (1994a). Systems of genres and the enactment of social intentions. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the New Rhetoric (pp. 79-101). London: Taylor and Francis Publishers. Bazerman, C. (1994b). Where is the classroom? In A.Freedman & P. Medway(Eds.), Learning and teaching genre. (pp. 25-30). Portsmouth: Boytod/Cook Publishers. Bazennan, C. (1997a). Discursively structured activities. Mind, culture and activity, 4(4), 296-308. Bazeman, C. (1997b). The life of genre, the life in the classroom. In W. Bishop & H. Ostrom (Eds.), Genre and writing. (pp. 19-26). Portmouth, NH: Boyton/Cook. Bazerman, C. (November 15- 19th, 2000). Texts, social organisation and activity in the classroom. Workshop conducted at the International Conference on Research and Practice in Professional Discourse, City University of Hong Kong. Bazerman, C., & Paradis, J. (Eds.).(1991). Textual dynamics of the professions: Historical and contemporary studies of writing in professional communities. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Berkenkotter, C. (2002). Genre systems at work: DSM-IV and rhetorical recontextualization in psychotherapy paperwork. Written Communication, 18 (3), 326-349. Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. N. (1993). Rethinking genre from a sociocognitive perspective. Written communication, 10(4), 475-509. Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. N. (1995). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication: Cognition/culture/power. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Berkenkotter, C., Huckin, T. N., & Ackerman, J. (1991). Social contexts and socially constructed texts: The initiation of a graduate student into a writing research community. In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions: Historical and contemporary studies of writing in academic and other professional communities. (pp. 191-215). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Berlin, J. A. (1982). Contemporary composition: The major pedagogical theories, College English, 44, 765- 777. Berlin, J.A. (1988). Rhetoric and ideology in the writing class. College English, 50, 477-494. Bex, T. (1996). Variety in written English: Texts in society: Society in text. London: Routledge. Thwaites, Davis and Mules Thwaites, Davis and Mules, V. K. (1991). A genre-based approach to ESP materials. World Englishes, 10(2), 153- 166. Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London: Longman. Bhatia, V. K. (1994). Generic integrity in ESP. In R. Khoo (Ed.), LSP-Problems and prospects. (pp. 49-62). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre. Bhatia, V. K. (1997). Introduction: Genre analysis and world Englishes. World Englishes, 16(3), 313-319. Bhatia, V. K. (1999). Intergrating products, processes, purposes and participants in professional writing. In C. N. Candlin & K. Hyland (Eds.), Writing: Texts, processes and practices. (pp. 21-39). London: Longman. Bhatia, V. (2000). Genres in conflict. In A. Trosborg (Ed.), Analysing professional genres. (pp. 147-162). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Bizzell, P. (1987). Language and literacy. In T.Enos (Ed.), A sourcebook for basic writing teachers.(pp.125-137). New York: Random House. Bitzer, L. F. (1968). The rhetorical situation. Philosophy and rhetoric, 1(1), 1-14. Brandt, D. (1992). The cognitive as the social: An ethnomethodological approach to writing process research. Written communication, 9(3), 315-355. Briggs, C.L., & Bauman, R. (1992). Genre, intertextuality, and social power. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 2 (2), 131-172. Brookes, A., & Grundy, P.(1990). Writing for Study Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brown, A. (1994). LSP testing: The role of linguistic and real-world criteria. In R. Khoo (Ed.), LSP-Problems and prospects. (pp. 202-218). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre. Brown, A. (1995). The effect of rater variables in the development of an occupation-specific language performance test. Language Testing, 12(1), 1-15. Brown, J. L. (1988). A survey of writing practices in management. English Quarterly, 21(1), 7-18. Brown, J. S., Collins, A,, & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42. Brown, A., McNamara, T., Iwashita, N., & 0 ' Hagan,S. (June 2001). Investigation of raters' orientation in specific-purpose task-based oral assessment. TOEFL 2000 research and development project: The University of Melbourne. Brown,P., & Levinson, S.(1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bruffee, K.A (1986). Social construction: Language and the authority of knowledge; A bibliographical essay. College English, 48, 773-790 Burke, K. (1950). A rhetoric of motives. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Burns, A., Joyce, H., & Gollin, S. (1996). 'I See What You Mean': Using spoken discourse in the classroom: A handbook for teachers. Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, Macquire University. Callaghan, M., & Rothery, J. (1993). Teaching factual writing: A genre-based approach. Erskineville, NSW: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program. Callaghan, M., Knapp, P., & Noble, G. (1993). Genre in practice. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing.(pp.179-202) London: Falmer Press. Christie, F. (1991). First-and second-order registers in education. In E. Ventola (Ed.), Functional and systemic linguistics: Approaches and uses. (pp. 235-256).Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Christie, F. (1993). Curriculum genres: Planning for effective teaching. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing. (pp. 154-178). London: Falmer Press. Christie, F. (2000). The language of classroom interaction and learning. In L. Unsworth (Ed.), Researching language in schools and communities. (pp. 184-203). London: Cassell. Clark, G. (1990). Dialogue, dialectic, and conversations: A social perspective on the function of writing. Carbondale and Edwardsville, IL: Southern Ilinois University Press. Coe, R.M. (1987). An apology for form: Or, who took the form out of process? College English, 49, 13-28. Coe, R. M. (1994). Teaching genre as process. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Learning and teaching genre. (pp. 157-172). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers. Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data. Complementary research strategies. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage. Cohen, A. D. (1984). On taking language tests: What the students report. Language Testing, 1 (1), 70-81. Cohen, A. D. (1987). Using verbal reports in research on language learning. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Introspection in second language research. (pp. 82-95). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Cohen, A. D. (1988). The use of verbal report data for a better understanding of test taking processes. ARAL, 11(2), 30-42. Cohen, A.D.(1994). English for academic purposes in Brazil: The use of summary tasks. In C. Hill & K. Parry(Eds.), From testing to assessment: English as an international language. (pp. 174-204). London: Longman. Cohen, A. D., & Cavalcanti, M. C. (1987). Giving and getting feedback on compositions: A comparison of teacher and student verbal report. Evaluation and Research in Education, 1 (2), 63-73. Cohen, A. D., & Cavalcanti, M. C. (1990). Feedback on compositions: Teacher and student verbal reports. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom. (pp. 155-177). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Collins, G. (1990). PEI guide: English for business communications. London: Pitman. Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Connor, U. (2000). Variation in rhetorical moves in grant proposals of US humanists and scientists. Text, 20(1), 1-28. Connor, U., & Mauranen, A. (1999). Linguistic analysis of grant proposals: European union research grants. English for Specific Purposes, 18 (1), 47-62. Cooper, M., & Holzman, M. (1983). Talking about protocols. College Composition and Communication, 34(3), 284-293. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (1993). Introduction: How a genre approach to literacy can transform the way writing is taught. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing.(pp. 11-21). London: The Falmer Press. Cumming, A. (1990). Expertise in evaluating second language compositions. Language Testing, 7(1), 31-51. Cunie, P.(1994). What counts as good writing? Enculturation and writing assessment. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Learning and teaching genre. (pp. 63-80). Portsmouth, Nh: Boynton/Cook Publishers. Davies, A. (1991). The native speaker in applied linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Davies, A. (2000). John M. Swales: Other floors, other voices: A textography of a small university building. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 585-590. Derewianka, B. (1990). Exploring how texts work. Sydney: Primary English Teaching Association. Devitt, A. J. (1991). Intertextuality in tax accounting: Generic, referential, and functional. In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions. (pp. 336-357). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Devitt, A. (1993). Generalizing about genre: New conceptions of an old concept. College Composition and Communication, 44(4), 573-586. Devitt, A. J. (2000). Integrating rhetorical and literary theories of genre. College English, 62(6), 696-718. Dey, I. (1993). Qualitative data analysis: A user-freindly guide for social scientists. London: Routledge. Dias, P. (1994). Initiating students into the genres of discipline-based reading and writing. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Learning and Teaching Genre. (pp. 193-206). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers. Dias, P., Freedman, A., Medway, P., & Pare, A. (1999). Worlds Apart: Acting and writing in academic and workplace contexts. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Dobrin, D. (1986). Protocols once more. College English, 8(7), 713-726. Dobrin, D. N. (1994). Whither wisdom? In P. Smagorinsky (Ed.), Speaking about writing: Reflections on research methodology. (Vol. 8, pp. 275-289). Thousand Oaks: Sage. dos Santos, VBM Pinto (2002). Genre analysis of business letters of negotiation. English for Specific Purposes, 21 (2), 167-199. Douglas, D. (2000). Assessing languages for specific purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Driskill, L. (1989). Understanding the writing context in organizations. In M.Kogen (Ed.), Writing in the business professions. (pp. 125-145). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English and Association for Business Communication. Dudley-Evans, T. (1993). Variation in communication patterns between discourse communities: the case of highway engineering and plant biology. In G.M. Blue (Ed.). Language, Learning and Success: Studying through English. (pp. 141 - 147). London: Macmillan. Dudley-Evans, T. (1994). Genre Analysis: An approach to text analysis for ESP. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis. (pp. 219-228). London: Routledge. Dudley-Evans, T. (1997). Genre: How far can we, should we go? World Englishes, 16(3), 351-358. Dudley-Evans, T. (2002). The teaching of the academic essay: Is a genre approach possible? In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives.(pp.225-236). Mahwah: New Jersey. Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dressen, D. F., & Swales, J. M. (2000). "Geological setting/ Cadre geologique" in English and French petrology articles: Muted indications of explored places. In A. Trosborg (Ed.), Analysing professional genres. (pp. 57-76). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Ede, L., & Lunsford, A. (1984). Audience addressed/audience invoked: The role of audience in composition theory and pedagogy. College Composition and Communication, 35,115-171. Ede, L., & Lunsford, A. (1990). Singular texts/plural authors: Perspectives on collaborative writing. Carbondale and Edwardsville, IL: Southern Illinois University Press. Eggins, S. (1994). An introduction to Systemic Functional Grammar. London: Pinter. Elbow, P. (1973). Writing without teachers. New York: Oxford University Press. Elbow, P. (1981). Embracing contraries: Explorations in learning and teaching. New York: Oxford University Press. Ewer, J. R., & Latorre, G. (1969). A course in basic scientific English. London: Longman. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1984/1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (May 1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87(3), 215-251. Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1987). From product to process: Introspective methods in second language research. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Introspection in second language research.(pp.5-23). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Faigley, L. (1986). Competing theories of process: A critique and a proposal. College English, 48, 527-542. Fairclough, N. (1992a). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press. Fairclough, N. (1992b). Discourse and text: linguistic and intertextual analysis within discourse analysis. Discourse and Society, 3(2), 193-217. Feez, S. (1998). Text-Based Syllabus Design. Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, Macquire University. Feez, S. (2002). Heritage and innovation in second language education. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives. (pp.43-72). Mahwah: New Jersey. Firth, J. R. (1957). Papers in linguistics 1934-1951. London: Oxford University Press. Flower, L. (1979). Writer-based prose: A cognitive basis for problems in writing. College English, 41, 19-32. Flower, L. (1985). Problem-solving strategies for writing. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Javanovich. Flowerdew, J.(1993). An educational,or process, approach to the teaching of professional genres. ELT Journal, 47,305-316 Flowerdew, J. (2000). Using a genre-based framework to teach organizational structure in academic writing. ELT Journal, 54(4), 369-378. Flowerdew, J. (2002). Genre in the classroom: A linguistic approach. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives. (pp.91 - 104). Mahwah: New Jersey. Flowerdew, J., Li, D., & Miller, L. (1998). Attitudes towards English and Cantonese among Hong Kong Chinese university lectures. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 201-231. Flower, L. S., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365-387 Freadman, A. (1994). Anyone for tennis? In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the New Rhetoric (pp. 43-66). London: Taylor & Francis Ltd. Freedman, A. (1994). "Do as I say": The relationship between teaching and learning new genres. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the New Rhetoric (pp. 191-210). London: Taylor & Francis. Freedman, A., & Adam, C., & Smart, G. (1994). Wearing suits to class: Simulating genres and simulations as genres. Written Communication, 11, 193-226. Freedman,A., & Medway,P.(1994a). Introduction: New views of genre and their implications for education. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.),Learning and Teaching Genre. (pp. 1-24). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers. Freedman, A., & Medway, P. (1994b). Locating genre studies: Antecedents and prospects. In A. Freedman & P. Medway(Eds.), Genre and the New Rhetoric (pp. 1-22). London: Taylor & Francis Publishers. Geertz, C. (1983). Local Knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology. New York: Basic Books. Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure and contradiction in social analysis. London: Macmillan. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Berkeley: University of California Press. Giltrow, J. (1994). Genre and the pragmatic concept of background knowledge. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the New Rhetoric. (pp.155- 180). London: Talylor & Francis Ltd. Goatly, A. (2000). Critical reading and writing: An introduction coursebook. London: Routledge. Goodman, M. B. (1984). Write to the point: Effective communication in the workplace. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Goodwin, C., & Duranti, A. (1992). Rethinking context: An introduction. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon. (pp. 1-42). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Grabe, W.,& Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistic perspective. New York: Longman. Green, A. (1998). Verbal protocol analysis in language testing research: A handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press and University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate. Greene, S., & Higgins, L. (1994). "Once upon a time": The use of retrospective accounts in building theory in composition. In P. Smagorinsky (Ed.), Speaking about writing: Refections on research methodology. (pp.115-140). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gruba, P. A. (1999). The role of digital video media in second language listening comprehension. Unpublished Doctor of Philosophy, Thesis, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold. Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar. (2 ed.). London: Edward Arnold. Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). Part A. In M.A.K. Halliday & R. Hasan. Language, context and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. (pp. 1-48). Victoria: Deakin University Press. Halliday, M.A.K. (1991). Towards probabilistic interpretations. In E. Ventola (Ed.), Functional and systemic linguistics: Approaches and uses. (pp.39-62) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, context and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Victoria: Deakin University Press. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1999). Construing experience through meaning: A language-based approach to cognition. London: Cassell. Halliday, M. A. K., McIntosh, A., & Strevens, P. (1964). The linguistic sciences and language teaching. London: Longmans. Hanks, W. (1989). Text and textuality. Annual Review of Anthropology, 18, 95-127. Hasan, R. (1985). Part B. In M.A.K. Halliday & R. Hasan. Language, context and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. (pp.52-109). Victoria: Deakin University Press. Henry, A., & Roseberry, R.L. (2001). A narrow-angled corpus analysis of moves and strategies of the genre: 'Letter of application.' English for Specific Purposes, 20(2),153-167. Hatch, E., & Lazaraton, A. (1991). The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics. New York: Newbury House. Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organisation of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing. (pp.3-30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Hayes, J. R., Flower, L., Schriver, K., Stratman, J., & Carey, L. (1987). Cognitive processes in revision. In S. Rosenberg (Ed.), Advances in applied linguistics: Reading, writing and language processing. (Vol. 2, pp. 176-240). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hebden, J. E. (1986). Adopting an organization's culture: The socialization of graduate trainees. Organizational Dynamics, 15, 54-72. Henderson, G. L., & Voiles, P. R. (1987). Business English essentials. New York: McGraw-Hill. Herbert, A. J. (1988). The structure of Technical English (1965). In J. Swales(Ed.), Episodes in ESP: A source and reference book on the development of English for Science and Technology. (pp. 17-27). New York: Prentice Hall. Herrington, A. J. (1985). Writing in academic settings: A study of the contexts for writing in two college chemical engineering. courses. Research in the Teaching of English, 19(4), 331-361. Hill, C.A., & Resnik, L. (1995). Creating opportunities for apprenticeship in writing. In J. Petraglia(Ed).Reconceiving writing, rethinking writing instruction. (pp. 145- 158). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hinds, J. (1987). Reader vs. writer responsibility: A new typology. In U. Connor & R.B. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text. (pp. 141-152). Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley. Hopkins, A., & Dudley-Evans, T. (1988). A genre-based investigation of the discussion sections in articles and dissertations. English for Specific Purposes, 7(2),113- 122. Hout, B. A. (1988). The validity of holistic scoring: A comparison of the talk-aloud protocols of expert and novice holistic raters. Unpublished Doctor of Philosophy, Thesis, Indiana University of Pennsylvania. Huot, B. A. (1993). The influence of holistic scoring procedures on reading and rating student essays. In M. M. Williamson & B. A. Huot (Eds.), Validating holistic scoring for writing assessment: Theoretical and empirical foundations. (pp. 206-236). Cresskil1,NJ: Hampton Press. Hout, B. (1996). Toward a new theory of writing assessment. College Composition and Communication, 47(4), 549-566. Huckin, T. N. (1992). Context-sensitive text analysis. In G. Kirsch & P. A. Sullivan (Eds.), Methods and methodology in composition research. (pp. 84-104). Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press. Huckin, M., & Bloch, J. (1993). Strategies for inferring word-meanings in context: A cognitive model. In T. Huckin & M. Haynes & J. Coady(Eds.), Second language reading and vocabulary learning. (pp. 153-178). Noorwood, NJ: Ablex. Huseman, R., Galvin, M., & Prescott, D. (1988). Business communication. Strategies and skills. Sydney: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-centred approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. London: Longman Hyland, K. (2002a). Genre: Language, context and literacy. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 113-135 Hyland, K. (2002b). Specificity revisited: How far should we go now? English for Specific Purposes, 21, 385-395. Hyon, S.(1996). Genre in the three traditions: Implications for ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 30(4), 693-722. Hyon, S. (2002). Genre and ESL reading: A classroom study. In Johns(Ed). Genre in the classroom:Multiple perspectives. (pp. 121 - 141). Marwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Iedema, R. (1997). The language of administration: Organizing human activity in formal institutions. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school. (pp. 73- 100). London: Cassell Jackson, J. (1998). Reality-based decision cases in ESP teacher education: Windows on practice. English for Specific Purposes, 17(2), 151 - 167. Jacoby, S., & McNamara, T. F. (1999). Locating competence. English for Specific Purposes, 18(3), 213-241. 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.(pp.24-36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Johns, A. M. (1993). Written argumentation for real audiences: Suggestions for teacher research and classroom practice. TESOL Quarterly, 27(1), 297-313. Johns, A. M. (1997). Text, role, and context: Developing academic literacies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Johns, A. M. (2002a). Destabilizing and enriching novice students' genre theories. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives. (pp. 237-248). Mahwah: New Jersey. Johns, A. M. (2002b). Introduction: Genre in the classroom. In A. M. Johns(Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives. (pp. 1 - 16). Mahwah: New Jersey. Johns, A. M., & Swales, J. M. (1998). Past imperfect continuous: Reflections on two ESP lives. English for Specific Purposes, 17(1), 15-28. Jones, C., Turner, J., & Street, B. (Eds.).(1999). Students writing in the university: Cultural and epistemological issues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Jordan, R.R.(1990). Academic writing course. London: Nelson. Kamler, B., & Threadgold, T. (1997). Which thesis did you read? In Z. Golebiowski. (Ed.). Policy and practice of tertiary literacy. Selected Proceedings of the First National Conference on Tertiary Literacy: Research and Practice. (Vol. 1, pp. 42-58). Melbourne: Victoria University of Technology. Kaplan, R. (1967). Contrastive rhetoric and the teaching of composition. TESOL Quarterly, 1 (4), 10-16. Kavale, K., & Schreiner, R. (1979). The reading processes of above average and average readers: A comparison of the use of reasoning strategies in responding to standardized comprehension measures. Reading Research Quarterly, 15(1), 102- 128. Kemp, F. (1993). The origins of ENFI network theory, and computer-based collaborative writing instruction at the University of Texas. In B. C. Bruce, J. K. Peyton & T. Batson (Eds.), Network-based classrooms: Promises and realities. (pp. 161 - 180). NY: Cambridge University Press. Kench, A. B. (1972). The language of English business letters: Commercial correspondence for foreign students of English. London: Macmillan. Kivela, R. J. (1997). Free to write: On-line class discussions. In Z. Golebiowski. (Ed.). Policy and practice of tertiary literacy. Selected Proceedings of the First National Conference on Tertiary Literacy: Research and Practice. (Vol. 1, pp. 219-232). Melbourne: Victoria University of Technology. Kletzien, S. B. (1991). Strategy use by good and poor comprehenders reading expository text of differing levels. Reading Research Quarterly, 26(1), 67-86. Kogen, M. (Ed.). (1989). Writing in the business professions. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English and Association for Business Communication. Kormos, J. (1998). The use of verbal reports in L2 research: Verbal reports in L2 speech production research. TESOL Quarterly, 32(2), 353-358. Kress, G. (1993). Genre as social process. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing. (pp. 22-37). London: Falmer Press. Kusel, P. (1992). Rhetorical approaches to the study and composition of academic essays. System, 20 (4), 457-469. Lackstrom, J. E., Selinker, L., & Trimble, L. P. (1988). Grammar and technical English (1972). In J. Swales (Ed.), Episodes in ESP: A source and reference book on the development of English for Science and Technology.(pp.58-68). New York: Prentice Hall. Lannon, M., Tullis, G., & Trappe, T. (1993). Insights into business. London: Thomas Nelson & Sons Lave, J. (1991). Situating learning in communities of practice. In L. B. Resnick & J. M. Levine & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition. (pp. 63-84). Washington, DC: American Psychological Associaton. Lave, J., & Wagner, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Lea, M.R., & Street, B.V. (2000). Student writing and staff feedback in Higher Education: An academic literacies approach. In M. R. Lea & B. Stierer (Eds.), Student writing in higher education: New contexts. (pp. 32-46). Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press. Leech, G. (1983). Principles in pragmatics. London: Longman. LeFevre, K. B.(1987). Invention as a social act. Carbondale and Edwardsville, IL: Southern Illinois University Press. Lemke, J.L. (1992). Intertextuality and educational research. Linguistics and Education. 4, 257-267. Liebman-Kleine, J. (1986). In defense of teaching process in ESL composition. TESOL Quarterly, 20(4), 783-788. Lock, G. (1996). Functional English grammar: An introduction for second language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Loos, E. (1999). Intertextual networks in organisations: the use of written and oral business discourse in relation to context. In F. Bargiela-Chiappini & C. Nickerson (Eds.), Writing business: Genres, media and discourses.(pp.315-332) New York: Pearson Education Ltd. Louhiala-Salminen, L. (1999). From business correspondence to message exchange: The notion of genre in Business Communication. Jyvaskyla: University of Jyvakyla, Centre for Applied Language Studies. Love, A. M. (1991). Process and product in geology: An investigation of some discourse features of two introductory textbooks. English for Specific Purposes, 10, 89-109. Lumley, T. J. N. (2000). The process of the assessment of writing performance: The rater's perspective. Unpublished Doctor of Philosophy, Thesis, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. Lundeberg, M. (1987). Metacognitive aspects of reading comprehension: Studying understanding in legal case analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 22(4), 408-432. Lynch, B. (1996). Language program evaluation: Theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. MacDonald, S. P. (1992). A method for analyzing sentence-level differences in disciplinary knowledge making. Written Communication, 9(4), 533 -569. MacKinnon, J. (1993). Becoming a rhetor: Developing writing ability in a mature, writing-intensive organization. In R. Spilka (Ed.), Writing in the workplace: New research perspectives. (pp. 41-55). Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press. Maier, P. (April, 1992). Politeness strategies in business letters by native and non-native English speakers. English for Specific Purposes, 11 (3), 189-205. Malinowski, B. (1923). The problem of meaning in primitive languages. In C. K. Ogden & I. A. Richards (Eds.), The meaning of meaning: A study of the influence of language upon thought and of the science of symbolism. (1st ed., pp. 296-336). New York: Harcourt, Brace & World. Malinowski, B. (1935). Coral gardens and their magic:A study of the methods of tilling the soil and of agricultural rites in the Trobriand Islands. (Vol.2). London: Allen and Unwin. Martin, J. R. (1985a). Factual Writing: Exploring and challenging social reality. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press. Martin, J.R. (1985b). Process and text: Two aspects of human semiosis. In J.D. Benson & S. G. Williams (Eds.), Systemic perspectives on discourse. (Vol. 1, pp. 248-274). New Jersey: Ablex. Martin, J. R. (1993a). A contextual theory of language. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The Powers of Literacy: A Genre Approach to Teaching Writing. (pp. 116- 136). London: Falmer Press. Martin, J. R. (1993b). Genre and literacy: Modelling context in educational linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistic, 13, 141 - 172. Martin, J. R. (1997). Analysing genre: Functional parameters. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school. (pp. 1-39). London: Cassell. Martin, J. R., Christie, F., & Rothery, J. (1987). Social processes in education: A reply to Sawyer Watson (and others). In I. Reid (Ed.), The place of genre in learning: Current debates. (pp. 58-82). Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press. Master, P., & Brinton, D. M. (1998). New Ways in English for Speczfic Purposes. Alexandria, VA: TESOL May, K. A. (1989). Interview techniques in qualitative research: Concerns and challenges. In J. M. Morse (Ed.), Qualitative nursing research: A contemporary dialogue. (pp. 187-201). Rockville, Maryland: Aspen Publishers. McCarthy, M., & Carter, R. (1994). Language as discourse: Perspectives for language teaching. London: Longman. McNamara, T. F. (1996). Measuring second language performance. London: Longman. Milanovic, M., Saville, N., & Shubong, S. (1996). A study of the decision-making behaviour of composition markers. In M. Milanovic & N. Saville (Eds.), Performance, testing, cognition and assessment. Selected papers from the 15th Language Testing Research Colloquium, Cambridge and Arnhem. (pp. 92-115). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press and University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate. Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Miller, C. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70(151-167). Miller, C. R. (1994). Genre as social action. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the New Rhetoric (pp. 23-42). London: Taylor & Francis Publishers. Mulholland, J. (1999). E-mail: uses, issues and problems in an institutional setting. In F. Bargiela-Chiappini & C. Nickerson (Eds.), Writing business: Genres, media and discourses. (pp. 57-84). New York: Pearson Education Ltd. Myers, G. (1985). Texts as knowledge claims: The social construction of two biologists' articles. Social Studies of Science, 15, 593-630. Myers, G. (2000). Powerpoints: Technology, lectures, and changing genres. In A. Trosborg (Ed.), Analysing professional genres.(pp. 177-192).Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Nesbitt, C., & Plum, G. (1988). Probabilities in a systemic-functional grammar: the clause complex in English. In R.P. Fawcett & D. Young (Eds.), New Developments in Systemic Linguistics. (Vol. 2, pp. 6-38). London: Pinter. Nickerson, C. (1999). The use of English in electronic mail in a multinational corporation. In F. Bargiela-Chiappini & C. Nickerson (Eds.), Writing business: Genres, media and discourses. (pp. 35-56). New York: Pearson Educated Ltd. Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84(231-259). Nurahimah, M. Y., Abdul Malek, A. K., & Syaharom, A.(1994). The role of ESP-The perspective of some employers. (Unpublished Research Report.). Sintok, Kedah: School of Languages and Scientific Thinking,Northern University of Malaysia. Nwogu, K. N. (1991). Structure of science popularizations: A genre analysis approach to the schema of popularized medical texts. English for Specifik Purposes,10(2),111- 123. Odell, L., & Goswami, D. (Eds.). (1985). Writing in nonacademic settings. New York: Guilford. 0' Hagan, S. R. (1999). Assessment of student essays: Methods of marking work written by students from non-English speaking backgrounds. Unpublished MA, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. Olshavsky, J. E. (1976-1977). Reading on problem solving: An investigation of strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 12(4), 654-674. O'Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U.(1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Oshima, A., & Hogue, A. (1992). Writing academic English. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. Oxford,R.L.(1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Newbury House. Paltridge, B. (1997). Genre, frames and writing in research settings. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Paltridge, B. (1998). Systems of genre and the TESOL classroom. TESOL in Context. 8, (1),13-16. Paltridge, B. (2000a). Genre knowledge and teaching professional communication. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 43,(4), 397-401. Paltridge, B. (2000b). Genre knowledge and the language learning classroom. EA Journal. 18, (2), 52-59. Paltridge, B. (2000c).Making sense of discourse analysis. Gold Coast, Qld: Antipodean Educational Enterprises. Paltridge, B. (2001a). Genre and the language learning classroom. Ann Arbor: MI: The University of Michigan Press. Paltridge, B. (2001b). Linguistic research and EAP pedagogy. In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacocks (Eds.). Research perspectives on English for Academic Purposes. (pp. 55-70). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Paltridge, B. (2002). Genre, text type, and the English for Academic Purposes (EAP) classroom. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives. (pp. 73-90). Mahwah: New Jersey. Pang, T.T.T. (2002). Textual analysis and contextual awareness building: A comparison of two approaches to teaching genre. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives. (pp. 145-162). Mahwah: New Jersey. Paradis, J., Dobrin, D., & Miller, R. (1985). Writing at Exxon ITD: Notes on the writing environment of an R & D organization. In L. Odell & D. Goswami (Eds.), Writing in nonacademic settings.(pp.281-308). New York: Guilford Press. Park, D. (1982). The meanings of 'audience'. College English, 44(3), 247-257 Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. (2 ed.). Newbury Park: Sage. Platt, E. (1993). Vocational/VESL teacher collaboration: Some substantive issues. English for Specific Purposes, 12(2), 139- 157. Plett, H.F. (Ed).(1991). Intertextuality: Berlin: de Gruyer. Poulisse, N. T., Bongaerts, T., & Kellerman, E. (1987). The use of retrospective verbal reports in the analysis of compensatory strategies. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Introspection in second language research. (pp. 213-229). Clevedon,UK: Multilingual Matters. Poynton, C. (1985). Language and gender: Making the difference. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press. Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pula, J. J., & Huot, B. A. (1993). A model of background influences on holistic raters. In M. M. Williamson & B. A. Huot (Eds.), Validating holistic scoring for writing assessment: Theoretical and empirical foundations. (pp. 237-265). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Raimes, A. (1985). What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom study of composing. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 222-258. Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Reid, J. (1984a). The radical outliner and the radical brainstormer: A perspective on composing processes. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 529-533. Reid, J. (1984b). Comments on Vivian Zamel's "The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies." TESOL Quarterly, 18, 149-159. Reppen, R. (1995). A genre-based approach to content writing instruction. TESOL Journal, 4 (2), 32-35. Rivers, W. M. (1968). Teaching foreign language skills. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Robinson, P. (1991). ESP today: A practitioner's guide. London: Prentice Hall International Ltd. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press. Rosch, E. (1977). Human Categorization. In N. Warren (Ed.), Studies in Cross-cultural Psychology. (Vol. 1, pp. 3-47). London: Academic Press. Salager-Meyer, F. (1994). Hedges and textual communicative function in medical written discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 13(2), 149-170. Samraj, B. (2002). Texts and contextual layers: Academic writing in content courses. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives. (pp. 163- 178). Mahwah: New Jersey. Schryer, C. F. (1993). Records as genre. Written Communication, 10(2), 200-234. Seliger, H. W., & Shohamy, E. (1989). Second language research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Silva, T. (1990). Second language composition instruction: developments, issues, and directions in ESL. In In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom.(pp.11-24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Smagorinsky, P. (1991). The writer's knowledge and the writing process: A protocol analysis. Research in the Teaching of English, 25(3), 339-364. Smagorinsky, P. (1994a). Introduction: Potential problems and problematic potentials of using talk about writing as data about writing process. In P.Smagorinsky (Ed.), Speaking about writing: Refections on research methodology. (Vol. 8, pp. ix-2). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Smagorinsky, P. (Ed.). (1994b). Speaking about writing: Refections on research methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Smart, G. (1992). Exploring the social dimension of a workplace genre and the implications for teaching. Carlton Papers in Applied Language Studies, 9, 33-46. Smart, G. (1993). Genre as community invention: A central bank's response to its executives' expectations as readers. In R. Spilka (Ed.), Writing in the workplace: New research. perspectives. (pp. 124-140). Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press. Smart, G.(1996). Mapping the world of a knowledge-producing tribe: Using interpretive ethnography to explore a professional community's genres. Paper presented at the AILA Symposium-Thicker Description in Applied Genre Analysis: Evaluating Approach. Smart, G. (1998). Mapping conceptualworlds:Using interpretive Ethnography to explore knowledge-making in a professional community. The Journal of Business Communication, 35(1), 111 - 127. Spack, R. (1984). Invention strategies and the ESL college composition student. TESOL Quarterly, 18 (4), 649-670. Spilka, R. (Ed.). (1993). Writing in the workp1ace:New research perspectives. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press. Stapp, Y. F. (1998). Instructor-employer collaboration: A model for technical workplace English. English for Specific Purposes, 17(2), 169-182. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage. Swales, J. (1981). Aspects of article introductions. (Aston ESP Research Report 1). Birmingham, UK: Language Studies Unit, The University of Aston in Birmingham. Swales, J. (1986). A genre-based approach to language across the curriculum. In M. L. Tickoo (Ed.), Language across the curriculum. (pp. 10-22). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre. Swales, J. (1988). Writing Scientific English (1965). In J. Swales (Ed.), Episodes in ESP: A source and reference book on the development of English for Science and Technology. (pp. 37-44). New York: Prentice Hall. Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Swales, J. M. (1998). Other floors, other voices: A textography of a small university building. Mahwah,NJ: Lawrence Erlbaums. Swales, J.M. (2000). Languages for specific purposes. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 20, 59-76. Swales, J., & Feak, C. B. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students: A Course for non-native speakers of English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Swales, J.M., & Feak, C.B. (2000). English in Today's Research World: A writing guide. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press. Swales, J. M., & Lindemann, S. (2002). Teaching the literature review to international graduate students. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives. (pp. 105-120). Mahwah: New Jersey. Syaharom, A. (1995). Needs analysis: Employers' perspective. (Unpublished Research Report.). Sintok, Kedah: School of Languages and Scientific Thinking, The Northern University of Malaysia. Tarone, E., Dwyer, S., Gillette, S., & Icke, V. (1988). On the use of the passive in two astrophysics journal papers (1981). In J. Swales (Ed.), Episodes in ESP: A source and reference book on the development of English for Science and Technology. (pp. 188-207). New York: Prentice Hall. Threadgold, T. (1989). Talking about genre: Ideologies and incompatible discourses. Cultural Studies, 3, 101 - 127. Thwaites, T., Davis, L., & Mules, W. (1994). Tools for Cultural Studies: An introduction. Melbourne: Macmillan. Thompson, G. (1994). Frameworks and contexts: A genre-based approach to analysing lecture introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 13(2), 171-186. Trosborg, A. (2000). The Inaugural address. In A. Trosborg (Ed.), Analysing professional genres. (pp. 121-147). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. van Nus, M. (1999). 'Can we count on your bookings of potatoes to Madeira?' Corporate context and discourse practices in direct sales letters. In In F. Bargiela-Chiappini & C. Nickerson (Eds.), Writing business: Genres, media and discourses. (pp. 181-206). New York: Pearson Education Ltd. van Someren, M. W., Barnard, Y. F., & Sandberg, J. A. C. (1994). The think aloud method: A practical guide to modelling cognitive processes. London: Academic Press. Vaughan, C. (1991). Holistic assessment: What goes on in the rater's mind? In L. Hamp-Lyons (Ed.), Assessing second language writing in academic contexts. (pp. 111-126). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing. Ventola, E. (1987). The structure of social interaction: A systemic approach to the semiotics of service encounters (Open Linguistic Series). London: Pinter. Watson, C. B.(1982). The use and abuse of models in the ESL writing class. TESOL Quarterly, 16(1), 5 - 15. Weigle, S. C. (1994). Effects of training on raters of ESL compositions. Language Testing, 11(2), 197-223. Weissberg, R.(1993). The graduate seminar: Another research-process genre. English for Specific Purposes, 12 (1),23-35. Weissberg, R., & Buker, S. (1990). Writing up research: Experimental report writing for students of English. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Regents. Widdowson, H. G. (1983). Learning purpose and language use. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Widdowson, H. G. (1984). Explorations in Applied Linguistics 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Widdowson, H. G. (1987). English for specific purposes: Criteria for course design. In M. H. Long & J. C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A book of readings. (pp.96-102). Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers. Widdowson, H.G. (1993). The relevant conditions of language use and learning. In M. Krueger & F.Ryan (Eds.), Language and content: Discipline and content-based approaches to language study. (pp. 27-36). Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath. Widdowson, H. G. (1998). Communication and community: The pragmatics of ESP. English for Specific Purposes,17(1),3-14. Windsor, D. A. (1989). An Engineer's writing and the corporate construction of knowledge. Written Communication, 6(3), 270-285. Wolcott, H. F. (1990). Writing up qualitative research. Newbury Park: Sage. Yates, J., & Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). Genres of organizational communication: A structurational approach to studying communication and media. Academy of Management Review, 17(2), 299-326. Yogman, J., & Kaylani, C. T. (1996). ESP program design for mixed level students. English for Specific Purposes, 15(4), 311-324. Yunick, S. (1997). Genre, registers and sociolinguistics. World Englishes, 16(3), 321-336. Zamel, V. (1976). Teaching composition in the ESL classroom: What we can learn from research in the teaching of English. TESOL Quarterly, IO(1), 67-76. Zamel, V. (1983). The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), 165-187.

Similar Items