![]() Deroey, Katrien ![]() Scientific Conference (2023, May 21) We present a research article writing course that uses a flipped classroom approach for independent, personalised learning (Deroey & Skipp, 2023). The course aims to improve insight into the structural ... [more ▼] We present a research article writing course that uses a flipped classroom approach for independent, personalised learning (Deroey & Skipp, 2023). The course aims to improve insight into the structural, stylistic and rhetorical features of research articles as well as the writing and publication process. Its five interlocking components are independent learning tasks, workshops, peer review, writing with reflection, and consultations. Learner autonomy is promoted through corpus work (Charles, 2018), analysis of disciplinary texts (Yasuda, 2011) and interviews with disciplinary experts. The course has been successfully delivered both fully online and on campus to several mixed-discipline cohorts of doctoral students. Before the workshops, students complete independent learning tasks by reading the e-coursebook and completing exercises, including applications to their own texts. The submitted tasks allow us to illustrate key points and design activities with examples from participants’ writing. Submissions of article drafts with reflections further promote and document the application of course content. Peer review happens independently of the instructor but uses a template to guide feedback. Writing consultations with the lecturer provide additional personal feedback. This course stimulates novice research writers to become writing researchers; maximises the added value of the workshops; and enables PhD students to manage their time better. We will explain how this independent, personalised approach works and formulate recommendations based on course evaluations and our experiences. References Charles, M. (2018). Corpus-assisted editing for doctoral students: More than just concordancing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 36, 15-25. Deroey, K. L. B., & Skipp, J. (2023). Designing and delivering an online research article writing course for doctoral students in Luxembourg during Covid-19. In B. Fenton-Smith, J. Gimenez, K. Mansfield, M. Percy, & M. Spinillo (Eds.), International perspectives on teaching academic English in turbulent times (pp. 81-94). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003283409-10 Yasuda, S. (2011). Genre-based tasks in foreign language writing: Developing writers’ genre awareness, linguistic knowledge, and writing competence. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 111-133. [less ▲] Detailed reference viewed: 33 (0 UL)![]() ![]() Deroey, Katrien ![]() Scientific Conference (2023, May 13) We present a writing course that uses a flipped classroom approach for personalised learning (Deroey & Skipp, 2023). The student-centred course design has at its core non-instructor-led activities and ... [more ▼] We present a writing course that uses a flipped classroom approach for personalised learning (Deroey & Skipp, 2023). The student-centred course design has at its core non-instructor-led activities and allows us to accommodate linguistically and disciplinary heterogeneous groups of PhD students. It considers practical issues such as PhD students’ busy schedules (Casanave, 2010), their ability to work independently and limited staff resources. The course has been very successfully delivered several times, both fully and partly online. This writing course provides insight into the structural, stylistic and rhetorical features of research articles as well as the writing and publication process. Students first submit an ‘independent learning task’ in which they apply theory from the book to their writing. Teachers use this output to illustrate key theory points and to provide further practice in the subsequent workshop. Additionally, students submit article drafts with their reflections (Yasuda, 2011) and receive feedback through peer review and consultations (Cho & MacArthur, 2010). Our course design has several advantages. First, it allows personalised learning and differentiated teaching. Second, it limits the number of workshops and maximises their value. Third, it stimulates novice research writers to become writing researchers, promoting continuous learning. References Casanave, C. P. (2010). Dovetailing under impossible circumstances. In C. Aitchison, B. Kamler, & A. Lee (Eds.), Publishing pedagogies for the doctorate and beyond (pp. 47-63). Routledge. Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20, 328-338. Deroey, K. L. B., & Skipp, J. (2023). Designing and delivering an online research article writing course for doctoral students in Luxembourg during Covid-19. In B. Fenton-Smith, J. Gimenez, K. Mansfield, M. Percy, & M. Spinillo (Eds.), International perspectives on teaching academic English in turbulent times (pp. 81-94). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003283409-10 Yasuda, S. (2011). Genre-based tasks in foreign language writing: Developing writers’ genre awareness, linguistic knowledge, and writing competence. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 111-133. [less ▲] Detailed reference viewed: 26 (0 UL)![]() ![]() Deroey, Katrien ![]() Scientific Conference (2023, April 20) We present a research article writing course that departs from traditional models in using a flipped classroom approach based on independent, personalised learning (Deroey & Skipp, 2023). This student ... [more ▼] We present a research article writing course that departs from traditional models in using a flipped classroom approach based on independent, personalised learning (Deroey & Skipp, 2023). This student-centred approach has at its core non-instructor-led activities. The number of classes is limited in favour of tasks using an in-house e-coursebook designed for self-directed learning; peer review; and information gathering from corpora and disciplinary informants. Course design considers practical issues such as PhD students’ busy schedules (Casanave, 2010), their ability to work independently and limited staff resources. The course has been successfully delivered both fully and partly online to several mixed-discipline cohorts of doctoral students. We will explain how this independent, personalised approach works and formulate recommendations based on course evaluations and lecturer experiences. The aim of the course is to improve insight into the structural, stylistic and rhetorical features of research articles as well as the writing and publication process. To maximise personalised learning through independent work, the course is ‘deconstructed’ into five interlocking components: independent learning tasks, workshops, peer review, writing and reflections, and consultations. Learner autonomy and continuous learning are further promoted through corpus work (Charles, 2018), writing reflection, and analysis of disciplinary texts (Yasuda, 2011). Peers and disciplinary experts are important additional learning resources (Cho & MacArthur, 2010; Zhu, 2004). Prior to a workshop, students complete an independent learning task by reading the relevant chapter from the e-coursebook and completing exercises. These exercises include working with writing from their discipline through corpus searches and text analysis as well as applying learning about structure, style and rhetoric to their own texts. This work is submitted before the workshop, allowing us to illustrate key points and design activities with examples from their tasks. Students also submit article drafts with reflections on how course learning has informed their writing. Peer review happens without an instructor present but using a template to guide feedback. Writing consultations with the lecturer enable participants to get further personal feedback from a writing expert. This course design has several advantages. First, it stimulates budding research writers to become writing researchers, which promotes continuous, independent learning. The course tools and analytical frameworks help them explore answers to their personal disciplinary, genre and language questions. Second, it maximises the added value of the workshops: prior independent work with e-book theory and exercises means we can limit theoretical explanations and use their task output to personalise workshops. Third, on an organizational level, students can manage their time better by being less bound to attend more workshops on our central campus. A fully online version of the course is also offered. However, we continue to look for ways to meet the challenges of our course approach. The personalisation of workshops and monitoring task completion constitutes a considerable workload for lecturers. We conclude by opening a discussion about how to manage independent, personalised learning. References Casanave, C. P. (2010). Dovetailing under impossible circumstances. In C. Aitchison, B. Kamler, & A. Lee (Eds.), Publishing pedagogies for the doctorate and beyond (pp. 47-63). Routledge. Charles, M. (2018). Corpus-assisted editing for doctoral students: More than just concordancing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 36, 15-25. Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20, 328-338. Deroey, K. L. B., & Skipp, J. (2023). Designing and delivering an online research article writing course for doctoral students in Luxembourg during Covid-19. In B. Fenton-Smith, J. Gimenez, K. Mansfield, M. Percy, & M. Spinillo (Eds.), International perspectives on teaching academic English in turbulent times (pp. 81-94). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003283409-10 Yasuda, S. (2011). Genre-based tasks in foreign language writing: Developing writers’ genre awareness, linguistic knowledge, and writing competence. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 111-133. Zhu, W. (2004). Faculty views on the importance of writing, the nature of academic writing, and teaching and responding to writing in the disciplines. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(1), 29-48. [less ▲] Detailed reference viewed: 28 (0 UL)![]() Deroey, Katrien ![]() in McDiarmid, Carole (Ed.) Exploring pedagogical approaches in EAP teaching (2023) This paper describes and evaluates a multidisciplinary, online research writing course for PhD students. First, we explain our course rationale and set-up. The core principles are personalised, self ... [more ▼] This paper describes and evaluates a multidisciplinary, online research writing course for PhD students. First, we explain our course rationale and set-up. The core principles are personalised, self-regulated and peer learning, and the optimal use of class time. This is achieved through the following components: an e-coursebook developed in-house; tasks preparing students for the workshops; workshops; writing and reflection; peer review; and individual consultations. Next, we review participants’ feedback from course evaluation surveys. Many students liked the online format although most would prefer the peer review and discussion of theory to happen ‘offline’. A key finding for course efficacy is that students greatly valued working with their own examples in the workshops. They saw this and independent learning tasks as the greatest drivers of their writing development. They also benefited from multidisciplinary peer review. As regards the writing and reflection, all students chose to write on their own and the writing reflection tool was deemed ineffective. We furthermore discuss our (teachers’) perceptions of the affordances and challenges of this course format. On the one hand, it allows workshops to be devoted to collaborative tasks, reflection and data-driven learning. On the other hand, preparing such workshops is very time-consuming, while the multiple components and regular task submissions carry a heavy administrative burden. The paper concludes with how lessons learnt have been implemented into the current course configuration. [less ▲] Detailed reference viewed: 26 (0 UL)![]() ![]() Deroey, Katrien ![]() in Fenton, James; Gimenez, Julio; Mansfield, Katherine (Eds.) et al International perspectives on teaching academic English in turbulent times (2023) This chapter reports on the design, delivery and evaluation of an online research article writing course for doctoral students. The course format was a response to COVID-19 but was designed to be ... [more ▼] This chapter reports on the design, delivery and evaluation of an online research article writing course for doctoral students. The course format was a response to COVID-19 but was designed to be sustainable through enabling flexible, interactive, personalised and independent learning. Its five major components are independent learning tasks, online workshops, writing output, peer review and consultations. Moodle is used for resources and assignments; WebEx for workshops and consultations. Students independently use the e-coursebook to read the theory and submit tasks based on their own texts and articles in their discipline ahead of a workshop on the topic. Additionally, they periodically submit article drafts and engage in peer review. Consultations with the instructor further personalise learning. Having described the course, the chapter goes on to evaluate its affordances and issues by reporting student feedback and teachers’ experiences. It was found that students greatly appreciated the systematic work on their writing in tasks and workshops. However, workshop preparation was very time-consuming for teachers and students would prefer them to be ‘offline’. Furthermore, multidisciplinary peer reviewing and the need to write throughout the course were positively perceived, although requiring greater flexibility in submission times. Consultations were also rated as extremely useful. We conclude with recommendations regarding online course delivery and a blended adaptation for post-COVID purposes. [less ▲] Detailed reference viewed: 62 (3 UL)![]() Deroey, Katrien ![]() Scientific Conference (2021, April 08) This paper describes and evaluates an online research article writing course at the University of Luxembourg. Participants were self-referred PhD students from different disciplines. The aim of the ten ... [more ▼] This paper describes and evaluates an online research article writing course at the University of Luxembourg. Participants were self-referred PhD students from different disciplines. The aim of the ten-week course is to improve insight into the structural, stylistic and rhetorical features of research articles as well as the writing and publication process. It also provides tools for students to develop their own writing. We will situate our course rationale and design within the literature, then compare these to both the reality of managing and delivering the course online as well as participants’ feedback as reflected in 30 surveys. We will focus on the following results: • The practicability of including multiple pedagogical elements in an online course was challenging. We wanted to integrate both independent and collaborative work, production and reflection. However, results of the surveys and our own experience show that the multiplicity of elements was often seen as complex and difficult to manage and multiple submission deadlines problematic. • Students favoured working alone over working together and uptake of writing groups (Aitchison, 2009) was poor. Multi-disciplinary peer groups were, however, positively reviewed (cf. Hyland, 2012). • The flexibility of the online environment was seen as positive, yet many reported problems finding time to write. However, participants did see the benefit in having to write regularly. Tools of reflection did not score highly. • The personalisation of learning input scored highly in the survey, but this was time-consuming to implement. Whilst instructor-student consultations were offered to further personalise feedback, these had a low uptake (8/30). • We wanted to create a course which included guidance on the writing and publication process (Starfield & Paltridge, 2016) as well as increased genre awareness (Swales, 1990) to prepare students for publication. However, tasks on language and structure were rated more useful by more students than this content. • More participants commented on the benefit of working through their language issues in live sessions over learning how to address language issues through the corpus-tools that were integrated into the course (Charles, 2018). Through sharing this information, we hope to generate a discussion with the audience about ways to optimise online writing courses and manage some of the problems associated with online delivery. Aitchison, C. (2009). Writing groups for doctoral education. Studies in Higher Education, 34(8), 905-916. Charles, M. (2018) Corpus-assisted editing for doctoral students: More than just concordancing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 36, 15-26. Charles, M. (2018). Using do-it-yourself-corpora in EAP: A tailor-made resource for teachers and students. Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 6(2), 217-224. Hyland, K. (2012). Disciplinary Identities: Individuality and Community in Academic Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nesi, H. & Gardener, S. (2012). Genres across the disciplines: Student writing in higher education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (2016). Getting published in academic journals: Navigating the publication process. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [less ▲] Detailed reference viewed: 82 (1 UL) |
||