Analytical writing poses particularly challenging, yet often overlooked, language demands that need attention in educational research and practice. In this article, I discuss the Core Analytical Language Skills (CALS) construct and its relevance for school reading and writing. CALS refer to the set of learners’ school-relevant language resources that are of high utility to understanding analytical texts across content areas. After a brief review of the relations between mid-adolescents’ language and their school reading and writing proficiencies, I offer illustrative examples of individual differences in middle-schoolers’ analytical writing and CALS. I argue, on the basis of recent but extensive empirical evidence, that without understanding and addressing the immense variability in the language resources that students bring to school and the language demands of reading- and writing-to-learn tasks and texts, schools run the risk of maintaining and even exacerbating the inequalities that exist in the larger society.

In science disciplines, students need sufficient and well-designed support to successfully gain writing competence along the different stages of their writing development. This study examines effective inquiry-based writing pedagogies and the contextualization of scientific writing instruction for supporting student writers in the scientific community. The researchers first systematically reviewed effective pedagogical practices that can help students gain writing competence through inquiry-based learning, then explicated how scientific writing is situated in inquiry-based writing instruction (IBWI) with respect to text structures using a genre-based approach. A systematic review of 40 empirical studies published between 2000 and 2021 was conducted. The researchers examined the pedagogies, methods, and models that effectively support IBWI and identified some emerging trends that aim to raise undergraduates’ scientific writing communicative competence. Implications for how scientific writing should be situated in IBWI were provided to help disciplinary faculty respond more precisely to science students’ writing needs in tertiary settings.

Predatory publishers deliver neither the editorial oversight, nor the peer review of legitimate publishers, and benefit from those whose positions require academic publications. These publishers also provide a home for conspiracy theorists and pseudoscience promoters, as their lack of scrutiny offers fraudulent academic research articles a veneer of scholarly credibility. While most predatory journals were designed to dupe researchers, the fraudulent articles they often publish are designed to be found by members of the public, and their accessibility ensures that unlike legitimate research, they are likely to be employed as evidence by those seeking evidence. While studies have examined the common features of predatory journals, their emails, and their websites, this essay situates fraudulent academic articles in posttruth discourse, offers a taxonomy of illegitimate research articles, and highlights their common rhetorical features, in the hopes that the concepts discovered here can further contribute to pedagogy and public understanding.

This systematic review of 46 published articles investigates the constructs employed and the meanings assigned to writing in writing-to-learn assignments given to students in science courses. Using components of assignments associated with the greatest learning gains—meaning making, clear expectations, interactive writing processes, and metacognition—this review illuminates the constructs of writing that yield conceptual learning in science. In so doing, this article also provides a framework that can be used to evaluate writing-to-learn assignments in science, and it documents a new era in research on writing to learn in science by showing the increased rigor that has characterized studies in this field during the past decade.

In this article, the author argues that Method sections in social science research reports, particularly those that employ qualitative methods, often lack sufficient detail to make any results that follow from the analytic method trustworthy. The author provides a brief review of the evolution of the Method section from the 1960s to the present, makes a case for a more robust reporting of research method, and then outlines one way to achieve the end of providing a detailed, specific account of research methods that enable readers to understand unambiguously the means by which data are rendered into results. This consideration includes attention to the reporting of data collection, data reduction, data analysis, and the context of the investigation to make it clear why an illustrative presentation of data supports the claim that it offers.

Scientific popularizations are generally considered translations (often dubious ones) of scientific research for a lay audience. This study explores the role popularizations play within scientific discourse, specifically in the development of chaos theory. The methods included a review of the popular and the semipopular books on chaos theory from 1975 to 1995, interviews with key figures, and an analysis of the citations in scientific research journals to Gleick’s well-known popularization, Chaos: Making a New Science. The results indicate that popularizations take different forms as a scientific revolution develops into normal science. At various points, popularizations are used by scientists to find a broad, interdisciplinary, scientific audience, to show interest in the field, to disseminate lines of inquiry, and to help establish the author’s priority claim.

The article consists of two parts: One introduces the concept of positioning as a framework for inspecting and relating major tendencies regarding research on writing; the other gives a historic outline of how research on writing in Norway first emerged. The triadic semiotics of Bühler, Bakhtin, Habermas, and Halliday are combined, and then related to the concept of positioning, which is used as a framework for the historical part. A triadic understanding of communication and didactics is outlined for the purpose of studying positioning of research on writing. Reviews of didactics, research, and stil are presented before overall developmental patterns of general tendencies in the early research writing are described. Central parts of the framework and the historical part are finally compared to an overview offered by Nystrand, Green, and Wiemelt.

The article explores the purpose and methods of teaching the personal narrative in foreign language classrooms. Following a cross-cultural comparison of the history, purpose, and form of autobiography in first-language contexts in the United States and Japan; a review of the place of personal narrative in second- and foreign-language compo sition theory and practice; and the results from survey research involving 160 Japanese freshman students about high school writing instruction in English, a rationale and methodology for teaching personal narrative to Japanese college students of English is presented. The five-paragraph, thesis-driven personal essay presented in English as a second language/English as a foreign language textbooks is critiqued, with recommendations for a more organic form synthesizing story and essay, as in Barrington's concept of “scene, summary and musing.” The limitations of peer editing are discussed, and the bundan writing workshop is described as an effective alternative.

A review of a range of usage handbooks reveals that many manuals advise against the use of words, phrases, and sentence types on the basis of commonly held beliefs rather than of empirical studies of the characteristics of the items and the ways in which professional writers actually use them. One element castigated by the manuals is expletive it, particularly when followed by a form of the verb be. This study distinguishes three constructions which begin with it is (extrapositive, cleft, and inferential), examines their linguistic characteristics, notes differences in meaning and function between them and their expletiveless counterparts, and explores the uses made of them by writers of fiction and nonfiction. The study demonstrates that although conventionally meaningless, expletive it is introduces sentence types with pragmatic and textual properties of considerable value to writers. The constructions are associated with specific interpretations beyond their conventional meanings. These interpretations provide writers with resources for creating subtle and significant local textual effects.