ABSTRACT On closely reading the Aristotelian-Ciceronian-Kantian-inflected essay “The Uses of Rhetoric in a Technological Age: Architectonic Productive Arts,” Richard McKeon’s 1970 Wingspread Conference address presciently sketches a new rhetoric that is no longer about the approval of an already formed opinion, the steering of public beliefs, or political influence, but rather about dealing with new problems. Showing the “art of discovery, invention and creativity” in action, his inimitable combination of ethos (trust), pathos (emotion), and logos (structure) opens the way to the perception of new facts and previously unnoticed structures and processes, particularly when read in conjunction with the vicissitudes of the relation between words and numbers, the verbal and the numeral across a historically changing trajectory that culminated in the constituted and constitutive force of all pervasive AI digitality. Considering its “inhuman” expansion, the article’s focus on the logos of techne opens a path toward a historical assessment of humankind’s digitally framed existence.

This study investigates how chronic pain is represented in widely used pain assessment scales. Through a thematic analysis, four overarching themes are identified: pain is framed as a linear continuum, depicted as a progressive bodily obstacle, normalized to a baseline of zero, and characterized as a predictable condition. The design of these scales oversimplifies the complexities of chronic pain into a linear narrative that can potentially marginalize patient experiences and lead to treatment delays. This research advocates for a shift toward patient experience design (PXD) to develop more nuanced, human-centered assessment tools that better capture the fluidity of chronicity.

We report on a longitudinal case study (n = 9) about popularization writing skills in undergraduate interdisciplinary students. Writing skills were determined by analyzing components of the cognitive process model of writing proposed by Hayes. Keystroke logging and video observation were used to analyze the text construction process (the process level) in third-year writing. Genre knowledge (the control level) was analyzed through text analysis and assessment of first-year and third-year texts. Results showed that writing was highly individualized at the process level, including switches between processes, timing, number of edits, and reliance on the source text. At the control level, popularization genre knowledge did not significantly change over time and text quality remained low to average, suggesting a lack in genre knowledge. Choices in the writing process are, thus, not reflected in the quality of the writing product. These findings point to a need for explicit training in popularization discourse alongside academic discourse training.

This study explores how the scholarly writing practices of early-career academics in China create new “ecologies” of research writing. Using a literacy studies framing, we examine how productivity policies, including evaluation and incentivization, impact the writing practices of academics working in the humanities and social sciences (HSS), creating a set of spatiotemporal predicaments and uncertainties. We draw on interviews and multimodal journals obtained from 22 academics at Chinese universities. Findings reveal important practices among China’s HSS academics within the distinctive institutional and policy landscape of Chinese academia, including how they organize their space and time for writing, the significance and function of writing practices, and the ways in which boundaries are disrupted and negotiated. We show that writing is deeply intertwined with multiple spaces and times, forming an ecology of research writing within emergent and shifting assemblages. We emphasize the need for further theoretical and practical understanding of research writing in the context of Chinese universities.

Abstract This study aims to analyze the perceptions of Spanish secondary school teachers in the fields of social and experimental sciences (n = 215) regarding the formative relevance of argumentative competence in the context of citizenship education. It also seeks to provide a psychometric instrument supported by robust empirical evidence of reliability and validity to achieve this goal. Based on a non-experimental, cross-sectional design, the AASES (Assessment of Argumentation in Social and Experimental Sciences) instrument,—developed ad hoc,—is administered to identify the potential relationship of sociodemographic factors with the theoretical subconstructs it comprises, the statistical association between age, origin, and gender, and the mediating role of gender in the relationship between age/place of origin and the defined latent factors, and the existence of significant differences among sociodemographic groups. The results indicate that, although a statistical association between age and gender was observed, the mediating role of gender in the relationship between age, origin, and the latent factors cannot be confirmed. SEM analyses showed that none of the sociodemographic predictors (age, origin, and gender) exert statistically significant direct or mediating effects on the latent factors. Furthermore, the comparative analyses complement the model by indicating that perceptions vary moderately by gender and age, even though these variables do not explain the latent factors in the SEM. Indeed, the analysis of variance revealed significant differences in the Critical and Ethical Skills dimension based on these two factors, with higher scores among male teachers and in the oldest age group, as well as increasing trends, with age, in the perceived importance of argumentation for the development and acquisition of critical thinking skills, informed decision-making, and ethical discussion. The findings highlight the need to incorporate specific spaces within the curriculum and teacher education programs to foster argumentative competencies and informed engagement with controversial socio-scientific issues, taking into account sociodemographic variables as influential factors in the educational process.

We conduct a close reading and micro-level analysis of a market update released by Restaurant Group Plc, a UK leisure firm, during the COVID-19 pandemic to examine its communication functions. While the market update aligns with communicative action theory by enhancing information transparency, it also deploys various rhetorical strategies, including impersonalization, positive self-evaluation, and metaphors consistent with impression management. The overly optimistic tone bears no relation to subsequent corporate outcomes. This study provides valuable insights for business and professional communication practitioners and students, enabling them to interpret the linguistic characteristics of market updates as a distinct genre of corporate communication.

Background: Responding to current research gaps in the investigation of researcher identity development among graduate students, we implement a longitudinal study, powered by user-experience (UX) methods, to document engineering doctoral students’ identity formation. Literature review: Identity formation in novice engineering researchers, such as doctoral students remains underexamined. A process-oriented approach to studying researchers’ identity development may yield useful theoretical and programmatic insights. UX methods offer visual and qualitative approaches to the understanding of student experiences by revealing their identity formation journey over time. Research questions: 1. How can UX methods like persona building support studies of researcher identity development? 2. How can the insights generated from longitudinal UX methods inform graduate program design and assessment? Methodology: Twenty participants were recruited from an industrial engineering department at an R1 university. Data were collected via surveys, qualitative interviews, and journey mapping. Analysis methods, informed by a phenomenological perspective, included persona building and collaborative affinity diagramming. Results: Seven distinctive personas were created to represent identity formation experiences influenced by learning modality, attitude, program stage, and prior experience. Theoretical conclusions and opportunities for academic programming emerged from affinity diagrams. Conclusion: Doctoral engineering students’ researcher identity formation presented implications for theory and curricular design. UX methods offered benefits to qualitative research that can support cross-disciplinary efforts.

Alongside the self-help industry, self-assessment in higher education and organizational training has blossomed, especially as digital tools have made it possible to provide immediate feedback. Both contexts lack validated tools for accomplishing their goals. This study created and validated a series of self-assessments for classroom and training use. Drawing on student self-report data, self-assessment items were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis to assess construct validity and correlational analysis with existing research instruments to assess convergent validity. A set of 19 self-assessments with their accompanying validity and reliability evidence correspond to the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) career-readiness (2021) skills, including communication, leadership, teamwork, technology, inclusiveness, and critical thinking.

Effective source use is a critical skill for first-year writing students because it prepares them for academic, professional, and civic engagement; however, existing research demonstrates that selecting appropriate sources and engaging them insightfully remains a significant challenge. While students struggle with the combined pressures to read, evaluate, and synthesize scholarly sources, we argue that online media including news articles, opinion pieces, and social media posts are a potent but underutilized resource for building students’ competence and confidence with source use. In this article, we present the methods that we have collaboratively developed as an instruction librarian and a first-year writing instructor to propose a new approach to teaching undergraduate research using online media. We detail strategies for teaching advanced search skills using Google and social media platforms like Reddit and X (formerly Twitter), as well as a “reception study” writing assignment that requires students to develop source evaluation and synthesis skills for engaging these online sources. The success of our module highlights that enabling students to build their research skills in the context of these more familiar source formats can lead them to an enriched understanding of the research process—including formulating an authentic research inquiry and engaging meaningfully with real audiences—while also building their skills in accessing, evaluating, and synthesizing diverse sources. Furthermore, by developing research skills in the context of social media platforms and online popular media sources, students gain a practical sense of the relevance of academic research skills to their daily research habits.

English professional communication competence is crucial for fresh graduates to succeed in the workplace and has been identified as a national priority in Malaysia to enhance employability. This study explores key attributes of that competence based on interviews with 12 employers and 9 graduates. Using a basic interpretive qualitative approach, 26 attributes were identified across four areas: linguistic, sociolinguistic, discourse, and strategic competence. The findings highlight the importance of aligning educational outcomes with workplace demands and offer insights that support curriculum development, targeted instruction, and assessment—informing policy and future research to enhance graduate readiness.

In this study, we identify the pedagogical practices the science teachers use for successfully conducting their argumentation-based science lessons and examine the process of managing informal formative assessments. For this qualitative study, we collected data via video and audio devices from classroom implementations after conducting two professional development courses on assessment practices in inquiry settings and argumentation in science classrooms. We analysed the data from the conversation analysis (CA) perspective to conduct a data-driven study. Our results show that there are multiple pedagogical practices that teachers use to achieve lesson purposes and shape lessons. These are primarily the revealing of different claims and warrants or counterarguments about the same phenomenon or situation, prompting the class to discuss different arguments, including more than one student in interaction. Regarding the nature of answers produced by students, the teachers also make implicit or explicit positive and negative assessments, avoid explicit assessments, and give content feedback as pedagogical practices and use them for managing the informal formative assessment process. The results show that the teachers perform some pedagogical practices via the information gained by the informal formative assessment process. These pedagogical practices provide them with new road maps to achieve the lesson goal by increasing classroom interactions.

The notion of grammatical metaphor (GM) (Halliday, 1985) is essentially where a writer can shift an action or quality into being a ‘thing’. As in most senses of metaphor, the goal is to “represent something as something else” (McGrath & Liardét, 2023, p.33). This study investigated the use of grammatical metaphor (GM) in Linguaskill writing exam responses across CEFR proficiency levels (below-B1 to C1 or above). It analysed the presence of a pre-existing GM list (see McGrath & Liardét, 2023) to explore GM frequency in L2 responses, the correlative relationship with proficiency scores and qualitatively explored candidate responses in terms of how GMs were used. Results show a moderate positive correlation between proficiency and GM use, with a dominance of process-to-thing shifts (e.g., transform→transformation) and emergence of GM use from lower to higher proficiency levels. This underscores GM's significance in crafting academically valued meanings in L2 contexts, suggesting its potential for informing instructional and assessment practices. • Metaphorisation in Writing is a useful metric for L2 writing assessment. • Evidence suggests GM frequency correlates with increased performance. • Learners progress from emergent arguments to presenting ideas more concisely. • The majority of GM shifts were to ‘things’. • The study provides further weight to arguments for meaning-based complexity.

This design-based study occurred within a writing methods course in an urban teacher education program. We designed an intervention to develop student teachers’ meta-composing strategies, critical thinking, and justice-oriented reflexivity by revising a teacher-as-writer course assignment to achieve two pedagogical goals: (1) synthesizing antiracist and pedagogical content from curated source texts, and (2) explicating racial literacy as future writing teachers of K-6 students. Using discourse synthesis as both an instructional and research method, we analyzed the synthesis outputs of student teachers during a writing assignment designed to communicate their learnings to an intended audience. Outputs included graphic organizers, planning documents, and a range of final products. We employed discourse synthesis to analyze source and synthesis texts through propositionalization, template formation, and thematic categorization, identifying idea unit origins, progression, or omission. Additionally, content and thematic analyses evaluated instructional strategies and materials to assess whether pedagogical objectives were met. Results indicated discourse synthesis instruction facilitated student engagement with antiracism content, such as historical events, systemic trends, and awareness of racist practices in schools. Findings also highlighted areas for improvement, including modifying source texts, revising the teacher-as-writer assignment, and reevaluating assessment practices in antiracist writing pedagogy.

Despite the growing interest in the dynamics of the writing process in writing research, publicly available large-scale corpora of keystroke logs have been rare. We introduce KLiCKe, a freely available collection of keystroke logs for around 5,000 argumentative texts written by adults in the United States. The KLiCKe corpus also includes human-rated holistic scores for the essays as well as writers' demographic details, their typing skills, and vocabulary knowledge. We describe our methods for constructing the corpus and present descriptives for different components of the corpus. To illustrate the use of the KLiCKe corpus, we report a study using a subset of the corpus to investigate whether keystroke features are associated with holistic writing quality for L1 and L2 writers. The study shows that higher writing scores are related to shorter pauses in general, shorter between-word pauses, lower proportion of deletions, higher proportion of insertions, and less process variance. The KLiCKe corpus provides a robust resource for researchers to study the dynamics of text production and revision that will help spur the development of process-oriented tools and methodologies in writing assessment and instruction.

Background: Instructors in STEM fields help prepare students to be effective communicators in the workplace, partially through instruction of professional genres such as client-facing reports. At the same time, class sizes are increasing, and writing assessment often falls to teaching assistants (TAs). Literature review: Research suggests that TAs possess a maturing but inchoate sense of writing in their field, which potentially complicates their ability to deliver quality feedback. This study uses frame semantics, a form of discourse analysis, to probe TAs for their beliefs about writing in statistics. Research questions: 1. When asked to describe the function and role of writing in statistics, what lexical verbs do TA informants use? 2. What frames are invoked by those verbs? 3. How do the invoked semantic frames position writing in relation to disciplinary and professional work in the field? Research methodology: This study interviewed three TAs from an introductory statistics course about their perceptions of writing in statistics. Frame semantics was used to analyze TA responses. Results: Less experienced TAs tended to perceive writing as a means of presentation, which entailed a weak sense of the role of rhetoric in technical communication and a muddied understanding of writing assessment. The more advanced TA perceived writing as a means of contextualizing statistical evidence for particular audiences. Conclusion: Due to their maturing perceptions of writing in their disciplines, TAs might not possess the ability to deliver quality formative feedback. One means of support for these TAs may be opportunities to discuss assessment decisions with one another, thereby calibrating against available expectations and rubrics.

This study presents a systematic review of the last decade of research published in Business and Professional Communication Quarterly , using PRISMA guidelines and bibliometric analysis. The review analyzes publication and citation trends, key contributors, and emerging themes. The research highlights how the field has evolved in response to global crises, technological advancements, and shifts in social dynamics. By exploring key themes such as virtual team communication, social presence in online learning, and the integration of emerging technologies, the study provides a comprehensive assessment of the journal’s contributions from 2014 to 2024. It also identifies future research directions.

• AI can offer useful writing feedback when used combined with peer review. • AI and peer responses were often similar and mutually reinforcing. • When AI and peer responses differed, the perspectives were often complementary. • Evaluating AI feedback fostered student agency and AI literacy. Cycles of drafting and revising are crucial for student writers' growth, and formative assessment plays an important role. However, many teachers lack the time or resources to provide feedback on drafts. While research suggests that AI feedback is high enough quality to be used for draft feedback, especially when assignment-specific criteria are used (Steiss et al., 2024), it must be used in a human-centered process. AI has the potential to reduce educational equity gaps in writing support (Warschauer et al., 2023), but when narrowly implemented, technologies can deepen divides (Stornaiuolo, et al., 2023). Peer and AI Review + Reflection (PAIRR) combines peer review best practices with AI review in an approach that emphasizes student agency and reflection. Using a mixed methods approach, this study examined student perceptions of AI utility in the context of peer review. Results indicate that AI tools offer useful feedback when combined with peer review. Students found the similarity between AI and peer feedback reassuring, while also valuing their complementary perspectives. Moreover, by evaluating AI outputs, students developed AI literacy, gaining familiarity with AI feedback's affordances and limitations while learning ethical ways to use AI in their writing processes.

tudent-centered learning, gamification, and critical pedagogy represent some of the most prominent and increasingly influential paradigms in contemporary educational scholarship.Central to these frameworks is an expanded understanding of literacy, one which acknowledges and embraces literacy as broad, inclusive, and context dependent.The concept of "multiliteracies, " introduced by the New London Group (NLG) in 1996, sought to redefine literacy beyond "formalized, monolingual, [and] monocultural" understandings (61).This framework was developed in response to the growing diversity of communication channels and remains relevant in today's global political climate, especially given the spread of misinformation (Abrantes da Silva; Kalantzis and Cope; New London Group; Zapata, Kalantzis, and Cope).However, the rapid development of multimodality and the ubiquity of the internet, which the NLG could not have fully anticipated, necessitate a reevaluation of their framework in light of these developments (Anstey and Bull 15).This review examines how multiliteracies, as a theoretical framework and pedagogical approach, has evolved over the past three decades.Through an evaluation of three recent publications, it explores how the concept has been adapted, reshaped, and expanded to address the needs and perspectives of diverse groups.First, I briefly discuss critiques of the original NLG conception of multiliteracy from the perspectives of critical literacy and critical pedagogy, as these are often paired with the concept of multiliteracies.At first glance, multiliteracies, critical literacy, and critical pedagogy appear compatible, as all emphasize the importance of fostering a critical understanding of the world.The NLG's call for "efficacious pedagogy" explicitly includes the development of students' critical abilities to "critique a

Emerging consensus suggests faculty should teach students to use large language models (LLMs) rather than ban them, but it is not clear that students need detailed AI-related instruction. To investigate, we conducted two studies: Study 1 used survey and focus group methods to assess how such instruction influenced students’ perceptions, while Study 2 used rater evaluation to examine how AI use affected message quality. Study 1 found no meaningful impact on perceptions. Study 2 found that instruction did not affect ratings, but genAI use did—messages composed with LLM assistance received higher evaluations than those without it. We conclude with recommendations for genAI-focused classroom instruction.

Argumentation, one of the foundational pillars of writing instruction in K–12 schools, is consistently framed in literacy policy, curriculum, and assessment as a crucial skill youth need to participate in democratic deliberation. Yet the normative emphases in argument discourse on individual subjectivity, binary analysis, and competitive social scarcity stifle the development of the solidarity and relationality needed to counter rancorous political discord and to build equitable civic futures. In this conceptual essay, the authors offer a reimagined paradigm and practice of argument that fosters empathetic thinking and mutuality, moving away from the conceptualization of argument as solitary edifice and toward a vision of argument as collective architecture. Drawing upon lessons from global communicative traditions and recent turns in literacy scholarship toward participatory design, multimodality, and critical speculation, the authors provide five guiding principles for the Argument Writing as Architecture (AWA) framework, share vignettes from classroom and community learning spaces to illustrate its utility, and propose strategies for its implementation in K–12 classrooms.

The proliferation of AI tools for text editing and generation has raised challenging but also interesting questions for writing classes. In this paper, we report on our experiences with an exercise exploring the use of AI in an academic writing class. We first outline our conceptualization of the writing process, breaking down the skills that students need to master the complex task of writing, visualized as a ‘writing pie’. This breakdown allows us to critically assess the capabilities of AI tools against our understanding of writing as a human process. We then share our experiences with an exercise with ChatGPT in an academic writing class, where students evaluate a text with respect to its academic style and suggest improvements. Students then compare their own suggestions to those made by ChatGPT and critically evaluate the output. We include both instructors’ and students’ evaluations to reflect on whether the inclusion of such exercises can aid in achieving the course’s learning outcomes. We share three key takeaways: (1) there is value to having students work with AI; (2) critical evaluation of AI output is key; (3) activities with AI should be evaluated against learning goals.

In this article I discuss some of the issues that scholars are and aren’t writing about in relation to the recent resurgence in contract grading, and reflect on my own experience using contract grading in composition and other classes. I come to the topic as a scholar and university teacher in rhetoric and composition, though my discussion certainly is relevant to teachers in many disciplines and institution types. My aim is to offer an analysis of the benefits and drawback of the “new” contract grading, with special attention to what I call the “more is better” mantra that informs many current iterations of contract grading.

Multilingual writing is a challenging process that requires adjusting to academic and cultural demands. Studies of multilingual writers acknowledge the need for learners to self-regulate their cognition, affect, and actions as they write. Scholarship in educational psychology emphasizes socially regulated learning, suggesting that the regulation of learning is facilitated or hindered not only by the self but also by others. There is, therefore, a need to examine how developments in educational psychology and multilingual writing inform efforts to promote language learners’ writing skills. This article introduces a theoretical model of self- and socially regulated multilingual writing that can guide empirical research. The narrative literature review method was used to inform the design of the model. The review revealed that self- regulated writing by multilingual writers involves activating background knowledge and motivational beliefs, which then lead to decisions about strategies to employ to accomplish a writing task. The review also identified effective processes of socially regulated writing, including cognitive strategy instruction and formative assessment practices, particularly feedback. Finally, the review surfaced gaps in the literature that could be addressed, including how multilingual writers interpret writing tasks, manage their time and environment, deal with distractions, respond to feedback, seek help, and reflect on their successes and failures.

To meet the current trends in higher education, there is accountability on EAP programmes to prepare and assess students’ access to higher education. Thus, multimodal tasks including integrated writing (IW) assessments have seen a resurgence because they arguably closely mirror academic writing. However, test practicality constraints and variability in the use and format of these assessments mean rating scales often fall short in substantiating the central claims of IW assessment. We developed an integrated reading-writing scale taking into account reading-writing requirements and empirical research on IW tests designed to assess readiness for first-year humanities and social science courses. We approached test development as part of the ongoing validation efforts, detailing the considerations involved in the scale development process. We argue that alignment with academic writing requirements should guide the development of IW tests, thereby acknowledging and comprehending nuances of academic writing. The paper demonstrates considerations and decisions in scale design as the validation process from the start, which is a reminder that assessment is not just a quantitative exercise but a multifaceted process. • The design of a rating scale for first-year undergraduate academic writing is detailed. • Emphasis is placed on the role of reading in integrated writing scales. • Academic argumentation, rather than solely source-use mechanics, is considered. • Implications for construct operationalisation in academic evaluations are offered.

Abstract This article describes a literature assignment that imposes short, defined limits on student writing to improve two thorny processes: writing and grading. For students, these limits improve student learning by streamlining the invention process and providing iterative practice in disciplinary skills; for faculty, these limits make assessment more purposeful, rewarding, and efficient.

This article reports on a qualitative assessment of intercultural competence (IC) in U.S. first-year writing (FYW) courses designed to increase intercultural exposure and interaction among domestic and international students. To measure students’ intercultural development via a series of reflective writings, we designed two innovative qualitative analysis tools: a grounded-theory coding scheme and a mapping procedure aligned to the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity. Our results show that qualitative assessment of reflective writing reveals dynamic, complex IC development trajectories, displaying nonlinearity, nondiscrete phases, and development within phases. Specifically, we noted that reflective writing helped students engage with and become attuned to aspects of cultural difference. Affordances of the FYW context indicated that students strongly engaged the cognitive domain of IC, and that this domain appears to be activated by reflective writing.

The study hypothesized that employees better receive messages containing inclusive forms. A review of the existing literature on inclusive language and its impact on employee well-being and organizational innovation was conducted. As studies worldwide show, inclusive language can: enhance the sense of belonging to an organization, provide a sense of security, and increase engagement. Inclusive language can lead to higher levels of employee creativity and innovation, and also reduce the likelihood of burnout. In our study, we examined whether inclusive language is understandable and can influence the organisation's perception and employee engagement. To this end, we tested three versions of a message: exclusive, non-inclusive, and inclusive – on a sample of 1375 working individuals using the Computer-Assisted Web Interview (CAWI) method in collaboration with IPSOS. Contrary to popular belief, inclusive language was not perceived as more difficult to understand. However, it did influence the assessment of the organization's friendliness. The study indicates that inclusive language can be a valuable asset for organizations.

Delineating a nuanced distinction between high-pressure and high-stakes scenarios, this study introduces the Measure of Interpersonal Apprehensions in High-Stakes Situations (MIPHSS), a sophisticated assessment instrument designed to comprehensively evaluate the direct, and mediating, effects of interpersonal apprehension (IpA) on the behavior (BA) and performance apprehension (PA) of professionals operating in high-stakes contexts. Additionally, the study explores the moderating effects of gender and behavioral and communication training (B&CT ) on these relationships. The hypotheses were empirically tested using SmartPLS-3, employing a sample of 210 professionals operating within high-stakes environments. The findings show a direct positive impact of interpersonal apprehension on both behavioral and performance apprehension, with behavioral apprehension identified as a mediating factor in the relationship between interpersonal and performance apprehension. Notably, the moderating effect of gender was statistically insignificant. Conversely, B&CT exhibited a moderately significant impact on mitigating performance apprehension in professions characterized by heightened stakes.

As part of the Association for Business Communication Student Case Competition, this article features a case study written by ABC member Rachel Dolechek. The case was blind reviewed and selected by the ABC Student Competition Committee. ABC membership utilized the case in their classrooms throughout 2024 and submitted top student examples for the 2024 Case Writing Competition. A submission from Addie Hileman, sponsored by Kelley O’Brien, was selected as the top student case writer after evaluation by the ABC Student Competition Committee and a marketing business professional. The student’s message serves as a teaching example within this article.

When students submit written assignments for assessment, they are generally trusted to have completed these honestly, and to have benefitted from the opportunity to learn. Academic integrity breaches are sometimes detected during the assessment process. Some common examples of integrity breaches during students’ academic writing include contract cheating, the unauthorised use of GenAI technology for completing assignments, and using AI tools to disguise existing work so that it appears to be original. None of these are new phenomena. Processes and procedures should be in place for managing suspected academic misconduct cases detected during the assessment process. But what happens when academic misconduct is detected retrospectively, sometimes after a student has moved degree programmes or graduated? This position paper sets out the case for universities and other academic institutions having procedures in place to deal with historic academic misconduct. It provides examples of how institutions can become aware of misconduct, including through whistleblowing and through development of more effective detection software. The authors bring together legal and educational expertise to suggest considerations that individual institutions should make towards future policy development. The discussion considers that students must be supported and prepared for success, but that institutions cannot ignore the reputational risks associated with cases of historic misconduct.

This teaching practice paper shows how students may choose to work with ChatGPT, generative AI and Large Language Models (LLMs) to produce essays and written assessment solutions in a manner that may be considered as either acceptable or as a breach of academic integrity depending on individual and institutional views. Following a brief introduction to how chatbots work, case study examples show how modified prompts can be used to generate writing in alternative styles, how a writing tutor review can be simulated, and how LLMs can be run locally and without Internet access. The paper is intended to inform academic writing tutors, instructors, and assessors what is possible using generative AI for writing as of January 2024. It is not positioned to make a judgement regarding what is acceptable, but rather to illustrate how technically proficient users can accomplish more than is often indicated by writing beginner level prompts for a chatbot. Such techniques are accessible to many students and the Academic Writing Development community will need to consider its response.

The standards and guidelines for quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG), define, within the standard 1.1, that higher education institutions (HEIs) need to have public internal Quality Assurance (QA) policies that effectively support academic integrity and are battling academic fraud, among other points (ENQA et al., 2015). On a national level (standard 3.6), QA agencies need to assure the integrity of their activities, in that way assuring that the national higher education (HE) systems are reliable, resilient and fit for purpose. When it comes to student involvement in QA, students are becoming increasingly engaged in QA activities as equal partners (ESU, 2020); however, the extent of their involvement in the matters of academic integrity on a national level still varies based on the national legislation and the activities covered by national QA agencies. Some countries, such as Ireland and Croatia, do involve students in discussions about academic integrity, prevention of academic misconduct, and implementation of different methods to preserve academic values within the curricula. In this paper, we have described the differences between the two mentioned national systems in terms of legislation, practices in preserving academic integrity within the Quality Assurance (QA) of higher education, and students’ reflections based on the information available at the webpages of the respective NUSs (Union of Students in Ireland and Croatian Students’ Council). In Ireland, the national QA Agency, Quality and Qualifications Ireland, has formed a National Academic Integrity Network (NAIN), and is directly involved in monitoring academic integrity practices and preventing academic misconduct, with the possibility of persecuting said misconduct. NAIN’s members include students who engage through their NUS - Union of Students in Ireland (USI), and who actively contribute to co-creation of policies and practices related to academic integrity. The student members receive appropriate training and are able to train and organise capacity-building activities for other students. The students also organise different activities on their own, to raise awareness on the need for battling academic misconduct such as contract cheating. In Croatia, the national QA Agency, Agency for Science and Higher Education (ASHE), is monitoring academic integrity through institutional self-assessment reports within internal QA evaluations, while the Law on Students’ Council and Other Students’ Organisations defines the position of students’ ombudspersons at each HEI, independently from the QA system. Students’ ombuds are students who do not receive training, but are able to request institutional reports. They are selected for a period of 1 year by the institutional students’ representation body, and they can help other students in protection of their rights in disciplinary processes. QQI and ASHE were interviewed as part of this research, and the findings indicate that QQI was much more successful in terms of engaging students in academic integrity-related topics, while ASHE does not have a responsibility to independently work on this topic with students, although they periodically participate in activities related to academic integrity. Students involved in QQI’s NAIN Network are independent and they understand the academic integrity policy well. Both the agencies reiterated the importance of students’ involvement in academic integrity and the need for educating students on these topics within their study cycles. Students who are overall most engaged in academic integrity are already active students’ representatives, which means that additional efforts need to be made in order to ensure all students understand this topic.

This article presents a constructivist writing placement framework, developed from the study of two pilot iterations of a local writing placement mechanism at a large public research university. Through preliminary analysis of data from these pilots, we present a model of constructivist writing placement and demonstrate how it helps move conceptualizations of student agency as primarily housed within student exercise of choice toward more robust understandings and facilitation of student agency via placement. Extending recent calls to reconsider methodological traditions like directed self-placement to more explicitly account for educational equity issues, our two pilot assessments illustrate how we might reposition student agency within writing placement as emergent from situational interactions with faculty and the institutions they represent, rather than merely authorized by them.

Students’ proficiency in constructing sentences impacts the writing process and writing products. Linguistic demands in writing differ in terms of both student characteristics and measurement features. To identify various syntactic demands considering these features, we conducted a meta-analysis examining the relationships between syntactic features (complexity and accuracy) and writing performance (quality, productivity, and fluency) and moderating effects of both student characteristics and measurement features. A total of 109 studies (effect sizes: 871; the total number of participants: 24,628) met the inclusion criteria. Results showed that there was a weak relationship for syntactic accuracy (r = .25) and complexity (r = .16). Writers' characteristics, including grade level and language proficiency, and measurement features, writing genres, writing outcomes, whether the writing task is text-based or not, and type of syntactic complexity measures, were significant moderators for certain syntactic features. The findings highlighted the importance of writer and measurement factors when considering the relationships between linguistic features in writing and writing performance. Implications were discussed regarding the selection of syntactic features in assessing language use in writing, gaps in the literature, and significance for writing instruction and assessment. • Aimed to depict the relationships between syntactic features and writing performance. • Found weak relationships between syntactic features and writing outcomes. • Relationships vary as a function of student characteristics and measurement features. • Noun phrase complexity might be more valid than some traditional syntactic complexity measures. • Findings have important implications for writing assessments.

This article assesses the data practices of Grammarly, the prominent AI-assisted writing technology, by applying data principles that advocate for empowering Indigenous data sovereignty. The assessment is informed by the authors’ work with an Inuit tribal organization from rural Arctic Alaska that generated data and metadata about potentially sacred tribal activities. Their analysis of Grammarly's large-language modeling practices demonstrates how technical communication can hold businesses to principled data practices created by Indigenous nations and communities that understand how to create more just futures.

The use of subordination enables language users to achieve syntactic efficiency by allowing them to connect ideas in temporal/logical relation. Although the importance of subordination has been recognized in previous research on second language (L2) writing, it has been typically assessed with global indices that measure overall ratio of subordination. In order to capture more nuanced patterns in the development of L2 writing, this study measures the sophistication of subordination, considering subordination type (adverbialization, complementization, relativization) and finiteness (finite, nonfinite). Our natural language processing analysis of 6,566 timed impromptu essays using the Subordination Sophistication Analyzer 1.0 showed that higher-proficiency L2 learners used more subordination, and, importantly, their patterns of use differed by subordination type and finiteness. Whereas the amount of adverbialization and relativization increased along with proficiency regardless of finiteness, the use of complementization increased only for nonfinite clauses. The broader impacts of this study for education and assessment are discussed.

Although writing-across-the-curriculum (WAC) programs have been commonplace since the 1970s, the focus has largely been at the level of assessment and programmatic development and less on the instructors, particularly graduate teaching assistants (TAs) who adopt these practices. In this article, we describe a pilot WAC graduate-level course in writing pedagogy that our institution developed as part of our recent membership in the Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning (CIRTL). We also share how one science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) graduate student revised her approach to assignment design, feedback, and assessment for a general education course and deepened her understanding of herself as an instructor as well as her students. We end by reflecting on how training in writing pedagogy can support graduate student identity development and improve student learning.

ABSTRACT Argumentation theory tends to treat the distinction between intentional and unintentional fallacies—sophisms and paralogisms—as unimportant for the evaluation of argumentation. The article author believes this is so because argumentation theory tends to be focused on the epistemic functions of argumentation and fallacious arguments pose the same threat to the production of epistemic goods whether they are intentional or not, so the distinction is not needed for the epistemic evaluation of argumentation. This article argues that argumentation has a special connection to respect for autonomy, one that enables it to also produce distinctly moral goods. Sophisms, but not paralogisms, spoil these goods. Worse—sophisms produce potentially continuing moral harms, while paralogisms do not. Therefore, the paralogism/sophism distinction should be reintegrated into argumentation theory’s evaluative toolbox.

Introduction: As demand for cannabis edibles increases worldwide, researchers have called for evidence-based packaging and labeling. To assist in these efforts, this integrative review focused on two questions. 1. What aspects of edibles packaging and labeling has the empirical literature covered across disciplines, and how? 2. How might professional communication researchers build on that empirical literature, addressing consumer and industry needs? Research methodology: The methods followed Whittemore and Knafl, who described five stages for integrative reviews: problem identification, literature search, data evaluation, data analysis, and presentation. These methods, supplemented with guidance from Arksey and O'Malley, involved searches in seven relevant databases, producing 341 total returns. The final corpus consisted of 25 empirical studies. I constructed tables of these studies to facilitate iterative comparisons and synthesis. Results/discussion: The final corpus covered five aspects of packaging and labeling: label accuracy; visual content, appeal, and compliance; comprehension of serving size and dosage; perceptions of warnings; and possible enhancements through innovative technologies. The most common intervention types were laboratory analyses (n = 8), followed by surveys paired with experimental tasks (n = 7) and content analyses (n = 4), two of which included a compliance audit. Conclusions and further research: Based on current literature, more empirical studies are needed overall as well as more geographic and linguistic coverage. These needs align with our field's calls for more experimental and quasi-experimental research, alongside long-standing commitments to translation and localization, including participatory localization. As in other fields, future studies should emphasize child and youth protection as well as label accuracy.

Introduction: Research shows that empathy is a core competence of communication professionals. Still, the pedagogy of including empathy in professional communication curricula has been underexposed in the literature. About the case: This article describes the development and evaluation of a course aimed at increasing students’ empathy competence in the final year of a Dutch bachelor-level communication program. A detailed description of the course is provided. Situating the case: The course operationalizes a recent model of empathy competence in professional communication settings. It focuses on empathy-related skills, knowledge, and attitudes. Experiential learning and student-led discussions are core elements in the course. Methods/approach: The course was taught in two different classes (N = 47). Student evaluations and reflections included standard institutional course assessment data, a report from an institution-led student panel evaluation, and student reflections during coursework as well as before, immediately after, and two years after the course. Results/discussion: The course was evaluated very positively in the institutional course assessment and panel evaluation. The student reflections show that students had a great appreciation for the course overall, as well as for specific course elements. The course made them aware of the complexity and multifaceted nature of empathy, and had a profound impact on their professional and personal identity. Conclusion: This article demonstrates the effectiveness of a course designed to develop empathy competence in communication professionals and advocates for future research to explore long-term effects and cross-industry applications.