Academic Writing Development at the University Level

Written Communication Apr 2016

Academic Writing Development at the University Level

Shelley Staples Purdue University West Lafayette ; Jesse Egbert Brigham Young University ; Douglas Biber Northern Arizona University ; Bethany Gray Iowa State University

Abstract

Using the British Academic Written English corpus, this study focuses on the use of grammatical complexity features in university level texts written by first language (L1) English writers to demonstrate knowledge and perform other specialized tasks required of advanced academic writers. While the primary focus of the analysis is on writing development from first-year undergraduate to graduate students, we also consider interactions with discipline and genre. The study goes beyond most previous work on grammatical complexity in writing by investigating the use of phrasal as well as clausal features. The results show that as academic level increases, the use of phrasal complexity features in writing also increases. On the other hand, the use of clausal complexity features in student writing, particularly finite dependent clauses, decreases as academic level increases. Results further indicate that the extent of the differences across level is mediated by discipline and genre, reflecting patterns observed in research on disciplinary variation in professional academic writing.

Journal: Written Communication
Published: 2016-04-01
DOI: 10.1177/0741088316631527
Open Access: Closed
Topics: graduate education multilingual writers

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (4)

Markey et al. (2024)

Dense and Disconnected: Analyzing the Sedimented Style of ChatGPT-Generated Tex…

Written Communication
Fang et al. (2022)

Genre and Register Features of Sixth-Grade Students’ Factual Writing

Written Communication
Johnson (2019)

Representations of Students in Composition Scholarship

Pedagogy
Aull (2019)

Linguistic Markers of Stance and Genre in Upper-Level Student Writing

Written Communication

Cites in this index (2)

Crossley et al. (2011)

The Development of Writing Proficiency as a Function of Grade Level: A Linguist…

Written Communication
HASWELL (2000)

Documenting Improvement in College Writing

Written Communication

Also cites 29 works outside this index ↓

10.1007/s11145-007-9107-5

↗
10.1007/s11145-010-9264-9

↗
10.1017/CBO9780511621024

↗
10.1080/01638539209544806

↗
10.1075/scl.23

↗
10.1075/lic.14.1.02bib

↗
10.1017/CBO9780511814358

↗
10.1016/j.jeap.2010.01.001

↗
10.1075/scl.47.04bib

↗
10.1017/CBO9781139060998.006

↗
10.1017/CBO9780511920776

↗
10.5054/tq.2011.244483

↗
10.1002/tesq.84

↗
10.1093/applin/amu059

↗
10.1017/CBO9780511805226

↗
10.1075/ijcl.20.1.01egb

↗
10.1093/applin/ams024

↗
10.1075/scl.71

↗
10.1017/CBO9781139165785

↗
10.4324/9780203978122

↗
10.1016/j.esp.2007.06.001

↗
10.5054/tq.2011.240859

↗
Nesi H., Gardner S. (2012). Genres across the disciplines: Student writing in higher education. Cambridge, UK…

↗
10.1093/applin/amp044

↗
10.1016/j.jeap.2013.12.001

↗
10.1177/0142723709350531

↗
10.1002/tesq.91

↗
10.1016/j.linged.2008.06.004

↗
10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.004

↗

CrossRef global citation count: 142 View in citation network →