English for Academic Purposes (EAP)
Examen Parcial
A discourse community is a knowledge community which shares social conventions and mechanism to hold the members together[v3]. A discourse com[YC4] munity is characterized by specific values, aims, expectations, and language-using practices (Bizzel, 1986, 1992; Candlin, 1997; Gunnarson, 1997; Herzberg, 1986; Ivanic, 1998; Reid, 1993; Swales, 1990; cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010[v5]). Bizzel (1992) and Harris (1989) also state that the notion of discourse community emerges from the concepts of speech community and interpretive community (cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p. 12[YC6] ).
¨This program design took into account what is known about factors that influence teacher learning (Putnam & Borko, 2000), including teacher beliefs as filters (Pajares, 1992),the importance of interactions in a discourse community (Soltis, 1981, Putnam & Borko, 2000, Regan-Smith, 1994), […]¨.(Wenzlaff & Wieseman, 2004)[YC7]
Discourse community is a high frequency term used in ELT [YC8] since teachers have gained a deep and critical position in their professional practices. Due to this fact, teachers meet Swales´ (1990) basic criteria for a discourse community: common goals, participatory mechanisms, information exchange, community-specific genres, highly specialized terminology and high general level of expertise (cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010).
Reference
Pintos, V., & Crimi,Y. (2010). Unit 1: Building up a Community of Teachers and Prospective Researchers. Retrieved September 2010, from http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=6856
1
Lengua Inglesa Especializada I
English for Academic Purposes (EAP)
Examen Parcial
Wenzlaff, T. L., & Wieseman, K. C. (2004). Teachers need teachers to grow. Teacher Education Quarterly. Retrieved October 2009, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200404/ai_n9349405
Professionalism
Professionalism is the conduct, aims and qualities that characterize a professional. Banfi (1997) states that there is ¨certain core criteria[YC10] ¨ for people to be professionals: to provide a social service, to trust in their intellectual skills, to have a long period of specialized training and to be autonomous and involved in decision- making issues (cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p. 28).
¨ Some authors have advocated sustained programs of school-level professional
development under the aegis of "the professional learning community" (Boyd & Hord,
1994; Hord, 1997; Hord, 1998; WaId & Castleberry, 2000).( Howley & Howley, 2005)
Teaching has developed not only into a scientific field but also a scientific profession. In order to achieve professionalism along the teaching practices, teachers are expected to fulfil certain social and intellectual requirements. Professionalis[YC11] in ELT goes beyond transmitting knowledge and training skill, it is also a matter of producing knowledge to become a professional teacher. [YC12]
Reference List.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/professionalism
Pintos, V., & Crimi,Y. (2010). Unit 1: Building up a Community of Teachers and Prospective Researchers. Retrieved September 2010, from http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=6856
Howley, A., & Howley, B. C. (2005) High-quality teaching: Providing for rural teachers´ professional development. The Rural Educator. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4126/is_200501/ai_n13591361
2
Academic definitions | |||||
Name and Surname: | Topic: | ||||
Title: | |||||
Dimension | Criteria | Points | |||
LAYOUT | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | (5 to 20) |
Format | No headers, no page numbers, no clear margins. Spacing problems. Inappropriate font. | Header included. Page numbers absence. Spacing problems. | Header and page numbers included. Spacing problems. Inappropriate font. | Clear paper’s presentation. There are page numbers. Respected margins. Correct spacing and type & size of font. 1.5 or double interlining. | 2 |
Header | Not included. | Included. Too much information. | Included. Not well balanced. | Included. Precise info is given. Well balanced. | 1 |
Title | Not included. | Included. Not appealing. Underlined, highlighted or italicized. | Included. Appealing. Underlined, highlighted or italicized. | Included. Appealing. Centered. | 2 |
References | Not mentioned. Plagiarism. | Mentioned vaguely. Not on a new sheet of paper. Not clear use of references or erroneous sources acknowledgement | Not clear use of references or erroneous sources acknowledgement. | Sources cited clearly in a reference list at the end of the paper. APA style. | 2 |
In-text citations | Not included. Plagiarism. | Little use of in-text citations. Incorrect use of required style. | Included. Not well balanced. Repeated pattern. (e.g. too many quotes, only paraphrasing, etc). | Included. Well balanced. Different techniques applied. It is read smoothly. | 2 |
CONTENT | (7 to 40) | ||||
Data analysis | Not clear analysis. Relationships & comparisons cannot be followed. | Brief. Not substantial. Some connections can be followed. | Clear. Good analysis. No evidence presented. Inversion. Hedging. Conditionals. | Very good. Clear analysis. Comparisons can be established. Evidence is provided. Inversion. Hedging & conditionals. | 2 |
Terminology/ Word choice | Difficult to follow. Not understandable. Imprecise language. No acronyms clarification. | Inappropriate terminology. Little clarification. Some terms are not academic. | Legible terminology. Clarification. More academic style. Effective. | Legible terminology. New terms clarification. Effective vocabulary. Good use of connectors. Academic style. | 2 |
Spelling | Full of errors. Unreadable. | Many errors. Some parts unreadable. | Few errors. Readable. | All words are spelled correctly. | 4 |
Sentence variety | Many sentence fragments. Same pattern and length. | Some sentence fragments. Same pattern & length. | Most sentences are complete and varied in pattern & length. | Complete sentences in a variety of patterns and lengths. | 2 |
Organization | Vague ideas. Long & confusing intro. Unrelated development. Blurred conclusion. | Some ideas connected to each other. Purpose established. No transitions. Main point presented. Two of the three parts are not clear or too long. | Connected ideas. Clear purpose. Marked transitions. One of the three parts is not clear or too long. | Connected ideas: supporting the main topic. Clear and concise introduction. Clear development: good clarification of major points. Clear conclusion. | 2 |
Punctuation | Frequent and major errors that obscure meaning. | Some frequent or major errors: Readers’ confusion. | A few errors. | No punctuation errors. | 3 |
Paragraph length | Few or no paragraphs relate to the topic. Not balanced: too long & too short paragraphs are presented. | Some paragraphs relate to the topic. Not balanced: too long or too short paragraphs are presented. | Most paragraphs are related to the topic. Well balanced. | Paragraph length has been respected & achieved. Smooth. Clear and precise. | 3 |
Grammar | Grammar choices are confusing. Mixture of tenses. | Grammar choices sometimes confuse the readers. | Appropriate grammar choice. No meaning interference. | Completely appropriate grammar choice: Help readers understand meaning. | 3 |
Details | No or little details (such as explanations, examples, etc) to support & explain the topic. | Some accurate details. Do not always support topic. | Accurate info that supports the topic. | Accurate and relevant info that fully support the topic. | 2 |
Tone & audience | Unclear & inappropriate tone. Audience not considered. | Inconsistent tone. Incomplete idea of audience | Appropriate tone. Audience is considered. | Appropriate & consistent tone. Audience correctly identified. | 2 |
Definition presentation | Non-academic and invalid definitions provided. Unclear construct of interpretations. Inappropriate terminology used. Ideas are not relevant or are out of subject. Not clear relation between theory and pratice. No examples in context. | Non-academic but valid definitions provided. Unclear construct of interpretations. Appropriate terminology used. Ideas are not relevant or are out of subject. Not clear relation between theory and pratice. Register is appropriate. Unclear examples in context. | Academic and valid definitions provided. Clear construct of interpretations. Appropriate terminology used. Some ideas are not relevant or are out of subject. Not clear relation between theory and pratice. Register is appropriate. Details are enough. Examples in context. | Academic and valid definitions provided. Clear construct of interpretations. Appropriate terminology used. Main idea is clearly stated and supporting clauses are relevant and scholar. Register is appropriate. Details are enough. Examples in context: Clear. | 2 |
Total | 36/64 | ||||
We’re afraid you need to work harder on academic requirements. There are two aspects that should be clear by now:
No plagiarism allowed (copy-pasting is not allowed)
Format and layout are a must.
Please, get ready for the make-up test.
Your mark is 2 (two)
[YC1]I’m afraid this is not a header. And this is not the info required.
[YC2]Check placement. Try and think of a title that represents your paper.
[v3]Too similar to the original… almost plagiarized…
[YC4]Why not it is? So as not to sound to repetitive.
[v5]Just by saying it has been cited somewhere else, it doesn’t mean you can copy-paste the original words.
[YC6]Do not forget to go to Formato/parrafo/interlineado/ doble.
[YC7]Is this a block quote? Check format, please.
[YC8]Clarify acronyms.
[YC9]Why is this entry here? It is not clear.
[YC10]Page number?
[YC11]Spelling.
[YC12]No clear examples in context provided. No clear definitions. You have to work on content and format. Though, you do have the skill of being concise. Keep on working.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario