This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Allison, D. Articles by Wu Siew Mei Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Academic Writing: Whose Expectations?

National University of Singapore

Wu Siew Mei

National University of Singapore

The importance of 'critical thinking', along with 'creativity' and 'originality', has long been widely proclaimed in educational circles. In Singapore, many recent government pronouncements have also strongly emphasized the importance of creative and critical thinking in relation to curriculum development. Ironically, however, these calls for the enhancement of 'thinking skills' and 'critical enabling skills' may contain unexamined assumptions, often derived from prevailing managerial expectations. Partly for this reason, any language curriculum that seeks to enhance thinking must be ready to place its own assumptions and educational practices under especially careful scrutiny.

An important part of a reflective review of a language curriculum is to ascertain the views and expectations of students and teachers themselves. This paper reports on an investigation into teachers' and students' expectations about the academic writing that students undertake in an English Language curriculum at a Singapore university. Following a brief but critical overview of some issues affecting a writing curriculum, the paper develops a grounded description and comparison of student and teacher expectations, drawing upon a combination of questionnaire responses (88 students and 18 teachers) and detailed interviews (14 students and 14 teachers). Our account of this extensive discourse data characterizes some of the main ways in which research and writing tasks, feedback, guidelines and assessment practices are talked about, valued and procedurally implemented by different participants in the undergraduate curriculum. The closing discussion suggests some general implications for the development and evaluation of knowledge and skills in education.

RELC Journal, Vol. 32, No. 1, 52-72 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/003368820103200104


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?