Article published In:
Literacies: Tertiary contextsCompiled and edited by Zosia Golebiowski
[Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 25:2] 2002
► pp. 29–47
Compiled and edited by Zosia Golebiowski
[Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 25:2] 2002
► pp. 29–47
General academic writing and discipline specific academic writing
References (26)
Buckingham, J. & Nevile, M. (1997). Comparing the citation choices of experienced academic writers and first year students. In Z. Golebiowski (Ed.) Policy and practice of tertiary literacy. Selected proceedings of the First National Conference on Tertiary Literacy: research and practice, (pp. 96–107). Melbourne: Victoria University of Technology.
Cadman, K. (1997). Thesis writing for international students: a question of identity? English for Specific Purposes, 16 (1), 3–14. 
Chafe, W. (1985). Linguistic differences produced by differences between speaking and writing. In D. Olson, N. Torrance & A. Hildyard (Eds) Literacy, language and learning: the nature and consequences of reading and writing (pp. 105–123). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chanock, K. (1997). Never say ‘I’?: the writer’s voice in essays in the humanities. In Z. Golebiowski & H. Borland (Eds.) Academic communication across disciplines and cultures. Selected proceedings of the First National Conference on Tertiary Literacy: research and practice (pp. 54–63). Melbourne: Victoria University of Technology.
Clark, H. H. & Haviland, S. E. (1977). Comprehension and the given-new contract. In R.O. Freedle (Ed.) Discourse production and comprehension (pp. 1–40). New Jersey: Ablex.
Cooper, M. M. & Holzman, M. (1988). Cohesion, coherence and incoherence. In M. Cooper & M. Holzman (Eds.) Writing as social action (pp. 94–108). Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook.
Crompton, P. (1992). Hedging in academic writing: some theoretical problems. English for Specific Purposes, 16 (4), 71–287.
Elliott, M. (1997). The teaching of academic discourse: collaboration between discipline lecturers and academic support staff at RMIT. In Z. Golebiowski & H. Borland (Eds.) Academic communication across disciplines and cultures. Selected proceedings of the First National Conference on Tertiary Literacy: research and practice (pp. 77–87). Melbourne: Victoria University of Technology.
Ferguson, G. (1997). Literacy in the disciplines: giving academics a language to talk about language. In Z. Golebiowski (Ed.) Policy and practice of tertiary literacy. Selected proceedings of the First National Conference on Tertiary Literacy: research and practice (pp. 161–166). Melbourne: Victoria University of Technology.
Garner, M. (1997). Some questions about integrated communication skills programs. In Z. Golebiowski (Ed.) Policy and practice of tertiary literacy. Selected proceedings of the First National Conference on Tertiary Literacy: research and practice (pp. 37–41). Melbourne: Victoria University of Technology.
Hallet, R. (1997). Promoting language skills through collaboration between content lecturers and language specialists. In Z. Golebiowski & H. Borland (Eds.) Academic communication across disciplines and cultures. Selected proceedings of the First National Conference on Tertiary Literacy: research and practice (pp. 88–102). Melbourne: Victoria University of Technology.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1989). Some grammatical problems in scientific English. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. Genre & Systemic Functional Studies, Series 5 (6), 13–37.
Halliday M.A.K. & Hasan R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Hamp-Lyons, L. (1991). Writer’s knowledge and our knowledge of the writer. In L. Hamp-Lyons (Ed.). Assessing second language writing in academic contexts (pp. 51–67). New Jersey: Ablex.
Horning, A. S. (1993). The psycholinguistics of readable writing. New Jersey: Ablex.
Howarth, P. (1996). How conventional is academic writing? Review of ELT, 6 (1), 192–204.
Ivanic, R. & Simpson, J. (1992). Who’s who in academic writing? In N. Fairclough (Ed.) Critical language awareness (pp. 141–1730. New York: Longman.
Kaldor, S., Herriman, M. & Rochecouste, J. (1997). Cross-disciplinary and discipline-specific discourse features in student academic writing. In Z. Golebiowski & H, Borland (Eds.) Academic communication across disciplines and cultures. Selected proceedings of the First National Conference on Tertiary Literacy: research and practice (pp. 198–208). Melbourne: Victoria University of Technology.
(1998). Tertiary student writing. A report for the collaborative ARC project ‘Framing Student Literacy: Aspects of cross-cultural communication in Australian universities’. Macquarie University, NSW: NCELTR.
Lakoff, G. (1972). Hedges: a study of meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. In Papers for the Eighth Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society Papers, Vol. 81. (pp. 183–228). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Martin, J. (1993). Literacy in science: learning to handle texts as technology. In M.A.K. Halliday & J. R. Martin Writing science (pp. 166–202). London: Falmer Press.
Skelton, J. (1997). The representation of truth in academic and medical writing. Applied Linguistics, 18 (2), 121–140.
Sodowsky, R. E. & Witte, S. P. (1983). Topical chains in high and low-quality informative texts of college freshman. Paper presented at the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Detroit.
Silyn-Roberts, H. (1997). The report and the essay: Are we muddling science and engineering undergraduates by asking them to write in two different genres? In Z. Golebiowski & H. Borland (Eds.) Academic communication across disciplines and cultures. Selected proceedings of the First National Conference on Tertiary Literacy: research and practice (pp. 240–247). Melbourne: Victoria University of Technology.
Swales, J. & Feak. C.B. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students: essential tasks and skills: a course for nonnative speakers of English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Vande Kopple, W. (1986). Given and new information and some aspects of the structures, semantics, and pragmatics of written texts. In C. Cooper & S. Greenbaum (Eds.) Studying writing: linguistic approaches (pp. 72–111). London: Sage.
Cited by (10)
Cited by ten other publications
Mathew, Priya & Deepali Bhatnagar
2019. A WID Collaborative Pedagogical Model in Computing. In Handbook of Research on Curriculum Reform Initiatives in English Education [Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design, ], ► pp. 159 ff. 
Clarke, Patricia, Daniel Schull, Glen Coleman, Rachael Pitt & Catherine Manathunga
2013. Enhancing professional writing skills of veterinary technology students: linking assessment and clinical practice in a communications course. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38:3 ► pp. 273 ff.
Johansen, Edda & Thomas Harding
2013. ‘So I forgot to use 1.5 line spacing! It doesn't make me a bad nurse!’ The attitudes to and experiences of a group of Norwegian postgraduate nurses to academic writing. Nurse Education in Practice 13:5 ► pp. 366 ff.
BASTURKMEN, HELEN
2012. Languages for Specific Purposes Curriculum Creation and Implementation in Australasia and Europe. The Modern Language Journal 96:s1 ► pp. 59 ff.
Vardi, Iris
2012. Developing students' referencing skills: a matter of plagiarism, punishment and morality or of learning to write critically?. Higher Education Research & Development 31:6 ► pp. 921 ff.
Vardi, Iris
2012. The impact of iterative writing and feedback on the characteristics of tertiary students' written texts. Teaching in Higher Education 17:2 ► pp. 167 ff.
Terraschke, Agnes & Ridwan Wahid
2011. The impact of EAP study on the academic experiences of international postgraduate students in Australia. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 10:3 ► pp. 173 ff.
Lee, Sook Hee (Susan)
2010. Command strategies for balancing respect and authority in undergraduate expository essays. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9:1 ► pp. 61 ff.
Gimenez, Julio
2008. Beyond the academic essay: Discipline-specific writing in nursing and midwifery. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7:3 ► pp. 151 ff.
O’Toole, Mitch
2004. What is Difficult to Read, Why Might This be So, and What Could, or Should, be Done About It?: An Overview of Section Two. In Missing the Meaning, ► pp. 161 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.