Book Review: Academic Writing for Graduate Students

I have several ESL writing related books that I am in the process of reading. I figured that I would use this space to keep track of them and record my impressions of them. So here's the first:

Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Tasks and Skills (Second Edition). By John M. Swales and Christine B. Feak. Published by University of Michigan Press (2004).

THE BACKSTORY

I first learned of this book in March while attending the 2007 TESOL convention in Seattle. I attended a forum on writing assistance for international students. Although I don't teach graduate students, many of my current students have already finished an undergraduate degree and have come to the USA to pursue graduate work. It's my job to help them improve their English so that they will be ready for graduate study at an English-speaking university. So for that reason, I figured that I would give the session a try.

As it was, I thoroughly enjoyed it. The panel included writing teachers from several different English-speaking universities who have large international (non-native English speaking) graduate students. They discussed the challenges and success to writing programs and what ESL teachers can do to facilitate more favourable university policy towards ESL learners, and better writing skills among international graduate students.

While they discussed their experiences, I wrote ferociously. I was immediately hit with the desire to take these suggestions back to our program and our students. Only there was a snag: I don't teach the writing course for international graduate students. Nevertheless, I figured the least I could do was pass on the material and suggestions. That night, at dinner, I sat at a table with my boss and discussed my suggestions for the graduate writing course and asked whether I would be able to discuss my ideas with the current instructor. "We no longer have an instructor for that course. She has retired, and we are looking for a new teacher," he explained. He suggested that I contact the professor overseeing that course, who just happens to be my former boss (I was her research assistant) and my thesis chair.

She wholeheartedly agreed to assign me to the course, and although it means extra work for me this fall, it is an opportunity I do not want to pass up since it will be a valuable experience for me. And although I have never used a textbook for any of the ESL writing courses that I have taught, I figured I would try out the text that was recommended in the TESOL forum. I ordered the text for my class, and the publisher sent me a desk copy that I have been reading over the past couple of week.

I frequently tell my students (and even my professors) that I don't like to read, that I got through an undergraduate degree in English literature without much reading, and that I finished a Master's degree in Teaching English with even less reading, and that I have nearly completed my PhD coursework without so much as reading a single textbook (I skim a lot). But despite all that, I actually read this book (well at least most of it - I'm not much for reading boring examples). But I mention this to say that I honestly did read through this text and I feel fairly good about its potential as a tool for me and the graduate students in the writing course I will teach this fall.

THE REVIEW

Part of what attracted me to Academic Writing for Graduate Students (AWG) was its reputation as a strong language guide. There is a current trend among second language (L2) writing texts to focus on rhetoric and writing process just as first language (L1) texts so. I fully support the need for rhetorical and process instruction (if fact, if this university had a PhD in rhetoric, I would be studying that rather than IP&T); however, L2 learners need more than just the rhetoric and process learning; they also need to learn the language of writing.

Imagine my surprise then, when I received my copy of AWG and read, in the introduction, "The general approach [of this book] is analytical and rhetorical" (p. 2). I was shocked, dismayed, and even felt a little betrayed. Here I had been duped into buying a text that was no different than the other L2 writing texts that I had seen in the past. It was going to ignore all the language needs (grammar, vocabulary, socio-linguistic appropriateness, and more) of my students and only focus on the types of writing that they could learn from a regular graduate research writing course.

I nearly stopped reading right there, but I held on and figured that regardless of my confused expectations, it had to have worth if enough people had recommended it to me. As it turns out, I misinterpreted the introduction. AWG is organized around rhetorical functions (i.e., writing general-to-specific, describing tables, summarizing), but each of those sections is chock full of language mini-lessons that describe how L2 writers can appropriately use English language to accomplish those tasks.

It is a dense text and contains a lot of language information, but its organization lends it to practical use. In fact, there are three aspects of its language focus that I really appreciate.

1. Much of its language discussion is supported by corpus research. This means that rather than state that many research papers use one grammatical form, or a particular vocabulary phrase, based on the authors personal anecdotes or impressions, instead this text cites research studies that have studied those very language questions. Corpus research is a hot new thing in applied linguistics, but for good reason. Rather than guess when we make claims about what kinds of words and structures we should teach language learners, corpus linguistics allows us to compile information from numerous real situations in order to help inform our recommendations and choices. It is an approach that L2, as well as L1, writers should greatly appreciate.
2. When the authors of this text discuss language use, they recognize that different disciplines have different standards and trends. They acknowledge the room for diversity, and in many cases, they do their best to cite corpus research in a variety of fields and compare them. Because I will be teaching students from a variety of graduate programs (and I am only familiar with writing from the Humanities and Education fields), I need a source that can help me to guide students from other fields.
   
3. Every time a new structural or vocabulary language topic is raised, the authors encourage writers to consult actual texts from their fields and discover how experts in their major use language to accomplish the particular task (or even if that particular task is relevant to that field of study). As a new graduate student, that is how I learned to write - by reading. Again, I joke about how I never read a book through graduate school, but I read numerous research articles. I paid attention to organization, patterns, vocabulary, structures and language. I still continue to do this, especially since I am now studying in the field of educational psychology and not just applied linguistics. I beleive in this method, and I am happy to see that the authors of this text agree; it will make it much easier for me to convince the students to adopt this approach.

It may seem premature for me to offer an evaluation of AWG. After all, I have yet to use it in the classroom. I do not know how students will receive it, and I do not know how I will feel about using a textbook for a writing course. However, at this point I am mildly optimistic (which is a huge leap for a realistic like me). I will be sure to revisit this topic in four month's time in order to compare my expectations with experience.