ENGLISH FOR MARKET RESEARCH REPORT WRITING: COURSE DESIGN

At undergraduate and postgraduate levels in business schools, lecturers often provide students with a suggested structure for a market research report assignment. Thereafter, the students are left to independently master the appropriate register and the technique of writing for this genre. While many students may learn to be good at business studies, they might fall short in writing despite having to produce several reports at university level. One of the reasons for this shortfall may be that some of the students may lack the confidence to produce reports which meet academic or professional standards in the English language. A short English for Specific Purposes (ESP) course that addresses the technical writing needs of business students as an option or add-on course to undergraduate and postgraduate business curricula could provide the simple solution. It could even be formalised as a credit bearing course to motivate students to undertake it.With a view to the above, as a pilot ESP module, a 15-hour English for Market Research Report Writing Skills course was designed to try and meet the specific needs of undergraduate market research students at the Warwick Business School (WBS). It was intended to be taught under the auspices of the Warwick Skills Certificate Programme at the University of Warwick in the United Kingdom (UK).

An interview with Joanna Suau from Infobip on the design of application programming interface (API) documentation

About Joanna Suau Joanna studied English literature and culture at the University of Silesia in Poland, where she was born. She did a technical writing postgraduate degree in the picturesque city of Krakow and moved to the U.K. in 2012, to work for shipping solutions provider Pierbridge, where she mainly focused on user guides and walkthroughs of various types of shipping applications. Interested in what makes an app tick, Joanna started learning programming language (JavaScript) and explored CSS and HTML in more detail. This is when she discovered her passion for writing clean and appealing developer-oriented documentation, and moved to the start-up company Moltin, to become a part of the Developer Success team. Joanna has changed industry, and currently works in the field of telecommunication. She works for a messaging services provider, Infobip, contributing content to their robust API solutions.

Investigating face-to-face and computer-mediated out-of-class collaboration in an English for Technical Writing course in Malaysia

<p>With the recent shift of emphasis to social learning and the proliferation of new technologies, collaborative writing and computer-mediated collaborative writing are gaining prominence in the second language learning context. Research has shown that collaborative writing leads to improved written outcomes as well as opportunities for language learning. However, few studies have investigated how learners collaborate and what the factors that foster effective collaboration are. These aspects of collaboration are especially important for longer-term tasks carried out in out-of-class contexts, where the instructor’s supervision is minimal. Similarly, research on the process of, and factors affecting, computer-mediated collaborative writing is still scarce. Using a qualitative approach, this study closely examines the process of face-to-face and computer-mediated out-of-class collaboration to identify both the features present in different modes of collaboration and the factors that affect the learners’ collaboration. Over the course of a 14-week semester, in the context of an English for technical writing course, two groups of learners collaborated in the face-to-face mode while another two groups of learners collaborated in the computer-mediated mode to complete an out-of-class writing task. Data were collected from multiple sources, including for the face-to-face groups: the groups’ self-recorded meetings, their numerous drafts of the task, and multiple interviews with individual group members; for the computer-mediated groups: the groups’ detailed ‘revision history’ of Google Docs, the chat histories of their synchronous interactions’ applications, Google Hangout and WhatsApp, as well as individual interviews with the group members about their experiences. The findings provide comprehensive insights into the intricate process of collaboration among the learners in both modes, specifically the interplay of different features and factors in shaping the collaboration of each group in each mode. In particular, although the groups in both modes of collaboration shared a number of common collaborative features, such as co-construction of task and peer assistance, a side-by-side examination revealed subtle but significant differences in the details and depth of the features of both modes. This leads to a clearer distillation of the affordances and constraints of each mode on out-of-class collaboration. The immediacy and physical presence of the face-to-face mode were found to encourage greater depth in discussion and peer support. On the other hand, the computer-mediated mode promoted peer editing and cultivated a stronger sense of joint ownership among the learners. Further, the findings also show the varying influences of other factors, such as the learners’ attitudes, their proficiency, and the role played by each group member in influencing the collaboration process. This study provides further understanding of the underexplored area of out-of-class collaboration, and the emerging area of computer-mediated collaborative writing. In addition, the findings of the study have many pedagogical implications for educators, especially in terms of preparation for learners, and consideration of other factors such as context and assessment, if they are looking to implement the collaboration approach beyond the confines of the classroom or in a computer-mediated mode.</p>

Investigating face-to-face and computer-mediated out-of-class collaboration in an English for Technical Writing course in Malaysia

<p>With the recent shift of emphasis to social learning and the proliferation of new technologies, collaborative writing and computer-mediated collaborative writing are gaining prominence in the second language learning context. Research has shown that collaborative writing leads to improved written outcomes as well as opportunities for language learning. However, few studies have investigated how learners collaborate and what the factors that foster effective collaboration are. These aspects of collaboration are especially important for longer-term tasks carried out in out-of-class contexts, where the instructor’s supervision is minimal. Similarly, research on the process of, and factors affecting, computer-mediated collaborative writing is still scarce. Using a qualitative approach, this study closely examines the process of face-to-face and computer-mediated out-of-class collaboration to identify both the features present in different modes of collaboration and the factors that affect the learners’ collaboration. Over the course of a 14-week semester, in the context of an English for technical writing course, two groups of learners collaborated in the face-to-face mode while another two groups of learners collaborated in the computer-mediated mode to complete an out-of-class writing task. Data were collected from multiple sources, including for the face-to-face groups: the groups’ self-recorded meetings, their numerous drafts of the task, and multiple interviews with individual group members; for the computer-mediated groups: the groups’ detailed ‘revision history’ of Google Docs, the chat histories of their synchronous interactions’ applications, Google Hangout and WhatsApp, as well as individual interviews with the group members about their experiences. The findings provide comprehensive insights into the intricate process of collaboration among the learners in both modes, specifically the interplay of different features and factors in shaping the collaboration of each group in each mode. In particular, although the groups in both modes of collaboration shared a number of common collaborative features, such as co-construction of task and peer assistance, a side-by-side examination revealed subtle but significant differences in the details and depth of the features of both modes. This leads to a clearer distillation of the affordances and constraints of each mode on out-of-class collaboration. The immediacy and physical presence of the face-to-face mode were found to encourage greater depth in discussion and peer support. On the other hand, the computer-mediated mode promoted peer editing and cultivated a stronger sense of joint ownership among the learners. Further, the findings also show the varying influences of other factors, such as the learners’ attitudes, their proficiency, and the role played by each group member in influencing the collaboration process. This study provides further understanding of the underexplored area of out-of-class collaboration, and the emerging area of computer-mediated collaborative writing. In addition, the findings of the study have many pedagogical implications for educators, especially in terms of preparation for learners, and consideration of other factors such as context and assessment, if they are looking to implement the collaboration approach beyond the confines of the classroom or in a computer-mediated mode.</p>

Technical Writing Difficulties Faced by High School Students in Dzongkha Subject

This study explores the technical difficulties and the causes of writing difficulties school students face in writing in Dzongkha. Using social constructivism, 16 participants (ten students and six teachers) were involved. In addition to document analysis, the participants were also interviewed to find the problems of writing in Dzongkha. The findings suggest that application of Dzongkha in its written form was one of the most difficult tasks among the four language skills. The writing difficulties faced by the students were the usage of correct spelling, grammar, vocabulary, word structure, sentence structure, paragraph structure, expression and handwriting. Among these, spelling was one of the most difficult parts while writing in Dzongkha. The causes of writing difficulties in Dzongkha were the poor foundation of Dzongkha writing and reading skills, low prestige of Dzongkha language/subject, time constraint, pronunciation related problems, limited resource/facility and professional support for the Dzongkha teachers, less career scope for Dzongkha background students and poor reading habit. It was also due to lack of additional Dzongkha medium based subject, inadequate modern ways of teaching learning strategies, and also because of minimal parents’ support, less personal interest and perseverance to learn and write in Dzongkha. The solutions to the writing problems were to give adequate time for Dzongkha subject, maintain reading and writing portfolios to enhance genres writing, teaching the clear meaning and concept of different words and terminologies having same pronunciation, and adequate teacher written response needs to be emphasized and implemented. Based on the findings of the study, recommendations to different stakeholders are also provided.

Regional Networks in Chinese Mathematics and Astronomy, 311–618 ce

This article offers a social and geographical network analysis of all attested works, authors, and practitioners in the mathematical sciences in China over the period of disunion and reunification from 311 to 618 ce. Inspired by Karine Chemla’s (2009) efforts to distinguish “different mathematical cultures” within the extant corpus of suan 筭/算 procedure texts, the goal is to explore a viable framework within which to break down the history of Chinese mathematics along different, pluralistic lines. What I find is that this period is home to distinct regional networks working in isolation from one another, and that situating authors within these networks helps explain continuities and discontinuities in their technical writing. This is evidence of plurality, but one that is incommensurable with Chemla’s “mathematical cultures,” so I offer it as an alternative means to the same historiographical ends. In examining what our historical subjects said and did about this plurality of traditions, however, we realize that it was as aberrant to them as the political disunion of which it was a product ‒ something to be rectified by “unification” (tongyi 統一), “integration” (tong 通), and, where necessary, force.