Invisible Discourse Demystified:

A Pre-Use Evaluation of a New Rhetoric Coursebook in an EFL Context

Academic Writing: An Introduction, J Giltrow, R Gooding, D

Burgoyne & M Sawatsky, 3rd edn, ebook, Broadview Press, pp.
1 467.

By Bianca van de Water

This paper evaluates the suitability of a New Rhetoric

coursebook in relation to a hypothetical ESAP writing
programme for Dutch post-graduate students in the humanities
at Utrecht University. Like graduate students worldwide, they
grapple with the quandary of how to gain recognition in their respective discourse communities.
Academic writing performs a gatekeeping function in that recognition pivots on writing skills whereby
students need to master the sociolinguistic conventions of several academic genres (Loudermilk 2007,
p. 191). This has been compounded by the upsurge of English as the lingua franca in academe and the
pressure to publish in English-only journals (Prez-Llantada 2007, p. 218). This poses a considerable
obstacle for Dutch graduates since they have predominantly been acculturated to L1 discourse
practices. The key to success is to provide writing programmes that integrate English language
demands as well as language lacks. In this paper, I will argue for an eclectic approach to teaching
English academic writing, whereby the suggested coursebook, Academic Writing: An Introduction,
functions as a proposal for action. Although this textbook has considerable strengths in unveiling
invisible discourse practices, its weaknesses are equally formidable that careful consideration before
implementation is warranted.

Bianca van de Water

Academic Writing: An Introduction

Page 1 of 8

Content
Academic Writing: An Introduction is a scholarly work including an index, a references list, in-text
references to relevant research, and a number of authentic texts from the social sciences.
Furthermore, the authors write in a highly accessible style, using plain English to explain academic
concepts and avoiding unnecessary jargon. They integrate cognitive and sociocultural perspectives on
language learning in that the course contains a variety of learning activities including individual tasks,
pair and group work. These are inquiry-based activities which encourage student input in that there
are neither pre-determined answers nor correct responses in an answer key. The intended audience
comprises students, beginning and beyond (Giltrow et al. 2014, p. 20), however, the content might
be more suitable for graduates. The central foci are positioning and interpersonal metafunctions,
which are concepts that closely meet graduate students learning needs. This cohort typically lacks
awareness of their instructors as audience and rarely perceive the extent to which . . . academic
texts . . . are negotiated and strategic (Swales 1995, p. 9). Although post-graduate and undergraduate
students might share these language needs, according to Swales (Ibid.), the latter have other, more
pressing needs.

Research genres form the textual focus of the coursebook, which is divided into fourteen chapters.
The first chapter explains the theoretical framework, which is the premise that genres embody as well
as respond to the socio-political contexts that produce them (Giltrow et al. 2014, p. 26). Chapter 2
demonstrates that reproductive writing is a discipline-specific social activity whereby the writer takes
a position in relation to other researchers. Chapter 3 and 4 provide practice in writing summaries so
as to provide an overview as well as an assessment of cited sources. Chapter 5 explores the fine line
between presupposing versus asserting knowledge and aims to develop audience awareness through
think/read aloud techniques. Chapter 6 focusses on writing summaries to highlight a knowledge
deficit. Chapter 7 explores different approaches to writing definitions. Chapter 8 addresses various
aspects of writing introductions. Chapter 9 extends the development of audience awareness by

Bianca van de Water

Academic Writing: An Introduction

Page 2 of 8

exploring reading and interpretation theories. Chapter 10 explores the (mis)use of nominalisations.
Chapter 11 is concerned with tenor and contrasts the use of the passive voice with the discursive I.
Chapter 12 explores method sections and distinguishes between stylistic devices for quantitative and
qualitative research. Chapter 13 explains a variety of hedging devices. The last chapter focusses on
epistemic modality, and finishes with research ethics.

New Rhetoric Approach

The coursebook is informed by the New Rhetoric interpretation of genre and as such it aims to foster
informed perspectives on scholarly styles and situations (Giltrow et al. 2014, p. 34). This framework
de-emphasises linguistic realisations but highlights the purposes and functions of genres and the
attitudes, beliefs, values, and behaviours of the members of the discourse community within which
genres are situated (Flowerdew 2002, p. 91). New Rhetoric proponents argue that knowledge of social
contexts is the key to successful academic apprenticeship: the more students understand the
fundamental assumptions and aims of the community, the more they can evaluate the
appropriateness and effectiveness of their own language choices (Bazerman 1988, cited in Hyon 1996,
p. 699). The coursebooks authors perceive student writers as aspiring members of the academic
community, who are invited to join the research conversation (Giltrow et al. 2014, p. 34), on the
condition that they examine the rules of engagement in their respective social situations first.

The New Rhetoric approach is successfully realised in the coursebook in that it communicates
effectively why scholars write the way they do. This is achieved through genre analysis activities and
descriptions of how written language is a means of contributing to an ongoing conversation. For
example in chapter 2, the authors unpack different citation conventions to demonstrate that this is a
discipline-specific activity with the purpose of positioning oneself in relation to other researchers. The
descriptions are supported by language awareness activities whereby students study citation
conventions in different texts and contexts in order to deduct what the different academic disciplines

Bianca van de Water

Academic Writing: An Introduction

Page 3 of 8

perceive as particularly noteworthy. Such insights are more helpful than narrow-focus instructions on
plagiarism in that situational knowledge provides purpose and direction to future reading and writing
activities beyond the confines of the language classroom. Additionally, the wide focus on texts from
different disciplines reinforces awareness that genres are highly discipline-specific, and fosters
necessary caution before drawing conclusions about language use in ones own discipline.

Lack of Linguistic Focus

Nonetheless, Academic Writing: An Introduction has some considerable shortcomings. Foremost, it
lacks a strong linguistic focus on textual features of genres. The authors do not inform learners that
genres are distinct, each with unique generic structures and stages. They discuss social actions shared
by all research genres, but neglect to identify or describe any in detail. There is no mention of textual
structures, generic stages or communicative moves. This omission is problematic in relation to both
language demands and learner needs. Firstly, all genres have regularities which must be learned by
anyone who has ambitions of joining specialist discourse communities (Bhatia 1997, cited in PrezLlantada 2007, p. 233). Secondly, EFL learners lack genre-specific knowledge (Yakhontova 2001, p.
403), and, therefore, are likely to need and expect EAP writing programmes to teach how to realise
English academic genres.

In addition to the lack of instruction on macrostructures, the coursebook also lacks information on
microstructures, such as how sentences and clauses are structured and coded so as to communicate
effectively. Although a recipe approach to ELT is not desirable, ELLs need to be provided with
opportunities to become aware of the restraints and options available so they learn to make language
choices appropriate for the genres they are striving to control. This awareness of regularity and
structure is not only facilitating, but also reassuring (Hyland 2003b, cited in Hyland 2007, p. 152). This
is confirmed by a qualitative research project in the Ukraine, which found that model sentences

Bianca van de Water

Academic Writing: An Introduction

Page 4 of 8

considerably raised phraseological as well as rhetorical awareness thus proving to be of invaluable

usefulness to ELLs (Yakhontova 2001, p. 408).

Furthermore, the coursebook lacks a clear vision on how to translate discourse knowledge into writing
skills. It contains no complete texts students could use as a model and there are very few writing
activities. Moreover, these are quite limited in focus, e.g. practise taking gists (p. 66), write a threesentence definition (p. 214) and draft an introductory paragraph (p. 266), and, therefore, do not
substantially contribute to learning to write longer texts. More significantly, the coursebook contains
no framework that guides students through the cognitive stages of planning, drafting, editing and
proofreading a text. This omission is contrary to language learner needs. Qualitative research at an
Australian university found that students who were not provided with adequate strategies for
negotiating the reading-writing nexus, wrote texts that were poorly structured, characterised by
patchwriting, and lacked coherence and cohesion (Dovey 2010, p. 58).

Integrated Course Design

Academic Writing: An Introduction has been analysed from the perspective of EFL learners with the
aim of determining its suitability for my chosen context, namely post-graduate humanities students
at Utrecht University in the Netherlands. The hypothetical needs analysis in assignment one identified
the research article as the principal genre that students will need to master for academic success.
Before I can evaluate the coursebooks suitability, I need to outline the envisaged ESAP programme
first.

The programme has a genre-based reading-writing focus, whereby the genre framework is a synthesis
of linguistic and non-linguistic approaches, based on the premise that genre is a staged, goal-oriented,
social process (Martin & Rose 2007, cited in Coffin, Donohue & North 2009, p. 249) in order to
introduce students to the complex and dynamic realities of English language discourse (Bhatia 2002,

Bianca van de Water

Academic Writing: An Introduction

Page 5 of 8

p. 5). Contact hours should be dedicated to studying model texts in relation to the generic structures
and stages, communicative moves, social actions and language features. Thereafter, students extend
their knowledge by creating reading portfolios of research articles in order to identify how the
concepts above apply in their respective disciplines. This is combined with a process writing approach,
whereby each sequential step is introduced at different points in the programme, leading to the
completion of an authentic text, i.e. a research article, at the end of the course. At this stage of the
design process, it is unknown whether the Dutch discourse community prefers to maintain some
rhetorical features of the native language, or rather complies with all rhetorical and linguistic
conventions of English academic writing. This potential threat to the integrity of the course design and
content could be alleviated by incorporating ethnographic techniques, whereby students interview
Dutch discourse community members as sources for a critical essay assignment.

Coursebook Implementation
Despite its considerable limitations, I argue in favour of implementing Academic Writing: An
Introduction. Firstly, the content is in alignment with the proposed course content in that it focusses
on research genres and contains authentic texts from the humanities. Secondly, its strengths outweigh
its weaknesses in that it is a powerful and methodical tool for reinforcing the discipline-specific nature
of genres, raising awareness of social functions, and demonstrating the causal relationship between
language choices and reader reactions. Overall, this coursebook significantly raises learners sensitivity
in regards to the interpersonal metafunctions of English academic genres. Thirdly, its shortcomings
could be perceived as an opportunity, especially for EAP practitioners who revel in the role of materials
writer. Several model texts will need to be sourced in that the coursebook contains no complete texts.
Furthermore, a number of worksheets on specific language features, e.g. discourse markers, passive
constructions and clause structures, need to be designed, depending on the specific language
demands and needs.

Bianca van de Water

Academic Writing: An Introduction

Page 6 of 8

Since a considerable amount of materials needs to adopted, adapted and/or created in addition to
the coursebook, Academic Writing: An Introduction could only be implemented in contexts where
there is the necessary time, money and initiative to achieve this requirement. Alternatively, it could
be used in conjunction with a coursebook with a stronger linguistic focus, such as English Academic
Writing for Researchers and Students by Yakhontova. Whether the course designer chooses to adopt
an additional coursebook or create materials de novo, Academic Writing: An Introduction still has a
significant role to play in that it should function as a starting point and springboard for raising language
awareness before students examine texts for their reading portfolios. Although New Rhetoric
scholarship has made a limited contribution to L2 writing instruction (Hyland 2003, cited in Johns et
al. 2006, p. 243), the evaluation above demonstrates that a New Rhetoric coursebook can be
implemented in EFL contexts as long as certain albeit extensive - requirements are met.

Bianca van de Water

Academic Writing: An Introduction

Page 7 of 8

References:
Bhatia, VK 2002, Applied genre analysis: a multi-perspective model, Ibrica, vol. 4, pp. 3 19.
Coffin, C, Donohue, J, North, S 2009, Exploring English Grammar: From formal to functional, Routledge,
Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon.
Dovey, T 2010, Facilitation writing from sources: A focus on both process and product, Journal of
English for Academic Purposes, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 45 60.
Flowerdew, J 2002, Genre in the Classroom: A Linguistic Approach, in A Johns (ed.), Genre in the
Classroom: Multiple Perspectives, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 91 102.
Giltrow, J, Gooding, R, Burgoyne, D & Sawatsky, M 2014, Academic Writing: An Introduction, 3rd edn,
ebook, Broadview Press, viewed 9 October 2015,
ttps://play.google.com/books/reader?printsec=frontcover&output=reader&id=pXKaBQAAQ
BAJ&pg=GBS.PP1.
Hyland, K 2007, Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction, Journal of Second
Language Writing, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 148 164.
Hyon, S 1996, Genre in Three Traditions: Implications for ESL TESOL Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 693
722).
Johns, AM, Bawarshi, A, Coe, RM, Hyland, K, Paltridge, B, Reiff, MJ & Tardy, C 2006, Crossing the
boundaries of genre studies: Commentaries by experts, Journal of Second Language Writing,
vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 234 249.
Loudermilk, BC 2007, Occluded academic genres: An Analysis of the MBA Thought Essay, English for
Specific Purposes, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 190 205.
Prez-Llantada, C 2007, Native and non-native English scholars publishing research internationally: A
small-scale study on authorial (in)visibility, Journal of Applied Linguistics, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 217
238.
Swales, JM 1995, The role of the Textbook in EAP Writing Research, English for Specific Purposes, vol.
14, no. 1, pp. 3 18.
Yakhontova, T 2001, Textbooks, contexts and learners, English for Specific Purposes, vol. 21, no. 1,
pp. 397 415.

Bianca van de Water

Academic Writing: An Introduction

Page 8 of 8