Analysis of an Academic Review According to the American Psychological Association Manual

The American psychological Association (APA, 2010), is one of the manuals which contains pre-established rules for academic writing style as well as citations and reference lists. Members of the discourse community who decide to produce academic papers should follow those rules (Purdue OWL, 2013).  The purpose of this work is to analyse if the Review of Deconstructing DigitalNatives  Mark (2012)follows some  pre- established conventions of the (APA, 2010) style, such as citations, signal phrases and reference list.

 Mark (2012) includes in his review some paraphrased in- text citations identified by a signal phrase, the authors’ surname and between brackets the date of the book, due to the fact that the author is mentioned in the structure of the sentence. In the review there are also direct quotations, which are mainly used in order to present certain phrases or words used in the book which is being reviewed. Those quotes are generally presented by a signal phrase, the authors’ surname and the page number, but in some cases there is no date between brackets which should be written (APA, 2010).

As regards signal phrases, in the review it could be found different ones such as “explains, identifies, a notable example, asserts, suggest, explains, recommends”, among others. According to the APA style (2010) signal phrases are used in order to lead quotations or citations, in that sense, the readers would know when it used a material written by others authors.

Considering APA style (2010) rules the reference list should be at the end of the body of the text in a new page. In addition, the title “references” should be centered, alienated and not in bold, (Purdue Owl, 2013). In the review the reference page is not separated from the body of the text, moreover the title reference is not centered and in bold.  The reference list follows the alphabetical order proposed by APA (2010), although it does not have double space neither hanging indent as it is required (Purdue Owl, 2013).  The signal phrase retrieved in digital documents is used by the author.

It could be concluded that the review written by Mark  (2012) generally follows the APA style (2010). Although there are some inconsistencies as regards APA style (2010) style and conventions. It can be noticed in direct quotations and in the format of the reference list.

References

American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association(6th ed.). Washington, DC

Mark, N. (2012). Review of Deconstructing Digital Natives. [Review of the book Deconstructing Digital Natives: Young People, Technology and the New Literacies]. Retrieved  October 2013,  http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2012/review1.pdf

Purdue OWL (2013). APA style workshop Retrieved October 2013,

            https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/664/01/

                                    Deconstructing Digital Natives. Annotated bibliography.

Mark, N. (2012). Review of Deconstructing Digital Natives. [Review of the book Deconstructing Digital Natives: Young People, Technology and the New Literacies]. Retrieved  October 2013,  http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2012/review1.pdf

Mark (2012) offers a thorough review of the book Deconstructing Digital Natives. He analyses the weak and strong points of this book. The review takes a critical view where Mark (2012) analyses deeply the necessity of having images and figures in order to understand better some concepts presented. Mark analyses some concepts presented by the authors of the book.  He  uses direct quotations in order to be precise with the concepts. The review clarifies some topics and apart from that it is explained each section of the book, which are three and twelve chapters. The readers who enjoy books related to technology could read this simple review in order to understand a complex book which has many chapters.  Mark summarizes all the chapters and gives a quite useful critique. 

References

Mark, N. (2012). Review of Deconstructing Digital Natives. [Review of the book Deconstructing Digital Natives: Young People, Technology and the New Literacies]. Retrieved  October 2013,  http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2012/review1.pdf

Critique to a Handbook for International Students

The book Academic Writing, a Handbook for International Students (2006, Bailey), presents simple activities which are recommended to students of different levels in order to practice their academic writing skills. In Bailey’s (2006) words,“It is a flexible course that allows students of all subjects and levels, from foundation to PhD, to practise those aspects of writing which are most important for their studies” (p.vii). The main purpose of Bailey’s (2006) work is probably to provide a guide with exercises in order to help students to learn academic writing. Although the book contains different exercises and papers, they may not be useful for advanced students due to its level.

Bailey (2006) presents a second edition where he separates it in four different sections. In “Part 1: The Writing Process” (pp.3-60) the exercises are meant to deal with sentences and with general rules of writing. In “Part 2: Elements of writing” (pp. 65- 114) students are offered exercises to practice essential parts of writing such as adverbs, nouns, punctuation, and so forth. “Part 3: Accuracy in writing” (pp. 119-182), there are exercises to practice grammar. “Part 4: Writing models” (pp. 185-199) samples of academic works can be found. After all the sections, there is a part with suggested answers for the exercises.

The book is presented in order to learn elements for academic writing. However the section which should deal deeply with it, part one, “avoiding plagiarism” (p.2), does not include sufficient activities neither examples. The author should have included the basic rules, such as in- text citations or reference list, of the Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA) (2010). Additionally, the handbook does not present a variety of  academic sampler texts as it is mentioned in the introduction: “Writing Models offers examples of the types of  writing that students commonly need, including letters and survey reports as well as essays” (Bailey, 2006, p. vii). It would have been better if the author had included more samples of academic writings in order to give students a wide variety of texts; those mentioned seem to be directed to students who start writing academically.

As regards the level of the book, it presents elementary exercises and examples. The book would have been more useful if the author had recommended it to a specified level of language competence. “The range goes from international students to PhD” (Bailey, 2006, p. vii). The author meant to provide a wide range of practice in different levels but instead it can be noticed in the book that the exercises are really useful for a beginner of academic writing instead of an advanced level. The book in this case may not achieve the expectations that the author presented.

So as to conclude, the book may not be appropriate to practice academic writing for all levels. It could be recommended this book for the students who are starting to produce their academic pieces of writings. Students with an advanced level may find the book quite incomplete and it could only serve in order to review elementary items of he academic writing.

References

American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC.  

Bailey, S. (2006). Academic Writing: A handbook for international students.  Retrieved November 2013 from   http://npu.edu.ua/!e-book/book/djvu/A/iif_kgpm_t27.pdf 

Characteristics of the discourse community

          Many authors have presented different theories about discourse communities.  Specific characteristics should be taken into account at the moment of deciding if a group belongs to a discourse community or not. Swales (1990) presented a list of six items to analyze if a determined group belongs to a discourse community or not. It is the aim of this work to analyze characteristics of the discourse community taking into account Swales’ theory.

Swales (1990) states that it is necessary to have common goals with the group to be a discourse community, having certain objectives and sharing specific interests. Kutz (1997, cited in Kristine-Kleese, 2004), exemplifies this, “its members have, overtime, developed a common discourse that involves shared knowledge, common purposes, common relationships, similar attitudes and values, shared understandings about how to communicate their knowledge and achieve their shared purposes, and a flow of discourse that has a particular structure and style”(p.9).

Apart from having common goals, according to Swales (1990), it is necessary to have participatory mechanisms. McLaughlin and Talbert (1993, cited in Wenzlaff, Terri L, Wiesman, K.C, 2004)clearly express that to maintain a discourse community, not only there must be a collaborative culture but also there has to be an environment that supports risk- taking, otherwise, the group probably could not be able to rich their goals without the participation of its members.

Swales (1990) makes also reference that it is important to have a community-specific genres. On Kristine- Kleese (2001, p.5) words “community colleges comprise their own discourse community because the two-year college culture does not include an expectation of faculty scholarship as it exists in the research university”. This statement bears out the fact that each group will have a specific genre, despite of being in the same environment.

In a discourse community, according to Swales’ theory (1990), it is supposed to be used highly specialized terminology, through the use of abbreviations and acronyms. For instance, “teachers rely on primary and secondary artifacts to reflect on their own practice reflection,” (Hoffman, Artiles & Torres, 2003, p. 10). Therefore, with this example presented it is seen that teachers make use of a specific terminology within their community.

 Swales (1990) mentions the importance of high level of expertise. Cazden (1993, cited in Hoffman, Artiles & Torres, 2003), explains that the groups’ practices will shape the normative, ways of acting and the belonging in the inquiry community. The novice people that want to participate in the inquiry group, assistance strategies should enlist them, before they become fully competent in the use of such practices).

We might conclude that the members of a certain group should have specific characteristics to be recognized as a discourse community. Swales’(1990) list encompassed, having high level of expertise, high level of terminology, a determined genre and participate inside that group to be named a discourse community. The characteristics have been exemplified in groups of teachers and community colleges, consequently it could be said that if a certain group follows the characteristics presented by Swales, that group might be called a discourse community.

References

Hoffman-Kipp, P., Artiles, A. J., & Lopez Torres, L. (2003). Beyond reflection: teacher learning as praxis. Theory into Practice.Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NQM/is_3_42/ai_108442653

Kelly-Kleese, C. (2001). Editor’s Choice: An Open Memo to Community College Faculty and Administrators. Community College Review. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_29/ai_77481463

Kelly-Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA community college review: community college scholarship and discourse. Community College Review. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_32/ai_n6361541

Swales, J. M (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wenzlaff, T. L., & Wieseman, K. C. (2004). Teachers Need Teachers To Grow. Teacher Education Quarterly. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200404/ai_n9349405

Welcome to my blog!

The aim of this blog is to publish my academic writings.  This is the first time I am going to make public my work, and to tell you the truth I have never been delighted with writing.  Anyhow, to share our compositions is an experience which will enrich us, not only as learners but also to open our minds; as my teacher of Management, Gonzales Marina Roxana, said “think outside the box”.

Now that you know the purpose of this blog, let me explain you the title. First, Teaching and learning are the activities that I am currently doing. Second, I have decided to write this title because we as teachers teach, but at the same time we learn. 

You are all invited to comment!

Kind regards, 

Romina