Абай шығармаларындағы гендерлік бейненің тəрбиелік табиғаты

Серия «Филология». № 2(82)/2016 

65 

 UDC 94 (574): 340 

T.D.Kuznetsova, A.N.Umutkulova 

Kazakh Ablaikhan University of International Relations and World Languages, Almaty 

(E-mail:

 

aumutkulova@mail.ru) 

Fostering academic written discourse in University: 

from theory to practice 

The article considers the problem of the formation of academic written discourse of students from the stand-

point of modern foreign language teaching theory; analyzes the nature and structure of the academic written 

discourse and put forward the idea that the basis for the formation of academic literacy is the notion of aca-

demic discourse. Academic Written Discourse is described in terms of modern levelof basic standardof stu-

dent. 

Key words: academic literacy, meta-disciplinary competence, cognitive practice, social practice, academic 

written discourse. 

 

Nowadays, an important factor in the formation ofstudents' research competence becomes account of 

the increasing role of the English language as a tool of scientific communication [1; 25]. Therefore, in the 

modern high school teaching of writtenacademic discourse in English includes the creation of scientific and 

professional texts, as well as written language learning in some subjects taught in English. Teaching 

writtenacademic discourse in English is traditionally taught within the framework of discipline «Foreign 

Language» [2; 178] or specialized courses in academic writing [3; 30]. Subject experts pay more and more 

attention to teaching written speech [4; 115]. We believe that the growing role of foreign language compe-

tence of the specialist requires a review of the theoretical foundations and approaches to teaching writing in 

modern high school. This article defends the thesis that the possession of written language is a meta-

competence and a major component of academic written discourse. At the same time teaching written speech 

should be tailored to the specific educational context: type of of high school, professional specialization, 

particular discipline, learning objectives. We suggest and illustrate the approach to teaching English written 

speech within the framework ofmodern foreign language teaching methodology. In the course of the analysis 

of foreign studies in the area of teaching written speech, it has been revealed that the written language is a 

central component of academic literacy. It is known that modern model of academic literacy served as a set 

of skills to read and write; it was focused only on training lagging in studying in high school [5; 664]. 

In accordance with S.S.Kunanbayeva, within the framework of the modern level of basic stan-

dard (LAP, B2), a student should correspond to a level ofCommon European scale of competence. This 

means that in written forms of communication students should demonstrate willingness and ability to: 

 summarize in written form the content of essays which they had listened or read; 

 write an essay with reasoning elements; 

 write complicated form of letters, reports, articles and essays, which have a clear and concise struc-

ture; 

 create a questionnaire-application form. 

According to level of Super — Basic Standard (compliance level LSP, C1) modeled forms of written 

communication are: narrative, description, communication and argumentation. Written and verbal works at 

the stage of this level are: reports and essays on the socio-political, educational and cross-cultural themes, as 

well as relying on maxims, proverbsand quotes [6; 332]. 

This means that students should be able to transfer different types of discourse, i.e., follow verbal rules 

of each specific type of discourse, to understand its values and the type of identity. 

Discourse in its broadest sense — is a social organization of speech activity and texts generated by par-

ticipants in a particular social group or community [7; 28]. The concept of «academic literacy» is not quite 

newfor our education system. In this context some modern magazines actively focus their attention on the 

necessity of teaching academic writing [2; 178, 3; 30, 8; 101]. However the attention on written speech (both 

native and English language) as an important communicative, cognitive, and social practice is still hardly 

paid. 

T.D.Kuznetsova, A.N.Umutkulova 

66 

Вестник Карагандинского университета 

Formation of written communicative competence is the aim of written language teaching, which in-

cludes the following components: 

 linguistic (language skills); 

 discursive (possession of different types of discourse in teaching communicative situations that re-

quire a decision subject-cognitive tasks); 

 pragmatic (to achieve communicative purposes); 

 strategy (awareness of the process of creating a written speech, overcoming communication failures, 

the ability to avoid failures in the case of a lack of linguistic resources); 

 sociocultural (ownership of behavior norms). 

Discursive competence manifests itself in the possession of different types of discourse. This aspect of 

communicative competence involves the ability to connect one statement to another, as well as the ability to 

logic (sequentially) express thoughts in a situation of written communication [9; 6].

 

Under the discursive competence some researchers understand the knowledge of how to combine 

grammatical forms and semantic content, to create a coherent oral or written texts of various genres, operat-

ing in different communication situations [10; 1], others see in the discursive competence verbal, non-verbal 

and paralinguistic skills that contribute to the ability to adequately organize the semantic content of the oral 

and written text [11; 103]. 

H.D.Brown defines discursive competence as the ability to connect the passages into discourse and 

meaningful whole structure of series of statements, at the same time he emphasizes that the discursive com-

petence is implemented at the level of relations between passages [12; 22]. 

Taking into account these definitions, bythe discursive competence we understood the ability to bind 

the individual passages in micro text through a variety of means of cohesion and build rhetorical structures 

and compositional speech forms, organizing them in compositional meaningful whole — written text / 

discourse functioning as a means of written communication. 

The content of discursive competence involves the following knowledge: 

 knowledge of the basic characteristics of functional styles; 

 knowledge of text construction schemes that operate as a means of communication; 

 knowledge of ways of rhetorical structures building, compositional voice and genre forms. 

Discursive competence involves the following skills: 

 ability to use language means in accordance with the type of the text being created; 

 skills of creating written text stylistically and correctly. 

The basis of discursive competence consists of the following communication skills: 

 planning a text; 

 prediction of communicative acceptability of language means; 

 to structure text according to the functional style and genre forms; 

 adjust the total modality of text (to express neutral or emotional communication intentions and se-

mantic content); 

 to formulate the communicative purpose of the text; 

 to introduce and formulate the theme of the text. 

To implement different ways of developing the theme: 

1) to introduce the main idea of a paragraph with the help of key sentence; 

2) to develop the main idea, enclosed in the key sentence; 

3) to transmit the semantic content logically and consistently (to compare, to convey briefly the basic 

information, to draw a conclusion); 

4) to build a rhetorical structure and compositional-speech forms, specific for a particular type of 

text [13; 5]. 

Formation of the academic written discourse — is not just development of such skills like reading and 

writing, but a certain way of thinking, suitable for a specific cultural environment. Thus, we can talk about 

the presence of a discursive model of academic literacy and the importance of written speech as a social 

practice in the formation of the ability to become a full member of the discourse. Formation written speech 

skills is directly affecting the academic progress of students and contributes to their successful socializa-

tion [14; 47]. 

Fostering academic written … 

Серия «Филология». № 2(82)/2016 

67 

We believe that academic literacy is meta-subject competence, certain complex structural formation, 

which integrates traditional knowledge and intellectual, communicative, ideological skills. The concept of 

the academic literacy is so broad, that it leads to the problems of developing models of its formation within a 

specific discipline. In this article Academic Literacy is defined as the ability to transfer the academic written 

discourse on the basis of foreign language professionally oriented academic texts, critical thinking, improve 

their self-education competence in academic and professional purposes [15; 29]. 

General structure of academic literacy is allocated on the basis of the well-known interpretation of 

competence [16; 34] and media literacy model [17; 34] (Fig. 1). Academic literacy as meta-subject compe-

tence consists of three main components (communicative, cognitive, regulatory and behavioral). The Com-

municative Component includes both Narrow Disciplinary skills (quoting in the discipline, the creation of 

written texts of certain genres, etc.), and Interdisciplinary skills (academic reading, academic writing and 

speech, etc.) [18; 55]. The Cognitive Component reflects the social and evaluative aspects of academic liter-

acy: knowledge of the academic community, and critical thinking. Regulatory and Behavioral aspect takes 

into account the formation of self-reference and reflection, as well as motivation of students. 

 

Academic Literacy 

Communicative Component 

Cognitive Component 

Regulatory and Behavioral Component 

Narrow disciplinary skills 

(quoting, creation of profes-

sional genres of texts) 

Interdisciplinary skills: read-

ing, writing, speaking, listen-

ing comprehension 

The knowledge of values of 

academic discourse (consistent 

with the values of socialization) 

and speech genres 

Critical thinking 

Self-competence 

 

Motivation 

 

Reflection 

Core 

Independence 

Figure 1. Structure of the Academic Literacy, according to N.V.Smirnova et. al. 

We consider that the basis of an academic literacy formation is teaching the ability to transfer the aca-

demic written discourse. Defining the status of the academic written discourse, it is important to take into 

account its relationship with the scientific and pedagogical types of institutional discourse [19; 46]. Thus 

A.V.Litvinov [20; 283] notes that there is not only communication between partners of equal status in scien-

tific discourse, but also the tone of communication, typical for educational activities, in which partners’ sta-

tus are different. L.V.Kulikova [21; 15] also notes the interpenetration of the functions and genres of these 

types of discourse and denotes this phenomenon as a unified system specialized (clichéd) scientific and edu-

cational cooperation. V.I.Karasik considers the pedagogical discourse as a special case of the implementation 

of the scientific discourse [22; 9], where scientific sub-genres are basic and scientific and academic sub-

genre is on the periphery of discourse. 

The aim of the academic discourse is the socialization of students in the university and its orientation on 

the generation of new knowledge as a terminal value. Strategy of scientific discourse (doing research, its ex-

pertise, implementation in practice) and strategies of pedagogical discourse (explanation, evaluation, control, 

organization) can be successfully combined for implementation of specific learning objectives. For example, 

writing a grant proposal is a strategy of scientific discourse, but in teaching situation at the university it will 

be combined with a pedagogical strategy explanation.Within this learning situationthegenre of the text was 

created. Genre characteristics of scientific text can be combined with texts as a pedagogical and professional 

discourse. For example, the training part in the scientific workshop while studying in high school will be 

based on the assimilation of adequate rules of conduct, as well as addressing professional issues under dis-

cussion. Consequently, texts of scientific, professional and pedagogical discourses are intertwined. 

We assume that academic written discourse involves three types (scientific, professional and pedagogi-

cal), accordingly, teaching it to senior students is aimed at the mastery of scientific research, professional, 

educational and cognitive competencies. Thus, the academic written discourse — is an institutional type of 

discourse, whichsuggests integration of three areas of communication and accordingly, interpenetration of 

three discourses. 

The structure of the academic written discourse as the basis of the formation of an academic literacy is 

shown in the following illustration. 

T.D.Kuznetsova, A.N.Umutkulova 

68 

Вестник Карагандинского университета 

We believe it can be used to develop application model of formation of academic literacy and 

introduction in the educational process within the framework of teaching certain disciplines. 

 

Academicwritten discourse 

Communicative Component 

Cognitive Component 

Regulatory and Behavioral Component 

Reading (scientific, professional, 

educational texts) 

Writing (scientific, professional, 

educational texts) 

Perception (scientific, profession-

al, educational)  

The knowledge of key values of aca-

demic discourse: 

The elements of scientific discourse 

(academic ethics, the culture of pro-

fessional academic communication, 

speech genres, legitimate borrowings) 

Elements of professional discourse 

(the construction of sociological 

knowledge, aspects of the professional 

activity of a sociologist) 

Elements of pedagogical discourse 

(educational and cognitive aspect, the 

academic progress) 

Critical thinking 

Self-competence 

 

Motivation 

 

Reflection 

Core 

Independence 

Figure 2. Structure of Academic Written Discourse, according to N.V.Smirnova et. al. [15; 41] 

On the basis of written speech, reading and writing are communicative, cognitive and social practice the 

transferring of the academic written discourse (Fig. 2). Thus, written speech is not only a way of communi-

cation and social practice, but also a means of developing cognitive abilities of students. In contrast to the 

traditional understanding of the written text as a chain of statements (and mastering skills of creating a text), 

the concept of «academic written discourse» makes it possible to take into account the communicative, social 

and cognitive performance of students in the process of creating a written text and its content. 

Under the discourse should be understood a text (s) in close connection with situational context: in a set 

of social, cultural, historical, ideological, psychological and other factors, with the system of communicative-

pragmatic and cognitive facilities of the author purposes, interacts with the addressee, determining special 

ordering of linguistic units of different levels in text embodiment. Discourse also characterizes the 

communicative process leading to the formation of a certain formal structure — text [23; 35].

 

The aim of the academic discourse is the socialization of students in the university and their ability of 

generation of new knowledge as a terminal value. Strategy of scientific discourse (doing research, its exami-

nation, implementation in practice) and strategies of pedagogical discourse (explanation, evaluation, control, 

organization) can be successfully combined for the implementation of specific educational objectives. For 

example, writing a grant proposal is a strategy of scientific discourse, but in the teaching process at the uni-

versity, it will be combined with a pedagogical strategy of explanation. As part of this learning situation atext 

of this genre is created. Genre characteristics of scientific text can be connected with the context of pedagog-

ical and professional discourse. For example, participation in scientific workshops while studying at high 

school will be based on the assimilation of adequate rules of behavior, as well as addressing professional is-

sues under discussion. Consequently, texts of scientific, professional and pedagogical discourses are inter-

twined. 

In this article we have tried to consider the role of Academic Written Discourse, Discursive Compe-

tence in sample program of foreign language teaching for academic purposes. It is obvious, that in order 

make successful course of academic writing in English, and there should be serious preliminary humanitarian 

training of students in the field of Russian and English literature, logic, rhetoric, and familiarity with the ba-

sics of scientific work. 

In this sense, it is important to put the Academic Writing in English in a fundamentally different 

context: it should not be seen as a further linguistic discipline, but as a professional cycle course. 

Practice has shown that the real level of the students does not always meet these requirements. And fi-

nally, perhaps the most important thing is Academic Writing course, that can be considered valid if the par-

ticipants perceive it as a creative laboratory, which allows them to generate and discover new meanings. 

It involves a certain spirit of collegiality and participation in the common cause, which, perhaps, is the high-

est meaning of pedagogy. 

Fostering academic written … 

Серия «Филология». № 2(82)/2016 

69 

References 

1  Lillis T., Curry M.J. Academic writing in a global context. — London: Routledge, 2010. — 520 p.  

2  Лытаева  М.А.,  Талалакина  Е.В.  Академические  навыки:  сущность,  модель,  практика // Вопросы  образования. — 

2010. — №. 4. — 302 c. 

3  Куприянов А.В. «Академическое письмо» и академическая жизнь: опыт адаптации курса в недружественной инсти-

туциональной среде // О высшем образовании. — 2011. — № 10. — 42 c. 

4  Шестак В.П., Шестак Н.В. Формирование научно-исследовательской компетентности и «академическое письмо» // 

О высшем образовании. — 2011. — № 12. — 119 c. 

5  Maloney W.H. Connecting the texts of their lives to academic literacy: Creating successfor at-risk first-year college students // 

Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. — 2003. — No. 46(8). — 854 p. 

6  Кунанбаева С.С. Теория и практика современного иноязычного образования. — Алматы: Эдельвейс, 2010. — 344 с. 

7  Зубкова Я.В. Конститутивные признаки академического дискурса // Известия ВГПУ. — 2009. — Вып. 5. — 120 c. 

8  Миронов Е.В. Формирование академической грамотности студентов: опыт Факультета государственного управления // 

Высшее образование в России. — 2013. — № 7. — 104 c. 

9  Щерба Л.В. Преподавание иностранных языков в средней школе: общие вопросы. — М.: Академия;

 

СПб.: Филоло-

гический факультет СПбГУ, 2002. — 160 c.  

10  Canale М. Theoretical bases of Communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing // Applied Linguistics. 

— 1980. — No. 1. — 50 p. 

11  Scarcella R.C., Andersen E.S., Krashen S.D. Discource competence // Developing Communicative Competence in a Second 

Language. — Boston: Heinle&Heinle Publ., 1990. — 106 p.  

12  Brown H. D. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. — Eglewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Regents, 1987. — 467 p. 

13  Кудряшова О. В. Компоненты коммуникативной компетенции при обучении письменной речи // Вестн. Южно-Урал. 

гос. ун-та. — 2007. —№ 15. — 87 c. 

14  Роботова А.С. Надо ли учить академической работе и академическому письму? // Высшее образование в России. — 

2011. — № 10. — 154 c. 

15  Смирнова  Н.В.,  Щемелева  И.Ю. Роль  письма  в  современном  университете:  анализ  зарубежной  практики  обучения 

академическому письму // Вестн. СПб. ун-та. — 2015. — 142 c. 

16  Зимняя И.А. Ключевые компетенции — новая парадигма результата образования // Высшее образование сегодня. —

2003. — № 5. — 342 c. 

17  Чичерина  Н.  В.  Медиатекст  как  средство  формирования  медиаграмотности  у  студентов  языковых  факультетов. —

М.: ЛКИ, 2008. — 211 c. 

18  Murrey N. Conceptualizing in English language needs of first year University students // The International Journal of the 

First Year in Higher Education. — 2010. — No. 1(1). — 321 p. 

19  Кашкин В.Б. Дискурс: пределы точности // Дискурс и стиль: теоретические и прикладные аспекты. — 2014. — 64 c. 

20  Литвинов А.В. Научный дискурс в свете межкультурной коммуникации // Филология в системе современного уни-

верситетского образования: материалы науч. конф. — Москва, 22–23 июня 2004 г. — Вып. 7. — 289 c. 

21  Куликова Л.В. Коммуникативный стиль в межкультурной парадигме. — Красноярск: Изд-во Краснояр.гос. пед. ун-та, 

2006. — 327 c. 

22  Карасик В.И. Языковой круг: личность, концепты, дискурс. — М.: Гнозис, 2004. — 453 c. 

23  Чернявская В.Е. Интерпретация научного текста. — М.: Либроком, 2013. — 127 с. 

 

 

Т.Д.Кузнецова, А.Н.Умуткулова 

жүктеу/скачать 1,75 Mb.

Достарыңызбен бөлісу: