Evaluation of a Reference List

Scientific research is a systematic, controlled, empirical and dynamic process which is undertaken in an attempt to achieve either one or two goals: producing knowledge and solving a problem (Sampieri, Collado & Lucio, 1998). When writing research articles (RA), sources must be documented and acknowledged properly in order to avoid plagiarism and to give credit to the work being reported. The American Psychological Association (APA) establishes a series of rules that should be followed to comply with the requirements of academic writing.

According to the APA (2010), electronic documents should be cited and included in the reference list as any other type of source by stating author and date. It is also necessary to refer to the retrieval statement to know the date the information was retrieved, and to mention the name of the source.

However, when examining RAs it is possible to see that sometimes authors do not follow some of the conventions above mentioned. Academic life may pose a challenge to those interested in engaging in research work. In the context of academic literacy, it is imperative to understand that the practices involved in it are not the product of individual work but of social construction. Complying with the rules and conventions that govern academic writing is of utmost importance to become a member of the discourse community which, as Swales (1990) explains, is a group joined together by the establishment of goals common to all its members, and is also characterised by the use of a defining genre.

This paper aims at analyzing three electronic resources included in the reference list of an RA. It is expected that a detailed examination like this one provides some insight into APA’s rules for reference lists and contributes to expand readers’ knowledge on academic writing.

The APA (2010) explains that when the author of a source is unknown, it should be listed by its title in the reference list. Quotation marks should be included in the in-text citation but not in the reference list. As regards capitalization, only the first letter of an article’s title should be capitalized and not all longer words, as is the case of journal titles. The first of the three sources mentioned in this reference list has no author. Although the title is presented first in compliance with APA’s conventions, all major words have been capitalized, so that the source reads “´Blueprint Lays Out Clear Path for Climate Action.`” Moreover, the title has been written between quotation marks, deviating from the rules.

The APA (2010) also states that, when authors are known, sources must be listed by the authors’ last names, followed by their initials. Example references two and three deviate from this rule by including the authors’ full names, in this way: “Clinton, Bill” and “Dean, Cornelia.” Also in these two cases, article titles have been enclosed within quotation marks and all major words have been capitalized, not complying with academic conventions. As, in the second source, “´Clinton on Climate Change`” can be read.

Immediately after the authors’ names, the date of publication should be written between brackets and followed by a period. None of the three examples analyzed in this paper follow this convention. The APA (2010) manual also recommends “providing a Digital Object Identifier (DOI), when it is available, as opposed to the URL. DOIs are an attempt to provide stable, long-lasting links for online articles” (Reference list: Electronic sources, para. 4). The three references examples fail to provide either the DOIs or URLs of the web pages consulted.

Even though the examples present their corresponding retrieval dates, the legend “retrieved from” has been omitted in all three cases. This signaling phrase points readers to the place where they can find the source cited in the article. The second and third references, on the other hand, refer to newspaper articles. The title of the newspaper has been correctly italicized and capitalized, but it appears duplicated and with different format, as in “New York Times. New York Times, 22 May 2007” (third example). The same deviation can be observed in the first reference. Moreover, the second reference does not include the author of the newspaper article first, but the name of the person interviewed in the article, which should not be mentioned in the reference list.

All in all, it can be seen that the reference list under analysis portrays serious deviations from APA’s standards and rules. Revision and a deeper understanding of the conventions are needed in order to comply with the requirements of academic writing. Not doing so might prevent the writer of such references from belonging to the discourse community of academic research and production. 

  

References 

American Psychological Association (2008). Publication Manual (5th ed.). Washington, DC: British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.

American Psychological Association (2010). APA formatting and style guide. Retrieved from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/

Sampieri, R.H., Collado, C.F., Lucio, P.B., Pérez, M. de la L.C. (1998). Metodología de la investigación. McGraw-Hill

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

Comparative Analysis of Abstracts in Specialized Journals

María E. Casinelli and Clarisa A. Dornes

Universidad CAECE

Abstracts are formal summaries of finished research papers (RPs) and research articles (RAs). They are descriptive, as they describe the main text of an RP or RA, and expository, as they tend to provide information clearly and concisely. According to Hubbuch (1996), abstracts are “brief summaries of the major points made by an author in a book or article” (p.126). Similarly, Swales and Feak (1994) claim that RP abstracts “consist of a single paragraph containing from about four to ten full sentences” (p. 210). The American Psychological Association (APA, 2008) states that abstracts “allow readers to survey the contents of an article quickly” (p. 12). Swales (1990) and Swales and Feak (1994) explain that there are different kinds of RP and RA abstracts: informative and indicative, structured and unstructured. As regards linguistic features, these authors specify that abstracts are characterized by the use of full sentences, past tense and impersonal passive, the absence of negatives, and the avoidance of abbreviation and jargon. Concerning tense usage, they state that conclusions tend to be written in present, opening sentences in present or present perfect, and sentences describing results usually show tense variation.

Hubbuch (1996) and Swales and Feak (1994) are among the most renowned researchers and scholars who have analysed the structure of abstracts in academic papers. However, it is doubtful whether many academic abstracts have been compared across fields. 

It is imperative for student writers to learn how to write abstracts properly, following academic conventions. A good abstract can enable them to effectively attract readers to continue reading their productions. The present paper aims at providing a comparative analysis of four different abstracts, two from the field of education and two from the field of medicine. It is expected that an analysis like this one will enhance students’ knowledge on the writing of academic abstracts.

The analysis of the abstracts from the two articles on education, one by Wang and Smith (2013) and another one by Winke, Gass and Sydorenko (2010), revealed that both abstracts are informative, as they describe what the researchers did, and unstructured; i.e., they consist of one long and unbroken paragraph. They follow the IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussions) formula but, contrary to APA’s (2008) conventions, they were not published on a separate sheet between the title and the first page of the body of the paper. This deviation may be explained by the fact that these are RAs and not RPs and, as such, changes in format may be due to publishing restrictions. The APA (2008) also stipulates that the word “Abstract” be centred and unformatted; a convention which has not been respected in these two RAs since both abstracts lack a heading. Another inconsistency found is that none of the abstracts has been double-spaced. However, the linguistic specifications described by Swales (1990) and Swales and Feak (1994) can be clearly observed in the two abstracts of the education RAs: full sentences, past tenses, impersonal passive, absence of negatives and avoidance of abbreviations and jargon. Wang and Smith (2013) have followed the general trend on tense usage strictly as the results section of their abstract presents tense variation and the conclusion has been written in present, as it can be observed in the sample sentence “Our study also instructs us of the necessity to empower the students in some form of materials development, as students themselves are best placed for knowing their learning preferences” (p. 129). Winke, Gass and Sydorenko (2010), on their part, have decided to write the whole abstract in the past tense.

The analysis of the abstracts from the two articles on medicine, one by Cooper et al. (2011) and the other one by Deveraux et al. (2014), disclosed that both abstracts are informative, as the ones found in the articles on education, since they also depict what the researchers did. However, these ones are structured, i.e., they contain bolded headings, each one identifying the main sections in the RA. This is a deviation from APA’s (2008) rule that abstracts should be a single, double-spaced paragraph, but it should be noted that the field of medicine usually follows the conventions of the Vancouver manual. Cooper et al. and Deveraux et al. also seem to have respected the linguistic conventions mentioned by Swales (1990) and Swales and Feak (1994) as regards the use of full sentences, past tense, absence of negatives and avoidance of abbreviations. Nevertheless, some jargon is used, probably because in abstracts from the field of medicine the use of specific medical terms is necessary. An example of the use of jargon is a phrase such as “Cox regression models” (Cooper et al., 2011, p.1896). It was also noticed that although impersonal passive is sometimes used, there are several examples of sentences in active voice with the pronoun We as subject, as in “We identified serious cardiovascular events [...] from health-plan data and vital records, with end points validated by medical-record review” (Cooper et al., 2011, p.1896). Concerning tense usage, both the results and conclusion sections in the abstracts by Cooper et al. and Deveraux et al. have been written in past tenses, with only one exception in the conclusion of the former, in which the first conditional is used.

A clear difference observed between the education and the medicine abstracts is the fact that the latter are heavily loaded with data supporting the results reported by the authors. Abbreviations are also used in these abstracts but they are always explained the first time they are mentioned. Of note, a second observable difference between both fields is the position of the abstracts within the RA: whereas in the medicine RAs they have been typed on a separate page, in the education RAs they appear right below the title and are directly followed by the first heading.

All in all it could be stated that the four abstracts under analysis comply with the rules described by Swales (1990), Swales and Feak (1994) and the APA (2008). They are all informative, they look to the past, they follow the IMRAD formula and they respect the linguistic features usually found in abstracts. The main distinguishing characteristic is in terms of structure: the abstracts from the field of education are unstructured but the ones from the field of medicine display a clear structure with highlighted headings. As mentioned above, the abstracts on medicine appear on a separate page whereas the ones on education are embedded into the RA as any other section, probably due to publishing restrictions, and partially deviate from APA’s (2008) standards as regards format. Despite these minor differences, it might be safe to assert that the authors of the four abstracts mostly respect the conventions of the fields they belong to. 

References

American Psychological Association. (2008). Publication Manual (5th ed.).Washington, DC: British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.

Cooper, W. O., Habel, L.A., Sox, C. M., Chan, K. A., Arbogast, P. G., Cheetham, T. C.,… Ray, W. A. (2011). DHD drugs and serious cardiovascular events in children and young adults. New England Journal of Medicine. 365 (20), 1896-1904. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1110212

Devereaux, P.J., Mrkobrada, M., Sessler, D.I., Leslie, K., Alonso-Coello, P., Kurz, A.,… Yusuf, S. (2014). Aspirin in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. The New England Journal of Medicine. [e-published ahead of print]. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1401105

Hubbuch, S. M. (1996). Writing research papers across the curriculum. (4th ed.). Harcourt Brace: Fort Worth, TX.

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

Swales, J.M., & Feak, C.B. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Harbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Wang, S., & Smith, S. (2013). Reading and grammar learning through mobile phones. Language Learning & Technology, 17(3), 117–134. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2013/wangsmith.pdf

Winke, P., Gass, S. & Sydorenko, T. (2010). The effects of captioning videos used for foreign language listening activities. Language Learning & Technology,14(1), 65–86. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol14num1/winkegasssydorenko.pdf

Comparative Analysis of Three Main Sections in Research Articles

María E. Casinelli and Clarisa A. Dornes

Universidad CAECE

 Research articles (RAs) have their own structure and are composed of different sections. Swales (1990) and Swales and Feak (1994) have described the structure that RAs should have, providing academic writers with guidelines about the elements which should be present in each section and the conventions to be respected when writing them. Focusing on the results and discussion sections in particular, it can be seen that they can be written together or separately, and that they are both descriptive in nature. The results section shows the main findings of the research but does not interpret its meanings, as the interpretation of outcomes should be done in the discussion section.The latter may be written in isolation or together with the conclusions, and it should restate the key findings with reference to the questions or hypotheses formulated in the introduction, comparing those outcomes with the ones found in the past literature. The conclusion, whether embedded in the discussion section or written separately, should tie the paper together by developing or making reference to some of the points mentioned in the introduction. Not only do RAs need to follow the conventions described by Swales and Swales and Feak, but they should also comply with the conventions established by The American Psychological Association (APA, 2007) as regards academic writing.

However, when examining RAs it is possible to see that sometimes authors do not follow some of the conventions above mentioned. Academic life may pose a challenge to college and university students, and in order to succeed it is necessary to participate actively in reading and writing activities which foster the development of thinking skills. Being able to analyze the structure of RAs and their linguistic characteristics is of utmost importance for student writers to develop such skills and to learn how to write an RA properly.

This paper aims at providing a comparative analysis of the results, discussion and conclusion sections in two research articles, one from the field of education by Wang and Smith (2013) and one from the field of medicine by Devereaux et al. (2014). It is expected that a detailed comparison like this one contributes to broaden students’ knowledge on academic writing and enhances their thinking skills.

In terms of general structure, it might be stated that the education article is a problem-solution text in which a situation was described, a problem was stated, and a solution was proposed, tested and evaluated. The conclusion, in turn, was developed as a persuasive-argumentative text, in which readers are persuaded to agree with the authors’ views. Examples of such persuasion are phrases like “We fully believe that having incentives [...]” or “linking mobile learning to a formal course evaluation may be a crucial step to improving [...]” (Wang & Smith, 2013, p. 129). The medicine article was also designed as a problem-solution text, but the discussion and conclusion section is more tentative: “Observational data have suggested [...]” and “the most effective time to restart aspirin would be [...]” (Devereaux et al., 2014, p. 1502). 

The results section in both articles was isolated from the discussion and its main function is to describe the findings related to the questions or hypotheses presented in the introductions. In the article on medicine, it was divided into four subsections: patients, study outcomes, differences between strata, and bleeding risk, whereas in the article on education, it presented three subsections, each of which displayed the outcomes related to a different research question. In the work by Wang and Smith (2013), the authors included some interpretations of the outcomes of the study in the results section, but the main analysis was performed in the discussion. As regards the use of tables and figures, in the article by Devereaux et al. (2014) they were referenced within the text of the results section, but were presented in the methods or discussion sections, for example. Conversely, the article from the field of education included one table in the results section, and both the reference to the table and its introduction were placed in the corresponding division. 

The discussion section in the article by Wang and Smith (2013) was isolated from the conclusion, which was presented separately. However, in the article by Devereaux et al. (2014), the conclusion was embedded in the discussion, the beginning of which was marked by the use of the phrase In conclusion. In both articles the discussion restated the key outcomes of the research with reference to the initial questions or hypotheses, and it also reminded the reader of the purpose of the studies. 

In their conclusions, all authors summarized their findings, evaluated their results and, in the case of the article related to education, suggested a subsequent course of action. Although the conclusion in the medicine article is considerably shorter compared to that in the education article, in both of them alluded to some of the points mentioned in the introduction, thus tiding the article together. 

The three sections analysed in this paper have been developed according to the text type expected for such sections: problem-solution and persuasive-argumentative. Regarding the use of academic language, it can be observed that hedging and tentative phrases can be found in the article on medicine, whereas the article on education also includes stronger or more emphatic phrases in its conclusion. The use of the signalling phrase In conclusion in the former is, according to Swales and Feak (1994), unnecessary and should therefore be avoided in serious academic writing. Concerning the use of tables and figures, the education article follows all the conventions established by the American Psychological Association (APA, 2007) in terms of organization, spacing, headings, numeration and title content. The article on medicine, on the other hand, follows these rules partially. It can be seen, for instance, that the way the tables have been used in the results section shows some incoherence, as they are cited in the results but are presented in other sections of the paper. This incoherence is rather confusing for the reader. The deviation from the rules as regards the use of tables and figures may be due to the fact that the field of Medicine usually follows the Vancouver system instead of APA.

All in all, both articles respect the conventions that Swales (1990) and Swales and Feak (1994) claim should be followed when writing the results, discussion and conclusion sections of a research article. The article written by Deveraux et al. (2014) deviates slightly from APA’s (2007) rules, possibly due to the fact that it belongs to the field of Medicine, but the education article seems to follow all APA’s conventions rigorously, as can be observed with the organization and structuring of tables and figures. By and large, it could be safely declared that the articles selected for the present analysis are in accordance with academic writing standards.

References

American Psychological Association. (2007). Concise rules of APA style. Washington, DC: British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.
Devereaux, P.J., Mrkobrada, M., Sessler, D.I., Leslie, K., Alonso-Coello, P., Kurz, A.,… Yusuf, S. (2014). Aspirin in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. The New England Journal of Medicine. [e-published ahead of print]. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1401105

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

Swales, J.M., & Feak, C.B. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Harbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Wang, S., & Smith, S. (2013). Reading and grammar learning through mobile phones. Language Learning & Technology, 17(3), 117–134. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2013/wangsmith.pdf

Comparative Analysis of Two Research Articles 

A research article (RA) reports on the work undertaken by researchers, who are supposed to demonstrate deep understanding of a topic, critical thinking skills and knowledge of the structure of an RA. An essential part of the RA is the introduction, which is intended to attract readers’ attention and whose purpose “is to establish a framework for the research, so that readers can understand how it is related to other research” (Wilkinson, 1991, p. 96, as cited in Pajares, 2007, p. 1). A second important part of the RA is the methods section, which follows the introduction and is written to provide a detailed account of the method or tools used to collect and process data.

Scholars and researchers in the academic field, among them Swales and Feak (1994), have analyzed the structure and governing rules of research articles for a long time. However, few studies have aimed at comparing academic articles across fields.

The purpose of this paper is to deeply analyze and compare the introduction and methods sections of an article in the field of medicine by Devereaux et al. (2014) and one in the field of education by Wang and Smith (2013). An important factor which inspired this analysis is the fact that students in academic settings are expected to produce different genre types, including research papers (Jordan, 1997). A detailed comparison like this one will hopefully contribute to broaden students’ knowledge on the subject. 

The article by Devereaux et al. (2014) respects the three “moves” or cycles of the introduction section proposed by the Create a Research Space Model (C.A.R.S) (Swales & Feak, 1994, p.174), according to which information is organized in a general-specific pattern; i.e., from general statements related to the topic of discussion to the situation under study. The introduction begins by explaining why the topic chosen by the researchers is of vital importance, and employs the Simple Present tense. This first paragraph is followed by a second one mostly written in Present Perfect to refer to the areas of inquiry, and this one, in turn, is succeeded by a third paragraph in present tenses to make reference to the state of current knowledge. The literature review is not included in the introduction by means of in-text citations but by means of endnotes. The researchers move on to step two and establish a niche at the end of the third paragraph: “Uncertainty regarding the risks and benefits of aspirin underscores the need for a large perioperative trial” (Devereaux et al., p.1495). The negative connotation of the word uncertainty prepares the ground for the purpose of the research, made clear in the final portion of the introduction. Here, the Simple Past tense is used to state why the research was conducted and what type of research it was: a trial.

The article written by Wang and Smith (2013) presents a comparatively longer introduction, divided in sub-sections with clear subtitles. It might be said that the information in the introduction of the article is organized in a ‘funnel shape’, i.e. from general concepts to more specific details. The introduction begins with a lengthy description of the technological context and the use of mobile phones in Japan —where the research was conducted—, and makes reference to current pedagogical theories. This description in present tenses helps to establish a context for the study. The second part of the introduction provides a host of examples in Simple Past referring to what previous researchers did, which means that the literature review has been included in Move 1. Move 2 (the establishment of a niche) starts with a negative connector: despite. In Move 3, the authors extend on the previous research data, describe the type of research done (a project), state the questions that functioned as a motivating force behind the study, and conclude with the purpose of their work, which is clearly indicated by a purposive statement which begins as follows: “This paper aims to redress the gap in current research […]” (Wang & Smith, 2013, p. 119).

The methods section in the article by Devereaux et al. (2014) presents the main elements that should be included in the section: participants, materials and procedure. The authors describe the study design and specify that participants’ consent was obtained before recruitment. Under the title of “Study Oversight”, funding sources and the roles of the different researchers during the study are explained. A step-by-step description of the procedures is also provided, and further details are included in an appendix at the end of the article, which contains the research outcomes as well. A table is used to display the participants’ characteristics, and the methods section concludes with a statistical analysis.

The second article also includes all the elements of the methods section: there is a clear description of the development of the materials used supported by figures; participants’ characteristics are mentioned together with information on their voluntary participation, and the procedures and data collection are very detailed and also backed by figures. All additional information on data collection is included in an appendix at the end of the article. Moreover, both the RA on medicine as the one on education employ the Simple Past tense to describe their procedures in the methods sections.

In conclusion, both articles respect the rules that should be followed when writing a scientific research paper. The methods sections are quite detailed and thorough in their descriptions of the processes developed. However, a marked difference can be observed between the introductions. The article on medicine presents a rather shorter introduction with a literature review referred to by endnotes, whereas the article on education has a comparatively longer, more descriptive and detailed introduction. Even though the former does include a literature review, the fact that it is not embedded in the introduction and that no in-text citations or paraphrasing techniques are used seems to show that the researchers were more interested in the following sections than in the opening part of their paper. As Wiersma (1995) states, “The review of the literature provides the background and context for the research problem. It should establish the need for the research and indicate that the writer is knowledgeable about the area” (p. 406, as cited in Pajares, 2007, p. 3).

References 

Devereaux, P.J., Mrkobrada, M., Sessler, D.I., Leslie, K., Alonso-Coello, P., Kurz, A.,… Yusuf, S. (2014). Aspirin in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. The New England Journal of Medicine. [e-published ahead of print]. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1401105
Jordan, R.R. (1997). English for Academic Purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. (Cambridge language teaching library series). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Pajares, F. (2007). Elements of a proposal. Retrieved from http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/proposal.html

Swales, J.M., & Feak, C.B. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Harbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Wang, S., & Smith, S. (2013). Reading and grammar learning through mobile phones. Language Learning & Technology, 17(3), 117–134. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2013/wangsmith.pdf

A different beginning - Year 2014

A new year has started and what in 2013 was English for Academic Purposes (EAP) has now become English for Specific Purposes (ESP).

This 2014 ESP course will hopefully be enriched by the productions created within the framework of research articles (RA) analyses. The first of these will delve into the examination of introductions and methods sections in RA. The second paper, on the other hand, will be devoted to analysing results, conclusions and discussions sections also in RA. The third and last analysis will deal with different kinds of abstracts.

Analysis of APA Standards in an Academic Piece of Writing

The American Psychological Association (APA) establishes standards and procedures that regulate the appropriate formatting, writing style, and source quotation in the academic writing field. This paper is aimed at analyzing deeply whether an academic article written by Dalvit, Murray, Terzoli, Zhao, and Mini (2005) complies with the standards issued by the APA (2010) in terms of in-text citations, signal phrases and references.

In their article, Dalvit, Murray, Terzoli, Zhao, and Mini have used mainly in-text citations of journal articles, dictionaries, books and studies belonging to universities. A thorough examination of such citations reveals that most of them are parenthetical quotations; i.e., the authors have used the paraphrasing technique. The University of Minnesota Center for Writing (n.d.) recommends using signal phrases when citing sources and varying the verbs used in such phrases. However, the article evidences very few signal phrases. Actually, one of them, “according to”, was used on the first page and then repeated on the second page, when other phrases could have been used to improve the academic style.

An apparently distinctive characteristic of the article is the absence of direct or block quotations. Not only does variation in types of quotations make the style of an article more engaging and vivid, but it also conveys greater credibility and support to the argument (The Portland State University Writing Center, 2013). The absence of direct quotations, therefore, does not contribute to provide a better substantiated rationale for the authors’ viewpoints.

Paiz et al. (2013b) explain in the Purdue OWL electronic page that:

Your references should begin on a new page separate from the text of the essay; label this page “References” centered at the top of the page (do NOT bold, underline, or use quotation marks for title). All texts should be double-spaced just like the rest of your essay. (Reference List: Basic Rules, para. 2)

The article does not seem to follow all the abovementioned instructions in its “References” section. First and foremost, the section was not included on a separate piece of paper but instead appears immediately after the “Conclusions” —it should be acknowledged, however, that as the article was published in a journal, it is possible that the format has been altered by the publishers. Nevertheless, the word References has not been centered, is followed by a colon and has been printed in bold letters. Moreover, although all the references appear in alphabetical order according to the first author’s last name, they have been numbered and were not double spaced. The names of journal articles were written in title case, in compliance with APA (2010) rules, but these names have been italicized instead of the names of the journals where they were published. This can be observed, for example, in entries 2 and 12.

Another difference worth mentioning in this section is indentation: The first line of each entry is indented, but it is all the lines after the first one that should be indented. The first one, however, ought to be left-aligned (Paiz et al., 2013b).

            Some final deviations from APA (2010) standards in this section are the absence of periods at the end of the entries, the use of “and” instead of the ampersand before the name of the last author in entry 6, the use of a period instead of a comma before the date in entry 13, and the omission of years when specifying the date a website was accessed. Besides, there is an inconsistency between entry 8, whose year reads “2004”, and its corresponding citation, where the year reads “2005”.

            As a closing observation on format it could be added that the word “Keywords” which follows the abstract should have been spelt as one word instead of two, and must be italicized. Finally, the header contains a full version of the title when it might portray a shortened version (Paiz et al., 2013a).

            It could be concluded that the authors of the article have followed some APA (2010) conventions but have omitted or misinterpreted others, above all in relation with the reference section.

References

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

Dalvit, L., Murray, S., Terzoli, A., Zhao, X., & Mini, B. (2005). Providing increased access to English L2 students of computer science at a South African University. US-China Education Review, Sep. 2005, Vol. 2 (9), 72-75.

 Paiz M. J., Angeli E., Wagner J., Lawrick E., Moore K., Anderson M., … Keck R. (2013a). General Format. Retrieved October 2013 from https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/

Paiz M. J., Angeli E., Wagner J., Lawrick E., Moore K., Anderson M., … Keck R. (2013b). Reference List: Basic Rules. Retrieved October 2013 from https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/05/

The Portland State University Writing Center, 2013. Quotes, paraphrases, and summaries: What they are and how to use them. Writing Resources Library. Retrieved October 2013 from http://www.writingcenter.pdx.edu/resources/library

University of Minnesota Center for Writing. (n.d.). Quicktips: APA documentation style: Reference list. University of Minnesota: Student Writing Support. Retrieved October 2013 from http://writing.umn.edu/sws/assets/pdf/quicktips/apa

Defining a Discourse Community

In the context of academic literacy, it is imperative to understand that the practices involved in it are not the product of individual work but of social construction. Within this context emerges the concept of discourse community. Multiple definitions have been proposed to define this concept. This paper aims at analysing a series of six criteria established by Swales (1990) that characterise academic discourse communities.

According to Swales (1990), the first of the six requirements a discourse community should meet is common goals. This requirement refers to the need of achieving certain objectives and sharing interests. Kelly-Kleese (2004) describes the discourse community in reference with the community college and states that “its members have, over time, developed a common discourse that involves shared knowledge, common purposes, common relationships, and similar attitudes and values” (p. 2). Hoffman-Kipp, Artiles and Lopez Torres (2003), on their part, analyse the role of teachers in academic contexts, and indicate that

teachers interact with colleagues in goal-directed activities that require communication and the exchange of ideas where reflection itself is not contained wholly in the mind of the individual but is ‘distributed’ through sign systems and artifacts that are embedded in the social activity of the school community. (p. 3)

In the previous excerpt, Hoffman-Kipp, Artiles and Lopez Torres (2003) mention another characteristic of discourse communities: information exchange. For Swales (1990), not only is exchanging information an essential component of any discourse community but also the establishment of participatory mechanisms to provide information and feedback. According to Kelly-Kleese (2001), members of a discourse community are culturally expected to participate in the discourse of their specific fields and that of higher education.  

A fourth distinguishing feature of discourse communities mentioned by Swales (1990) is the presence of community-specific genres; i.e., the use of genres that characterise the group or association. In fact, the group shares conventionalised language, and the discourse community is “bound together primarily by its uses of language,” as Bizzell (1992) declares (cited in Kelly-Kleese, 2004, p. 2).

Swales (1990) considers that, besides displaying common goals, participatory mechanisms, information exchange and community-specific genres, a discourse community also presents highly specialised terminology: vocabulary and words difficult to understand for outsiders. As Giroux (1983) states, “language is a social event that is defined, shaped and constrained by the culture of the setting in which it is used” (as cited in Kelly-Kleese, 2001, p. 2). 

The sixth characteristic of discourse communities established by Swales (1990) is their high general level of expertise. In order to use language appropriately in a discourse community, it is necessary to have communicative competence, which is in turn associated with the idea that “individuals and groups with greater skill in using (and manipulating) the language system will exercise power in naming and thus controlling how others will view social reality” (Bowers, 1987, p. 28, as cited in Kelly-Kleese, 2001, p. 2).

In sum, as Swales (1990) explains, a discourse community is a group joined together by their acquisition and use of specific lexis, the establishment of goals common to all its members, and the exchange of information through communication channels provided by the group. It is also characterised by the use of a defining genre and the high level of competence attained by its members.

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.