LCE101 Academic Writing I Feedback

Academic Writing I:

1. What aspects of this section worked well?

The consistent inclusion of SCMP articles in the textbook allowed my classes to dive into those features of this peculiar text type which help us to summarize and to paraphrase well.

2. What aspects of the section did not work particularly well? Why?

My students and I did not think the definitions for paraphrasing and summarizing were clear. We need clearer definitions of summarizing and paraphrasing. In these definitions, we should have exclusion and inclusion criteria: what summarizing is and what summarizing isn’t; and what paraphrasing is and what paraphrasing isn’t. We should also preface this definition within the context of LCE101 and the course assessment for summarizing and paraphrasing.

3. What aspects of this section should be done differently next time?

We need to convey clearly the components for a good summary for the LCE101 assessment. My students and I did not know the extent to which we need to include supporting details on top of the article’s main idea for the LCE101 assessment. Although one task in the book alludes to extensive supporting details, that is, an idea from each paragraph in the article, I didn’t see any explicit requirement for that.

If we are focused on leveraging newspaper articles for summarizing and paraphrasing, perhaps we could use newspaper articles from non-Hong Kong newspapers. We could be less insular with our media.

4. Did you depart from the section plan or include any of your own materials/activities?

I used articles from the New York Times which presented background information and main ideas in a more sophisticated style. Generally, in a NYTimes article, the main idea is hidden inside a paragraph within the article and is not found in the first sentence of the first paragraph of the article, per SCMP style.

5. Are there any words, expressions, or grammatical items that students needed in order to better cope with the section?

I think the semi-fixed expressions for paraphrasing sources were useful. Perhaps we could recommend that students select just one of those semi-fixed expressions and become proficient in using that in writing.

6. Any further comments or suggestions?

How did CEAL select newspaper articles as the primary text type for learning about summarizing and paraphrasing? I don’t see the connection between this text type and the text types that students will encounter in their classes. Teaching students to summarize text book passages, journal articles and, even, lecture notes may be more relevant to their studies. As it is, I only see a connection between our activities with newspaper articles and what students did with newspaper articles in secondary school.

Besides, I don’t think students read English language newspapers; nor do I think students should read English language newspapers when they could more easily read Chinese language newspapers. In the same way, although I can read Chinese, I prefer reading my news in English. I’ll read in Chinese only what I must read in Chinese. In sum, the connection between the text type we feature in this section of academic writing and which text types I perceive students will need in their studies and in their lives is weak.