No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The interpersonal dimension of language use has attracted growing interest in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) for its important role in representing the writer’s evaluative position in a text and in constructing successful interpersonal relationship between the writer and the reader. The present study explores the construction of evaluative meanings in English for second/foreign language (ESL/EFL) writing under exam conditions – still an under-explored area in EAP research. This study analyses short argumentative essays written in response to Task 2 of the Academic Writing Module of the International English Language Testing Systems (IELTS) as a high-stakes gatekeeping genre by drawing on Appraisal theory and Genre theory developed within Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) as well as the theory of intertextuality. In so doing, it focuses on the linguistic and rhetorical resources deployed by IELTS writers to construct the intersubjective relationship between the writer and the reader and the intertextual relationship between the task prompt and the exam script. The findings of the research demonstrate that there are differences in linguistic choices of evaluative resources depending on grades awarded. Specifically, the study provides important insights into the distinguishing features of successful and less successful IELTS texts in terms of the degree of the writer’s dialogical or subjective engagement with the reader as well as the degree of intertextual density between the examination response and the task prompt as construed in the choice of what is evaluated (i.e. appraised). The results suggest that the evaluative patterns which can be identified through the different ‘voices’ that the IELTS writer projects in the IELTS task provide insights into what is valued in more successful IELTS writing.The study makes a significant contribution to our understanding of the interpersonal expectations which are ‘hidden’ or implicit in the current IELTS assessment criteria in the public domain. The tentative framework on intertextuality put forward in the study extends the current description of engagement resources captured in the existing Appraisal theory. The study has practical implications for effective IELTS preparation courses.

The interpersonal dimension of language use has attracted growing interest in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) for its important role in representing the writer’s evaluative position in a text and in constructing successful interpersonal relationship between the writer and the reader. The present study explores the construction of evaluative meanings in English for second/foreign language (ESL/EFL) writing under exam conditions – still an under-explored area in EAP research. This study analyses short argumentative essays written in response to Task 2 of the Academic Writing Module of the International English Language Testing Systems (IELTS) as a high-stakes gatekeeping genre by drawing on Appraisal theory and Genre theory developed within Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) as well as the theory of intertextuality. In so doing, it focuses on the linguistic and rhetorical resources deployed by IELTS writers to construct the intersubjective relationship between the writer and the reader and the intertextual relationship between the task prompt and the exam script. The findings of the research demonstrate that there are differences in linguistic choices of evaluative resources depending on grades awarded. Specifically, the study provides important insights into the distinguishing features of successful and less successful IELTS texts in terms of the degree of the writer’s dialogical or subjective engagement with the reader as well as the degree of intertextual density between the examination response and the task prompt as construed in the choice of what is evaluated (i.e. appraised). The results suggest that the evaluative patterns which can be identified through the different ‘voices’ that the IELTS writer projects in the IELTS task provide insights into what is valued in more successful IELTS writing.The study makes a significant contribution to our understanding of the interpersonal expectations which are ‘hidden’ or implicit in the current IELTS assessment criteria in the public domain. The tentative framework on intertextuality put forward in the study extends the current description of engagement resources captured in the existing Appraisal theory. The study has practical implications for effective IELTS preparation courses.

Thesis (M.S.) -- Central Connecticut State University, 2008. / Thesis advisor: Kenneth J. Weiss. "... in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Early Childhood Education." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 52-57). Also available via the World Wide Web.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--Teachers College, Columbia University, 1964. / Typescript; issued also on microfilm. Includes tables. Sponsor: Howard F. Fehr. Dissertation Committee: Myron F. Rosskopf. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.Ed.)--University of Hong Kong, 2003. / Also available in print.

Thesis (M.S.) -- Central Connecticut State University, 2009. / Title from electronic title page. Project advisor: S. Louise Gould. "A special project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Secondary Mathematics."

This study, based on classroom observation of ESL students, is an attempt to explore the effects of prior interactions on the learners' performance in communicative writing tasks. The study seeks to ascertain how classroom discourse generated by students as they interact prior to writing is shaped by the tasks and how it subsequently contributes to the quality of the written compositions. The basic hypotheses projected for the study were that different tasks would generate different quantities and qualities of interaction patterns which would correspondingly affect the written compositions. The nature of the tasks was seen as being instrumental in determining the variety of words rather than the amount of words used and that determined the quality of the compositions. Similarly, the generation of complex syntactic and cohesion features by the subjects was closely associated with the opportunity they were afforded by the tasks to interact. Narrative composition tasks in which there was substantial interactions were more likely to generate these language features than were the descriptive composition tasks in which there were restricted patterns of interaction. The study reveals, however, that the interaction patterns arising from the oral language gave rise to language features which got incorporated into the written compositions but did not conform with the conventions of the written language. Moreover, the discourse acts employed did not invariably bring about a coherent semantic relationship among propositions because of the subjects' low language proficiency and their inability to appropriately employ cohesion features associated with the expression of propositions. A survey among subjects of the study shows that collaborative learning in pairs or groups is regarded as being more favourable to promoting features of language that lead to good quality compositions than a teacher-fronted approach, although input from the latter is seen as a prerequisite for the smooth running of pair work and group work. However, there is a general consensus that group work is a better method of learning than pair work, apparently because group work, offers opportunity for more substantial interactions than pairwork which often culminates in interlocutors being unable to sustain a conversation in English.