Open Collections

Evaluating causal discourse in academic writing

University of British Columbia

According to the Canale and Swain model of language evaluation (1979, 1980), discourse can be assessed in an integrative manner using their theoretical framework of communicative competence, yet this framework, which reflects Chomsky's 1965 notion of competence as the knowledge of language rules, offers only a taxonomy of elements without showing how these elements can be integrated. In sharp contrast to this is systemic functional linguistics, which views language as resource. According to Halliday and Martin (1993), speakers of a language use a variety of language features to construct meaning. These authors examined the causal line in scientific writing and established a clear example of the integration of form and function. This qualitative study attempts to discover whether Canale and Swain's framework is able to evaluate texts which demonstrate the integration of form, meaning, and the visual line. To do this, discourse samples were collected from fifty participants who wrote accounts of the water cycle using a visual prompt. Twenty-seven of these accounts were discussed in two small focus groups, and from these twenty-seven, five samples were rated using an assessment instrument based on Canale and Swain, and analyzed using a discourse analysis tool presented in Veel (forthcoming). The following questions were asked: 1. Can readers intuitively detect differences in the quality of descriptions written using a visual prompt, and can they notice the relationship between the discourse and the visual prompt? 2. Can readers using an assessment instrument based on the Canale and Swain theoretical framework assess the quality of descriptions written using a visual prompt, and can they notice the relationship between the discourse and the visual prompt? 3. Can a Hallidayan functional analysis illuminate the quality of the descriptions and address the relationship between the discourse and the visual prompt? The findings raise questions about the assumptions of the Canale and Swain framework as a model for assessing differences in the quality of academic writing, and recommend instead the examination of systemic functional linguistics as a framework for teaching and assessing academic language.

Thesis/Dissertation

application/pdf

2009-05-26

For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use.

http://hdl.handle.net/2429/8268

Language and Literacy Education

University of British Columbia

UBCV

DSpace