Abstract
The problem-oriented learning approach embraces and emphasizes particular aspects of the learning process such as critical thinking and self-directed learning. As a result, a particular genre grew out of the problem-oriented study practices to scaffold and shape written problem-oriented knowledge and knowledge production. This chapter briefly presents the history of the problem-oriented project report and continues by presenting one of the specific aspects of the genre – the inclusion of an active student voice – and an analysis of the three dominant variations of the genre. The chapter concludes by arguing the point that deliberate focus on genre and writing practices during supervision might further problem-oriented critical thinking, self-directed learning and academic enculturation.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Baker, R. S. J. d., D’Mello, S. K., Rodrigo, M. M. T., & Graesser, A. C. (2010). Better to be frustrated than bored: The incidence, persistence, and impact of learners’ cognitive-affective states during interactions with three different computer-based learning environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(4), 223–241.
Barthes, R. (1972). Mythologies. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science (Rhetoric of the human services). Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press.
Bean, J. C. (2011). Engaging ideas: The professor’s guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Beaufort, A. (2007). College writing and beyond: A new framework for university writing instruction. Salt Lake City: Utah University Press.
Billig, M. (2013). Learn to write badly: How to succeed in the social sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Brookfield, S. (1987). Developing critical thinkers. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Brookfield, S. (2011). Teaching for critical thinking: Tools and techniques to help students question their assumptions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Casanave, C. P. (2002). Writing games. Multicultural case studies of academic literacy practices in higher education. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Casanave, C. P., & Li, X. (2008). Learning the literacy practices of graduate school. Insiders’ reflections on academic enculturation. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
Chomsky, N., & Foucault, M. (2006). The Chomsky-Foucault debate: On human nature. New York: The New Press.
Creme, P. (2008). A space for academic play. Student learning journals as transitional writing. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 7(1), 49–64.
Creme, P., & Hunt, C. (2002). Creative participation in the essay writing process. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 1(2), 145–166.
Ebest, S. B. (2005). Changing the way we teach: Writing and resistance in the training of teaching assistants (p. 244). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Ennis, R. H. (1996). Critical thinking. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.
Flower, L. S., & Hayes, J. R. (1977). Problem-solving strategies and the writing process. College English, 39(4), 449–461.
Fook, J., & Askeland, G. A. (2007). Challenges to critical reflection: ‘Nothing ventured, nothing gained’. Social Work Education, 7, 1–14.
Freedman, A., Adam, C., & Smart, G. (1994). Wearing suits to class: Simulating genres and simulations as genre. Written Communication, 11, 193–226.
Hansen, E. (1997). En koral i tidens strøm [A coral in the flow of time]. Roskilde: Roskilde University Press.
Harvey, A. (1995). Interaction in public reports. English for Specific Purposes, 14(3), 189–200.
Helms-Park, R., & Stapleton, P. (2003). Questioning the importance of individualized voice in undergraduate L2 argumentative writing: An empirical study with pedagogical implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 245–265.
Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse: English in a global context. London: Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2012). Disciplinary identities: Individuality and community in academic discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Illeris, K. (1974). Problemorientering og deltagerstyring: Oplæg til en alternativ didaktik [Problem orientation and participatory learning. A proposal for alternative didactics]. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.
Illeris, K. (1999). Projektarbejdets gennembrud i 1970’erne – en personlig beretning. In S. V. Knudsen (Ed.), Projektarbejdets fortid og fremtid (pp. 11–26). Copenhagen: Danmarks Lærerhøjskole.
Ivanic, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Ivanic, R., & Camps, D. (2001). I am how I sound voice as self-representation in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 3–33.
Jeffries, L. (2010). Critical stylistics: The power of english. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Knudsen, S. (2013). Students are doing it for themselves – ‘The problem-oriented problem’ in academic writing in the humanities. Studies in Higher Education, (September 2), 1–22. doi:10.1080/03075079.2013.806455.
Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157–172.
Lillis, T. M. (2001). Student writing: Access, regulation, desire. London: Routledge.
Martin, J. (1989). Factual writing: Exploring and challenging social reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Miller, C. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70(2), 151–167.
Myers, G. (1989). Writing biology: Texts in the social construction of scientific knowledge. Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press.
Read, B., Francis, B., & Robson, J. (2001). Playing safe”: Undergraduate essay writing and the presentation of the student “voice”. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 22(3), 387–399.
Reddy, M. J. (1979). The conduit metaphor – A case of frame conflict in our language on language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284–325). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ricot, R. (2010). Students rewriting Gibbon, and other stories: Disciplinary history writing. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 9(2), 169–184.
Samraj, B. (2004). Discourse features of the student-produced academic research paper: Variations across disciplinary courses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 3(1), 5–22.
Savin-Baden, M. (2000). Problem-based learning in higher education: Untold stories (Society for Research into Higher Education). Bury St Edmunds: Open University Press.
Savin-Baden, M. (2004). Understanding the impact of assessment on students in problem-based learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41(2), 221–233.
Savin-Baden, M. (2006). Disjunction as a form of troublesome knowledge in problem based learning. In J. H. F. Meyer & R. Land (Eds.), Overcoming barriers to student understanding (pp. 160–171). London: Routledge.
Schmidt, H. G., Rotgans, J. I., & Yew, E. H. J. (2011). The process of problem-based learning: What works and why. Medical Education, 45(8), 792–806.
Stapleton, P. (2002). Critiquing voice as a viable pedagogical tool in L2 writing: Returning the spotlight to ideas. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11(3), 177–190.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Turner, J. (2012). Academic literacies. Providing a space for the socio-political dynamics of EAP. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(1), 17–25.
Yeung, L. (2007). In search of commonalities: Some linguistic and rhetorical features of business reports as a genre. English for Specific Purposes, 26(2), 156–179.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Knudsen, S. (2015). Genre and Voice in Problem-Oriented Reports. In: Andersen, A., Heilesen, S. (eds) The Roskilde Model: Problem-Oriented Learning and Project Work. Innovation and Change in Professional Education, vol 12. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09716-9_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09716-9_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-09715-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-09716-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)