Skip to main content

Stance and Voice in Academic Discourse across Channels

  • Chapter

Abstract

Developments in technology are opening up new channels for written academic discourse, using electronic devices to supplement paper-based media. These interactive technologies become part of evolving academic literacy practices and affect both what writers and readers expect and is expected of them in high-stakes genres like essays and reports. The influence of electronic environments is reflected in overall generic structure, authorial voice and individual knowledge claims, as well as in how writers construct themselves and their arguments and create and disseminate their work (Lea and Jones, 2011).While traditionally crafted assignments – whether on paper or screen – are likely to maintain a strong status hierarchy between tutor (i.e. anyone with a teaching role) and student, interactive communication allows the flattening of such hierarchies through collaboration and the creation of different writer voices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Andriessen, J. (2006) Collaboration in computer conferencing in O’Donnell, A. M., C. E. Hmelo-Silver and G. Erkens (eds) Collaborative learning, reasoning and technology (New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), pp. 197–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, A. (2005) ‘Access and resistance: challenges of using on-line environments to teach academic discursive practices’, Education as Change, 9 (2), 74–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biber, D., S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad and E. Finegan (1999) Longman grammar of spoken and written English (Harlow: Pearson Education).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloch, J. (2007) ‘Abdullah’s blogging: a generation 1.5 student enters the blogo-sphere’, Language Learning and Technology, 11 (2), 128–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandrasegaran, A. (2008) ‘NNS students’ arguments in English: observations in formal and informal contexts’, Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 237–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng-Wen, H. and A. Archer (2008) ‘Discursive construction of medical students’ identities in informal course-based online discussions’, Education as Change, 12 (1), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. and R. Ivanič (1997) The politics of writing (New York: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffin, C. and A. Hewings (2005) ‘Engaging electronically: using CMC to develop students’ argumentation skills in Higher Education’, Language and Education, 19 (1), 32–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coffin, C., C. Painter and A. Hewings (2005) ‘Patterns of debate in tertiary level asynchronous text-based conferencing’, International Journal of Educational Research, 43 (7–8), 464–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comas-Quinn, A., R. Mardomingo and C. Valentine (2009) ‘Mobile blogs in language learning: making the most of informal and situated learning opportunities’, ReCALL, 21 (1), 96–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gebhard, M., S. Dong-shin and W. Seger (2011) ‘Blogging and emergent L2 literacy development in an urban elementary school: a functional perspective’, ReCALL, 28 (2), 278–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gills, S. (2010) ‘Case study: assessing discussion forum postings’, The Higher Education Academy English Subject Centre, Online discussion in English Studies, A good practice guide to design, moderation and assessment, Report Series, 21, 27–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, M. (2000) ‘Communication within on-line forums: the opportunities, the constraints and the value of a communicative approach’, Computers and Education, 35, 251–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemmi, A., S. Bayne and R. Land (2009) ‘The appropriation and repurposing of social technologies in higher education’, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25 (1), 19–30. http://blog.lib.umn.edu/blogosphere/women_and_children.html

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewings, A. and C. Coffin (2007) ‘Writing in multi-party computer conferences and single authored assignments: exploring the role of writer as thinker’, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6 (2), 126–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewings, A., C. Coffin and S. North (2006) Supporting undergraduate students’ acquisition of academic argumentation strategies through computer conferencing. Research Project Report for Higher Education Academy, UK (http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/publications/hewings_full_report_07).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirvela, A. and D. Belcher (2001) ‘Coming back to voice: the multiple voices and identities of mature multilingual writers’, Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 83–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunston, S. and G. Thompson, G. (eds) (2000) Evaluation in text: authorial stance and the construction of discourse (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyland, K. (2000) Disciplinary discourses. Social interactions in academic writing (Harlow: Pearson Education).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivanič R. and D. Camps (2001) ‘I am how I sound: voice as self-representation in L2 writing’, Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 3–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joiner, R. and S. Jones (2003) ‘The effects of communication medium on argumentation and the development of critical thinking’, International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 861–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2009) ‘Will mobile learning change language learning?’ ReCALL, 21 (2), 157–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuteeva, M. (2011) ‘Wikis and academic writing: changing the writer–reader relationship’, English for Specific Purposes, 30, 44–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lea, M. R. and S. Jones (2011) ‘Digital literacies in higher education: exploring textual and technological practice’, Studies in Higher Education, 36 (4), 377–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, G. (2010) Discourse of blogs and wikis (London: Continuum).

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, T. (2005) What is Web 2.0? Available at http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html (accessed 18.4.11).

  • Painter, C., C. Coffin and A. Hewings (2003) ‘Impacts of directed tutorial activities in computer conferencing: a case study’, Distance Education, 24 (2), 159–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prensky, M. (2001) Digital natives, digital immigrants. Available at: http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf (accessed 18.4.11).

  • Prior, P. (2001) ‘Voices in text, mind, and society: sociohistoric accounts of discourse acquisition and use’, Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 55–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sperling, M. and D. Appleman (2011) ‘Voices in the context of literacy studies’, Reading Research Quarterly, 46 (1), 70–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tagg, C. (2011) ‘Wot did he say or could u not c him 4 dust? Written and spoken creativity in text messaging’ in Ho, C. M. L., K. T. Anderson and A. P. Leong (eds) Transforming literacies and language: multimodality and literacy in the new media age (London: Continuum), pp. 223–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolmie, A. and J. Boyle (2000) ‘Factors influencing the success of computer mediated communication (CMC) environments in university teaching: a review and case study’, Computers & Education, 34, 119–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warschauer, M. (2002) ‘Networking into academic discourse’, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1, 45–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Y. F. (2011) ‘Learner interpretations of shared space in multilateral English blogging’, Language Learning and Technology, 15 (1), 122–46.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2012 Ann Hewings

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hewings, A. (2012). Stance and Voice in Academic Discourse across Channels. In: Hyland, K., Guinda, C.S. (eds) Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137030825_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics