Swales’ (1990) concepts of ‘genre’ and ‘moves’ have formed the basis for many studies of text types in ESP and EAP, which can also offer insight into pedagogy in these areas. Viewing genre as a set of communicative events (= ‘moves’) which are considered typical by members of a discourse community allows us to analyse the structural schema and lexico-grammar employed in certain text types to achieve certain communicative goals. But rather than focussing on genre analyses of text types EAP students may be required to produce (e.g. project proposal, dissertation, research report), this study explores typical structures and linguistic features of EAP lessons. More concretely, it examines the rhetorical moves frequently found in different phases of a lesson and the particular language features common in each phase. The results demonstrate the relevance and usefulness of Swales’ approach in distinguishing the typical sequencing in an EAP classroom lesson.
Article:
Lee, J.J. (2016). “There’s intentionality behind it … ” : A genre analysis of EAP classroom lessons.
Research:
- Corpus made by recording 24 EAP lessons taught by 4 experienced teachers on a 16-week intensive EAP course at an American university.
- 28 hours of lessons videoed and transcribed verbatim.
- videoed from back of classroom – focus on teacher talking to whole class (not helping individual students)
- students low-intermediate / intermediate level, aiming to study at American university.
- Broad analyses using Swales’ approach identified 3 common EAP lesson phases: opening, activity cycle(s), and closing.
- Detailed analyses of rhetorical moves within phases (according to Biber, Connor & Upton’s 2007 guidelines) discovered 3 key moves per phase.
- Corpus analysed to search for frequent phrases (3-5 word clusters) used to signal moves in each phase.
- Corpus analyses supplemented by ‘stimulated recall interviews’ where teachers explained their thought processes and decision-making rationales in each lesson.
Findings:
This section uses the following notation:
M = move S = submove
(xx %) = frequency (i.e. % of lessons in which this move/submove was observed)
[conventional] / [optional] = based on frequency – conventional if observed in >80% of lessons
LingF: = example phrases used / linguistic features
Opening Phase
M1: Getting Started (100%) [Conventional] LingF: Good afternoon/morning. I’m gonna get started.
M2: Warming Up (100%) [Conventional] LingF: Before we get started…
S1: Housekeeping (91.7%) [Conventional] LingF: If you have homework for me give it to me now.
S2: Looking ahead (29.2%) [Optional] LingF: Next week we’re gonna talk about our presentations. / going-to future / use of ‘we’
S3: Making a digression (20.8%) [Optional] (aims to build rapport)
M3: Setting Up Lesson Agenda (29.2%) [Optional] LingF: Today we’re gonna work a little bit on… / going-to future use of ‘we’
Activity Cycle Phase
M4: Setting Up Activity Framework (100%) [Conventional] LingF: going-to future / frequent use of ‘we’ / frequent use of politeness markers
S1: Announcing activity (100%) [Conventional] LingF: So what we’re gonna do today is… The next thing we’re going to do is…
S2: Outlining activity procedure (100%) [Conventional] LingF: I’d like you to get into groups of three, please. Please answer the first four questions.
S3: Modeling activity (50%) [Optional] LingF: So, for example… Let’s look at number 1. / often multimodal explanation with demonstration.
S4: Checking in (70.8%) [Optional] LingF: Any questions? / frequent yes-no questions
S5: Indicating activity time (70.8%) [Optional] LingF: I’ll give you / You’ve got 5 minutes.
S6: Initiating activity (54.2%) [Optional] LingF: Okay, so go ahead.
M5: Putting Activity In Context (87.5%) [Conventional]
S1: Building/Activating background knowledge (66.7%) [Optional] LingF: Okay so before we do … let’s just quickly review. / eliciting vocabulary / use of present perfect
S2: Presenting rationale (87.5%) [Conventional] LingF: This is very useful when you… So why are we doing this? / frequent use of ‘useful’
S3: Referring to earlier lesson (41.7%) [Optional] LingF: Do you remember…?
M6: Reviewing Activity (100%) [Conventional]
S1: Regrouping participants (100%) [Conventional] LingF: All right/OK, I’m going to stop you there. / often multimodal oral instruction & physical movement/gesture by teacher.
S2: Establishing common knowledge (87.5%) [Conventional] LingF: We’re going to look at these together. / Tell me, what is number 1?
S3: Following up (54.2%) [Optional] LingF: Take a minute to look over your notes. I’ll collect your notes now.
S4: Checking in (50%) [Optional] LingF: How are you at this point? / often affective questions
S5: Evaluating student performance (87.5%) [Conventional] LingF: Okay, good. So we have a lot of good examples here. / Some of you might need to practise … again, okay?
S6: Presenting rationale (41.7%) [Optional]
Closing Phase
M7: Setting Up Homework Framework (100%) [Conventional] Resembles M4 above.
S1: Announcing homework (100%) [Conventional] LingF: So homework for Friday is this. / Often multimodal explanation with demonstration.
S2: Outlining homework procedure (70.9%) [Optional] LingF: I want you to…
S3: Modeling homework (25%) [Optional] LingF: So on, page xx, you’re given two choices, and I’d like you to make a choice to decide which one…
S4: Checking in (25%) [Optional] LingF: Any questions about the homework?
M8: Cooling Down (100%) [Conventional] Similar to M2.
S1: Looking ahead (70.8%) [Optional] LingF: Next time we’re gonna talk about…
S2: Housekeeping (91.6%) [Conventional] LingF: So, finally, I just want to… / I’m going to give you back your tests. / Before we go, let’s… / Frequent use of ‘just’
M9: Farewell (100%) [Conventional] LingF: Okay, see you later/next time. Have a nice weekend / day.
Conclusion & Discussion:
Lee and team were able to discern typical phases and sequences within this genre, common moves and submoves within these, as well as some frequently used language chunks for each (sub)move. Though we must bear in mind the comparatively small corpus size here when interpreting the findings, this study claims to demonstrate the validity of viewing an EAP classroom lesson as a genre, in Swales’ definition, the moves within which can be analysed using Biber, Connor & Upton’s guidelines, and thus to provide
valuable insight into the communicative functions, rhetorical organization, and lexico-grammatical features of a spoken genre considered less conventionalized, and […] functional shape and meaning to its discourse structure. (p. 111)
Considering the moves listed above, however, does prompt questioning as to whether these are only typical of EAP lessons, or are commonly found in L2 teaching more generally.
Takeaway:
This study does not aim to provide a prescription for sequencing lessons, particularly as the moves listed may overlap, be repeated, and progress in a cyclical manner. Moreover, as the participant teachers reported in their interviews, some of the submoves and language used is dependent on the individual class group and the teacher’s rapport with the students. Nonetheless, this descriptive approach may raise awareness of the EAP lesson as a potential genre with typical moves. Understanding these discourse patterns could serve as an aid for teachers to develop a repertoire of effective sequencing and discursive language for their classrooms. The list of typical moves in the genre may also be useful as a prompt tool for planning ELT lessons or presenting the lesson’s agenda to the students. Thus the insight from this study may enable teachers to create more accessible and easily navigable lessons for their students, which would seem beneficial in the process of developing their academic language competence.
References:
Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. A. (2007). Discourse on the move. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
