Las Constituciones y leyes de los Estados en materia electoral garantizarán que:

Following the approach illustrated in recent works on corpus-informed materials development (Barbieri & Eckhart, 2007; Conrad, 1999), a detailed examination of the chosen target feature in the two major textbooks of the course, which are two of the three required textbooks selected in the course syllabus template, is provided in this section. These two textbooks are popular and commonly used in universities across the country; they are representative of other texts also in use. This examination also acts as a springboard for the proposal of the designed DDL learning activities in the research described in the next section. Based on my review of corpus-based findings on citation use and the results of my pilot study, I examine how the selected aspects of the target feature (i.e., citation density, author integration, textual integration, citation function, reporting verbs) are addressed in these two textbooks.

The first book, called the “Everything is an argument” book (EA), is a primer on rhetoric which consists of chapters on major concepts in rhetoric such as appeals of an argument, and the second one, called the “Everyday writer” book (EW), is a reference handbook which provides a guide to different styles and language-level writing such as common errors in college student writings. Several chapters in these two books touch on this targeted discourse feature as following:

The EA book:

 Chapter 19: Using sources (Building a critical mass; synthesizing information);  Chapter 20: Plagiarism and academic integrity (Acknowledging your sources

accurately and appropriately, Using copyrighted Internet sources, Acknowledging collaboration);

 Chapter 21: Documenting sources (MLA Style, APA Style) The EW book:

 Chapter 18: Integrating sources and avoiding plagiarism

 Chapters 49-55: MLA documentation and APA, Chicago, and CSE documentation

Because the two books were written by the same author, there are a lot of similarities in terms of their treatment on three aspects of the citation feature in academic writing. Moreover, similar to what was reported by Thompson and Tribble (2001), the review of these chapters shows that the target feature is mostly examined in terms of its mechanical conventions in academic writing. Table 3 summarizes key observations of the examination of the two books on these three aspects. Further explanations and examples for each category are given below. Table 3. Summary of the Treatment of Source Use in the Textbooks

Aspects of Citation Book 1 (EA)

Book 2 (EW)

A. Citation Density - -

B. Author Integration

1. Types of author integration X - 2. Different forms of integrating sources/authors in an

integral citation

X - (only one) 3. Genre specific (e.g. research article vs. student

writing)

- -

C. Reporting Verbs

1. Frequently-used verbs X X 2. Classification of reporting verbs & their evaluative

potential meaning

X -

3. Genre specific - -

D. Rhetorical functions

1. Different functions of citation X - 2. Function use variations across registers or sections of a

writing

- -

Author Integration No explicit instruction on types of author integration is provided in the two books. There is also no clear indication of genre or discipline for each example of citations presented. There seems to be an assumption that every writer in every field integrates sources in the same way for every type of writing (genre). For example, the EW book writes “Ordinarily, use the author’s name in a signal phrase to introduce the material, and cite the page number in parentheses” (p. 227). This instruction is completely opposite to the corpus-based research findings so far on the existence of various ways of integrating a source in a citing sentence and its variations across genres and disciplines. This presentation of author integration in the EW book, thus, provides a simplistic view on citation practice in academic writing.

Moreover, the EA book introduces the use of the signal phrase (i.e., according to) and illustrates how it could be positioned in a citing sentence without discussing its rhetorical effects. This presentation of the signal phrase “according to” might lead to the overuse of “according to” in student papers as what was observed by Thompson and Tribble (2001) in their students’ source-based essays.

Reporting Verbs Both books present the use of signal verbs as a way to report external sources. However, all the examples in the two books illustrate one syntactic pattern (author’s name + reporting verb + clause/phrase). Interestingly, in four out of the five given examples, “that” is not present in the complementary clause which is not typical in academic writing (Charles, 2006a, 2006b; Biber et al., 1999).

Next, the two books provide the same list of frequently used reporting or “signal” verbs. Most of the given verbs match the frequently used verbs used for academic writing, especially in highly graded student papers (Nesi, 2014). However, all the reporting verbs are categorized under “signal verbs” with no further descriptions or classification, conveying a simplistic view

about their semantic and rhetorical role in academic discourse. Although the EA book comments that “the signal verb is important because it allows you to characterize the author’s or source’s viewpoint as well as your own – so choose these verbs with care” and gives three citing

sentences using reporting verbs (argue vs. fantasize or unreasonably contend) (EA, p. 427), such treatment on the use of reporting verbs in citation is insufficient to help student writers to be aware of the stance conveyed by reporting verbs in order to use them effectively (Bloch, 2010). Rhetorical Functions Some explanations on rhetorical functions of in-text citations in academic writing are given in the two books. While the EW (p. 206) briefly mentions six uses of citations under the section “understand the purpose of sources” without any illustrative examples, the EA book has a quite in-depth presentation on how to use external sources “strategically and

selectively” in academic writing in order to “have the flavor of a hearty but focused intellectual conversation.” (p. 442). Also, each specific purpose of using a citation is explained with an example. Interestingly, while most of the presented rhetorical functions of citation in the book are similar to those reported in corpus-based studies about the use of citations in academic writing, the function #4 (i.e., to present technical material) appears to be ambiguous. Specifically, the explanation on its use and the provision of its illustrative example make it unclear about the responsibility of the writer to rephrase technical material to accommodate his or her target readers.

Overall, the current treatment of the ‘source use’ feature in academic writing in the teaching materials of the course is insufficient and not well-supported by corpus-based studies on citation in academic writing. In other words, the discourse feature is presented very simplistically compared to what has been revealed about citation practices in academic writing by previous corpus-based studies. For example, the materials fail to provide specific explanations and

descriptions of the citation practices in the specific genre that the students are going to write, and do not provide sufficient examples to foster the students’ uptake of various aspects of citations, especially their rhetorical purposes. This simplistic presentation of this essential discourse feature without addressing its usage variations across disciplines and genres might make the textbooks less practical and useful to learners. Moreover, the reliance on the one-way delivery of the feature usage in these books without having students interact with the feature through

multiple examples and exercises might not assist in the transfer of what they have read into their writings.

These observations of the treatment of source use in the target instructional context have thus motivated me to design online materials to teach college student writers in the target course how to incorporate external sources in their papers in order to achieve the learning objectives of the source-based writing assignment. The next section continues to present the design and

development of the online materials on source use for this specific teaching and learning context, which are also shaped by the relevant learning theories discussed in Chapter 2 and my findings of the corpus-based linguistic analysis on source use in the students’ documented essays.

3.2. The Four Bases of the Development of the Materials on Source Use