Option One
Many of the readings in this unit argue that “native-like” use of English is no longer an appropriate
target for users. In his small-scale study in Hong Kong, Sung (2013) found that students have different
...
Option One
Many of the readings in this unit argue that “native-like” use of English is no longer an appropriate
target for users. In his small-scale study in Hong Kong, Sung (2013) found that students have different
ideal pronunciation models and that speakers’ preferences for English pronunciation “may be a
reflection of the kinds of identity they would like to project” (p. 20). Write an academic paper taking a
position on whether native-speaker pronunciation should be taught as a model in English courses in
countries that are not English dominant (i.e., non-inner circle countries). Support your position by
drawing on readings from this course as well as your personal experience as an English user.
Option Two
Write a formal response to the article written by Matsuda and Matsuda (2010), specifically taking a
position on whether English as an additional language (EAL) writers should be taught the dominant
forms of English writing, the nondominant forms, or (as the authors argue) both. You may choose to
make this argument specifically for EAL writers in expanding circle countries or EAL writers studying in
inner circle countries—or, you may address multiple situations. Support your position by drawing on
readings from this course as well as your personal experience as an EAL writer.
Option Three
Many of the readings in this unit argue that “native-like” use of English may not be an appropriate target
for some English learners. Sung (2013), for example, found that students had different ideal
pronunciation models and that speakers’ preferences for English pronunciation “may be a reflection of
the kinds of identity they would like to project” (p. 20). Writing can also be said to have an “accent,” and
English as an additional language (EAL) writers may “sound” different from first language (L1) English
writers. Write a position paper for University of Arizona professors, in which you discuss whether or not
nonnative English variations (e.g., nondominant spelling, vocabulary, grammar) should be considered
acceptable in student writing. Support your position by drawing on readings from this unit of the course
as well as your personal experience and/or goals as an EAL writer.
Requirements
● 1600-2000 words
● Formatting must be consistent with academic expectations (12 point Times New Roman font,
double-spaced, 1” margins, etc.)
● Sources should be cited in the text and at the end of the paper, using APA documentation style
Important Dates
Thursday, Nov. 3: Project Planning due
Thursday, Nov. 10: 1st draft due
Thursday, Nov. 17: 2nd draft due
Tuesday, Nov. 22: 3rd draft due
Tuesday Nov. 29: Final Project due, with complete Feedback Response Form (from all drafts)Unit 2 Project: Academic Argument/Position
Dr. Christine Tardy, English 106-14
English 106 Learning Objectives for this Project
Academic Literacy Practices
○ 2C: Develop an idea using explanations, examples, and/or details.
○ 2D: Summarize a familiar text using some conventional summary language (e.g., third person, reporting
verbs).
○ 2G: Understand concepts of intellectual copyright and plagiarism as defined in US academic environments
and at the University of Arizona.
Reflection and Revision
○ 3B: Revise their writing on global and local levels.
○ 3C: Make use of peer and instructor feedback when revising their texts.
Academic Language and Conventions
○ 4A. Identify and use common academic phrases for functions such as organizing ideas, expanding on
ideas, providing examples, expressing personal views, attributing ideas, and making claims or sharing a
thesis.
○ 4B: Apply conventional formatting features to their writing, such as use of capitalization, titles, sentence
boundaries, paragraphs, and document layout.
○ 4C: Produce simple written text that conveys the intended meaning to readers.
○ 4D: Incorporate some syntactic and lexical variety into their writing.
Project Grading Criteria
Criterion Description of an “A” Paper
Purpose (20%) • Argument or position is clear, identifiable throughout, and well aligned
with the assignment task.
Development and
Support (35%)
• The main position or argument in the paper is persuasively developed
through relevant and interesting explanations, examples, and other
details.
• Ideas in the paper are supported through relevant class readings and
through interesting personal experience.
Academic Discourse
and Language
Conventions (35%)
• At least three source texts (unit readings) are summarized or paraphrased
in useful and appropriate ways where relevant.
• Paper makes appropriate and effective use of common academic phrases
for functions like expanding on ideas, providing examples, expressing
personal views, and/or making claims.
• Writing incorporates very strong syntactic and lexical variety.
• Text effectively communicates the intended meaning to readers.
Formatting (10%) • Paper uses conventional formatting for page layout, title, capitalization,
paragraph formatting, and sentence boundaries.
• Sources are accurately cited through APA documentation style.
**Note: Revision and Reflection are graded separately through the Feedback Response Form and
Project Reflection
References
AlHammadi, F. (2013). The Urgent Necessity for Learning and Using English as an International Dialect of Communication in the Arab School System and Universities: A Sociolinguistic Study. International Journal of English Linguistics, 3, 1-8. Retrieved November 11, 2016, from http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijel/article/viewFile/23786/16037
Coskun, A. (2010). Whose English should we teach? Reflections from Turkey. Abant Izzet Baysal University, Turkey, 9, 1-20. Retrieved November 10, 2016, from http://www.esp-world.info/Articles_27/espworld.pdf
Howlader, M. R. (2010, July). Teaching English Pronunciation in Countries where English is a Second Language: Bangladesh Perspective. ASA University, 1-12. Retrieved November 10, 2016, from http://www.asaub.edu.bd/data/asaubreview/v4n2sl20.pdf
Medgyes, P. (2010). When the Teacher is a Non-Native Speaker. Differences in Teaching Behavior, 1-14. Retrieved November 11, 2016, from http://teachesl.pbworks.com/f/When%2Bthe%2Bteacher%2Bis%2Ba%2Bnon-native%2Bspeaker.PDF
[Show More]
.png)
