Genre analysis of introduction section in electrical engineering undergraduate laboratory reports

Veeramuthu Veerappan; Mokhtarrudin Ahmad; Kavitha Balakrishnan; Mohd Afizal Aris; Wei Hui Suan

doi:10.12688/f1000research.73461.3

Home Browse Genre analysis of introduction section in electrical engineering undergraduate...

ALL Metrics

Views

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Research Article

Revised

Genre analysis of introduction section in electrical engineering undergraduate laboratory reports

[version 3; peer review: 2 approved, 2 approved with reservations]

Veeramuthu Veerappan ^1,2, Mokhtarrudin Ahmad¹, Kavitha Balakrishnan², Mohd Afizal Aris², Wei Hui Suan³

Veeramuthu Veerappan ^1,2, Mokhtarrudin Ahmad¹, [...] Kavitha Balakrishnan², Mohd Afizal Aris², Wei Hui Suan³

PUBLISHED 22 Mar 2024

Author details Author details

¹ Learning Institute for Empowerment, Multimedia University, 63100 Cyberjaya, Selangor, Malaysia
² Faculty of Applied Communication, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, Selangor, 63100, Malaysia
³ City University, Selangor, Malaysia

Veeramuthu Veerappan
Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Mokhtarrudin Ahmad
Roles: Funding Acquisition, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Visualization

Kavitha Balakrishnan
Roles: Formal Analysis, Resources, Writing – Review & Editing

Mohd Afizal Aris
Roles: Formal Analysis, Resources, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Wei Hui Suan
Roles: Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

This article is included in the Research Synergy Foundation gateway.

Abstract

Background

This study examines the genre of Engineering Laboratory Reports (ELR) introduction section written by Electrical Engineering Undergraduates in a higher learning institution. The aims of this study are to identify the rhetorical moves and combinations of move patterns used by electrical engineering (EE) students to write introduction section.

Method

A genre analysis was conducted to identify writing patterns and convention practices of engineering undergraduate students thus a corpus of N = 35 was selected from electrical engineering students in their final year of study. This study adopted Genre Theory as its theoretical framework, Ngowu 1997 analytical framework and BCU approach for analysis procedure. A pilot test was conducted to determine the model that fits the best to describe moves and steps of ELR. Coding scheme was developed and intercoder reliability showed a significance of 0.91 The study benchmarks a move or step to be present in at least 60% of the reports.

Results

The finding shows the introduction consists of one main move which is providing background information of the experiment and followed by four subsequent steps which are reference to research purposes, reference to theoretical knowledge in the field, providing an overview of the study and identification of main research apparatus. The move 1 and all four steps identified above are viewed as obligatory, conventional and optional move and steps in introduction section among undergraduates in academic context. The exemplification of finding shows lack of compliance among undergraduates to produce EELR based on university

Keywords

Introduction section, laboratory reports, move analysis, engineering discourse

Corresponding author: Veeramuthu Veerappan

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Copyright: © 2024 Veerappan V et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Veerappan V, Ahmad M, Balakrishnan K et al. Genre analysis of introduction section in electrical engineering undergraduate laboratory reports [version 3; peer review: 2 approved, 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2024, 11:163 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73461.3) First published: 09 Feb 2022, 11:163 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73461.1) Latest published: 22 Mar 2024, 11:163 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73461.3)

Revised Amendments from Version 2

All comments from reviewers are taken into consideration and a thorough revision and amendment are made to the article from the previous version. An analytical model used based on university guidelines are provided to highlight the writing mismatches. The intercoder reliability test score was calculated and reported, besides the process and procedures of coding are clearly stated. To depict how the texts are analysed, the extracts of text from EELR corpus that shows moves and steps are exemplified. The extracted text used for exemplification is bolded and italicised to show the differences in analysis. The insights of the engineering content specialists towards students’ compliance to university report writing guidelines based on semi-structured interviews are included and discussed in method section. The mismatches are highlighted to show the existing gaps in writing this genre.11 new references on epistemological properties of electrical engineering studies are discussed and added into this version. The corpus consisting N=35 is converted and compiled into pdf and the number of words obtained are 47194. A clear description on how the study is conducted qualitatively is discussed thoroughly. A robust discussion to the results and conclusion are given and are framed to a broader discussion of electrical engineering literacy.

See the authors' detailed response to the review by Donnie Tulud
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Enrique Sologuren Insúa
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Ilyana Jalaluddin
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Thi Ngoc Phuong Le

Introduction

Among the many academic genres, writing an investigative article has grown a lot of curiosity and thoughtfulness among the academicians and researchers.¹ Has introduced his “move analysis” to examine the structure of introduction section in the engineering research articles.² This study contributes to a better understanding among practitioners in this discourse community on how to write effective research articles but not much study has been conducted to analyze electrical engineering laboratory reports (EELR).³ In his paper, “Writing a Laboratory Report for Senior Electrical Engineering Courses: Guidelines and Recommendations,” mentioned that in engineering pedagogics, specifically in the electrical engineering courses, laboratory report can be use as the measurement to evaluate the understanding of the theory taught in the classes.

Research indicates that tertiary level engineering programs are challenging for both learners and educators. This can be seen with high dropout rates, low academic achievement and lack of diversity within academic programs.⁴^–⁷

Across the globe, governments, corporates, and scholars are widely acknowledging the need for reform in tertiary engineering education.⁸ Substantial efforts and resources have been funded to improve the quantity and quality of engineering graduates. However, despite these tantamount investments, there has been limited improvement and reformation in this field of education.⁹

The attention given to the actions and behaviours of teachers, students, administrators and institutions have often overshadowed the gist and essence of engineering knowledge. This study aims to address the rhetorical patterns, structure and conventions of EELR writing among EE students in a higher learning institution. The EE education specializes in scientific foundation, by emphasising graduates to gain expertise in electrical field. It encompasses elements of traditional EE curriculum such as circuit building and electricity transmission, alternative energy, and high current transfer.¹⁰

Beck and Young (2005)¹¹ contend that regional context shapes professional identity and their specialised knowledge while Bernstein¹² identified the connection between professional identity and knowledge through “inner dedication” to foster awareness and dedication among EE learners and educators. The cutting-edge engineering education are shifting its understanding or epistemology by moving from foundational sciences to applied sciences, from theoretical knowledge to practical problem solving and design skills, and from academic realm to professional world. New perspectives and methodologies are introduced within disciplines like EE. Academics at universities are becoming increasingly cognizant to these epistemological changes and recognise that successful navigation through these stages are crucial for students’ achievement.⁴ Thus, an engineering project can serve as a distinctive teaching pedagogy within EE programs that entails hands-on laboratory work and the creation of engineering artifacts.¹³

The primary job of any scientific introduction is to establish the purpose for doing the experiment that is to be reported. Thus, the introduction and the theoretical background were usually combined into one introductory section depending on the length and complexity of the report.³ stated that the introduction creates the reader’s overall understanding of the rest of the report. He mentioned that students should only write a maximum of two A4 papers to avoid any irrelevant information being mentioned and stated in the introductory paragraph. Moreover, the introductory paragraph should also make a reference to the appropriate theory and the importance of the previous studies whenever necessary. Not all undergraduate students have experienced writing ELRs in high schools or before varsity admission.¹⁴

The ability to write an effective introductory paragraph and abstract or summary will assist the writing process, as these sections, especially the introduction contains a synopsis of the whole report. According to Ref. ¹⁵ the inquiry based ELRs foster questioning, designing experiments and interpreting results are essential processes to become experimental scientist.¹⁶ The introduction or the introductory paragraph is one of the central sections of a laboratory report. To have the readers have a better understanding and a clear guideline of the report, the introduction should also provide relevant background information and puts the study into context of the depth and challenges of an experiment.¹⁷ Additionally, the introduction should include a brief overview of relevant and latest publications in the respective field.

According to the university under study’s guideline, an introduction of an Engineering Laboratory Report (ELR) should consist of an overview of the topic under experiment, a clear statement of purpose, the reasons to initiate the experiment, as well as general content to assist reader’s understanding into subject matter. The engineering faculty also requires students to discuss underpinning theory that leads to experiments, a short literature review on the theory, questions and even ambiguities which arose from the chosen theory. The current study attempts to fill the existing gap by investigating the lacks in the Introduction section against the guidelines provided by the university. Previous studies in similar field have focused on underpinning theories, rather than tertiary driven experiments. The focus is not explicitly on laboratory work, but on inquiry as cited by Refs. 18–22 and practical work,²² hands-on practices.²³ The purpose of this study is to investigate what are the moves and steps as well as the combination of move and step patterns used by engineering undergraduates in writing the introduction section of ELR. These aims are to be realized with the use of Genre Theory.¹^,²⁴ mentioned that Genre Theory has evolved from the study of discourse and linguistic analysis to further describe and explain why the members which belongs to a certain discourse community use the language the way they do. The interpretative characteristic of genre theory made it widely accepted and used in genre-based studies among academics and linguists.²⁵

Methods

The study descriptively examines EELRs, focusing on analyzing rhetorical moves and steps. It utilizes a qualitative research approach to explore and elucidate the various moves and steps present in EELRs. Descriptive research is chosen to portray the natural state of people, events, and conditions whereby Information is sourced from physical settings, records, documents, objects, materials, and individuals directly associated with the EELRs.²⁶ A genre analysis was conducted to determine the moves and steps that occur in the introduction section by adapting the categories outlined by Ref. 2 framework. Prior to using Ngowu’s model, a pilot test was conducted to examine the suitability of this model to the current study on introduction section of EELR.

15 EELRs were selected and examined to determine the match in the description. There were more than 60% match in the categories outlined by the model and EELRs under examination, making it the most suitable analytical framework that can be modified and replicated. The total sample size collected was N=74. These samples were further scrutinized and minimized to select the EELRs that contain most complete and comprehensive information. Quality of data, amount of information, nature of topic, scope of study, design and method used in a qualitative study are the few factors used in determining sample size.²⁷ To control the variable, only EELRs that received distinction grades of 4 and above score over maximum score of 5 awarded by lab instructors were selected to maximise the possibility that it conforms to EE disciplinary standards. The sample size of this study is maintained at N=35 as these samples best represented the EE laboratory genre and reached a saturation level with similar recurring moves and steps. The corpus consisting N=35 was converted and compiled into pdf and the number of words obtained are 47194.

To further validate the data, semi-structured interview was conducted with an engineering content specialist. According to the subject specialist, the total intake of electrical engineering students in this tertiary institution is not more than 100 students a year and, in each trimester, these students are engaged in writing at least 4 EELRs.²⁸ stated that the sample size for a qualitative study is influenced by several factors, including the quality of data, scope of the study, nature of topic, information richness from each subject, the qualitative methodology utilized, and the study’s design. Thus, the data set of N=35 represents the final year EE student population of this institution. The procedures for conducting move analysis in this study adapted a corpus-based model outlined by Ref. 29 BCU approach. This approach adopted³⁰ and followed the procedures to determine the rhetorical function and meaning of each move and step of each text, conduct a pilot-coding to test and fine-tune the definitions of move purposes manually by hand, develop a coding protocol with clear definitions and examples of move types and steps, code the full set of texts, with an inter-rater reliability check to confirm a clear understanding of move definitions and realization of moves/steps, revise the coding protocol to resolve any discrepancies revealed by the inter-rater reliability check or newly discovered’ moves/steps, and re-coding problematic areas, conduct analysis on move features and other corpus-facilitated analyses and finally describe the corpus of texts in terms of obligatory, conventional or optional move structures. As to address the trustworthiness of this study, a coding protocol was developed with definitions and examples for mandatory, conventional and optional moves and an inter-coder reliability check was conducted among three coders. A coding scheme was developed to identify rhetorical moves and steps in introduction section and also to control the variability in the analysis that guide all coders. There were three coders involved in the development and modification of the coding scheme who is the researcher himself, secondly an engineering content specialist and thirdly a language instructor. The reason for including two other coders apart from the researcher is to ensure inter-coder reliability. The second and third coders were trained to read two similar samples of EELR’s and identify the moves and steps in the Introduction section. Cohen & Kappa coefficient, a statistical measure that takes into consideration random agreement between coders, was used to evaluate intercoder reliability. To determine the degree of agreement above and beyond what would be predicted by chance, kappa statistics were computed. An online calculator was used to calculate Kappa statistics by comparing the coded data for a subset of the EELRs from all three coders. Following their separate codes for the subset of reports, the coders got together to discuss their consensus and differences. Each coder then went on to rate nine more reports. With a coefficient of 0.91, the Kappa coefficient obtained from this analysis demonstrated a high degree of agreement. This supports the validity of the study’s conclusions and shows a high level of dependability in the coding procedure.

Some textbooks and research articles were also used as a guide such as the textbooks written by Refs. 25, 27 on engineering and technical writing and research articles reporting engineering writing,³¹^–³³ and genre-based studies of written discourse in other engineering disciplines.³⁴^–³⁶

Ethical Approval Number: EA1582021 approved by Technology Transfer Office, Multimedia University.

Results and discussion

To depict how the texts are analysed, the extracts of text from EELR corpus which show moves and steps are exemplified. The move and steps are identified such as (M1S1 means Move 1 Step 1). The extracted text used for exemplification is bolded and italicised to show the differences in analysis. The analysis shows that the introduction consists of one main move which is providing background information of the experiment and followed by three subsequent steps which are reference to research purposes, reference to theoretical knowledge in the field, providing an overview of the study and identification of main research apparatus. This finding has more than 80% consistency to the findings of a previous studies by Refs. 30, 36 on biochemistry articles.

Move 1: Presenting background information.

This move occurred in all 35 ELRs or 100% (Obligatory) shows this move as the most important element in ELR introduction. This statement is written prior to all other information as to guide the writer throughout the reporting process of laboratory experiment and is important to give readers general information about the experiment. It is written to present background information of the experiments consists of 4 steps. Firstly, Move 1 Step 1 the reference to research purposes. Move 1 Step 2 provides an overview of the topic under study. Move 1 Step 3 provides the theoretical knowledge of the field under study and Move 1 Step 4 is identification of main research apparatus. Move 1: Presenting background information was written in all 35 ELRs or 100% (Obligatory) that makes this move as the most important structure in ELR introduction. The extracted text used for exemplification is italicised to show the differences from the analysis. The following example shows how the modifications are made to the extracted text in this study. The example below is taken from the introduction section of ELR 25.

Table 1. Exemplification of Moves and Steps in Introduction Section extracted from ELR 25.

Move 1 Presenting Background Information Move 1 Step 1 Reference to research purposes	To verify Thevenin’s Theorem. To verify Superposition Theorem.
Move 1 Step 2 Providing an overview of the study Move 1 Step 3 Reference to theoretical knowledge in the field	By measuring the short-circuit current I_SC flowing through a wire that connects X to Y, the value of R_TH (or Z_TH) can be calculated as the ratio of V_TH over I_SC. (Phasor values are to be used when calculating the Thevenin equivalent impedance.) (S1) The series combination of V_TH and R_TH (or Z_TH) is the equivalent circuit of the black box. (S2) By equivalent, it means the voltage across and current through any circuit element that is connected between terminals X and Y of the black box will be the same as the case when that circuit element is connected in series with R_TH (or Z_TH) and V_TH. (S3) The theorem is valid provided that the circuit inside the “black box” is linear. (S4) The load resistor R_L (or load impedance Z_L), however, may not be linear. (S5) Thevenin’s Theorem is a very useful and frequently used theorem in circuit analysis(S6) Consider a load resistor R_L (or load impedance Z_L) that is connected to a “black box” as shown in Figure 1. (S7) The black box can contain any combination of circuit elements. (S8) Thevenin’s Theorem states that insofar as the load resistor R_L (or load impedance Z_L) is concerned, the black box can be represented by a series combination of an ideal voltage source, V_TH, and a resistor, R_TH (or impedance Z_TH). V_TH is known as the Thevenin equivalent voltage source. (S9) Its value can be found by measuring the open-circuit voltage between terminals X and Y when the resistor R_L is removed. (S10) R_TH is called the Thevenin equivalent resistance. (S11) (Z_TH is called the Thevenin equivalent impedance.) (S12)
Move 1 Step 4 Identification of main research apparatus	“Circuit Theory” experiment board DC Power Supply Dual-trace Oscilloscope Function Generator Digital Multimeter Connecting wires

Move 1 Step 1: Reference to research purposes

Reference to research purposes is written to state the objectives of the initial experiment. This step is considered as the most important step in the introduction section that serves to inform readers of the aims of conducting laboratory experiments. The completed report can only be understood by readers if the objectives are clearly stated before moving on to other steps. However, based on the analysis of 35 ELR’s compiled, this step occurred as Move 1 Step 1 only in 24 ELR’s or 69% (conventional). This hinders reader’s from understanding the purpose of the conducting and reporting experiments and supports the gap in stating the research objectives clearly.

Table 2. Move 1 Step 1: Reference to the research purposes of experiment is exemplified in the following instances.

ELR 5	To apply error-control coding techniques using Linear Block Codes. To design and generate Linear Block Codes with MATLAB software.
ELR 13	To trace out the standing wave pattern developed along a waveguide. To make direct SWR measurements using an SWR meter. To make indirect SWR measurements using the Double Minimum Method.
ELR 27	To construct a power measurement in DC circuit by a wattmeter.
ELR 20	To design and construct a prototype of a functioning programmable digital alarm clock using uP 8051. Apply and integrate the micro-processor & interfacing principles taught in ECP2216 course.
ELR 35	To study the effect of magnetic inductance of the given circuit. To measure self-inductance and mutual inductance.
ELR 17	To examine a message signal, a carrier signal and an AM modulated waveform in time domain. To measure the modulation index of an AM signal. To examine a message signal, a carrier signal and an AM modulated waveform in frequency domain.
ELR 30	In this experiment we will examine a message signal, a carrier signal and a FM modulated waveform in the time domain. To examine a message signal, a carrier signal and a FM modulated waveform in frequency domain. And later demonstrate the demodulation of an FM signal.

Move 1 Step 2: Giving an overview of the topic under study

Move 1 Step 2 provides an overview of the topic under study. It gives general information about what the experiment is all about, states the characteristics of the variables under study, the main terms used in this experiment, short definition of the functions of each variable and features used that gives an overall view of the experiment conducted. This step has occurred in 33 reports or 94% of the total report (conventional) and but was in correct sequence in only 9 reports as step 2. This shows that the move pattern in introduction section is not always in sequence of M1S1-M1S2-M1S3-M1S4.

Table 3. Move 1 Step 2: Giving an overview of the topic under study is exemplified in the following instances.

ELR 22	SWR stands for standing wave ratio or VSWR stands for Voltage standing wave ratio. SWR is computed from the ratio between an RF signal going in the forward direction (toward antenna) and the RF signal going in the reverse, or reflected direction (toward transmitter) on a transmission line. As I read the explanations given in the lab sheet i tried not to make any judgements or jump to conclusions about the meanings, A low SWR refers to a large forward RF signal and small reflected signal. Since the reflected voltage can never be less than zero the very lowest value possible is 1 or 1:1. A high SWR refers to a large reflected signal. For example, a meter reading of 9.5 indicates an SWR of 9.5 to 1.
ELR 18	Pulse code modulation (PCM) is essentially an analog-to-digital conversion (ADC) process where the information contained in the instantaneous samples of an analog signal is represented by digital codewords in a serial bit stream. This can be accomplished by representing the signal in discrete form in both time and amplitude domain.
ELR 24	Baseband digital signals are suitable for transmission over a pair of wires or coaxial cables due to its sizable power at low frequencies. These signals cannot be transmitted over a radio link because this would require impractically large antennas to efficiently radiate the low-frequency spectrum of the signal. Hence, for such purposes, we use analogue modulation techniques in which the digital signal messages are used to modulate a high-frequency continuous-wave (CW) carrier.

Move 1 Step 3: Reference to theoretical knowledge in the field

Move 1 Step 3 provides reference to the theoretical knowledge in the field. This move provides students or readers with sufficient mathematical or theoretical background to understand how the experiment works, what has the earlier assumptions indicated and how the experiment is related to the theoretical knowledge. This section may be written in short if it can be well understood and connection can be made with the measurement of an experiment. Move 1 Step 3 occurred in only 20 reports or 57% (optional). Moreover, this step occurred as step 4 in 17 instances or 49% thus neither in accordance with university guidelines nor in correct sequence of M1S1-M1S2-M1S3 and M1S4. Based on the interview with subject specialist, these reports are lacking in referencing underpinning theories and citing previous literature thus making the report less concrete. A robust intervention is required in teaching EELR writing conventions to reinforce students’ ability to provide proper referencing to theories and literature.

Table 4. Move 1 Step 3: Reference to the theoretical knowledge in the field is exemplified in the following instances.

ELR 35	When the equation R₁R₄ = R₂R₃, for the circuit of Figure 1.1 is satisfied, the bridge is balanced and a “null” or zero reading is obtained on the detector. Consider the Wheastone's bridge shown in Figure 1.1. It has four arms each having a resistance. The voltage at the nodes A and B may be computed using the simple potential division rule $V_{A} = \frac{R_{3}}{R_{1} + R_{3}} \cdot V_{S}$
ELR 29	An electronic filter is careful circuit that can be specified to attenuate other signal than selected band of frequency. There is two type of filter which is active and passive. Passive consist only resistor, inductor and capacitor while active filter consist of band amplification with a few frequency-selective passive components.
ELR 16	A radio frequency signal can be sent between two antennas at transmitting and receiver station. Besides, bandwidth used to transmit an AM signal usually allocate in between 200 kHz to 25MHz.
ELR 34	In extrinsic materials, investigation of the conduction properties gives information about the majority carriers; in intrinsic materials, we obtain information about the combined effects of conduction electrons and holes. The conductivity, σ, is defined from the equation J = σE and, in terms of the charge carrier concentrations and mobility.
ELR 9	The Hall effect is based on a moving charge that experience a Lorentz force in a magnetic field of F = q υ x B (= qυ_xB_z). Consider a n-type semiconductor (germanium), the Lorentz force due to B_{z(magnetic field)} will exert an average downward force on the electron flowing in the negative x-direction (as show as the Figure 1).

Move 1 Step 4: Stating the main apparatus used to conduct the experiment occurred in the introduction section of 33 ELR’s or 94% (conventional) but 29 reports or 83% of the total reports just stated or outlined the main apparatus used without detailed explanation on how to use it. This is another lack identified that most of the ELRs did not provide detailed description of the apparatus used. Moreover, this step has occurred as step 4 in only 17 ELR’s or 49% only. This shows lack of compliance among undergraduates reporting ELR’s in sequential orders outlined by the university. Based on interview with lab instructors, they commented this step is often overlooked by EE students and suggested further reinforcement in instruction.

Table 5. Move 1 Step 4: Identification of main research apparatus is exemplified in the following instances.

ELR 24	Software required is MATLAB
ELR 25	“Circuit Theory” experiment board DC Power Supply Dual-trace Oscilloscope Function Generator Digital Multimeter Connecting wires
ELR 22	A specialized linear-beam vacuum tube (evacuated electron tube). Klystrons are used as amplifiers at microwave and radio frequencies to produce both low-power reference signals for super heterodyne radar receivers and to produce high-power carrier waves for communications and the driving force for modern particle accelerators.
ELR 3	The frequency (ƒ) can be measured either using the mathematical relationship of speed of light in the waveguide medium, or rather using size resonant cavity (Cavity Wave meter). The resonant cavity wave takes circular or rectangular ship with both sides of wave guide short circuited.

Combination of move patterns in Introduction section.

In this section, the analysis of ELR’s focuses to determine the sequence of move and steps used to begin and end the introduction section. As noted in previous analysis, the length of each step varies with Move 1 Step 1 that shows the objectives stated are experiment written the shortest of all 4 steps. In this step, students use action verbs to state the objectives without detailed elaboration. This step clearly states the aims to be achieved by the end of experiment. 24 ELR’s or 69% of the reports began with statement of objectives. Although most of the reports start with M1S1, this finding cannot be generalized to overall EELR’s as some start from M1S1. 7 ELR’s or 20% of the overall reports starts with M1S2, 2 ELR’s or less than 6% of the reports start with M1S3 and only 1 report or 3% starts from M1S4 and 17 ELR’s or 49% of the total reports end with M1S1. This is the last step in presenting background information of the experiment. This step is frequently adopted to end the introduction section and before moving to method section. Next, 9 ELR’s or 26% of the reports end with M1 S3, while 6 ELR’s or 17% of the reports end with M1S2 and only 3 report ends with M1S1. Based on the occurrence of each step-in move 1 of introduction section and all three steps identified and discussed above are viewed as mandatory and conventional and optional steps in introduction section. The model proposed in Table 1 below encapsulates the Move and Steps made by undergraduate students of Electrical Engineering in writing their laboratory reports. As a whole, the findings are compared against the guidelines set by the university to determine the mismatch or lacks that shows minimal discussion on the theoretical aspects leading to experiment and the absence of referencing and citations to published literature, thus hinders the targeted reader who may not have prior knowledge to orientate into the introduction section of ELR. The combination of move and steps show most of the steps overlaps against each other and not in sequential order. This may pose challenges to laboratory instructors and supervisors to comprehend and assess the reports with clarity as only moderate level of compliance shown by undergraduates to write the reports in the format and conventions outlined by the university.

Table 6. Model for Introduction section of ELR.

Move 1	Presenting background information (Obligatory)
by Move 1 Step 1	Reference to research purpose (Obligatory)
by Move 1 Step 2	Providing an overview of the study (Conventional)
by Move 1 Step 3	Reference to theoretical knowledge in the field (Optional)
by Move 1 Step 4	Identification of main research apparatus (Conventional)

Conclusion

It is advised that discipline-specific engineers and English for Academic Purposes (EAP) practitioners, such as English writing instructors, work together in response to these findings. Through this partnership, the unique learning needs of engineering students can be identified, and genre-based writing training can be effectively tailored to meet these requirements. Students can improve the quality and clarity of their lab reports as well as better fulfil the requirements stated in the university guidelines by doing this. The investigation found substantial variances between the final report deliverables produced by students and the guidelines set by the university. The absence of pertinent literature evaluations and background theories is one of the most noticeable differences. This shortcoming raises questions about the theoretical underpinnings of laboratory tests. The lack of references to past studies or attempts at replication raises the possibility that undergraduates are handling laboratory experiments quite independently. The experiments may not be as compelling or have a broad application if they lack a theoretical foundation. There appears to be a lack of information provided regarding the experiment and the reasoning behind the apparatus choice. The goal of the experiment and its applicability may not be evident to readers because of this lack of background information.

Moreover, the examination revealed discrepancies from the suggested chronological sequence while writing reports. Such deviation from the recommended structure can make the evaluation procedure more difficult and compromise the reports overall cohesion and clarity. The study also underlined how crucial it is for laboratory reports to have accurate referencing and citations. The contribution of laboratory reports to the larger corpus of knowledge and literature is constrained in the absence of these academic practices. For students to place their experiments in the larger scientific discourse, it is imperative that they comprehend the need to cite prior engineering research and theories.

It is important to recognise that this study is limited to electrical engineering ELRs, and the results might not be immediately applicable to other engineering subfields. Future research should consider data triangulation from other sources, including expert validation and interviews, to provide a more thorough knowledge of how various discourse groups approach the drafting of laboratory reports. In the long run, this comprehensive study strategy can deepen our awareness of the reasons for the adoption of writing styles and norms by discourse groups and improve our comprehension of literacy processes in engineering.

Data availability

Figshare. Genre Analysis of introduction section in electrical engineering undergraduate laboratory reports. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14881911.v3.³⁷

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero “No rights reserved” data waiver (CC BY 4.0 Public domain dedication).

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge Dr. Shamala Paramasivam from UPM has given permission to include her name and affiliation in this publication for her advice in conducting this research.

References

1. Swales J: Genre Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1990.
2. Nwogu KN: The medical research paper: Structure and function. Engl. Specif. Purp. 1997; 16(2): 119–138. Publisher Full Text
3. Masoud MI: Writing a laboratory report for senior electrical engineering courses: Guidelines and recommendations. Proceedings of 2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON 2017. [7942870] IEEE Computer Society. 2017; pp. 340–346. Publisher Full Text
4. Winberg C, Winberg S, Jacobs C, et al.:‘I take engineering with me’: epistemological transitions across an engineering curriculum. Teach. High. Educ. 2016; 21(4): 398–414. Publisher Full Text
5. Baillie C, Armstrong R: Crossing Knowledge Boundaries and Thresholds: Challenging the Dominant Discourses Within Engineering Education.Engineering Education for Social Justice: Critical Explorations and Opportunities.Lucena J, editor. Dordrecht: Springer2013; pp. 135–152.Publisher Full Text
6. Carstensen A-K, Bernhard J: Threshold Concepts and Keys to the Portal of Understanding: Some Examples from Electrical Engineering.Threshold Concepts Within the Disciplines.Land R, Meyer JHF, Smith J, editors. Rotterdam: Sense; 2008; pp. 143–154. Publisher Full Text
7. Garrison L, Amos DM, Stevens R, et al.: Engineering as Lifestyle and a Meritocracy of Difficulty: Two Pervasive Beliefs among Engineering Students and Their Possible Effects.Paper presented at the 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition of the American Society for Engineering Education.Honolulu, HI; 2007. https://peer.asee.org/2791
8. McKenna A, Jeffrey F, Judson King C, et al.: The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Report on Forum on Characterizing the Impact and Diffusion of Transformative Engineering Education Innovations. 2011. https://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=52358
9. McKenna A, Froyd J, Litzinger T:The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Preparing for Next Steps. J. Eng. Educ. 2014; 103(2): 188–192. Publisher Full Text
10. Gumaelius L, Skogh IB, Matthíasdóttir Á, et al.:Engineering education in change. A case study on the impact of digital transformation on content and teaching methods in different engineering disciplines. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 2024; 49(1): 70–93. Publisher Full Text
11. Beck J, Young MFD:The Assault on the Professions and the Restructuring of Academic and Professional Identities: A Bernsteinian Analysis. Br. J. Sociol. Educ. 2005; 26: 183–197. Publisher Full Text
12. Bernstein B: Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research and Critique. Oxford:Rowman & Littlefield; 2000.
13. Stiwne EE, Jungert T:Engineering Students’ Experiences of Transition from Study to Work. J. Educ. Work. 2010; 23(5): 417–437. Publisher Full Text
14. Parkinson J: The student laboratory report genre: A genre analysis. Engl. Specif. Purp. 2017; 45: 1–13. Publisher Full Text
15. Kalaskas AB: Science lab report writing in postsecondary education: Mediating teaching and learning strategies between students and instructors (Doctoral dissertation, George Mason University).2013.
16. Beer D, McMurrey D: A guide to writing as an engineer. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1997.
17. Lannon JM: Technical Writing. 6th ed.New York: HarperCollins College Publishers; 1993.
18. Lin V, Barrett NE, Liu GZ, et al.:A Systematic Review on Inquiry-Based Writing Instruction in Tertiary Settings. Writ. Commun. 2023; 40(1): 238–281. Publisher Full Text
19. Chin C, Osborne J:Students’ questions: a potential resource for teaching and learning science. Stud. Sci. Educ. 2008; 44(1): 1–39. Publisher Full Text
20. Furtak EM, Seidel T, Iverson H, et al.:Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 2012; 82(3): 300–329. Publisher Full Text
21. Gericke N, Högström P, Wallin J:A systematic review of research on laboratory work in secondary school. Stud. Sci. Educ. 2022; 59(2): 245–285. Publisher Full Text
22. Lazonder AW, Harmsen R:Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Rev. Educ. Res. 2016; 86(3): 681–718. Publisher Full Text
23. Akuma FV, Callaghan R:Teaching practices linked to the implementation of inquiry-based practical work in certain science classrooms. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2019; 56(1): 64–90. Publisher Full Text
24. Bhatia VK: Integrating products, processes and participants in professional writing. Candlin CN, Hyland K, editors. Writing: Texts, Process and Practices. New York: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.; 1999.
25. Bhatia VK: Applied Genre Analysis: A MultiPerspective Model. Ibérica. 2002; 4: 3–19.
26. Caglak S:Does hands-on science practices make an impact on achievement in science? A meta-analysis. J. Educ. Sci. Environ. Health. 2017; 3(1): 69–87. Publisher Full Text
27. Morse JM: Determining sample size. Qual. Health Res. 2000; 10: 3–5. Publisher Full Text
28. Mertler CA, Charles CM: Introduction to educational research. 5th ed.Boston, MA:Pearson; 2005.
29. Biber D, Connor U, Upton TA: Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Vol. 28.. John Benjamins Publishing; 2007
30. Kanoksilapatham B: Rhetorical moves in biochemistry research articles. Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. 2007; 73–119.
31. Flowerdew L: The problem-solution pattern in apprentice vs. professional technical writing: An application of appraisal theory. Aston G, Bernardini S, Stewart D, editors. Corpora and language learners. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; 2004; pp. 125–135.
32. Flowerdew L: Corpus-based analyses of the problem–solution pattern: A phraseological approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; 2008.
33. McKenna B: How engineers write: An empirical study of engineering report writing. Appl. Linguis. 1997; 18(2): 189–211. Publisher Full Text
34. Hopkins A, Dudley-Evans T: A genre-based investigation of the discussion sections in articles and dissertations. Engl. Specif. Purp. 1988; 7: 113–121. Publisher Full Text
35. Kanoksilapatham B: A corpus-based investigation of scientific research articles: Linking move analysis with multidimensional analysis. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Georgetown University, Washington, DC.2003.
36. Kanoksilapatham B: Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. Engl. Specif. Purp. 2005; 24: 269–292.
37. Veerappan V, Ahmad M, Aris M, et al.: Genre Analysis of Introduction Section in Electrical Engineering Undergraduate Laboratory Reports. figshare. Dataset. 2021. Publisher Full Text

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 3

VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 09 Feb 2022

Author details Author details

Mokhtarrudin Ahmad
Roles: Funding Acquisition, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Visualization

Kavitha Balakrishnan
Roles: Formal Analysis, Resources, Writing – Review & Editing

Mohd Afizal Aris
Roles: Formal Analysis, Resources, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Wei Hui Suan
Roles: Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Article Versions (3)

version 3

Revised

Published: 22 Mar 2024, 11:163

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73461.3

version 2

Revised

Published: 27 Apr 2023, 11:163

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73461.2

version 1

Published: 09 Feb 2022, 11:163

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73461.1

© 2024 Veerappan V et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Veerappan V, Ahmad M, Balakrishnan K et al. Genre analysis of introduction section in electrical engineering undergraduate laboratory reports [version 3; peer review: 2 approved, 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2024, 11:163 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73461.3)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?

Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE

ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Version 3

VERSION 3

PUBLISHED 22 Mar 2024

Revised

Views

Reviewer Report 26 Apr 2024

Ilyana Jalaluddin, Department of Foreign Languages, Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.163629.r258425

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Views

Reviewer Report 16 Apr 2024

Enrique Sologuren Insúa, Universidad de los Andes, Las Condes, Santiago Metropolitan Region, Chile

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.163629.r258427

Revisions are appropriate. I have no further comments on ... Continue reading

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Version 2

VERSION 2

PUBLISHED 27 Apr 2023

Revised

Views

Reviewer Report 09 Aug 2023

Enrique Sologuren Insúa, Universidad de los Andes, Las Condes, Santiago Metropolitan Region, Chile

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.146353.r184280

The article is clear and comprehensible. It uses a theoretical and methodological framework appropriate to the nature of the object of study.

The specialized bibliography used is complete and sufficient.

The study follows a firmly established tradition in genre theory and provides new knowledge about the discursive rhetorical characteristics of the texts and the difficulties that students manifest in the texture and writing of the text.

The methodology needs to be reinforced. It is necessary to indicate the total number of words in the corpus.

There is also a lack of data on the statistical analytical procedures, i.e. how the data was analyzed to obtain the respective percentages: was a statistical test used, was only descriptive statistics used? The quantitative description procedures need to be made clearer.

In the conclusion the difficulties are presented, but they are not framed within a broader discussion of literacy processes in engineering. In that sense, it is suggested to add a more robust discussion component, either in the results section or in the conclusion section.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Applied linguistics; Genre Analysis; Literacy in specialised contexts; Academic and professional writing; Writing in STEM areas.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 04 Apr 2024

Veeramuthu Veerappan, Learning Institute for Empowerment, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, 63100, Malaysia

04 Apr 2024

Author Response

Reviewer 2
1. The methodology needs to be reinforced. It is necessary to indicate the total number of words in the corpus.

The corpus consisting N==35 was converted and compiled ... Continue reading Reviewer 2
1. The methodology needs to be reinforced. It is necessary to indicate the total number of words in the corpus.

The corpus consisting N==35 was converted and compiled into pdf and the number of words obtained are 47194.

2. There is also a lack of data on the statistical analytical procedures, i.e. how the data was analyzed to obtain the respective percentages: was a statistical test used, was only descriptive statistics used? The quantitative description procedures need to be made clearer.

This study is qualitatively done. A genre analysis was conducted to determine the moves and steps that occur in the introduction section by adapting the categories outlined by Ref. 1 framework. Prior to using Ngowu’s model, a pilot test was conducted to examine the suitability of this model to the current study on introduction section of EELR. 15 EELRs were selected and examined to determine the match in the description. There were more than 60% match in the categories outlined by the model and EELRs under examination, making it the most suitable analytical framework that can be modified and replicated. The total sample size collected was N=74. These samples were further scrutinized and minimized to select the EELRs that contain the most complete and comprehensive information. Quality of data, amount of information, nature of topic, scope of study, design and method used in a qualitative study are the few factors used in determining sample size. ⁹To control the variable, only EELRs that received distinction grades of 4 and above score over maximum score of 5 awarded by lab instructors were selected to maximise the possibility that it conforms to EE disciplinary standards.The sample size of this study is maintained at N=35 as these samples best represented the EE laboratory genre and reached a saturation level with similar recurring moves and steps. To further validate the data, a semi-structured interview was conducted with an engineering content specialist. According to the subject specialist, the total intake of electrical engineering students in this tertiary institution is not more than 100 students a year and, in each trimester, these students are engaged in writing at least 4 EELRs. [27] stated that the sample size for a qualitative study is influenced by several factors, including the quality of data, scope of the study, nature of topic, information richness from each subject, the qualitative methodology utilized, and the study's design. Thus, the data set of N=35 represents the final year EE student population of this institution. The procedures for conducting move analysis in this study adapted a corpus-based model outlined by Ref. 2 BCU approach. This approach adopted (18) and followed the procedures to determine the rhetorical function and meaning of each move and step of each text, conduct a pilot-coding to test and fine-tune the definitions of move purposes manually by hand, develop a coding protocol with clear definitions and examples of move types and steps, code the full set of texts, with an inter-rater reliability check to confirm a clear understanding of move definitions and realization of moves/steps, revise the coding protocol to resolve any discrepancies revealed by the inter-rater reliability check or newly discovered' moves/steps, and re-coding problematic areas, conduct analysis on move features and other corpus-facilitated analyses and finally describe the corpus of texts in terms of obligatory, conventional or optional move structures.

3. In the conclusion the difficulties are presented, but they are not framed within a broader discussion of literacy processes in engineering. In that sense, it is suggested to add a more robust discussion component, either in the results section or in the conclusion section.

It is advised that discipline-specific engineers and English for Academic Purposes (EAP) practitioners, such as English writing instructors, work together in response to these findings. Through this partnership, the unique learning needs of engineering students can be identified, and genre-based writing training can be effectively tailored to meet these requirements. Students can improve the quality and clarity of their lab reports as well as better fulfil the requirements stated in the university guidelines by doing this. The investigation found substantial variances between the final report deliverables produced by students and the guidelines set by the university. The absence of pertinent literature evaluations and background theories is one of the most noticeable differences. This shortcoming raises questions about the theoretical underpinnings of laboratory tests. The lack of references to past studies or attempts at replication raises the possibility that undergraduates are handling laboratory experiments quite independently. The experiments may not be as compelling or have a broad application if they lack a theoretical foundation. There appears to be a lack of information provided regarding the experiment and the reasoning behind the apparatus choice. The goal of the experiment and its applicability may not be evident to readers because of this lack of background information.
Moreover, the examination revealed discrepancies from the suggested chronological sequence while writing reports. Such deviation from the recommended structure can make the evaluation procedure more difficult and compromise the reports overall cohesion and clarity. The study also underlined how crucial it is for laboratory reports to have accurate referencing and citations. The contribution of laboratory reports to the larger corpus of knowledge and literature is constrained in the absence of these academic practices. For students to place their experiments in the larger scientific discourse, it is imperative that they comprehend the need to cite prior engineering research and theories. It is important to recognise that this study is limited to electrical engineering ELRs, and the results might not be immediately applicable to other engineering subfields. Future research should consider data triangulation from other sources, including expert validation and interviews, to provide a more thorough knowledge of how various discourse groups approach the drafting of laboratory reports. In the long run, this comprehensive study strategy can deepen our awareness of the reasons for the adoption of writing styles and norms by particular discourse groups and improve our comprehension of literacy processes in engineering.

Reviewer 2
1. The methodology needs to be reinforced. It is necessary to indicate the total number of words in the corpus.

The corpus consisting N==35 was converted and compiled into pdf and the number of words obtained are 47194.

2. There is also a lack of data on the statistical analytical procedures, i.e. how the data was analyzed to obtain the respective percentages: was a statistical test used, was only descriptive statistics used? The quantitative description procedures need to be made clearer.

This study is qualitatively done. A genre analysis was conducted to determine the moves and steps that occur in the introduction section by adapting the categories outlined by Ref. 1 framework. Prior to using Ngowu’s model, a pilot test was conducted to examine the suitability of this model to the current study on introduction section of EELR. 15 EELRs were selected and examined to determine the match in the description. There were more than 60% match in the categories outlined by the model and EELRs under examination, making it the most suitable analytical framework that can be modified and replicated. The total sample size collected was N=74. These samples were further scrutinized and minimized to select the EELRs that contain the most complete and comprehensive information. Quality of data, amount of information, nature of topic, scope of study, design and method used in a qualitative study are the few factors used in determining sample size. ⁹To control the variable, only EELRs that received distinction grades of 4 and above score over maximum score of 5 awarded by lab instructors were selected to maximise the possibility that it conforms to EE disciplinary standards.The sample size of this study is maintained at N=35 as these samples best represented the EE laboratory genre and reached a saturation level with similar recurring moves and steps. To further validate the data, a semi-structured interview was conducted with an engineering content specialist. According to the subject specialist, the total intake of electrical engineering students in this tertiary institution is not more than 100 students a year and, in each trimester, these students are engaged in writing at least 4 EELRs. [27] stated that the sample size for a qualitative study is influenced by several factors, including the quality of data, scope of the study, nature of topic, information richness from each subject, the qualitative methodology utilized, and the study's design. Thus, the data set of N=35 represents the final year EE student population of this institution. The procedures for conducting move analysis in this study adapted a corpus-based model outlined by Ref. 2 BCU approach. This approach adopted (18) and followed the procedures to determine the rhetorical function and meaning of each move and step of each text, conduct a pilot-coding to test and fine-tune the definitions of move purposes manually by hand, develop a coding protocol with clear definitions and examples of move types and steps, code the full set of texts, with an inter-rater reliability check to confirm a clear understanding of move definitions and realization of moves/steps, revise the coding protocol to resolve any discrepancies revealed by the inter-rater reliability check or newly discovered' moves/steps, and re-coding problematic areas, conduct analysis on move features and other corpus-facilitated analyses and finally describe the corpus of texts in terms of obligatory, conventional or optional move structures.

3. In the conclusion the difficulties are presented, but they are not framed within a broader discussion of literacy processes in engineering. In that sense, it is suggested to add a more robust discussion component, either in the results section or in the conclusion section.

It is advised that discipline-specific engineers and English for Academic Purposes (EAP) practitioners, such as English writing instructors, work together in response to these findings. Through this partnership, the unique learning needs of engineering students can be identified, and genre-based writing training can be effectively tailored to meet these requirements. Students can improve the quality and clarity of their lab reports as well as better fulfil the requirements stated in the university guidelines by doing this. The investigation found substantial variances between the final report deliverables produced by students and the guidelines set by the university. The absence of pertinent literature evaluations and background theories is one of the most noticeable differences. This shortcoming raises questions about the theoretical underpinnings of laboratory tests. The lack of references to past studies or attempts at replication raises the possibility that undergraduates are handling laboratory experiments quite independently. The experiments may not be as compelling or have a broad application if they lack a theoretical foundation. There appears to be a lack of information provided regarding the experiment and the reasoning behind the apparatus choice. The goal of the experiment and its applicability may not be evident to readers because of this lack of background information.
Moreover, the examination revealed discrepancies from the suggested chronological sequence while writing reports. Such deviation from the recommended structure can make the evaluation procedure more difficult and compromise the reports overall cohesion and clarity. The study also underlined how crucial it is for laboratory reports to have accurate referencing and citations. The contribution of laboratory reports to the larger corpus of knowledge and literature is constrained in the absence of these academic practices. For students to place their experiments in the larger scientific discourse, it is imperative that they comprehend the need to cite prior engineering research and theories. It is important to recognise that this study is limited to electrical engineering ELRs, and the results might not be immediately applicable to other engineering subfields. Future research should consider data triangulation from other sources, including expert validation and interviews, to provide a more thorough knowledge of how various discourse groups approach the drafting of laboratory reports. In the long run, this comprehensive study strategy can deepen our awareness of the reasons for the adoption of writing styles and norms by particular discourse groups and improve our comprehension of literacy processes in engineering.

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 04 Apr 2024

Veeramuthu Veerappan, Learning Institute for Empowerment, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, 63100, Malaysia

04 Apr 2024

Author Response

Reviewer 2
1. The methodology needs to be reinforced. It is necessary to indicate the total number of words in the corpus.

The corpus consisting N==35 was converted and compiled ... Continue reading Reviewer 2
1. The methodology needs to be reinforced. It is necessary to indicate the total number of words in the corpus.

The corpus consisting N==35 was converted and compiled into pdf and the number of words obtained are 47194.

2. There is also a lack of data on the statistical analytical procedures, i.e. how the data was analyzed to obtain the respective percentages: was a statistical test used, was only descriptive statistics used? The quantitative description procedures need to be made clearer.

This study is qualitatively done. A genre analysis was conducted to determine the moves and steps that occur in the introduction section by adapting the categories outlined by Ref. 1 framework. Prior to using Ngowu’s model, a pilot test was conducted to examine the suitability of this model to the current study on introduction section of EELR. 15 EELRs were selected and examined to determine the match in the description. There were more than 60% match in the categories outlined by the model and EELRs under examination, making it the most suitable analytical framework that can be modified and replicated. The total sample size collected was N=74. These samples were further scrutinized and minimized to select the EELRs that contain the most complete and comprehensive information. Quality of data, amount of information, nature of topic, scope of study, design and method used in a qualitative study are the few factors used in determining sample size. ⁹To control the variable, only EELRs that received distinction grades of 4 and above score over maximum score of 5 awarded by lab instructors were selected to maximise the possibility that it conforms to EE disciplinary standards.The sample size of this study is maintained at N=35 as these samples best represented the EE laboratory genre and reached a saturation level with similar recurring moves and steps. To further validate the data, a semi-structured interview was conducted with an engineering content specialist. According to the subject specialist, the total intake of electrical engineering students in this tertiary institution is not more than 100 students a year and, in each trimester, these students are engaged in writing at least 4 EELRs. [27] stated that the sample size for a qualitative study is influenced by several factors, including the quality of data, scope of the study, nature of topic, information richness from each subject, the qualitative methodology utilized, and the study's design. Thus, the data set of N=35 represents the final year EE student population of this institution. The procedures for conducting move analysis in this study adapted a corpus-based model outlined by Ref. 2 BCU approach. This approach adopted (18) and followed the procedures to determine the rhetorical function and meaning of each move and step of each text, conduct a pilot-coding to test and fine-tune the definitions of move purposes manually by hand, develop a coding protocol with clear definitions and examples of move types and steps, code the full set of texts, with an inter-rater reliability check to confirm a clear understanding of move definitions and realization of moves/steps, revise the coding protocol to resolve any discrepancies revealed by the inter-rater reliability check or newly discovered' moves/steps, and re-coding problematic areas, conduct analysis on move features and other corpus-facilitated analyses and finally describe the corpus of texts in terms of obligatory, conventional or optional move structures.

3. In the conclusion the difficulties are presented, but they are not framed within a broader discussion of literacy processes in engineering. In that sense, it is suggested to add a more robust discussion component, either in the results section or in the conclusion section.

It is advised that discipline-specific engineers and English for Academic Purposes (EAP) practitioners, such as English writing instructors, work together in response to these findings. Through this partnership, the unique learning needs of engineering students can be identified, and genre-based writing training can be effectively tailored to meet these requirements. Students can improve the quality and clarity of their lab reports as well as better fulfil the requirements stated in the university guidelines by doing this. The investigation found substantial variances between the final report deliverables produced by students and the guidelines set by the university. The absence of pertinent literature evaluations and background theories is one of the most noticeable differences. This shortcoming raises questions about the theoretical underpinnings of laboratory tests. The lack of references to past studies or attempts at replication raises the possibility that undergraduates are handling laboratory experiments quite independently. The experiments may not be as compelling or have a broad application if they lack a theoretical foundation. There appears to be a lack of information provided regarding the experiment and the reasoning behind the apparatus choice. The goal of the experiment and its applicability may not be evident to readers because of this lack of background information.
Moreover, the examination revealed discrepancies from the suggested chronological sequence while writing reports. Such deviation from the recommended structure can make the evaluation procedure more difficult and compromise the reports overall cohesion and clarity. The study also underlined how crucial it is for laboratory reports to have accurate referencing and citations. The contribution of laboratory reports to the larger corpus of knowledge and literature is constrained in the absence of these academic practices. For students to place their experiments in the larger scientific discourse, it is imperative that they comprehend the need to cite prior engineering research and theories. It is important to recognise that this study is limited to electrical engineering ELRs, and the results might not be immediately applicable to other engineering subfields. Future research should consider data triangulation from other sources, including expert validation and interviews, to provide a more thorough knowledge of how various discourse groups approach the drafting of laboratory reports. In the long run, this comprehensive study strategy can deepen our awareness of the reasons for the adoption of writing styles and norms by particular discourse groups and improve our comprehension of literacy processes in engineering.

Reviewer 2
1. The methodology needs to be reinforced. It is necessary to indicate the total number of words in the corpus.

The corpus consisting N==35 was converted and compiled into pdf and the number of words obtained are 47194.

2. There is also a lack of data on the statistical analytical procedures, i.e. how the data was analyzed to obtain the respective percentages: was a statistical test used, was only descriptive statistics used? The quantitative description procedures need to be made clearer.

This study is qualitatively done. A genre analysis was conducted to determine the moves and steps that occur in the introduction section by adapting the categories outlined by Ref. 1 framework. Prior to using Ngowu’s model, a pilot test was conducted to examine the suitability of this model to the current study on introduction section of EELR. 15 EELRs were selected and examined to determine the match in the description. There were more than 60% match in the categories outlined by the model and EELRs under examination, making it the most suitable analytical framework that can be modified and replicated. The total sample size collected was N=74. These samples were further scrutinized and minimized to select the EELRs that contain the most complete and comprehensive information. Quality of data, amount of information, nature of topic, scope of study, design and method used in a qualitative study are the few factors used in determining sample size. ⁹To control the variable, only EELRs that received distinction grades of 4 and above score over maximum score of 5 awarded by lab instructors were selected to maximise the possibility that it conforms to EE disciplinary standards.The sample size of this study is maintained at N=35 as these samples best represented the EE laboratory genre and reached a saturation level with similar recurring moves and steps. To further validate the data, a semi-structured interview was conducted with an engineering content specialist. According to the subject specialist, the total intake of electrical engineering students in this tertiary institution is not more than 100 students a year and, in each trimester, these students are engaged in writing at least 4 EELRs. [27] stated that the sample size for a qualitative study is influenced by several factors, including the quality of data, scope of the study, nature of topic, information richness from each subject, the qualitative methodology utilized, and the study's design. Thus, the data set of N=35 represents the final year EE student population of this institution. The procedures for conducting move analysis in this study adapted a corpus-based model outlined by Ref. 2 BCU approach. This approach adopted (18) and followed the procedures to determine the rhetorical function and meaning of each move and step of each text, conduct a pilot-coding to test and fine-tune the definitions of move purposes manually by hand, develop a coding protocol with clear definitions and examples of move types and steps, code the full set of texts, with an inter-rater reliability check to confirm a clear understanding of move definitions and realization of moves/steps, revise the coding protocol to resolve any discrepancies revealed by the inter-rater reliability check or newly discovered' moves/steps, and re-coding problematic areas, conduct analysis on move features and other corpus-facilitated analyses and finally describe the corpus of texts in terms of obligatory, conventional or optional move structures.

3. In the conclusion the difficulties are presented, but they are not framed within a broader discussion of literacy processes in engineering. In that sense, it is suggested to add a more robust discussion component, either in the results section or in the conclusion section.

It is advised that discipline-specific engineers and English for Academic Purposes (EAP) practitioners, such as English writing instructors, work together in response to these findings. Through this partnership, the unique learning needs of engineering students can be identified, and genre-based writing training can be effectively tailored to meet these requirements. Students can improve the quality and clarity of their lab reports as well as better fulfil the requirements stated in the university guidelines by doing this. The investigation found substantial variances between the final report deliverables produced by students and the guidelines set by the university. The absence of pertinent literature evaluations and background theories is one of the most noticeable differences. This shortcoming raises questions about the theoretical underpinnings of laboratory tests. The lack of references to past studies or attempts at replication raises the possibility that undergraduates are handling laboratory experiments quite independently. The experiments may not be as compelling or have a broad application if they lack a theoretical foundation. There appears to be a lack of information provided regarding the experiment and the reasoning behind the apparatus choice. The goal of the experiment and its applicability may not be evident to readers because of this lack of background information.
Moreover, the examination revealed discrepancies from the suggested chronological sequence while writing reports. Such deviation from the recommended structure can make the evaluation procedure more difficult and compromise the reports overall cohesion and clarity. The study also underlined how crucial it is for laboratory reports to have accurate referencing and citations. The contribution of laboratory reports to the larger corpus of knowledge and literature is constrained in the absence of these academic practices. For students to place their experiments in the larger scientific discourse, it is imperative that they comprehend the need to cite prior engineering research and theories. It is important to recognise that this study is limited to electrical engineering ELRs, and the results might not be immediately applicable to other engineering subfields. Future research should consider data triangulation from other sources, including expert validation and interviews, to provide a more thorough knowledge of how various discourse groups approach the drafting of laboratory reports. In the long run, this comprehensive study strategy can deepen our awareness of the reasons for the adoption of writing styles and norms by particular discourse groups and improve our comprehension of literacy processes in engineering.

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Views

Reviewer Report 25 Jul 2023

Thi Ngoc Phuong Le, University of Foreign Language Studies - The University of Danang, Đà Nẵng, Vietnam

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.146353.r184286

The article provides a move analysis of the Introduction section of electrical engineering undergraduate laboratory reports based on a corpus of 35 reports, adopting the approach proposed by Biber, Connor, and Upton (2007).

The research findings show that the Introduction section of electrical engineering undergraduate laboratory reports is structured in one move and its four subsequent steps.

The study provides a window into how the introductory section of electrical engineering laboratory reports is organised and how much its organisational patterning comply with or deviate from university guidelines.

There are a few concerns related to the study design and the way the results are interpreted.

It is apparent from the results presentation that the study predicate its move analysis on a pre-existing model built on university guidelines. When this is the case, such an analytical model should be provided.

To ensure the reliability of the data, three coders were involved, including the researcher, an engineering content specialist, and a language instructor. However, it is not quite clear how the collaboration was implemented and what inter-coder reliability coefficient was used and how it was calculated.

Extracted from the corpus should be provided to show content realisation of the move and the steps.

Lack of this information may make it a challenge to replicate the study.

It would be great if insights from electrical engineering instructors who marked the students' reports were incorporated into the analysis and interpretation of the results. It would be interesting to seek their comments on the mismatches between student writing and university guidelines.

Also, reference should be made to the epistemological properties of electrical engineering to explain why the laboratory report in electrical engineering is structured that way.

Finally, the manuscript should be proofread again to get error free.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Genre analysis; move analysis; rhetorical features; phraseology; corpus linguistics; academic writing

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 04 Apr 2024

Veeramuthu Veerappan, Learning Institute for Empowerment, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, 63100, Malaysia

04 Apr 2024

Author Response
Comments from reviewer 1
Details of amendment made in the manuscript based on reviewers comments

1. It is apparent from the results presentation that the study predicate its move ... Continue reading
Comments from reviewer 1
Details of amendment made in the manuscript based on reviewers comments

1. It is apparent from the results presentation that the study predicate its move analysis on a pre-existing model built on university guidelines. When this is the case, such an analytical model should be provided.
Revision and/or justification:

The coursework specification guideline was provided to students before they embark into writing ELR which was discussed and agreed with students prior to assigning the lab report task.

Here is the guideline provided by the university:
To provide FOE’s method writing guideline

According to guidelines provided by Faculty of Engineering (FOE) in MMU, the introduction section should contain the following:

An introduction is necessary to give an overview of the overall topic and the purpose of the report.

The motivation to the initialization of the experimental work can be included.

Its content should be general enough to orientate the reader gracefully into the subject materials.

Based on the university guidelines, below are the rhetorical structures required for the introduction section.
1.This section is to discuss the theoretical aspects leading to the experiment.
2.Typically, this involves the historical background of the theories published in the research literature and the questions or ambiguities arose in this theoretical work.
3.Citations for the sources of information should be given in one of the standard bibliographic formats (for example, using square brackets with the corresponding number [2] that points to the List of References).
4.Explore this background to prepare the readers to read the main body of the report.
5.It should contain sufficient materials to enable the readers to understand why the set of data are collected, and what are the salient features to observe in the graph, charts and tables presented in the later sections.
6.Depending on the length and complexity of the report, the introduction and the theoretical background may be combined into one introductory section (FOE)

2. To ensure the reliability of the data, three coders were involved, including the researcher, an engineering content specialist, and a language instructor. However, it is not quite clear how the collaboration was implemented and what inter-coder reliability coefficient was used and how it was calculated

As to address the trustworthiness of this study, a coding protocol was developed with definitions and examples for mandatory, conventional and optional moves and an inter-coder reliability check was conducted among three coders., consisting firstly the researcher, secondly an engineering content specialist and thirdly a language expert to determine disagreement or discrepancies and the coding protocol was revised. A coding scheme was developed to identify rhetorical moves and steps in introduction section and also to control the variability in the analysis that guide all coders. There were three coders involved in the development and modification of the coding scheme who is the researcher himself, secondly an engineering content specialist and thirdly a language instructor. The reason for including two other coders apart from the researcher is to ensure inter-coder reliability. The second and third coders were trained to read two similar samples of EELR’s and identify the moves and steps in the Introduction section.
Cohen & Kappa coefficient, a statistical measure that takes into consideration random agreement betweenagreement between coders, was used to evaluate intercoder reliability. To determine the degree of agreement above and beyond what would be predicted by chance, kappa statistics were computed. An online calculator was used to calculate Kappa statistics by comparing the coded data for a subset of the EELRs from all three coders. Following their separate codes for the subset of reports, the coders got together to discuss their consensus and differences. Each coder then went on to rate nine more reports. With a coefficient of 0.91, the Kappa coefficient obtained from this analysis demonstrated a high degree of agreement. This supports the validity of the study’s conclusions and shows a high level of dependability in the coding procedure.

3. Extracted from the corpus should be provided to show content realisation of the move and the steps.Lack of this information may make it a challenge to replicate the study

To depict how the texts are analysed, the extracts of text from EELR corpus which show moves and steps are exemplified. The move and steps are identified such as (M1S1 means Move 1 Step 1). The extracted text used for exemplification is bolded and italicised to show the differences in analysis. Example:

Move 1
Presenting Background Information
Move 1 Step 1
Reference to research purposes
-To verify Thevenin’s Theorem.
-To verify Superposition Theorem.

Please refer to manuscript for detailed exemplification.

4. It would be great if insights from electrical engineering instructors who marked the students' reports were incorporated into the analysis and interpretation of the results. It would be interesting to seek their comments on the mismatches between student writing and university guidelines.

The insights of the engineering content specialists towards students’ compliance to university report writing guidelines based on semi-structured interviews are discussed in method and result sections. The mismatches highlight the existing gaps in writing this genre.

5. Also, reference should be made to the epistemological properties of electrical engineering to explain why the laboratory report in electrical engineering is structured that way.

11 new references on epistemological properties of electrical engineering studies studies are discussed and added:

26. Caglak, S. (2017). Does hands-on science practices make an impact on achievement in science? A meta-analysis. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 3(1), 69-87
27. . Mertler, C. A. & Charles, C. M. (2005). Introduction to educational research.(5th Edition). Boston: MA: Pearson
28. Winberg, C., Winberg, S., Jacobs, C., Garraway, J., & Engel-Hills, P. (2016). ‘I take engineering with me': epistemological transitions across an engineering curriculum. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(4), 398-414.
29. Baillie, Caroline, and Rita Armstrong. 2013. “Crossing Knowledge Boundaries and Thresholds: Challenging the Dominant Discourses Within Engineering Education.” In Engineering Education for Social Justice: Critical Explorations and Opportunities, edited by Juan Lucena, 135–152. Dordrecht: Springer
30. Carstensen, Anna-Karin, and Jonte Bernhard. 2008. “Threshold Concepts and Keys to the Portal of Understanding: Some Examples from Electrical Engineering.” In Threshold Concepts Within the Disciplines, edited by Ray Land, Jan H. F. Meyer, and Jan Smith, 143–154. Rotterdam: Sense
31. Garrison, Lari, Daniel M. Amos, Reed Stevens, and Andy Jocuns. 2007. “Engineering as Lifestyle and a Meritocracy of Difficulty: Two Pervasive Beliefs among Engineering Students and Their Possible Effects.” Paper presented at the 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition of the American Society for Engineering Education, Honolulu, HI. https://peer.asee.org/2791.
32. McKenna, Ann, Jeffrey Froyd, C. Judson King, Thomas Litzinger, and Elaine Seymour. 2011. “The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Report on Forum on Characterizing the Impact and Diffusion of Transformative Engineering Education Innovations.” https://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=52358
33. McKenna, Ann, Jeffrey Froyd, and Thomas Litzinger. 2014. “The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Preparing for Next Steps.” Journal of Engineering Education 103 (2): 188–192. doi:10.1002/jee.20039
34. Beck, John, and Michael F. D. Young. 2005. “The Assault on the Professions and the Restructuring of Academic and Professional Identities: A Bernsteinian Analysis.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 26: 183–197. doi:10.1080/0142569042000294165.
35. Bernstein, Basil. 2000. Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research and Critique. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
36. Stiwne, Elinor Edvardsson, and Thomas Jungert. 2010. “Engineering Students’ Experiences of Transition from Study to Work.” Journal of Education and Work 23 (5): 417–437. doi:10. 1080/13639080.2010.515967.
37. Gumaelius, L., Skogh, I. B., Matthíasdóttir, Á., & Pantzos, P. (2024). Engineering education in change. A case study on the impact of digital transformation on content and teaching methods in different engineering disciplines. European Journal of Engineering Education, 49(1), 70-93

6. Finally, the manuscript should be proofread again to get error free.

The manuscript is thoroughly proofread for content, language and grammar. Changes are tracked.
Comments from reviewer 1
Details of amendment made in the manuscript based on reviewers comments

1. It is apparent from the results presentation that the study predicate its move analysis on a pre-existing model built on university guidelines. When this is the case, such an analytical model should be provided.
Revision and/or justification:

The coursework specification guideline was provided to students before they embark into writing ELR which was discussed and agreed with students prior to assigning the lab report task.

Here is the guideline provided by the university:
To provide FOE’s method writing guideline

According to guidelines provided by Faculty of Engineering (FOE) in MMU, the introduction section should contain the following:

An introduction is necessary to give an overview of the overall topic and the purpose of the report.

The motivation to the initialization of the experimental work can be included.

Its content should be general enough to orientate the reader gracefully into the subject materials.

Based on the university guidelines, below are the rhetorical structures required for the introduction section.
1.This section is to discuss the theoretical aspects leading to the experiment.
2.Typically, this involves the historical background of the theories published in the research literature and the questions or ambiguities arose in this theoretical work.
3.Citations for the sources of information should be given in one of the standard bibliographic formats (for example, using square brackets with the corresponding number [2] that points to the List of References).
4.Explore this background to prepare the readers to read the main body of the report.
5.It should contain sufficient materials to enable the readers to understand why the set of data are collected, and what are the salient features to observe in the graph, charts and tables presented in the later sections.
6.Depending on the length and complexity of the report, the introduction and the theoretical background may be combined into one introductory section (FOE)

2. To ensure the reliability of the data, three coders were involved, including the researcher, an engineering content specialist, and a language instructor. However, it is not quite clear how the collaboration was implemented and what inter-coder reliability coefficient was used and how it was calculated

As to address the trustworthiness of this study, a coding protocol was developed with definitions and examples for mandatory, conventional and optional moves and an inter-coder reliability check was conducted among three coders., consisting firstly the researcher, secondly an engineering content specialist and thirdly a language expert to determine disagreement or discrepancies and the coding protocol was revised. A coding scheme was developed to identify rhetorical moves and steps in introduction section and also to control the variability in the analysis that guide all coders. There were three coders involved in the development and modification of the coding scheme who is the researcher himself, secondly an engineering content specialist and thirdly a language instructor. The reason for including two other coders apart from the researcher is to ensure inter-coder reliability. The second and third coders were trained to read two similar samples of EELR’s and identify the moves and steps in the Introduction section.
Cohen & Kappa coefficient, a statistical measure that takes into consideration random agreement betweenagreement between coders, was used to evaluate intercoder reliability. To determine the degree of agreement above and beyond what would be predicted by chance, kappa statistics were computed. An online calculator was used to calculate Kappa statistics by comparing the coded data for a subset of the EELRs from all three coders. Following their separate codes for the subset of reports, the coders got together to discuss their consensus and differences. Each coder then went on to rate nine more reports. With a coefficient of 0.91, the Kappa coefficient obtained from this analysis demonstrated a high degree of agreement. This supports the validity of the study’s conclusions and shows a high level of dependability in the coding procedure.

3. Extracted from the corpus should be provided to show content realisation of the move and the steps.Lack of this information may make it a challenge to replicate the study

To depict how the texts are analysed, the extracts of text from EELR corpus which show moves and steps are exemplified. The move and steps are identified such as (M1S1 means Move 1 Step 1). The extracted text used for exemplification is bolded and italicised to show the differences in analysis. Example:

Move 1
Presenting Background Information
Move 1 Step 1
Reference to research purposes
-To verify Thevenin’s Theorem.
-To verify Superposition Theorem.

Please refer to manuscript for detailed exemplification.

4. It would be great if insights from electrical engineering instructors who marked the students' reports were incorporated into the analysis and interpretation of the results. It would be interesting to seek their comments on the mismatches between student writing and university guidelines.

The insights of the engineering content specialists towards students’ compliance to university report writing guidelines based on semi-structured interviews are discussed in method and result sections. The mismatches highlight the existing gaps in writing this genre.

5. Also, reference should be made to the epistemological properties of electrical engineering to explain why the laboratory report in electrical engineering is structured that way.

11 new references on epistemological properties of electrical engineering studies studies are discussed and added:

26. Caglak, S. (2017). Does hands-on science practices make an impact on achievement in science? A meta-analysis. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 3(1), 69-87
27. . Mertler, C. A. & Charles, C. M. (2005). Introduction to educational research.(5th Edition). Boston: MA: Pearson
28. Winberg, C., Winberg, S., Jacobs, C., Garraway, J., & Engel-Hills, P. (2016). ‘I take engineering with me': epistemological transitions across an engineering curriculum. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(4), 398-414.
29. Baillie, Caroline, and Rita Armstrong. 2013. “Crossing Knowledge Boundaries and Thresholds: Challenging the Dominant Discourses Within Engineering Education.” In Engineering Education for Social Justice: Critical Explorations and Opportunities, edited by Juan Lucena, 135–152. Dordrecht: Springer
30. Carstensen, Anna-Karin, and Jonte Bernhard. 2008. “Threshold Concepts and Keys to the Portal of Understanding: Some Examples from Electrical Engineering.” In Threshold Concepts Within the Disciplines, edited by Ray Land, Jan H. F. Meyer, and Jan Smith, 143–154. Rotterdam: Sense
31. Garrison, Lari, Daniel M. Amos, Reed Stevens, and Andy Jocuns. 2007. “Engineering as Lifestyle and a Meritocracy of Difficulty: Two Pervasive Beliefs among Engineering Students and Their Possible Effects.” Paper presented at the 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition of the American Society for Engineering Education, Honolulu, HI. https://peer.asee.org/2791.
32. McKenna, Ann, Jeffrey Froyd, C. Judson King, Thomas Litzinger, and Elaine Seymour. 2011. “The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Report on Forum on Characterizing the Impact and Diffusion of Transformative Engineering Education Innovations.” https://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=52358
33. McKenna, Ann, Jeffrey Froyd, and Thomas Litzinger. 2014. “The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Preparing for Next Steps.” Journal of Engineering Education 103 (2): 188–192. doi:10.1002/jee.20039
34. Beck, John, and Michael F. D. Young. 2005. “The Assault on the Professions and the Restructuring of Academic and Professional Identities: A Bernsteinian Analysis.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 26: 183–197. doi:10.1080/0142569042000294165.
35. Bernstein, Basil. 2000. Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research and Critique. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
36. Stiwne, Elinor Edvardsson, and Thomas Jungert. 2010. “Engineering Students’ Experiences of Transition from Study to Work.” Journal of Education and Work 23 (5): 417–437. doi:10. 1080/13639080.2010.515967.
37. Gumaelius, L., Skogh, I. B., Matthíasdóttir, Á., & Pantzos, P. (2024). Engineering education in change. A case study on the impact of digital transformation on content and teaching methods in different engineering disciplines. European Journal of Engineering Education, 49(1), 70-93

6. Finally, the manuscript should be proofread again to get error free.

The manuscript is thoroughly proofread for content, language and grammar. Changes are tracked.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 04 Apr 2024

Veeramuthu Veerappan, Learning Institute for Empowerment, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, 63100, Malaysia

04 Apr 2024

Author Response
Comments from reviewer 1
Details of amendment made in the manuscript based on reviewers comments

1. It is apparent from the results presentation that the study predicate its move ... Continue reading
Comments from reviewer 1
Details of amendment made in the manuscript based on reviewers comments

1. It is apparent from the results presentation that the study predicate its move analysis on a pre-existing model built on university guidelines. When this is the case, such an analytical model should be provided.
Revision and/or justification:

The coursework specification guideline was provided to students before they embark into writing ELR which was discussed and agreed with students prior to assigning the lab report task.

Here is the guideline provided by the university:
To provide FOE’s method writing guideline

According to guidelines provided by Faculty of Engineering (FOE) in MMU, the introduction section should contain the following:

An introduction is necessary to give an overview of the overall topic and the purpose of the report.

The motivation to the initialization of the experimental work can be included.

Its content should be general enough to orientate the reader gracefully into the subject materials.

Based on the university guidelines, below are the rhetorical structures required for the introduction section.
1.This section is to discuss the theoretical aspects leading to the experiment.
2.Typically, this involves the historical background of the theories published in the research literature and the questions or ambiguities arose in this theoretical work.
3.Citations for the sources of information should be given in one of the standard bibliographic formats (for example, using square brackets with the corresponding number [2] that points to the List of References).
4.Explore this background to prepare the readers to read the main body of the report.
5.It should contain sufficient materials to enable the readers to understand why the set of data are collected, and what are the salient features to observe in the graph, charts and tables presented in the later sections.
6.Depending on the length and complexity of the report, the introduction and the theoretical background may be combined into one introductory section (FOE)

2. To ensure the reliability of the data, three coders were involved, including the researcher, an engineering content specialist, and a language instructor. However, it is not quite clear how the collaboration was implemented and what inter-coder reliability coefficient was used and how it was calculated

As to address the trustworthiness of this study, a coding protocol was developed with definitions and examples for mandatory, conventional and optional moves and an inter-coder reliability check was conducted among three coders., consisting firstly the researcher, secondly an engineering content specialist and thirdly a language expert to determine disagreement or discrepancies and the coding protocol was revised. A coding scheme was developed to identify rhetorical moves and steps in introduction section and also to control the variability in the analysis that guide all coders. There were three coders involved in the development and modification of the coding scheme who is the researcher himself, secondly an engineering content specialist and thirdly a language instructor. The reason for including two other coders apart from the researcher is to ensure inter-coder reliability. The second and third coders were trained to read two similar samples of EELR’s and identify the moves and steps in the Introduction section.
Cohen & Kappa coefficient, a statistical measure that takes into consideration random agreement betweenagreement between coders, was used to evaluate intercoder reliability. To determine the degree of agreement above and beyond what would be predicted by chance, kappa statistics were computed. An online calculator was used to calculate Kappa statistics by comparing the coded data for a subset of the EELRs from all three coders. Following their separate codes for the subset of reports, the coders got together to discuss their consensus and differences. Each coder then went on to rate nine more reports. With a coefficient of 0.91, the Kappa coefficient obtained from this analysis demonstrated a high degree of agreement. This supports the validity of the study’s conclusions and shows a high level of dependability in the coding procedure.

3. Extracted from the corpus should be provided to show content realisation of the move and the steps.Lack of this information may make it a challenge to replicate the study

To depict how the texts are analysed, the extracts of text from EELR corpus which show moves and steps are exemplified. The move and steps are identified such as (M1S1 means Move 1 Step 1). The extracted text used for exemplification is bolded and italicised to show the differences in analysis. Example:

Move 1
Presenting Background Information
Move 1 Step 1
Reference to research purposes
-To verify Thevenin’s Theorem.
-To verify Superposition Theorem.

Please refer to manuscript for detailed exemplification.

4. It would be great if insights from electrical engineering instructors who marked the students' reports were incorporated into the analysis and interpretation of the results. It would be interesting to seek their comments on the mismatches between student writing and university guidelines.

The insights of the engineering content specialists towards students’ compliance to university report writing guidelines based on semi-structured interviews are discussed in method and result sections. The mismatches highlight the existing gaps in writing this genre.

5. Also, reference should be made to the epistemological properties of electrical engineering to explain why the laboratory report in electrical engineering is structured that way.

11 new references on epistemological properties of electrical engineering studies studies are discussed and added:

26. Caglak, S. (2017). Does hands-on science practices make an impact on achievement in science? A meta-analysis. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 3(1), 69-87
27. . Mertler, C. A. & Charles, C. M. (2005). Introduction to educational research.(5th Edition). Boston: MA: Pearson
28. Winberg, C., Winberg, S., Jacobs, C., Garraway, J., & Engel-Hills, P. (2016). ‘I take engineering with me': epistemological transitions across an engineering curriculum. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(4), 398-414.
29. Baillie, Caroline, and Rita Armstrong. 2013. “Crossing Knowledge Boundaries and Thresholds: Challenging the Dominant Discourses Within Engineering Education.” In Engineering Education for Social Justice: Critical Explorations and Opportunities, edited by Juan Lucena, 135–152. Dordrecht: Springer
30. Carstensen, Anna-Karin, and Jonte Bernhard. 2008. “Threshold Concepts and Keys to the Portal of Understanding: Some Examples from Electrical Engineering.” In Threshold Concepts Within the Disciplines, edited by Ray Land, Jan H. F. Meyer, and Jan Smith, 143–154. Rotterdam: Sense
31. Garrison, Lari, Daniel M. Amos, Reed Stevens, and Andy Jocuns. 2007. “Engineering as Lifestyle and a Meritocracy of Difficulty: Two Pervasive Beliefs among Engineering Students and Their Possible Effects.” Paper presented at the 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition of the American Society for Engineering Education, Honolulu, HI. https://peer.asee.org/2791.
32. McKenna, Ann, Jeffrey Froyd, C. Judson King, Thomas Litzinger, and Elaine Seymour. 2011. “The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Report on Forum on Characterizing the Impact and Diffusion of Transformative Engineering Education Innovations.” https://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=52358
33. McKenna, Ann, Jeffrey Froyd, and Thomas Litzinger. 2014. “The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Preparing for Next Steps.” Journal of Engineering Education 103 (2): 188–192. doi:10.1002/jee.20039
34. Beck, John, and Michael F. D. Young. 2005. “The Assault on the Professions and the Restructuring of Academic and Professional Identities: A Bernsteinian Analysis.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 26: 183–197. doi:10.1080/0142569042000294165.
35. Bernstein, Basil. 2000. Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research and Critique. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
36. Stiwne, Elinor Edvardsson, and Thomas Jungert. 2010. “Engineering Students’ Experiences of Transition from Study to Work.” Journal of Education and Work 23 (5): 417–437. doi:10. 1080/13639080.2010.515967.
37. Gumaelius, L., Skogh, I. B., Matthíasdóttir, Á., & Pantzos, P. (2024). Engineering education in change. A case study on the impact of digital transformation on content and teaching methods in different engineering disciplines. European Journal of Engineering Education, 49(1), 70-93

6. Finally, the manuscript should be proofread again to get error free.

The manuscript is thoroughly proofread for content, language and grammar. Changes are tracked.
Comments from reviewer 1
Details of amendment made in the manuscript based on reviewers comments

1. It is apparent from the results presentation that the study predicate its move analysis on a pre-existing model built on university guidelines. When this is the case, such an analytical model should be provided.
Revision and/or justification:

The coursework specification guideline was provided to students before they embark into writing ELR which was discussed and agreed with students prior to assigning the lab report task.

Here is the guideline provided by the university:
To provide FOE’s method writing guideline

According to guidelines provided by Faculty of Engineering (FOE) in MMU, the introduction section should contain the following:

An introduction is necessary to give an overview of the overall topic and the purpose of the report.

The motivation to the initialization of the experimental work can be included.

Its content should be general enough to orientate the reader gracefully into the subject materials.

Based on the university guidelines, below are the rhetorical structures required for the introduction section.
1.This section is to discuss the theoretical aspects leading to the experiment.
2.Typically, this involves the historical background of the theories published in the research literature and the questions or ambiguities arose in this theoretical work.
3.Citations for the sources of information should be given in one of the standard bibliographic formats (for example, using square brackets with the corresponding number [2] that points to the List of References).
4.Explore this background to prepare the readers to read the main body of the report.
5.It should contain sufficient materials to enable the readers to understand why the set of data are collected, and what are the salient features to observe in the graph, charts and tables presented in the later sections.
6.Depending on the length and complexity of the report, the introduction and the theoretical background may be combined into one introductory section (FOE)

2. To ensure the reliability of the data, three coders were involved, including the researcher, an engineering content specialist, and a language instructor. However, it is not quite clear how the collaboration was implemented and what inter-coder reliability coefficient was used and how it was calculated

As to address the trustworthiness of this study, a coding protocol was developed with definitions and examples for mandatory, conventional and optional moves and an inter-coder reliability check was conducted among three coders., consisting firstly the researcher, secondly an engineering content specialist and thirdly a language expert to determine disagreement or discrepancies and the coding protocol was revised. A coding scheme was developed to identify rhetorical moves and steps in introduction section and also to control the variability in the analysis that guide all coders. There were three coders involved in the development and modification of the coding scheme who is the researcher himself, secondly an engineering content specialist and thirdly a language instructor. The reason for including two other coders apart from the researcher is to ensure inter-coder reliability. The second and third coders were trained to read two similar samples of EELR’s and identify the moves and steps in the Introduction section.
Cohen & Kappa coefficient, a statistical measure that takes into consideration random agreement betweenagreement between coders, was used to evaluate intercoder reliability. To determine the degree of agreement above and beyond what would be predicted by chance, kappa statistics were computed. An online calculator was used to calculate Kappa statistics by comparing the coded data for a subset of the EELRs from all three coders. Following their separate codes for the subset of reports, the coders got together to discuss their consensus and differences. Each coder then went on to rate nine more reports. With a coefficient of 0.91, the Kappa coefficient obtained from this analysis demonstrated a high degree of agreement. This supports the validity of the study’s conclusions and shows a high level of dependability in the coding procedure.

3. Extracted from the corpus should be provided to show content realisation of the move and the steps.Lack of this information may make it a challenge to replicate the study

To depict how the texts are analysed, the extracts of text from EELR corpus which show moves and steps are exemplified. The move and steps are identified such as (M1S1 means Move 1 Step 1). The extracted text used for exemplification is bolded and italicised to show the differences in analysis. Example:

Move 1
Presenting Background Information
Move 1 Step 1
Reference to research purposes
-To verify Thevenin’s Theorem.
-To verify Superposition Theorem.

Please refer to manuscript for detailed exemplification.

4. It would be great if insights from electrical engineering instructors who marked the students' reports were incorporated into the analysis and interpretation of the results. It would be interesting to seek their comments on the mismatches between student writing and university guidelines.

The insights of the engineering content specialists towards students’ compliance to university report writing guidelines based on semi-structured interviews are discussed in method and result sections. The mismatches highlight the existing gaps in writing this genre.

5. Also, reference should be made to the epistemological properties of electrical engineering to explain why the laboratory report in electrical engineering is structured that way.

11 new references on epistemological properties of electrical engineering studies studies are discussed and added:

26. Caglak, S. (2017). Does hands-on science practices make an impact on achievement in science? A meta-analysis. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 3(1), 69-87
27. . Mertler, C. A. & Charles, C. M. (2005). Introduction to educational research.(5th Edition). Boston: MA: Pearson
28. Winberg, C., Winberg, S., Jacobs, C., Garraway, J., & Engel-Hills, P. (2016). ‘I take engineering with me': epistemological transitions across an engineering curriculum. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(4), 398-414.
29. Baillie, Caroline, and Rita Armstrong. 2013. “Crossing Knowledge Boundaries and Thresholds: Challenging the Dominant Discourses Within Engineering Education.” In Engineering Education for Social Justice: Critical Explorations and Opportunities, edited by Juan Lucena, 135–152. Dordrecht: Springer
30. Carstensen, Anna-Karin, and Jonte Bernhard. 2008. “Threshold Concepts and Keys to the Portal of Understanding: Some Examples from Electrical Engineering.” In Threshold Concepts Within the Disciplines, edited by Ray Land, Jan H. F. Meyer, and Jan Smith, 143–154. Rotterdam: Sense
31. Garrison, Lari, Daniel M. Amos, Reed Stevens, and Andy Jocuns. 2007. “Engineering as Lifestyle and a Meritocracy of Difficulty: Two Pervasive Beliefs among Engineering Students and Their Possible Effects.” Paper presented at the 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition of the American Society for Engineering Education, Honolulu, HI. https://peer.asee.org/2791.
32. McKenna, Ann, Jeffrey Froyd, C. Judson King, Thomas Litzinger, and Elaine Seymour. 2011. “The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Report on Forum on Characterizing the Impact and Diffusion of Transformative Engineering Education Innovations.” https://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=52358
33. McKenna, Ann, Jeffrey Froyd, and Thomas Litzinger. 2014. “The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Preparing for Next Steps.” Journal of Engineering Education 103 (2): 188–192. doi:10.1002/jee.20039
34. Beck, John, and Michael F. D. Young. 2005. “The Assault on the Professions and the Restructuring of Academic and Professional Identities: A Bernsteinian Analysis.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 26: 183–197. doi:10.1080/0142569042000294165.
35. Bernstein, Basil. 2000. Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research and Critique. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
36. Stiwne, Elinor Edvardsson, and Thomas Jungert. 2010. “Engineering Students’ Experiences of Transition from Study to Work.” Journal of Education and Work 23 (5): 417–437. doi:10. 1080/13639080.2010.515967.
37. Gumaelius, L., Skogh, I. B., Matthíasdóttir, Á., & Pantzos, P. (2024). Engineering education in change. A case study on the impact of digital transformation on content and teaching methods in different engineering disciplines. European Journal of Engineering Education, 49(1), 70-93

6. Finally, the manuscript should be proofread again to get error free.

The manuscript is thoroughly proofread for content, language and grammar. Changes are tracked.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 09 Feb 2022

Views

Reviewer Report 20 Jun 2022

Donnie Tulud, Graduate School and Department of English Language and Literature, University of Southern Mindanao, Cotabato, Philippines

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.77113.r139566

This article aims to examine the genre of Engineering Laboratory Reports (ELR) introduction section written by Electrical Engineering Undergraduates in a higher learning institution. The aims of this study are to identify the rhetorical moves and combinations of move patterns used by engineering students to write the introduction section of ELR. However, there are several issues that I want to clarify specifically with the following parts:

Introduction

Though the writer has presented the problems well, still; this part lacks related concepts and studies that could substantiate the current study so as to establish the research gap. In here, the writer can provide pieces of information to make the study more problematic. Thus, it is necessary for the writer to use other studies as reference that have explored other research introduction as corpora.

Methods

Why did you not consider the framework of JOHN SWALES which is the CARS model in analyzing the introduction, since you made mention of CARS model in your introduction? I believe the CARS model in describing introduction is much more comprehensive than Ngowu. Swale's model should also be considered because his framework might also generate a more comprehensive result. It can also be a confluence of these two models to see if the two have similar or different move or steps in presenting the research introduction.

Results

The meat of determining move structure is through identifying linguistic markers that realize the move or steps. Therefore, in presenting the results, the writer should include salient linguistic markers that realize each step and move. Also, the writer, should also get the frequency of each move and step to determine what move is obligatory, optional, non-evident and conventional. By doing such, the reader will know the most common moves being used and neglected in writing research introduction. Moreover, it is recommended to provide samples from the corpora on how these moves and steps are realized and presented in Engineering Laboratory Reports (ELR) introduction section written by Electrical Engineering Undergraduates

Overall, the research paper is excellent in terms of presentation and overall findings. However, there is just a need to add more literature and related studies to give substance to the problem and establish the gap. As mentioned, there is a need to add linguistic features to the analyses so that it would be easier for the readers to identify characteristics of each move and step.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Not applicable
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Genre analysis and discourse analysis

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 27 Apr 2023

Veeramuthu Veerappan, Faculty of Applied Communication, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, 63100, Malaysia

27 Apr 2023

Author Response

Dear Dr Donnie,
Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments given.

List of Amendments :
Details of amendment made in the manuscript. ... Continue reading Dear Dr Donnie,
Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments given.

List of Amendments :
Details of amendment made in the manuscript. Only a paraphrased and simplified version of the revision was added in the manuscript. The full text was not reported in the manuscript due to word limitation.

Introduction

Reviewer 2

The writer can provide pieces of information to make the study more problematic. Thus, it is necessary for the writer to use other studies as reference that have explored other research introduction as corpora.

Revision with justification:

There are several related concepts and studies that could substantiate the current study and establish the research gap. Analysis of genre in academic writing has received a lot of attention (Swales, 1990; Bhatia, 1993; Hyland, 2000). Finding the norms, expectations, and communication goals of certain discourse groups is the task of genre analysis (Swales, 1990), and offers a theoretical framework to analyze the genre of ELR introductions. Writing skills in engineering education has been the focus of studies, and it has been determined that engineering students have difficulty writing clearly (Larson & Murray, 2008; Lunsford, 2012). Notable studies (Swales, 1990; Hyland, 2000; Samraj, 2002) have been conducted on the moves and writing styles employed in academic writing. The concept and framework bridge the research gap for all the reason stated above, making this study significant and relevant.

There may be a few causes for the recent lack of attention paid to this subject. Research in the field of engineering education has switched its attention to other areas, namely the use of technology in teaching and learning, assessment procedures, or diversity and inclusion in engineering classrooms. Moreover, the material already available on ELR introduction sections may be deemed sufficient and complete. In addition, the scant attention paid to this field in recent years may also have been a result of a lack of funding or other resources for research in this field.

Methods

Reviewer 2

Why did you not consider the framework of JOHN SWALES which is the CARS model in analyzing the introduction, since you made mention of CARS model in your introduction?

Justification

This study adopted Ngowu's framework because it is better suited to meet the study's objectives and unique research problems. The Ngowu's framework has been adopted or accepted in the field of engineering education research. The intention was also to apply and test this framework for assessing the introduction section of ELRs. It's also possible that the study compared the findings after using both frameworks for their analysis, but this may be beyond the scope of this study and could be recommended for future study. Generally, the choice of framework depends on various criteria, including the research topic, aims, and the researcher's experience and skill with the framework. Since the research was conducted on all IMRDC sections of ELR, Ngowu (1997) framework was found to be more suitable.

Results

Reviewer 2

Therefore, in presenting the results, the writer should include salient linguistic markers that realize each step and move.

Also, the writer, should also get the frequency of each move and step to determine what move is obligatory, optional, non-evident and conventional.

Response

Thank you for your comments on our study. We appreciate your feedback and have carefully considered your suggestions. Regarding the lack of linguistic markers in our study, we acknowledge that these are important in analyzing the introduction section of Engineering Laboratory Reports (ELRs). However, we focused on identifying the rhetorical moves and move patterns used by engineering students in writing the introduction section of ELRs. The linguistic markers are not included as they have been published in a previous study (DOI: 10.2991/978-2-494069-61-9_24
and https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/cless-22/125980201

We agree that combining the framework used in our study with the linguistic markers identified in previous research could provide a more comprehensive analysis of ELRs. Therefore, we plan to consider incorporating these markers in future research to enhance the analysis of ELRs. We appreciate your suggestions and feedback, and we will make sure to incorporate them into future research.

Thank you for your feedback. We agree that providing samples from the corpora on how the moves and steps are realized in the introduction section of ELR would have been useful for the readers. We have categorised the type of moves to obligatory, conventional and optional in the revision. However, due to the limited word count of the journal, we had to prioritize providing more significant information on the study's aims, methodology, and findings. Therefore, we hope that the description of the methodology used, and the findings of the study provided in this manuscript will be sufficient for readers to understand the study's contribution to the field.
Dear Dr Donnie,
Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments given.

List of Amendments :
Details of amendment made in the manuscript. Only a paraphrased and simplified version of the revision was added in the manuscript. The full text was not reported in the manuscript due to word limitation.

Introduction

Reviewer 2

The writer can provide pieces of information to make the study more problematic. Thus, it is necessary for the writer to use other studies as reference that have explored other research introduction as corpora.

Revision with justification:

There are several related concepts and studies that could substantiate the current study and establish the research gap. Analysis of genre in academic writing has received a lot of attention (Swales, 1990; Bhatia, 1993; Hyland, 2000). Finding the norms, expectations, and communication goals of certain discourse groups is the task of genre analysis (Swales, 1990), and offers a theoretical framework to analyze the genre of ELR introductions. Writing skills in engineering education has been the focus of studies, and it has been determined that engineering students have difficulty writing clearly (Larson & Murray, 2008; Lunsford, 2012). Notable studies (Swales, 1990; Hyland, 2000; Samraj, 2002) have been conducted on the moves and writing styles employed in academic writing. The concept and framework bridge the research gap for all the reason stated above, making this study significant and relevant.

There may be a few causes for the recent lack of attention paid to this subject. Research in the field of engineering education has switched its attention to other areas, namely the use of technology in teaching and learning, assessment procedures, or diversity and inclusion in engineering classrooms. Moreover, the material already available on ELR introduction sections may be deemed sufficient and complete. In addition, the scant attention paid to this field in recent years may also have been a result of a lack of funding or other resources for research in this field.

Methods

Reviewer 2

Why did you not consider the framework of JOHN SWALES which is the CARS model in analyzing the introduction, since you made mention of CARS model in your introduction?

Justification

This study adopted Ngowu's framework because it is better suited to meet the study's objectives and unique research problems. The Ngowu's framework has been adopted or accepted in the field of engineering education research. The intention was also to apply and test this framework for assessing the introduction section of ELRs. It's also possible that the study compared the findings after using both frameworks for their analysis, but this may be beyond the scope of this study and could be recommended for future study. Generally, the choice of framework depends on various criteria, including the research topic, aims, and the researcher's experience and skill with the framework. Since the research was conducted on all IMRDC sections of ELR, Ngowu (1997) framework was found to be more suitable.

Results

Reviewer 2

Therefore, in presenting the results, the writer should include salient linguistic markers that realize each step and move.

Also, the writer, should also get the frequency of each move and step to determine what move is obligatory, optional, non-evident and conventional.

Response

Thank you for your comments on our study. We appreciate your feedback and have carefully considered your suggestions. Regarding the lack of linguistic markers in our study, we acknowledge that these are important in analyzing the introduction section of Engineering Laboratory Reports (ELRs). However, we focused on identifying the rhetorical moves and move patterns used by engineering students in writing the introduction section of ELRs. The linguistic markers are not included as they have been published in a previous study (DOI: 10.2991/978-2-494069-61-9_24
and https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/cless-22/125980201

We agree that combining the framework used in our study with the linguistic markers identified in previous research could provide a more comprehensive analysis of ELRs. Therefore, we plan to consider incorporating these markers in future research to enhance the analysis of ELRs. We appreciate your suggestions and feedback, and we will make sure to incorporate them into future research.

Thank you for your feedback. We agree that providing samples from the corpora on how the moves and steps are realized in the introduction section of ELR would have been useful for the readers. We have categorised the type of moves to obligatory, conventional and optional in the revision. However, due to the limited word count of the journal, we had to prioritize providing more significant information on the study's aims, methodology, and findings. Therefore, we hope that the description of the methodology used, and the findings of the study provided in this manuscript will be sufficient for readers to understand the study's contribution to the field.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 27 Apr 2023

Veeramuthu Veerappan, Faculty of Applied Communication, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, 63100, Malaysia

27 Apr 2023

Author Response

Dear Dr Donnie,
Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments given.

List of Amendments :
Details of amendment made in the manuscript. ... Continue reading Dear Dr Donnie,
Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments given.

List of Amendments :
Details of amendment made in the manuscript. Only a paraphrased and simplified version of the revision was added in the manuscript. The full text was not reported in the manuscript due to word limitation.

Introduction

Reviewer 2

The writer can provide pieces of information to make the study more problematic. Thus, it is necessary for the writer to use other studies as reference that have explored other research introduction as corpora.

Revision with justification:

There are several related concepts and studies that could substantiate the current study and establish the research gap. Analysis of genre in academic writing has received a lot of attention (Swales, 1990; Bhatia, 1993; Hyland, 2000). Finding the norms, expectations, and communication goals of certain discourse groups is the task of genre analysis (Swales, 1990), and offers a theoretical framework to analyze the genre of ELR introductions. Writing skills in engineering education has been the focus of studies, and it has been determined that engineering students have difficulty writing clearly (Larson & Murray, 2008; Lunsford, 2012). Notable studies (Swales, 1990; Hyland, 2000; Samraj, 2002) have been conducted on the moves and writing styles employed in academic writing. The concept and framework bridge the research gap for all the reason stated above, making this study significant and relevant.

There may be a few causes for the recent lack of attention paid to this subject. Research in the field of engineering education has switched its attention to other areas, namely the use of technology in teaching and learning, assessment procedures, or diversity and inclusion in engineering classrooms. Moreover, the material already available on ELR introduction sections may be deemed sufficient and complete. In addition, the scant attention paid to this field in recent years may also have been a result of a lack of funding or other resources for research in this field.

Methods

Reviewer 2

Why did you not consider the framework of JOHN SWALES which is the CARS model in analyzing the introduction, since you made mention of CARS model in your introduction?

Justification

This study adopted Ngowu's framework because it is better suited to meet the study's objectives and unique research problems. The Ngowu's framework has been adopted or accepted in the field of engineering education research. The intention was also to apply and test this framework for assessing the introduction section of ELRs. It's also possible that the study compared the findings after using both frameworks for their analysis, but this may be beyond the scope of this study and could be recommended for future study. Generally, the choice of framework depends on various criteria, including the research topic, aims, and the researcher's experience and skill with the framework. Since the research was conducted on all IMRDC sections of ELR, Ngowu (1997) framework was found to be more suitable.

Results

Reviewer 2

Therefore, in presenting the results, the writer should include salient linguistic markers that realize each step and move.

Also, the writer, should also get the frequency of each move and step to determine what move is obligatory, optional, non-evident and conventional.

Response

Thank you for your comments on our study. We appreciate your feedback and have carefully considered your suggestions. Regarding the lack of linguistic markers in our study, we acknowledge that these are important in analyzing the introduction section of Engineering Laboratory Reports (ELRs). However, we focused on identifying the rhetorical moves and move patterns used by engineering students in writing the introduction section of ELRs. The linguistic markers are not included as they have been published in a previous study (DOI: 10.2991/978-2-494069-61-9_24
and https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/cless-22/125980201

We agree that combining the framework used in our study with the linguistic markers identified in previous research could provide a more comprehensive analysis of ELRs. Therefore, we plan to consider incorporating these markers in future research to enhance the analysis of ELRs. We appreciate your suggestions and feedback, and we will make sure to incorporate them into future research.

Thank you for your feedback. We agree that providing samples from the corpora on how the moves and steps are realized in the introduction section of ELR would have been useful for the readers. We have categorised the type of moves to obligatory, conventional and optional in the revision. However, due to the limited word count of the journal, we had to prioritize providing more significant information on the study's aims, methodology, and findings. Therefore, we hope that the description of the methodology used, and the findings of the study provided in this manuscript will be sufficient for readers to understand the study's contribution to the field.
Dear Dr Donnie,
Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments given.

List of Amendments :
Details of amendment made in the manuscript. Only a paraphrased and simplified version of the revision was added in the manuscript. The full text was not reported in the manuscript due to word limitation.

Introduction

Reviewer 2

The writer can provide pieces of information to make the study more problematic. Thus, it is necessary for the writer to use other studies as reference that have explored other research introduction as corpora.

Revision with justification:

There are several related concepts and studies that could substantiate the current study and establish the research gap. Analysis of genre in academic writing has received a lot of attention (Swales, 1990; Bhatia, 1993; Hyland, 2000). Finding the norms, expectations, and communication goals of certain discourse groups is the task of genre analysis (Swales, 1990), and offers a theoretical framework to analyze the genre of ELR introductions. Writing skills in engineering education has been the focus of studies, and it has been determined that engineering students have difficulty writing clearly (Larson & Murray, 2008; Lunsford, 2012). Notable studies (Swales, 1990; Hyland, 2000; Samraj, 2002) have been conducted on the moves and writing styles employed in academic writing. The concept and framework bridge the research gap for all the reason stated above, making this study significant and relevant.

There may be a few causes for the recent lack of attention paid to this subject. Research in the field of engineering education has switched its attention to other areas, namely the use of technology in teaching and learning, assessment procedures, or diversity and inclusion in engineering classrooms. Moreover, the material already available on ELR introduction sections may be deemed sufficient and complete. In addition, the scant attention paid to this field in recent years may also have been a result of a lack of funding or other resources for research in this field.

Methods

Reviewer 2

Why did you not consider the framework of JOHN SWALES which is the CARS model in analyzing the introduction, since you made mention of CARS model in your introduction?

Justification

This study adopted Ngowu's framework because it is better suited to meet the study's objectives and unique research problems. The Ngowu's framework has been adopted or accepted in the field of engineering education research. The intention was also to apply and test this framework for assessing the introduction section of ELRs. It's also possible that the study compared the findings after using both frameworks for their analysis, but this may be beyond the scope of this study and could be recommended for future study. Generally, the choice of framework depends on various criteria, including the research topic, aims, and the researcher's experience and skill with the framework. Since the research was conducted on all IMRDC sections of ELR, Ngowu (1997) framework was found to be more suitable.

Results

Reviewer 2

Therefore, in presenting the results, the writer should include salient linguistic markers that realize each step and move.

Also, the writer, should also get the frequency of each move and step to determine what move is obligatory, optional, non-evident and conventional.

Response

Thank you for your comments on our study. We appreciate your feedback and have carefully considered your suggestions. Regarding the lack of linguistic markers in our study, we acknowledge that these are important in analyzing the introduction section of Engineering Laboratory Reports (ELRs). However, we focused on identifying the rhetorical moves and move patterns used by engineering students in writing the introduction section of ELRs. The linguistic markers are not included as they have been published in a previous study (DOI: 10.2991/978-2-494069-61-9_24
and https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/cless-22/125980201

We agree that combining the framework used in our study with the linguistic markers identified in previous research could provide a more comprehensive analysis of ELRs. Therefore, we plan to consider incorporating these markers in future research to enhance the analysis of ELRs. We appreciate your suggestions and feedback, and we will make sure to incorporate them into future research.

Thank you for your feedback. We agree that providing samples from the corpora on how the moves and steps are realized in the introduction section of ELR would have been useful for the readers. We have categorised the type of moves to obligatory, conventional and optional in the revision. However, due to the limited word count of the journal, we had to prioritize providing more significant information on the study's aims, methodology, and findings. Therefore, we hope that the description of the methodology used, and the findings of the study provided in this manuscript will be sufficient for readers to understand the study's contribution to the field.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Views

Reviewer Report 04 Apr 2022

Ilyana Jalaluddin, Department of Foreign Languages, Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.77113.r126416

The authors have discussed the background of the study and methodology in great detail.

The findings manage to give an overall overview of how moves have actually been used in the engineering report. However, the findings lack discussion such as the indication of what it means if the certain steps occur less in the report. The authors only state percentage and perhaps it will be more clear if the authors provide discussion and interpretation of the findings so that readers will have better view of what it means when occurrence is low or high in the report.

Conclusion summarises the whole thing by pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the study. But it is not connected properly to the findings. How or in what way does it mismatch with the university guidelines? What content is lacking here? Perhaps, the authors can explain further on these two matters as it helps to elaborate more about the findings.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Not applicable
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Literacy studies, ESL writing skills, Technology and literacy

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 27 Apr 2023

Veeramuthu Veerappan, Faculty of Applied Communication, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, 63100, Malaysia

27 Apr 2023

Author Response
Dear Dr Ilyana,

Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments.

List of Amendments :

Details of amendment made in ... Continue reading
Dear Dr Ilyana,

Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments.

List of Amendments :

Details of amendment made in the manuscript: Only a paraphrased and simplified version of the revision was added in the manuscript. The full text was not reported in the manuscript due to word limitation allowed by publisher.

Reviewer 1

The findings lack discussion such as the indication of what it means if the certain steps occur less in the report. Provide discussion and interpretation of the findings.

The following is added and paraphrased:

The introduction section of the ELR corpus consists of one main move, which is presenting background information, and four subsequent steps: referencing research purposes, providing an overview of the subject under study, referencing theoretical knowledge in the field, and identifying the primary apparatus used to conduct the experiment. The majority of the ELRs examined featured all four processes, but the study also discovered that the sequence and frequency of these steps varied among the ELRs examined. Overall, the study's findings are highly consistent with research on biochemistry articles from earlier studies, showing that this structure is typical in the industry. Therefore, authors in the field of ELR typically start their introductions by giving a general overview of the subject and establishing the background information for their experiment. This indicates ELR writers assume their readers are already familiar with the subject and do not need to provide a thorough introduction.This would imply that ELR writers are especially interested in identifying and resolving distinct issues within their field. This study suggest that ELR writers are more concerned with presenting their own research than they are with summarising earlier work in the same topic.This may also indicate that ELR writers have a keen interest in finding and solving specific research gaps in their area of study. The specific research problem or hypothesis that they provide holds mores significance to ELR writers.When analysing these results, it's critical to keep in mind that the percentages provided only reflect the frequency of each move over the whole ELR corpus and may not necessarily be representative of all introductions in the field. Furthermore, it's likely that the frequency of each motion may differ based on several factors. Yet, these results offer helpful information about the general structure and relevance of introductions in the field of ELR.

Reviewer 1

Conclusion summarises the whole thing by pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the study. But it is not connected properly to the findings.

How or in what way does it mismatch with the university guidelines? What content is lacking here?

Revision made:

The study's conclusion is based on several findings made during the investigation of the ELR corpus. First, the study identified discrepancies between university guidelines and students' final outputs, particularly the exclusion of underpinning theories or important literature reviews. The students require more guidance in comprehending the expectations of the genre and the significance of incorporating background information is corroborated by this study. Additionally, the study revealed that there wasn't enough content in the introduction section of the ELR corpus to give readers a clear understanding of the experiment's topic. This finding is similar to the findings of other studies that students require assistance in honing their writing skills so they can incorporate the relevant details they need to engage with their readers.

Reviewer 1

The findings of the study also confirmed that while experiential learning is a good strategy, it might not always add to the body of knowledge in the engineering area. Collaboration between English for Academic (EAP) practitioners and subject matter experts from the engineering profession is necessary to advance genre-based writing instruction and to determine students' learning needs. Overall, the study's results call for a need for collaborative effort to enhance writing skills as well as the need to support students in comprehending the requirements of the ELR genre.

The study's conclusion highlights various discrepancies between the recommended format for lab reports following the university’s guidelines and the actual report the students' produce. Firstly, the absence of underpinning theories or relevant literature review, which is important to convince readers that the theory guides the current study. Next, there is a lack of sufficient general information to guide and engage readers to the study's purpose and need. These results are consistent with the Faculty’s report guidelines that the introduction section should give a general overview of the subject and the report's purpose and that its content should be sufficiently general to allow readers to easily engage and comprehend the contents of the report.

Hence, the findings specifically found these two discrepancies:

The findings claim that that students frequently neglected to mention the background theories or relevant literature in the introduction section which is crucial because it can be replicated, reproduced, and reapplied to the current study. It is also important to convince the readers that the theory is still valid to be used for their investigation.

Study findings also revealed that the introductions lacked the necessary general information to guide readers through the project's subject matter and provided readers with little information to comprehend the relevance and context of the study.
Dear Dr Ilyana,

Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments.

List of Amendments :

Details of amendment made in the manuscript: Only a paraphrased and simplified version of the revision was added in the manuscript. The full text was not reported in the manuscript due to word limitation allowed by publisher.

Reviewer 1

The findings lack discussion such as the indication of what it means if the certain steps occur less in the report. Provide discussion and interpretation of the findings.

The following is added and paraphrased:

The introduction section of the ELR corpus consists of one main move, which is presenting background information, and four subsequent steps: referencing research purposes, providing an overview of the subject under study, referencing theoretical knowledge in the field, and identifying the primary apparatus used to conduct the experiment. The majority of the ELRs examined featured all four processes, but the study also discovered that the sequence and frequency of these steps varied among the ELRs examined. Overall, the study's findings are highly consistent with research on biochemistry articles from earlier studies, showing that this structure is typical in the industry. Therefore, authors in the field of ELR typically start their introductions by giving a general overview of the subject and establishing the background information for their experiment. This indicates ELR writers assume their readers are already familiar with the subject and do not need to provide a thorough introduction.This would imply that ELR writers are especially interested in identifying and resolving distinct issues within their field. This study suggest that ELR writers are more concerned with presenting their own research than they are with summarising earlier work in the same topic.This may also indicate that ELR writers have a keen interest in finding and solving specific research gaps in their area of study. The specific research problem or hypothesis that they provide holds mores significance to ELR writers.When analysing these results, it's critical to keep in mind that the percentages provided only reflect the frequency of each move over the whole ELR corpus and may not necessarily be representative of all introductions in the field. Furthermore, it's likely that the frequency of each motion may differ based on several factors. Yet, these results offer helpful information about the general structure and relevance of introductions in the field of ELR.

Reviewer 1

Conclusion summarises the whole thing by pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the study. But it is not connected properly to the findings.

How or in what way does it mismatch with the university guidelines? What content is lacking here?

Revision made:

The study's conclusion is based on several findings made during the investigation of the ELR corpus. First, the study identified discrepancies between university guidelines and students' final outputs, particularly the exclusion of underpinning theories or important literature reviews. The students require more guidance in comprehending the expectations of the genre and the significance of incorporating background information is corroborated by this study. Additionally, the study revealed that there wasn't enough content in the introduction section of the ELR corpus to give readers a clear understanding of the experiment's topic. This finding is similar to the findings of other studies that students require assistance in honing their writing skills so they can incorporate the relevant details they need to engage with their readers.

Reviewer 1

The findings of the study also confirmed that while experiential learning is a good strategy, it might not always add to the body of knowledge in the engineering area. Collaboration between English for Academic (EAP) practitioners and subject matter experts from the engineering profession is necessary to advance genre-based writing instruction and to determine students' learning needs. Overall, the study's results call for a need for collaborative effort to enhance writing skills as well as the need to support students in comprehending the requirements of the ELR genre.

The study's conclusion highlights various discrepancies between the recommended format for lab reports following the university’s guidelines and the actual report the students' produce. Firstly, the absence of underpinning theories or relevant literature review, which is important to convince readers that the theory guides the current study. Next, there is a lack of sufficient general information to guide and engage readers to the study's purpose and need. These results are consistent with the Faculty’s report guidelines that the introduction section should give a general overview of the subject and the report's purpose and that its content should be sufficiently general to allow readers to easily engage and comprehend the contents of the report.

Hence, the findings specifically found these two discrepancies:

The findings claim that that students frequently neglected to mention the background theories or relevant literature in the introduction section which is crucial because it can be replicated, reproduced, and reapplied to the current study. It is also important to convince the readers that the theory is still valid to be used for their investigation.

Study findings also revealed that the introductions lacked the necessary general information to guide readers through the project's subject matter and provided readers with little information to comprehend the relevance and context of the study.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 27 Apr 2023

Veeramuthu Veerappan, Faculty of Applied Communication, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, 63100, Malaysia

27 Apr 2023

Author Response
Dear Dr Ilyana,

Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments.

List of Amendments :

Details of amendment made in ... Continue reading
Dear Dr Ilyana,

Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments.

List of Amendments :

Details of amendment made in the manuscript: Only a paraphrased and simplified version of the revision was added in the manuscript. The full text was not reported in the manuscript due to word limitation allowed by publisher.

Reviewer 1

The findings lack discussion such as the indication of what it means if the certain steps occur less in the report. Provide discussion and interpretation of the findings.

The following is added and paraphrased:

The introduction section of the ELR corpus consists of one main move, which is presenting background information, and four subsequent steps: referencing research purposes, providing an overview of the subject under study, referencing theoretical knowledge in the field, and identifying the primary apparatus used to conduct the experiment. The majority of the ELRs examined featured all four processes, but the study also discovered that the sequence and frequency of these steps varied among the ELRs examined. Overall, the study's findings are highly consistent with research on biochemistry articles from earlier studies, showing that this structure is typical in the industry. Therefore, authors in the field of ELR typically start their introductions by giving a general overview of the subject and establishing the background information for their experiment. This indicates ELR writers assume their readers are already familiar with the subject and do not need to provide a thorough introduction.This would imply that ELR writers are especially interested in identifying and resolving distinct issues within their field. This study suggest that ELR writers are more concerned with presenting their own research than they are with summarising earlier work in the same topic.This may also indicate that ELR writers have a keen interest in finding and solving specific research gaps in their area of study. The specific research problem or hypothesis that they provide holds mores significance to ELR writers.When analysing these results, it's critical to keep in mind that the percentages provided only reflect the frequency of each move over the whole ELR corpus and may not necessarily be representative of all introductions in the field. Furthermore, it's likely that the frequency of each motion may differ based on several factors. Yet, these results offer helpful information about the general structure and relevance of introductions in the field of ELR.

Reviewer 1

Conclusion summarises the whole thing by pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the study. But it is not connected properly to the findings.

How or in what way does it mismatch with the university guidelines? What content is lacking here?

Revision made:

The study's conclusion is based on several findings made during the investigation of the ELR corpus. First, the study identified discrepancies between university guidelines and students' final outputs, particularly the exclusion of underpinning theories or important literature reviews. The students require more guidance in comprehending the expectations of the genre and the significance of incorporating background information is corroborated by this study. Additionally, the study revealed that there wasn't enough content in the introduction section of the ELR corpus to give readers a clear understanding of the experiment's topic. This finding is similar to the findings of other studies that students require assistance in honing their writing skills so they can incorporate the relevant details they need to engage with their readers.

Reviewer 1

The findings of the study also confirmed that while experiential learning is a good strategy, it might not always add to the body of knowledge in the engineering area. Collaboration between English for Academic (EAP) practitioners and subject matter experts from the engineering profession is necessary to advance genre-based writing instruction and to determine students' learning needs. Overall, the study's results call for a need for collaborative effort to enhance writing skills as well as the need to support students in comprehending the requirements of the ELR genre.

The study's conclusion highlights various discrepancies between the recommended format for lab reports following the university’s guidelines and the actual report the students' produce. Firstly, the absence of underpinning theories or relevant literature review, which is important to convince readers that the theory guides the current study. Next, there is a lack of sufficient general information to guide and engage readers to the study's purpose and need. These results are consistent with the Faculty’s report guidelines that the introduction section should give a general overview of the subject and the report's purpose and that its content should be sufficiently general to allow readers to easily engage and comprehend the contents of the report.

Hence, the findings specifically found these two discrepancies:

The findings claim that that students frequently neglected to mention the background theories or relevant literature in the introduction section which is crucial because it can be replicated, reproduced, and reapplied to the current study. It is also important to convince the readers that the theory is still valid to be used for their investigation.

Study findings also revealed that the introductions lacked the necessary general information to guide readers through the project's subject matter and provided readers with little information to comprehend the relevance and context of the study.
Dear Dr Ilyana,

Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments.

List of Amendments :

Details of amendment made in the manuscript: Only a paraphrased and simplified version of the revision was added in the manuscript. The full text was not reported in the manuscript due to word limitation allowed by publisher.

Reviewer 1

The findings lack discussion such as the indication of what it means if the certain steps occur less in the report. Provide discussion and interpretation of the findings.

The following is added and paraphrased:

The introduction section of the ELR corpus consists of one main move, which is presenting background information, and four subsequent steps: referencing research purposes, providing an overview of the subject under study, referencing theoretical knowledge in the field, and identifying the primary apparatus used to conduct the experiment. The majority of the ELRs examined featured all four processes, but the study also discovered that the sequence and frequency of these steps varied among the ELRs examined. Overall, the study's findings are highly consistent with research on biochemistry articles from earlier studies, showing that this structure is typical in the industry. Therefore, authors in the field of ELR typically start their introductions by giving a general overview of the subject and establishing the background information for their experiment. This indicates ELR writers assume their readers are already familiar with the subject and do not need to provide a thorough introduction.This would imply that ELR writers are especially interested in identifying and resolving distinct issues within their field. This study suggest that ELR writers are more concerned with presenting their own research than they are with summarising earlier work in the same topic.This may also indicate that ELR writers have a keen interest in finding and solving specific research gaps in their area of study. The specific research problem or hypothesis that they provide holds mores significance to ELR writers.When analysing these results, it's critical to keep in mind that the percentages provided only reflect the frequency of each move over the whole ELR corpus and may not necessarily be representative of all introductions in the field. Furthermore, it's likely that the frequency of each motion may differ based on several factors. Yet, these results offer helpful information about the general structure and relevance of introductions in the field of ELR.

Reviewer 1

Conclusion summarises the whole thing by pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the study. But it is not connected properly to the findings.

How or in what way does it mismatch with the university guidelines? What content is lacking here?

Revision made:

The study's conclusion is based on several findings made during the investigation of the ELR corpus. First, the study identified discrepancies between university guidelines and students' final outputs, particularly the exclusion of underpinning theories or important literature reviews. The students require more guidance in comprehending the expectations of the genre and the significance of incorporating background information is corroborated by this study. Additionally, the study revealed that there wasn't enough content in the introduction section of the ELR corpus to give readers a clear understanding of the experiment's topic. This finding is similar to the findings of other studies that students require assistance in honing their writing skills so they can incorporate the relevant details they need to engage with their readers.

Reviewer 1

The findings of the study also confirmed that while experiential learning is a good strategy, it might not always add to the body of knowledge in the engineering area. Collaboration between English for Academic (EAP) practitioners and subject matter experts from the engineering profession is necessary to advance genre-based writing instruction and to determine students' learning needs. Overall, the study's results call for a need for collaborative effort to enhance writing skills as well as the need to support students in comprehending the requirements of the ELR genre.

The study's conclusion highlights various discrepancies between the recommended format for lab reports following the university’s guidelines and the actual report the students' produce. Firstly, the absence of underpinning theories or relevant literature review, which is important to convince readers that the theory guides the current study. Next, there is a lack of sufficient general information to guide and engage readers to the study's purpose and need. These results are consistent with the Faculty’s report guidelines that the introduction section should give a general overview of the subject and the report's purpose and that its content should be sufficiently general to allow readers to easily engage and comprehend the contents of the report.

Hence, the findings specifically found these two discrepancies:

The findings claim that that students frequently neglected to mention the background theories or relevant literature in the introduction section which is crucial because it can be replicated, reproduced, and reapplied to the current study. It is also important to convince the readers that the theory is still valid to be used for their investigation.

Study findings also revealed that the introductions lacked the necessary general information to guide readers through the project's subject matter and provided readers with little information to comprehend the relevance and context of the study.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 3

VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 09 Feb 2022

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2	3	4
Version 3 (revision) 22 Mar 24	read			read
Version 2 (revision) 27 Apr 23			read	read
Version 1 09 Feb 22	read	read

Ilyana Jalaluddin, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia
Donnie Tulud, University of Southern Mindanao, Cotabato, Philippines
Thi Ngoc Phuong Le, University of Foreign Language Studies - The University of Danang, Đà Nẵng, Vietnam
Enrique Sologuren Insúa, Universidad de los Andes, Las Condes, Chile

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

3 Views

26 Apr 2024 | for Version 3

Ilyana Jalaluddin, Department of Foreign Languages, Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia

3 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved

No further comments

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

ESL Writing, Literacy and Technology

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

6 Views

16 Apr 2024 | for Version 3

Enrique Sologuren Insúa, Universidad de los Andes, Las Condes, Santiago Metropolitan Region, Chile

6 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved

Revisions are appropriate. I have no further comments on the article. The observations for improvement have been incorporated.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Applied linguistics; Genre Analysis; Literacy in specialised contexts; Academic and professional writing; Writing in STEM areas.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

16 Views

09 Aug 2023 | for Version 2

Enrique Sologuren Insúa, Universidad de los Andes, Las Condes, Santiago Metropolitan Region, Chile

16 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Applied linguistics; Genre Analysis; Literacy in specialised contexts; Academic and professional writing; Writing in STEM areas.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

04 Apr 2024

Veeramuthu Veerappan, Learning Institute for Empowerment, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, 63100, Malaysia

Reviewer 2
1. The methodology needs to be reinforced. It is necessary to indicate the total number of words in the corpus.

The corpus consisting N==35 was converted and compiled into pdf and the number of words obtained are 47194.

2. There is also a lack of data on the statistical analytical procedures, i.e. how the data was analyzed to obtain the respective percentages: was a statistical test used, was only descriptive statistics used? The quantitative description procedures need to be made clearer.

This study is qualitatively done. A genre analysis was conducted to determine the moves and steps that occur in the introduction section by adapting the categories outlined by Ref. 1 framework. Prior to using Ngowu’s model, a pilot test was conducted to examine the suitability of this model to the current study on introduction section of EELR. 15 EELRs were selected and examined to determine the match in the description. There were more than 60% match in the categories outlined by the model and EELRs under examination, making it the most suitable analytical framework that can be modified and replicated. The total sample size collected was N=74. These samples were further scrutinized and minimized to select the EELRs that contain the most complete and comprehensive information. Quality of data, amount of information, nature of topic, scope of study, design and method used in a qualitative study are the few factors used in determining sample size. ⁹To control the variable, only EELRs that received distinction grades of 4 and above score over maximum score of 5 awarded by lab instructors were selected to maximise the possibility that it conforms to EE disciplinary standards.The sample size of this study is maintained at N=35 as these samples best represented the EE laboratory genre and reached a saturation level with similar recurring moves and steps. To further validate the data, a semi-structured interview was conducted with an engineering content specialist. According to the subject specialist, the total intake of electrical engineering students in this tertiary institution is not more than 100 students a year and, in each trimester, these students are engaged in writing at least 4 EELRs. [27] stated that the sample size for a qualitative study is influenced by several factors, including the quality of data, scope of the study, nature of topic, information richness from each subject, the qualitative methodology utilized, and the study's design. Thus, the data set of N=35 represents the final year EE student population of this institution. The procedures for conducting move analysis in this study adapted a corpus-based model outlined by Ref. 2 BCU approach. This approach adopted (18) and followed the procedures to determine the rhetorical function and meaning of each move and step of each text, conduct a pilot-coding to test and fine-tune the definitions of move purposes manually by hand, develop a coding protocol with clear definitions and examples of move types and steps, code the full set of texts, with an inter-rater reliability check to confirm a clear understanding of move definitions and realization of moves/steps, revise the coding protocol to resolve any discrepancies revealed by the inter-rater reliability check or newly discovered' moves/steps, and re-coding problematic areas, conduct analysis on move features and other corpus-facilitated analyses and finally describe the corpus of texts in terms of obligatory, conventional or optional move structures.

3. In the conclusion the difficulties are presented, but they are not framed within a broader discussion of literacy processes in engineering. In that sense, it is suggested to add a more robust discussion component, either in the results section or in the conclusion section.

It is advised that discipline-specific engineers and English for Academic Purposes (EAP) practitioners, such as English writing instructors, work together in response to these findings. Through this partnership, the unique learning needs of engineering students can be identified, and genre-based writing training can be effectively tailored to meet these requirements. Students can improve the quality and clarity of their lab reports as well as better fulfil the requirements stated in the university guidelines by doing this. The investigation found substantial variances between the final report deliverables produced by students and the guidelines set by the university. The absence of pertinent literature evaluations and background theories is one of the most noticeable differences. This shortcoming raises questions about the theoretical underpinnings of laboratory tests. The lack of references to past studies or attempts at replication raises the possibility that undergraduates are handling laboratory experiments quite independently. The experiments may not be as compelling or have a broad application if they lack a theoretical foundation. There appears to be a lack of information provided regarding the experiment and the reasoning behind the apparatus choice. The goal of the experiment and its applicability may not be evident to readers because of this lack of background information.
Moreover, the examination revealed discrepancies from the suggested chronological sequence while writing reports. Such deviation from the recommended structure can make the evaluation procedure more difficult and compromise the reports overall cohesion and clarity. The study also underlined how crucial it is for laboratory reports to have accurate referencing and citations. The contribution of laboratory reports to the larger corpus of knowledge and literature is constrained in the absence of these academic practices. For students to place their experiments in the larger scientific discourse, it is imperative that they comprehend the need to cite prior engineering research and theories. It is important to recognise that this study is limited to electrical engineering ELRs, and the results might not be immediately applicable to other engineering subfields. Future research should consider data triangulation from other sources, including expert validation and interviews, to provide a more thorough knowledge of how various discourse groups approach the drafting of laboratory reports. In the long run, this comprehensive study strategy can deepen our awareness of the reasons for the adoption of writing styles and norms by particular discourse groups and improve our comprehension of literacy processes in engineering.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

13 Views

25 Jul 2023 | for Version 2

Thi Ngoc Phuong Le, University of Foreign Language Studies - The University of Danang, Đà Nẵng, Vietnam

13 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Genre analysis; move analysis; rhetorical features; phraseology; corpus linguistics; academic writing

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

04 Apr 2024

Veeramuthu Veerappan, Learning Institute for Empowerment, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, 63100, Malaysia

Comments from reviewer 1
Details of amendment made in the manuscript based on reviewers comments

1. It is apparent from the results presentation that the study predicate its move analysis on a pre-existing model built on university guidelines. When this is the case, such an analytical model should be provided.
Revision and/or justification:

The coursework specification guideline was provided to students before they embark into writing ELR which was discussed and agreed with students prior to assigning the lab report task.

Here is the guideline provided by the university:
To provide FOE’s method writing guideline

According to guidelines provided by Faculty of Engineering (FOE) in MMU, the introduction section should contain the following:

An introduction is necessary to give an overview of the overall topic and the purpose of the report.
The motivation to the initialization of the experimental work can be included.
Its content should be general enough to orientate the reader gracefully into the subject materials.

Based on the university guidelines, below are the rhetorical structures required for the introduction section.
1.This section is to discuss the theoretical aspects leading to the experiment.
2.Typically, this involves the historical background of the theories published in the research literature and the questions or ambiguities arose in this theoretical work.
3.Citations for the sources of information should be given in one of the standard bibliographic formats (for example, using square brackets with the corresponding number [2] that points to the List of References).
4.Explore this background to prepare the readers to read the main body of the report.
5.It should contain sufficient materials to enable the readers to understand why the set of data are collected, and what are the salient features to observe in the graph, charts and tables presented in the later sections.
6.Depending on the length and complexity of the report, the introduction and the theoretical background may be combined into one introductory section (FOE)

2. To ensure the reliability of the data, three coders were involved, including the researcher, an engineering content specialist, and a language instructor. However, it is not quite clear how the collaboration was implemented and what inter-coder reliability coefficient was used and how it was calculated

As to address the trustworthiness of this study, a coding protocol was developed with definitions and examples for mandatory, conventional and optional moves and an inter-coder reliability check was conducted among three coders., consisting firstly the researcher, secondly an engineering content specialist and thirdly a language expert to determine disagreement or discrepancies and the coding protocol was revised. A coding scheme was developed to identify rhetorical moves and steps in introduction section and also to control the variability in the analysis that guide all coders. There were three coders involved in the development and modification of the coding scheme who is the researcher himself, secondly an engineering content specialist and thirdly a language instructor. The reason for including two other coders apart from the researcher is to ensure inter-coder reliability. The second and third coders were trained to read two similar samples of EELR’s and identify the moves and steps in the Introduction section.
Cohen & Kappa coefficient, a statistical measure that takes into consideration random agreement betweenagreement between coders, was used to evaluate intercoder reliability. To determine the degree of agreement above and beyond what would be predicted by chance, kappa statistics were computed. An online calculator was used to calculate Kappa statistics by comparing the coded data for a subset of the EELRs from all three coders. Following their separate codes for the subset of reports, the coders got together to discuss their consensus and differences. Each coder then went on to rate nine more reports. With a coefficient of 0.91, the Kappa coefficient obtained from this analysis demonstrated a high degree of agreement. This supports the validity of the study’s conclusions and shows a high level of dependability in the coding procedure.

3. Extracted from the corpus should be provided to show content realisation of the move and the steps.Lack of this information may make it a challenge to replicate the study

To depict how the texts are analysed, the extracts of text from EELR corpus which show moves and steps are exemplified. The move and steps are identified such as (M1S1 means Move 1 Step 1). The extracted text used for exemplification is bolded and italicised to show the differences in analysis. Example:

Move 1
Presenting Background Information
Move 1 Step 1
Reference to research purposes
-To verify Thevenin’s Theorem.
-To verify Superposition Theorem.

Please refer to manuscript for detailed exemplification.

4. It would be great if insights from electrical engineering instructors who marked the students' reports were incorporated into the analysis and interpretation of the results. It would be interesting to seek their comments on the mismatches between student writing and university guidelines.

The insights of the engineering content specialists towards students’ compliance to university report writing guidelines based on semi-structured interviews are discussed in method and result sections. The mismatches highlight the existing gaps in writing this genre.

5. Also, reference should be made to the epistemological properties of electrical engineering to explain why the laboratory report in electrical engineering is structured that way.

11 new references on epistemological properties of electrical engineering studies studies are discussed and added:

26. Caglak, S. (2017). Does hands-on science practices make an impact on achievement in science? A meta-analysis. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 3(1), 69-87
27. . Mertler, C. A. & Charles, C. M. (2005). Introduction to educational research.(5th Edition). Boston: MA: Pearson
28. Winberg, C., Winberg, S., Jacobs, C., Garraway, J., & Engel-Hills, P. (2016). ‘I take engineering with me': epistemological transitions across an engineering curriculum. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(4), 398-414.
29. Baillie, Caroline, and Rita Armstrong. 2013. “Crossing Knowledge Boundaries and Thresholds: Challenging the Dominant Discourses Within Engineering Education.” In Engineering Education for Social Justice: Critical Explorations and Opportunities, edited by Juan Lucena, 135–152. Dordrecht: Springer
30. Carstensen, Anna-Karin, and Jonte Bernhard. 2008. “Threshold Concepts and Keys to the Portal of Understanding: Some Examples from Electrical Engineering.” In Threshold Concepts Within the Disciplines, edited by Ray Land, Jan H. F. Meyer, and Jan Smith, 143–154. Rotterdam: Sense
31. Garrison, Lari, Daniel M. Amos, Reed Stevens, and Andy Jocuns. 2007. “Engineering as Lifestyle and a Meritocracy of Difficulty: Two Pervasive Beliefs among Engineering Students and Their Possible Effects.” Paper presented at the 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition of the American Society for Engineering Education, Honolulu, HI. https://peer.asee.org/2791.
32. McKenna, Ann, Jeffrey Froyd, C. Judson King, Thomas Litzinger, and Elaine Seymour. 2011. “The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Report on Forum on Characterizing the Impact and Diffusion of Transformative Engineering Education Innovations.” https://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=52358
33. McKenna, Ann, Jeffrey Froyd, and Thomas Litzinger. 2014. “The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Preparing for Next Steps.” Journal of Engineering Education 103 (2): 188–192. doi:10.1002/jee.20039
34. Beck, John, and Michael F. D. Young. 2005. “The Assault on the Professions and the Restructuring of Academic and Professional Identities: A Bernsteinian Analysis.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 26: 183–197. doi:10.1080/0142569042000294165.
35. Bernstein, Basil. 2000. Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research and Critique. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
36. Stiwne, Elinor Edvardsson, and Thomas Jungert. 2010. “Engineering Students’ Experiences of Transition from Study to Work.” Journal of Education and Work 23 (5): 417–437. doi:10. 1080/13639080.2010.515967.
37. Gumaelius, L., Skogh, I. B., Matthíasdóttir, Á., & Pantzos, P. (2024). Engineering education in change. A case study on the impact of digital transformation on content and teaching methods in different engineering disciplines. European Journal of Engineering Education, 49(1), 70-93

6. Finally, the manuscript should be proofread again to get error free.

The manuscript is thoroughly proofread for content, language and grammar. Changes are tracked.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

15 Views

20 Jun 2022 | for Version 1

Donnie Tulud, Graduate School and Department of English Language and Literature, University of Southern Mindanao, Cotabato, Philippines

15 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Not applicable
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Genre analysis and discourse analysis

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

27 Apr 2023

Veeramuthu Veerappan, Faculty of Applied Communication, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, 63100, Malaysia

Dear Dr Donnie,
Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments given.

List of Amendments :
Details of amendment made in the manuscript. Only a paraphrased and simplified version of the revision was added in the manuscript. The full text was not reported in the manuscript due to word limitation.

Introduction

Reviewer 2

The writer can provide pieces of information to make the study more problematic. Thus, it is necessary for the writer to use other studies as reference that have explored other research introduction as corpora.

Revision with justification:

There are several related concepts and studies that could substantiate the current study and establish the research gap. Analysis of genre in academic writing has received a lot of attention (Swales, 1990; Bhatia, 1993; Hyland, 2000). Finding the norms, expectations, and communication goals of certain discourse groups is the task of genre analysis (Swales, 1990), and offers a theoretical framework to analyze the genre of ELR introductions. Writing skills in engineering education has been the focus of studies, and it has been determined that engineering students have difficulty writing clearly (Larson & Murray, 2008; Lunsford, 2012). Notable studies (Swales, 1990; Hyland, 2000; Samraj, 2002) have been conducted on the moves and writing styles employed in academic writing. The concept and framework bridge the research gap for all the reason stated above, making this study significant and relevant.

There may be a few causes for the recent lack of attention paid to this subject. Research in the field of engineering education has switched its attention to other areas, namely the use of technology in teaching and learning, assessment procedures, or diversity and inclusion in engineering classrooms. Moreover, the material already available on ELR introduction sections may be deemed sufficient and complete. In addition, the scant attention paid to this field in recent years may also have been a result of a lack of funding or other resources for research in this field.

Methods

Reviewer 2

Why did you not consider the framework of JOHN SWALES which is the CARS model in analyzing the introduction, since you made mention of CARS model in your introduction?

Justification

This study adopted Ngowu's framework because it is better suited to meet the study's objectives and unique research problems. The Ngowu's framework has been adopted or accepted in the field of engineering education research. The intention was also to apply and test this framework for assessing the introduction section of ELRs. It's also possible that the study compared the findings after using both frameworks for their analysis, but this may be beyond the scope of this study and could be recommended for future study. Generally, the choice of framework depends on various criteria, including the research topic, aims, and the researcher's experience and skill with the framework. Since the research was conducted on all IMRDC sections of ELR, Ngowu (1997) framework was found to be more suitable.

Results

Reviewer 2

Therefore, in presenting the results, the writer should include salient linguistic markers that realize each step and move.

Also, the writer, should also get the frequency of each move and step to determine what move is obligatory, optional, non-evident and conventional.

Response

Thank you for your comments on our study. We appreciate your feedback and have carefully considered your suggestions. Regarding the lack of linguistic markers in our study, we acknowledge that these are important in analyzing the introduction section of Engineering Laboratory Reports (ELRs). However, we focused on identifying the rhetorical moves and move patterns used by engineering students in writing the introduction section of ELRs. The linguistic markers are not included as they have been published in a previous study (DOI: 10.2991/978-2-494069-61-9_24
and https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/cless-22/125980201

We agree that combining the framework used in our study with the linguistic markers identified in previous research could provide a more comprehensive analysis of ELRs. Therefore, we plan to consider incorporating these markers in future research to enhance the analysis of ELRs. We appreciate your suggestions and feedback, and we will make sure to incorporate them into future research.

Thank you for your feedback. We agree that providing samples from the corpora on how the moves and steps are realized in the introduction section of ELR would have been useful for the readers. We have categorised the type of moves to obligatory, conventional and optional in the revision. However, due to the limited word count of the journal, we had to prioritize providing more significant information on the study's aims, methodology, and findings. Therefore, we hope that the description of the methodology used, and the findings of the study provided in this manuscript will be sufficient for readers to understand the study's contribution to the field.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

18 Views

04 Apr 2022 | for Version 1

Ilyana Jalaluddin, Department of Foreign Languages, Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia

18 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Not applicable
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Literacy studies, ESL writing skills, Technology and literacy

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

27 Apr 2023

Veeramuthu Veerappan, Faculty of Applied Communication, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, 63100, Malaysia

Dear Dr Ilyana,

Thank you for the feedback provided. Below are our revision based on each comments.

List of Amendments :

Details of amendment made in the manuscript: Only a paraphrased and simplified version of the revision was added in the manuscript. The full text was not reported in the manuscript due to word limitation allowed by publisher.

Reviewer 1

The findings lack discussion such as the indication of what it means if the certain steps occur less in the report. Provide discussion and interpretation of the findings.

The following is added and paraphrased:

The introduction section of the ELR corpus consists of one main move, which is presenting background information, and four subsequent steps: referencing research purposes, providing an overview of the subject under study, referencing theoretical knowledge in the field, and identifying the primary apparatus used to conduct the experiment. The majority of the ELRs examined featured all four processes, but the study also discovered that the sequence and frequency of these steps varied among the ELRs examined. Overall, the study's findings are highly consistent with research on biochemistry articles from earlier studies, showing that this structure is typical in the industry. Therefore, authors in the field of ELR typically start their introductions by giving a general overview of the subject and establishing the background information for their experiment. This indicates ELR writers assume their readers are already familiar with the subject and do not need to provide a thorough introduction.This would imply that ELR writers are especially interested in identifying and resolving distinct issues within their field. This study suggest that ELR writers are more concerned with presenting their own research than they are with summarising earlier work in the same topic.This may also indicate that ELR writers have a keen interest in finding and solving specific research gaps in their area of study. The specific research problem or hypothesis that they provide holds mores significance to ELR writers.When analysing these results, it's critical to keep in mind that the percentages provided only reflect the frequency of each move over the whole ELR corpus and may not necessarily be representative of all introductions in the field. Furthermore, it's likely that the frequency of each motion may differ based on several factors. Yet, these results offer helpful information about the general structure and relevance of introductions in the field of ELR.

Reviewer 1

Conclusion summarises the whole thing by pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the study. But it is not connected properly to the findings.
How or in what way does it mismatch with the university guidelines? What content is lacking here?

Revision made:

The study's conclusion is based on several findings made during the investigation of the ELR corpus. First, the study identified discrepancies between university guidelines and students' final outputs, particularly the exclusion of underpinning theories or important literature reviews. The students require more guidance in comprehending the expectations of the genre and the significance of incorporating background information is corroborated by this study. Additionally, the study revealed that there wasn't enough content in the introduction section of the ELR corpus to give readers a clear understanding of the experiment's topic. This finding is similar to the findings of other studies that students require assistance in honing their writing skills so they can incorporate the relevant details they need to engage with their readers.

Reviewer 1

The findings of the study also confirmed that while experiential learning is a good strategy, it might not always add to the body of knowledge in the engineering area. Collaboration between English for Academic (EAP) practitioners and subject matter experts from the engineering profession is necessary to advance genre-based writing instruction and to determine students' learning needs. Overall, the study's results call for a need for collaborative effort to enhance writing skills as well as the need to support students in comprehending the requirements of the ELR genre.

The study's conclusion highlights various discrepancies between the recommended format for lab reports following the university’s guidelines and the actual report the students' produce. Firstly, the absence of underpinning theories or relevant literature review, which is important to convince readers that the theory guides the current study. Next, there is a lack of sufficient general information to guide and engage readers to the study's purpose and need. These results are consistent with the Faculty’s report guidelines that the introduction section should give a general overview of the subject and the report's purpose and that its content should be sufficiently general to allow readers to easily engage and comprehend the contents of the report.

Hence, the findings specifically found these two discrepancies:

The findings claim that that students frequently neglected to mention the background theories or relevant literature in the introduction section which is crucial because it can be replicated, reproduced, and reapplied to the current study. It is also important to convince the readers that the theory is still valid to be used for their investigation.
Study findings also revealed that the introductions lacked the necessary general information to guide readers through the project's subject matter and provided readers with little information to comprehend the relevance and context of the study.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:

Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

[1] 1. Swales J: Genre Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1990.

[2] 2. Nwogu KN: The medical research paper: Structure and function. Engl. Specif. Purp. 1997; 16(2): 119–138. Publisher Full Text

[3] 3. Masoud MI: Writing a laboratory report for senior electrical engineering courses: Guidelines and recommendations. Proceedings of 2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON 2017. [7942870] IEEE Computer Society. 2017; pp. 340–346. Publisher Full Text

[4] 4. Winberg C, Winberg S, Jacobs C, et al.:‘I take engineering with me’: epistemological transitions across an engineering curriculum. Teach. High. Educ. 2016; 21(4): 398–414. Publisher Full Text

[5] 5. Baillie C, Armstrong R: Crossing Knowledge Boundaries and Thresholds: Challenging the Dominant Discourses Within Engineering Education.Engineering Education for Social Justice: Critical Explorations and Opportunities.Lucena J, editor. Dordrecht: Springer2013; pp. 135–152.Publisher Full Text

[6] 6. Carstensen A-K, Bernhard J: Threshold Concepts and Keys to the Portal of Understanding: Some Examples from Electrical Engineering.Threshold Concepts Within the Disciplines.Land R, Meyer JHF, Smith J, editors. Rotterdam: Sense; 2008; pp. 143–154. Publisher Full Text

[7] 7. Garrison L, Amos DM, Stevens R, et al.: Engineering as Lifestyle and a Meritocracy of Difficulty: Two Pervasive Beliefs among Engineering Students and Their Possible Effects.Paper presented at the 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition of the American Society for Engineering Education.Honolulu, HI; 2007. https://peer.asee.org/2791

[8] 8. McKenna A, Jeffrey F, Judson King C, et al.: The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Report on Forum on Characterizing the Impact and Diffusion of Transformative Engineering Education Innovations. 2011. https://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=52358

[9] 9. McKenna A, Froyd J, Litzinger T:The Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education: Preparing for Next Steps. J. Eng. Educ. 2014; 103(2): 188–192. Publisher Full Text

[10] 10. Gumaelius L, Skogh IB, Matthíasdóttir Á, et al.:Engineering education in change. A case study on the impact of digital transformation on content and teaching methods in different engineering disciplines. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 2024; 49(1): 70–93. Publisher Full Text

[11] 11. Beck J, Young MFD:The Assault on the Professions and the Restructuring of Academic and Professional Identities: A Bernsteinian Analysis. Br. J. Sociol. Educ. 2005; 26: 183–197. Publisher Full Text

[12] 12. Bernstein B: Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research and Critique. Oxford:Rowman & Littlefield; 2000.

[13] 13. Stiwne EE, Jungert T:Engineering Students’ Experiences of Transition from Study to Work. J. Educ. Work. 2010; 23(5): 417–437. Publisher Full Text

[14] 14. Parkinson J: The student laboratory report genre: A genre analysis. Engl. Specif. Purp. 2017; 45: 1–13. Publisher Full Text

[15] 15. Kalaskas AB: Science lab report writing in postsecondary education: Mediating teaching and learning strategies between students and instructors (Doctoral dissertation, George Mason University).2013.

[16] 16. Beer D, McMurrey D: A guide to writing as an engineer. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1997.

[17] 17. Lannon JM: Technical Writing. 6th ed.New York: HarperCollins College Publishers; 1993.

[18] 18. Lin V, Barrett NE, Liu GZ, et al.:A Systematic Review on Inquiry-Based Writing Instruction in Tertiary Settings. Writ. Commun. 2023; 40(1): 238–281. Publisher Full Text

[19] 19. Chin C, Osborne J:Students’ questions: a potential resource for teaching and learning science. Stud. Sci. Educ. 2008; 44(1): 1–39. Publisher Full Text

[20] 20. Furtak EM, Seidel T, Iverson H, et al.:Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 2012; 82(3): 300–329. Publisher Full Text

[21] 21. Gericke N, Högström P, Wallin J:A systematic review of research on laboratory work in secondary school. Stud. Sci. Educ. 2022; 59(2): 245–285. Publisher Full Text

[22] 22. Lazonder AW, Harmsen R:Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Rev. Educ. Res. 2016; 86(3): 681–718. Publisher Full Text

[23] 23. Akuma FV, Callaghan R:Teaching practices linked to the implementation of inquiry-based practical work in certain science classrooms. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2019; 56(1): 64–90. Publisher Full Text

[24] 24. Bhatia VK: Integrating products, processes and participants in professional writing. Candlin CN, Hyland K, editors. Writing: Texts, Process and Practices. New York: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.; 1999.

[25] 25. Bhatia VK: Applied Genre Analysis: A MultiPerspective Model. Ibérica. 2002; 4: 3–19.

[26] 26. Caglak S:Does hands-on science practices make an impact on achievement in science? A meta-analysis. J. Educ. Sci. Environ. Health. 2017; 3(1): 69–87. Publisher Full Text

[27] 27. Morse JM: Determining sample size. Qual. Health Res. 2000; 10: 3–5. Publisher Full Text

[28] 28. Mertler CA, Charles CM: Introduction to educational research. 5th ed.Boston, MA:Pearson; 2005.

[29] 29. Biber D, Connor U, Upton TA: Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Vol. 28.. John Benjamins Publishing; 2007

[30] 30. Kanoksilapatham B: Rhetorical moves in biochemistry research articles. Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. 2007; 73–119.

[31] 31. Flowerdew L: The problem-solution pattern in apprentice vs. professional technical writing: An application of appraisal theory. Aston G, Bernardini S, Stewart D, editors. Corpora and language learners. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; 2004; pp. 125–135.

[32] 32. Flowerdew L: Corpus-based analyses of the problem–solution pattern: A phraseological approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; 2008.

[33] 33. McKenna B: How engineers write: An empirical study of engineering report writing. Appl. Linguis. 1997; 18(2): 189–211. Publisher Full Text

[34] 34. Hopkins A, Dudley-Evans T: A genre-based investigation of the discussion sections in articles and dissertations. Engl. Specif. Purp. 1988; 7: 113–121. Publisher Full Text

[35] 35. Kanoksilapatham B: A corpus-based investigation of scientific research articles: Linking move analysis with multidimensional analysis. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Georgetown University, Washington, DC.2003.

[36] 36. Kanoksilapatham B: Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. Engl. Specif. Purp. 2005; 24: 269–292.

[37] 37. Veerappan V, Ahmad M, Aris M, et al.: Genre Analysis of Introduction Section in Electrical Engineering Undergraduate Laboratory Reports. figshare. Dataset. 2021. Publisher Full Text

Genre analysis of introduction section in electrical engineering undergraduate laboratory reports

Abstract

Background

Method

Results

Keywords

Revised Amendments from Version 2

Introduction

Methods

Results and discussion

Move 1: Presenting background information.

Table 1. Exemplification of Moves and Steps in Introduction Section extracted from ELR 25.

Table 2. Move 1 Step 1: Reference to the research purposes of experiment is exemplified in the following instances.

Table 3. Move 1 Step 2: Giving an overview of the topic under study is exemplified in the following instances.

Table 4. Move 1 Step 3: Reference to the theoretical knowledge in the field is exemplified in the following instances.

Table 5. Move 1 Step 4: Identification of main research apparatus is exemplified in the following instances.

Combination of move patterns in Introduction section.

Table 6. Model for Introduction section of ELR.

Conclusion

Data availability

Acknowledgements

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated