許多大學發展了各種形式的學術寫作訓練來幫助研究生增強期刊寫作的知識和技巧，然而，很少有研究對於在科技幫助下的人文和社會科學學科的研究生在前言和方法兩大章節的體裁結構和語言使用的學習進行比較性分析。為了回應這個研究需求，本研究設計了13週的結合線上寫作系統(EJP-Write)、同儕審查和發現式學習的混成式英語文類本位寫作教學(GBWI)，以協助來自人文和社會科學學科的九個領域的研究生更加了解前言和方法兩大章節的體裁結構和語言使用，同時了解受試者對於該設計的認知。
混成式英語文類本位寫作教學工作坊研究地點在南台灣的一所研究導向大學，此工作坊一個禮拜一次，每次兩個小時並持續了13週。25個學生自願參加了這個工作坊。此工作坊可分成兩部分，第一部分為由英文為母語的老師以面對面的方式授課，第二部分由研究者主導，帶領學生用EJP-Write學習和進行後續的寫作練習和活動。
本研究的結果顯示受試者受益於混成式英語文類本位寫作教學。學生引言和方法兩大章節的文類結構知識和語言使用狀況都有進步，但並沒有顯著進步。學生也學會在寫作中使用更加學術的用詞、恰當的英文文法和時態、更多元的句子類型等。儘管學生知識和語言使用上有所進步，學生仍表示混成式英語文類本位寫作教學、EJP-Write 系統、同儕審查和發現式學習活動並沒有完全符合他們的需求。然而，他們也肯定了老師的教學、EJP-Write對於各章節功能和目(文類)的教學內容和同儕審查和發現式學習活動所賦予的批判性思考訓練。
依據系統性思考，研究者認為受試者太多元的背景、不太足夠的EJP-Write使用機會和EJP-Write不足的寫作功能都可能影響學生對於混成式英語文類本位寫作教學設計的滿意度及知識和寫作進步的多寡。研究者也建議未來的研究能使用必修課及擁有更加充足的研究時間、更注重時間的管理、考量受試者的背景多元性和數量，並探索如何恰當的融入同儕審查方法。本研究的主要貢獻為幫助有興趣的學者和教育家更加理解如何結合寫作系統的混成式英語文類本位寫作教學，來幫助人文和社會科學領域的研究生發展學術寫作知識和技巧，並且加強未來混成式英語文類本位寫作教學研究的有效性和效率。本研究也發現混成式英語文類本位寫作教學可以與不同的學習方法結合，如:同儕審查和發現式學習。

Academic writing trainings in various forms have been developed to enhance journal writing knowledge and skills for graduate students in universities. However, not many studies have conducted comparative learning analysis of Introduction and Method sections in terms of genre structure and language use in humanity and social science contexts with the support of technology. In response to the need, the present study designed a 13-week blended English explicit genre-based writing instruction (GBWI; Lo et al., 2014) with the support of an online writing tutorial system—EJP-Write, as well as peer review and discovery-based learning approaches to help graduate students of nine fields of humanity and social science disciplines enhance genre structure and language use of Introduction and Method sections of research writing. The study also examined participants’ perceptions of the GBWI design.
The GBWI workshop with integrated EJP-Write took two hours once a week and lasted for 13 weeks at a research-based university in southern Taiwan. Twenty-five students voluntarily participated in this project. The GBWI consisted of two phases, an English teacher used the first to deliver lectures in a face-to-face (F2F) instructional way, while the investigator took advantage of the second phase to carry out teaching and learning with EJP-Write, as well as follow-up writing tasks and assignments.
The results of the present study showed that the participants benefited from the GBWI. From pre- and post-tests, participants had insignificant improvements. Students’ knowledge of the genre structure and language use of the Introduction and Method sections was enhanced. The participants also learned to use formal language, appropriate grammar or tense choices, and more diverse types of sentence in their writing.
In terms of the students’ perceptions, however, they reported that the GBWI, EJP-Write system and peer review and discovery-based learning activities did not completely meet their needs and expectations. However, they all had positive views of the teacher of the GBWI, the purposes, functions, and moves/steps of each section with examples in EJP-Write, and the logical and critical thinking assistance provided by the peer review and discovery-based learning activities.
Based on systems thinking, it was the heterogeneous backgrounds of the participants, inadequate opportunities to use EJP-Write, and insufficient writing functions of EJP-Write that might influence students’ satisfaction of the GBWI and improvements in their knowledge of the Introduction and Method sections. The researcher also suggested use of required courses and a longer research period, more attention to time arrangement or control, considerations of the participants’ backgrounds and numbers, and a further exploration of the peer review approach for future research. The present study mainly contributes to the literature by helping interested scholars and educators to better understand how GBWI with an integrated system was applied with EFL graduate students of humanities and social science disciplines to develop their knowledge and skills of academic writing, and further strengthen effectiveness and efficiency of future GBWI research. This study also found that GBWI can be employed with different learning approaches, such as discovery-based learning and peer review.

Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum,
H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1-18.
Alharbi, S. H. (2016). Schematic Structure of Discussion of Results Sections in the Field of Dentistry: A Comparison of International and Local English-Medium Journals. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 7, 61-76
Amnuai, W., & Wannaruk, A. (2013). Investigating move structure of English applied linguistics research article discussions published in international and Thai journals. English Language Teaching, 6(2), 1-13.
Aronson, D. (1996). Overview of systems thinking. Retrieved December 7, 2016, from
http://www.thinking.net/Systems_Thinking/OverviewSTarticle.pdf
Ausubel, D.P. (1964). Some psychological and educational limitations of learning by discovery. The Arithmetic Teacher, 11, 290-302.
Barron, B., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Teaching for meaningful learning. In L. Darling-Hammond, B. Barron, P. D. Pearson, A. H. Schoenfeld, E. K. Stage, T. D. Zimmerman, G. N. Cervetti, & J. Tilson (Eds.), Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding (pp. 11-70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Basturkmen, H., & Lewis, M. (2002). Learner perspectives of success in an EAP writing course. Assessing writing, 8(1), 31-46.
Basturkmen, H. (2009). Commenting on results in published research articles and masters dissertations in language teaching. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(4), 241-251.
Bazerman, C., & Prior, P. (2003). What writing does and how it does it: An introduction to analyzing texts and textual practices. Routledge.
Benesch, S. (2001). Critical English for academic purposes. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Berns, M. (2013). Contexts of competence: Social and cultural considerations in communicative language teaching. Springer Science & Business Media.
Bhatia, V. K. (2014). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. Routledge.
Bikowski, D., & Vithanage, R. (2016). Effects of web-based collaborative writing on individual L2 writing development. Language Learning & Technology, 20(1), 79-99.
Bitchener, J., & Basturkmen, H. (2006). Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(1), 4-18.
Bondi, M., & Hyland, K. (2006). Introduction. In K. Hyland, & M. Bondi (Eds.), Academic discourse across disciplines (pp. 7–17). Germany: Peter Lang.
Breeze, R. (2007). A contrastive approach to genre-based pedagogies. In Actas del V Congreso Internacional de la Asociación European de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza (pp. 443-448).
Brown, P. (2012). Changemaking: Building strategic competence. The Foundation Review, 4(1), 8.
Brown, J. D. (2016). Introducing needs analysis and English for specific purposes. Routledge.
Bruce, I. (2008). Cognitive genre structures in Methods sections of research articles: A corpus study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(1), 38-54.
Bruce, I. (2009). Results sections in sociology and organic chemistry articles: A genre analysis. English for Specific Purposes, 28(2), 105-124.
Bruce, I. (2013). A role for genre-based pedagogy in academic writing instruction?: An EAP perspective. Text Special Issue, 21, 1–15.
Bruner, J.S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review. 31, 21-32.
Bunton, D. (2005). The structure of PhD conclusion chapters. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(3), 207-224.
Burgess, S. (2002). Packed houses and intimate gatherings: Audience and rhetorical structure. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 196–215). London: Pearson Education.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
Cargill, M., O’Connor, P., & Li, Y. (2012). Educating Chinese scientists to write for international journals: Addressing the divide between science and technology education and English language teaching. English for Specific Purposes, 31(1), 60-69.
Carver, D. (1983). Some propositions about ESP. The ESP journal, 2(2), 131-137.
Calvo, R. A., O'Rourke, S. T., Jones, J., Yacef, K., & Reimann, P. (2011). Collaborative writing support tools on the cloud. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 4(1), 88-97.
Chaisiri T (2010). Implementing a Genre Pedagogy to the Teaching of Writing in a University Context in Thailand. Lang. Educ. Asia, 1(1), 181- 199.
Chan, T. W., Hue, C. W., Chou, C. Y., & Tzeng, O. J. L. (2001). Four spaces of network learning models. Computers & Education, 37(2), 141–161.
Chang, K. E., Sung, Y. T., & Lee, C. L. (2003). Web‐based collaborative inquiry learning. Journal of computer assisted learning, 19(1), 56-69.
Chang, P. (2012). Using a stance corpus to learn about effective authorial stance-taking: a text linguistic approach. ReCALL, 24(02), 209-236.
Chang, J. Y. (2014). The use of general and specialized corpora as reference sources for academic English writing: A case study. ReCALL, 26(02), 243-259.
Charles, M. (2013). English for academic purposes. In B. Paltridge, & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 137-153). Chichester,
England: Wiley-Blackwell.
Chen, Y. S., & Su, S. W. (2012). A genre-based approach to teaching EFL summary writing. ELT journal, 66(2), 184-192.
Cheng, A. (2006). Understanding learners and learning in ESP genre-based writing instruction. English for Specific Purposes, 25(1), 76-89.
Cheng, A. (2007). Transferring generic features and recontextualizing genre awareness: Understanding writing performance in the ESP genre-based literacy framework. English for Specific Purposes, 26(3), 287-307.
Chu, S. K., Chan, C. K., & Tiwari, A. F. (2012). Using blogs to support learning during internship. Computers & Education, 58(3), 989-1000.
Chukharev-Hudilainen, E., & Saricaoglu, A. (2016). Causal discourse analyzer: improving automated feedback on academic ESL writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(3), 494-516
Cockrell, K. S., Caplow, J. A. H., & Donaldson, J. F. (2000). A context for learning: Collaborative groups in the problem-based learning environment. The Review of Higher Education, 23(3), 347-363.
Coe, R. M. (2002). The new rhetoric of genre: Writing political briefs. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom (pp. 195–205). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second language writing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Connor, U., Upton, T. A., & Kanoksilpatham, B. (2007). Introduction to move analysis. In D. Biber, U. Connor, & T. A. Upton (Eds.), Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure (pp. 23-41). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Cotos, E. (2014). Enhancing writing pedagogy with learner corpus data. ReCALL, 26(2), 202-224.
Cowan, R., Choo, J., & Lee, G. S. (2014). ICALL for Improving Korean L2 Writers' Ability to Edit Grammatical Errors. Language Learning & Technology, 18(3), 193-207.
Craig, R.C. (1965). Discovery, task completion, and the assignment as factors in motivation. American Educational Research Journal, 2, 217-222.
Cross, C., & Oppenheim, C. (2006). A genre analysis of scientific abstracts.Journal of documentation, 62(4), 428-446.
Crowe, J. A., Silva, T., & Ceresola, R. (2015). The Effect of Peer Review on Student Learning Outcomes in a Research Methods Course. Teaching Sociology, 43(3), 201-213.
Currie, W., & Galliers, R. (1999). Rethinking management information systems: An interdisciplinary perspective. Oxford university press.
Devlin, B. M. (2010). Effects of students' multiple intelligences on participation rate of course components in a blended secondary family and consumer sciences course. (Doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University). Retrieved from http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/11286
Dooey, P. (2010). Students' perspectives of an EAP pathway program. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(3), 184-197.
Dowse, C., & Van Rensburg, W. (2015). "A hundred times we learned from one another." Collaborative learning in an academic writing workshop. South African Journal of Education, 35(1), 1-12.
Drobnic, K. (1978). Teaching Conceptual Paragraphs in EST Courses: A Practical Technique. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED249766).
Dudley Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dunn, P. (1993). English 101 and Chemistry 101: Examining Texts through Different Lenses. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, San Diego, CA.
Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of advanced nursing, 62(1), 107-115.
Elbow, P. (1973). Writing without teachers. New York: Oxford University Press.
Evans, S., & Green, C. (2007). Why EAP is necessary: A survey of Hong Kong tertiary students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(1), 3-17.
Feng, H. (2008). A genre-based study of research grant proposals in China. In U.
Connor, E. Nagelhout & W. V. Rozycki (Eds.), Contrastive rhetoric: Reaching to
intercultural rhetoric (pp. 63-86). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Co
Ferriman, N. (2013). The impact of blended e-learning on undergraduate academic essay writing in English (L2). Computers & Education, 60(1), 243-253.
Flowerdew, J. (2000). Discourse community, legitimate peripheral participation, and the nonnative-English-speaking scholar. TESOL quarterly, 34(1), 127-150.
Forte, A., & Innocentini, V. (2015). I Understand, and then I Can Write: an Experience of the Impact of Models and Metacognitive Analysis of Rhetorical Features on the Writing of Abstracts. Course and Material Design for Active ESP Journalism English Teaching, 5(1), 24-46.
Freedman, A. (1993). Show and tell? The role of explicit teaching in the learning of new genres. Research in the Teaching of English, 27, 222-251.
Freedman, A. (1994). “Do as I say?”: The relationship between teaching and learning new genres. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the new rhetoric (pp. 191–210). London: Taylor & Francis.
Guthrie, J.T. (1967). Expository instruction versus a discovery method. Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 45-49.
Gutierrez, D., & Russo, S. (2011). Comparing Student Performance, Attitudes And Preferences In An Introduction To Business Course: Online, Hybrid And Traditional Delivery Methods–Who Makes The “A” Grade?. College Teaching Methods & Styles Journal (CTMS), 1(3), 83-90.
Hammond, J., and Derewianka, B. (2001). Genre. In. Nunan, D., & Carter, R. (Eds.). The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages. Ernst Klett Sprachen.
Han, S., Capraro, R., & Capraro, M. M. (2015). How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) project-based learning (PBL) affects high, middle, and low achievers differently: The impact of student factors on achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(5), 1089-1113.
Haskell, R. E. (2000). Transfer of learning: Cognition and instruction. Academic Press.
Hattie, J., & Anderman, E. M. (2013). International guide to student achievement. Routledge.
Hayes, A., Holden-Rachiotis, C., Kavanagh, B., & Otoom, S. (2011). Bridging the gap: on easing the transition from Arab secondary to Western third level learning. Evaluation & Research in Education, 24(2), 105-120.
Herbert, A. J. (1965). The Structure of technical English. London: Longman.
Holmes, R. (1997). Genre analysis, and the social sciences: An investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 321-337.
Houts, A. C. (2002). Discovery, invention, and the expansion of the modern Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals of Mental Disorders. In L.E. Beutler, & M.L. Malik (Eds.), Rethinking the DSM (pp. 17–65). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
Huhta M (2010). Language and communication for professional purposes: needs analysis methods in industry and business and their yield to stakeholders. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Helsinki University of Technology, Helsinki, Finland). Retrieved from http://lib.tkk.fi/Diss/2010/isbn978952
2482273/isbn9789522482273.pdf
Hung, H. C., & Young, S. S. C. (2015). The Effectiveness of Adopting E-Readers to Facilitate EFL Students' Process-Based Academic Writing. Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 250-263.
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes. Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K. (2003). Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to process. Journal of second language writing, 12(1), 17-29.
Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and second language writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Hyland, K. (2006). English for academic purposes: An advanced resource book. Routledge.
Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of second language writing, 16(3), 148-164.
Hyland, K. (2014). Genre and writing instruction. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, Special Issue 2014 From Research to Practice: New Perspectives in English Language Education, 40-49.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. Sociolinguistics, 269-293.
Hyon, S. (1996). Genre in three traditions: Implications for ESL. TESOL quarterly, 30(4), 693-722.
James, M. A. (2006). Transfer of learning from a university content-based EAP course. TESOL Quarterly, 40(4), 783-806.
James, M. A. (2010). An investigation of learning transfer in English-for-general-academic-purposes writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 183-206.
James, M. A. (2014). Learning transfer in English-for-academic-purposes contexts: A systematic review of research. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 14, 1-13.
Johns, A. M. (1988). The discourse communities dilemma: Identifying transferable skills for the academic milieu. English for Specific Purposes, 7(1), 55-59.
Johns, A. M. (1990). Coherence as a cultural phenomenon: Employing ethnographic principles in the academic milieu. In U. O’Connor & A.M. Johns (Eds.), Coherence in writing: Research and pedagogical perspectives (pp. 209-226). Alexandria, VA:TESOL.
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(2), 112-133.
Jonassen, D. H. (2004). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. Taylor & Francis.
Jordan, R. R. (1989). English for academic purposes (EAP). Language teaching, 22(03), 150-164.
Jordan, R. R. (1997). English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge University Press.
Kagan, J. (1966). Learning, attention, and the issue of discovery. In L.S. Shulman & E.R. Keislar (Eds.), Learning by discovery: A critical appraisal (pp. 151-161). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Kallet, R. H. (2004). How to write the methods section of a research paper. Respiratory care, 49(10), 1229-1232.
Karlström, P., & Lundin, E. (2013). CALL in the zone of proximal development: Novelty effects and teacher guidance. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(5), 412-429.
Kersh, B.Y. (1958). The adequacy of “meaning” as an explanation for the superiority of learning by independent discovery. Journal of Educational Psychology, 49, 282-292.
Kersh, B.Y. (1962). The motivating effect of learning by directed discovery. Journal of Educational Psychology, 53, 65-71.
Kimura, M., Obari, H., & Goba, Y. (2011). Mobile technologies and language learning in Japan: Learning anywhere, anytime. In M. Levy, F. Blin, C. B. Siskin & O. Takeuchi (Eds.), WorldCALL: International Perspectives on Computer-Assisted Language Learning (pp. 275-292). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Kissau, S. (2006). Gender differences in second language motivation: An investigation of micro-and macro-level influences. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique appliquée, 9(1), 73-96.
Knutsson, O., Pargman, T. C., Eklundh, K. S., & Westlund, S. (2007). Designing and developing a language environment for second language writers. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1122-1146.
Koschmann, T., Kelson, A. C., Feltovich, P. J., & Barrows, H. S. (1996). Computer- supported problem-based learning: A principled approach to the use of computers in collaborative learning. . In T. Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 83–119). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assocaites.
Kunz, P., Frischknecht‐Tobler, U., Bollmann‐Zuberbuehler, B., & Groesser, S. N. (2015). Factors Influencing the Adoption of Systems Thinking in Primary and Secondary Schools in Switzerland. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 34(1), 78-93.
Kuteeva, M. (2013). Graduate learners' approaches to genre-analysis tasks: variations across and within four disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 32(2), 84-96.
Lackstrom, J., Selinker, L., & Trimble, L. (1973). Technical rhetorical principles and grammatical choice. TESOL quarterly, 7(2), 127-136.
Lavolette, E., Polio, C., & Kahng, J. (2015). The Accuracy of Computer-Assisted Feedback and Students’ Responses to It. Language, Learning & Technology, 19(2), 50-68.
Lam, R. (2015). Understanding EFL Students' Development of Self‐Regulated Learning in a Process‐Oriented Writing Course. TESOL Journal, 6(3), 527-553.
Lee, S. (2000). Contrastive Rhetorical Study on Korean and English Research Paper Introductions. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 316-36.
Leki, I., & Carson, J. G. (1994). Students' perceptions of EAP writing instruction and writing needs across the disciplines. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 81-101.
Leki, I., & Carson, J. (1997). “Completely different worlds”: EAP and the writing experiences of ESL students in university courses. TESOL quarterly, 31(1), 39-69.
Lewin, B. A., Fine, J., & Young, L. (2001). Expository discourse: A genre-based approach to social science research texts. London: Continuum.
Li, L. J., & Ge, G. C. (2009). Genre analysis: Structural and linguistic evolution of the English-medium medical research article (1985–2004). English for Specific Purposes, 28(2), 93-104.
Li, Z., & Hegelheimer, V. (2013). Mobile-assisted grammar exercises: Effects on self-editing in L2 writing. Language Learning & Technology, 17(3), 135-156.
Li, L., Liu, X., & Steckelberg, A. L. (2010). Assessor or assessee: How student learning improves by giving and receiving peer feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 525-536.
Lim, J. M. H. (2006). Method sections of management research articles: A pedagogically motivated qualitative study. English for Specific Purposes, 25(3), 282-309.
Lim, J. M. H. (2010). Commenting on research results in applied linguistics and education: A comparative genre-based investigation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(4), 280-294.
Lin, C. C. (2015). Developing and evaluating engineering English journal paper writing (EEJP-Write) online writing tutorial system (Master's thesis). Retrieved from http://ir.lib.ncku.edu.tw/handle/987654321/156219
Lin, L., & Evans, S. (2012). Structural patterns in empirical research articles: a cross-disciplinary study. English for Specific Purposes, 31(3), 150-160.
Liou, H. C., Kuo, C. H., Chang, J. S., Chen, H. H., & Chang, C. F. (2008). Web-based English writing courses for graduate students. Encyclopedia of networked and virtual organizations, 3, 1871-1878.
Liou, H. C., Yang, P. C., & Chang, J. S. (2012). Language supports for journal abstract writing across disciplines. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(4), 322-335.
Liu, G. Z. (2008). Innovating research topics in learning technology: Where are the new blue oceans? British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(4), 738–47.
Liu, G. Z. (2011). The blended language learning course in Taiwan: Issues & challenges of instructional design. In J. Macalister & I. S. P. Nation (Eds.), Case studies in language curriculum design: Concepts and approaches in action around the world (pp. 82-100). New York, NY: Routledge.
Liu, G. Z., & Hwang, G. J. (2010). A key step to understanding paradigm shifts in e‐learning: towards context‐aware ubiquitous learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), E1-E9.
Liu, G. Z., Liu, Z. H., & Hwang, G. J. (2011). Developing multi-dimensional evaluation criteria for English learning websites with university students and professors. Computers & Education, 56(1), 65–79.
Liu, G. Z., Lo, H. Y., & Wang, H. C. (2013). Design and usability testing of a learning and plagiarism avoidance tutorial system for paraphrasing and citing in English: A case study. Computers & Education, 69, 1-14.
Liu, G. Z., Chiu, W. Y., Lin, C. C., & Barrett, N. E. (2014). English for Scientific Purposes (EScP): technology, trends, and future challenges for science education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(6), 827-839.
Loan, N. T. T., & Pramoolsook, I. (2015). Move Analysis of Results-Discussion Chapters in TESOL Master’s Theses Written by Vietnamese Students. 3L: Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 21(2), 1-15.
Lo, H. Y., Liu, G. Z., & Wang, T. I. (2014). Learning how to write effectively for academic journals: A case study investigating the design and development of a genre-based writing tutorial system. Computers & Education, 78, 250-267.
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer's own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30-43.
Marefat, H., & Mohammadzadeh, S. (2013). Genre analysis of literature research article abstracts: A cross-linguistic, cross-cultural study. Applied Research on English Language, 2(2), 37-50.
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. 2nd edition. London: Continuum.
Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning?. American psychologist, 59(1), 14.
Melander, B., Swales, J. M., & Fredrickson, K. M. (1997). Journal abstracts from three academic fields in the United States and Sweden: National or disciplinary
proclivities. In A. Duszak (Ed.), Culture and Styles of Academic Discourse, (pp. 251-272), Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
McBride, K. K. (2016). Linking Science Fiction and Physics Courses. The Physics Teacher, 54(5), 280-284.
McDonough, J. (1986). English for academic purposes: A research base? English for Specific Purposes, 5(1), 17-25.
McLeod, S. H., & Miraglia, E. (2001). Writing across the curriculum in a time of change. In, S.H. McLeod, E. Miraglia, M. Soven, & C. Thaiss (Eds), WAC for the new millennium: Strategies for continuing writing across the curriculum programs (pp. 1-27), Urbana, IL: NCTE.
Mort, P., & Drury, H. (2012). Supporting student academic literacy in the disciplines using genre-based online pedagogy. Journal of Academic Language and Learning, 6(3), A1-A15.
Moulton, M. R., & Holmes, V. L. (2000). An ESL capstone course: Integrating research tools, techniques, and technology. TESOL Journal, 9(2), 23-29.
Mozaheb, M. A., Saeidi, M., & Ahangari, S. (2014). A comparative genre-based study of research articles' introductions written by English native/non native speakers. Calidoscópio, 12(3), 323-334.
Munby, J. (1978). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Musa, N. F., Khamis, N., & Zanariah, J. (2015). The Structure of Method Section in Engineering Research Articles. Asian Social Science, 11(17), 74-82.
Neuendorf, K. A. (2016). The content analysis guidebook. Sage.
Niskanen, T., Louhelainen, K., & Hirvonen, M. L. (2016). A systems thinking approach of occupational safety and health applied in the micro-, meso-and macro-levels: A Finnish survey. Safety science, 82, 212-227.
Novakovich, J. (2016). Fostering critical thinking and reflection through blog‐mediated peer feedback. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(1), 16-30.
Nwogu, K. N. (1997). The medical research paper: Structure and functions. English for specific purposes, 6(2), 119-138.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2004). Enhancing the interpretation of significant findings: The role of mixed methods research. The Qualitative Report, 9(4), 770-792.
Oztürk, I. (2007). The textual organization of research article introductions in applied linguistics: Variability within a single discipline. English for Specific Purposes, 26(1), 25-38.
Paltridge, B. (2001). Genre and the language learning classroom. University of Michigan Press.
Peacock, M. (2002). Communicative moves in the discussion section of research articles. System, 30(4), 479-497.
Peacock, M. (2011). The Structure of the Method Section in Research Articles Across Eight Disciplines. The Asian ESP Journal, 7(2), 97-124.
Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1992). Transfer of learning. International Encyclopedia of Education, 2, 6452-6457.
Potter, J. (1996). Discourse analysis and constructionist approaches: Theoretical background. In J. Richardson, (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for psychology and the social sciences (pp, 125-140). British Psychological Society.
Rahman, M. M. (2011). Genre-based writing instruction: implications in ESP classroom. English for Specific Purposes World, 33(11), 1-9.
Reid, A., & Petocz, P. (2004). Learning domains and the process of creativity. The Australian Educational Researcher, 31(2), 45-62.
Reynolds, B. L. (2013). A Web‐based EFL writing environment as a bridge between academic advisers and junior researchers: A pilot study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), E77-E80.
Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge university press.
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. W. (2014). Language and communication. Routledge.
Richterich, R., & Chancerel, J.L. (1977). Identifying the needs of adults learning English as a foreign language. Oxford: Pergamon
Richey, R. C. (1998). The pursuit of usable knowledge in instructional technology. Educational Technology Research & Development, 46(4), 7-22.
Rittle-Johnson, B., Saylor, M., & Swygert, K.E. (2008). Learning from explaining: Does it matter if mom is listening? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 100, 215-224.
Robatjazi, M. A. (2008). Language education: Intercultural communicative competence and curriculum. Glossa, 3(2), 245-265.
Robinson, J. M. (1999). Anonymous peer review for classroom use: Results of a pilot in a large science unit. In K. Martin, N. Stanley & N. Davison (Eds.), Teaching in the Disciplines, Learning in Context. Paper presented at The 8th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, University of Western Australia, 3-4 February (pp. 348-353). Perth: UWA.
Rolfe, V. (2011). Can Turnitin be used to provide instant formative feedback?. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), 701-710.
Roskelly, H. (2008). What Do Students Need to Know About Rhetoric? Special Focus in English Language and Composition: Rhetoric. Retrieved from https://www.
southingtonschools.org/uploaded/faculty/ehosmer/Publications/summer_reading/2015/AP_Language_Summer_Packet_Gr_12.pdf
Rozgiene, I., Medvedeva, O., & Strakova, Z. (2008). Integrating ICT into language learning and teaching: Guide for tutors. Retrieved March 11, 2017 from: http://www. elexforum.etqm.ae/Proceeding
Ruiz, J. G., Candler, C., & Teasdale, T. A. (2007). Peer reviewing e-learning: opportunities, challenges, and solutions. Academic Medicine, 82(5), 503-507.
Rushby, N., & Seabrook, J. (2008). Understanding the past—illuminating the future. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(2), 198-233.
Sabariah, M. R., & Rafik-Galea, S. (2005). Designing test specifications for assessing ESL writing skills in English for academic purposes. In S. H. Chan & M. E. Vethamani (Eds.), ELT Concerns in Assessment (pp. 149-167). Petaling Jaya: Sasbadi Sdn. Bhd
Salager-Meyer, F (1992). A text-type and move analysis study of verb tense and modality distributions in medical English abstracts. English for Specific Purposes, 11, 93-133.
Salovaara, H. (2005). An exploration of students' strategy use in inquiry‐based computer‐supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(1), 39-52.
Samraj, B. (2002). Introductions in research articles: Variations across disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 21(1), 1-17.
Samraj, B. (2005). An exploration of a genre set: Research article abstracts and introductions in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 24(2), 141-156.
Savignon, S. J. (2002). Communicative language teaching: Linguistic theory and classroom practice. In S. J. Savignon, (Ed.), Interpreting Communicative Language Teaching (pp. 1-27), New Haven & London, Yale University Press.
Serafini, E. J., Lake, J. B., & Long, M. H. (2015). Needs analysis for specialized learner populations: Essential methodological improvements. English for Specific Purposes, 40, 11-26.
Shei, C. (2005). Plagiarism, Chinese learners and Western convention. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, 2(1), 97-113.
Shing, S., & Sim, T. (2011). EAP needs analysis in higher education: Significance and future direction. English for Specific Purposes World, 33, 1-11.
Soler-Monreal, C., Carbonell-Olivares, M., & Gil-Salom, L. (2011). A contrastive study of the rhetorical organisation of English and Spanish PhD thesis introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 30(1), 4-17.
Solomon, G. (2003). Project-based learning: A primer. Technology & Learning, 23(6), 20-20.
Song, B. (2006). Content-based ESL instruction: Long-term effects and outcomes. English for specific purposes, 25(4), 420-437.
Songhori, M. H. (2008). Introduction to needs analysis. English for Specific Purposes World, 4, 1-25.
Stark, R., Gruber, H., Renkl, A., & Mandl, H. (1998). Instructional effects in complex learning: Do objective and subjective learning outcomes converge? Learning and Instruction, 8, 117-129.
Strevens, P. (1977). New Orientations in the Teaching of English. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Suárez, L. & Moreno, A. I. (2008). The rhetorical structure of academic book reviews
of literature: An English-Spanish cross-linguistic approach. In U. Connor, E.
Nagelhout & W. V. Rozycki (Eds.), Contrastive rhetoric: Reaching to
intercultural rhetoric (pp. 147-168). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Co
Swales, J. M. (1981). Aspects of article introductions. Language Studies Unit, University of Aston in Birmingham.
Swales, J. (1985). Episodes in ESP: A source and reference book on the development of English for science and technology (Vol. 1). Pergamon.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Ernst Klett Sprachen.
Swales, J. M. & Lindemann, S. (2002). Teaching the literature review to international graduate students. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives (pp. 105-119). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Swales, J. M., & Luebs, M. A. (2002). Genre analysis and the advanced second language writer. In E. Barton & G. Stygall (Eds.), Discourse studies in composition (pp. 135-154). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Swales, J., & H. Najar (1987). The Writing of research article introductions, Written Communication, 4, 175-192.
Tardy, C. M. (2006). Researching first and second language genre learning: A comparative review and a look ahead. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), 79-101.
Taylor, G., & Chen, T. (1991). Linguistic, cultural, and subcultural issues in contrastive discourse analysis: Anglo-American and Chinese scientific texts. Applied Linguistics, 12(3), 319-336.
Terraschke, A., & Wahid, R. (2011). The impact of EAP study on the academic experiences of international postgraduate students in Australia. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(3), 173-182.
Thompson, D. K (1993). Arguing for experimental “facts” in science. Written Communication, 10, 106-128.
Tinto, V. (1999). Taking retention seriously: Rethinking the first year of college. NACADA Journal, 19(2), 5-9.
Tono, Y., Satake, Y., & Miura, A. (2014). The effects of using corpora on revision tasks in L2 writing with coded error feedback. ReCALL, 26(02), 147-162.
Tribble, C. (2009). Writing academic English—a survey review of current published resources. ELT journal, 63(4), 400-417.
Tsai, C. C., & Hwang, G. J. (2013). Issues and challenges of educational technology research in Asia. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(2), 215.
Tseng, F. P. (2011). Analyses of move structure and verb tense of research article abstracts in applied linguistics. International journal of English linguistics, 1(2), 27.
Tuan, L. T. (2011). Teaching writing through genre-based approach. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(11), 1471-1478.
Tucker, P. (2003). Evaluation in the art-historical research article. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(4), 291-312.
Turner, J. (2004). Language as academic purpose. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 3(2), 95-109.
Van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & Van Merriënboer, J. (2010). Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 270-279.
Watson, J. (2008). Promising practices in online learning: Blending learning: The convergence of online and face-to-face education. North American Council for Online Learning.
Weissberg, R., & Buker, S. (1990). Writing up research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Widdowson, H. G. (2008). Text, Context, Pretext: Critical Issues in Discourse Analysis (Vol. 12). John Wiley & Sons.
Williams, I. A. (1999). Results Sections of Medical Research Articles:: Analysis of Rhetorical Categories for Pedagogical Purposes. English for Specific Purposes, 18(4), 347-366.
Wingate, U. (2012). Using academic literacies and genre-based models for academic writing instruction: A ‘literacy’ journey. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(1), 26-37.
Wolfe, M. L. (2008). Different cultures-Different discourses? Rhetorical patterns of business letters by English and Russian speakers. In U. Connor, E. Nagelhout, & W. V. Rozycki (Eds.), Contrastive rhetoric: Reaching to intercultural rhetoric (pp. 87–121). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Worthen, B.R. (1968). A study of discovery and expository presentation: Implications for teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 19, 223-242.
Wu, W. C. V., Petit, E., & Chen, C. H. (2015). EFL writing revision with blind expert and peer review using a CMC open forum. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 58-80.
Yakhontova, T. (2002). Selling’or ‘telling’? The issue of cultural variation in research genres. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 216-232). London:
Longman/Addison Wesley/Pearson.
Yang, R., & Allison, D. (2003). Research articles in applied linguistics: Moving from results to conclusions. English for specific purposes, 22(4), 365-385.
Yeh, H. C. (2015). Facilitating metacognitive processes of academic genre-based writing using an online writing system. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(6), 479-498.
Yesilyurt, M. (2011). Meta-analysis of the computer assisted studies in physics: A sample of Turkey. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B-Social and
Educational Studies, 3(2), 173-182.
Yoshizawa, S., Terano, T., & Yoshikawa, A. (2012). Assessing the impact of student peer review in writing instruction by using the normalized compression distance. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 55(1), 85-96.
Zarei, G. R., & Rahimi, A. (2014). Learning transfer in English for general academic purposes writing. SAGE Open, 4(1), 1-12.
Zhu, W., & Flaitz, J. (2005). Using focus group methodology to understand international students' academic language needs: A comparison of perspectives. TESL-EJ, 8(4), 1-11.
Zohrabi, M. (2010). A New Outlook on EAP Literacies: General and Specific English Territories. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 14(2), 165-186.