# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 1/2019: Table 1 shows methods of assessments with comments and critique 

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 1/2019: Table 1 shows methods of assessments with comments and critique 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
30 Oct Ramona P TEAP Associate Fellow Obs1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
13 Nov BALEAP TEAP Associate Fellow Obs2 RP

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 44: Feedback with reference to the Student Book and External Websites

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 44: Feedback with reference to the Student Book and External Websites

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Feedback with links to external websites

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 43: Padlet for  student feedback

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 43: Padlet for  student feedback

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 31A: 5-week PEP Student Handboook

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 31A: 5-week PEP Student Handboook

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 40: In class Reading Blog feedback 

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 40: In class Reading Blog feedback 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
In class Reading Blog grade and feedback

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 27: Pronunciation activity where I grouped students by nationality

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 27: Pronunciation activity where I grouped students by nationality

# data[].attributes.body
Task 2: students of the same nationality work together to identify sounds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Grouping by nationality to complete task

# data[].attributes.body
I provided links to useful websites

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 22: Teaching Feedback Questionnaire

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 22: Teaching Feedback Questionnaire

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 19: Student population and nationalities

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 19: Student population and nationalities

# data[].attributes.body
Example from 5 week PEP Lesson 4.1 when students question the text and then compare it to an extract from another text.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Questioning a text and comparing it to another

# data[].attributes.body
Assignment for Linguistic Theories and Alternative Models in ELT

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Essay Excerpt Linguistic Theories and Alternative Models in ELT

# data[].attributes.body
Assignment 2

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 3: Lesson Plan and Observation Feedback 

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 3: Lesson Plan and Observation Feedback 

# data[].attributes.body
Lesson observed on 12 July 2018

# data[].attributes.body
I used this handout for a memory game of collocations for the Project Module before Ss read the literature review section of Wallace and Sheldon (2015)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Project 1.3 Handout activities-collocation pelmanism for Task 3

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 5: Explicit/Direct teaching for academic style

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 5: Explicit/Direct teaching for academic style

# data[].attributes.body
used for teaching the differences between academic non-academic writing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Explicit Direct teaching for academci style

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 6: Avoiding personal pronouns handout 

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 6: Avoiding personal pronouns handout 

# data[].attributes.body
Used for teaching the differences between academic and non-academic writing

# data[].attributes.body
Used in 5 week PEP

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 7: Put the strips in the right cell 

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 7: Put the strips in the right cell 

# data[].attributes.body
Handout - descriptive and evaluative

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Handout 1 Diff between descriptive and evaluative Ramona

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 11: Technology that I used in my teaching

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 11: Technology that I used in my teaching

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 10: Activity: Identifying a 'hedged' expression

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 10: Activity: Identifying a 'hedged' expression

# data[].attributes.body
Using an external website that I put on on the screen. Pair work. Students decide Yes/No.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A feature of academic writing is the need to be cautious in one's statements in order to distinguish between facts and claims. This feature is termed 'hedging'. Hedging can be defined as the use of linguistic devices to show hesitation or uncertainty and to display politeness and indirectness.

# data[].attributes.body
taken from OXFORD EAP

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 32A: Group Discussion Marking Criteria 

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 32A: Group Discussion Marking Criteria 

# data[].attributes.body
I used this pro-forma for marking group discussions and presentations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Group Discussion Marking Criteria 5 week autumn

# data[].attributes.body
End of course survey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PEP EAP 6 week student feedback end of course

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 16: Connections between different sessions

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 16: Connections between different sessions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Connecting lessons based on an existing syllabus

# data[].attributes.body
processes students followed during their course

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Processfolio Group 1 and 2 6 week PEAP Summer

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 37: Comparison of international tests

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 37: Comparison of international tests

# data[].attributes.body
C2a

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 36: Feedback in a variety of formats

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 36: Feedback in a variety of formats

# data[].attributes.body
C2
NILE - in text, right column, Rubric

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 34: Feedback on draft and final submission

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 34: Feedback on draft and final submission

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 33: Feedback on content, language and structure

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 33: Feedback on content, language and structure

# data[].attributes.body
C2
Autumn - Synthesis task 2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Feedback on content He Liu (Tara) Syntehsis task 2

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 32: Feedback Form Oral Presentation 

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 32: Feedback Form Oral Presentation 

# data[].attributes.body
C2 Criteria
Oral presentation feedback with another tutor

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 31: 6-week PEP writing module handbook 

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 31: 6-week PEP writing module handbook 

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 35: In class feedback (written and oral)

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 35: In class feedback (written and oral)

# data[].attributes.body
C2
Writing tasks

# data[].attributes.body
A getting to know each other activity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Find someone who - getting to know each other activity

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 18: Manchester Academic Phrasebank 

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 18: Manchester Academic Phrasebank 

# data[].attributes.body
Students use the website to find words and examples they can use in future writing tasks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As an academic writer, you are expected to be critical of the sources that you use. This essentially means questioning what you read and not necessarily agreeing with it just because the information has been published. Being critical can also mean looking for reasons why we should not just accept something as being correct or true. This can require you to identify problems with a writer's arguments or methods, or perhaps to refer to other people's criticisms of these. Constructive criticism goes beyond this by suggesting ways in which a piece of research or writing could be improved.
... being against is not enough. We also need to develop habits of constructive thinking.
Edward de Bono

Highlighting inadequacies of previous studies

Previous studies of X have not dealt with ...
Researchers have not treated X in much detail.
Such expositions are unsatisfactory because they ...
Most studies in the field of X have only focused on ...
Such approaches, however, have failed to address ...
Previous published studies are limited to local surveys.
Half of the studies evaluated failed to specify whether ...
The research to date has tended to focus on X rather than
published studies on the effect of X are not consistent.
Smith's analysis does not take account of ..., nor does she examine ...

The existing accounts fail to resolve the contradiction between X and Y.
Most studies of X have only been carried out in a small number of areas.
However, much of the research up to now has been descriptive in nature ...
The generalisability of much published research on this issue is problematic.
Research on the subject has been mostly restricted to limited comparisons of ...
However, few writers have been able to draw on any systematic research into ...
Short-term studies such as these do not necessarily show subtle changes over time ...
Although extensive research has been carried out on X, no single study exists which ...
However, these results were based upon data from over 30 years ago and it is unclear if ...
The experimental data are rather controversial, and there is no general agreement about ...

Identifying a weakness in a single study or paper

(However,)

Smith fails to fully define what ...
Jones fails to acknowledge the significance of ...
the author overlooks the fact that X contributes to Y.
what Smith fails to do is to draw a distinction between ...
the paper would appear to be over-ambitious in its claims.
another weakness is that we are given no explanation of how ...
no attempt was made to quantify the association between X and Y.
the main weakness of the study is the failure to address how ...
the study fails to consider the differing categories of damage that ...
the research does not take into account pre-existing ... such as ...
the author offers no explanation for the distinction between X and Y.
Smith makes no attempt to differentiate between different types of X.

Smith
The paper
The book

fails to
does not
makes no attempt to

specify ...
quantify ...
compare ...
separate ...
account for ...
suggest why ...
analyse how ...
ascertain whether ...
distinguish between ...
explain the meaning of ...
provide information on ...
address the question of ...
assess the effectiveness of ...
use a standardised method of ...
give sufficient consideration to ...
consider the long term impact of ...
offer an adequate explanation for ...
engage with current discourses on ...
determine the underlying causes of ...
systematically review all the relevant literature.

Offering constructive suggestions

The study would have been more interesting if it had included ...
These studies would have been more useful if they had focused on ...
The study would have been more relevant if the researchers had asked ...
The questionnaire would have been more useful if it had asked participants about ...
The research would have been more relevant if a wider range of X had been explored

Introducing problems and limitations: theory or argument

Smith's argument relies too heavily on ...
The main weakness with this theory is that ...
The key problem with this explanation is that ...
However, this theory does not fully explain why ...
One criticism of much of the literature on X is that ...
Critics question the ability of the X theory to provide ...
However, there is an inconsistency with this argument.

A serious weakness with this argument, however, is that ...
However, such explanations tend to overlook the fact that ...
One of the main difficulties with this line of reasoning is that ...
Smith's interpretation overlooks much of the historical research ...
Many writers have challenged Smith's claim on the grounds that ...
The X theory has been criticised for being based on weak evidence.
A final criticism of the theory of X is that it struggles to explain some aspects of ...

The theory is unable to

predict ...
explain why ...
fully account for ...
adequately explain the ...
explain what happens when ...
make any useful prediction about ...
explain the differences observed when ...
provide a comprehensive explanation for ...

Introducing problems and limitations: method or practice

The limitation of this approach is that ...
A major problem with the X method is that ...
One major drawback of this approach is that ...
A criticism of this experimental design is that ...
The main limitation of this technique, however, is ...
Selection bias is another potential concern because ...

Perhaps the most serious disadvantage of this method is that ...
In recent years, however, this approach has been challenged by ...
Non-government agencies are also very critical of the new policies.
All the studies reviewed so far, however, suffer from the fact that ...
Critics of laboratory-based experiments contend that such studies ...
There are certain problems with the use of focus groups. One of these is that there is less ...

However,

this method of analysis has a number of limitations.
this method does involve potential measurement error.
there are limits to how far the idea of/concept of X can be taken.
one of the problems with the instrument used to measure X was ...
approaches of this kind carry with them various well known limitations.

However, all the previously mentioned methods suffer from some serious

drawbacks.
limitations.
weaknesses.
shortcomings.
disadvantages.

Introducing general criticism

Critics question the ability of poststructuralist theory to provide ...
Non-government agencies are also very critical of the new policies.
Smith's meta-analysis has been subjected to considerable criticism.
The most important of these criticisms is that Smith failed to note that ...
The X theory has been vigorously challenged in recent years by a number of writers.
These claims have been strongly contested in recent years by a number of writers.
More recent arguments against X have been summarised by Smith and Jones (1982):
Critics have also argued that not only do surveys provide an inaccurate measure of X, but the ...
Many analysts now argue that the strategy of X has not been successful. Jones (2003), for example, argues that ...

Introducing the critical stance of particular writers

Smith (2014) disputes this account of ...
Jones (2003) has also questioned why ...
However, Jones (2015) points out that ...
The author challenges the widely held view that ...
Smith (1999) takes issue with the contention that ...
The idea that ... was first challenged by Smith (1992).
Smith is critical of the tendency to compartmentalise X.
However, Smith (1967) questioned this hypothesis and ...

Jones (2003) has challenged some of Smith's conclusions, arguing that ...
Another major criticism of Smith's study, made by Jones (2003), is that ...
Jones (2003) is probably the best-known critic of the X theory. He argues that ...
In her discussion of X, Smith further criticises the ways in which some authors ...
Smith's decision to reject the classical explanation of X merits some discussion ...
In a recent article in Academic Journal, Smith (2014) questions the extent to which ...
The latter point has been devastatingly critiqued by Jones (2003), who argues that ...
A recently published article by Smith et al. (2011) casts doubt on Jones' assumption that ...
Other authors (see Smith, 2012; Jones, 2014) question the usefulness of such an approach.

Smith (2020)

criticises ...
questions ...
challenges ...
is critical of ...
casts doubt on ...
points out that ...
takes issue with...
raises a number of questions about ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As an academic writer, you are expected to be critical of the sources that you use. This essentially means questioning what you read and not necessarily agreeing with it just because the information has been published. Being critical can also mean looking for reasons why we should not just accept something as being correct or true.

# data[].attributes.body
Students had to reflect on their processes for writing and produce a poster

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 13: Prugl and True (2014) used for collocation and critical thinking 

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 13: Prugl and True (2014) used for collocation and critical thinking 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Prugl and True (2014) used for collocation and critical thinking 

# data[].attributes.body
5 week PEP - Lecture 2.3

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 26: Feedback given to students by email 

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 26: Feedback given to students by email 

# data[].attributes.body
5 week PEP

# data[].attributes.body
C1g
Scaffolding

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Prugl and True (2014) – Scaffolding Questions 

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 24: Matching Activity for Waves Lesson

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 24: Matching Activity for Waves Lesson

# data[].attributes.body
Abstract or concrete?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lesson 8 - Waving Examples of Writing (1)

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 17 A: Journal and newspaper articles analysis for discourse types 

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 17 A: Journal and newspaper articles analysis for discourse types 

# data[].attributes.body
C1f Academic Discourse

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Journal and newspaper articles analysis for discourse types 

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 23: Feedback on Writing Task 2 in class

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 23: Feedback on Writing Task 2 in class

# data[].attributes.body
C1f in class feedback
UG2 Yaquan Chen

# data[].attributes.headline
Appendix 36A: Feedback Writing Task 2 with in text comments 2

# data[].attributes.subject
Appendix 36A: Feedback Writing Task 2 with in text comments 2