Assessment 2: Portfolio and evaluative account
Length: 2,500 words
· Describe and evaluate material from Unit 3 of an EAP resource: EAP Now! Preliminary (2007). (that I attached)
· Propose modifications and teaching strategies to optimize delivery of the core content covered in the chosen excerpt.
· Justify your comments with reference to sources from the literature.
The structure of your response
Your response will be in the form of a report, with:
Introduction (200 words):
Outline of your response, including:
Ø Structure of your report
Ø Excerpt from Unit 3 which will be analysed in detail
Ø Summary of target student profile, approach, aims and key focus areas of EAP Now! Preliminary, as stated in the Student’s and Teacher’s books (attached).
General description & evaluation from Unit 3 (attached). (550 words), including:
Ø Suitability of theme for target student group
Ø Layout on page
Ø Coverage of core skills, including integration / flow between skills
Ø Language development throughout unit
Ø Link to stated aims and focus of resource explained in your Introduction
Excerpt(s) from Unit 3 (3-5 pages of Students’ Book): Detailed analysis and proposals
For each section (skills) you cover, include:
Ø Purpose / objectives.
Ø Description of content and activities. [ what student do in that section]
Ø Evaluation of content and activities
Ø Proposed modifications: some can be described, but some original materials must be provided. Justify resource modifications. [ suggest modification to improve that section, with reasons].
Ø Proposed teaching strategies, including justification. [ how to teach that section, support with resources].
Conclusion (250 words):
Summary of the potential benefits for this target student group of your proposals, in terms of preparation for their future studies in Australia.
Reference list (APA system): at least six sources (with citations referring to your sources included throughout response to support your argument) all in-text citations must include the page number(s) when quoting directly and when paraphrasing an idea from the text.
stick to the attached readings ONLY.
All these sources relevant to Assignment 2 (Attached):
Basturkmen, H. (2016). Dialogic interaction. Ch. 12 in (Eds) K. Hyland & P. Shaw, The Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Coffin, C., Curry, M-J, Goodman, S., Hewings, A, Lillis, T., Swann, J. (2003). Approaches to teaching writing. Ch. 2 in Teaching academic writing. London: Routledge.
Dreyfus, S. & MacNaught, L. (2001). Joint construction in the SLATE Project. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 7(1-3), 77-99.
Graves, L. (2001). A framework of course development processes. In (Eds) D. Hall et al., Innovation in language teaching. London: Routledge.
Hyland, K. (2011). Learning to write: Issues in theory, research, and pedagogy. Ch. 2 in (Ed) R.M. Manchon, Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Jordan, R.R. (1997). Speaking for academic purposes. Ch. 13 in English for Academic Purposes: a guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rogers, M.P.H. & Webb, S. (2016). Listening to lectures. Ch. 13 in (Eds) K. Hyland & P. Shaw, The Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Sterzik, A.M. & Fraser, A.L. (2012). RC-MAPS: Bridging the Comprehension Gap in EAP Reading. TESL Canada Journal 29(2), 103-109.
Swales, J. (2009). When there is no perfect text: Approaches to the EAP practitioner’s dilemma. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 8(1), 5-13.
/* Style Definitions */
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;