Website analytics from Google and other platforms has become the key performance indicators for communication practitioners. The omnipresence of different metrics, mediated through data dashboards, has an important impact on the world of communication. However, little is known of the imaginaries inscribed in these platforms, yet these imaginaries also govern the understanding of digital communication as a professional activity. We work with the theoretical idea of sociotechnical imaginaries, that is, a set of visions sustained by infrastructures, practices, and more or less shared meanings of social life (Jasanoff & Kim, 2015). Similarly, the technical imaginaire (Flichy, 2007), algorithmic imaginaries (Bucher, 2017), and data imaginaries (Tupasela et al., 2020) are emerging as collectively held understandings of what technology, data and algorithms do.

In our paper, we discuss Google’s switch from the analytics platform Universal Analytics to Google Analytics 4 (GA4). We conduct a semiotic analysis of the analytics dashboards and map the related environment of instructional pages, videos and tutorials to uncover the imaginaries. While the surface-level argument claims GA4 to be better, the discontinuation of third-party cookies and change of user-tracking possibilities means that Google will often have to operate with much less data about the audiences than in Universal Analytics. The related environment of instructional pages, videos and tutorials demonstrates a diverse ecosystem of actors who are seeking to capitalise on Google's data collection interest and support the imaginary with their promotional materials directed towards communication practitioners.

The data dashboard is imagined as the one-stop site for an overview of the audiences, their interest and engagement; data is supposed to be precise, immediate, and actionable. However, there is also a clear link to imagining the work of the communication – success or failure in digital communication and reaching the audiences is imagined through the data on the dashboard. The role of AI and algorithms as supporting imaginaries related to audiences confirms the expectation of unlimited digital surveillance but also indicates the limitations of the data collection of the GA4. Communication practitioners in different fields rely on the data from Google and other platform players to help them understand the reach of their messages. But we find that in the ecology of complex relationships, messy data and diversity of actors looking to capitalise on the data provisions, the idea of the audiences is diluted and abstract. The research fills the gap in audience studies, demonstrating that despite the promises and fears Google Analytics is still supporting desperately seeking audiences (Ang, 1991).

References:Ang, I. (1991). Desperately seeking the audience. Routledge.

Bucher, T. (2017). The algorithmic imaginary: Exploring the ordinary affects of Facebook algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1154086

Flichy, P. (2007). The internet imaginaire. MIT Press.

Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S.-H. (2015). Dreamscapes of Modernity: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226276663.001.0001

Tupasela, A., Snell, K., & Tarkkala, H. (2020). The Nordic data imaginary. Big Data & Society, 7(1), 2053951720907107. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720907107Read lessSpeaker account_circlePille Pruulmann-VengerfeldtMalmö University, School of Arts and Communication, Malmö , Sweden bookmark_border

Research shows that student reflective writing is a valuable window into student learning, particularly student metacognition; however, our knowledge of the challenges of accessing metacognition to inform curriculum design and assessment practices in the ESL (English as a Second Language) context is less robust. This paper reports two qualitative studies of student reflective writing on an ESL writing course within a teacher education programme. The studies investigate how student metacognition manifests itself in reflective papers and how mapping student metacognition can inform evidence-based curriculum design and assessment. The data comes from several iterations of an ESL writing course and is analysed using directed and conventional content analyses. Our results expose a complex relation between metacognition, curriculum design and assessment practices: 1) unless scaffolded by the curriculum design to use precise terminology, students resort to expressing their understanding of the course content in terms of everyday, vernacular language and 2) student reflective writing not only provides a more nuanced picture of their learning than the final course grades but is invaluable for developing scaffolding and assessment practices. Based on our results, we recommend integrating structured reflection as part of the regular curricula to gauge ESL student metacognition and monitor more precisely their uptake of course content.

Collaborative Future-Making is a research platform at the Faculty of Culture and Society at Malmö University that is concerned with how to envision, elaborate and prototype multiple, inclusive, and sustainable futures. The platform gathers around 20 researchers that share a methodological interest in how critical perspectives from the humanities and social sciences can be combined with the constructive and collaborative aspects of making and prototyping in design research.

The research centers around two major themes:

• Critical imagination​, which focuses on how basic assumptions, norms and structures can be challenged to widen the perspectives on what can constitute socially, culturally, ecologically and economically sustainable and resilient futures.
• Collaborative engagements​, which focuses on how we can set up more inclusive collaborations to prototype and discuss alternative futures, engaging not only professionals and policy makers but also citizens and civil society.

During 2019 the research group set out to make a shared glossary for collaborative future-making. The glossary is multiple in purpose and exists in several versions. Hopefully there will be more to come. At first, the making and articulation of the glossary was used within the research group as an exercise to share concepts that we found central to collaborative future-making, coming from different disciplines. This published version of the glossary was assembled to be used during a workshop called ​Imagining Collaborative Future-Making,​ which gathered a group of international researchers from different disciplines.

The collection of concepts reflects the heterogeneous and diverse character of the research group and a strong belief in that plurality regarding ontologies and epistemologies will be crucial to be able to handle the multiple uncertainties and complex challenges we have to face in the future. Some of the concepts are already well established within different research communities, but gain a specific meaning in relation to the research area. Others are more preliminary attempts to advance our understanding or probe into new potential practices within collaborative future-making. In that sense the concepts in the glossary are well situated and grounded in past and ongoing research within this research group, at the same time as they are meant to suggest, propose and point towards practices and approaches yet to come.

The concepts in this glossary are not only meant to be descriptive but also performative. In that sense, assembling and circulating this glossary is part of collaborative future-making. As pointed out by Michelle Westerlaken in her articulation of “Doing Concepts” (see page 15), “...without proposing, critiquing, or working towards a common or uncommon understanding of certain concepts, it becomes impossible to ‘make futures’ in any deliberate fashion.”

In 2015, the Swedish government allocated 130 million SEK to Äga rum ('Taking Place'): a three-year program of arts projects across Sweden to address low voter turnout in certain housing areas, but which, in effect, target the immigrants. We argue-through a short account of Foucault's take on the state, biopolitics, race, and governmentalisation-that this is an example of contemporary state racism, which is best understood as an inextricable part of biopolitical governmentalisation through forms of veridiction. We further analyse a specific governmental program (Äga rum) and a specific project (anonymised) within that program which takes place in two Miljonprogrammet housing areas in Malmö. Although both the program and the project have clear political agendas of empowerment and anti-exclusion, we argue that they nevertheless end up producing racial divisions and what we call a 'racial archipelago.'

Although peer review is a common practice in writing classrooms, there are still few studies that analyze written patterns in students’ peer reviews across multiple institutional contexts. Based on a sample of approximately 50,000 peer reviews written by students at the University of South Florida (USF), Malmö University (MAU), and the University of Tartu (UT), this study examines how students formulate criticism and praise, negotiate power relations, and express authority and expertise in reviewing their peers’ writing. The study specifically focuses on features of affective language, including adjectives, expressions of suggestion, boosters and hedges, cognitive verbs, personal pronouns, and adversative transitions. The results show that across all three contexts, the peer reviews contain a blend of foci, including descriptions and evaluations of peer texts, directives or suggestions for revisions, responses to the writer or the text, and indications of reader interpretations. Across all three contexts, peer reviews also contain more positively glossed responses than negatively glossed responses. By contrast, certain features of affective language pattern idiosyncratically in different contexts; these distinctions can be explained variously according to writer experience, nativeness, and institutional context. The findings carry implications for continued research and for instructional guidance for student peer review.

This paper maps some of the ontological and methodological concerns incurred by the governmentalization of art and culture that has come about in most advanced liberal societies since WWII. The main argument is that cultural policy forms a new historical ontology constituting a transformed relationship between art and the state. This transformed relationship has profound effects on the “art institution,” loosely defined after Peter Bürger as the apparatuses of production and distribution of the art system but also the historical ideas about what art is and what it should be doing. This transformation has produced a new situation for art and for artists: if print capitalism secured the conception of the artist-genius and the contemplative reader, then today we have the emergence of something new. In the wake of the governmentalization of art we have a landscape on the horizon, one that belabors art with economic, social and quantifiable functions. It is in this context that cultural policy has become a “historical ontology.”

The commencement of cultural policy in Sweden is analysed as part of global and networked socio-technical agencements, beginning with the transformation of the political rationalities underlying state support for theatre in the early nineteen-thirties and ending in the current moment, which is described as a phase of cascading metrologies. Using Actor Network Theory as a methodology, the article explores how cultural policy partakes in what Foucault has elaborated as the progressive governmentalization of power relations, whereby art and culture, in this case, is “elaborated, rationalized, and centralized in the form of, or under the auspices of, state institutions.” Specific attention is brought to the historical role of UNESCO in the governmentalization of art and culture, and its importance for the first Swedish bill of culture. The article also elaborates on the central role of metrologies in the process of governmentalization, whereby art and culture is subjected to measuring devices, and by extension, concepts and instruments that contribute to the progressive socialization and naturalization of novel art-effects, such as social and economic development.

Cities increasingly use artistic and cultural activities to promote active citizenship and social cohesion. We suggest that city-sponsored cultural and artistic practices in Sweden are finding a new discursive context in migration. In this article, we look at two artistic and cultural institutions in Malmö, Sweden: Arena 305 and Drömmarnas hus. We develop a typology of governmentalisation based on the work of Nicholas Rose and Peter Miller, which allows us to describe the governing activity of Arena 305 and Drömmarnas hus. What becomes visible is the discrepancy between the moral form of the political rationalities and the technologies of government: even though institutions may harbour ideals and principles of inclusion, they are perfectly capable of sustaining activities that brighten the very boundaries they set out to challenge.

Cultural policies will be analysed as producing what Bruno Latour calls “metrologies”; that is, measuring devices and valuemeters, and by extension, concepts and instruments that contribute to the progressive socialization and naturalization of art effects such as social sustainability, community cohesion, social capital, and innovation. The case analysed will be the art scene of the city of Malmö, its policies and metrological devices, with a focus on one community theatre project as an exemplary case. The metrologies, we claim, are the ways in which the policy apparatus opens up to larger concerns of what Michel Foucault calls dispositifs, linking art policy to other policy changes and societal concerns in general, and making art respond to those concerns in managed ways.

In this exploratory, descriptive study, we examine ways in which students negotiate symmetrical and asymmetrical power relations and express their authority and expertise in reviewing their peers’ writing. Furthermore, we question the ways in which the context for these peer reviews may explain differences in commenting styles. This mapping of peer reviews is layered by different cultural and developmental contexts. Our corpus is composed by students and faculty at Malmö University (Sweden), the University of South Florida (U.S.) and the University of Tartu (Estonia). These students were enrolled in a variety of courses at different educational levels: the Malmö students were enrolled in an English teacher trainee program, the USF students were enrolled in first-year composition, and the students at Tartu were doctoral students working on their journal articles. To conduct this analysis, we will pay particular attention to linguistic expressions such as modality markers, verbs, adverbs and adjectives, and transitions as indicators of politeness, criticism and praise. One of the dimensions for comparison is the difference, if any, manifested in the peer reviews depending whether the peer reviewer is a native speaker of English or an EFL learner. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: some universals in language usage ([Rev. ed.] with corr., new introd. and new bibliogr). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6 Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 304–315. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.007 Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2007). The Language of Evaluation. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Retrieved from http://www.palgraveconnect.com/doifinder/10.1057/9780230511910 Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: how different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375–401. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative Assessment and the Design of Instructional Systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119.

This paper describes a corpus of writing as a process (MUCH), comprising English as a Foreign Language (EFL) student texts. The corpus will contain a large number of richly annotated papers in several versions from students of different performance levels. It will also include peer and instructor feedback, as well as tools for visualising the revision process, and for analysing the writing process and the peer and instructor feedback. MUCH will make it possible to study how texts develop and change in the course of the writing process and how feedback impacts the process.

Cultural policies will be analyzed as producing what Latour calls metrologies; that is, measuring devices and, by extension, concepts and instruments that contribute to the progressive socialization and naturalization of art effects such as social sustainability, community cohesion, social capital, and innovation. The case analyzed will be the art scene of the city of Malmö, its policies and metrological devices. The metrologies, we claim, are the ways in which the policy apparatus opens up to larger concerns of what Foucault calls dispositifs, linking art policy to other policy changes and societal concerns in general, and making art respond to those concerns in managed ways.

Nowadays, e-platforms designed specifically to cater for academic writing offer a new range of feedback possibilities for instructors. On our writing courses we use automated feedback, that is, metalinguistic comments generated within the e-platform on skill-building assignments in the form of multiple-choice exercises pertaining to the surface-level features of writing: grammar, punctuation, and citation conventions. In this chapter we explore the impact that automated feedback has on student experience of learning and development of skills pertaining to these features from beginner to advanced courses. Some of the key features of automated feedback which we consider are immediacy, metalinguistic explanations, and links to additional readings and exercises. We suggest that surface-level features can successfully be taught as part of academic writing courses, but the focus should be on improving writing fluency rather than language proficiency. Automated feedback on surface-level features is a particularly successful form of feedback on both our beginner and intermediate courses, but it performs less successfully on our advanced-level courses.

Cities increasingly use artistic and cultural activities to promote active citizenship and social cohesion. We suggest that city-sponsored cultural and artistic practices in Sweden are finding a new discursive context in migration. In this article, we look at two artistic and cultural institutions in Malmö, Sweden: Arena 305 and Drömmarnas hus. We develop a typology of governmentalisation based on the work of Nicholas Rose and Peter Miller, which allows us to describe the governing activity of Arena 305 and Drömmarnas hus. What becomes visible is the discrepancy between the moral form of the political rationalities and the technologies of government: even though institutions may harbour ideals and principles of inclusion, they are perfectly capable of sustaining activities that brighten the very boundaries they set out to challenge.

Cities increasingly use artistic and cultural activities to promote active citizenship and social cohesion. We suggest that city-sponsored cultural and artistic practices in Sweden are finding a new discursive context in migration. In this article, we look at two artistic and cultural institutions in Malmö, Sweden: Arena 305 and Drömmarnas hus. We develop a typology of governmentalisation based on the work of Nicholas Rose and Peter Miller, which allows us to describe the governing activity of Arena 305 and Drömmarnas hus. What becomes visible is the discrepancy between the moral form of the political rationalities and the technologies of government: even though institutions may harbour ideals and principles of inclusion, they are perfectly capable of sustaining activities that brighten the very boundaries they set out to challenge. 

Damian Finnegan (damian.finnegan@mah.se) Asko Kauppinen (asko.kauppinen@mah.se) Anna Wärnsby (anna.warnsby@mah.se) Automated Feedback, Student Experience and Writing as a Process Many EFL learners struggle with issues pertaining to grammar, style and idiomaticity, and, traditionally, language teachers spend a lot of time addressing these mechanical errors (see Zamel 1985). This corrective practice seems to shape learner expectations of the type of feedback that is most effective or useful to them (Hedgcock and Lefkowitz 1996). In the context of teaching academic writing, this may easily pose a problem for allocating teacher resources away from teaching writing as a process to taking care of the learner language issues. Nowadays, e-platforms designed specifically to cater for academic writing offer a new range of feedback possibilities for teachers. Tasks pertaining particularly to language use can, for example, be created so that the feedback is fully automated. The easy and immediate access to such feedback is beneficial for learners with different proficiency levels (Brandl 1995). In our course, in order to free teacher resources for feedback on students’ critical thinking, treatment of sources, structure and context, we used automated feedback, i.e. direct corrections with metalinguistic comments generated within the e-platform, to feedback on skill building exercises pertaining to grammar, style and idiomaticity. Previous research indicates that direct corrective feedback on mechanical errors is efficient in facilitating learning (see Sheen 2007 for an overview of the field). In a pilot study on student experience of the writing process, we noticed that the level of student satisfaction with this automated feedback was surprisingly high and valued as much as the extensive written teacher feedback on papers submitted for examination. In our current study, we explore the impact automated feedback has on student experience of learning skills pertaining to the mechanics of writing as described above from beginner to advanced students of academic writing. Some of the factors we consider are the immediacy/remoteness of the feedback, the extent of the metalinguistic comment and the connection of the skill building exercises to the teaching materials. References Brandl, K. K. 1995. Strong and Weak Students' Preferences for Error Feedback Options and Responses. The modern Language Journal, vol. 79, no. 2, 194-211. Hedgcock, J. and Lefkowitz, N. 1996. Some Input on Input: Two Analyses of Student Response to Expert Feedback in L2 Writing. The Modern Language Journal, vol. 80, no. 3, 287-308. Sheen, Y. 2007. The Effect of Focused Written Corrective Feedback and Language Aptitude on ESL Learners' Acquisition of Articles. TESOL Quaterly, vol. 41, no. 2, 255-283. Zamel, V. 1985. Responding to student writing. TESOL Quaterly, 19, 79-101.

MUCH: THE MALMÖ UNIVERSITY-CHALMERS CORPUS OF ACADEMIC WRITING AS A PROCESS Andreas Eriksson, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg; Damian Finnegan, Asko Kauppinen, Maria Wiktorsson, Anna Wärnsby, Malmö University, Malmö; Peter Withers, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen This poster introduces a recently-launched corpus project which aims to compile and monitor various text drafts involved in the writing process of EFL students in higher education. The corpus material will consist of three drafts of undergraduate, master or PhD student texts. Additionally, the corpus will contain a collection of self-reflective papers. Papers will be collected from approximately 400 students per year over a three-year period. In addition to parts-of-speech tagging, the corpus will include peer comments between the first and second drafts and teacher comments between the second and third drafts, as well as annotations of information structure and rhetorical structures. Upon its completion, the corpus will consist of about 500,000 words, excluding the metadata and peer and teacher comments. The corpus is primarily an academic writing research corpus, but also a pedagogic and linguistic corpus, and it is the combination of these perspectives that we would like to emphasise. One important aim of the project is to narrow the gap between writing pedagogy and the use of corpora for teaching and learning purposes. In writing pedagogy, the focus has been on issues such as writing as social action (Miller 1984), feedback processes (Hyland & Hyland 2006) and the development of academic literacy (Lea & Street 1998, Lillis & Scott 2007, Street 2004), whereas there has been a tendency in corpus-driven and corpus-based pedagogy to focus on linguistic aspects of language learning, such as vocabulary, grammar and phraseology. This tendency is, for instance, evidenced in Flowerdew’s (2010) comprehensive overview of how corpora have been used in writing instruction. There are obviously notable exceptions to this somewhat sweeping description (see e.g. Charles 2007 and Flowerdew 2008). However, a lot more can be done to merge these two perspectives. We believe that a corpus containing drafts tagged for information structure, rhetorical structures, and linguistic structures as well as peer and teacher feedback is an important step in such a process. In this poster, we will establish the rationale for the project by exemplifying how the corpus can be used for research purposes as well as teaching and learning purposes. We will show how the corpus can be employed in the study of: 1) peer and teacher comments; 2) thesis statements and how these are formed, located and realised in students’ writing processes; and 3) linguistic structures, such as elements recurring in thesis statements. References: Charles, M. 2007. Reconciling top-down and bottom-up approaches to graduate writing: Using a corpus to teach rhetorical functions. Journal of English for Specific Purposes 6: 289-302. Flowerdew, L. 2008. Corpus linguistics for academic literacies mediated through discussion activities. In D. Belcher & A. Hirvela (eds), The Oral-Literate Connection: Perspectives on L2, speaking, writing and other media interactions. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, p. 268-287 Flowerdew, L. 2010. Using a corpus for writing instruction. In O’Keeffe, Anne & McCarthy, Michael (eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics. London/New York: Routledge, pp. 444-457. Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (eds.). 2006. Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Miller, C. R. 1984. Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70:151-167. Lea, M. R. and Street, B. (1998) Student writing in higher education: an academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education 23(2): 157–172. Lillis, T. & Scott, M. 2007. Defining Academic Literacies Research: Issues of epistemology, ideology and strategy. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(1): 5-32. Street, B. (2004) Academic Literacies and the ‘new orders’: implications for research and practice in student writing in higher education. Learning and Teaching in the Social Sciences, 1(1): 9–20.

Damian Finnegan (damian.finnegan@mah.se) Asko Kauppinen (asko.kauppinen@mah.se) Anna Wärnsby (anna.warnsby@mah.se) On the Importance of Teaching Academic Writing to Teacher Trainees Many EFL learners struggle with issues pertaining to grammar, style and idiomaticity, and, traditionally, language teachers spend a lot of time addressing these mechanical errors (Zamel 1985). This corrective practice seems to shape learner and teacher expectations of the type of feedback that is most effective or useful to learners (Hedgcock and Lefkowitz 1996). In the context of teaching academic writing, this may easily pose a problem for allocating teacher resources away from teaching writing as a process to taking care of the learner language issues. In the new Swedish school curriculum for English, however, the ability to write for different purposes and audiences and the familiarity with different text types is made prominent (Lgr11). Therefore, the teachers’ ability to reflect on the writing process as such and not only on the mechanical learner errors is crucial for the pupils’ achievement of the learning outcomes specified in the curriculum. At Malmö University, we facilitated systematic instruction to teacher trainees, amongst others, through the creation of courses in academic writing in English across the curriculum (WAC). The design of our courses is explicitly based on the general model of information processing, which assumes that “complex behavior builds on simple processes” (McLaughlin and Heredia, 1996, p. 213). The focus of all learning activities is on acquisition of procedural knowledge geared towards comprehension and production (see Anderson 1983, 2009). Specifically, we gear our courses to equip teacher trainees with tools that can later aid them in their reflection on elements of the writing process other than those that are traditionally addressed in the language classroom. In this paper, we address particularly the increased ability in teacher trainees to reflect upon their own and their peers’ writing. We look at their ability to identify core elements of the writing process, for example, purpose, audience, genre, structure, critical thinking, and meta-cognitive analysis. These data have been compiled in the form of self-reflective papers produced by teacher trainees upon completion of our course. References Anderson, J. R. 2009. Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications. 7th edition. New York: Worth Publishers. Anderson, J. R. 1983. The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Hall, Jonathan. 2009. “WAC/WID in the Next America: Redefining Professional Identity in the Age of the Multilingual Majority.” The WAC Journal. Vol. 20, November. 33-49. Hedgcock, J. and Lefkowitz, N. 1996. Some Input on Input: Two Analyses of Student Response to Expert Feedback in L2 Writing. The Modern Language Journal, vol. 80, no. 3, 287-308. McLaughlin, B. and Hereda, J. L. C. 1996. “Information-processing Approaches to Research on Second Language Acquisition and Use.” In Ritchie, W. C. and Bhatia, T. K. (eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. San Diego: Academic Press, 213-228. Preto-Bay, Ana Maria and Kristine Hansen. 2006. “Preparing for the Tipping Point: Designing Writing Programs to Meet the Needs of the Changing Population.” WPA: Writing Program Administration, Vol. 30, Nos. 1-2, Fall. 37-57.

One crucial challenge for teaching academic writing concerns the increasing heterogenisation of student populations. In many writing classes, we now find “any combination of native-born, international, refugee, permanent resident, and naturalized students,” exhibiting considerable linguistic diversity and multiple levels of English proficiency (Preto-Bay and Hansen, 2006; see also Hall, 2009). At the same time, interest towards academic writing in European higher education is growing, yet resources for teaching do not reflect this. Moreover, the wider student base demands practical application from their writing courses, not theoretical knowledge of language skills (see, for example, Anderson 1983, 2009 on procedural vs. declarative knowledge). To show how these problems can be addressed, we discuss the course in Academic Writing in English offered at Malmö University, Sweden, which currently enrolls approximately 300 students per year. Our students come from different disciplines, and English is a foreign language for most of them. The course design is explicitly based on the general model of information processing, which assumes that “complex behavior builds on simple processes” (McLaughlin and Heredia, 1996, p. 213). The focus of all learning activities is on acquisition of procedural knowledge geared towards comprehension and production. One distinctive feature of this course is the very tight integration of electronic resources and other teaching material. By utilizing technology to facilitate the writing process (see, for example, Askov and Bixler 1998 on computer-assisted instruction as means for achieving learner-centered classrooms), we provide diverse student populations with ample scaffolding in terms of various types of continuous feedback and highly individualised learning paths. REFERENCES Anderson, J. R. 2009. Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications. 7th edition. New York: Worth Publishers. Anderson, J. R. 1983. The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Askov, E., & Bixler, B. 1998. “Transforming Adult Literacy Instruction Through Computer-Assisted Instruction.” In D. Reinking, M. McKenna, L. Labbo, & R. Kieffer (Eds.). 2009. Handbook of literacy and technology: transformations in a post-typographic world.184-203. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Hall, Jonathan. 2009. “WAC/WID in the Next America: Redefining Professional Identity in the Age of the Multilingual Majority.” The WAC Journal. Vol. 20, November. 33-49. McLaughlin, B. and Hereda, J. L. C. 1996. “Information-processing Approaches to Research on Second Language Acquisition and Use.” In Ritchie, W. C. and Bhatia, T. K. (eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. San Diego: Academic Press, 213-228. Preto-Bay, Ana Maria and Kristine Hansen. 2006. “Preparing for the Tipping Point: Designing Writing Programs to Meet the Needs of the Changing Population.” WPA: Writing Program Administration, Vol. 30, Nos. 1-2, Fall. 37-57.

Damian Finnegan (damian.finnegan@mah.se) Asko Kauppinen (asko.kauppinen@mah.se) Anna Wärnsby (anna.warnsby@mah.se) Academic Writing in a Multi-lingual and Multidisciplinary Context One crucial challenge of academic writing concerns the increasing heterogenisation of student populations. In many writing classes, we now find “any combination of native-born, international, refugee, permanent resident, and naturalized students,” exhibiting considerable linguistic diversity and multiple levels of English proficiency (Preto-Bay and Hansen, 2006; see also Hall, 2009). At the same time, interest towards academic writing in European higher education is growing, yet resources for teaching do not reflect this. Moreover, the wider student base demands practical application from their writing courses, not theoretical knowledge of language skills (see, for example, Anderson 1983, 2009 on procedural vs. declarative knowledge). To show how these problems can be addressed, we discuss the course Academic Writing in English offered at Malmö University, Sweden, which currently enrolls approximately 300 students per year. The course design is explicitly based on the general model of information processing, which assumes that “complex behavior builds on simple processes” (McLaughlin and Heredia, 1996, p. 213). The focus of all learning activities is on acquisition of procedural knowledge geared towards comprehension and production. One distinctive feature of this course is the very tight integration of electronic resources and other teaching material. This provides student populations various types of continuous feedback and highly individualised learning paths. In this paper, we present and evaluate empirical data pertaining to students’ experience of the content, structure and resources in this course. We also discuss the preliminary results obtained through tests administered before, during and after the course. References Anderson, J. R. 2009. Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications. 7th edition. New York: Worth Publishers. Anderson, J. R. 1983. The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Hall, Jonathan. 2009. “WAC/WID in the Next America: Redefining Professional Identity in the Age of the Multilingual Majority.” The WAC Journal. Vol. 20, November. 33-49. McLaughlin, B. and Hereda, J. L. C. 1996. “Information-processing Approaches to Research on Second Language Acquisition and Use.” In Ritchie, W. C. and Bhatia, T. K. (eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. San Diego: Academic Press, 213-228. Preto-Bay, Ana Maria and Kristine Hansen. 2006. “Preparing for the Tipping Point: Designing Writing Programs to Meet the Needs of the Changing Population.” WPA: Writing Program Administration, Vol. 30, Nos. 1-2, Fall. 37-57.

Informative presentation of the pedagogy of writing at the English Studies Programme, Malmö University

Rayann Eskandari (reihaneh.s@hotmail.com) Damian Finnegan (damian.finnegan@mah.se) Asko Kauppinen (asko.kauppinen@mah.se) Lisa-Marie Teubler (lisa.marie.teubler@googlemail.com) Anna Wärnsby (anna.warnsby@mah.se) The Role of Student Experience in Integrating E-platforms in Academic Writing Although e-platforms are becoming ubiquitous in teaching academic writing, noticeable differences in the ways in which they are integrated into course design and curricula remain. Further, student experience of these resources has often been overlooked. In this workshop, we explore how to integrate e-platforms into teaching academic writing to enhance positive student experience. We demonstrate a design of an existing course in academic writing at Malmö University, Sweden, which currently enrolls approximately 300 students per term. The distinctive feature of this course is the very tight integration of the e-platform Mycomplab (http://www.mycomplab.com) and teaching material. We evaluate critically empirical data pertaining to student experience of i. the e-platform interface, ii. the link between the e-platform and the teaching material, iii. the different levels and forms of feedback provided through the e-platform, and iv. the e-platform’s impact on learning. Participants of this workshop can test various tasks to emulate student experience of the e-platform. Furthermore, we welcome participants to contribute and discuss other e-platform solutions to the above issues. This workshop aims to provide a clearer understanding of the potential of e-platforms to enhance positive student experience, and it allows participants to gain an overview of different e-platform solutions available and currently in use in academic writing courses. From this workshop, we intend to establish a forum for discussing use of e-platforms in academic writing.