The effect of evaluative language on high- and low-graded post-graduate students’ academic writing ability across gender

References

• Akbarzade Haromi, F. (2014). Teaching through appraisal: Developing critical reading in iranian EFL learners. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 127–15. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.398
   Google Scholar
• Arsyad, S. (2000). The indonesian and english argument structure: A cross-cultural rhetoric of argumentative texts. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 22(2), 85–102. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.22.2.06ars
   Google Scholar
• Artiles, A. J., Rueda, R., Salazar, J. J., & Higareda, I. (2005). Within-group diversity in minority disproportionate representation: English language learners in urban school districts. Exceptional Children, 71(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey, S. (2003). Academic writing. A practical guide for students. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bill, D. (2011). Writing argumentative essays. http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=1093BB347CD6DC613DD1CB941EA0749B
   Google Scholar
• Bouwer, R., Lesterhuis, M., Bonne, P., & De Maeyer, S. (2018). Applying criteria to examples or learning by comparison: Effects on students’ evaluative judgment and performance in writing. Frontiers in Education, 3(86), 1–12. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00086
   Google Scholar
• Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Farhady, H., Jafarpour, A., & Birjandi, P. (1994). Testing language skills. SAMT Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday, M. A. K. (ed.). (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed.). Edward Arnold.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. (ed.). (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd). Edward Arnold.
   Google Scholar
• Hunston, S., & Thompson, G. (2000). Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hyland, K. (2002). Directives: Argument and engagement in academic writing. Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 215–239. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/23.2.215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyland, K. (2003). Writing and teaching writing. In J. C. Richards (Ed.), Second language writing (pp. 1–30). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hyland, K. (2006). English for Academic Purposes: An advanced resource book. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• IELTS (2006). Research note, Issue 23. http://www.ielts.org
   Google Scholar
• Jalilifar, A., & Hemmati, A. (2013). Construction of evaluative meanings by kurdish-speaking learners of english: A comparison of high- and low-graded argumentative essays. Issues in Language Teaching, 2(2), 57–84.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S. H. (2006). The use of interpersonal resources in argumentative/persuasive essays by East-Asian ESL and Australian tertiary students. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S. H. (2008). Attitude in undergraduate persuasive essays. Prospect: An Australian Journal of TESOL, 23(3), 43–58.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S. H. (2010). Attribution in high-and low-graded persuasive essays by tertiary students. Functions of Language, 17(2), 181–206. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.17.2.02lee
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, S. H. (2015). Evaluative stances in persuasive essays by undergraduate students: Focusing on APPRECIATION resources. Text & Talk, 35(1), 49–76. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2014-0029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, X. (2013). Evaluation in chinese university EFL students’ english argumentative writing: An appraisal study. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 10(1), 40–53.
   Google Scholar
• London. Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• MaCswan, J., & Rolstad, K. (2006). How language proficiency tests mislead us about ability: Implications for english language learner placement in special education. Teachers College Record, 108(11), 2304–2328. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00783.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, J. R. (1992). English text, system and structure. John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J. R. (1997). Analyzing genre: Functional parameters. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and Institutions: Social process in the workplace and school (pp. 3–39). Cassell.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J. R. (2000). Beyond exchange: Appraisal system in English. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 145–175). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (ed.). (2007). Working with discourse. Meaning beyond the clause (2nd).
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J. R., & White, P. P. R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Morton, T., & Llinares, A. (2018). Students’ use of evaluative language in L2 English to talk and write about history in a bilingual education programme. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(4), 496–508. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1192101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 58–78. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.58
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner, A. R. (2015). Motivating reluctant writers: A cumulative research project aimed to improve student motivation and writing outcomes. Research and Evaluation in Literacy and Technology, 38, 1–36.
   Google Scholar
• White, P. P. R. (1998). Telling media tales: The news story as rhetoric. Unpublished PhD Thesis, The University of Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, S. M. (2008). Investigating the effectiveness of arguments in undergraduate essay from an evaluation perspective. Prospect, 23(3), 59–75.
   Google Scholar