Designing an EAP Module on 'Health' Writing: Scaffolding Academic Skills for University Success

In the development of the 'Health' module for the "Core University English" EAP course, my objective was to guide students from the basic writing level typical in IELTS to the rigorous standards of scholarly communication in higher education. This module is designed for students who are just beginning their higher education journey at English-speaking universities and have limited exposure to advanced academic writing and critical thinking in English. The choice of 'Health' as a theme is due to its widespread appeal and its potential to engage a diverse group of students culturally. Its personal relevance makes it a powerful tool for transitioning into other academic areas and refining complex writing skills. The module's activities methodically introduce essential aspects of academic writing, including constructing logical arguments, using a formal style, and navigating the nuances of academic language. Focusing on 'Health', students gain substantial experience in research, citation, and rephrasing—fundamental components of academic writing that may be new to EFL students.

Materials and Procedure

This unit, comprising approximately 10 exercises, is structured to facilitate a comprehensive understanding of academic writing, particularly focusing on argumentative writing in the health domain.

The unit opens with a brief, 5-minute lead-in activity designed to engage students by prompting them to consider contemporary health issues. This discussion-based warm-up lays the groundwork for the topic, sparking curiosity and promoting critical thinking about familiar health subjects. Aligned with the Interaction Hypothesis (Ellis, 1991; Namaziandost & Nasri, 2019), which prioritizes genuine linguistic exchange for language acquisition, this stage encourages learners to articulate real-world health discussions in English, enhancing both fluency and confidence. Following this, a 5-minute Source Evaluation exercise introduces students to the essential skill of assessing academic sources. They will scrutinize elements such as document length, structural coherence, author qualifications, and the reputation of the publication to gauge credibility.

Then, with such an awareness, in Activity 3, Skimming and Scanning (5 minutes), students refine their skimming and scanning skills through reviewing a health article. This task bolsters their capacity to pinpoint main ideas and key details swiftly, essential for proficient academic reading. Following this, Activity 4, Identifying Features of Text Types (15 minutes), encompasses a group discussion that guides students in cataloguing the unique characteristics of essays and reports, enhancing their grasp of various academic text structures in preparation for diverse writing tasks. Throughout, emphasis will be placed on metalinguistic strategies; rather than relying on familiar direct feedback, I will introduce more subtle cues and metalinguistic prompts to stimulate student reflection on potential improvements (Hyland & Hyland, 2006). Also, these exercises are aligned with the Genre-Based Approach to writing (Dirgeyasa, 2016; Luu, 2011), which emphasizes mastery over the structures and nuances of various academic genres—a vital competency for success in higher education.

Activity 5, entitled "Vocabulary in Academic Health Writing," (10 minutes) emphasizes the importance of mastering pertinent health-related terminology. Through a combination of vocabulary-matching tasks and exercises in paraphrasing, students not only familiarize themselves with key terms but also improve their proficiency in deploying these concepts accurately in an academic context. Activity 6, "Paraphrasing Practice," (15 minutes) builds directly upon these skills, underscoring the critical role paraphrasing plays in upholding academic integrity. Here, students collaboratively work on reconstructing passages from health-focused literature, ensuring they convey the original text’s intent while transforming its structure and word choice. The synergy between activities 4 and 5 allows students to apply their newly acquired vocabulary effectively in the practice of paraphrasing.

This signifies the mid-point of the class at 55 minutes, followed by a 5-minute break.

In Activity 7: Summary Writing (15 minutes), students will engage in 'text reduction' — a crucial skill in writing that involves drafting, revising, and garnering feedback. The task requires summarizing a scholarly health article, refining their ability to condense and comprehend complex material, and fostering critical thinking. Participants will practice pinpointing central arguments and supporting evidence, a cornerstone of academic literacy. This summary writing activity not only promotes active engagement with the material for deeper understanding but also equips students for advanced academic tasks that demand synthesis across various texts.

Subsequently, Activity 8: Mini Essay Writing (25 minutes) presents a synthesis challenge, where students condense their insights on a health topic into a brief essay. Drawing from the preceding exercises, learners are tasked to apply their acquired language competencies in a real-world scenario emblematic of task-based learning. This culminating exercise interlaces critical source analysis, precise use of field-specific terminology, structured argumentative coherence, and adept rephrasing — each element honing academic rigor and linguistic precision. Beyond evaluating their grasp of unit material, this multi-faceted assignment nurtures independent study skills, consolidates multifarious competencies, and sets the stage for increasingly sophisticated writing endeavors.

The program culminates with Activity 9: Reflective Learning Log (15 minutes). Students introspect on their skill development, engage in peer dialogue, and plan for advancing their academic writing prowess. Rooted in reflective practice theory (Fook, 2015; Osterman, 1990)—which advocates for enriched learning through self-reflection—the session invites participants to deliberate on their progress and future application of these competencies. It nurtures metacognitive awareness, allowing students to analyze their cognitive and educational growth. Additionally, the peer discussions catalyze communal learning, as insights and tactics are mutually exchanged, enriching understanding. This introspection solidifies the unit's lessons and equips students with goal-setting capabilities for ongoing linguistic improvement, empowering them to take ownership of their academic evolution.

The unit's exercises are crafted to achieve specific learning outcomes, fostering a detailed grasp of health-related academic writing. Beginning with foundational tasks such as evaluating sources and advancing to intricate essay composition, the curriculum incrementally fortifies student proficiency and self-assurance (see Van Merriënboer & Sweller, 2005, for a discussion in cognitive load theory and complex learning). Its diverse content keeps students actively involved while equipping them with essential academic skills. Additionally, group discussions and peer assessments (Babaii & Adeh, 2019) cultivate a cooperative educational atmosphere, crucial for honing critical analysis and evaluative competencies.

Reflection

Working on the 'Health' module for "Core University English" has significantly enhanced my understanding of second language writing pedagogy and the issues faced by ESL learners. This task highlighted the importance of balancing theoretical knowledge with practical application, focusing on structured activities to improve academic writing skills. Delving into theories like the Interaction Hypothesis, I have gained insights into effectively blending these theories into practical teaching methods. It has become evident that teaching academic writing goes beyond mere language skills; it involves fostering critical thinking, assessing sources, and synthesizing diverse information.

Creating educational content for students who are just beginning to grasp academic English, was a substantial challenge. This required innovative techniques to simplify complex concepts into understandable formats without losing academic richness. I shifted to a student-centered approach, prioritizing tasks that encourage engagement and self-reflection. This process has deepened my appreciation for interactive exercises and highlighted the need to develop resources that not only teach but also stimulate curiosity and independence in students.

Considering the practical application of these materials, I acknowledge the evolving nature of academic environments and the diverse language backgrounds of EFL learners. Although the module is comprehensive, incorporating elements of digital literacy could be beneficial, especially with the increasing prevalence of online education (Son et al., 2017). While the current content establishes a solid foundation, adopting new teaching methodologies and adapting to changing educational landscapes is essential. This project has reinforced the ongoing evolution of educational materials, underscoring the need for teaching resources to evolve alongside academic and linguistic research to remain effective and relevant.

References

Babaii, E., & Adeh, A. (2019). One, two,..., many: The outcomes of paired peer assessment, group peer assessment, and teacher assessment in EFL writing. Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(1), 53.

Dirgeyasa, I. W. (2016). Genre-based approach: What and how to teach and to learn writing. English Language Teaching, 9(9), 45–51.

Ellis, R. (1991). The Interaction Hypothesis: A Critical Evaluation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED338037

Fook, J. (2015). Reflective practice and critical reflection. Handbook for Practice Learning in Social Work and Social Care: Knowledge and Theory, 3. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=wEZBCgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA440&dq=reflective+practice+theory&ots=TfQRTdOAML&sig=nSNbhM77rcPT__gj_5vt3g6mAHA

Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524742

Luu, T. T. (2011). Teaching writing through genre-based approach. BELT-Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal, 2(1). https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/index.php/belt/article/view/9361

Namaziandost, E., & Nasri, M. (2019). A meticulous look at Long’s (1981) interaction hypothesis: Does it have any effect on speaking skill. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 6(2), 218–230.

Osterman, K. F. (1990). Reflective Practice: A New Agenda for Education. Education and Urban Society, 22(2), 133–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124590022002002

Son, J.-B., Park, S.-S., & Park, M. (2017). Digital literacy of language learners in two different contexts. The JALT CALL Journal, 13(2), 77–96. https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v13n2.213

Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive Load Theory and Complex Learning: Recent Developments and Future Directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0