Search

This study investigated the epistemic conventions of pedagogical practices in higher education (HE) from the viewpoints of lecturers. Phenomenological design, focusing on semi-structured interview guide, was considered for the study. Through the purposive sampling technique, 15 lecturers from three departments of institution of higher learning were considered for the study. The study utilised emerging themes as an analytic procedure. Analysis focused on two principal domains: Peripheral Academic Writing Practices with focus on Pedagogy (PAWP-P), and Actual Academic Writing Practices focusing on Pedagogy (AAWP-P). In terms of PAWP-P, lecturers considered students' ability to engage in self-regulated practices such as perusing course outline, concomitant with reading and making their own notes prior to lectures to be momentous pedagogical practices. Also, in tandem with AAWP-P, lecturers placed dialogue, argument, meaning making, and criticality (i.e. analysis, evaluation, and creation) as requisite pedagogic practices in HE. In addressing the pedagogical limitation in Lea and Street's (1998) academic literacies model, the finding of this study helps to build on the model; hence, in this study, Lea and Street's (1998) academic literacies model is reconceptualised as academic socialisation, with three developmental overlapping orbitals: electromagnetic wave, normative socialisation and academic literacies socialisation. Management in HE should prioritise the teaching of Information Literacy and Language Literacy courses such as Communicative Skills (variously expressed elsewhere as Use of English, Writing across the Curriculum, General Composition, and Academic Writing).

An important feature of the interface between language and society is the use of address terms. Following Brown and Gilman (1960), research studies of address terms have been extended to several cultural settings. This study contributes to this fertile area of sociolinguistic studies by describing the address terms used among undergraduates in an English-medium university in Ghana. Two sets of data collected from participant and nonparticipant observation and interviews constitute the primary source of data, supplemented by intuition. Analysis and discussion of this study point to three key findings. First, Ghanaian students use four major groups of address terms. The second finding relates to the use of the reported modes of address, namely, personal names, titles, descriptive terms and catch phrases to reflect and construct the individual and social identity of students. The final point is the use of modes of address to reflect a warm and vivacious culture. These findings have implication for theory and intercultural communication.

The author presents a study that employs a modified version of Swales' (1990) move analysis to investigates the generic structure of introductions in a total of 120 writing samples of Ghanaian undergraduates in English and Sociology. The study reveals differences between the two groups in their use of move-structures.