Faculty Evaluation as a Genre System

Negotiating intertextuality and interpersonality

Authors

  • Rong Chen California State University
  • Sunny Hyon California State University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.v2.i2.153

Keywords:

genre system, intertextuality, interpersonality, stance, evaluative writing, writing in academia

Abstract

This article analyzes evaluation reports in the genre system of a university's retention, promotion and tenure (RPT) process. We first discuss how intertextuality in the report genre is mandated by the RPT genre system and analyze how writers use strategies that reflect institutional values of fairness and objectivity as well as different kinds of power in the system. We then consider how RPT report writers express stance about negative information in a faculty member's file in ways that show interpersonal sensitivity toward multiple audiences, including themselves. The study lends further understanding to how texts within genre systems balance intertextual and interpersonal concerns in order to achieve different functions in an institution.

Author Biographies

  • Rong Chen, California State University

    Rong Chen is Professor of English at California State University, San Bernardino. He is interested in pragmatics, discourse analysis, and cognitive linguistics

  • Sunny Hyon, California State University

    Sunny Hyon is Professor of English at California State University, San Bernardino. Her research interests include evaluative discourse and second language writing

References

Bazerman, C. (1988) Shaping Written Knowledge: the genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Bazerman, C. (1994a) Systems of genres and the enactment of social intentions. In A. Freedman and P. Medway (eds) Genre and the New Rhetoric 79–101. London: Taylor & Francis.

Bazerman, C. (1994b) Constructing Experience. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Bazerman, C. (2004) Intertextualities: Volosinov, Bakhtin, literary theory, and literacy studies. In A. Ball and S. W. Freedman (eds) Bakhtinian Perspectives on Languages, Literacy, and Learning 53-65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Berkenkotter, C. (2001) Genre systems at work: DSM-IV and rhetorical recontextualization in psychotherapy paperwork. Written Communication 18(3): 326–49.

Brown, P. and Levinson, S. (1987) Politeness: some universals in language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brown, G. and Yule, G. (1983) Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chen, R. (2001) Self-politeness: a proposal. Journal of Pragmatics 33: 87–106.

Coe, R., Lingard, L. and Teslenko, T. (eds) (2002) The Rhetoric and Ideology of genre: strategies for stability and change. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Devitt, A. (1991) Interintertextuality in tax accounting: generic, referential, and functional. In C. Bazerman and J. Paradis (eds) Textual Dynamics of the Professions: historical and contemporary studies of writing in professional communities 336–57. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.

Fairclough, N. (1992) Discourse and Social Change. London: Polity.

Fairclough, N. (2003) Analyzing Discourse: textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge.

Grice, H. P. (1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds) Syntax and Semantics 3: speech acts 41–8. New York: Academic Press.

Hunston, S. and Thompson, G. (eds) (2000) Evaluation in Text: authorial stance and the construction of discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hyland, K. (1998) Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Hyland, K. (1999) Disciplinary discourses: writer stance in research articles. In C. N. Candlin and K. Hyland (eds) Writing: texts, processes and practices 99–121. London: Longman.

Hyland, K. (2000) Disciplinary Discourses: social interactions in academic writing. London: Longman.

Hyland, K. (2001) Bringing in the reader: addressee features in academic articles. Written Communication 18 (4): 549–74.

Hyland, K. (2002) Genre: language, context, and literacy. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 22: 113–35.

Linell, P. (1998) Discourse across boundaries: on recontextualizations and the blending of voices in professional discourse. Text 18: 143–57.

Lowenstein, B. (1995) From fax to facts: communication in the cold fusion sage. Social Studies of Science 25: 403–36.

Paré, A. (2000) Writing as a way into social work: genre sets, genre systems, and distributed cognition. In P. Dias and A. Paré (eds) Transitions: writing in academic and workplace settings 145–66. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Procedures and Criteria for Performance Review and Period Evaluation, vol. 1: Instructional Faculty. Revision XVI. September 1, 2003. California State University, San Bernardino.

Samraj, B. (2005) An exploration of a genre set: research article abstracts and introductions in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes 24: 141–56.

Smart, G. (1998) Knowledge-making in a Central Bank: the interplay of writing and economic modeling. Unpublished PhD dissertation. McGill University, Montreal.

Smart, G. (1999) Storytelling in a central bank: the role of narrative in the creation and use of specialized economic knowledge. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 13: 249–73.

Smart, G. (2003) A central bank’s ‘communications strategy’: the interplay of activity, discourse genres, and technology in a time of organizational change. In C. Bazerman and D. Russell (eds) Writing Selves/Writing Societies: research from activity perspectives 9–61. Fort Collins, Colorado: The WAC Clearinghouse and Mind, Culture, and Activity.

Swales, J. M. (2004) Research Genres: explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tardy, C. (2003) A genre system view of the funding of academic research. Written Communication 21: 7–36.

Thetela, P. (1997) Evaluated entities and parameters of value in academic research articles. English for Specific Purposes 16(2): 101–18.

Published

2008-01-02

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Chen, R., & Hyon, S. (2008). Faculty Evaluation as a Genre System: Negotiating intertextuality and interpersonality. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 2(2), 153-184. https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.v2.i2.153

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>