Abstract

The present study offers an alternative methodological approach to the growing body of literature on stance—the linguistic arrangements that construe a writer’s perspective on knowledge. A number of recent studies have concluded that control over linguistic stance tends to develop through college and that preferred markers of stance differ by discipline. We know relatively little, however, about how those patterns differ within and between individuals. This study uses a person-centered method, multilevel latent profile analysis, to determine how secondary students in the United States use typical markers of stance in their writing, and to what extent that use varies across texts. The analysis focuses on 338 informal responses produced by 27 rising high school seniors during a college access program. Findings point to wide variation in how students at this level use linguistic markers in their writing, and to the role of the larger instructional context in shaping stance in the informal response genre.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2022-10-01
DOI
10.1177/07410883221107884
CompPile
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation context

Cited by in this index (2)

  1. Across the Disciplines
  2. Journal of Writing Analytics

References (60) · 12 in this index

  1. Anthony L. (2018). AntConc (Version 3.5.7) [Computer software]. Waseda University. https://www.laurenceanthon…
  2. Advances in latent variable mixture models
  3. 10.1057/9781137350466
     ↗
  4. Journal of Writing Analytics
  5. Written Communication
Show all 60 →
  1. How students write: A linguistic analysis
  2. 10.1016/j.jeap.2017.01.005
     ↗
  3. Written Communication
  4. Fforum: Essays on theory and practice in the teaching of writing
  5. 10.2307/378428
     ↗
  6. 10.2307/j.ctt46nxp6
     ↗
  7. Research in the Teaching of English
  8. Assessing Writing
  9. 10.1075/wll.5.2.06ber
     ↗
  10. 10.1075/scl.23
     ↗
  11. 10.1017/CBO9780511804489
     ↗
  12. Apprenticeship in textual conversation: A mixed methods study of student writing in a college access seminar
  13. 10.1007/s10869-017-9491-z
     ↗
  14. Research in the Teaching of English
  15. Academic writing: At the interface of corpus and discourse
  16. 10.1177/1474022207084882
     ↗
  17. Written Communication
  18. 10.1016/j.system.2017.06.010
     ↗
  19. 10.1007/s11145-013-9489-5
     ↗
  20. 10.1002/tl.6901
     ↗
  21. 10.1080/08957347.2016.1138959
     ↗
  22. College Composition and Communication
  23. Language and Linguistics
  24. 10.3366/cor.2015.0068
     ↗
  25. 10.1016/j.jeap.2016.03.002
     ↗
  26. 10.3366/cor.2013.0040
     ↗
  27. 10.1080/10705511003659342
     ↗
  28. Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing
  29. 10.1093/applin/amm011
     ↗
  30. 10.1017/S0261444808005235
     ↗
  31. 10.1016/S1060-3743(97)90033-3
     ↗
  32. 10.1057/9781137030825
     ↗
  33. 10.1111/lang.12198
     ↗
  34. Written Communication
  35. 10.1016/j.jeap.2016.05.006
     ↗
  36. 10.1093/applin/amy012
     ↗
  37. 10.1016/j.jslw.2016.06.004
     ↗
  38. 10.1007/978-3-642-01044-6_22
     ↗
  39. 10.1177/1094428118760690
     ↗
  40. Assignments across the curriculum: A national study of college writing
  41. 10.1080/10705511.2014.919825
     ↗
  42. Mplus: Statistical analysis with latent variables: User’s guide
  43. 10.1017/9781009030199
     ↗
  44. Assessing Writing
  45. Agents of integration: Understanding transfer as a rhetorical act
  46. 10.1023/A:1008981510081
     ↗
  47. 10.3366/cor.2011.0011
     ↗
  48. Researching language in schools and communities: Functional linguistic perspectives
  49. 10.1017/CBO9780511609664.008
     ↗
  50. Everyday genres: Writing assignments across the disciplines
  51. 10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103445
     ↗
  52. Written Communication
  53. 10.1016/j.jsp.2016.10.001
     ↗
  54. 10.1177/0962280207081238
     ↗
  55. Written Communication