Research in the Teaching of English May 2017

Elaborated Specificity versus Emphatic Generality: A Corpus-Based Comparison of Higher- and Lower-Scoring Advanced Placement Exams in English

David West Brown Marymount University ; Laura L. Aull

Abstract

Text-driven, quantitative methods provide new ways to analyze student writing, by uncovering recurring grammatical features and related stylistic effects that remain tacit to students and those who read and evaluate student writing. To date, however, these methods are rarely used in research on students transitioning into US postsecondary writing, and especially rare are studies of student writing that is already scored according to high-stakes writing expectations. This study offers a corpus-based, comparative analysis of higher- and lower-scoring Advanced Placement (AP) exams in English, revealing statistically significant syntactic patterns that distinguish higher-scoring exams according to “informational production” and lower-scoring essays according to “involved” or “interactional” production (Biber, 1988). These differences contribute to what we label emphatic generality in the lower-scoring essays, in which writers tend to foreground human actors, including themselves. In contrast, patterns in higher-scoring essays achieve what we call elaborated specificity, by focusing on and explicating specific, often abstract, concepts.These findings help uncover what is rewarded (or not) in high-stakes writing assessments and show that some students struggle with register awareness. A related implication, then, is the importance of teaching register awareness to students at the late secondary and early university level—students who are still relative novices, but are being invited to compose informationally dense prose. Such register considerations, and specific features revealed in this study, provide ways to help demystify privileged writing forms for students, particularly students for whom academic writing may seem distant from their own communicative practices and ambitions.

Journal
Research in the Teaching of English
Published
2017-05-01
DOI
10.58680/rte201729118
CompPile
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export
BibTeX RIS

Citation context

Cited by in this index (15)

  1. Toth et al. (2026)
    Generative Artificial Intelligence, Writing Placement, and Principled Decision …
    Journal of Writing Analytics
  2. Si&acirc et al. (2026)
    Curating a Corpus: A Three-Phase Model
    Journal of Writing Analytics
  3. Slagle (2025)
    Effort is All You Need: The Possibilities of Writing Analytics
    Journal of Writing Analytics
  4. DeJeu (2024)
    A Rhetorical Approach for Reimagining Business Writing Instruction in the AI Age
    Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  5. Laudenbach et al. (2024)
    Visualizing formative feedback in statistics writing: An exploratory study of s…
    Assessing Writing
Show all 15 →
  1. Gere et al. (2022)
    Interchanges: Response to Shawna Shapiro
    College Composition and Communication
  2. Black (2022)
    Variation in Linguistic Stance: A Person-Centered Analysis of Student Writing
    Written Communication
  3. Veeramoothoo (2022)
    Social Justice and the Portrayal of Migrants in International Organization for …
    Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  4. McCaffrey et al. (2022)
    Across Performance Contexts: Using Automated Writing Evaluation to Explore Stud…
    Journal of Writing Analytics
  5. Latif (2021)
    Remodeling writers’ composing processes: Implications for writing assessment
    Assessing Writing
  6. Wetzel et al. (2021)
    Computer-Assisted Rhetorical Analysis: Instructional Design and Formative Asses…
    Journal of Writing Analytics
  7. Aull (2019)
    Linguistic Markers of Stance and Genre in Upper-Level Student Writing
    Written Communication
  8. Poe (2019)
    Research in the Teaching of English: From Alchemy and Science to Methodological…
    Journal of Writing Analytics
  9. Ringler (2018)
    Placing Writing Tasks in Local and Global Contexts: The Case of Argumentative Writing
    Journal of Writing Analytics
  10. Aull (2017)
    Corpus Analysis of Argumentative Versus Explanatory Discourse in Writing Task Genres
    Journal of Writing Analytics

References (0)

No references on file for this article.

CrossRef global citation count: 14 View in citation network → Build reading path →

Related articles

  1. Journal of Academic Writing Jul 2021
    Using author-devised cover letters instead of instructor-devised rubrics to generate useful written peer feedback comments ↗
    Roger Yallop; Djuddah A. J. Leijen
    genre theory writing across the curriculum graduate education teacher development revision assessment quantitative research
  2. Research in the Teaching of English May 2015
    Editors’ Introduction: Decolonizing Research in the Teaching of English(es) ↗
    Ellen West Cushman; Mary Juzwik; Kati Macaluso; Esther Milu
    decolonial rhetorics teacher development assessment quantitative research
  3. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication Mar 2012
    Assessing the Impact of Student Peer Review in Writing Instruction by Using the Normalized Compression Distance ↗
    Sayuri Yoshizawa; Takao Terano; Atsushi Yoshikawa
    writing pedagogy teacher development revision assessment technical communication quantitative research affect and writing book reviews
  4. Written Communication Jul 2026
    The Dynamics Between the Biographical Factors, Professional Identities, and Teaching Practices of Second Language Writing Instructors ↗
    Young Wha Lee
    first-year composition writing pedagogy graduate education teacher development assessment qualitative research multilingual writers grammar and mechanics
  5. Journal of Response to Writing Apr 2026
    Examining Automated Writing Evaluation Error Coverage in Relation to Uptake and Retention ↗
    Mehrzad, Mohaddeseh; Rahimi, Mohammad; Link, Stephanie
    genre theory writing pedagogy teacher development revision assessment artificial intelligence multilingual writers grammar and mechanics