Demystifying Discussion Section in Engineering Laboratory Reports

This study examines the genre of Engineering Laboratory Reports (ELR) discussionsection written by Electrical Engineering Undergraduates in a higher learning institution. Theaims of this study are to identify the rhetorical moves and combinations of move patterns used byengineering students to write discussion section of ELR. A genre analysis is deemed important toidentify writing patterns and convention practices of engineering undergraduate students thus acorpus of N= 35 was selected from electrical engineering students in their third and fourth yearof study. This study adopted an interdisciplinary approach to address the analytical frameworkbased on Genre Theory and Ngowu [1] analytical model was used for data analysis. Theprocedures of the move analysis were based on Biber [2] BCU Approach. A pilot test wasconducted to determine the model that fits the best to describe moves and steps of ELR. Thestudy benchmarks a move or step to be present in at least 60% of the reports. The results showPresenting Experimental Outcomes as the main move followed by Step 1 Restating purpose orprocedures of experiment as an optional step while Step 2 Stating Specific outcome and Step 3Interpreting outcomes as mandatory steps. The two steps in discussion section (step 2 and 3) arein cyclical pattern and most frequently occurred along with move 4. Step 3 is extensively writtenby employing various thinking skills that are explicitly written without much manipulation andspeculation to the information. As discipline-specific writing continues to gain importance inEAP context, this study determines ways to help students to acquire discipline-specific literacyand to shed light on discoursal research methodology.