Teaching and Researching Writing
Abstract
This third edition of Teaching and Researching Writing continues to build upon the previous editions’ work of providing educators and practitioners in applied linguistics with a clearly written and complete guide to writing research and teaching. The text explores both theoretical and conceptual questions, grapples with key issues in the field today, and demonstrates the dynamic relationship between research and teaching methods and practice. This revised third edition has been reorganized to incorporate new topics, including discussions of technology, identity, and error correction, as well as new chapters to address the innovative directions the field has taken since the previous edition’s publication. Boxes throughout, including "Concepts" and "Quotes", help to both reinforce readers’ understanding of the topics covered by highlighting key ideas and figures in the field, while the updated glossary and resource sections allow readers to further investigate areas of interest. This updated edition of Teaching and Researching Writing is the ideal resource for language teachers, practitioners, and researchers to better understand and apply writing research theories, methods, and practices.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Writing teachers are usually dubious about the best ways of giving feedback to their learners.
“Writing teacher themselves are usually dubious about the best ways of giving feedback to their learners (Hyland, 2015).”
From A comparative study of the effect of teacher’s group and individual feedback on Iranian EFL learners’ learning of speech acts in apology letter writing (2020) · cites this paper as Hyland, 2015
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing
Zhang, Z. (., & Hyland, K. (2018) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2018.02.004 · Cited by 546 · see citing works
Self-citationSyntactic and lexical development in an intensive English for academic purposes programme.
Mazgutova, D., & Kormos, J. (2015) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.004 · Cited by 209 · see citing works
Teng, M. F., Wang, C., & Zhang, L. J. (2022) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2021.100573 · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Pourmousavi, Z., & Mohamadi Zenouzagh, Z. (2020) · Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education · doi:10.1186/s40862-020-00088-w · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Rezai, A., Naserpour, A., & Rahimi, S. (2024) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2022.2086575 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Bergantiňos, M. (2025) · Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.70838/pemj.490606
- Authors
- Hyland, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Hong Kong (HK)
- Corresponding author
- Hyland, Ken
- ORCID
- Hyland, Ken
- Venue
- Routledge eBooks
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2015-11-19
- OpenAlex
- W4299293661
- Cited by
- 474
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 25 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 36.69
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Routledge eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
- Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
- Keywords
- writing instruction, writing research, second language writing, writing technology, authorial identity, error correction, research-practice relationship
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review