paper. The researchers divided 95 students into different groups: (a) no models, (b) three models of Methods sections receiving “A,” labeled as such, (c) a model of an “A,” “B,” and “C” Methods section, labeled with their respective grades, (d) three “A”-graded models with no labels included, and (e) an “A,” “B,” and “C” model with no labels. Students were then given details related to a particular experiment and asked to compose their own Methods section in a one-hour time period. Exposure to models influenced both the content and the organization of the students’ texts in positive ways. Interestingly, there appeared to be no advantage to giving students only “A” models, as opposed to giving them the range of “A,” “B,” and “C” models. Exposure to models, however, did not seem to help the student-writers discriminate between relevant and irrelevant details; similarly, labeling models (as “A,” “B,” or “C”) also had no affect in this area.
Within the context of a genre-based ESP classroom, Henry and Roseberry (1998) examined the effects of explicit genre analysis of model texts on student writers in a first-year management class in Brunei. As the students learned to write travel brochures, they were divided into two groups: one receiving six hours of genre-based instruction (in which students analyzed model texts) and a second receiving no genre-based instruction. Those students who analyzed model texts had higher “texture” scores (an index designed to measure cohesion and coherence) in a post-test, and their gain scores were significantly higher than the students who had received no genre-based instruction. Like Charney and Carlson’s (1995) research, however, this study measures only very short-term benefits of exposure to and analysis of model texts. Also important for instructors is the absence of any consideration of students’ application of genre knowledge beyond the immediate classroom context.
If student interactions with texts—whether those texts be “models” or simply “samples”—are so influential in non-writing classroom settings (as these studies, for example, suggest), one might believe that such interactions are also important within the writing classroom. It is, after all, in this space that students are very often given samples and that such samples are explicitly discussed. As I traced student writing in WCGS, it soon became clear that the texts to which they were exposed played a very important role in developing their knowledge of an unfamiliar genre. One such example was the writers’ engagement in the writing assignment of a self-promotional genre: a job application cover letter.
Job Application Cover Letters as a Genre
As junior scientific researchers, Chatri, Paul, John, and Yoshi repeatedly spoke of the disciplinary value of remaining objective and impersonal in one’s writing. Through years of writing lab reports, research reports, and classroom assignments, they had become accustomed to avoiding any mention of themselves in their writing. Therefore, the job application cover letter assignment in WCGS introduced a fairly new rhetorical purpose to these writers: to promote themselves, rather explicitly, to their readers.
Certainly, scientific texts like research articles do require authors to self-promote or market themselves, persuading readers that they are legitimate and credible members of the discipline (Hyland, 2000). In such texts, writers must illustrate their credibility through relatively subtle means such as displays of disciplinary knowledge or self-citation. Numerous other genres require writers to take more of a “hard-sell” approach, marketing themselves in addition to their work. This class of genres includes, for example, résumés, job application letters, graduate school statements of purpose, or fellowship applications. In composing these sorts of texts, writers need to know how to promote themselves effectively within a specific rhetorical context, balancing the boundary between confidence and arrogance.
Studies of self-promotional genres in general, and job application cover letters in particular, are scarce. Swales and Feak (2000) describe these letters as supporting a research career, “primarily designed to get the ‘right’ academic people in the ‘right’ positions” (p. 257). Job application letters are also included in Swales’ (1996) list of “occluded genres,” which encompass genres that share several characteristics: they are typically formal, kept on file, written for very specific audiences, often highly evaluative, often concerned with promoting the author (and his or her scholarship), and often occluded from the public. While the cover letter meets several of these criteria, it lacks the defining feature of occlusion. Through reference books, career centers, advisors, and, most importantly, the Internet, examples of this genre are readily available—and, as I’ll show throughout this chapter, these resources can have a significant impact on writers who are relatively new to the genre.
Bhatia’s (1993, 1999) work provides the most extensive discussion of the job application cover letter from a genre perspective. Bhatia (1993) focuses on communicative purpose as the defining element of the cover letter genre, and he analyzes the rhetorical structure of an exemplar, drawing parallels between the job application letter and the sales promotion letter. Bhatia claims that the most important function of this type of letter is to show a favorable and relevant description of the job candidate. In other words, the writer’s task is to persuade the readers that he or she is competent and possesses those credentials that are of particular importance to the job at hand.
In his application of generic move analysis to job application letters, Bhatia (1993, p. 62) identifies a typical seven-part structure (see Figure 3.1). He describes “Indicating value of candidature” as the key step, as it is here that the writer attempts to persuade readers that he or she has the relevant experience, qualifications, or background for the position. While Bhatia provides no details regarding the corpus on which this structure is based, he exemplifies it through a letter written for a lectureship in Britain. This generic structure is, however, influenced by socio-cultural factors within any given context. Drawing on a corpus of South Asian scholarship and job application letters, for example, Bhatia (1996) identifies self-degradation as a frequently used strategy in the closing move of a letter.
1. Establishing credentials
2. Introducing candidature
a. Offering candidature
b. Essential detailing of candidature
c. Indicating value of candidature
3. Offering incentives
4. Enclosing documents
5. Using pressure tactics
6. Soliciting response
7. Ending politely
Figure 3.1. Move structure of job application letters identified in Bhatia (1993).
Using a corpus of 40 application letters written by native English speakers for a variety of jobs, Henry and Roseberry (2001) identify similar moves to those in Figure 3.1. Their analysis, however, goes further in identifying key lexical phrases common to different promotional strategies. They note, for example, the high frequency of paired nouns, verbs, and adjectives that writers use to describe their relevant skills (e.g., “background and experience” or “assess and implement”). Awareness of common features like these, the authors argue, may help second language writers compose letters that resemble those written by their native-English-speaking peers. While resembling a conventional “native-like” letter may be a goal of many L2 writers, they are also likely to want to assert an individual identity within their letters, standing out as distinct in some ways—and this is, of course, another important goal and rhetorical move of job application letters.
Beyond these studies of generic form, job application letters have not received any significant research attention—a fact that is somewhat surprising given their relative prominence in professional writing course curricula (particularly at the undergraduate level) as well as the weight that these documents often carry in a tight marketplace. Studies of the procedural dimensions of these
