Genre variation in student writing: A multi-dimensional analysis Jack A. Hardy a, * , Eric Friginal b a Program in Linguistics, Emory University, 532 Kilgo Circle, Suite 202C, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA b Department of Applied Linguistics and ESL, Georgia State University, 34 Peachtree St., Suite 1200, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA article info Article history: Received 25 February 2013 Received in revised form 3 March 2016 Accepted 8 March 2016 Keywords: Genre Corpus Multi-dimensional analysis Student writing Disciplinary writing MICUSP abstract EAP professionals often desire to better understand writing in the disciplines (WID) to inform their pedagogical materials and practices. While genre analysis has increased our understanding of academic writing, quantitative, corpus-based approaches can supple- ment the area (Biber, Connor, & Upton, 2007). To that end, a multi-dimensional (MD) analysis was conducted using dimensions extracted by Hardy and R€ omer (2013). Paper types from the Michigan Corpus of Upper-level Student Papers (MICUSP) were investigated along the following dimensions (1) Involved, Academic Narrative vs. Descriptive, Infor- mational Discourse; (2) Expression of Opinions and Mental Processes; (3) Situation- Dependent, Non-Procedural Evaluation vs. Procedural Discourse; and (4) Production of Possibility Statement and Argumentation. The MICUSP paper types were found to pattern similarly across all four dimensions, with the more personal genres (e.g., creative writing, critiques/evaluations, response papers) and the more objective genres (e.g., research pa- pers, reports) consistently averaging dimension scores on opposing ends of the poles. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. An important tradition in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) programs is the pursuit of teachers, materials developers, and curriculum designers to better understand the written products expected of students outside of the language classroom. The tailor-made courses and materials associated with EAP, however, can be difficult to create because in many English classes, students have different areas of interest. This heterogeneity can be daunting when deciding what to incorporate. Not only do we have to decide which generic practices to emphasize, those of us who teach these courses may specialize in literature, composition, and/or second language teaching. There is thus a possibility of disconnect between the tasks familiar to and assigned by instructors and the writing requirements across the curriculum. For example, students in a biology course may need to write experimental reports: a task they may never have encountered in composition courses. It would thus be useful for writing instructors to be familiar with the linguistic and rhetorical demands in their students' other courses, a belief long associated with EAP pedagogy. With this knowledge, instructors can help students build genre awareness and become more aware that the commonly assigned personal and argumentative writing tasks are only one part of the styles that will be expected of them throughout their academic and post-academic experiences. With that in mind, the current study hopes to better understand the multi-dimensional variation among paper types, or genres, of student writing across the curriculum. * Corresponding author. Program in Linguistics, Emory University, 532 Kilgo Circle, Suite 202C, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA. E-mail address: jack.hardy@emory.edu (J.A. Hardy). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of English for Academic Purposes journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jeap http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.03.002 1475-1585/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 22 (2016) 119e131