Rhetorical Structure of an Occluded Academic Genre: A Corpus-Based Move Analysis of Teaching Philosophy Statements

Teaching philosophy statements (TPSs) are high-stakes promotional documents required for academic hiring, tenure, and promotion in higher education worldwide. Despite their gatekeeping function in professional academic discourse, TPSs remain an underexamined occluded genre: prescriptive writing guides offer general advice, but few empirical studies have described the rhetorical structure of authentic statements. This study addresses this gap by investigating the move-step structure and lexicogrammatical features of TPSs from an English for Specific Purposes (ESP) perspective. A specialized corpus of 46 authentic TPSs written by faculty members and graduate students from North American universities (2004-2016) was compiled and analysed using corpus-based genre analysis. Functional moves were coded in MAXQDA with an inter-rater reliability of 94.9%, and keywords and three-word n-grams for each conventional move were extracted with AntConc. The analysis identified fourteen moves across three categories (teacher-focused, classroom-focused, and teaching/evaluation process), of which five were conventional. The most frequent and cyclical move was focus on teaching practices (100%), indicating that concrete classroom examples outweigh abstract philosophical declarations. The genre proved hybrid and flexible, with no fixed move order, combining features of academic prose (prepositional-phrase n-grams) and promotional genres such as CVs and application letters. Substantial variation emerged between faculty and graduate-statement corpora: faculty privileged philosophical concepts and mentorship, while graduate students foregrounded concrete activities, technology use, and diversity. A systematic comparison with twelve prescriptive writing guides revealed partial alignment but also several moves – such as acknowledging mentors and addressing students’ difficulties – that occur in authentic texts but are absent from the guides. The study contributes a genre model grounded in authentic data, offers empirically derived lexicogrammatical resources for novice writers, and provides pedagogical implications for teacher training and ESP instruction in academic genres.

1. Abaalkhail, A. (2022). Understanding teaching philosophy statements as a genre: A corpus-based discourse analysis of rhetorical moves and linguistic features [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The University of Sheffield.

2. Albakry, M., & Bryan, C. (2025). Presentation of self in academic support genres: Job application statements. University of Michigan Press/ELT. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.14362754

3. Alghbban, M. I., Ben Salamh, S., & Maalej, Z. (2017). Metaphoric modeling of foreign language teaching and learning, with special reference to teaching philosophy statements. Applied Linguistics, 38(4), 559–580. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv053

4. Anthony, L. (2019). AntConc (Version 3.5.8). Waseda University. https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software

5. Arsyad, S. (2013). A genre-based analysis of Indonesian research articles in the social sciences and humanities written by Indonesian speakers. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 8(3), 234–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2013.849711

6. Baker, P. (2006). Using corpora in discourse analysis. Continuum.

7. Beatty, J. E., Leigh, J. S. A., & Lund Dean, K. (2009). Philosophy rediscovered: Exploring the connections between teaching philosophies, educational philosophies, and philosophy. Journal of Management Education, 33(1), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562907310557

8. Beatty, J. E., Leigh, J. S. A., & Lund Dean, K. (2020). Republication of: Philosophy re discovered: Exploring the connections between teaching philosophies, educational philosophies, and philosophy. Journal of Management Education, 44(5), 543–559. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562920912915

9. Bhatia, V. K. (2004). Worlds of written discourse. Continuum.

10. Bhatia, V. K. (2017). Critical genre analysis: Investigating interdiscursive performance in professional practice. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315690315

11. Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. A. (2007a). Discourse analysis and corpus linguistics. In D. Biber, U. Connor, & T. A. Upton (Eds.), Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure (pp. 1–20). John Benjamins.

12. Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. A. (2007b). Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.28

13. Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2004). If you look at ...: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25(3), 371–405. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.3.371

14. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Pearson Education Limited.

15. Bordet, G. (2015). The Role of “Lexical Paving” in building a text according to the requirements of a target genre. In P. Thompson & G. Diani (Eds.), English for academic purposes: Approaches and implications (pp. 43–77). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

16. Boye, A. (2012). Writing your teaching philosophy. Texas Tech University Teaching, Learning, and Professional Development Center, (7), 1–7.

17. British Psychological Society. (2021). Ethics guidelines for internet-mediated research. https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsrep.2021.rep155

18. Bruff, D. (2007). Valuing and evaluating teaching in the mathematics faculty hiring process. Notices of the AMS, 54(10), 1308–1315. http://www.ams.org/notices/200710/tx071001308p.pdf

19. Casal, J. E., & Kessler, M. (2020). Form and rhetorical function of phrase-frames in promotional writing: A corpus and genre-based analysis. System, 95, 102370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102370

20. Casal, J. E., & Kessler, M. (2024). Rhetorical move-step analysis. In M. Kessler & C. Polio (Eds.), Conducting genre-based research in Applied Linguistics: A methodological guide (1st ed., pp. 82–104). Routledge.

21. Caukin, N. G., & Brinthaupt, T. (2017). Using a teaching philosophy statement as a professional development tool for teacher candidates. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2017.110218

22. Chang, Y. J., & Huang, H. T. (2015). Exploring TED talks as a pedagogical resource for oral presentations: A corpus-based move analysis. English Teaching and Learning, 39(4), 29–62. https://doi.org/10.6330/ETL.2015.39.4.02

23. Charles, M., & Whiteside, K. (2024). Seeking research funding in a peripheral context: A learner corpus genre study of grant proposal summaries. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101431

24. Chen, Y., & Baker, P. (2016). Investigating criterial discourse features across second language development: Lexical bundles in rated learner essays, CEFR B1, B2 and C1. Applied Linguistics, 37(6), 849–880. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu065

25. Chism, N. V. N. (1997). Developing a philosophy of teaching statement. Essays on Teaching Excellence, 9(3), 1–2.

26. Connor, U., & Mauranen, A. (1999). Linguistic analysis of grant proposals: European Union research grants. English for Specific Purposes, 18(1), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00026-4

27. Coppola, B. P. (2002). Writing a statement of teaching philosophy. Journal of College Science Teaching, 31(7), 448–453.

28. Cornut, F., Giroux, H., & Langley, A. (2012). The strategic plan as a genre. Discourse & Communication, 6(1), 21–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481311432521

29. Cotos, E. (2019). Articulating societal benefits in grant proposals: Move analysis of Broader Impacts. English for Specific Purposes, 54, 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2018.11.002

30. Cotos, E., Huffman, S., & Link, S. (2017). A move/step model for methods sections: Demonstrating rigour and credibility. English for Specific Purposes, 46, 90–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2017.01.001

31. Crookes, G. V. (2015). Redrawing the boundaries on theory, research, and practice concerning language teachers’ philosophies and language teacher cognition: Toward a critical perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 99(3), 485–499. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12237

32. Ding, H. (2007). Genre analysis of personal statements: Analysis of moves in application essays to medical and dental schools. English for Specific Purposes, 26(3), 368–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.09.004

33. Durrant, P., & Mathews-Aydinli, J. (2011). A function-first approach to identifying formulaic language in academic writing. English for Specific Purposes, 30(1), 58–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2010.05.002

34. Eierman, R. J. (2008). The teaching philosophy statement: Purposes and organizational structure. Journal of Chemical Education, 85(3), 336–339. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed085p336

35. Faryadi, Q. (2015). Teaching philosophy statements. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 61–66.

36. Fitzgerald, S. (2020). «There’s only one pot of money it can come from»: A corpus-based analysis of the International Baccalaureate in Canada’s Provinces. Canadian Journal of Education, 43(3), 862–890.

37. Flowerdew, J. (2013). Discourse in English language education. Routledge.

38. Flowerdew, J., & Dudley-Evans, T. (2002). Genre analysis of editorial letters to international journal contributors. Applied Linguistics, 23(4), 463–489. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/23.4.463

39. Flowerdew, L. (1998). Corpus linguistic techniques applied to textlinguistics. System, 26(4), 541–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(98)00039-6

40. Flowerdew, L. (2005). An integration of corpus-based and genre-based approaches to text analysis in EAP/ESP: Countering criticisms against corpus-based methodologies. English for Specific Purposes, 24(3), 321–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.09.002

41. Flowerdew, L. (2008). Determining discourse-based moves in professional reports. In A. Ädel & R. Reppen (Eds.), Corpora and discourse: The challenges of different settings (pp. 117–131). John Benjamins.

42. Flowerdew, L. (2012). Corpus-based discourse analysis. In J. P. Gee & M. Handford (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 174–187). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203809068.ch13

43. Giannoni, D. S. (2002). Worlds of gratitude: A contrastive study of acknowledgement texts in English and Italian research articles. Applied Linguistics, 23(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/23.1.1

44. Goodyear, G. E., & Allchin, D. (1998). Statements of teaching philosophy. In M. Kaplan (Ed.), To Improve the Academy (Vol. 17, pp. 103–121). New Forums Press and the Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-4822.1998.tb00345.x

45. Hall, D. P., Waalkes, P. L., & Smith, P. H. (2021). A content analysis of counselor educators’ teaching philosophy statements. Journal of Counselor Preparation and Supervision, 14(1). https://research.library.kutztown.edu/jcps/vol14/iss1/3/

46. Halleck, G. B., & Connor, U. (2006). Rhetorical moves in TESOL conference proposals. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(1), 70–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.08.001

47. Heim, A. B., & Holt, E. A. (2025). The Teaching Philosophy Rubric (TPR): A reflection tool for teaching statements. College Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2025.2549329

48. Hyland, K. (2012). Bundles in academic discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 150–169. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190512000037

49. Hyon, S. (2018). Introducing genre and English for Specific Purposes. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315761152

50. Jiang, F. (Kevin), & Ma, X. (2018). ‘As we can see’: Reader engagement in PhD candidature confirmation reports. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 35, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.05.003

51. Joseph, R., Lim, J. M.-H., & Nor, N. A. M. (2014). Communicative moves in forestry research introductions: Implications for the design of learning materials. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 134, 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.224

52. Kanoksilapatham, B. (2007). Rhetorical moves in biochemistry research articles. In D. Biber, U. Connor, & T. A. Upton (Eds.), Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure (pp. 73–119). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.28.06kan

53. Kaplan, M., Meizlish, D. S., O’Neal, C., & Wright, M. C. (2008). A research-based rubric for developing statements of teaching philosophy. In D. R. Robertson & L. B. Nilson (Eds.), To improve the academy: Resources for faculty instructional and organizational developers (Vol. 26, pp. 242–262). Jossey-Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-4822.2008.tb00512.x

54. Kenny, N., Berenson, C., Jeffs, C., Nowell, L., & Grant, K. (2018). Teaching philosophies and teaching dossiers guide. University of Calgary Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning. https://taylorinstitute.ucalgary.ca/resources/teaching-philosophies-and-teaching-dossiers-guide

55. Kessler, M. (2020). A text analysis and gatekeepers’ perspectives of a promotional genre: Understanding the rhetoric of Fulbright grant statements. English for Specific Purposes, 60, 182–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2020.07.003

56. Li, L. J., & Ge, G. C. (2009). Genre analysis: Structural and linguistic evolution of the English-medium medical research article (1985–2004). English for Specific Purposes, 28(2), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2008.12.004

57. Lim, J. M.-H. (2014). Formulating research questions in experimental doctoral dissertations on Applied Linguistics. English for Specific Purposes, 35, 66–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.02.003

58. Liu, Y., & Buckingham, L. (2018). The schematic structure of discussion sections in ap plied linguistics and the distribution of metadiscourse markers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 34, 97–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.04.002

59. López-Ferrero, C., & Bach, C. (2016). Discourse analysis of statements of purpose: Connecting academic and professional genres. Discourse Studies, 18(3), 286–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445616634553

60. Lorés, R. (2004). On RA abstracts: From rhetorical structure to thematic organisation. English for Specific Purposes, 23(3), 280–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.06.001

61. Loudermilk, B. C. (2007). Occluded academic genres: An analysis of the MBA thought essay. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(3), 190–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2007.07.001

62. Macfarlane, B. (2020). The CV as a symbol of the changing nature of academic life: Performativity, prestige and self-presentation. Studies in Higher Education, 45(4), 796–807. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1554638

63. Martín, P. M. (2003). A genre analysis of English and Spanish research paper abstracts in experimental social sciences. English for Specific Purposes, 22(1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(01)00033-3

64. McEnery, T. (2016). Keywords. In P. Baker & J. Egbert (Eds.), Triangulating methodological approaches in corpus linguistic research (pp. 20–32). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315724812-2

65. Merkel, W. (2020). “What I mean is…”: The role of dialogic interactions in developing a statement of teaching philosophy. Journal of Second Language Writing, 48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.100702

66. Neaderhiser, S. E. (2009). “Metaphors we teach by”: Representations of disciplinary and teacherly identity [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/1044

67. Neaderhiser, S. E. (2016a). Conceiving of a teacherly identity: Metaphors of composition in teaching statements. Pedagogy, 16(3), 413–443. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3600781

68. Neaderhiser, S. E. (2016b). Hidden in plain sight: Occlusion in pedagogical genres. Composition Forum, 33, 1–12.

69. O’Neal, C., Meizlish, D. S., & Kaplan, M. (2007). Writing a statement of teaching philosophy for the academic job search. CRLT Occasional Papers, 23, 1–8.

70. Paltridge, B., Starfield, S., Ravelli, L., & Tuckwell, K. (2012). Change and stability: Examining the macrostructures of doctoral theses in the visual and performing arts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(4), 332–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.08.003

71. Parkinson, J. (2017). The student laboratory report genre: A genre analysis. English for Specific Purposes, 45, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.08.001

72. Payant, C. (2017). Teaching philosophy statements: In-service ESL teachers’ practices and beliefs. TESOL Journal, 8(3), 636–656. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.290

73. Payant, C., & Hirano, E. (2018). Recurring topics in English language teachers’ writ ten teaching philosophy statements. TESL Canada Journal, 35(1), 29–51. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v35i1.1283

74. Petyko, M., Busso, L., Atkins, S., Basu, N., Chiang, E., & Grant, T. (2025). “This is an extortion note”: A rhetorical move-analysis of discourse structure and genre in commercial extortion letters. Language and Law/Linguageme Direito, 11(2), 160–178. https://doi.org/10.21747/21833745/lanlaw/11_2a7

75. Pho, P. D. (2008). Research article abstracts in applied linguistics and educational technology: A study of linguistic realizations of rhetorical structure and authorial stance. Dis course Studies, 10(2), 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607087010

76. Rossetti, J., & Fox, P. G. (2009). Factors related to successful teaching by outstanding professors: An interpretive study. Journal of Nursing Education, 48(1), 11–16. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20090101-09

77. Samraj, B. (2014). Move structure. In K. P. Schneider & A. Barron (Eds.), Pragmatics of discourse (pp. 385–406). De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214406-015

78. Samraj, B. (2016). Discourse structure and variation in manuscript reviews: Implications for genre categorization. English for Specific Purposes, 42, 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2015.12.003

79. Samraj, B., & Monk, L. (2008). The statement of purpose in graduate program applications: Genre structure and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27(2), 193–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2007.07.001

80. Schönwetter, D. J., Sokal, L., Friesen, M., & Taylor, K. L. (2002). Teaching philosophies reconsidered: A conceptual model for the development and evaluation of teaching philosophy statements. International Journal for Academic Development, 7(1), 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/13601440210156501

81. Sharmin, N., & Chow, A. (2024). Teaching Philosophy Statement: It is time to think outside the box. McGill Journal of Education / Revue Des Sciences de l’éducation de McGill, 325–332. https://doi.org/10.26443/mje/rsem.v58i3.10283

82. Solin, A. (2018). Writing in the context of unstable norms: Teaching portfolios as a genre of academic recruitment. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28(3), 424–437. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12213

83. Supasiraprapa, S., & De Costa, P. I. (2017). Metadiscourse and identity construction in teaching philosophy statements: A critical case study of two MATESOL students. TESOL Quarterly, 51(4), 868–896. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.360

84. Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.

85. Swales, J. M. (1996). Occluded genres in the academy: The case of the submission letter. In E. Ventola & A. Mauranen (Eds.), Academic writing: Intercultural and textual issues (pp. 45–58). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.41.06swa

86. Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524827

87. Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2004). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills (2nd ed.). The University of Michigan Press.

88. Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2011). Navigating academia: Writing supporting genres. The University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.3073304

89. Thompson, S. (1994). Frameworks and contexts: A genre-based approach to analysing lecture introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 13(2), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(94)90014-0

90. VERBI Software. (2018). MAXQDA 2018. VERBI Software. https://www.maxqda.com

91. Yang, R., & Allison, D. (2003). Research articles in applied linguistics: Moving from results to conclusions. English for Specific Purposes, 22(4), 365–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00026-1

92. Yang, W. (2015). “Call for papers”: Analysis of the schematic structure and lexico-grammar of CFPs for academic conferences. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.06.006

93. Yelland, C. (2011). A genre and move analysis of written feedback in higher education. Language and Literature, 20(3), 218–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947011413563

94. Yeom, Y., Miller, M. A., & Delp, R. (2018). Constructing a teaching philosophy: Aligning beliefs, theories, and practice. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 13(3), 131–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2018.01.004