About the Academic Writing Service and Studie- och Språkverkstaden

Do you want to improve your study skills or writing? At the Academic Writing Service, you can get help with all aspects of your university work.

You can book one-on-one consultations with us to help you prepare for an exam, structure an assignment, or review the language in your thesis. Whether you find university study difficult or are doing well but want to improve further, you are welcome to book a meeting with us. We also offer talks, workshops and writing groups for students at Stockholm University. Our website contains guides and resources for study skills and writing.

We are located in Studenthuset on the Frescati campus. You can find links to all of our services on our homepage.

Our pedagogical work in higher education is grounded in research and best practice. Below, you can learn more about our mission and how we have shaped our work with students and teaching staff.

Our mission is to ensure that students with diverse backgrounds and circumstances are able to complete their studies and achieve good results. We do this by:

  • Offering one-on-one student consultations, as well as talks, seminars and web-based resources on topics such as academic writing, study skills and oral presentations. These services are offered in both English and Swedish.
  • Supporting the work of the university’s academic departments with initiatives promoting the improvement of academic reading, writing and study skills.
  • Contributing our perspectives and competence to long-term partnerships with other university services and departments in order to promote the development of transferable skills. We work together with study and careers counsellors, the Student Union, Student Health, Special Pedagogical Support, the Stockholm University Library, the Centre for the Advancement of University Teaching and Språkstudion, in order to give students the best possible support.
  • Actively developing our pedagogical approaches, drawing on our discipline-specific competence.

The Academic Writing Service is a part of Student Services. We are called the Academic Writing Service in English and Studie- och språkverstaden (the Study and Language Workshop) in Swedish.

Our staff are experienced educators with special knowledge of general and academic English and Swedish, English and Swedish as other languages, teaching methods, information and communications technologies, and special-needs education.

We aim to base our work on research and best practice, and we develop our practice continually by drawing on research and promoting collegial learning. Examples of the results of this approach are given below.

Our approach

An important starting point for us is to meet students where they are. We also work with the assumption that all students have the potential to learn and develop.

The framework for one-on-one consultations

Rather than help students with any specific text, the aim of a writing consultation is to help students develop writing skills they can make use of throughout their studies. Our focus is therefore on helping students to learn independently. Students are expected to play an active role in consultations and to work independently on their text after and between consultations.

We take Per Lauvås and Gunnar Handal's (1998) definition of constructive criticism as a starting point for our consultations:

  • Make the positive features of the text visible.
  • Point out what is worth keeping.
  • Make clear what is unclear.
  • Give some direction for work with the unfinished parts of the text.
  • Help generate the will and energy to complete the work.

To set the scene for a productive dialogue, we always begin our consultations with a discussion of the students’ needs (see Winder, Kathpalia & Koos, 2016). We ask questions such as:

  • What can I help you with today?
  • Where are you in your writing process?
  • What do you want to get out of today’s consultation?
  • What works well with your writing at the moment?
  • What are the greatest challenges for your writing?
  • What do you need to move the work forward?

At the end of the consultation we want to create space for questions and make sure that any remaining doubts are addressed. In this way the work can be given some direction and we can help the student find the will and energy to complete the remaining work (see Thonus, 2016). The end of the consultation is often initiated by asking the student to explain what they have gotten from the conversation so far. We open up the dialogue with new questions and discuss the students’ next steps in their writing task. Common questions at this point in the meeting are:

  • Can you sum up what we have spoken about so far?
  • What have you gotten from our conversation so far?
  • Have any questions come up while we have been talking?
  • What can you do now that will have the greatest impact on the final product?
  • Are there any obstacles to completing your work successfully?
  • What would be most interesting for you to work on now?
  • Is it OK for me to make some suggestions based on what we have spoken about today?
  • When we finish the consultation, how are you going to continue your work on the text?
  • What have you learned today?

Consultations on study skills

Consultations on study skills take a different form to writing consultations. Our goal is to help the student become more independent, experience a greater sense of control and develop more effective study skills. However, it is often difficult to achieve these outcomes in the space of one consultation. We therefore aim to help the student take a step towards these goals, working from their current situation and circumstances.

To create the context for a productive dialogue, we want to gain an understanding the student’s current situation at the beginning of the discussion. Afterwards, we aim to activate the student’s ability to find their own solutions to the challenges they face. Our study skills consultations draw on coaching methods such as the GROW model and cognitive coaching (as described in Berg, 2007). Typical questions we pose are:

  • What do you want to get out of our conversation today?
  • How are your studies going at the moment?
  • What are the reasons for this particular problem or challenge?
  • What are your options for changing the situation?
  • Which course of action are you going to choose?

When we give advice, we try to offer the student a range of strategies to choose from, rather than advocating any specific strategy. Whenever possible, we offer digital or printed resources that the student can refer to and work with after their visit. These resources are available online (in Swedish) at su.se/studiestrategier.

Scaffolding

We use cognitive and motivational scaffolding in our consultations, together with explicit instruction (see Mackiewicz & Thompson, 2014). This scaffolding aids in the development of the student's writing and study skills, and helps strengthen the student’s self-efficacy. Our choice of instruction or cognitive or motivational scaffolding varies according to the situation, but we nearly always make use of all three strategies in a consultation.

Metalanguage

We often use metalanguage to talk about texts and writing. In doing so, we hope to make more features of writing visible for the students. In a writing consultation we might, for example, use the text triangle (Løkensgard Hoel, 2010) to point to the different levels of a text and indicate which level the consultation will focus on. We often try to raise the discussion from the local to the global level, however when the student indicates that they would like to discuss their text at the local level, we also respect their choice. Together with metalanguage for the grammatical features of a text, we use metalanguage to describe structure, organisation and the writing process.

Examples of metalanguage we use in presentations and consultations:

organisation, thesis statement, coherence, signposting, paragraph structure, topic sentences, transition signals, cohesion, redundancy, third person, active voice, hedging, boosting, precision

Peer observation

Peer observation is part of our systematic approach to ensuring the quality of our work. Rather than evaluation of teaching, the aim of a peer observation is give the person being observed the opportunity to reflect on their own practice, with the help of a colleague. For our peer observations, an observer will sit in on a lecture, workshop or student meeting and then guide the person being observed through a reflection on their teaching in a follow-up dialogue.

Variation theory as support for teaching design

Variation theory suggests that we learn by distinguishing how the object of learning differs from something else, rather than by looking at similarities (Marton, 2015). In our teaching, we often point to difference and contrast, rather than solely referring to examples of successful student work. In the case of academic writing, we aim to both demonstrate how academic writing differs from other forms of writing and give students good examples of academic writing.

Here is some of the literature we have drawn on to develop our practice:

Academic writing

  • Ask, S. (2007). Vägar till ett akademiskt skriftspråk [Doctoral dissertation, Växjö University]. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:vxu:diva-1276
  • Blückert, A. (2010). Juridiska – ett nytt språk?: En studie av juridikstudenters språkliga inskolning [Doctoral dissertation, Stockholm University]. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-111807
  • Blåsjö, M. (2004). Studenters skrivande i två kunskapsbyggande miljöer [Doctoral dissertation, Stockholm University]. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:su:diva-265
  • Eklund Heinonen, M., Lennartson-Hokkanen, I., & Nord, A. (2018). ”Mer än bara text och ord”: Akademiskt skrivande i utbildningar i socialt arbete och sociologi (FUMS rapport: Arbetsrapporter om modern svenska Nr 235; p. 48). Uppsala universitet, Institutionen för nordiska språk.
  • Hoel, T. L. (2010). Skriva på universitet och högskolor: En bok för lärare och studenter (S. Andersson, Övers.; 1. uppl.). Studentlitteratur.
  • Kaufhold, K., & Yencken, D. E. (2021). Writing Groups as Dialogic Spaces: Negotiating Multiple Normative Perspectives. Journal of Academic Writing, 11(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.18552/joaw.v11i1.748
  • Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in higher education, 23(2), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079812331380364
  • Lillis, T. (2003). Student writing as’ academic literacies’: Drawing on Bakhtin to move from critique to design. Language and education, 17(3), 192–207. https://doi.org/doi:10.1080/09500780308666848
  • Malmström, M. (2017). Synen på skrivande: Föreställningar om skrivande i mediedebatter och gymnasieskolans läroplaner. Lunds universitet.
  • Schött, K. (2015). Studentens skrivhandbok. (3rd ed.). Stockholm: Liber.

First-year students

Multilingualism as a resource

  • Brinkschulte, M., Grieshammer, E. & Stoian , M. (2018). Translingual Academic Writing Pedagogy at internationalised universities. Journal of Academic Writing , 8(2), 150–160. Retrieved from https://publications.coventry.ac.uk/index.php/joaw/article/view/460/714
  • Brinkschulte, M., Stoian , M., and Borges, E. (2015). Resource Focused Research for Multilingual Competence in Scientific Writing. Journal of Academic Writing , 5(1), 17–28. Retrieved from https://publications.coventry.ac.uk/index.php/joaw/article/view/159/174
  • Cook, V. (2008). Second language learning and language teaching (4th ed.), London: Hodder Education.
  • Cummins, J. (2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics , 10(2), 221–240. Retrieved from https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/CJAL/article/view/19743
  • Gentil, G. (2018). Multilingualism as a writing resource . In J. Liontas (Ed). The TESOLEncyclopedia of English Language Teaching (Vol. Teaching Writing). New York: Wiley.
  • Norton, B. (2013). Identity and language learning (2nd ed.). Bristol: Multilingual.
  • Wei, L. (2016). Epilogue: Multicompetence and the Translanguaging Instinct. In V. Cook & L. Wei (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Multi Competence (pp. 533–543). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Inclusive teaching

  • Burgstahler, S. (Ed.). (2010). Universal Design in Higher Education: From Principles to Practice. Cambridge.
  • Larsdotter Frid, H. & Krantz, O. (2013). Högskoleexamen-möjlighet eller rättighet? Studenter med funktionsnedsättningar och högskolestudier - En litteraturstudie. Occasional Papers in Disability och Rehabilitation, pp. 1–27.
  • Melander, S. (u.å.). Att göra högre studier tillgängliga - Ett lärarperspektiv. Högre utbildning, 10(2), 37–49.
  • Yssel, N., Pak, N. & Bielke, J, (2016). A Door Must Be Opened. Perceptions of Students with Disablilities in Higher Education. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 63(3), 384–394.

Referencing and plagiarism

  • Badenhorst, C. M. (2019). Literature reviews, citations and intertextuality in graduate student writing. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(2), 263–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1359504
  • Eriksson, A.-M., & Mäkitalo, Å. (2013). Referencing as practice: Learning to write and reason with other people’s texts in environmental engineering education. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2(3), 171–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2013.05.002
  • Gravett, K., & Kinchin, I. M. (2020). Referencing and empowerment: Exploring barriers to agency in the higher education student experience. Teaching in Higher Education, 25(1), 84–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1541883
  • Hellman, J., & Thorsten, A. (2021). Plagiera eller referera vetenskapligt? En studie om vad studenter behöver lära sig för att bli bättre på referathantering. Högre utbildning, 11(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.23865/hu.v11.2730
  • Howard, R. M., Serviss, T., & Rodrigue, T. K. (2010). Writing from sources, writing from sentences. Writing and Pedagogy, 2(2), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.v2i2.177
  • Hutchings, C. (2014). Referencing and identity, voice and agency: Adult learners’ transformations within literacy practices. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(2), 312–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.832159
  • Hyland, T. (2010). Reflections on teaching referencing: What four case studies can tell us about developing effective teaching strategies. TESL Canada Journal, 27(2), 51–67. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v27i2.1055
  • Pecorari, D. (2015). Plagiarism in second language writing: Is it time to close the case? Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 94–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.003
  • Refaei, B., Kumar, R., Wahman, M. L., & Peplow, A. B. (2017). Supporting Source Integration in Student Writing. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 29(3), 534–544.
  • Vardi, I. (2012). Developing students’ referencing skills: A matter of plagiarism, punishment and morality or of learning to write critically? Higher Education Research & Development, 31(6), 921–930.

Study skills

  • Asikainen, H., Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Vanthournout, G., & Coertjens, L. (2014). The Development of Approaches to Learning and Perceptions of the Teaching-Learning Environment during Bachelor Level Studies and Their Relation to Study Success. Higher Education Studies, 4(4), 24–36.
  • Duckworth, A. (2016). Grit: Konsten att inte ge upp (C. Jonasson, Övers.). Natur & kultur.
  • Dunn, R., Griggs, S. A., Olson, J., Beasley, M., & Gorman, B. S. (1995). A Meta-Analytic Validation of the Dunn and Dunn Model of Learning-Style Preferences. The Journal of Educational Research, 88(6), 353–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1995.9941181
  • Dweck, C. S. (2015). Mindset: Du blir vad du tänker. Natur & kultur.
  • Hjerth Klingenstierna, M. (2011). Lösningsfokus – gör mer av det som fungerar. Riksförbundet Attention, Attention UNG.
  • Patterson, R. W., & Patterson, R. M. (2017). Computers and productivity: Evidence from laptop use in the college classroom. Economics of Education Review, 57, 66–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2017.02.004
  • Öhrstedt, M. (2017). Högskolestudenters lärande: Ett lärstrategiskt perspektiv på studier i psykologi [Diss, Psykologiska institutionen, Stockholms universitet]. DiVA. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:su:diva-145455
  • Westlund, B. (2012). Att undervisa i läsförståelse: Lässtrategier och studieteknik. Natur & kultur.
  • Wingate, U. (2007). A Framework for Transition: Supporting ‘Learning to Learn’ in Higher Education. Higher Education Quarterly, 61(3), 391–405.

Writing groups

Student perspectives and student diversity

  • Clouder, L., Karakus, M., Cinotti, A., Fierros, G. A. & Rojo, P. (2020). Neurodiversity in higher education. A narrative synthesis. Higher education, 80, 757–778.
  • Eriksson Gustavsson, A-L. (2011). ’Det är tufft att plugga…men jag känner att jag klarar det’. En studie om akademiska studier och skriftspråkliga svårigheter. Linköpings universitet.
  • Lane, L. (2017). ’Am I being heard’? The ’voice of’ students with disability in higher education. A literature review. Högskolepedagogisk skriftserie 2017:01. Göteborgs universitet.
  • Lang, L. (2015). Responsibility and participation in transition to university. Voices of young peoples with disabilities. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 17(2), 130–143.
  • MacCullagh, L., Bosanquet, A. & Babcock, N. (2016). University students with dyslexia. A qualitative exploratory study of learning practicies, challenges and strategies. Dyslexia, 23(1), 3–23.
  • Mortimore, T. & Crozier, W. R. (2006). Dyslexia and difficulties with study skills in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 235–251.

Writing and academic skills centres

  • Babcock, R. D. (2011). Interpreted writing center tutorials with college-level deaf students. Linguistics and Education, 22(2), 95–117.
  • Babcock, R. D. & Daniels, S. (2017). Writing Centers and Disability. Southlake.
  • Babcock, R. D. & Thonus, T. (2018). Researching the Writing Center. Towards an Evidence-Based Practice. New York.
  • Dahl, K. (2021). En språkverkstad för alla : Språkverkstadspedagogers jurisdiktion över arbetet med studenter i studiesvårigheter [Master's thesis, Uppsala University]. Retrieved from http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-440988
  • Dahl, K., & Lindqvist, G. (2022). En språkverkstad för alla? Högre utbildning, 12(1), 13-28. Retrieved from https://hogreutbildning.se/index.php/hu/article/view/3325
  • Grönvall, C. (2015). Skrivhandledning och akademiskt skrivande: Språkdebatt och forskningslucka. Karlstads universitets pedagogiska tidskrift, 11(1), 60–71.
  • Hellman, J. (2022). Kan en föreläsning om referathantering göra skillnad? : En learning study om att utveckla språkverkstadsundervisning om att referera i högre utbildning [Master's thesis, Linköping University]. Retrieved from http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-185331
  • Hellman, J., & Thorsten, A. (2021). Plagiera eller referera vetenskapligt? En studie om vad studenter behöver lära sig för att bli bättre på referathantering. Högre utbildning, 11(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.23865/hu.v11.2730
  • Lennartson-Hokkanen, I. (2016). Organisation, attityder, lärandepotential: Ett skrivpedagogiskt samarbete mellan en akademisk utbildning och en språkverkstad [Doctoral dissertation, Stockholm University]. Retreived from http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:su:diva-134828
  • Kaufhold, K., & Yencken, D. E. (2021). Academic writing centres in multilingual settings: Intermediary agents of higher education language policy?. Linguistics and Education, 64, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2021.100950
  • Mackiewicz, J. & Thompson, I. (2014). Instruction, Cognitive Scaffolding, and Motivational Scaffolding in Writing Center Tutoring. Composition Studies, 42(1), 54–78. https://www.jstor.org/stable/compstud.42.1.0054
  • Thonus, T. (2016). Time to say goodbye: Writing center consultation closings. Linguistics and Education, 33, 40–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2015.12.002
  • Winder, R., Kathpalia, S. S., & Koo, S. L. (2016). Writing centre tutoring sessions: Addressing students’ concerns. Educational Studies, 42(4), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2016.1193476
  • Yeats, R., Reddy, P., Wheeler, A., Senior, C., & Murray, J. (2010). What a difference a writing centre makes: A small scale study. Education + Training, 52(6/7), 499–507. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911011068450

Learning and teaching

  • Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher education, 32(3), 347–364.
  • Carlgren, I. (2017). Undervisningsutvecklande forskning: Exemplet learning study. Gleerups.
  • Elmgren, M., & Henriksson, A.-S. (2016). Universitetspedagogik. Studentlitteratur.
  • Hattie, J. (2014). Synligt lärande: En syntes av mer än 800 metaanalyser om vad som påverkar elevers skolresultat (K. Ashing, Övers.). Natur & Kultur.
  • Lo, M. L. (2014). Variationsteori: För bättre undervisning och lärande (I. Johansson, Övers.). Studentlitteratur.
  • Marton, F. (2015). Necessary conditions of learning. Routledge.

The Academic Writing Service and generative AI

AI-based tools are developing rapidly and this requires us to stay well-informed about how these changes may affect our work with academic literacies and academic writing. We follow Stockholm University's guidelines for using artificial intelligence and AI-based tools. When collaborating with different departments, we learn about their specific frameworks for student use of AI and adapt our teaching accordingly. We otherwise aim to explore the positive aspects of these tools for developing students' academic literacies while remaining aware of potential risks. To this end, we continue to pilot activities in our teaching where AI can support students in their planning, reading, and learning. We will also continue our efforts to promote our students' independence and academic integrity. Moving forward, we plan to explore ethical ways of using AI-based tools in writing. We welcome dialogue with relevant university functions and other language centers as we navigate this work.

The Academic Writing Service's stance on genAI pdf, 168.9 kB.

Professional development for teachers on students' literacy development

Research shows that instruction in academic literacies needs to be embedded more in discipline-based teaching and that writing centres can be a resource for teachers in this work (see for example Bjernhager & Sjöberg 2022). The Academic Writing Service has therefore been collaborating for a number of years with the Centre for the Advancement of University Teaching (CeUL) where we teach and support teachers in areas relating to students' development of academic literacies. Each spring, we offer the Glappet workshop, which helps lecturers to understand the difference in expectations between upper-secondary and higher education settings and presents tools to help bridge the gap. Together with CeUL's teaching staff, we also offer a workshop on supporting doctoral students' writing as well as the course Akademisk litteracitetsutveckling – att främja studenters läsande of skrivande (The development of academic literacies – on promoting students' reading and writing).

Read more about our joint projects with CeUL (in Swedish)

Guide to supporting neurodivergent students for writing centre staff

Karin Dahl, together with a reference group of writing center educators from other higher education institutions, primarily Dana Nilsson from Örebro University and Jennifer Vestergård from the University of Gothenburg, has developed a Swedish-language guide for how writing centre educators can better support neurodivergent students with regard to study skills and academic writing.

Read the complete guide (in Swedish)

Collegial professional development workshops for Swedish writing centres

During 2021 and 2022 the Academic Writing Service participated in a collegial professional development project together with the Language Workshop (Uppsala University), the Study Support Unit (Södertörn University), and the Unit for Academic Language (Gothenburg University). The workshops aimed to promote shared professional development around four themes:

  1. Tutoring methods as higher education pedagogy. Gothenburg University, 11 February, 2021.
  2. Multilingualism and multiculturalism. Södertörn University, 14 October, 2021.
  3. Integrated support between writing centres and teaching in the disciplines. Stockholm University, 10 February, 2022.
  4. Documentation and systematic work with quality management. Uppsala University, 13 October, 2022.

Swedish writing centres are currently undergoing a process of professionalisation. At the Academic Writing Service, we want to contribute to this professionalization by sharing our knowledge openly and transparently. Under the section ‘Research and best practice’ on this page, we list the resources and working methods that have been successful for us.

We hope to make an active contribution to the development of Sweden’s writing centres. We also believe that we have a great deal to learn from each other and we welcome all forms of knowledge exchange. If you would like to know more about our practice, please visit us or come and speak to us at conferences. You can find our contact details below.

Visiting address
Studenthuset, Universitetsvägen 2B, level 2, rooms 226–230

Web addresses
su.se/writingservice (English)
su.se/sprakverkstaden (Swedish)

Email
writingservice@su.se (English)
sprakverkstaden@su.se (Swedish)

YouTube channel
Studie- och språkverkstaden SU (Swedish)

 

Staff 
Karin Dahl (Swedish, group leader) ​
karin.dahl@su.se

Petra Kjellarson (Swedish)
petra.kjellarson@su.se

Kristina Schött (Swedish)
​​kristina.schott@su.se

Daria Titarenko (Swedish)
​​daria.titarenko@su.se

Egil Yencken (English)
egil.yencken@su.se​​

Last updated: 2025-11-07

Source: Student Services

Cookie settings

By allowing third-party services, you accept their cookies and the use of tracking technologies necessary for them to function properly.