Box 376, R.R.#1

Corbiel, Ontario

P0H 1K0, CANADA

This paper will consider the tutorial style sections of consumer oriented instruction texts dealing popular business computer programs such as spreadsheets, word processors and databases. The particular texts chosen all deal with the relational database program, Microsoft Access, and each text is selected from a chapter explaining a certain database function. The paper will investigate how the three texts achieve their instructional aims, whether they constitute a distinctive genre, the functional stages of this genre and how they are realized in patterns of semantic and lexico-grammatical choice, the usefulness of Activity Theory and the concept of Mental Tools in understanding the staging and strategies of the texts, and the relationship of this kind of text to general science writing,

These books are an example of technology related science education. They are also a consumer product. People commonly pay between $50 and $150 for these books and expect them to be useful and user-friendly. They do this in spite of the fact that modern computer programs come with very extensive on-line help systems built into them. People buy these books to learn how to use the program to solve real-world problems. We would expect such texts to be action and solution oriented, and to be highly concerned with the reader's particular needs.

This preliminary description of the texts immediately raises questions about how they achieve their purposes:

• Are these texts as user-friendly as they purport to be, and if they are, what strategies, kinds of structural organization, and lexico-grammatical features make them so?
• Can they be usefully analyzed as a genre, and if so, what features mark this genre out as distinctive?
• Can these texts be divided into functional stages, and what are the configurations of semantic and lexico-grammatical features that realize these stages?
• How do they deal with the characteristic grammatical problems of science writing - interlocking definitions, technical taxonomies, special expressions, lexical density, syntactic ambiguity, grammatical metaphor, semantic discontinuity? (Halliday & Martin 1993)
• How do the texts deal with the reader's wide variety of possible motivations for using the target program?
• How do the texts explain program features which are sequential in their learning and use, yet at the same time offer the reader a text which they can consult as a reference when they have an immediate problem with a particular program feature?
• How do they treat the reader and use the reader's participation, and how is this revealed in grammatical selections?
• What kinds of thematic patterns (Lemke 1990) does this kind of text deal with, and how does the idea of thematic pattern or taxonomy (Halliday & Martin 1993) relate to complex procedural knowledge such as building a database report based on multiple groups of related information?

The basic functions of a word processor or a spreadsheet program are relatively self evident. Users can perform most basic business functions, like writing a memo or calculating and graphing a set of sales figures, without going beyond a single document and thus a single plane of information. A relational database, on the other hand, is more conceptually complex. By definition, it involves multiple planes of information related in complex ways. Building a database to organize information and allow users to access it in useful and convenient ways is called "application" development. It may involve actual computer programming, and database applications may be designed to be used simultaneously by people with different purposes. The accounting department, for example, might need monthly summarized statistics while the sales department needs instant access to contact information and price lists. (Microsoft 1995)

Thus, it is misleading to think of Microsoft Access as a database program. It is, in fact, a tool for building database applications. These database applications are in turn tools for solving real-world information problems. Database applications are made up of elements such as tables, relationships, forms, queries and reports. Together, these are used to store, structure, manipulate, input and display information. We can see that learning to use Access to develop database applications involves a triple problem:

• How to use the Access program itself - what to point and click on the screen and where to find options in the menu system.
• How to set up and relate database elements such as tables, forms, queries and reports so that they work together to produce a useful and convenient application.
• How to analyze a real-world information problem into the set of systematically related data that becomes a database application.

The multi-level nature of the process of learning how to use Access to build an effective application poses particular difficulties for novice users such as the readers of these texts. Since "the underlying functionality is similar regardless of the product." (Microsoft 1995), for users who are experienced in the design and use of relational databases, the problem is simply to learn the specifics of the Access interface. Novice users, on the other hand, face all three parts of the problem at the same time, and it is in the last part of the problem that inexperienced database developers are most vulnerable. The experienced or expert user "can literally see the situation in a different way from novices, being more sensitive to its relevant aspects" (Raeithel and Velichkovsky 1996: 205. My emphasis.) This is also the level where the program itself can offer the user the least guidance: "just as the best word processor cannot compose a letter, database products aren't very good at anticipating what structure would best suit a user's needs" (Microsoft 1995). Also, as Brydon (1997) points out, Access's roles as a tool for organizing data into structures, for setting up database elements with which a user interacts, and for sequential programming, give the program "multiple personalities" requiring the user to interact with the program and think of the application development process in different ways at different stages. The experienced or expert user will already be familiar with the different ways of looking at the database design process and the different kinds of tools used at each stage. The novice user has no such framework.

An instructional text of this kind faces particular problems as it attempts to guide a novice user in building an effective application using a relational database management system (DBMS) like Microsoft Access.

The first problem has already been alluded to. While both the expert and the novice user need to learn how to use the Access interface to design and manipulate the elements of a database application, only the expert user understands the functions of these elements within the overall structure of the application being built, and has an idea of how to analyze the problem situation so as to make it manageable using the available tools. In the introduction to his tutorials, Brydon (1997) writes

Such an instructional text must at the same time teach from the top down and the bottom up, without overwhelming the learner. As each skill in building a database element is learned, it must be integrated with the overall application development process.

The second problem is that, unlike a computer program with a dedicated purpose, a tax-accounting program for example, the range of real-world information problems which the user might wish to solve using a relational database application is very large. An application built using Access could equally well track and analyze satellite positions as it could usage of hospital beds or entertainment bookings. The range of ways in which users of the application might want to interact with the assembled data is also large. This leads to what Raeithel and Velichkovsky (1996) refer to as the "Dilemma of User-Centered Design" (202). As modern computer programs become more robust and open-ended in their design, programmers are less able to predict where users will encounter problems, or guide them when their expectations break down. As they put it, "All contemporary systems present users a colorful and spatially and figuratively articulated landscape of possibilities for action... users are too often lost in the virtual landscape" (202). These problems also apply to designers of instructional texts.

A third problem is the dilemma between guiding the user step by step through the application development process using an integrated tutorial, or providing a reference book which the user can access at random when they have a particular problem. The first option has the advantage of allowing the designers of the text to control the user's "learning path... into the system" (Raeithel and Velichkovsky 1996: 202). Background concepts can be introduced once, specific skills taught within established contexts, and one skill can be built upon another. The disadvantage is that the learner may turn to the text with an immediate problem to solve and may not be inclined to work step by step through an integrated tutorial to get the specific information they need. The second option has the advantage of allowing random access, but has the disadvantage that "it is hard for people to search for their task at hand in a list of items compiled by somebody else." (ibid., 217). Another disadvantage is that necessary background material for each specific skill dealt with in the text may need to be repeated. Of the three text sources, Access Tutorial is the most integrated, and the Quick reference most like a reference book. Running Access has elements of both and is the most comprehensive. Consequently, it runs to more than nine hundred pages, includes a CD-ROM, and is by no means the largest book of its type available.

Bibliographic information for the source texts is listed in the Reference section. I will refer to them as Access Tutorial, Running Access, and Quick Reference.

The three texts I will consider are individual chapters from instructional texts aimed at novice to intermediate users of Microsoft Access. They are all designed to be accessible to users with no experience in relational database applications development. Of the three source texts, two are widely available commercial books. The other, Access Tutorial is an electronic document available free for down-load from a web-site. It is used as part of a course in business computing at the University of British Columbia. All three texts make extensive use of screen-shots and diagrams of the Access interface. Running Access comes with several fully developed example database applications on CD-ROM. Tutorial sections of this book take the user through the process of building specific elements of these applications. The Access Tutorial does not come with a finished application, but takes the user through the process of building one step by step. Quick Reference does not make use of example database applications, although it does give short examples of specific elements.

The three chapters that have been selected all deal with the design, and use of a particular element of a database application. This element, the action query, is used to make mass changes to data based on specified criteria. It is important to note two things about action queries. Firstly, action queries come in four different types. These four types are used to delete, change, copy to a new location, or add specified data to existing collections. Secondly, action queries are similar in appearance and construction to another common application element, the select query, however they are crucially different in their use. While select queries are used to filter, sort and display selected data, or to make selected data available to other database elements, action queries are used to make actual changes to the data. Action queries are set up in the same way as select queries, which are part of the static data organizing "personality" of Access. When they are complete, however, they are "run" like a sequential computer program (Brydon 1997).

Three areas of theory will be useful in the analysis of these texts to discover how they achieve their instructional aims. These are genre theory, especially as discussed and exemplified by Eggins and Slade (1997), activity theory and the concept of mental tools based on the work of Leontiev and Vygotsky, and the lexico-grammatical characteristics of science writing as discussed by Halliday and Martin (1993).

Martin, Christie & Rothery (1987) define genre as "a staged, goal oriented social process" (1987: 59) and similar definitions from Martin's work are often quoted (e.g.: Eggins & Slade 1997, Gerot 1995, Dixon & Stratta 1995 ). For written texts, examples of genres such as recounts, procedures, descriptions, reports, explanations, and analytical and hortatory expositions are given along with their characteristic social purposes, stages, and lexico-grammatical features (e.g. Gerot & Wignell 1994, Martin 1985). The genre of explanation, for example, is described in the following terms:

(Gerot & Wignell 1994: 212)

These descriptions were developed from research on school children's writing and a problem arises when complex adult texts are considered. Such texts are often multi-functional, and may seem to combine or blend more than one genre and set of semantic and lexico-grammatical features (Dixon & Stratta 1995). Knapp & Watkins (1994: 12) give the example of a review which "may first describe, then narrate, and finally, argue." Knapp & Watkins call the review a text type and the different functional stages within it genres. They then outline characteristics for the different functional genres of describing, explaining, instructing and so forth in a similar way to the description of recount given above. This is similar to what Fairclough (1995: 88) describes as a kind of intertextuality which is sequential or embedded: "where different generic types alternate within a text, or where one is embedded within the other". Here, each generic stage within the text is recognizable by its particular group of linguistic features.

It is also possible for stages within a text to be multi-functional, to perhaps have both overt and covert purposes, and to display a divergent or even contradictory group of linguistic features. Stages within a text may seem to blend generic types. This is what Fairclough describes as "mixed intertextuality" (88). Take for example the description of the generic function of explaining given by Knapp & Watkins (1994: 80)

Within this framework, it is not only a possibility for other genres to be woven through an explanation sequence, it is a characteristic of the generic function of explaining. Martin (1985) makes a similar observation that judgement and interpretation are involved in the genre of explaining, and we will see that evaluation of options and justification of methods co-occur with explanation within the Access texts. As another example, Knapp & Watkins (1994:99 ) note that within the generic function of instructing, non-procedural instructions "may take a range of textual forms." They give the example of a set of instructions to a prospective jury which fits the criteria for hortatory exposition given by Martin (1985), and Gerot & Wignell (1994). Clearly it is possible for a section of text to be multi-generic.

A third option is to treat a genre as "a schematic structure made up of stages" (Fairclough 1995: 85) which may be either obligatory or optional, and fixed or partially fixed in their order. Eggins & Slade (1997) describe a genre as having a distinctive function or "social purpose" (233), a distinctive configuration of stages that act to fulfill this purpose (or purposes), and a distinctive pattern of lexico-grammatical choices. Of the stages within the abstract generic structure, some will be optional and there may be recursive sequences, but it is the obligatory "core stages" (284) and their predictable order that are "defining of the genre" (234). These generic stages can be differentiated in terms of their distinctive function in relation to the overall purpose of the text, their "particular semantic strategies" (298), and the pattern of lexico-grammatical features in their realization. The stages within a genre are to be labeled in terms of "what the stage is doing, relative to the whole, in terms as specific to the genre as possible." (233)

To summarize the "schematic" approach, a genre is functionally distinctive, has a predictable configuration of stages which act to fulfill its purpose(s), and an associated pattern of lexico-grammatical features. The "constituent stages" (233) within the genre can be characterized by a distinctive configuration of function(s) relative to the whole and semantic and lexico-grammatical features. Thus, multi-functional genres, and sections which appear to blend generic functions, can be taken on their own terms as configurations of functional, semantic and lexico-grammatical features that together constitute generic stages and generic types. It is important to remember that, as Eggins & Slade put it, "generic forms should not be interpreted as fixed or rigid schema. The generic structure description is an abstraction" (238). This means that as long as an abstract underlying structure is identifiable, disruptions and deviations are not a problem. Labels are applied to generic stages, not according to some arbitrary criteria (c.f.: Dixon & Stratta 1995), but it terms of the stage's functional contribution and its distinguishing pattern of linguistic features relative to the whole text.

The concepts of mental tools and mediation were developed by the Russian researcher Lev Vygotsky and his associates such as Alexander Luria. A theory of Activity was subsequently developed by his colleague, Alexei Leontiev (Bodrova & Leong 1996). These concepts will be useful in understanding the distinctive social purposes and functions of the genre of computer software instruction, and in distinguishing the stages of the genre and the part they play in the strategy of each text in meeting its instructional goals.

Bodrova and Leong (1995: 17) write that "For Vygotsky, the purpose of learning, development and teaching is more than acquiring and transmitting a body of knowledge; it involves the acquisition of tools." Vygotsky and Luria (1994) argue strongly against the separation of what we normally think of as practical tool use, and complex symbolic activities used in problem solving including speech. According to the Vygotskian framework, just as physical tools extend our physical capabilities, mental tools are extensions of mental capacity. Examples include logical processes, memory strategies, categorizing information, and the ability to deliberately attend "to the aspects of the environment most pertinent to solving a problem" (Bodrova & Leong 1995: 20). The eventual goal is for learners not only to become active and independent users of mental tools, but for them to be able to creatively adapt or construct new tools for new problems. It is also crucially important for learners to gain an understanding or the parameters and limitations of the tools they acquire since as Kuutti (1996: 27) points out, a tool "is at the same time both enabling and limiting... it also restricts the interaction to be from the perspective of that particular tool or instrument only." (27)

How does this apply to learning to use a program like Access to construct a database application? Consider, for example, the basic element of any database application, a table of data made up of records and fields with a key field that uniquely identifies each record. This is not only a device for storing data and retrieving it efficiently. It is a way of thinking about a set of information from a problem situation, and the relevant factors that make it solvable using database elements. A database table structures information by dividing it into instances (records), characteristics that apply to all the instances and may or may not differ (fields), and a characteristic which can be used to uniquely identify each instance (a key field). Figure 1 shows an example.

An individual record is created for each employee on the payroll, fields are created for relevant characteristics of each instance, and a characteristic is selected which uniquely identifies each instance, in this case the employee's tax file number. We are now no longer thinking of an undifferentiated mass of employee information. We are dealing with an organized set of instances of information which can be uniquely identified, selected and sorted based on common criteria. Once thought of in this way and organized with this tool, it is a small step to constructing an action query tool to, for example, award a bonus to all the employees in the design department. Note that in this example it is relatively easy to divide the problem information into unique instances and choose relevant characteristics to include as fields in the table. In complex situations this may involve creating multiple tables of related data. In such a case, isolating the relevant characteristics to describe each set of instances may require considerable forethought and planning.

Vygotskian theory provides a framework for understanding the acquisition of mental tools. One important aspect is the notion of mediators, and the other is the notion of assisted learning. Bodrova and Leong (1996: 21 ) write that "Mediation is the use of certain signs or symbols in mental processing" (original emphasis). For children, this can be as simple as counting on fingers or singing a song to remind oneself of the what to do next in a game. For adults, this can include complex and abstract symbolic representations, both visual and linguistic. These aids are not only facilitators in mental processing, they "facilitate the development of thinking and reasoning" (ibid.: 76). When mediators are incorporated into independent activity, they become mental tools. For example, we have already discussed the basic database table as a mental tool. When the three instructional texts introduce tables in their early chapters it is both as a practical tool, and as a mediator for basic concepts in database design. As the learner becomes familiar with tables, their function and the principles behind them, they become a mental tool in the organization of the learners own real world information problem. Crucially, the principles of table design are tools on which other skills, such as building action queries, will be built. We will see this process at work in the three sample texts.

A crucial aspect of the use of mediators and the acquisition of mental tools is that they are acquired through interaction in shared activity. In a process of internalization, skills explored in shared activity then come to be used independently and creatively (Bodrova & Leong 1996, Vygotsky & Luria 1994). What is practiced first in an assisted learning situation is later appropriated and used without assistance. Interaction may be direct, as in guidance from a teacher, cooperation with peers, or self talk. On the other hand, it may be indirect as in a teacher or expert "setting up the environment to facilitate practicing a specific set of skills" (Bodrova & Leong 1996: 35). Activity may be shared with the author of a text. Comprehension then becomes an active dialogue in which the learner actively constructs "new meanings rather than simply copying existing ones" (ibid.: 31).

Above all, the Vygotskian framework is a theory of learning in action and action in learning, rather than passive absorption. Vygotsky and Luria (1996: 108) write of "practical intellect and symbolic activity" and they argue that one cannot be studied in isolation from the other. Within this framework, learning is a deliberate mental activity in which new knowledge is not simply passed on and appended to old, but actually "modifies present knowledge" (Bodrova & Leong 1996: 31).

Each level of the activity structure is embedded within the context of the level above it. Leontiev (1981) gives the example of a brick layer who carries out operations with trowel and mortar depending on immediate conditions: the kind of structure being built, the kind of stone available, etc. Different brick layers may perform the same action, for example building a wall, with different operations depending on their conditions and training. Because their motivations may also differ, they may also be engaging in entirely different activities. One may be building the wall to meet the work quota for the day and earn a living, while another may be donating his/her labour as part of a community aid project, while still another is working on the weekend to build her own house. The meaning that the action has for the participant may be very different depending on the overall activity in which it plays a part.

Similarly, the operations of setting the criteria for a database query, and then switching to display mode with a click of the mouse to see the results, might be part of the action of building a select query to display a certain set of filtered and sorted data. On the other hand, these operations could be part of the action of setting up an action query to delete, copy or modify the data. One application developer might engage in the action of setting up an action query in order to archive last year's sales transactions now that they are no longer needed. Later, the same developer might set up an action query to change the rate of tax charged on this year's transactions depending on the item sold. Other developers might use update queries as part of different applications to solve completely different information problems. This analysis clearly shows why teaching and learning the skill of constructing a database application to solve a real-world information problem requires integrated attention to all three levels. It explains why the categorized lists of operations and conditions that make up a computer program's on-line help system are useful for solving immediate problems (if one knows where in the help system to look for the specific operation needed), but do not guide the user in learning how to build an effective application.

An important aspect of the structure of activities is that it is possible for units of activity at one level to merge to become combined units at a higher level. Activities are typically completed by sequences of actions which are in turn made up of individual operations. In teaching and learning, an action in response to an immediate aim may first need to be planned and then executed with close attention to each operation. Later, when the learner gains confidence and understanding, the learner will treat this complex action as simply an operation to combine with others to form actions of a higher order. (Kuutti 1996, Leontiev 1981) On the other hand, in response to new conditions, complex and fluent operations "can again 'unfold' and return to the level of conscious action" (Kuutti 1996: 31). We will see in the three instructional texts how actions which have been learned step by step in previous chapters, such as manipulating the program interface to initiate and display a new table or query, are subsequently discussed as discrete operations. This is one great advantage of texts structured as sequential tutorials rather than reference books for random access.

In their collection of papers on the nature of science writing (Halliday & Martin 1993), Halliday devotes a chapter to the characteristic features of the language of scientific texts that cause difficulties for readers and have "the effect of making the learner feel excluded and alienated from the subject-matter" (Halliday 1993: 67). Halliday rejects the notion that it is difficult words, technical terminology or "jargon", that cause difficulties for readers. Rather, problems are caused by the unfamiliar semantic relationships that exist between terms, and the characteristic grammatical structures in which they play a part. Halliday classifies the problematic features of scientific English into seven categories:

• Interlocking definitions
• Technical taxonomies
• Special expressions
• Lexical density
• Syntactic ambiguity
• Grammatical metaphor
• Semantic discontinuity

Interlocking definitions refers to constructions in which technical terms are used to define each other. If the learner is unfamiliar with the meaning or usage of one or more of the terms in the construction, then its meaning as a whole will be lost. Here is an example from Quick Reference (96): "Click the arrow next to the Query Type button and choose the query type that you want." Understanding the function of the Query type button depends on understanding that action queries come in four types depending on their function. This in turn depends on understanding that action queries are different from select queries which can only display data and come in only one type. This depends on understanding the function and usage of queries in general and their place within a database application. Naturally the reader must also be familiar with interface operations such as click and choose, and be able to recognize the appropriate button, in order to follow the instruction at all. We can see that what seems like a simple instruction in fact depends on having "an understanding of a cluster of related concepts, all at the same time" (Halliday 1993: 72).

Technical taxonomies refers to complex semantic frameworks in which technical terms play a part. Lemke (1990) calls these thematic patterns and describes them as "The pattern of connections among the meanings of words in a particular field of science." (Lemke 1990: 12). Understanding a technical term requires understanding where it fits into the particular technical taxonomies of the field in question. Figure 3 shows two taxonomies in which action queries play a part. One is a classification of entities: database elements and their types. The other is a taxonomy of actions and associated methods. Notice how action queries can in one sense be thought of as part of a taxonomy of things (forms, tables, etc.) and in another sense as a method or strategy. It is a common problem with scientific texts that the underlying taxonomies and their criteria are left implicit rather than explained step by step or diagrammed. (Halliday 1993, Martin 1993, Lemke 1990). Since scientific taxonomies are often based on abstract or counter-intuitive criteria, rather than the immediate observations of "common sense" experience, this can lead to clashes of understanding between learners and instructors. Special problems arise when terms which are commonly used with one meaning take on a specialized meaning when used within a technical taxonomy (Lemke 1990, Martin 1993). To "open" a database query, for example, has little in common with opening a door or a book - one cannot open a door in "design mode"!

Following Eggins & Slade (1997: 273), this paper will undertake generic analysis by the following procedure:

• Establishing that there is a distinctive genre
• Defining and labeling the genre
• Establishing the social function
• Identifying and differentiating the text stages
• Specifying obligatory and optional stages
• Specifying the semantic and lexico-grammatical realizations for each stage

For two reasons, this paper will not undertake a comprehensive genre analysis of the complete text of the three chapters. Firstly, time and space do not allow for such an analysis. Secondly, as discussed above, the three texts differ in their comprehensiveness, and the degree to which their sections are integrated into a sequential tutorial. Rather, a general outline of the three chapters will be made, and representative sections common to the three texts will identified for genre analysis.

Also, for reasons of space and copyright, it is not possible to reproduce the full text of the three chapters in an appendix.

A comparison of the schematic outlines of the three chapters (Appendix 1) reveals similarities and differences in their organizational strategies. Table 2gives a summary.

Because it provides an introduction containing a general procedure and background for action queries, and because it does not require the user to build the elements of an example application, Quick Reference is able to use stand-alone procedural sections for the four types of action queries. This text focuses on using the Access program interface to build a general class of application element. It does not discus combining elements or make use of an example application, and it gives few examples of possible uses. Illustrations are of specific interface buttons and icons.

Access Tutorial, on the other hand, gives a non-procedural introduction which places action queries within a taxonomy of alternate methods for solving an example problem at the information level. The user then proceeds to build elements to solve this problem which are part of an example database application. Because of this, the "Tutorial" and its individual procedural sections are tightly integrated, and it only deals with the two kinds of action query necessary for solving the problem. Interspersed with the procedural sections of the tutorial are screen-shots of the interface accompanied by detailed operational information. Access Tutorial also contains assignment tasks which are part of the academic course for which the text was written.

Running Access contains elements of the organization of both the other texts. Like Access Tutorial, it contains tutorial sections which build the elements of an integrated example application. However, detailed context and background material are provided for each section rather than for the chapter as a whole, and unlike Access Tutorial, the finished application and its elements are provided on disk. The first tutorial section, on update queries, doubles as an introductory procedure for action queries in general. This gives the more advanced user the freedom to turn to individual sections as needed, while still providing the novice user with the option of working through the chapter as an integrated sequence of tutorials. The example database is a highly complex, fully developed database application that provides examples of the use and integration of all four types of action query. The text gives a complete description of the situational context of the example application even including a fictional owner/developer and his business needs.

Although the three chapters differ in their structure and scope, they all contain sections which can be roughly divided into introductions, and step by step tutorial procedures. Several kinds of functional moves regularly recur within these rough divisions and are variously distributed between them. Introductions may deal with action queries in general, or be to individual procedural sections which build specific elements. Introductions contain moves such as recaps of material already covered (link-back sections), discussions and evaluations of alternative methods, descriptions of the general situation of use of action query types, and descriptions of example situations and the elements of example databases. Procedure sections may deal with building action queries in general, as in the introduction to Quick Reference, with building individual action queries, as in sections of Quick Reference and Running Access, or with combining database elements to solve complex problems, as in Running Access and Access Tutorial. Within procedural sections, interspersed with procedural steps, we find such moves as link-backs, previews, discussions of examples, comparisons of alternative methods, explanations of details, and expansions of possible use. As noted, the texts differ as to how these moves are distributed within introduction and procedural sections, however selecting sections of each chapter which take in both introduction and procedural sections and a full range of functional moves will allow common ground for analysis. This paper will undertake a genre analysis of the sections listed in Table 3.

The first stage of analysis is to establish that the configurations of formal and functional features exemplified by these texts constitute a genre distinct from other related genres. The obvious candidates for comparison are procedures and explanations as discussed by Gerot and Wignell (1994), Knapp & Watkins (1994), and others, and the report genre associated with science writing (Halliday & Martin 1993)

At first glance, the tutorial procedure sections of the example texts have many similarities with the kind of procedure commonly exemplified by recipes, instructions for games and machines, directions for high-school science experiments and so forth. Descriptions and examples of this genre are given in Gerot and Wignell (1994) and Knapp and Watkins (1994). As with these simple procedures, one of the functions of the example texts is "To describe how something is accomplished through a sequence of actions or steps" (Gerot & Wignell 1994: 206). All the texts contain procedural steps such as the following:

These moves are clearly recognizable by their use of imperatives or structures such as "To do X, You can do Y", material processes such as open, save, click and convert, and their placement within a step by step sequence.

Other section of the texts are clearly explanatory. Here the goal is "To explain the processes involved in the formation or workings of natural or sociocultural phenomena." (Gerot & Wignell 1994: 212). Explanatory sequences in the example texts often deal with how the Access program operates in response to user actions, or with the function of particular elements.

These explanatory sequences are recognizable by their temporal or causal sequencing, generalized simple present tense, and material processes.

The example texts also contain sections which can be seen as setting up the kind of technical taxonomies discussed by Halliday and Martin (1993) in relation to science writing. This is a function associated with the report genre as described by Gerot and Wignell (1994: 196). For example, in conjunction with descriptions of the general situation of use of action queries, the introduction sections of the example texts contrast them with select queries in terms of their function and usage. Quick Reference begins with a definition of action queries in terms of what they are used for, and this text and Access Tutorial include lists which classify the types of action by function. Access Tutorial includes a taxonomy of methods, including action queries, for making mass changes to data (c.f.: Figure 3), and all the texts discuss and evaluate alternative methods and courses of action.

We can see that certain sections of the example texts share similarities with related genres. However, when the example texts are considered as a whole, an important difference emerges. This is the degree to which the texts interweave and blend procedure, explanation and evaluation to achieve their ends. As already noted, sections describing situations of use and evaluations of alternative methods can at the same time outline taxonomies of elements and methods based on functional criteria. Running Access and Access Tutorial alternate procedural steps with explanations, and Quick Reference uses a sequence of explanations of relevant details which can in practice be followed as a procedure. It is also not uncommon to find procedure, explanation, and evaluation closely combined, as in the following examples. Evaluation is highlighted in bold, and explanation is in italics.

This combination of procedure, explanation and evaluation is reflective of important functional differences between the example texts and the related genres already discussed.

At first glance, it seems to be the procedural elements that separate the example texts from the characteristic reports and explanations of science writing. However, it is not only the presence of sequenced, procedural steps that separates the example texts from the kinds of taxonomic reports and explanations of phenomena found in science writing. What makes these texts different from a description of the parts of a cell or an explanation of the process of cloud formation and precipitation, is that in these texts there is a motivated participant who is an important part of the text itself. While science explanations are concerned with how things are organized and how things happen, these texts are concerned with what you can do, and how you can do it. The first evidence of this is the great number of times that the reader is directly referred to either as "you", as the object of an imperative, or as the implied agent in a passive clause. Beyond this, notice how often the reader's needs, wants, and options for action are referred to. Table 4lists some examples of such constructions and their variations, loosely arranged into groups, along with references to instances in the example texts. Virtually no information or explanation is ever introduced with out an indication of its relevance to the reader and his or her purposes. These texts not only make the process of reading and comprehension a process of joint construction by the instructor and the learner (Bodrova & Leong 1996), they make the learner's motivation, needs, wants and options for action an intrinsic part of the text itself.

There are also important functional differences between the example texts and the genre of simple procedures such as recipes and directions for games. One key difference is that while recipes and sets of directions guide the reader through the process of achieving a goal, the product of that process is not usually an element in achieving further goals. To use an analogy, we expect a recipe to guide the user in cooking a certain dish. We turn to a different kind of text to learn how to cook: to select ingredients, plan menus, arrange equipment, and coordinate cooking, cleaning, and serving. Such a text requires more than just procedure, it requires explanation and evaluation of methods and options. It involves the acquisition of mental tools such as attention to appropriate categories and criteria, and methods for planning and organization. In terms of activity theory, it requires attention to the three levels of overall activity and motivation, actions and their immediate goals, as well as individual operational steps and their conditions. While an instructional text about cooking undoubtedly contains recipes, a simple collection of recipes is clearly not an instructional text until they are coordinated into an overall framework. It is easy to imagine how cooking, and other examples of complex practical activities lend themselves to the tutorial instruction format.

To summarize, these texts are examples of a genre which is distinct from the simple genres of report, explanation, and procedure. Evidence for this includes their combination of procedural steps, explanation, evaluation and even technical taxonomies both in alternating functional sections, and combined within individual moves. The example texts make almost constant reference to the reader and the reader's motivations and options for action. The subject matter extends beyond individual actions and their constituent operations, to creating and manipulating tools which will be used to achieve further goals within a wider framework.

Having established that the genre exemplified by the example texts is distinct from related genres and discussed some of the characteristics that make it so, the next step is to define and label it.

The texts in question are examples of tutorial instruction relating to computer software. These instances of the genre are part of book-length texts that deal with relational database management systems, specifically Microsoft Access. Texts which follow similar formats are widely available for the other major software packages on the market, and we would expect many of them to contain similar instances of the genre. Such instances may form part of tightly integrated sequential tutorials, reference works with stand-alone sections, or comprehensive combinations of the two.

As discussed in the previous section, defining characteristics of the genre are as follows:

• Combination of procedural steps, evaluation of options, and explanation, sometimes within a single functional move.
• Reference to the reader as a motivated actor, and the reader's goals, needs, and options for action.
• Focus not only on operations and conditions, but on the wider activities in which they play a part, and the possible motivations that they fulfil.

Regarding their structure, the example texts can be broadly divided into introduction and procedure, and certain functional sections, such as link-backs and procedural steps, appear to recur. We will go on to describe the characteristics of these sections and see how they contribute to defining the genre.

We have noted that the purposes of the example texts are considerably more complex than simply teaching how to use a piece of software. It is not enough to list a recipe-like string of operations for using a computer program with a single dedicated function. Rather, the purposes of the texts are to guide the user in using the program to create tools for solving real-world information problems, and in thinking about such problems so as to solve them with these kinds of tools. Classified in terms of the three levels of Activity Theory, the purposes of three "Action query" texts can be described as in Table 5. We would expect that the purposes of texts which take as their subject other elements of a database application ,or even tools produced with other kinds of programs, could be described in similar terms.

Having defined the overall purposes of the texts, we can now proceed to outline the abstract structure of generic stages that the texts go through to achieve their purposes. The aim is not to identify text sections based on some arbitrary criteria, but to describe functional stages in terms of their contribution to overall generic goals. Following Eggins and Slade (1997), the task is then to decide which stages are optional, and which are obligatory and thus characteristic of the genre, and to describe how these stages are realized through configurations of semantic and lexico-grammatical choices. It is important to remember that the pattern of stages which will be found will differ depending on the particular interests the researcher has in the texts. To use an analogy, a structural engineer and an electrical engineer will use different plans of a building to show the features and systems that are relevant to their activity, and will label them differently according to their place in that activity. Similarly, another researcher with a different interest in the texts might isolate different generic stages and label them according to their contribution to different generic purposes.

As already discussed, the example texts can be roughly divided into a macro structure of introduction and procedure. Table 6 is a comparison of the stages found in the three texts. It is followed by functional descriptions of each stage.

General situation of use

This stage functions to describe what the application elements to be focussed on do in general, and to contextualize them as an element of a database application.. Here we find descriptions of the kinds of information problems that the element is designed to solve and what the element can do with the reader's data to solve the problem. This stage is associated and sometimes combined with Comparisons to related elements, Alternative methods and evaluations and Taxonomies of types (see below). For example, Quick Reference: (sections 1, 4) combines the General Situation of Use with a taxonomy of action query types. Access Tutorial: (section 2) combines this stage with a comparison to select queries, and Running Access: (section 1) with a comparison to changing data manually. We also often find evaluation of the element or method under discussion and it's alternatives. Examples of such evaluation are "The primary advantage of action queries is that they allow you to modify a large number of records without having to write Visual Basic programs." (Access Tutorial: section 2 ), and "Changing each record one at a time could be very tedious" (Running Access: section 1).

Taxonomy of element types

This stage functions to list the sub-types of the application elements to be focussed on. In this case the element is the action query, which comes in four types. The stage may take the form of a list of types and explanations of function (Access Tutorial: section 3), or in combination with the General Situation of Use, a list of types and their generalized uses (Quick Reference: Section 4, Running Access: section 2).

Comparison to related elements

This stage functions to differentiate the element under focus from related application elements. In this case, the related element is the select query. This stage is closely related to the General Situation of Use, and in practice the two may blend together. Quick Reference: section 3, for example, could also be considered as an extension of the General Situation of Use, and sections 1 and 2 of Running Access in fact make a contrast between action and select queries.

Alternative methods and evaluations

Unlike the previous stage, which contrasts the element under focus with related elements in terms of parameters and usage, this stage functions to contrast and evaluate the use of the element as a method or strategy with other problem solving methods. For example, the action query method is compared to changing data manually (Running Access: section 4), with other automated methods (Access Tutorial: section 6), and with the "find and replace" function (Quick Reference: section 2).

Example situation of use and example database

This stage functions to introduce a specific hypothetical problem at the information level, and then to describe the kind of application element(s) that will be built to solve this problem. Access Tutorial: section 5 describes the problem of changing the number of credits allocated per course in a database of university courses. Running Access: section describes the problem of updating the status of contracts within a database of entertainment bookings. Note that while Quick Reference does not use an example situation or database, it does give an example in the next section of the chapter:

Link-back

This stage functions to place the contents of the current section or chapter into context by referring to material or steps covered in previous sections or chapters. Note that when the text uses integrated sequences of tutorial sections to build a number of application elements that work together, the link-back stage puts the current section into the context of this larger activity sequence. For example:

Preview

This stage functions within the introduction to outline the material which will be covered in the section. It can also function to outline the procedural steps which will be followed, in which case it may occur within the procedure itself. Note that it often includes an evaluative justification of the course of action chosen as in Access Tutorial: sections 4, 7 and Running Access: section 6.

Step(s)

This stage functions to guide the user through the actual steps involved in setting up and using the particular application element(s) under focus. This is the stage where the actions referred to and justified in the preview stage, and contextualized and motivated in the General situation of use and Example situation and example database stages, are actually translated into operational steps.

Explanation

This section functions to explain the action of the Access program or its interface, especially in response to the user's actions. This often includes explanations of messages and requests for confirmation from the Access program as it carries out the user's actions, for example Running Access: section 15.

Together, the stages of the introduction function to outline the uses and parameters of the particular tool or set of tools to be built in the procedure section. Within the introductions of all three texts, we find the stages of General situation of use, Alternative methods and evaluations, comparison with related elements, and taxonomies of element types. These are core stages of the genre. Note that they may be combined, but that the configurations in which they are combined are predictable. If the text is one in which uses an integrated tutorial sections associated with an example database, we find the stage Example situation of use and example database, Preview, and link-back. These stages may be regarded as core stages of this manifestation of the genre..

Within the procedure section we find the core stages of Step(s) alternating with Explanation. Where the text presents an integrated sequence of tutorial sections, especially where multiple elements are built within a single section (e.g. Running Access: "Example 1: Using an append query to archive data"), preview, and link-back stages may occur within the procedure. Another possible stage is the Expansion of possible use (e.g. Running Access: "Updating multiple rows" page 286) which explains extensions of the usage of the element built in the current section.

As discussed above, the overall process of application development can be analyzed into the three levels of Activity Theory (see Table X). Also, the generic purposes of the texts can likewise be described in terms of these three levels (see Table 5). It is now possible to hypothesize that certain kinds of actions and objects of action will be characteristic of functional moves relating to the fulfillment of generic purposes at each of the three levels (see Table 7 ). This will be helpful in isolating the configurations of semantic and lexico-grammatical features which realize and differentiate the functional stages of the genre. This section will draw on the terminology of Systemic-Functional Linguistics (see Halliday 1994).

General situation of use

This stage is characterized by reference to general classes of database elements and actions applicable to such elements or to sets of data. Examples of actions are updating, changing, deleting and copying. Examples of database elements are records, fields, tables, queries, result-sets, and databases. The characteristic construction found in this stage is as follows. The generalized action of the query is expressed as a non-finite enhancing clause, which is introduced by clauses which refer to the user's motivation or potential for action. A typical example is

Taxonomy of element types

As discussed above, this stage may be combined with the General situation of use. Its distinguishing feature is a list of the four different kinds of action query by name and generalized action. As with the previous stage, objects of action are classes of database element or sets of data. Access Tutorial: section 3 separates this stage from the General situation of use by describing the four kinds of action query available only in terms of their action, rather than in terms of their utility to the user. Running Access: section 2 presents an abbreviated taxonomy of four kinds of action, and this is embedded in a General situation of use.

Comparison to related elements

As discussed above, this stage may be combined with the General situation of use. This stage is characterized by reference to related database elements, their generalized function, and the contrast with the element under discussion. An example is " Action queries differ significantly from select queries... A select query shows you data..." (Quick Reference: section 3).

Alternative methods and evaluations

In this stage, hypothetical methods for solving a problem are presented and evaluated. At this stage Access Tutorial (section 6) has already introduced an example problem and example database, so alternative methods are discussed in terms of specific information and actions on specific database elements. The other two texts discuss alternative methods for the general problem of making specific changes to large quantities of data. In all cases, the alternative method is referred to and evaluated. Examples are "consider whether you can fix the problem by using the much simpler Find dialogue box" (Quick Reference: Section 2), and " This approach is tedious and error prone." (Access Tutorial: section 6).

Example situation of use and example database

The characteristics of this stage make a sharp contrast with those of the General situation of use. The objects of action here are predominantly not database elements, but units or categories of information from a hypothetical real-world situation. Note that Access Tutorial: section 5 and the example cited above from Quick Reference refer to information only. Where database elements are mentioned, as in Running Access: section 5, the references are not to general classes of element but to specific elements from the example application.

Link-back

This stage is characterized by reference to material or actions already covered in the text.

Preview

This stage is characterized by reference to, evaluation, and justification of the steps to be followed in subsequent sections. Objects of action of are application elements, in this case queries, and sets of data. Actions are typically those appropriate to sets of data, and creating and building application elements. An example is " If you want to be completely safe, you should make a backup copy of your table before you run an update query. " (Running Access: section 13).

Step(s)

As discussed above, this is the stage in which actions are broken down into operational steps. Note that this may involve reference to actions which had previously been explained as detailed sequences of operations, but with which the user is now expected to be familiar. In such a case the objects acted on may be high level application elements. For example, "Create a select query based on the Courses table and save it as qryCoursesBackup" (Access Tutorial: section 8). Where the action is introduced for the first time, the kind of operation and object may be at the physical point-and-click level of manipulating elements of the Access program interface, often accompanied by pictures.

This stage is characterized by structures such as the following:

To do Action || do Operation(s)

E.g.: "To change the query type... Click the arrow next to the Query Type button..."

You can do Operation || to Goal.

E.g.: "You can join the tblClubs table with tblContracts to get this information."

(Running Access: section 7)

Where sequential lists of operations are given, they are in the imperative, or the form "You can Operation". Note that the texts sometimes give alternative sets of operational steps for achieving a particular goal as in Quick Reference: sections 6 and 9, and that this may involve evaluation.

Explanation

It is in these sections that the Access program itself or its elements become participants in the text, often in direct response to the user's actions. A typical structure is as follows:

When you do Operation || Access does Operation(s)

E.g.: "When you convert a select query..., Access changes the title bar..."

(Running Access: section 10)

E.g.: "Action queries do not execute until you explicitly run them."

Frequently at this stage the user becomes a Recipient of messages from the Access program or it's elements. For example, we find references to the program (or elements) warning or reminding the user, requesting confirmation of user actions, or displaying message and iconic indicators in response to actions.

The configuration of functional stages which are characteristic of the genre of computer software tutorial instruction helps to address the kinds of problems faced by this kind of text in meeting its instructional goals. These problems were discussed in the Introduction and are briefly restated below:

• Teaching the user the place of the current action and its goal (e.g. building a particular application element) within the overall process of application development.
• Teaching the user the parameters of the tool(s) being built so as to choose and adapt them for a variety of real-world information situations.
• Allowing the user to access the texts as a reference book using stand-alone sections, or narrowing down their path through the texts using tightly integrated sequences of tutorials.

To help address the first problem, The General situation of use, Preview and link-back stages integrate the immediate actions and goals of the current tutorial section into the overall framework of building a database application. In addition, the Taxonomy of element types, Comparison to related elements, and Alternative methods and evaluations stages help to make the user familiar with the particular parameters, advantages, and limitations of the tool to be constructed. This contributes to addressing the second problem.

The Example situation and example database stage, and the general use of example problems and applications, show the user the possible activities that the actions of the current tutorial section can play a part in, and the kinds of motivations they can help to fulfil. They also give the user an example of the analysis of a real-world situation into the categories used by the current set of tools under discussion. Once again, this helps to address the second problem.

As discussed in the previous section, the third problem is addressed by the organizational strategy of the text chapter. Using a tightly integrated sequence of tutorial sections which are based on an example situation and application allows the author to guide the reader's progress through the material. The text is then able to collapse skills explained as sequences of operations in one section into discrete operations which are part of higher level actions in future section. Quick Reference, and to an extent Running Access, which are designed to have stand-alone sections, still rely on the user being familiar with basic concepts and operations to access advanced sections, such as those on action queries. For example, the user is highly unlikely to turn to the section on action queries without being familiar with select queries. Unless the user already has expert knowledge, they will probably work through the section in Quick Reference on action queries in general before turning to one of the sections on the four sub-types.

This paper has discussed the genre of tutorial instruction relating to computer software as manifested by three texts dealing with a relational database program. While at certain points texts of this genre have similarities with the genre of simple procedures, and the explanations and reports found in general science writing, they are distinctive both in their form and function. In particular, they include a motivated actor/reader as part of the text, they intersperse and sometimes blend procedure, explanation and evaluation, and they show attention to activity at the levels of operational step, immediate action, and overall activity and motivation. Texts of this genre face particular problems and they employ certain organizational strategies and distinctive configurations of functional stages to address them. These stages have been described in terms of their contribution to generic purposes, and their patterns of semantic and lexico-grammatical realization.

At a time when enrolment in so called "traditional" science subjects is declining, and yet information technology is a growth industry, it seems well worth paying attention to these kinds of texts and the strategies that they employ. With their emphasis on the motivations, options and goals of the reader, on building tools that the reader will feel confident in adapting and using independently, on using those tools as mediators for building skills in the analysis of real-world situations, and on integrating operations and actions into coherent activities, it is not difficult to see why these texts are so successful.

Section-titles taken from the texts are given in quotation marks and bold type. Descriptions of other sub-sections are given in regular type.

You may need to create an action query if you want to do any of the following things:

• Delete some records (delete query).
• Append data from one table to another table (append query).
• Update information in some records (update query).
• Create a new table from data stored in other tables(make table query).

To change the query type, do either of the following things:

• Click the arrow next to the Query Type button and choose the query type that you want
• Choose the type of query you want from the query table. (You can choose Query => Make Table Query, Query => Update Query, Query => Update Append, Query => Delete Query to create an action query.)

Use the View button and the Run button when you create action queries. When you work with a Select Query the View and Run buttons do the same thing. When you work with an Action Query, the View and Run buttons do completely different jobs.

• The View button displays Datasheet view, which is a good way to preview what you're going to do with the action query.
• The Run button executes the action - It deletes or changes data in your database. You cannot undo the action after you click the Run button in an Action Query, so be very sure that the query is set up correctly before you run it.

• The really safe method is to first create a select query, to ensure that the records that are selected are the records that you actually want to perform the action on.
• The fairly-safe-but-not-absolutely-foolproof-method is to set up your query and then click the View button to see Datasheet view. The datasheet shows you the data that the query has found to act on. Be careful to use the View button rather than the Run button, which actually performs the action.

Access provides four different types of action queries:

• Make table — creates a new table based on the results set of the query;
• Append — similar to a make- table query, except that the results set of the query is appended to an existing table;
• Update — allows the values of one or more fields in the result set to be modified; and,
• Delete — deletes all the records in the results set from the underlying table.

There are at least four different ways of accomplishing this task:

• Create a calculated field called NewCredits that multiplies the value of Credits by 1.5The query containing the calculated field can be used in place of the Courses table whenever credit information is required. Of course, the values stored in the Courses table are still the old values. Although there might be some advantages to keeping the old values, it may cause confusion about which values to use. In addition, the use of a calculated field creates a computational load that becomes larger as the number of courses increases.
• Go through the Courses table record by record and manually change all the values — This approach is tedious and error prone. Furthermore, it is simply impractical if the number of courses is large.
• Write a Visual Basic program to automate Step 2.This is a good approach; however, it clearly requires the ability to write Visual Basic programs.
• Create an update query that (a) selects only those courses that require modification and (b)replaces the value of Credits with Credits * 1.5 . — This approach is computationally efficient and allows you to work with the QBE editor rather than a programming language.

If you switch to the database window, you will notice that the new make- table query has a different icon than the select queries.

• Project all fields (*) into the query definition. _
• Transform the Select query into a Make Table query _
• Provide a name for the new (target) table. _

• You can switch to datasheet mode to view the results set.

In chapter 7, "Using Datasheets," you learned how to inset, update, and delete single rows of data within a datasheet. In Chapter 8, "Adding Power with Select Queries," you discovered that you can use queries to select the data you want - even from multiple tables.

2) General situation of use - Taxonomy of element types

Now you can take the concept of queries one step further and use action queries to quickly change, insert, create or delete sets of data in your database.

3) Preview

In this chapter, we'll use the tables and data from the Entertainment Schedule sample database that comes with this book to explore action queries.

To run an action query again, select it in the Database window and click the Open button. When you run an action query from the Database window, Access displays a confirmation dialog box similar to the one shown in Figure 9-7. Click the Yes button to complete the action query. If you want to disable this extra confirmation step, choose the Options command from the Tools menu and, on the Edit/Find tab of the Options dialog box, deselect the Confirm Action Queries check box.

Brydon, Michael. (1997). "Access tutorial 1: An introduction to Microsoft Access." In Access Tutorial. Victoria: University of British Columbia. An electronic text available at http://mis.commerce.ubc.ca/~brydon/MSAccess/tutorials.html

Dixon, John & Stratta, Leslie. (1995). "New demands on the model for writing in education: what does genre theory offer?" In Teaching writing: is genre the answer? Springwood, N.S.W.: Australian education network Inc.

Eggins, Suzanne & Diana Slade. (1997). Analysing casual conversation. London: Cassell.

Eggins, Suzanne. (1994). Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Pinter

Fairclough, Norman. (1995). Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold

Gerot, Linda. (1995). Making sense of text. Cammeray, N.S.W.: Gerd Stabler: Antipodian Educational Enterprises.

Gerot, L. and P. Wignell. (1994). Making sense of Functional Grammar: An Introductory Workbook. Cammeray, N.S.W.: Gerd Stabler: Antipodian Educational Enterprises.

Halliday, M.A.K. (1993). "Some grammatical problems in scientific English." In Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Ed.: Halliday, M. A. K. & J. R. Martin. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh press. Pages 69-85.

Halliday, M. A. K. and Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh press.

Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd Edition. London: Edward Arnold.

Knapp, Peter & Watkins, Megan. (1994). Context - Text - Grammar: Teaching the genres and grammar of school writing in infants and primary classrooms. Broadway, N.S.W.: Text Productions.

Lemke, Jay L. 1990. Talking science : language, learning, and values. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Publishing Corp.

Leontiev, A. A. (1981). Psychology and the language learning process. Oxford: Pergamon.

Martin, J. R. (1984). "Language, register and genre." In Children Writing: Reader. Ed.: Christie, F. Geelong: Deakin University Press.

Martin, J. R. (1985). Factual writing: Exploring and challenging social reality. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press.

Martin, J. R. (1993). "The discourse of geography: Ordering and explaining the experiential world." In Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Ed.: Halliday, M. A. K. & J. R. Martin. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Pages 136-165.

Martin, J.R., Christie, F. & Rothery, J. (1987). "Social processes in education." In The place of genre in learning. Ed.: Reid, Ian. Victoria: Deakin University.

Microsoft. (1995). "Microsoft Office White Paper - Microsoft Access for Windows 95 - The Desktop Database Backgrounder." An on-line document available from the Microsoft Corporation web-site. http://www.microsoft.com/access/.

Nardi, B. N. (1996). "Activity theory basics." In Context and Consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Ed.: Nardi, B. N. Cambridge, Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press.

Raeithal, Arrne and Velichkovsky, Boris M.. (1996). "Joint attention and co-construction of tasks." In Context and Consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Ed.: Nardi, B. N. Cambridge, Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press.

Vygotsky, Lev and Luria, Alexander. (1930) "Tool and symbol in child development." In The Vygotsky Reader. (1994). Ed.: Van der Veer, Rene and Valsiner, Jaan. Oxford: Blackwell

Brydon, Michael. (1997). "Tutorial 11: Action Queries." In Access Tutorial. Victoria: University of British Columbia. An electronic text available at http://mis.commerce.ubc.ca/~brydon/MSAccess/tutorials.html

Viescas, John L. (1997). "Modifying data with action queries." In Using Microsoft Access '97. Redmond, Washington: Microsoft Press. Pages 281-308.