Enhancing professional writing skills of veterinary technology students: linking assessment and clinical practice in a communications course

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 273-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Clarke ◽  
Daniel Schull ◽  
Glen Coleman ◽  
Rachael Pitt ◽  
Catherine Manathunga
2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 310-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karol Marek Klimczak ◽  
Marta Dynel

Professionals and individuals who invest in equity markets rely on financial analysts’ recommendations and reports to decide on what to invest in and when to trade. This study examines the role of two groups of communication strategies, evaluation markers and mitigators, in establishing analysts’ credibility. The sample consists of 80 reports written in Polish for companies listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange in Poland. In this emerging market setting, where credibility is challenged by uncertainty, analysts deploy various strategies depending on the recommendation they make: “buy,” “hold,” or “sell” shares. The findings point toward a specific group of mitigators, namely subjectivization, as a means of communicating expert opinion. Regression results reveal that investors’ reaction to the publication of a recommendation to “hold” or “sell” shares, measured based on the changes in share prices, is stronger when subjectivization is used in a report. The findings carry implications for research into analyst behavior and for the development of professional writing skills.


Author(s):  
Janet R. Johnston

This chapter provides a brief historical context about how political controversies have limited professional writing about parent–child contact problems and describes the ways in which this volume provides a more nuanced and nonpartisan perspective on family-based interventions for these complex problems. The chapter first highlights the conceptual formulation of parent–child contact problems that underlies the treatment approach described throughout the book. It next suggests essential components of the Overcoming Barriers intervention model. This discussion is followed by comments on limitations of the empirical evidence available to inform policy and practice. Conundrums in clinical practice that involve risks of harming rather than helping families are then considered. Finally, the chapter explores how to practice ethically while awaiting more definitive direction from accumulated research on these matters.


2012 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Nelson ◽  
Cal Weatherald

2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denis Alamargot ◽  
Jean-Louis Lebrave

In this article, we argue that examining the writing processes of literary authors would enrich and extend empirical research on writing, which is currently grounded in cognitive psychology. In most empirical studies of writing skills, experts are defined as either advanced students or technical writers, neither of whom work within the same constraints or timeframes as literary authors. Including literary authors in psychological accounts of writing, by drawing on the observations of genetic criticism (a linguistic-literary discipline that reconstructs the genesis of an author’s manuscript by collecting and interpreting the notes, drafts, revisions, successive versions, etc.), would add to our knowledge of professional writing. Two issues could then be considered: (a) the way the creative process takes place during writing and (b) the role of memory in the management of writing processes over extended time periods.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document