Strategies for developing a writing community for doctoral students

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 198-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Roulston ◽  
Deborah Teitelbaum ◽  
Bo Chang ◽  
Ronald Butchart

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present considerations for developing a writing community for doctoral students. Design/methodology/approach The paper reflects on data from a self-study of a writing seminar in which the authors were involved. The authors examined students’ writing samples and peer-review comments, email correspondence, online discussion board postings, meeting minutes and participants’ reflections on their participation in the seminar. Findings While doctoral students described benefits from their participation in the writing seminar, the paper provides a cautionary tale concerning the challenges that can arise in the development and delivery of interventions that focus on developing writing communities involving doctoral students. Research limitations/implications This article draws on findings from an examination of a writing intervention to consider potential challenges that faculty and students face in developing writing communities. Findings may not apply to other kinds of settings, and they are limited by the small number of participants involved. Practical implications The paper discusses strategies that might be used to inform faculty in the development of writing communities for doctoral students. Social implications The authors’ experiences in developing and delivering a writing seminar highlight the importance of the process of trust-building for students to perceive the value of feedback from others so that they can respond to the technical demands of doctoral writing. Originality/value There is a growing body of work on the value of writing interventions for doctoral students such as retreats and writing groups. These are frequently facilitated by faculty whose area of expertise is in teaching writing. This paper contributes understanding to what is needed for faculty who are not writing instructors to facilitate groups of this sort. Participants must demonstrate a sufficient level of competence as writers to review others’ work; develop trusting, collegial relationships with one another; and be willing to contribute to others’ development and make a commitment to accomplishing the required tasks.

Author(s):  
Beth Kania-Gosche

To improve graduation rates in doctoral programs, the Council of Graduate Schools has recommended more supports for dissertation writing. This article describes and evaluates through action research one such support, an online discussion board where students could post drafts of their dissertation and peer review each other’s work. Results of effectiveness were mixed because of the wide spectrum of student participation. Students did not feel they had the expertise to critically read another’s work, although they liked reading the instructor’s comments to other students. Future implementation of the discussion board might be more successful if it was utilized as a support group or frequently asked questions page rather than a place for peer review or if it was utilized for excerpts from the dissertation rather than entire chapters. Faculty involved with supervising doctoral students should consider what supports are being offered and continue to evaluate their effectiveness.


2021 ◽  
pp. 70-97
Author(s):  
Kamila Etchegoyen-Rosolová ◽  
Alena Kašpárková

Doctoral studies in the Czech Republic are highly individualized with little coursework outside the supervisor/supervisee dyad, and the PhD students are mandated to publish prior to the dissertation defense. This mandate is troublesome because writing development has been on the fringes of the Czech education culture. In addition, the publications often must be in English, and many doctoral students struggle with English. In this exploratory study, we examined how this mandate translates into practice, how doctoral students learn to meet the requirements and how university administrators/supervisors perceive doctoral writing development. To answer our questions, we interviewed 7 university administrators/dissertation supervisors and 7 doctoral students from various backgrounds and universities, looking for diverse views on the issue. Our analysis confirmed the formal status of supervisors as the key doctoral writing literacy brokers. While the supervisors acknowledged their role, they also tended to view doctoral writing as a matter of self-study and funding, thus indirectly emphasising the publication outcomes. In contrast, doctoral students called for structured support of their writing processes. We propose a systemic approach to introduce writing pedagogies into the Czech discourse. With this study we hope to contribute to research on doctoral writing for publication of EAL (English as an Additional Language) students in Central Europe.  


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen Howell Gregory ◽  
Amanda Kate Burbage

Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of critical friendship on a first- and last-year doctoral student’s novice and expert mindsets during role transitions. Doctoral students are challenged to navigate role transitions during their academic programs. Experiences in research expectations, academy acculturation and work-life balance, may impact doctoral students’ novice-expert mindsets and contribute to the costly problem of attrition. Universities offer generic doctoral support, but few support sources address the long-term self-directed nature of self-study. Design/methodology/approach The authors participated in a collaborative self-study over a 30-month period. The authors collected 35 personal shared journal entries and 12 recorded and transcribed discussions. The authors conducted a constant comparative analysis of the data, and individually and collaboratively coded the data for initial and focused codes to construct themes. Findings The critical friendship provided a safe space to explore the doctoral experiences and novice-expert mindsets, which the authors were not fully able to do with programmatic support alone. The authors identified nine specific strategies that positively impacted the novice-expert mindsets during the following role transitions: professional to student, student to graduate and graduate to professional. Originality/value While researchers have identified strategies and models for doctoral student support targeting specific milestones, this study identified strategies to support doctoral students’ novice-expert mindsets during role transitions. These strategies may benefit other graduate students, as well as faculty and program directors, as they work to support student completion.


Author(s):  
Alexandra Davidson ◽  
Lisa Romkey ◽  
Allison Van Beek

Due to the increasing prevalence of asynchronous learning platforms, the development and implementation of online discussion boards have become important considerations in the design of post-secondary learning environments. This research is conducted as a case study of the online discussion board use in a small engineering education graduate course, consisting of in-class and online discussion components. By varying the structure of the online discussion board to allow different types of student interaction, the study identifies trends in discussion board use, specifically pertaining to student participation, student collaboration, and the integration between in-class and online discussions. As a result, the study provides insight into the utility and limitations of online discussion boards in post-secondary courses.  


SpringerPlus ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 445 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yannick Lippka ◽  
Oliver Patschan ◽  
Tilmann Todenhöfer ◽  
Christian Schwentner ◽  
Andreas Gutzeit ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
John P. Myers

PurposeThis study examines whether online asynchronous discussion forums support student’s meaning-making about citizenship in a globalizing world. Citizenship is an increasingly contested identity for young people, yet they have few opportunities in traditional civic education to consider their own citizenship. Although online discussions are considered effective spaces for increasing dialogue and critical thinking between diverse students, there has been little research to understand how effective they are for helping students to construct new understandings of citizenship.Design/methodology/approachA content analysis approach was used to analyze and code 89 discussion board posts. The Interaction Analysis Model (IAM) coding scheme was used to describe and analyze the quality of knowledge construction that occurred across the posts focusing on different aspects of global citizenship.FindingsThe findings demonstrate that the discussion boards produced substantive talks about the meaning of citizenship that in some instances reached the level of new knowledge construction. The students considered different meanings for global citizenship and negotiated positions on key issues. However, the highest levels of knowledge construction were rarely reached.Practical implicationsA major implication is the need to organize and cue discussion boards to support knowledge construction in addition to fostering dialogue.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the role that technology can play in supporting students’ knowledge construction about global citizenship that go beyond the scripted meanings conveyed in civics classes.


2021 ◽  
Vol 121 (3) ◽  
pp. 322-336
Author(s):  
Wayne Usher ◽  
Brittany A. McCormack

PurposeThe Higher Degree Research (HDR) journey is known for its difficulties, complexities and challenges (Lees-Deutsch, 2020), with many students experiencing multi-faceted issues and concerns (Skopek et al., 2020). Therefore, the purpose of this research is to investigate the relationships that exist between variables, vulnerability factors and doctorial capital of candidates (n = 532) studying at Australian universities (2019).Design/methodology/approachA quantitative cross-sectional correlational research design and Bronfenbrenner's socio – ecological framework (personal, home, university, community) was utilised to collect participants' (n = 532) descriptive statistics. Bourdieu's social reproduction theory was used as a lens to examine how experiences, across the PhD candidature, are influenced by several psychosocial factors and doctoral capital.FindingsFrom such a dual methodological approach, the findings from this study suggests that (1) age, (2) gender, (3) nationality, (4) financial/work status, (5) years of PhD and (6) attending postgraduate (PG) student events, go to significantly (p < 0.001) impact (positively and negatively) on students' experiences and correspondingly, impacts on their self-confidence, motivation and mental health and well-being status.Research limitations/implicationsResearch limitations are related to the recruitment of more doctoral students across more Australian universities. Further research is required from HDR supervisors, so as to “balance” the experiences of the PhD journey in higher education.Practical implicationsIn order to succeed in academia and HDR programs, students need to identify with and develop the “right kind of capital” to successfully navigate fields of social and scholarly play. Investigating how the participants perceive their social and scholarly habitus is seen as crucial in helping students to develop positive dispositions relevant to being a doctoral student.Social implicationsThe concept of doctoral capital and well-being, amongst Australian PhD students, is under researched and requires further investigation as a precursor to developing more specific policy designs aimed at providing heightened positive learning environments/HDR programs tailored to support doctoral students.Originality/valueWhilst reforms to improve PhD experiences are well established across the international literature (Geven et al., 2018; Skopek et al., 2020), evidence for Australia is largely missing. It is envisaged, that findings from this research will further assist in the development of quality policies that would go to provide effective services and support for doctoral students within Australian universities.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary Alan Fine ◽  
Hannah Wohl ◽  
Simone Ispa-Landa

Purpose This study aims to explore how graduate students in the social sciences develop reading and note-taking routines. Design/methodology/approach Using a professional socialization framework drawing on grounded theory, this study draws on a snowball sample of 36 graduate students in the social sciences at US universities. Qualitative interviews were conducted to learn about graduate students’ reading and note-taking techniques. Findings This study uncovered how doctoral students experienced the shift from undergraduate to graduate training. Graduate school requires students to adopt new modes of reading and note-taking. However, students lacked explicit mentorship in these skills. Once they realized that the goal was to enter an academic conversation to produce knowledge, they developed new reading and note-taking routines by soliciting and implementing suggestions from advanced doctoral students and faculty mentors. Research limitations/implications The specific requirements of the individual graduate program shape students’ goals for reading and note-taking. Further examination of the relationship between graduate students’ reading and note-taking and institutional requirements is warranted with a larger sample of universities, including non-American institutions. Practical implications Graduate students benefit from explicit mentoring in reading and note-taking skills from doctoral faculty and advanced graduate students. Originality/value This study uncovers the perspectives of graduate students in the social sciences as they transition from undergraduate coursework in a doctoral program of study. This empirical, interview-based research highlights the centrality of reading and note-taking in doctoral studies.


2019 ◽  
Vol 120 (3/4) ◽  
pp. 158-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon Ince ◽  
Christopher Hoadley ◽  
Paul A. Kirschner

PurposeThis paper aims to review current literature pertaining to information literacy and digital literacy skills and practices within the research workflow for doctoral students and makes recommendations for how libraries (and others) can foster skill-sets for graduate student research workflows for the twenty-first century scholarly researcher.Design/methodology/approachA review of existing information literacy practices for doctoral students was conducted, and four key areas of knowledge were identified and discussed.FindingsThe findings validate the need for graduate students to have training in information literacy, information management, knowledge management and scholarly communication. It recommends empirical studies to be conducted to inform future practices for doctoral students.Practical implicationsThis paper offers four areas of training to be considered by librarians and faculty advisers to better prepare scholars for their future.Originality/valueThis paper presents a distinctive synthesis of the types of information literacy and digital literacy skills needed by graduate students.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document