scholarly journals Supporting Academic Writing and Publication Practice: PhD Students in Engineering and their Supervisors

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 221
Author(s):  
Alena Kasparkova ◽  
Kamila Etchegoyen Rosolová
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
Thinking Skills ◽  
Writing Development ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Drop Out ◽  
University Management ◽  
Doctoral Studies ◽  
National Training

Supporting Academic Writing and Publication Practice: PhD Students in Engineering and their Supervisors This poster documents the bottom-up efforts leading to the establishment of an academic writing support program for doctoral students at an engineering university in the Czech Republic (CR). To defend their dissertation, by law Czech doctoral students have to have published their research. Moreover, many faculties require their doctoral students to publish in prestigious English-medium journals, which is a challenge even for the students’ supervisors. Although publication requirements prior to dissertation defence are becoming common in many countries (Kamler and Thompson, 2014; Kelly, 2017), Czech students often face a challenge of writing in the absence of any prior writing support, where insufficient knowledge of English only adds an extra hurdle to the already difficult task of argumentation absent in Czech schooling. CR has a comparatively high number of doctoral students, but also alarmingly high drop-out rates with more than 50% students not finishing their studies (Beneš et al., 2017). In part, this is due to the students’ difficulties to publish (National Training Fund, 2019). This challenge could be addressed with systematic writing development, but Czech educators and dissertation supervisors are not commonly aware of composition being teachable as we learned from our preliminary study on writing support in doctoral programs in several Czech universities (Rosolová & Kasparkova, in press). While supervisors and university leaders tended to see writing development as a responsibility of the students, the doctoral students were calling for systematic support.  We strive to bring attention to the complexity of writing development and introduce a discourse on academic writing that conceives of academic writing as a bundle of analytical and critical thinking skills coupled with knowledge of rhetorical structures and different academic genres. We show how these skills can be taught through a course drawing on the results from a needs analysis survey among engineering doctoral students, the target population for this course (for more information on the survey, see Kasparkova & Rosolová, 2020). In the survey, students expressed a strong interest in a blended-learning format of the course, which we base on a model of a unique academic writing course developed for researchers at the Czech Academy of Sciences, but not common in Czech universities. Our course is work in progress and combines writing development with library modules that frame the whole writing process as a publication journey ranging from library searches, to a selection of a target journal and communication with reviewers. Because we are well aware that a course alone will not trigger a discourse on writing development in Czech higher education, we also plan on involving a broader academic community through workshops for supervisors and a handbook on teaching academic writing and publishing skills for future course instructors. Colleagues at EATAW 2019 conference commented on the poster sharing their difficulties from the engineering context and for instance suggested a computer game to engage engineers. This resonated with our plan to invite our engineers into the course through a geo-caching game – for more, see Kasparkova & Rosolová (2020). References Beneš, J., Kohoutek, J., & Šmídová, M. (2017). Doktorské studium v ČR [Doctoral studies in the CR].  Centre for Higher Education Studies. https://www.csvs.cz/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Doktorandi_final_2018.pdf Rosolová, K. E., & Kasparkova, A. (in press). How do I cook an Impact Factor article if you do not show me what the ingredients are? Educare. https://ojs.mau.se/index.php/educare Kamler, B., & Thomson, P. (2014). Helping Doctoral Students Write (2nd edition). Routledge. Kasparkova, A., & Rosolová, K. (2020). A geo-caching game ‘Meet your Editor’ as a teaser for writing courses. 2020 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm), Kennesaw, GA, USA, 2020, pp. 87-91. https://doi.org/10.1109/ProComm48883.2020.00019 Kelly, F. J. (2017). The idea of the PhD: The doctorate in the twenty-first-century imagination. Routledge. National Training Fund. (2019). Complex study of doctoral studies at Charles University and recommendations to improve the conditions and results. Report for the Charles University Management. Prague.

scholarly journals Doctoral Journey During Covid-19: Reflections From a Collaborative Autoethnography

10.28945/4871 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 633-656
Author(s):  
Aireen Grace Andal ◽  
Shuang Wu
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
Ethical Dilemmas ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Doctoral Studies ◽  
Anxiety Levels ◽  
The Impact

Aim/Purpose: This paper identifies and examines cross-cutting experiences from the perspective of two doctoral students, whose research was affected by the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). Background: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to be challenging for higher education scholars in terms of proceeding with their research and how the pandemic sets the scene for changes in higher education’s future. Due to increased anxiety levels because of uncertainties, the paper provides a reflection of doctoral experiences from two students – one in Russia at the data collection stage, and one in China (enrolled in New Zealand) at the proposal stage. Methodology: Through collaborative autoethnography and joint-reflection, we analyze our experiences as doctoral students focusing on methodological adjustments, ethical dilemmas, adaptation strategies and supervisor-supervisee relationships. Conducting a collaborative autoethnography provides a richer analysis of the interplay between perspectives, compared to a traditional autoethnography. Collaborative autoethnography also provides conditions for a collective exploration of subjectivities of doctoral students through an iterative process. After providing separate individual accounts, we discussed our experiences, analyzed them, and engaged in a joint-reflection from our consensual interpretations. Contribution: Our work aims to contribute to existing discussions on how COVID-19 impacted on doctoral students’ coping strategies during the pandemic. The paper encourages doctoral students to further discuss how they navigate their doctoral experiences through autoethnography and joint-reflections. Findings: Three main themes transpired in our analysis. First, we encountered roadblocks such as interruptions, frustrations and resistance to adapt our doctoral studies in the pandemic context, which align with the recent literature regarding education during the coronavirus pandemic. Second, we faced a diversity of burdens and privileges in the pandemic, which provided us with both pleasant (opportunity to create change) and unpleasant (unknown threats) situations, thereby enabling us to construct and reconstruct our stories through reflection. Third, we experienced a shared unfamiliarity of doing doctoral studies during the pandemic, to which the role of the academic community including our supervisors and doctoral colleagues contributed to how we managed our circumstances. Recommendations for Practitioners: We speak to our fellow doctoral students to dare navigate their doctoral experiences through collaborative reflections. In practice, by reflecting on our experience, we recommend that new doctoral students remain flexible and mindful of their doctoral journeys and recognize their agency to deal with the unexpected. We thus encourage the view of doctoral studies as a process rather than outcome-oriented, as we gain experience from processes. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend using both collaborative autoethnography and joint-reflection as an instructive tool for qualitative research. Such engagements offer important discussions towards further communications and exchange of ideas among doctoral students from various backgrounds. Impact on Society: More broadly, this work is an invitation to reflect and provoke further thoughts to articulate reflections on the impact and various ways of thinking that the pandemic might bring to the fore. Future Research: Doctoral students are welcome to contribute to a collectivity of narratives that thicken the data and analyses of their pandemic experiences in higher education to reinforce the role of doctoral researchers as agents of history in the trying times of a pandemic.

scholarly journals Preparing Ell Writers for Becoming Multilingual Writers: Challenges and Strategies

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-140
Author(s):  
Lee Jin Choi
Keyword(s):  
Academic Writing ◽  
English Language ◽  
Writing Development ◽  
Multiple Identities ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Language Learner ◽  
Medium Of Instruction ◽  
Academic Context ◽  
Multilingual Writers ◽  
English Speaking

Summary The increasing number of international students enrolled in higher education in English-speaking countries has presented the growing need to support their academic writing development. It, however, has often led to the hasty assumption that English language learner (ELL) writers need to quickly adopt the dominant academic writing conventions in order to succeed in an English-speaking academic community. Even though the growing number of scholars have started to pay attention to ELL writers’ diverse writing styles and multiple identities, little research and discussion have taken place on how language practitioners could engage ELL writers in developing their voices as multilingual and multicultural writers. By analyzing a qualitative interview with ten experienced writing consultants and instructors, this paper explores major challenges that ELL writers experience and different strategies that could effectively help them develop their voices as writers in the academic context where English is dominantly used as the medium of instruction. Findings show that while many colleges and universities in English-speaking countries still adopt a monolithic view and label ELL writers as ‘a troubled non-native writer’, it is crucial for writing consultants and instructors to acknowledge ELL writers’ multilingual background and help them to develop their unique voices and achieve sustainable development and progress.

University Students’ Self-Motivated Blogging and Development of Study Skills and Research Skills

2010 ◽  
pp. 149-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shailey Minocha ◽  
Lucinda Kerawalla
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
Time Management ◽  
Study Skills ◽  
Online Community ◽  
Thinking Skills ◽  
University Education ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Research Skills ◽  
Academic Events

This chapter presents and analyzes an empirically grounded investigation into the self-motivated course-related blogging activities of undergraduate and Master’s-level students, and research-related blogging of doctoral students. It focuses on how blogging may help students to develop their study skills and research skills. Analysis of students’ blogs and semi-structured interviews with the participants shows that writing in the public domain can encourage networking, commitment to goals, articulation of research ideas, development of confidence in writing, and facilitation of critical and reflective thinking skills. The blog can be a useful repository of ideas and resources, and can be a public platform for the synthesis of ideas. Blogging can facilitate the creation and membership of an online community where academic events are flagged, resources are shared, research is advertised, and ideas and comments are exchanged. The authors conclude with a discussion of the ways in which blogging can support the development of key study and research skills, such as time management, academic writing, and effective communication. It is hoped that the findings will help in guiding students, educators, and institutions considering the use of blogging in university education.

Linguistic Markers of Stance and Genre in Upper-Level Student Writing

2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 267-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Aull
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
Writing Development ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Student Writing ◽  
Linguistic Markers ◽  
Writing Research ◽  
Upper Level ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Level Student

Stance is a growing focus of academic writing research and an important aspect of writing development in higher education. Research on student writing to date has explored stance across different levels, language backgrounds, and disciplines, but has rarely focused on stance features across genres. This article explores stance marker use between two important genre families in higher education—persuasive argumentative writing and analytic explanatory writing—based on corpus linguistic analysis of late undergraduate and early graduate-level writing in the Michigan Corpus of Upper-Level Student Papers (MICUSP). The specific stance markers in the study, both epistemic and textual cues, have been shown to distinguish student writing across levels; this study, then, extends the analysis to consider the comparative use of these markers across genres. The findings show two stance expectations persistent across genres as well as significant distinctions between argumentative and explanatory writing vis-à-vis stance markers that intensify and contrast. The findings thus point to important considerations for instruction, assignment design, and future research.

scholarly journals How to create and develop writing centres

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingrid Galtung ◽  
Cathinka Dahl Hambro ◽  
Solveig Kavli
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
Writing Process ◽  
Academic Staff ◽  
Writing Development ◽  
Learning Activities ◽  
Daily Work ◽  
Strategic Plans ◽  
Good Writing ◽  
The Way

This roundtable addresses how three Norwegian writing centres – in different stages of their establishment and settled within different constitutional frames – handle staff policy and aims to facilitate academic writing to their main users; students and PhD candidates. We will structure the discussion around four main themes that we juggle in our daily work:  Using strategic plans to promote academic writing development and student throughput Co-creating learning activities with and for MA students Keeping up with the Library and Faculty Strengthening and further developing academic writing in Higher Education Attendees at the roundtable will be invited to discuss and participate in a dialogue on the way in which writing centres can improve the students’ and PhD candidates’ writing process; why we find teaching and preaching academic writing to be an important skill, and how we can co-create learning activities in libraries and writing centres with academic staff and students. We will also discuss the issue of legitimacy, and  what it takes to move writing centre activities from the periphery to the centre of the institution and its pedagogical mission. The audience will leave with ideas and inspirations on how to facilitate and build good writing centres in collaboration between staff, librarians and experienced students.

scholarly journals Wybrane problemy dotyczące statusu doktoranta

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 111-124
Author(s):  
Agata Pyrzyńska ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
School System ◽  
Academic Staff ◽  
Doctoral Studies ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Status ◽  
Education Model ◽  
New Education ◽  
Academic Group

The Act of 20 July 2018 Law on Higher Education and Science modifies the system of education of PhD students in a significant way. In this act, the doctoral studies model was abandoned in favor of the doctoral school system. Along with the indicated change, the status of PhD students as a separate academic group was also ordered. Thus, the practice of treating PhD students as quasi -students has been broken. The new education model also provides for a number of institutional guarantees, which should have a pro -quality impact on the education system of future academic staff. The paper discusses selected solutions in this area, paying special attention to the universal scholarship system, the social security system of PhD students and mechanisms of parenthood protection among doctoral students.

scholarly journals Randomness and chance as writing methodology: Is there a case for Dada in the academic essay?

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Eden
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
Writing Process ◽  
Writing Development ◽  
Potential Use

This article attempts to first speculate and then demonstrate how Dada methods can be used by creative practitioners or writers in general within an academic essay. In particular, the inclusion of randomness and chance is examined in the writing process with a view to foreground materiality in writing development and execution. Methods to make use of chance and to randomize text are outlined and the distinction between randomness and chance is clearly drawn. Antecedents to Dada and to the cut-up techniques that form the focus of the method outlined here are examined and offer context for the development of an embodied and empowered approach to challenges encountered around academic writing. Furthermore, contemporary scholarship that reflects on writing in higher education is drawn on to highlight the article’s primary purpose; that being to offer a background, explanation and useful methodology for the inclusion of randomness and chance which addresses the institutional demands encountered by students. The article draws on work created and discussed at a workshop that took place at Central St Martins in 2019, called ‘Breaking Into and Out of Academic Writing’. This workshop included various students from University of Arts London experimenting with the cut-up techniques and discussing their potential use in writing.

scholarly journals Individual and Structural Challenges in Doctoral Education: An Ethical Perspective

10.28945/4738 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 211-236
Author(s):  
Liana Roos ◽  
Erika Löfström ◽  
Marvi Remmik
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Doctoral Education ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Ethical Principles ◽  
Structural Level ◽  
Ethical Perspective ◽  
Doctoral Studies ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Individual

Aim/Purpose: The study set out to understand the challenges doctoral students experience at different systemic levels of doctoral education through the perspective of ethical principles. Background: Doctoral students experience various challenges on their journey to the degree, and as high dropout rates indicate, these challenges become critical for many students. Several individual and structural level aspects, such as student characteristics, supervisory relationship, the academic community as well national policies and international trends, influence doctoral studies, and students’ experiences have been researched quite extensively. Although some of the challenges doctoral students experience may be ethical in nature, few studies have investigated these challenges specifically from an ethics perspective. Methodology: The study drew on qualitative descriptions of significant negative incidents from 90 doctoral students from an online survey. The data were first analyzed using a reflexive thematic analysis, and then the themes were located within different systemic levels of doctoral studies: individual (e.g., doctoral student, the individual relationship with supervisor) and structural (e.g., the institution, faculty, academic community). Finally, the ethical principles at stake were identified, applying the framework of five common ethical principles: respect for autonomy, benefiting others (beneficence), doing no harm (non-maleficence), being just (justice), and being faithful (fidelity). Contribution: Understanding doctoral students’ experiences from an ethical perspective and locating these among the systemic levels of doctoral studies contributes to a better understanding of the doctoral experience’s complexities. Ethical considerations should be integrated when creating and implementing procedures, rules, and policies for doctoral education. Making the ethical aspects visible will also allow universities to develop supervisor and faculty training by concretely targeting doctoral studies aspects highlighted as ethically challenging. Findings: In doctoral students’ experiences, structural level ethical challenges out-weighed breaches of common ethical principles at the individual level of doctoral studies. In the critical experiences, the principle of beneficence was at risk in the form of a lack of support by the academic community, a lack of financial support, and bureaucracy. Here, the system and the community were unsuccessful in contributing positively to doctoral students’ welfare and fostering their growth. At the individual level, supervision abandonment experiences, inadequate supervision, and students’ struggle to keep study-related commitments breached fidelity, which was another frequently compromised principle. Although located at the individual level of studies, these themes are rooted in the structural level. Additionally, the progress review reporting and assessment process was a recurrent topic in experiences in which the principles of non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice were at stake. Recommendations for Practitioners: Going beyond the dyadic student-supervisor relationship and applying the ethics of responsibility, where university, faculty, supervisors, and students share a mutual responsibility, could alleviate ethically problematic experiences. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend that further research focus on experiences around the ethics in the progress reporting and assessment process through in-depth interviews with doctoral students and assessment committee members. Impact on Society: Dropout rates are high and time to degree completion is long. An ethical perspective may shed light on why doctoral studies fail in efficiency. Ethical aspects should be considered when defining the quality of doctoral education. Future Research: A follow-up study with supervisors and members of the academic community could contribute to developing a conceptual framework combining systemic levels and ethics in doctoral education.

scholarly journals Becoming academics: embracing and resisting changing writing practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saija Katila ◽  
Mikko Laamanen ◽  
Maarit Laihonen ◽  
Rebecca Lund ◽  
Susan Meriläinen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Performance Management ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
Group Method ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Memory Work ◽  
Writing Practices ◽  
Writing Practice ◽  
Over Time

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze how global and local changes in higher education impact upon writing practices through which doctoral students become academics. The study explores how norms and values of academic writing practice are learned, negotiated and resisted and elucidates how competences related to writing come to determine the academic selves. Design/methodology/approach The study uses memory work, which is a group method that puts attention to written individual memories and their collective analysis and theorizing. The authors offer a comparison of experiences in becoming academics by two generational cohorts (1990s and 2010s) in the same management studies department in a business school. Findings The study indicates that the contextual and temporal enactment of academic writing practice in the department created a situation where implicit and ambiguous criteria for writing competence gradually changed into explicit and narrow ones. The change was relatively slow for two reasons. First, new performance management indicators were introduced over a period of two decades. Second, when the new indicators were gradually introduced, they were locally resisted. The study highlights how the focus, forms and main actors of resistance changed over time. Originality/value The paper offers a detailed account of how exogenous changes in higher education impact upon, over time and cultural space, academic writing practices through which doctoral students become academics.

scholarly journals Exploring doctoral students’ expectations of work-based skills training

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 403-417
Author(s):  
Jenny Candy ◽  
Padmali Rodrigo ◽  
Sarah Turnbull
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Skills Training ◽  
Doctoral Training ◽  
Perceived Fit ◽  
Snowball Sampling ◽  
Doctoral Studies ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Team Working ◽  
Uk Higher Education

Purpose Doctoral students are expected to undertake work-based skills training within their doctoral studies in areas such as problem solving, leadership and team working. The purpose of this paper is to explore student expectations of doctoral training within a UK Higher Education context. Design/methodology/approach The data for the study were gathered via two focus groups conducted among doctoral students from different faculties in a post-92 UK University. Participants were selected using a snowball sampling approach. Findings The findings suggest that the expectations of doctoral students are contingent upon their year of study, study mode, perceived fit between training goals and available training, peer recommendations, word-of-mouth (WoM) and the scholarly support they received from their supervisors. Practical implications The study suggests a better understanding of students’ segmentation can help Higher Education Institutions deliver training that meets the expectations of doctoral students in a way that result in zero or a positive disconfirmation. Originality/value This paper develops and deepens the understanding of the doctoral students’ expectations of work-based skills training and highlights the need for universities to adapt their doctoral training according to the expectations of different student segments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document