scholarly journals PhD Students Learning the Process of Academic Writing: The Role of the Rhetorical Rectangle

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 136-162
Author(s):  
Beverly FitzPatrick ◽  
Mike Chong ◽  
James Tuff ◽  
Sana Jamil ◽  
Khalid Al Hariri ◽  
...  

PhD students are enculturated into scholarly writing through relationships with their supervisors and other faculty. As part of a doctoral writing group, we explored students’ experiences that affected their writing, both cognitively and affectively, and how these experiences made them feel about themselves as academic writers. Six first and second year doctoral students participated in formal group discussions, using Edward de Bono’s (1985/1992) Six Thinking Hats to guide the discussions. In addition, the students wrote personal narratives about their writing experiences. Data were analyzed according to the rhetorical rectangle of logos, ethos, pathos, and kairos. Analysis revealed that students were having struggles with their identities as academic writers, not feeling as confident as they had before their programs, and questioning some of the pedagogy of teaching academic writing.

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-74
Author(s):  
Jenny Mattsson ◽  
Emma-Karin Brandin ◽  
Ann-Kristin Hult

The present study revisits writing retreat participants who have spontaneously formed writing groups before or after attending a retreat hosted by the Unit for Academic Language at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden. All in all, 11 doctoral students and 1 post doc were interviewed using a semi-structured interview model. The answers were thematically analysed based on Murray’s (2014) concept of coherence in writing groups as well as parts of Aitchison and Lee’s (2006) key characteristics of writing groups. The two main research questions posed concern (i) whether the informants have changed their writing practice and/or the way they think and feel about writing since joining a writing group, and (ii) whether possible changes have aided the development of their identity as academic writers. Results show that the informants have indeed changed central aspects of their writing practice and that this in turn has positively influenced how they now think and feel about writing. This has to some extent contributed to the informants’ development of their writer identity; however, the present study also sheds light on the fact that more needs to be done at departmental levels across the university to make academic writing visible.


2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 609-626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felix Maringe ◽  
Jennifer Jenkins

Purpose – This paper examines the experiences of engaging with academic writing of international doctoral students in the schools of humanities and education at a UK university. The purpose of this paper is to uncover the real accounts of international students whose cultural and language backgrounds are often marginalised and considered, not as facilitators, but as barriers to academic writing in the western context of universities. Design/methodology/approach – Developed broadly within an interpretive post-positivistic paradigm, the study utilised Harré and van Lagenhove, 1999 Positioning theory and Goffman’s theory of Stigma to interrogate accounts of 12 students from the two schools in a year-long project involving three focus group discussions, questionnaire responses and personal reflective summaries by the students. Findings – The paper highlights the notions of stigma associated with their foreign writing conventions and how students experience tensions and apprehensions about their ability as they painfully negotiate the new academic writing conventions of the institution. International students position themselves as vulnerable outsiders working within an ill-defined but highly valued language environment. Research limitations/implications – The research is limited to the extent that it utilises a very small number of students as its key source of evidence. However, the study was not aimed at providing generalisation as much as it sought to explore issues associated with the use of language by international studying in UK universities. Practical implications – The study has practical implications for the professionals in HE to develop clear guidelines about what constitutes good English and to provide greater support to international students who see themselves as vulnerable outsiders in an environment which marginalises their linguistic and cultural identities. Social implications – The study has implications for the social, cultural, and academic integration of international students in HE institutions. Originality/value – The paper signals a need for diverse writing frameworks which seek to promote rather than silence and marginalise potentially rich sources of knowledge and understanding in an increasingly globalising world.


10.28945/4900 ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 001-023
Author(s):  
Danielle Hradsky ◽  
Ali Soyoof ◽  
Shaoru Zeng ◽  
Elham M Foomani ◽  
Ngo Cong-Lem ◽  
...  

Aim/Purpose: It is increasingly recognized that doctoral education programs should better support doctoral students. In particular, it has been noted that students experience significant isolation during their PhD, which negatively affects their educational experiences and their personal wellbeing. Doctoral writing groups are collaborative learning communities that have in recent years received increasing attention to address this issue. This collaborative autoethnography explores the affective benefits (i.e., benefits associated with emotions and feelings) of these doctoral writing groups, particularly focused on the pastorally supportive nature of these learning communities. Background: Writing groups have been shown to promote academic writing skills and build reflective practice, personal epistemology, and academic identity. We have found that a much more significant benefit of our writing groups has been the pastoral care we have experienced, particularly in relation to the turbulent emotions often associated with academic writing. This should, perhaps, not be surprising since it is clear that academic writing is a form of identity work. There is, therefore, a clear need to better support doctoral students, particularly with regard to the more affective components of academic writing. This prompted us to write this collaborative autoethnography to showcase what we consider to be the primary role of doctoral writing groups: pastoral care. Methodology: We employ a collaborative autoethnographic methodology to integrate our personal reflections into the existing literature in the field. Contribution: We argue that doctoral writing groups are vehicles of pastoral care as they promote wellbeing, foster resilience, provide academic care, and build social capital. Findings: We demonstrate that doctoral writing groups foster students’ sense of belonging through self-reflection and the sharing of experiences in a safe space, which builds perceived self-efficacy and self-awareness. Furthermore, through the self-reflection and discussion that is inherent in doctoral writing groups, students also develop a better understanding of themselves and their place within the academy. Recommendations for Practitioners: Our research highlights that writing groups may be designed to teach academic communication skills, but they provide an affective benefit that cannot yet be quantified and which should not be underestimated. Incorporating writing groups into doctoral education programs can, therefore, have a positive influence on the educational experiences of PhD students and improve their overall wellbeing. This paper concludes by providing practical suggestions to help practitioners implement writing groups into doctoral education programs, particularly focused on how these groups can be made more pastorally supportive. Recommendation for Researchers: This paper also extends the theoretical understanding of pastoral care by providing a framework for pastoral care within the doctoral writing group environment. We show how pastoral care can be conceptualized as the promotion of self-awareness, self-efficacy, reflection, and empowerment of doctoral students through nurturing communities where all members are valued, encouraged, guided, and supported. Our experiences, which we have integrated throughout this paper, also highlight the importance of relationship-building within the educational community, particularly when these relationships are characterized by mutual respect and shared responsibility. Impact on Society: The poor well-being of doctoral students has now been well-established across the world, but strategies to improve the academic environment for these students are still lacking. This paper provides evidence that implementing writing groups as a strategy to embed pastoral care in a doctoral education environment helps doctoral students flourish. Ultimately, this can lead to an improved academic research culture into the future. Future Research: Future research should explore other methods of better integrating pastoral care interventions into doctoral education programs in order to reduce isolation and promote student wellbeing.


Author(s):  
Tracy Griffin Spies

For many international doctoral students, English is an additional language (EAL), and consequently, scholarly writing in English is a source of academic anxiety. Although international English as an additional language (IEAL) students often have professional experience in their field of study and have been academically successful, the shift in linguistic demand at the doctoral level is especially challenging. Learning to communicate as a member of the academic community requires the development of discipline specific knowledge, rhetorical conventions, and discourse registers which precisely communicate complex ideas in their nonnative language. Research evidence points to the importance of social support and feedback in international/EAL doctoral students' socialization into scholarly writing. This chapter outlines the implementation of a writing feedback group with four IEAL doctoral students and their developing scholarly habits of mind and academic writing skills.


2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 122-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elke Stracke ◽  
Vijay Kumar

The mastery of academic writing is essential in doctoral writing. Supervisory feedback provides opportunities for students to improve their writing. It is a communicative tool that can be categorised based on fundamental functions of speech: referential, directive, and expressive. This study provides some understanding of the impact that language and speech functions have on the learning experiences of doctoral students. Sources of data are oral interviews with each student, and their supervisor’s written feedback on drafts of that student’s thesis. Analysis of the feedback provided useful insights into the type of feedback the student considered useful for their development. The students found value in all three types of feedback. In particular, expressive types of feedback often led to an emotional reaction, as students viewed praise, criticism and opinions as motivating or challenging. We argue that expressive types of feedback can play an important role for developing academic writing. This study assists supervisors to acquire a higher level of language awareness so they are better equipped to provide feedback that supports the academic writing and overall learning of their students.


2018 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Weatherall

Writing a doctoral thesis is a testament to years of anxiety, excitement, confusion, terror and passion. A thesis is, however, much more than just an output of learning. It is a formative process through which a doctoral student learns what it means to be a researcher. The doctoral thesis as a form of academic writing has, however, received scant attention in organisational studies. My decision to write my thesis differently inspired me to think deeply about the conventions and procedures of doctoral writing. How is it that doctoral students write? What conventions govern them? And how could doctoral writing be done differently to expand the boundaries of thought in management? In this article, I give an autoethnographic account of how I wrote my thesis differently to provide the groundwork for doctoral students to reconsider the conventional approach to doctoral writing. Ultimately, I offer guidance and points of reflection for how doctoral students and their supervisors might break with writing conventions and contribute to their learning as emerging management researchers through writing the doctoral thesis differently.


Author(s):  
Rachael Cayley

Thesis supervision is a crucial aspect of the doctoral writing experience. While scholarly attention to both doctoral writing and supervisory dynamics is increasing, supervisory support of doctoral students as novice academic writers is still an under-investigated topic. Not having a clear understanding of the way supervisors treat writing gives insufficient insight into a crucial aspect of the doctoral experience. To counter this lack of information about supervision as it pertains to writing, I conducted interviews with seven supervisors who were identified by their doctoral students as a good supervisor of writing. In this paper, I will discuss the practices that unified and those that distinguished these supervisors in their role as supporters of doctoral writing. The supervisors interviewed expressed similar ideas in three areas: reflexivity about academic writing; awareness of variability among doctoral writers; and acceptance of the profound challenges facing doctoral writers. In three other key areas, the supervisors expressed significant differences: attitudes towards the appropriate degree of supervisory support; commitment to writing support as professional development; and facilitation of peer mentoring. These patterns of commonality and difference suggest that good supervisory writing support may allow for significant variations while still drawing upon crucial shared precepts.


2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-85
Author(s):  
Marina Svensson

This article analyses the visions, careers, and companies of Jack Ma of Alibaba and Geng Le of Blue City. Jack Ma is a well-known business leader and visionary, whereas the less well-known Geng Le only began to receive more attention since launching a successful gay dating app in 2012. The article focuses on the personal narratives and visions of these two IT entrepreneurs. It provides new perspectives on the role of individual entrepreneurs in relation to the Chinese state’s global ambitions and vision of creating a “strong internet country.” It argues that the commercialisation and platformisation of the Chinese internet, and the growing transnational nature of Chinese IT companies, serve to make them more, not less, co-dependent of the state and its visions. The internet’s emancipatory potential is today increasingly conflated with consumption, and online spaces and social relations are subject to both commodification and datafication.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document