African international doctoral students in New Zealand: Englishes,doctoral writing and intercultural supervision

While the experiences of international doctoral students, especially those from Asian countries, have been well researched, fewer studies have explored the experiences of African students in Southern countries like Australia and Aotearoa/New Zealand. This article reports on doctoral writing and student and supervisor perspectives on English languages in a small study of supervisors and African students in New Zealand. It challenges deficit constructions of African students and illustrates how the growing internationalisation of higher education is adding to the complexities of doctoral writing, raising questions as to how students and supervisors recognise and navigate differences in Englishes and doctoral writing. It makes a number of recommendations about how supervisors might work effectively with African and other doctoral students.     

Anticipating doctoral supervision: (Not) bridging the transition from supervisee to supervisor

Building on existing studies that ask doctoral supervisors how they understand their role, and what has influenced this understanding, this article explores invitations that are issued to supervisors to reflect in certain ways about the role of supervisor. The article calls into question the ways in which supervisors are invited to think about and represent supervision, by professional development courses, handbooks on supervision, and the questions that researchers pose about supervision. This discussion is situated in autoethnographic analysis of a valuable moment in the author's academic career for reflecting on these factors: the author is positioned directly between the role of doctoral supervisee and the role of doctoral supervisor. Through autoethnographic engagement with doctoral supervision literature, the article argues that professional development for supervisors would benefit from more critical analysis of the invitations which are issued to supervisors to reflect on the transition from supervisee to supervisor.     

Peer facilitated writing groups: a programmatic approach to doctoral student writing

Very few empirical studies have investigated programmes in which doctoral students act as peer facilitators in faculty writing groups. We report on the development of a centrally delivered doctoral student writing programme in which twenty student participants were mentored and provided with the resources to initiate their own faculty-based doctoral writing groups. ‘Legitimate peripheral participation’ was used as a conceptual lens to interpret the data collected during the establishment and evaluation of the programme. All student participants in the preparatory training course, which was developed in consultation with postgraduate students and research supervisors, went on to become doctoral writing peer facilitators of peer writing groups. Insights from seven of these showed how a well-structured and supportive programme harnessed the benefits of peer learning by bringing personal rewards to participants and building institutional capacity around doctoral research writing literacies.     

Trust: the power that binds in team supervision of doctoral students

Team supervision of doctoral students adds new dimensions and complexities to relationships within the teams that impact functionality of the team. Trust emerged as a significant theme in recent qualitative research into the quality of team supervision of doctoral students. Trust was cited as a key component in successful team collaborations, and the missing component in dysfunctional teams. Definitions refer to trust as the belief of truthfulness, reliability or faith in another person’s abilities. My hypothesis is that trust operates as a form of power in team supervision. It is a form of power that enables voice, resilience and creativity in teams. This article concludes that placing trust in others in supervisory teams is a deliberate decision by candidates and supervisors. It is a decision to engage in a team context despite known risks and may be understood as a gamble on the reliability of others in the expectation of reciprocity. By conceptualising trust as a form of power, strategies that engender and maintain trust may be utilised more intentionally.     

Fact and fiction: a case history of doctoral supervision

Background

There exist a number of textual sources of advice concerning the provision of effective doctoral supervision. This academic material aimed at both supervisors and students makes assumptions both about the conduct of science and the contemporary nature of higher education as a setting for inducting students into the academy.

Purpose

This paper aims to explore and critique received ideas about supervision, and seeks to elucidate their implications for intellectual originality and the nature of research-based knowledge production. This aim is situated in the context of governmental discourses of performativity.

Sample

The sample consists of one doctoral student who is advanced in the progress of her studies. She is based in a Scottish university and is of overseas origin. She is a mature student whose previous education took place outwith the UK.

Design and methods

A case-study design is adopted within which a supervisor has the stance of a participant observer. It is through participant observation that the data are collected. These qualitative data are then subjected to an appropriate analysis which aims to characterize their meaning.

Results

The findings suggest that the conflicting array of ideological discourses exercising authority over the university sector may undermine the concept of scholarly originality and the underpinning academic skills as well as dispositions. It is concluded that supervisory strategies vary, but the received ones premised upon a different historical landscape which championed academic autonomy may bring supervisors into a tense relationship with their institutions and policies of performativity.

Conclusions

The evidence indicates that current models of research degree supervision, as presented in published textual sources, are guilty of neglecting to engage properly with the effects of discourses of performativity and commercialization which now, arguably, exercise a controlling influence over significant parts of higher education.     

Writes of passage: writing up qualitative data as a threshold concept in doctoral research

Effective writing is an essential skill for all doctoral students, yet it is one that receives relatively little attention in training and supervision. This article explores extensive feedback from participants in a series of workshops for doctoral candidates engaged with writing up qualitative data. The themes arising from the data analysis are discussed in terms of the affective domain of writing, and the main claim is that writing up qualitative data has been identified as what Meyer and Land would call a threshold concept for doctoral candidates employing qualitative analysis. Drawing on Turner's notion of liminality, the article concludes that interdisciplinary workshops can be instrumental in helping doctoral candidates understand the role of writing, and of writing up qualitative data in particular, in their development into independent, autonomous researchers.     

Academic socialization of doctoral students through feedback networks: a qualitative understanding of the graduate feedback landscape

ABSTRACT

Scholars focus on the social nature of academic writing to refine an understanding of feedback interactions in higher education. However, studies on the various sources of feedback – feedback networks – have been scarce, particularly during the initial years of doctoral education. Using a qualitative case study approach, multiple sources of feedback for four students in one doctoral program in the United States were identified in line with broader trends focusing on feedback as a social practice. Informed by the academic socialization framework [Duff, Patricia A. 2012. “Second Language Socialization.” In Handbook of Language Socialization, edited by Alessandro Duranti, Elinor Ochs, and Bambi B. Schieffelin, 564–586. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell], this study aims (1) to navigate the landscape of graduate feedback, including interactions beyond class as well as oral and written feedback, and (2) to elucidate the socialization process. Findings suggest that academic writing development is defined as how feedback is situated within disciplinary, academic communities of interaction. This article describes how the larger network of feedback creates the types of interaction that characterizes the community.     

Writing together to foster wellbeing: doctoral writing groups as spaces of wellbeing

ABSTRACT

Candidate wellbeing is recognised as a continual challenge for doctoral programs, with government mandates requiring an institutional response. This article explores the experiences of candidates undertaking intensive writing sessions (‘Write-Ins’) and their influence on their wellbeing. Exploratory findings demonstrate opportunities for Write-In models to contribute positively to ‘Spaces of Wellbeing’. Spaces of Wellbeing theory highlights four dimensions of space that influence wellbeing: capability, security, integrative and therapeutic spaces. Findings show the Write-Ins contributed positively to wellbeing by offering space for candidates to enhance writing productivity, to work to their own pace, to connect with others, and to work flexibly.     

Grade one peer and teacher feedback on student writing

This article examines a grade one teacher's support for her students’ writing development through formal peer and teacher feedback. The teacher modelled and provided examples of effective feedback and good writing in whole-class and small-group lessons and in her own one-on-one verbal feedback on student writing. She allocated time for the students to participate in formal peer-feedback sessions, in turn giving feedback to the students on the suggestions to one another during these sessions. Students gave more content-oriented than conventions-oriented feedback to each other. They revised the content and writing conventions of their writing in response to 90% of the feedback they received from their peers and teacher.     

远程英语写作教学中的书面反馈调查与研究

在远程语言教学中,由于交流机会有限,书面反馈就成为了开启和维持指导教师与学习者对话的重要手段。基于网络平台开放英语写作课程,以书面反馈为研究对象,采用问卷和访谈等方式,探索在远程语言教学环境下,指导教师和学习者对反馈的理念与实践。研究发现不同指导教师所提供的反馈类型和形式有明显差异,而不同学习者之间的期望和理解也差异较大。建议指导教师提供反馈前应了解学习者的学习需求与特点,同时,需要对指导教师和学习者进行有关有效利用书面反馈系统的培训,以提高书面反馈的对语言教学的促进效果。     

英语写作教学中的师生面谈反馈研究及实践

师生面谈反馈指的是师生之间一对一的关于学生作文和写作过程所进行的写作会议。写作师生面谈被认为是一种高效并有效的写作反馈方式(Ferris,2003;Williams,2004)。以往对于写作教学中的师生面谈反馈更多是一语的语境下;即使是二语的语境下,研究的重点更多的是放在对于教师或学生某一方在互动中的表现。本研究基于交互假说(Long,1981,1985,1996)和注意假说(Schimdt,1990)搭建起的沟通和辅助相结合的理论框架,根据对某中国大学的两位英语写作老师和五位大学一年级学生为期两个学期的调查和数据采集,针对老师和学生双方在互动中的表现以及其效果进行分析,作者发现利用师生面谈反馈对低水平学生的英语写作进行辅导时效果明显,并整理出一套师生面谈反馈的谈话模式以供其他老师实际操作英语写作教学中的师生面谈。     

Effects of feedback on collaborative writing in an online learning environment

The need for supporting student writing has received much attention in writing research. One specific type of support is feedback—including peer feedback—on the writing process. Despite the wealth of literature on both feedback and academic writing, there is little empirical evidence on what type of feedback best promotes writing in online environments. This article reports on research that tries to determine what type of feedback best improves the quality of collaborative writing and what the effects of feedback are on student learning in an environment based on asynchronous written communication. The results reveal that concerning the type of feedback, epistemic feedback or epistemic and suggestive feedback best improve the quality of collaborative writing performance. The nature of the feedback-giver (whether teacher feedback or teacher and peer) makes a difference to the final text only when the feedback is epistemic, or epistemic and suggestive.     

反馈方式对二语写作语言复杂度的影响

本研究以自动评分系统反馈和范文反馈为例,探讨纠错反馈与非纠错反馈对大学生英语作文语言复杂度的影响。借助LCA、L2SCA和Coh-Metrix 3.0等在线分析器,对词汇复杂度和句法复杂度共10个代表性指标进行测量和分析。发现系统反馈能提高词汇复杂度但降低句法复杂度,而范文反馈对学生作文的词汇和句法复杂度均有显著的提升作用。由此可见,不同反馈方式对语言复杂度产生错综复杂的影响,相比而言范文反馈能促进文本质量在更多维度上的提升。     

The learning alliance: ethics in doctoral supervision

This paper is concerned with the ethics of relationships in doctoral supervision. We give an overview of four paradigms of doctoral supervision that have endured over the past 25 years and elucidate some of their strengths and limitations, contextualise them historically and consider their implications for doctoral supervision in the contemporary university. Two common threads across the four paradigms are a view of doctoral supervision as pedagogical practice and that supervisors have primary responsibility for the supervision of doctoral students. We challenge these assumptions. In their place, we propose that the goal of doctoral supervision is praxis and that this involves a learning alliance between multiple institutional agents grounded in a relational ethics of mutual responsibility.     

网络环境下同伴反馈与写作焦虑关系的实证研究

本研究探讨网络环境下同伴反馈对写作焦虑的影响。研究采用SPSS统计软件对受试者在实验前后的写作焦虑程度进行对比分析。同时,辅以访谈方式了解学生对该模式的态度。研究结果表明,网络环境下的同伴反馈在一定程度上能缓解学生写作焦虑,大部分学生认可该模式。     

Team modes and power: supervision of doctoral students

Currently, team supervision in doctoral studies is widely practised across Australian universities. The interpretation of ‘team’ is broad and there is evidence of experimentation with supervisory models. This paper elaborates upon a taxonomy of team modes and power forms based on a recent qualitative study across universities in a number of states and territories in Australia. Team modes, described as de facto dyad, segmented and collaborative are defined, explained and presented in diagrammatic forms. Team modes are understood as being fluid, oscillating along a continuum according to particular contextual factors such as thesis stage and personal/professional circumstances of team members. Operating parallel to team modes are forms of power, defined as ‘power to’, ‘power over’ and ‘power with’. The article concludes that to maximise collaborative knowledge making within team supervision it is necessary to background social status. As the performance of social status is diminished the focus of the team endeavour is the creative exchange of ideas, creating ‘power with’. The intention of this article is to provide more information to supervisors and doctoral students on team structure so that the needs of all parties might be met more reliably and productively during the intense and sustained period of thesis production.     

Increasing the uptake of peer feedback in primary school writing: findings from an action research enquiry

This article reports on how an action research strategy was used to increase children's uptake of feedback during peer assessment in primary school writing. Several different strategies were used in the study that had been successful in increasing students’ uptake of peer feedback in contexts such as higher education. In order to evaluate how successful these actions were, several different data collection methods were drawn upon to triangulate findings including children's work, observations, informal interviews and mind mapping. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data generated. Findings are consistent with those from research in other settings which suggest that pupils make better use of feedback if: it is task-involving and useful; there is sufficient time given for them to act on it and discuss it with their peers; and they are asked to reflect on how it has been used to improve the quality of the assessed work.     

What lies beneath: exploring the deeper purposes of feedback on student writing through considering disciplinary knowledge and knowers

Feedback plays an integral role in students’ learning and development, as it is often the only personal communication that students have with tutors or lecturers about their own work. Yet, in spite of its integral role in student learning, there is disagreement between how students and tutors or lecturers perceive the pedagogic purpose of feedback. Central to this disagreement is the role that feedback has to play in ensuring that students produce the ‘right’ kinds of knowledge, and become the ‘right’ kinds of knowers within their disciplines. This paper argues that, in order to find common ground between students and tutors or lecturers on what feedback is for, and how to both give and use it effectively, we need to conceptualise disciplinary knowledge and knowers anew. We offer, as a useful starting point, the Specialisation dimension of Legitimation Code Theory as both practical theory and methodological tool for exploring knowledge and knowers in English Studies and Law as two illustrative cases. The paper concludes that this analysis offers lecturers and tutors a fresh understanding of the disciplinary knowledge and knower structures they work within and, relatedly, a clearer view of the work their feedback needs to do within these.