An evaluation of research students' writing support intervention

Emerald - Tập 6 Số 1 - Trang 22-34 - 2013
Barry O'Mahony1, Elena Verezub1, John Dalrymple1, Santina Bertone1
1Faculty of Business and Enterprise, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia

Tóm tắt

Purpose

Achieving quality standards in postgraduate education, particularly among Higher Degree by Research (HDR) students, can be challenging. In addition to the diverse educational and cultural backgrounds of these students, thesis writing frequently involves the development of new skills associated with the comprehension of a large volume of information, critical analysis and the development of an academic writing style. Many students need support in one or all of these key areas. Universities currently provide a number of different writing support activities to address students' needs. The purpose of this study is to report on a writing support intervention that employed a specialist in academic writing to support HDR students in the business faculty.

Design/methodology/approach

Following a two‐year period, the intervention was evaluated to assess the appropriateness and effectiveness of this support using qualitative methods. The results of this study are presented and discussed from different angles. First, a lecturer in academic writing support outlines her observations and reflection on the value of individual consultations and students' progress. Second, the attitudes and experience of students and their supervisors to this service are discussed. This is followed by the faculty senior management view with regard to the effectiveness and efficiency of this service.

Findings

This research found that both students and their supervisors expressed satisfaction with the service offered. Also it was found that the writing quality of submitted theses is improving; the costs of thesis editing have reduced; HDR students appear to be more satisfied with and confident of their academic writing; the attractiveness of the PhD program has been enhanced, as judged by the increase in PhD enquiries and the quality of potential applicants.

Research limitations/implications

The results reported here indicate that the intervention was successful. However, the sample size was relatively small and the HDR candidates and supervisors were drawn from only one faculty in one university.

Practical implications

The study provides some recommendations that could be taken into account by senior management and academic staff in order to set up and deliver a faculty‐based writing support service for HDR students, which would bring benefits to students, their supervisors, faculties and universities.

Originality/value

The value of this research is that the writing program was proven to be beneficial for universities to support research students in the development of their writing skills, which in turn, could improve the quality of thesis and ensure on time completion.


Tài liệu tham khảo

Bitchener, J. and Basturkmen, H. (2006), “Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section”, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, Vol. 5, pp. 4‐18. Bordia, P., Restubog, S.L.D., Bordia, S. and Tang, R.L. (2010), “Breach begets breach: trickle‐down effects of psychological contract breach on customer service”, Journal of Management, Vol. 36 No. 6, pp. 1578‐1607. Chan, A. (1996), “The uses of ignorance: reflections on teaching graduate students”, in Chanock, K., Burley, V. and Davies, S. (Eds), What Do We Learn from Teaching One‐to‐One that Informs Our Work with Larger Numbers? Proceedings of the Language and Academic Skills Conference Held at La Trobe University, November, pp. 43‐49. Chanock, K. (1999), “‘You get me to explain myself more better’: supporting diversity through dialogic learning”, Cornerstones, Proceedings of the HERDSA Conference Held at the University of Melbourne, July. Chanock, K. (2007a), “Valuing individual consultations as input into other modes of teaching”, Journal of Academic Language and Learning, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. A1‐A9. Chanock, K. (2007b), “What academic language and learning advisers bring to the scholarship of teaching and learning: problems and possibilities for dialogue with the disciplines”, Higher Education, Research and Development, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 269‐280. Chanock, K., Burley, V. and Davies, S. (1996), “What do we learn from teaching one‐to‐one that informs our work with larger numbers?”, Proceedings of the Language and Academic Skills Conference Held at La Trobe University, November. Clerehan, R. (1996), “What do we learn from teaching one‐to‐one that informs our work with larger numbers?”, in Chanock, K., Burley, V. and Davies, S. (Eds), Proceedings of the Language and Academic Skills Conference Held at La Trobe University, November, pp. 69‐81. Craswell, G. (1995), “To integrate or not? Interests, practice and the dialogic development of graduate students' discourse skills”, in Chanock, K. (Ed.), Integrating the Teaching Academic Discourses into the Disciplines, Proceedings of the Language and Academic Skills Conference Held at La Trobe University, November. Delamont, S., Atkinson, P. and Parry, O. (1999), Survival and Success in Graduate School: Disciplines, Disciples and the Doctorate, Palmer, London. Diezmann, C. (2005), “Supervision and scholarly writing: writing to learn – learning to write”, Reflective Practice, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 443‐457. English Language Standards for Higher Education (2010), “AUQA”, available at: www.aall.org.au/sites/default/files/FinalEnglishLanguageStandardsMay2012.pdf (accessed 1 June 2012). Gibbons, P. and Hammond, J. (2005), “Putting scaffolding to work: the contribution of scaffolding in articulating ESL education”, Prospect: An Australian Journal of TESOL, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 6‐13. Gordon, J. (2003), “One to one teaching feedback”, BMJ, Vol. 326 No. 7388, pp. 543‐545, available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1125426 (accessed 20 April 2011). Harris, M. (1986), “Teaching one‐to‐one”, paper presented at Writing Conference, National Council of Teachers of English, available at: http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED270824.pdf (accessed 20 April 2011). Kamler, B. and Thomson, P. (2004), “Driven to abstraction: doctoral supervision and writing pedagogies”, Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 195‐209. McGinty, S.C., Koo, Y.L. and Saedi, M. (2010), “A cross‐country study on research students' perceptions of the role of supervision and cultural knowledge in thesis development”, International Journal of Inclusive Education, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 517‐531. Minichiello, V., Aroni, R., Timewell, E. and Alexander, L. (1995), In Depth Interviewing, 2nd ed., Longman, Melbourne. Patton, M.Q. (1987), Creative Evaluation, 2nd ed., Sage, Newbury Park, CA. RMIT (2007), Higher Degrees by Research: Doctor of Philosophy, Masters by Research, Professional Doctorate, PhD by Publication, Policy and Procedures Information Booklet p37 Section 11.5.2, available at: http://mams.rmit.edu.au/6rp3m7h6fawnz.pdf (accessed 20 January 2013). Stevenson, M.D. and Kokkinn, B.A. (2009), “Evaluating one‐to‐one sessions of academic language and learning”, Journal of Academic Language and Learning, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 36‐50. Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Sage, Newbury Park, CA. Vygotsky, L. (1978), Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Wade‐Benzoni, K.A., Rousseau, D.M. and Li, M. (2006), “Managing relationships across generations of academics: psychological contracts in faculty‐doctoral student collaborations”, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 4‐33. White, K. (1998), “Thesis writing for supervisors”, in Kiley, M. and Mullins, G. (Eds), Quality in Postgraduate Research: Managing the New Agenda, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, pp. 229‐242. Wilson, K., Li, L., Collins, G. and Couchman, J. (2011), “Co‐constructing academic literacy: examining teacher‐student discourse in a one‐to‐one consultation”, Journal of Academic Language and Learning, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 139‐153. Woodward‐Kron, R. (2007), “Negotiating meanings and scaffolding learning: writing support for non‐English speaking background postgraduate students”, Higher Education Research & Development, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 253‐268.
Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Emerald

Tập 6 Số 1

22-34

Thông tin tác giả