الصعوبات التي يواجهها طلبة الدكتوراة السعوديين في الجامعات البريطانية في كتابة الأطاريح
Keywords:
Thesis writingAbstract
Abstract :
This paper examines the writing difficulties of UK based Saudi doctoral students. It is framed around Wenger’s (1998) concept of participation in a community of practice (CoP). Using a qualitative methodology, the paper reports the results of an open-ended survey of 61 Saudi PhD students, across various UK universities, and closely examines the cases of 6 of those students and their supervisors through interviewing both students and their supervisors, focusing on their interactions with their theses topics, the English language, the supervisory relationship and their new academic environment. The findings reveal that academic language is the principal impediment to students thesis writing development. However, a key to the improvement of academic language was active participation in scholarly communities of practice. In conclusion, the paper underlines the value of qualitative studies, underpinned by authentic voices from the participants, in helping educators develop new insights about the thesis writing process. Additionally, it provides direction for research and practice in thesis writing curricula design and supervisory support both within the UK and the Saudi Arabian academic contexts.
References
References
Aitchison, C., Catterall, J., Ross, P., & Burgin, S. (2012). ‘Tough love and tears’: Learning doctoral writing in the sciences. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(4), 435-447.
Allison, D., Cooley, L., Lewkowicz, J., & Nunan, D. (1998). Dissertation writing in action: The development of a dissertation writing support program for ESL graduate research students. English for Specific Purposes, 17(2), 199-217.
Anderson, C., Day, K., & McLaughlin, P. (2006). Mastering the dissertation: Lecturers’ representations of the purposes and processes of Master’s level dissertation supervision. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 149-168.
Armitage, A., (2006). The roles, expectations and experiences of master’s degree dissertation supervisors. In: C. Rust (Ed.), Improving student learning through assessment. Proceedings of the 13th improving student learning symposium, Imperial College, London, 5-7 September 2005. Oxford: Oxford Brookes University.
Armstrong, K. (2012). Best practice in managing, supervising and assessing post-graduate marketing dissertations. York: Higher Education Academy.
Aspland, T., Edwards, H., O’Leary, J., & Ryan, Y. (1999). Tracking new directions in the evaluation of postgraduate supervision. Innovative Higher Education, 24(2), 127-147.
Belcher, D. (1994). The apprenticeship approach to advanced academic literacy: Graduate students and their mentors. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 23-34.
Bitchener, J., & Basturkmen, H. (2006). Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 5(1), 4-18.
Bridgeman, B., & Carlson, S. B. (1984). Survey of academic writing tasks. Written Communication, 1(2), 247-280.
Braine, G. (2002). Academic literacy and the nonnative speaker graduate students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1(1), 59-68.
Canseco, G., & Byrd, P. (1989). Writing Required in Graduate Courses in Business Administration. TESOL Quarterly, 23(2), 305–316.
Casanave, C. P. (1998). Transitions: The balancing act of bilingual academics. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(2), 175-203.
Casanave, C. P., & Hubbard, P. (1992). The writing assignments and writing problems of doctoral students: Faculty perceptions, pedagogical issues, and needed research. English for Specific Purposes, 11(1), 33-49.
Cooley, L., & Lewkowicz, J. (1995). Developing awareness of the rhetorical and linguistic conventions of writing a thesis in English: Addressing the needs of ESL/EFL postgraduate students. In A. Duszak (Ed.), Culture and styles of academic discourse. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Dong, Y. (1998). Non-native graduate student students' thesis/dissertation writing in science: Self-reports by students and their advisors from two US institutions. English for Specific Purposes, 17, 369-390.
Exley, K., & O'Malley, C. (1999). Supervising PhDs in Science and Engineering. In Wisker, G., & Sutcliffe, N. (Ed.). Good practice in postgraduate supervision. Birmingham: SEDA.
Fan, Ying. (2013). The experiences of international students with dissertation study: Business Education. York: Higher Education Academy.
Fotovatian, S. (2012). Three constructs of institutional identity among international doctoral students in Australia. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(5), 577-588.
Gosden, H. (1996). Verbal reports of Japanese novices' research writing practices in English. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(2), 109–128.
Grant, B. M. (2008). Agonistic Struggle: Master—slave dialogues in humanities supervision. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 7(1), 9-27.
Hirvela, A., & Belcher, D. (2001). Coming back to voice: The multiple voices and identities of mature multilingual writers. Journal of second language writing, 10(1), 83-106.
Horowitz, D. M. (1986). What professors actually require: Academic tasks for the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 445–460. doi:10.2307/3586294
James, K. (1984). The writing of theses by speakers of english as a foreign language: The results of a case study. Common Ground: Shared Interests in ESP and Communication Studies, 99-113.
Jenkins, S., Jordan, M. K., & Weiland, P. O. (1993). The role of writing in graduate engineering education: A survey of faculty beliefs and practices. English for specific purposes, 12(1), 51-67.
Kamler, B., & Thomson, P. (2014). Helping doctoral students write: Pedagogies for supervision. Routledge.
Lea, M.R. ( 2005). "Communities of practice" in higher education: Useful heuristic or educational model? In D. Barton & K. Tusting (Eds.), Beyond communities of practice: Language, power and social context (pp. 180-197). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, A. (2008) How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3), 267-281.
Li, Y. (2016). “Publish SCI papers or no degree”: practices of Chinese doctoral supervisors in response to the publication pressure on science students. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(4), 545-558.
Lillis, T., & Scott, M. (2007). Defining academic literacies research: Issues of epistemology, ideology and strategy. Journal of applied linguistics, 4(1), 5-32.
Lumadi, M. W. (2011). The pedagogy of postgraduate research supervision and its complexities. College Teaching Methods & Styles Journal (CTMS), 4(11), 25-32.
McCormack, C. (2004). Tension between students and institutional conceptions of postgraduate research. Studies in Higher Education, 29(3), 319-334.
Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Quantitative and qualitative approaches (7th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Paltridge, B. (2002). Thesis and dissertation writing: An examination of published advice and actual practice. English for Specific Purposes, 21(2), 125-143.
Parry, S. (1998). Disciplinary discourse in doctoral theses. Higher Education, 36(3), 273-299.
Philips, E. M., & Pugh, D. S. (2000). How to get a PhD: A handbook for students and their supervisors (3rd ed.). Buckingham: Open University Press.
Riazi, A. (1997). Acquiring disciplinary literacy: A social-cognitive analysis of text production and learning among Iranian graduate students of education. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6(2), 105-137.
Ryan, J., & Viete, R. (2009). Respectful interactions: Learning with international students in the English-speaking academy. Teaching in Higher education, 14(3), 303-314.
Sommers, N., & Saltz, L. (2004). The novice as expert: Writing the freshman year. College Composition and Communication, 124-149.
Strauss, P., Walton, J. A., & Madsen, S. (2003). “I don’t have time to be an English teacher.” - Supervising the EAL thesis. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 1-16.
Swales, J. M. (2001). EAP-related linguistic research: An intellectual history. Research perspectives on English for academic purposes, 42-54.
Thompson, P. (1999). Exploring the contexts of writing: Interviews with PhD supervisors. Issues in EAP writing research and instruction, 37-54.
Todd, M. J., Smith, K., & Bannister, P. (2006). Supervising a social science undergraduate dissertation: Staff experiences and perceptions. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(2), 161-173.
Wallimann, I. (1981). Estrangement: Marx's conception of human nature and the division of labor. Westport: Greenwood Press.
Wellington, J. (2010). More than a matter of cognition: An exploration of affective writing problems of post-graduate students and their possible solutions. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(2), 135-150.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge university press.
West, G. K., & Byrd, P. (1982). Technical writing required of graduate engineering students. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 12(1), 1-6.
Wood, A. (2001). International scientific English: The language of research scientists around the world. Research perspectives on English for academic purposes, 71-83.
Woolhouse, M. (2002). Supervising dissertation projects: Expectations of supervisors and students. Innovations in Education and Training International, 39(2), 137-144.
Yancey, K. B. (1994). Voices on Voice: Perspectives, Definitions, Inquiry. Urbana: National Council of Teachers of English
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 مجلة الفتح
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
