Search

Academic papers in the social sciences were once more essayistic in their form. The carefree launching of concepts and ideas of academic value were the order of the day, all without the security of the present standardized paper format inspired by the natural sciences. This text draws on the most cited paper by the acclaimed scholar Carol Weiss, as an outset to discussing academic writing; why we write as we do and what we may lose by doing so. This means exploring the history of academic writing as well as discussing the complex, yet exciting, relationship between writing, identity, language, and the very process of conducting research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that the dominant modes of academic address, the conference paper, the journal article, and the monograph, reinforce problematic and exclusionary assumptions concerning what counts as legitimate research, whilst also restricting academic enquiry and impoverishing intellectual life. It makes its case by exploring in some detail the intellectual commitments of one the West's more wayward 20th century thinkers, Georges Bataille. It suggests that Bataille presents not simply a conceptual armoury (and one among many) for critiquing Western logocentrism from within, but offers an example of what a less domesticated, less stylistically narrowed mode of thinking might look like. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses the role of formative feedback in teaching academic writing for a large class of first-year business students. The paper contributes to our knowledge on how to design an effective formative feedback process for a class in excess of 300 students. Based on survey data from 2018 the paper addresses how the students respond to being taught academic writing in two different feedback modalities: face-to-face interaction and electronic annotations. Our findings indicate that there are no significant differences between the two modalities and that the students are relatively satisfied with the feedback they received. The majority of the students report that feedback has helped them accomplish their learning goals, they pay attention to feedback, and feedback motivates them in their studies. Even with these positive responses from the students, we question whether our approach is sustainable in the long run. Unless smarter and more efficient ways of providing personalised feedback are developed for large student groups, the transition to the new paradigm for feedback, where the emphasis is placed on dialogic interaction, will not be practicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has increasingly influenced higher education, notably in academic writing where AI-powered assisting tools offer both opportunities and challenges. Recently, the rapid growth of generative AI (GAI) has brought its impacts into sharper focus, yet the dynamics of its utilisation in academic writing remain largely unexplored. This paper focuses on examining the nature of human-AI interactions in academic writing, specifically investigating the strategies doctoral students employ when collaborating with a GAI-powered assisting tool. This study involves 626 recorded activities on how ten doctoral students interact with GAI-powered assisting tool during academic writing. AI-driven learning analytics approach was adopted for three layered analyses: (1) data pre-processing and analysis with quantitative content analysis, (2) sequence analysis with Hidden Markov Model (HMM) and hierarchical sequence clustering, and (3) pattern analysis with process mining. Findings indicate that doctoral students engaging in iterative, highly interactive processes with the GAI-powered assisting tool generally achieve better performance in the writing task. In contrast, those who use GAI merely as a supplementary information source, maintaining a linear writing approach, tend to get lower writing performance. This study points to the need for further investigations into human-AI collaboration in learning in higher education, with implications for tailored educational strategies and solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For papers to have scientific impact, they need to impress our peers in their role as referees, journal editors, and members of conference committees. Does better writing help our papers make it past these gatekeepers? In this study, we estimate the effect of writing quality by comparing how 30 economists judge the quality of papers written by PhD students in economics. Each economist judged five papers in their original version and five different papers that had been language edited. No economist saw both versions of the same paper. Our results show that writing matters. Compared to the original versions, economists judge edited versions as higher quality; they are more likely to accept edited versions for a conference; and they believe that edited versions have a better chance of being accepted at a good journal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we build an argument for studying and promoting teacher development in dialectical teacher-researcher partnership, praxis, which is informed by perezhivanie, a dialectical unity of emotion and intellect. We will study the developmental trajectory of an in-service L2 teacher striving to give her learners agency in the teaching-learning process while navigating institutional structures. We guide the reader through this teacher’s development in a year-and-a-half praxis with two researchers, illustrating the joint process of sense-making to resolve tensions stemming from institutional constraints, learner expectations, and own practices. The data come from (a) teacher-researcher discussions, (b) a teacher interview, and (c) data sessions. Perezhivanie informed the design, researchers’ mediation, and data analysis. We illustrate how the teacher moved towards and realised her commitment to enabling learner agency in language teaching. We discuss the implications of making perezhivanie a central concept in teacher education with in-service L2 teachers, realised through praxis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Unintentional plagiarism abounds at universities. The literature offers several explanations for students’ difficulties with acquiring standards of good academic practice. In this paper, I propose an alternative account: unintentional plagiarism can only be understood in the context of implicit but irreconcilable forms of knowledge. While higher education institutions mainly operate within the framework of propositional epistemology, institutions of primary and secondary education tend to furnish students with encyclopedic epistemology. Accordingly, universities and institutions of pre-college education tend to propagate conflicting assumptions regarding the nature of knowledge. Put simply, propositional epistemology is characterized by dialogue, agency and the exchange of ideas, which are ideally made explicit in academic writing. By contrast, encyclopedic epistemology tends to present knowledge monologically, leaving the scholarly conversation around it out. It is highly likely that the hardwired legacy of encyclopedic epistemology among students impedes the acquisition of the dialogism of academic inquiry at universities, resulting in cases of unintentional plagiarism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

English for Academic Purposes (EAP) instructors may struggle to capitalize on students' multilingual practices in teaching and demystifying academic writing, considering the expectation to use standard English. My teaching report is situated in Qazaqstan, where I worked as an EAP instructor with first-year undergraduate students for whom Qazaq and Russian are the dominant languages, English is a foreign language, and translanguaging is a commonplace practice. The paper shares how I built on my shared linguistic and cultural background with my students to implement translanguaging pedagogy for teaching EAP writing in a hybrid course at an English-medium university. A major takeaway from my teaching experience is to establish a translanguaging space, in which students with different translanguaging beliefs can explore pedagogical translanguaging. The pedagogical translanguaging instructions used in writing one academic essay were focused on developing an outline, citations, and rough drafts. Throughout the essay completion in person and online, students and I discussed translanguaging writing examples, drew on our metalinguistic awareness, and critical discussions of linguistic choices. Overall, this paper illuminates on how an EAP instructor with a similar linguistic background to their students can disrupt monolingual norms, and use translanguaging pedagogy for linguistically just academic writing instruction [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chinese returnee scholars' trans -spatial integration and identity (re)construction have received considerable attention in recent discussions. However, their collaborative academic writing practices in English have been relatively neglected in research. This paper addresses this gap by examining how a group of Chinese returnees engage in collaborative English writing for publication, aiming not only to navigate the challenges of competitive academia but also to excel within it. The concept of community of practice is used as a lens to analyze these returnees' motivation in seeking collaboration in English writing. The examination encompasses the affordances derived from such collaborative efforts and the subsequent impact on the scholars' (re)constructed identities. The paper explores their perceptions of how collaborative writing has built their professional social capital and strengthened their identity as academics. This study contributes to understanding Chinese returnee scholars' international publishing practices and urges universities to reconsider their policy when assessing scholars' collaborative writing and publishing practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to Petrić's (2012) call for comparing citation practices between student and published writing in the same field to better understand the interaction between developmental and disciplinary influences on the utilization of direct quotation, this paper conducts a comparative analysis of citation choices in 100 literature review sections of L2 master's theses and 100 research article literature review sections in the field of translation studies. This analysis utilizes a modified framework of functional options for cited information. The findings reveal a significant difference in the normalized frequency of citation options between the student corpus and the expert corpus. L2 master's students predominantly rely on single-source, author-responsible, long direct quotations with active voice and past tense. This approach is used to present source information without active engagement, suggesting their primary objective is to showcase knowledge of the research field. Conversely, experts strategically employ citations to support their claims and establish intertextual links. The differences in citation choices between master's theses and research articles might be attributed to the L2 students' limited grasp of the subtle nuances associated with citation forms, reporting verbs, verb tenses and voices, as well as a lack of proficiency in employing various pragmatic and rhetorical functions achievable through citation. Additionally, these differences may be attributed to the comprehensive knowledge and experience accumulated by expert writers over time. The implications of these findings for teaching English academic writing are discussed within the paper. • A new citation analysis model is proposed. • Students use more single-source direct quotations than experts. • Students prefer using the active past tense describing previous studies. • Students prefer non-factive reporting verbs. • Students place more responsibility on authors than writers in citing studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Qualitative social scientists working in medical faculties have to meet multiple expectations. On the one hand, they are expected to comply with the philosophical and theoretical expectations of the social sciences. On the other hand, they may also be expected to produce publications which align with biomedical definitions and framings of quality. As interdisciplinary scholars, they must handle (at least) two sets of journal editors, peer reviewers, grant-awarding panels, and conference audiences. In this paper, we extend the current knowledge base on the ‘dual expectations’ challenge by drawing on Orlikowski and Yates’ theoretical concept of communicative genres. A ‘genre’ in this context is a format of communication (e.g. letter, email, academic paper, and conference presentation) aimed at a particular audience, having a particular material form and socio-linguistic style, and governed by both formal requirements and unwritten social rules. Becoming a member of any community of practice involves becoming familiar with its accepted communicative genres and adept in using them. Academic writing, for example, is a craft that is learned through participation in the social process of communicating one’s ideas to one’s peers in journal articles and other formats. In this reflective paper, we show how the concept of a communicative genre can sensitise us to the conflicting and often dissonant expectations and rule systems governing different academic fields. We use this key concept to suggest ways in which the faculty can support early-career researchers to progress in careers which straddle qualitative social science and medical science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic writing is a dynamic process that in some senses reveals a writer's scholarly identity. To illuminate how this identity-forming process occurs, in the present study, three Anglosphere-educated writing scholars in China were interviewed to uncover their English-Chinese bilingual scholarly identities focusing on their perspectives of academic writing in two languages. The findings reveal they were conscious of their bilingual scholarly identities as English and Chinese academic writers, and attributed their academic writing skill development to their education at universities overseas, despite holding different views about the rhetorical styles of English and Chinese academic writing. Although the three returnee scholars faced challenges with writing and publishing papers in Chinese journals, they consciously applied different approaches in practicing and promoting both an English writing style and evidence-based argumentation when writing and teaching academic writing to Chinese students. The present study unpacks the complex nature of the Chinese returnee scholars' bilingual scholarly identity construction in academic writing while highlighting their contribution to the Anglo-centric globalization of academic writing and rhetorical development. Implications for graduate research training programs and research on academic writing identity are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]