Thesis (Ph. D.)--Indiana University of Pennsylvania. / Includes bibliographical references.

The purpose of this study was to elicit information by questionnaire regarding the teaching of the research paper in selected high schools. The research was planned to secure information in seven general areas: (1) Reasons for teaching the research paper; (2) Methods of describing the research paper; (3) Objectives for teaching the research paper; (4) Procedures for teaching the research paper; (5) Problems encountered in the students' completed papers; (6) Judgments and opinions about the current program, and (7) Suggestions for improvement.The investigator mailed questionnaires to 88 English teachers who teach the research paper in 29 school corporations willing to participate. Of the 88 participants, 59 or 67 percent returned usable questionnaires. The analyses of these data were conducted by frequency count and percentage frequency.Major Findings1. The teachers' primary reason for teaching the research paper was that it was a syllabus requirement.2. Teachers described the research paper by giving a verbal explanation of the requirements, by using a research paper manual or the pertinent section in the textbook, and by showing a sample research paper.3. Teachers differentiated between the research paper and the theme by use of documentation, by use of source materials, and by length.4. Objectives cited were learning library usage, using footnotes and bibliography, and organizing large amounts of material.5. Major teaching procedures used were as follows: they allowed the students to choose any topic with teacher approval; they selected a variety of style manuals; they required books and magazines as source materials; they required balancing paraphrase and quotation; they spend more than ten days in class on this project, and they had students give an audio-visual presentation as a culminating procedure.6. Problems most often found in completed papers were lack of transition and continuity of ideas, grammatical/ mechanical errors, and failure to narrow the topic.7. In evaluating this assignment, the teachers agreed with these assertions: it helped students acquire respect for scholarly work; it helped students learn self-discipline, and it prepared students for college. Further, the majority wanted it maintained in the curriculum. The teachersdisagreed with these evaluative statements: the students lack sophisticated writing skills; library facilities were inadequate; library skills should be the primary objective, and short papers should replace the research paper. The teachers were ambivalent toward the ideas that the research paper should be taught only to college-bound students and that it is useful for non-college bound students.8. Improvement suggestions favored included: incorporating a unit in logic and critical thinking, culminating with an oral report or written resume, and obtaining feedback from colleges on the quality of the students' preparation. Improvement proposals rejected included: teaching only the mechanics as a service, and having an in-service program. The teachers were ambivalent toward the assertion that the research paper be a separate course. Suggestions received with indifference were concluding with an audiovisual presentation and presenting the project in a team teaching situation.9. Teachers suggested that below the eleventh grade, only the mechanics be taught. Some offered procedural and curricular suggestions. Most chose to re-assert the positive value of this assignment in high school.Research paper preparation in these high schools can be characterized as consistent. The teachers expressed satisfaction with the current status, minimizing the need or desire for change. Any conclusions or implications from this study must be considered within its limitations, namely a select group of respondents in a limited geographic area.

Thesis (D.A.)--Illinois State University, 1987. / Title from title page screen, viewed August 30, 2005. Dissertation Committee: Russell Rutter (chair), Richard Dammers, Ray Lewis White, Stanley W. Renner, Catherine Konsky. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 164-184) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Rhode Island, 2009. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 196-207).

Thesis (MPhil)--University of Stellenbosch, 2006. / Bibliography. Also available via the Internet.

Thesis (M.Ed.)--University of Hong Kong, 1989. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Western Australia, 2004.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of North Texas, Dec., 2009. / Title from title page display. Includes bibliographical references.

The study examined research writing. The aim was to establish the nature of the relation between the quality of article and report writing in occupational therapy and the density of hedges in such writing. The texts comprised undergraduate reports, which were divided into two achievement groups, namely high and low achievers, and journal articles by occupational therapists. Articles were included because it was assumed that they exemplify good writing, and accordingly, would be appropriately hedged, and would provide a reliable basis for comparing the student groups. Hyland's (1998b) analytical framework was used. While statistical tests revealed no differences between the student groups, overall, the tests revealed significant differences in the use of hedges between the professional and student writers. In light of these findings, it is suggested that hedging in research writing be studied and taught to students in order to assist them in their studies and careers. / Linguistics / M.A. (Linguistics)

Thesis (D.A.)--Illinois State University, 1990. / Title from title page screen, viewed November 29, 2005. Dissertation Committee: Russell Rutter (chair), Douglas D. Hesse, Janice G. Neuleib, Ronald J. Fortune, Robert L. Baker. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 196-203) and abstract. Also available in print.