abstract: This action research project explores masters level graduate student writing and academic identity during one semester in an interdisciplinary masters program. Informing this study is a two part theoretical framework including the Academic Literacy Model (Lea and Street) and Wenger's concept of identity. The purpose of this exploration was to understand how first semester graduate students experienced academic writing and what characteristics of their academic identity emerged. A mixed-methods approach was used to collect both quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative data included results from the Inventory of Processes in Graduate Writing (Lavelle and Bushrow, 2007) and the Graduate Student Identity Survey. Qualitative data was collected through researcher observations, student blog entries, writing group transcripts, and individual interviews. The following themes emerge from the data: a) graduate students attribute their successes in writing to previous experiences, b) graduate students experience struggles related primarily to academic quality and faculty expectations, c) graduate students negotiate ways of being in the academy through figuring out expectations of faculty and program, d) work done in the writing group meetings shows evidence of meaning-making for the graduate students, e) the focus of the MA program was critically important to graduate students in the graduate writing project, e) participants' role as graduate students felt most strongly in contexts that include academic activity, and f) students acknowledge change and increasingly identify themselves as writers. Ideas for future cycles of research are discussed. / Dissertation/Thesis / Ed.D. Educational Leadership and Policy Studies 2012

No description available.

The implicit position of writing during Research Higher Degree (RHD) candidature shapes how students in science approach the task of writing their theses. The dedication of universities to the principles of research has pushed writing to the fringes of the research higher degree. When writing is pushed to the fringes, it is rarely taught explicitly as an integral part of the postgraduate program. This research has found that students who are concerned with writing a thesis often require writing to be discussed explicitly during their education. In response to the absence of explicit instruction on writing, students turn to the principles of research to discover how to write their theses. However, students find that writing belongs to a different epistemological tradition than scientific research. This investigation found that as students realise that research is different from writing, they often write their theses by mimicking the work of other published authors in the same field. These findings emerge from eight semi–structured interviews with linguistically homologous students from a science faculty at a research-intensive university in Australia. These interviews show that students are initiating their own writing groups to learn more about writing. This research presents a case study which culminates in recommendations about how to re-position writing as an explicit discourse requiring attention during the research higher degree. These writing recommendations are developed in this research by analysing the principles of writing programs, examining the literature on writing groups, and reflecting the experience of students during the research higher degree.

This project seeks to mediate one of the most significant issues with implementing writing groups in the secondary classroom: students do not know how to meaningfully engage in discussions about their writing. Students lack the necessary skills as well as understanding of the rhetorical nature of language to effectively request and provide feedback on pieces of writing. The application of theories of dialogue and collaboration to the research about writing groups suggest that the quality of student writing depends on the quality of their discussions about writing. Thus, my action research study investigates the types of language used between students in writing groups. I audio recorded students' writing group discussions and asked students to reflect on their experience in a written survey. Drawing on recorded small group conversations and student reflections, I consider how secondary students' rhetorical approach to writing groups allows them to collaboratively make meaning and improve their writing. The following research question guided my work: What rhetorical skills and understanding are necessary for meaningful participation in writing groups? In this context, meaningful participation is defined as productive discussions wherein comments build on one another as students create meaning and generate new ideas together. This was evaluated by the students themselves in their written reflections as well as my analysis of the recorded group discussions. Thematic analysis revealed that students who have an awareness of the rhetorical situation as well as skills such as responding and questioning are better able to participate meaningfully in writing groups.

No description available.