text:
Κύρια Thesis and Dissertation Writing in a Second Language: A Handbook for Supervisors
Thesis and Dissertation Writing in a Second Language: A Handbook for SupervisorsPaltridge Starf
Διαβάστε βιβλίο online
You may be interested in
Most frequently terms
You can write a book review and share your experiences. Other readers will always be interested in your opinion of the books you've read. Whether you've loved the book or not, if you give your honest and detailed thoughts then people will find new books that are right for them.
Thesis and Dissertation Writing in a Second Language The changing demographics of higher education in conjunction with imperatives of greater accountability and increasing support for research students mean that many supervisors find themselves challenged by the task of guiding non-native-speaker students to completion. Thesis and Dissertation Writing in a Second Language is a practical guide containing useful real-life examples. Tasks in each unit are designed for supervisors to use with their students to help them develop the skills and understanding necessary for successful thesis and dissertation writing. Each unit of the book focuses on a particular aspect of thesis and dissertation writing and the research and supervision process, including: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● aspects of language use particular to thesis and dissertation writing; typical chapter structures and organization; social and cultural expectations particular to writing a thesis or dissertation; what is expected of students in this kind of writing and at this level of study; expectations of students and supervisors in the supervision and thesis writing process; disciplinary differences in thesis writing; what examiners expect of theses and dissertations written in English-medium universities; insights into barriers faced by non-native-speaking students studying for a research degree. Thesis and Dissertation Writing in a Second Language is the ideal guide for all supervisors working with non-native-speaker students writing a thesis or dissertation in English. This accessible text provides guidelines to facilitate successful writing using tasks which encourage students to apply the points covered in each unit to their own situation. Brian Paltridge is Associate Professor of TESOL at the University of Sydney in Australia. Sue Starfield is Director of the Learning Centre, and a Visiting Fellow in the Department of Linguistics, University of New South Wales. They both have extensive experience in working with students writing a thesis or dissertation in English as their second language. Thesis and Dissertation Writing in a Second Language A handbook for supervisors Brian Paltridge and Sue Starfield First published 2007 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 270 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2007. "To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge's collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk." © 2007 Brian Paltridge and Sue Starfield All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Paltridge, Brian. Thesis and dissertation writing in a second language : a handbook for supervisors / Brian Paltridge and Sue Starfield. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-415-37170-4 (alk. paper) -- ISBN 978-0-415-37173-5 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Dissertations, Academic--Authorship. 2. Academic writing. 3. English language--Study and teaching--Foreign speakers. I. Starfield, Sue, 1952- II.Title. LB2369.P353 2007 808'.042--dc22 2006038301 ISBN 0-203-96081-5 Master e-book ISBN ISBN10: 0–415–37170–8 (hbk) ISBN10: 0–415–37173–2 (pbk) ISBN10: 0–203–96081–5 (ebk) ISBN13: 978–0–415–37170–4 (hbk) ISBN13: 978–0–415–37173–5 (pbk) ISBN13: 978–0–203–96081–3 (ebk) Contents List of illustrations vi Acknowledgements viii 1 Introduction 1 2 Working with second-language speakers of English 22 3 Thesis writing in English as a second language 43 4 Writing a research proposal 55 5 The overall shape of theses and dissertations 66 6 Writing the Introduction 82 7 Writing the background chapters 99 8 Writing the Methodology chapter 114 9 Writing the Results chapter 134 10 Writing Discussions and Conclusions 145 11 Writing the Abstract and Acknowledgements 155 12 Resources for thesis and dissertation writing 163 Appendix References Index 168 175 185 Illustrations Figures 1.1 Text and context in academic writing 2.1 Interrelationships between level of English language proficiency and research status 2.2 The role perception scale 3.1 A simplified model of the writing process 3.2 A more realistic model of the writing process 3.3 The reciprocal relationship of writing and thinking 6.1 The thesis hourglass 8.1 Visual map of typical components of a Methodology chapter 9.1 Making claims: some examples of hedging Tables 1.1 The social and cultural context of theses and dissertations 1.2 Attitudes to knowledge, approaches to learning and different levels of study 1.3 Characteristics of high and low quality theses 4.1 Purpose of each section of a research proposal 6.1 Typical moves in thesis Introductions 7.1 Degrees and the nature of the literature review 7.2 Steps and strategies for writing a literature review 7.3 Typical tenses used in the literature review 7.4 Choices of tense and reasons for their use 7.5 Linguistic strategies for commenting on previous research 7.6 Techniques for paraphrasing and summarizing 9.1 Typical elements in reporting Results sections of theses 10.1 Stance and engagement strategies 10.2 The typical structure of thesis-oriented Conclusions 10.3 Reporting, commenting and suggesting in the Conclusions section 18 24 38 46 47 47 84 123 143 8 9 19 61 83 100 104 109 109 111 112 135 149 152 153 Illustrations 11.1 Use of verb tenses in thesis and dissertation Abstracts 11.2 Moves in Acknowledgements sections vii 159 161 Boxes 2.1 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 6.1 6.2 6.3 7.1 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.9 8.10 8.11 8.12 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 11.1 Dai's story A 'simple' traditional thesis A 'complex' traditional thesis A topic-based thesis A compilation of research articles presented as a PhD thesis Summary of thesis types and their typical organizational structures Typical content of individual chapters Language patterns in Move 3c Extract from Introduction of a PhD thesis in physics Extract from Introduction of a PhD thesis in history Sample literature review chapters Extract from table of contents of a thesis by compilation Extract from table of contents of a PhD thesis in linguistics Extract from table of contents of a PhD thesis in sociology Extract from Research Design chapter of a PhD thesis in history Extract from Methodology chapter of a PhD thesis Example of justification of unit of analysis Description and evaluation of data sources Extract from Materials and Methods section of a PhD thesis in marine biology Account of how data were processed from a PhD thesis in marine biology Use of impersonal language in data analysis section of a PhD thesis in marine biology Writer's representation of herself as researcher in a PhD thesis in linguistics Extract from Methodology chapter of a PhD thesis in which writer explicitly discusses the role of the researcher Extract from Move 1 in Findings chapter of a PhD thesis in history Extract from a PhD thesis in engineering illustrating Move 1 Extract from a PhD thesis in history showing Move 2 Extract from an engineering thesis showing use of Move 2 Extract from Move 3 of Findings chapter of a history thesis Move 3 showing hedging in an engineering thesis Analysis of a PhD thesis abstract 34 68 69 71 72 73 76 90 92 95 102 115 116 117 118 120 121 124 125 127 128 130 131 136 138 139 140 142 143 156 Acknowledgements This book is the result of many years of teaching, talking and thinking about thesis and dissertation writing with our students, colleagues, friends and families. We thank them all. We would also like to acknowledge the many doctoral and master's students whose theses have contributed extracts to this book. Specifically we would like to thank Dwight Atkinson, Diane Belcher, Chris Casanave, Andy Curtis, Tony Dudley-Evans, Chris Feak, Liz HampLyons, Alan Hirvela, Cynthia Nelson, Louise Ravelli and John Swales for their interest, support and inspiration; Tracey-Lee Downey for her help with illustrations; our anonymous reviewers as well as Philip Mudd at RoutledgeFalmer for his support for our project and Lucy Wainwright, also at RoutledgeFalmer, for seeing our project through to completion. Being able to develop and teach our courses in thesis and dissertation writing has been and continues to be a rewarding experience for us both. From what our students tell us, they find the courses very helpful with the development of their own writing. Writing a research thesis in a language that is not your native one is undoubtedly a challenge. We hope that other students and their supervisors will find our book helpful in meeting that challenge and that the students' unique contribution to knowledge in their field will be enhanced. Sue would especially like to acknowledge her parents for their unconditional love and support and thank Alan, Sophia and Jeremy for putting up with her during the writing process. She would also like to thank Adrian Lee and Richard Henry for their encouragement and her Learning Centre colleagues for being passionate about writing. Brian would like to acknowledge the support he has in his faculty for the work that he does, and his colleagues and research students there for making it the place to be that it is. Chapter 1 Introduction Background to the book The aim of this book is to provide a handbook for supervisors who are working with students writing a thesis or dissertation1 in English as their second language. The book aims to unpack some of the tacit understanding that supervisors often have of the thesis or dissertation writing process that is often not shared by their students, and in this case, students who come from a language and culture background other than English. The book is also suitable for teachers who run courses or workshops on thesis and dissertation writing for second-language students. There are practical examples, learning tasks, and examples from completed theses and dissertations throughout the book. The learning tasks are designed to help students develop the skills and understandings necessary for successful thesis and dissertation writing. These learning tasks include a focus on aspects of language use particular to thesis and dissertation writing, as well as the social and cultural expectations particular to writing a thesis or dissertation, such as what is expected of students in this kind of writing and at this level of study, expectations of students and supervisors in the supervision and thesis writing process, the issue of disciplinary differences in thesis writing, and what examiners expect of theses and dissertations written in English-medium universities. The book includes a focus on theory and research, where appropriate, as well as providing practical advice on thesis and dissertation writing for secondlanguage students. It discusses issues that are common to all thesis and dissertation writers, such as understanding the setting and purpose of thesis and dissertation writing, the place of audience in thesis and dissertation writing, understanding writer/reader relationships, issues of writer identity, and the place of assumed background knowledge in thesis and dissertation writing. Each unit of the book focuses on a particular aspect of thesis and dissertation writing and the research and supervision process. The sequencing of the units follows the stages of carrying out research and writing a thesis or dissertation. Each of the units includes tasks for supervisors to use with their students. The tasks are written in a way that encourages students to 2 Introduction explore the points that are covered in each chapter in relation to their own discipline-specific and academic situation. While there are a large number of texts that offer support to students with assignment writing, there are far fewer that offer support to students who are writing a thesis or dissertation. Furthermore, assignment writing is a quantitatively and qualitatively different task to writing a thesis or dissertation and managing the writing process over a sustained period of time. There are a number of books that offer advice to research students but very few of these provide detailed instruction in the writing of the actual thesis and hardly any offer specific advice to students from non-English-speaking backgrounds (see Paltridge 2002 for further discussion of this). We hope that the approach to the conceptualizing and teaching of thesis and dissertation writing presented in this book will be of benefit to our disciplinary colleagues. The approach adopted is one which explicitly teaches the expectations, conventions, structure and organization of the various sections of the typical thesis and dissertation. It also draws on authentic instances of theses and dissertations to illustrate these features of the texts. While the aim of this book is to make the issues we discuss clear to second-language students and their supervisors, there is much in this book that will also be of use to native-speaker students, and to students who have already studied in an English-medium university but have not previously written a text of the kind we are discussing. Background to thesis and dissertation writing in a second language A large number of second-language students attending British, US, Canadian, Australian and New Zealand universities are enrolled in a degree that requires the writing of a thesis or dissertation in English. There are also many students enrolled in degrees in places such as South Africa and Hong Kong who are required to write a thesis or dissertation in English for whom English is not their first or dominant language. Such students often have difficulty in meeting the demands of the kind of writing required of them in this particular genre. This is especially the case for students who come from a context where the conventions and expectations of academic writing may be quite different to the situation they now find themselves in. This chapter discusses: ● ● ● the context in which theses and dissertations are produced and the implications of this for second-language writers from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds; the very particular social and cultural context of theses and dissertations and how this impacts on what students write and how they can write it; approaches to knowledge and approaches to learning at different levels of study; Introduction ● ● ● ● ● 3 cross-cultural issues in thesis and dissertation writing; the issue of being a second-language writer in research settings; critical issues in thesis and dissertation writing; disciplinary differences in thesis and dissertation writing; what universities and examiners expect of theses and dissertations. The social and cultural context of thesis and dissertation writing We have found that a useful way to discuss thesis and dissertation writing with our students is by starting with an examination of the social and cultural context in which the student's thesis or dissertation is being produced. Factors that might be discussed with the student, for example, include: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● the setting of the text; the focus and perspective of the text; the purpose/s of the text; the intended audience for the text, their role and purpose in reading the text; the relationship between writers and readers of the text; expectations, conventions and requirements for the text; the background knowledge, values, and understandings it is assumed the student shares with their readers, including what is important to their reader and what is not; the relationship the text has with other texts. Each of these is important to consider as they all, in their way, have an impact on what the student writes and the way they write it. Often these issues are mutually understood by people working in the university, but not explicitly stated to students. This discussion can include values and expectations that are held in a particular area of study, the audience students are writing for, and different expectations at different levels of study. We have found it useful to have this discussion with students before they start writing their thesis or dissertation, as well as before we look at examples of actual texts with them. Some of the issues we raise with our students are discussed below. The setting of the students' text The setting of the student's text includes the kind of university and level of study the thesis or dissertation is being written in. This may be a comprehensive research university, or it may be a university of technology where different sorts of work and different sorts of research projects might be more especially valued. The thesis or dissertation may be being written for an 4 Introduction honours, a master's, or a doctoral degree. This has implications for the breadth and scale of the student's research project. Another important issue is the kind of study area the student's text is being written in; that is, whether it is written in what Becher and Trowler (2001) call a 'hard' or a 'soft' discipline, a 'pure' or 'applied' discipline, or a 'convergent' or 'divergent' area of study. This has important implications for understanding the values, ideologies and research perspectives that are prioritized in the students' area/s of study. Students can be asked, for example, to consider whether academic staff in their area of study share the same basic ideologies, judgments and values (a convergent area of study) or whether their research perspectives are drawn from other areas of study (a divergent area of study). They might consider whether there is more variation in what might be considered 'research' in their particular area of study, and to what extent this makes a difference as to what students can 'say' and do. This discussion helps students to place their dissertation in its particular academic setting as well as to bring to the fore the sets of values that hold in their area of study that might be shared by members of academic staff, but not openly expressed by them. Research perspective, topic and purpose of the thesis or dissertation Students can be asked to consider the research perspective and topic of their research project and the extent to which this impacts on how they will write their thesis or dissertation. They can consider, for example, whether they are doing a quantitative or qualitative study or whether their research project is an example of 'mixed method' research, and what particular assumptions these perspectives imply. This includes what sorts of claims can be made in the particular perspective and area of study, and what claims cannot. Students can then be asked to consider the actual purpose of their research, and in turn, their thesis or dissertation. This may, for example, be to answer a question, to solve a problem, or to prove something, as well as to contribute to knowledge in their area of study. The purpose may equally be to display knowledge and understanding of a particular topic, to demonstrate particular skills, to convince a reader, as well as, often, to 'gain admission to a particular area of study'. Students are often required in this kind of writing not only to answer their research question/s, but also to 'show what they know' in doing this (see Chapters 3, 5 and 6 where this is discussed in more detail). The audience for theses and dissertations A further issue that students should consider is the intended audience for their thesis or dissertation, their readers' role and purpose in reading their text, how their readers will react to what they read, and the criteria they will use for assessing their text. For example, are the students writing for academics in the Introduction 5 field, for their examiners, or for their supervisor? And who counts most in judging whether their text meets the requirements of their particular area of study? Theses and dissertations are typically written for a primary readership of one or more examiners. In some cases the student's supervisor may be one of the examiners and in other cases they may not. If the supervisor is not one of the student's examiners, they will be a secondary reader of the student's text, not a primary one. This difference between 'primary' and 'secondary' readerships (Brookes and Grundy 1990) is significant, and is often not immediately obvious to students. In the case of thesis and dissertation writing, it is the primary reader that is the final judge as to the quality of the student's piece of work, rather than the secondary reader. As Kamler and Threadgold (1997: 53) point out, a dominant or 'primary' reader within the academy, 'quite simply counts more than other readers' (such as friends, learning advisors and anyone else the student shows their text to). It is important, then, for students to consider the expert, 'all-powerful reader' of their texts who can either accept, or reject, their writing as being coherent and consistent with the conventions of the target discourse community (Johns 1990) and how they will (potentially) read their text. The relationship between writers and readers of theses and dissertations Next, students can be asked to consider the relationship between their readers and themselves as writers and how this impacts on what they say and how they can say it. They can also be asked to consider how this relationship changes for other academic texts such as research articles and conference presentations. Writers of theses and dissertations, for example, are typically 'novices writing for experts' whereas writers of research articles are generally 'experts writing for experts'. Conference presentations, for research students, are often a mix of the two. Background knowledge, values and understandings in thesis and dissertation writing Another useful topic to discuss is the background knowledge, values, and understandings it is assumed students will share with their primary readers (their examiners), what is important to their readers, and what is not. This, students will discover, impacts on how much 'display of knowledge' their text should contain, to what extent they should 'show what they know', as well as what issues they should address, what boundaries they can cross (Kamler and Threadgold 1997), and how they might do this. 6 Introduction Discourse community expectations and thesis and dissertation writing It is also useful to discuss general expectations and conventions for theses and dissertations, as well as the particular expectations, conventions and requirements of the students' area of study. Students can be asked how a thesis or dissertation might typically be organized and how this might vary for a particular research topic and kind of study. The next issue is what might typically be contained in each chapter of the thesis or dissertation and what amount of variation might be allowed in all of this. A further important topic is the level of critical analysis required of students at the particular level and area of study and the level of originality and 'contribution to knowledge' expected of the students' research projects. Relationship with other texts A final important point to discuss with students is the relationship their thesis or dissertation has with other texts such as monographs, journal articles and research reports, as well as how they are expected to show the relationship between what they are writing and what others have written before them on their topic. Students can be asked how they might use other texts to support arguments they wish to make, as well as differences between acceptable and unacceptable textual borrowings (Pennycook 1996) and differences between reporting and plagiarizing. The context of theses and dissertations Table 1.1 (see p.8) is an analysis of the social and cultural context of theses and dissertations based on this set of questions. This table shows the range of factors that impact on how a student's text is written, how it will be read and, importantly, how it will be assessed. Applications 1 Ask your student to consider the following in relation to their thesis or dissertation. To what extent do these factors influence what they write and how they write it? ● ● ● the institutional setting of the text; the focus and perspective of the text; the intended audience for the text. Introduction 2 Ask your student to consider how these factors influence how they write their text: ● ● 3 7 university expectations, conventions and requirements for the thesis or dissertation; the background knowledge, values, and understandings it is assumed they will share with their readers, including what is important to their readers and what is not. Ask your student to discuss the differences between reporting, paraphrasing and plagiarizing. Ask what strategies they use when they are paraphrasing other writers' work (see Bailey 2003: 21–22 for a useful activity on paraphrasing). Attitudes to knowledge and different levels of study A further useful topic to discuss with students is attitudes to knowledge, learning approaches, and teaching and learning strategies at different levels of study – also how these are often different in English-medium universities from those in second-language-speaker students' own counties. Ballard and Clanchy (1984, 1997) discuss each of these, including how they change as students progress in their studies. For example, the primary focus in an English secondary school education is often 'conserving' knowledge whereas, as a student continues on to tertiary studies, there is often a shift to critiquing and 'extending' knowledge. This may entail a shift from a focus on correctness, to 'simple' originality and, in turn, to 'creative' originality and the creation of new knowledge. Students, thus, often move from summarizing and describing information, to questioning, judging and recombining information, through to a deliberate search for new ideas, data and explanations. Higher levels of study still expect correctness and the recombination of information, however. They also often expect the creation of new knowledge, and a search for new evidence and interpretations (Ballard and Clanchy 1997). Table 1.2 presents relationships between teaching and learning strategies and attitudes to knowledge at different levels of study in English-medium institutions. This figure is a useful starting point for a discussion with students on these issues, including cross-cultural differences and expectations at different levels of study. Ballard and Clanchy point out, importantly, that the attitudes and strategies they describe are not fixed and static, but on a continuum. In some courses, students vary in the strategies and attitudes to knowledge that they adopt. Equally, the learning strategies students adopt Table 1.1 The social and cultural context of theses and dissertations Setting of the text The kind of university and level of study, the kind of degree (e.g. honours, master's or doctoral, research or professional). Study carried out in a 'hard' or 'soft', pure or applied, convergent or divergent area of study (Becher and Trowler 2001). Focus and Quantitative, qualitative or mixed method research. perspective Claims that can be made, claims that cannot be made. of the text Faculty views on what 'good' research is. Purpose of To answer a question, to solve a problem, to prove something, to the text contribute to knowledge, to display knowledge and understanding, to demonstrate particular skills, to convince a reader, to gain admission to a particular area of study. Audience, role To judge the quality of the research. and purpose Primary readership of one or more examiners, secondary in reading readership of everyone else who reads their work. the text How readers will react to what they read, the criteria they will use for assessing the text, who counts the most in judging the quality of the text. Relationship Students writing for experts, for admission to an area of study (the between writers primary readership), students writing for peers, for advice (the and readers secondary readership). of the text Writer identity, authority and positioning. Expectations, An understanding and critical appraisal of relevant literature. conventions A clearly defined and comprehensive investigation of the research topic. and Appropriate use of research methods and techniques for the requirements research question. for the text Ability to interpret results, develop conclusions and link them to previous research. Level of critical analysis, originality and contribution to knowledge expected. Literary quality and standard of presentation expected. Level of grammatical accuracy required. How the text is typically organized, how the text might vary for a particular research topic, area of study, kind of study and research perspective. What is typically contained in each chapter. The amount of variation allowed in what should be addressed and how it should be addressed. The university's formal submission requirements in terms of format, procedures and timing. Background The background knowledge, values, and understandings it is assumed knowledge, students will share with their readers, what is important to their values, and readers, what is not important to their readers. understandings How much knowledge students are expected to display, the extent to which students should show what they know, what issues students should address, what boundaries students can cross. Relationship How to show the relationship between the present research and the text has other people's research on the topic, what counts as valid previous with other research, acceptable and unacceptable textual borrowings, texts differences between reporting and plagiarizing. Source: Paltridge 2006: 100. By kind permission of Continuum Table 1.2 Attitudes to knowledge, approaches to learning and different levels of study Attitudes to knowledge Conserving knowledge Critiquing knowledge Extending knowledge Learning approaches Reproductive Analytical Speculative Role of the teacher almost exclusive source of knowledge; direction/ guidance; assessment coordinator of learning resources; questioner, critical guide, gadfly; principal source of assessment Characteristic activities transmission of information and demonstration of skills; overt moral and social training more experienced colleague and collaborator; preliminary critic and advisor; patron discussion/ advice on ideas and methods on individual basis; modelling of hypothetical and creative thinking Teaching strategies Assessment Learning strategies analysis of information and ideas within interpretive frameworks; modelling of demand for critical approach to knowledge and conventions tests of memory assignment/exams recall and practical requiring critical demonstration of analysis and problem skills; emphasis on solving; emphasis replication; geared on originality, quality to ranking of interpretation Aim simple transfer of knowledge and skills Type of activities memorization and imitation; summarizing, describing, identifying, and applying formulae and information independent research; thesis and papers of publishable quality; contribution to field of knowledge independent and development critical styles of of speculative, thinking; critical development of intelligence; capacity for theory expansion and abstraction of knowledge base (theory, data, techniques) analytical and speculating and critical thinking; hypothesizing; questioning, judging, research design, and recombining implementation ideas and information and reporting; into an argument deliberate search for new ideas, data, explanations 10 Introduction Table 1.2 continued Attitudes to knowledge, approaches to learning and different levels of study Attitudes to knowledge Conserving knowledge Critiquing knowledge Extending knowledge Learning approaches Reproductive Analytical Speculative Characteristic questions what? What if? Aim correctness why? how? how valid? how important? 'simple' originality, reshaping material into a different pattern creative originality, totally new approach/ new knowledge Source: adapted from Ballard and Clanchy 1997: 12 vary in relation to the different learning tasks they are undertaking. Notwithstanding, English-medium academic institutions often share a dominant set of attitudes towards knowledge and learning strategies that are not immediately apparent to many second-language students writing a thesis or dissertation in English (Ballard and Clanchy 1997). Application Discuss Table 1.2 with your student. How similar or different is this to their previous study experiences? For example, which of these characteristics most typically describe their secondary school education? Which most typically describe their undergraduate and postgraduate study? Which of these are important for them to consider in their thesis and dissertation writing? Cross-cultural issues in thesis and dissertation writing Writing across cultures There are a number of cultural issues to consider in thesis and dissertation writing. An important issue is cultural differences in the writing and reading of this kind of academic genre. The area of research known as contrastive rhetoric compares writing across languages and cultures. Many studies in this area have focused on academic writing. Contrastive rhetoric has its origins in the work of Kaplan (1966) who examined different patterns in the academic writing of students from a number of different languages and cultures. Introduction 11 Although Kaplan has since revised his strong claim that differences in academic writing are the result of culturally different ways of thinking, many studies have found important differences in the ways in which academic texts are written in different languages and cultures. Other studies, however, have found important similarities in academic writing across cultures. Kubota (1997), for example, argues that studies in the area of contrastive rhetoric tend to overgeneralize the cultural characteristics of writing from a few specific examples. She argues that just as Japanese expository writing, for example, has more than one rhetorical style, so does English, and that it is misleading to try to reduce rhetorical styles to the one single norm. Leki (1997) has argued that contrastive rhetoric oversimplifies not only other cultures but also ways of writing in English. She points out that while secondlanguage students may often be taught to write in a standard way, professional writers do not necessarily write this way in English. She argues that many rhetorical devices that are said to be typical of Chinese, Japanese and Thai writing, for example, also occur in certain contexts in English. Equally, features that are said to be typical of English writing appear on occasion in other languages as well. Contrastive rhetoric, she argues, can most usefully be seen, not as the study of culture-specific thought patterns, but as the study of 'the differences or preferences in the pragmatic and strategic choices that writers make in response to external demands and cultural histories' (Leki 1997: 244). Kubota and Lehner (2004) have argued that contrastive rhetoric takes a deficit view of students' second-language academic writing. They also argue that much contrastive rhetoric research presents differences in academic writing that do not always exist. An example of this is the view of Chinese academic writing being circular and indirect and English academic writing being linear and direct. Some Chinese students have said: What do you mean when you say English academic writing is linear? In English, an essay writer says what they are going to say, says it, then says it again. This really is a circular, rather than a linear way of writing. (Pennycook, personal communication) Other times, a writing advisor may look at a student's family name and make assumptions about their writing on the basis of this, without knowing if they are indeed of that language and culture background. An example of this is an Australian student with a Chinese husband who was given advice on the circular nature of 'oriental' writing and the need to be more western in her writing on the basis of her (Chinese) family name. In this case, the advisor pre-judged the student's writing and made assumptions about it solely on his preconceived ideas about Chinese and English academic writing and the student's ethnicity (Pennycook 2001). An important feature of a well-written text is the unity and connectedness with which individual sentences relate to each other. This is, in part, the 12 Introduction result of how ideas are presented in the text, but also depends on the ways in which the writer has created cohesive links within and between sentences as well as within and between paragraphs in the text. This is especially important for English writing which is sometimes referred to as writer-responsible, as opposed to other languages (such as Japanese) where written texts are sometimes described as being reader-responsible (see Chapter 3 for further discussion of this). That is, in English it is often the writer's responsibility to make the sense of their text clear to their reader. Theses and dissertations in English, then, are characterized by a large amount of 'display of knowledge'; that is, telling the reader something they may already know and, in some cases, may know better than the student. Often a second-language student will say 'I didn't say that because I thought you already knew it'. This, however, is exactly what thesis and dissertation writers do in English, and is something many second-language students may find strange or unnatural. It is important, then, not to take a stereotyped view of how students from one culture will necessarily write in another. There may be substantial differences, and there may not. It is not always easy to predict what these differences may be. One way of finding this out is to ask students if they have written the same kind of text in their first language and in what ways that text was similar or different to the one they are now writing in English. Prince (2000) did this in a study in which she asked Polish and Chinese students who had already written a dissertation in their first language how similar or different they found dissertation writing in English. She found that, although the students had all written a dissertation in their first language, they had little idea of how they should do this in English. She also found that different students had different views on how they wanted to represent themselves in their English texts. She argues that we 'should be wary of generalizing about students from different cultural backgrounds, because all students are individuals' (Prince 2000: 1) and may have their own preferences and ways of writing that are especially important to them. Speaking across cultures There is also potential for misunderstandings between students and their supervisors in the kind of cross-cultural setting involved in supervising a second-language student. The area of research known as cross-cultural pragmatics looks at this in particular. Researchers in this area have looked at the difficulties created by transferring one behaviour or rhetorical strategy into another language and culture without realizing things may be done differently in that language and culture. It may be something as simple as walking into someone's office without knocking (because they saw the door was open) or it may involve transferring the way of asking for something from one culture into another without realizing the way of doing this is different in the other language and culture. A student may think, for example, Introduction 13 that adding the word 'please' adds politeness to a request, which in some ways it does, without realizing that sending their supervisor an email saying 'I've finished Chapter 3. Please check it' is not sufficiently polite (in most circumstances) for this kind of request. Different views of cultural appropriateness, thus, can lead to misunderstandings and prevent effective cross-cultural communication. This is particularly the case where students and supervisors come from different language and cultural backgrounds. As Cargill (2000) points out, although students have passed the university's English language admission requirements, they are often under-prepared for the face-to-face interactions that are part of the student/supervisor arrangement. These face-to-face interactions are a crucial part of the supervisory process. They are, however, fraught with the potential for misunderstandings, especially in cross-cultural communication situations (Moses 1984). Supervisors and students, then, need to be aware of and expect cross-cultural differences in their interactions with each other. If communication problems arise, they need to be prepared to talk about them. Native speakers of a language, in fact, are often much less tolerant of these kinds of errors in cross-cultural communication situations than they are, for example, of grammatical errors. If a student says something the supervisor thought was rude, it is easy for the supervisor to think the student 'meant to be rude', rather than that they did not now how to do something in a culturally different way. These are issues which are discussed in further chapters of the book. Applications 1 2 Ask your student to tell you what is typical of academic writing in their first language and culture. Then ask them to compare this to their understanding of academic writing in English. Ask your student to think of a situation where they have had a cross-cultural communication problem in an academic setting. Discuss what happened and what might have caused the miscommunication. Think of ways in which the situation might have been resolved. Second-language academic writing and identity Writer identity is a key issue in written academic discourse, and especially thesis and dissertation writing. This is a particularly difficult issue for many second-language writers. Academic writing is often presented to students as something that is faceless and impersonal. Students are told, for example, 'to leave their personalities at the door' (Hyland 2002: 352) and not to use personal pronouns such as 'I' which show what is being said is the student's view 14 Introduction or place in things. As Hyland points out, however, 'almost everything we write says something about us and the sort of relationship that we want to set up with our readers'. Establishing writer identity is often difficult for secondlanguage writers. This is further complicated by students having a different way of writing and different 'voice' in their first-language academic writing (see Hirvela and Belcher 2001 for further discussion of this). Prince (2000) looked at the issue of writer identity in second-language thesis writing. Her interest was in the ways in which second-language writers might be influenced (or not) by their experience of having written a thesis in their first language and culture. She looked at the experiences of a group of Chinese and Polish students, all of whom had written a thesis in their first language prior to writing a thesis in English. She found a major theme that emerged in her study was whether the students had to give up, or change, their personal identity in order to write a successful thesis in English. Prince tells how one of her Polish students, Ilona, fiercely fought to retain her personal and individual style of writing, but in the end found she had to give this away in order to pass. Bartolome (1998: xiii) argues that learning to succeed in western academic settings is not just a matter of language, but of knowing the 'linguistically contextualised language' of the particular discourse that is valued in the particular academic setting. Many students find this a difficult thing to do. They may fear a loss of cultural identity and not wish to be 'drowned' in the new academic culture. Ilona, the Polish student in Prince's study, felt exactly this. Other student experiences reported on in the research literature, however, have been slightly different. A Chinese student, for example, in Shen's (1989) study felt that learning to write in a new way added another dimension to himself and to his view of the world. This did not mean, he said, that he had lost his Chinese identity. Indeed, he said, he would never lose this. Students do, however, have to learn to write in a way that is often new and different for them and have to balance their new identity with their old one. This is as much about cultural views of writing as it is about new and different relationships between student writers with their new and imagined readers, their supervisors and their examiners. As Silva and Matsuda point out, writing is always embedded in a complex web of relationships between writers and readers. These relationships, further, are constantly changing. As they argue: the writer's task is not as simple as constructing an accurate representation of reality; the writer also has to negotiate, through the construction of the text, his or her own view of these elements of writing with the views held by the readers. (Silva and Matsuda 2002: 253) Introduction 15 Student writers, then: do not write in isolation but within networks of more and less powerfully situated colleagues and community members. They learn to forge alliances with those community members with whom they share values or whom they perceive will benefit them in some way and to resist when accommodating does not suit them. (Casanave 2002: xiii–xiv) These are all factors that influence what a student writes and how they position themselves in relation to what they write. A further complication is that some students may come from backgrounds where they have considerable standing in their field of study and find it difficult to be told they need to take on the voice of a novice academic writer as they write in their second language. Hirvela and Belcher (2001) discuss this issue, arguing that we need to know more about the ways our students present themselves in their first-language writing, and about their first-language and culture identities, so we can help them deal with the issue of identity in their second-language academic writing. The issue of writer identity, thus, is important and is a theme we return to in later chapters of this book. Applications 1 2 Ask your student to discuss how they show their opinion about something in their first-language writing. Is this the same in English or different? How easy or difficult do they find doing this in English? Why? The quotes below relate what some second-language students in a study carried out by Cadman (2000) had to say about expressing opinions in thesis writing. Show these to your student and ask them to comment on them. How similar or different are these to how they feel? It's not really easy to be critical of the works of others. This is contrary to what I've learned from my mother who was my first teacher. To criticize and to judge the articles or literature are something new for me, because in my undergraduate study in [my home country] our study approaches were more passive, we became receivers of knowledge and we rarely argued about our subjects. Disciplinary differences in thesis and dissertation writing Disciplinary differences in academic writing have been studied by a number of researchers. Ken Hyland (1999; 2005; 2005b) for example has looked at 16 Introduction disciplinary differences in research articles and academic textbooks. These are not the same as theses and dissertations, however. Research articles and textbooks have different audiences and different goals from theses and dissertations. Research articles, as mentioned earlier, are 'experts writing for experts'. Thesis and dissertation writing, however, is much more a case of students writing 'for admission to an area of study'. While there are some similarities between each of these kinds of texts, there are also important differences. Hyland's (2004a) study of master's and doctoral students' writing points to many of the unique features of thesis and dissertation writing, as well as important disciplinary differences in this kind of writing. One important feature he examines is metadiscourse in thesis and dissertation writing; that is, the ways thesis writers use language to organize what they want to say in their text, how they 'shape their arguments to the needs and expectations of their target readers' (Hyland 2004a: 134) and how they show their stance towards the content and the reader of their text. This topic is returned to in detail later in this book. It is important to point out, however, that Hyland did find there were important differences in the use of metadiscourse across disciplines. He also found there were differences in the use of metadiscourse across degrees. He found, for example, that PhD students used much more metadiscourse to show the organization of their texts than did master's students. This could be partly explained, he suggests, by the longer length of PhD texts requiring students to show the arrangement of their texts more than at the master's level. It could also be, he suggests, the result of doctoral students being generally more sophisticated writers than master's students and much more aware of the need to write reader-friendly texts and to engage with their readers. In terms of disciplinary differences he found social science disciplines used the most metadiscourse overall, especially in the use of hedges (such as possible, might, tend to and perhaps). The social sciences students also used more attitude markers (such as unfortunately, surprisingly, and interestingly) and self mentions (such as I, we, my and our). Thompson (1999) carried out a study in which he interviewed PhD supervisors about organization, presentation, citation and argumentation practices in PhD theses in different areas of study. He looked, in particular, at theses written in the areas of agricultural botany and agricultural economics. He found a wide range of differences, even in the length of the texts that he examined. He also found quite different views of how students were told they should position themselves in relation to their texts. One supervisor, for example, argued that the research project should be the main focus of the thesis and the author should not intrude on this by using the personal 'I' in their writing. Another supervisor gave the opposite advice when he felt the use of personal pronouns would help the student to communicate their ideas. Thompson's work suggests that is really not possible to say there is one single way in which theses and dissertations should be written in a university. How the thesis is written will be influenced by a number of things. It will be influenced by the set of values Introduction 17 underlying the particular discipline in which it is written, by the research perspective the student adopts, as well as by advice that is given to the student by their supervisor (see Chapter 5 for further discussion of thesis types and disciplinary differences in thesis and dissertation writing). Applications 1 2 The chart in Figure 1.1 illustrates the relationship between the student's text, their course of study, the academic discipline in which they are writing, and the institution in which they are studying. Each of these has an influence on the form and content of the students' text and needs to be considered in terms of its influence on what students write and how they write it. Ask your student to look at this figure and to discuss how each of these impact on what they write and how they write it. Ask your student to go to the library, or to search an online thesis database (see Chapter 12), and make a copy of the table of contents of three theses or dissertations written in their area of study. Ask them also to copy the table of contents from three theses or dissertations written in other, quite different, areas of study. Ask your student to make notes about the similarities and differences between each of these theses or dissertations. What seems to be typical of a thesis or dissertation written in their area of study and what does not? What universities and examiners expect of theses and dissertations While theses and dissertations may be written differently in different areas of study, universities typically apply the same criteria to their examination. Many universities send examiners a list of criteria to refer to while they are reading a student's thesis or dissertation. These often vary according to the level of study. They are normally, however, some kind of variation on the following list of points: ● ● ● ● ● an awareness and understanding of relevant previous research on the topic; a critical appraisal of previous research on the topic; a clearly defined and comprehensive investigation of the topic; the appropriate application of research methods and techniques; a thorough presentation and interpretation of results; 18 ● ● ● Introduction appropriately developed conclusions and implications that are linked to the research framework and findings; a high standard of literary quality and presentation; a contribution to knowledge on the particular topic. The last of these points, contribution to knowledge, is especially important at the PhD level where examiners are often asked if the thesis 'makes a substantive original contribution' to knowledge in the particular area. It is helpful to discuss these criteria with students early on in their candidature so they can consider how they impact on how they carry out and write up their research. A special edition of the International Journal of Educational Research published in 2004 addressed the issue of doctoral thesis examination. The study by Holbrook et al. (2004) published in this issue looked at 803 examiners' reports on 301 theses from three different universities. From their analysis they identified the list of qualities shown in Table 1.3 (on p.19) as being characteristic of 'high quality' PhD theses. Their definition of a high quality thesis was one that was accepted for the degree by all examiners without requiring any revisions. These qualities include the significance of the student's research topic, potential of the thesis for publication, use of the research literature in the design of the study and writing of the thesis, logic The academic institution The academic discipline The level of study The writing task The student The thesis or dissertation Figure 1.1 Text and context in academic writing Source: adapted from Samraj 2002 Introduction 19 Table 1.3 Characteristics of high and low quality theses General criteria Thesis topic and approach Literature review Communicative competence Publications arising Specific criteria High quality theses Low quality theses Significance and challenge of the topic Fusion of originality of the approach with realization of a significant contribution to the field Expert use of the literature in design of the study and discussion of the findings Thorough, clear and incisive reporting of the literature Questionable integrity of the approach of thesis or presentation of findings Inadequate coverage or focus of the literature in relation to the study Inaccuracies and omissions in referencing Manifest editorial inadequacies Recognized need for early publication of/from the study Source: Holbrook et al. 2004: 117 and clarity of the reporting and discussion of findings, and the extent to which the findings can be applied in the field. Holbrook and her colleagues also identified characteristics of 'low quality' PhD theses. Low quality theses were defined as theses that were required to be revised and resubmitted for re-examination by at least half of the examiners. The characteristics of these theses are also shown in Table 1.3. With low quality theses there was a wider range of agreement amongst examiners. The reports written for these theses were much longer than those that were written for high quality theses. They contained a preponderance of instructed comment, more negative judgment, and a greater emphasis on editorial errors and inaccuracies in the referencing of the literature than was the case for high quality thesis reports. Applications 1 2 Ask your student to look at the criteria on pp.17–18 and in Table 1.3 and discuss how each of these impacts on how they will carry out and write up their research. The following are quotes from studies which have looked at thesis examination. Ask your student to read these quotes and to discuss what they mean for the writing of their thesis. 20 Introduction A research thesis ought to: ● ● ● ● be a report of work that others would want to read; tell a compelling story articulately whilst pre-empting inevitable critiques; carry the reader into complex realms, and inform and educate him/her; be sufficiently speculative or original to command respectful peer attention. (Winter et al. 2000: 32–35; Mullins and Kiley 2002: 372) One of the common descriptors of a poor thesis, across all disciplines, was 'sloppiness'. Sloppiness might be demonstrated by typographical errors, or mistakes in calculations, referencing or footnotes. The concern with sloppiness was that examiners considered it was an indication that the research itself might not be rigorous and the results and conclusions could not be trusted. (Mullins and Kiley 2002: 378) Overview of the book This chapter has provided a background to thesis and dissertation writing as well as introducing a number of issues that are of particular relevance to second-language thesis and dissertation writers. It has discussed the social and cultural contexts of thesis and dissertation writing and factors within this context that impact on the writing of the student's thesis and dissertation. It has discussed the relationship between thesis writers and readers, including what examiners expect to see in a successful student text. It has also discussed disciplinary differences in thesis and dissertation writing, as well as approaches to knowledge at different levels of study. Cross-cultural issues and writer identity in thesis and dissertation writing have also been discussed. A number of these themes will be taken up in greater detail further in the book. The next chapter of the book discusses what it means to be a non-nativespeaker research student in an English-medium university. It looks at definitions of the 'non-native-speaker student' and the challenges that face non-native-speaker students in this role. It discusses, in more detail, crosscultural communication problems between non-native-speaker students and their supervisors as well as suggesting strategies for dealing with these. It also offers suggestions for ways in which supervisors can help support non-nativespeaker students in learning to become successful research students and thesis or dissertation writers. Introduction 21 Note 1 The terms 'thesis' and 'dissertation' are used in different ways in different parts of the world. In this book, the term 'dissertation' is used for undergraduate and master's degrees and 'thesis' for doctoral degrees. Chapter 2 Working with second-language speakers of English The first language of many international candidates is not English and this adds to the time and effort supervisors in all disciplines put into verbal communication and candidates' written work. Supervisors are additionally burdened both by their knowledge of the distinct linguistic, cultural, familial and professional pressures that international candidates' circumstances exert on the candidate, and by perceived financial pressures from universities to take on increasing numbers of full-fee-paying international candidates. (Sinclair 2005: 19) Introduction The above extract from a recent investigation into the pedagogy of 'good' PhD supervision provides a summary of the motivation behind the writing of this book. Supervising research students who are second-language speakers of English, whatever the language background of the supervisor, provides an additional challenge in terms of the multiple factors alluded to in the quote. It would appear that there is an absence of relevant material in this area that might support supervisors of second-language speakers. A recent survey of 22 guides to supervising doctoral students and dissertation writing revealed that only five of the books provided a comprehensive analysis of the needs of international students (Dedrick and Watson 2002). At the same time, it is our experience that many international students, regardless of language background, are uniquely placed to carry out and contribute to important and valuable research by virtue of the diverse perspectives that they are able to bring to the research. Not all second-language speakers of English enrolled in research degrees are however international students: many are citizens or permanent residents of the country in which they are studying and the topic begs a wider investigation. Above all, our intention in writing this book is to reduce the perception that the supervision of students from non-English-speaking backgrounds need be an 'additional burden'. Working with second-language speakers of English 23 Second-language research students in the era of globalization The issue of who second-language English-speaking students are is a vexed one linguistically, educationally and politically. We acknowledge that being a speaker of English as a second, third or fourth language is very much a feature of the globalized reality of the twenty-first century and that, for many, the dominance of English at the perceived expense of other languages is not unproblematic. In 1999, Graddol estimated that the overall number of native speakers of English as a percentage of the world's population was declining. Depending on the criteria used to define non-nativeness, native English speakers may already constitute a minority. Moreover, as Swales (2004) points out, the internationalization and the concomitant Anglicization of the research world have encouraged the dominance of English as the international language of research. The clear divisions of say 20 or 30 years ago, characterized by academics who were predominantly English first-language speakers supervising the research of growing numbers of second-language students, have given way to today's more complex picture. Many supervisors would themselves be from a non-English-speaking background and would be publishing and communicating in English via conferences, journals and books. Moreover, there are thousands of second-language graduate students engaged in master's and doctoral studies in countries such as Hong Kong, Singapore and in other parts of Asia and indeed in Africa, where English is essential for reading and writing but not necessarily used in daily communication with supervisors and colleagues (Braine 2002). Rather than a dichotomy between first- and second-language speakers of English, it may be more useful, Swales suggests, to think of academic English proficiency as a continuum. At one pole are broadly English proficient (BEP) scholars and researchers who are either firstor second-language speakers of English and, if second-language speakers, practically academically bilingual within their disciplinary field, and, at the other pole, those scholars who are more narrowly English proficient (NEP). NEP researchers are second-language speakers who may be commencing advanced study in an anglophone country and may have only a reading knowledge of academic English and weaker oral or written abilities. They are often, but not always, what Swales refers to as junior researchers: those starting out on their academic or other careers including PhD candidates, postdoctoral scholars and new researchers, while senior researchers are academics well established in the anglophone world of research, writing and publication. We have tried to capture these interrelationships in a simple matrix (see Figure 2.1). It is only the BEP senior researcher who requires little or no assistance with successful research communication. Junior researchers, whether first- or second-language speakers, can all benefit from more explicit research communication induction, while the NEP senior researcher may still be 24 Working with second-language speakers of English Junior researchers Needs academic English and academic literacy support, especially for thesis writing May benefit from explicit thesis writing support Broad English Proficiency (BEP) Narrow English Proficiency (NEP) Could benefit from academic writing support Should not need additional support Senior researchers Figure 2.1 Interrelationships between level of English language proficiency and research status struggling with publication and communication in English. The growing number of journal articles and handbooks on the topic of assisting academics with writing for publication bear testimony to the notion of academic writing development as being on a continuum (e.g. Grant and Knowles 2000; Lee and Boud 2003; Morss and Murray 2001; Murray 2004). The groups that our book is primarily designed to assist are the junior researchers who fall into the NEP category and those who are supervising their dissertation writing. To quote Swales again: NEP individuals are typically those who are identified as needing further EAP [English for Academic Purposes] help when they undertake Anglophone or largely Anglophone advanced degrees [...]. These groups Working with second-language speakers of English 25 typically have greater difficulty in establishing an academic identity in an era when English (however unfortunately) has come to occupy an increasingly dominating position. (Swales 2004: 57) We believe that supervisors of junior researchers who are located further towards the BEP end of the continuum may also find the book helpful. Our own experience of working with a wide range of research students has shown us that the majority of students will benefit from a more explicit induction into research writing. For all students, writing a thesis is a challenge; for those writing in English whose first language is not English, the challenges are even greater. However, as a second-language PhD student of Cadman's (1997: 11) concluded, 'cross-cultural differences are a matter of degree not kind'. Whereas 20 to 30 years ago the issue for 'western' universities was how second-language students, particularly international students, would adjust or acculturate to the 'host' English-speaking country, there is now a growing recognition that they are part of the global movement of people whose identities, perhaps through the very fact of sojourning elsewhere to study and work, are less linked to a specific community and more to cultural globalization (Bradley 2000: 419). Becoming 'more Western' is certainly not the desired outcome (Kiley 2003: 354). However, some students will feel more easily 'at home' in the new academic community than others for whom the 'costs' involved are substantial – not solely in financial terms but in terms of the struggle to cope successfully in an environment which presents linguistic, educational and cultural challenges (Banerjee 2003). Surviving and writing a thesis in a 'foreign' environment in a second or third language may take its toll on student and supervisor. Supervisors, for example, consistently indicate that they spend more time assisting second-language students with drafting their work (Sinclair 2005). In the next section, we consider some of the potential 'costs' that the second-language student may bear and, in the section that follows, we discuss ways in which supervisors may attempt to minimize these costs to the student and their impact on the student–supervisor relationship. Not all the issues that affect second-language speakers can be resolved at the student–supervisor level, however. We are fully aware that institutions and overly enthusiastic recruiters may unduly raise student expectations of what is available to them in terms of resources and achievable in terms of their language proficiency. The high fees that international students pay may also create a climate of expectation that can impact on the student–supervisor relationship. The individual supervisor should always look to departmental colleagues and to the institution for support as it appears to be the case that support initiatives are increasing (see Chapter 12 for a list of additional resources that may help supervisors). 26 Working with second-language speakers of English 'I just say yes all the time but I am not happy. In my head I feel like a fool': exploring 'cost' Mei, a PhD student from China whose words are cited above (Aspland 1999: 29), struggled with what she perceived as her original supervisor's lack of expertise in her area and an absence of structure and explicit direction. Although unhappy, she felt unable to question his authority: I can judge now that he had no specialized knowledge of my topic, but we Chinese are humble and do not like to question these matters. I continued to assume that he must be the best person because of the recommendation by the authorities. (Aspland 1999: 29) She felt it would be a sign of disrespect to articulate her unhappiness: I am very embarrassed because things with this supervisor are not right. [...] I am too frightened to challenge him or the authorities. I just say yes all the time but I am not happy. In my head I feel like a fool. (Aspland 1999: 29) Mei later changed supervisors and had an extremely positive experience that will be referred to later when we examine the characteristics of successful supervision of second-language students. The costs to Mei in terms of this unhappy experience were not merely financial, although she struggled to support herself without a scholarship, but also substantial in terms of damage to her self-esteem and confidence in her abilities. Cadman (2005) has pointed out that some international research students entering western research contexts for the first time may experience difficulty with the absence of set topics or prescribed reading lists and few set tasks other than the research proposal. This absence illustrates the not always explicit expectation that research students should take responsibility for directing their own learning, that autonomy is required and that students must self-manage their writing. Supervisors need to be mindful of crosscultural miscommunication that may arise through such differing sets of expectations, and how these may lead to stereotypical views of their students and, in turn, to students not developing more confident, peer-like relationships with their supervisors. Challenges of the new student role As indicated in the previous section, second-language thesis writers are by no means a homogenous group (Bradley 2000). They may be residents or citizens of the country in which they are studying but speak English as a second or Working with second-language speakers of English 27 third language. They can be young PhD or master's students about to launch an academic career, established academics in their country of origin, or perhaps scholarship holders or professionals in their own countries who are on leave from employment in government or non-government agencies. They may have previously studied in an English-medium environment or they may have left home for the first time. They may be accompanied by spouses and children or they may be alone (Cadman 2005). International students in western universities tend to be older, married and well established in their professional careers prior to commencing postgraduate study. The decision to enrol in a research degree can be seen as an investment by the candidate. International second-language students may feel under intense pressure to succeed as they are scholarship holders or have jobs to return to. Other challenges identified in the literature that will be familiar to many supervisors include finances, family support (both back home or in the host country), friendships, isolation, loss of social status and the hidden rules that govern interactions (Bradley 2000; Myles and Cheng 2003). In their study of postgraduate students at a British university, Humphrey and McCarthy (1999) found that international postgraduate students who spoke English as a second language were more likely to be older, married and better established in their careers than the local students who tended to be recent graduates, young and single. International students could, therefore, benefit from additional support in their transition to the student role. According to Humphrey and McCarthy, international postgraduates from certain countries may expect the university to take a more protective role towards their students than tends to be the case in British universities. A 34-year-old male PhD student from South Korea stated: 'In my country students are the university's moral responsibility' (cited in Humphrey and McCarthy 1999: 385). Students may expect the university to provide accommodation and be shocked when this is not the case: [The University] accepts no responsibility for overseas students. It is completely different from our country. For example, in my own country there were some undergraduate students from other countries, from some Arab countries and the government felt very much a responsibility about them because they believe they are our guests. (28-year-old male Iranian PhD student cited in Humphrey and McCarthy 1999: 385) International second-language postgraduate students are often members of the elite in their home countries – accustomed to enjoying high status and shouldering responsibility – so becoming a student can lead to a 'temporary lowering of status and power' (Humphrey and McCarthy 1999: 384). Some of the students interviewed by Humphrey and McCarthy felt strongly that their difference from the local students was not being acknowledged: 'Most of the 28 Working with second-language speakers of English postgraduate students, especially from overseas, are not recognized at all. We are treated just like students, forgetting that some of us are also lecturing in the universities in our various countries' (36-year-old male Nigerian PhD student); and 'We should be involved in the Department activity and treated like junior staff' (36-year-old male Malaysian PhD student) (both cited in Humphrey and McCarthy 1999: 384). The spouses of international students may also have to adapt to quite different circumstances, together with loss of identity and status. Families and children will also need different types of accommodation from individual students and inappropriate housing is often a source of cost and stress to the students. The following quotes from international students in the UK reveal the impact the non-academic factors highlighted above can have on the postgraduate student experience: 'People do not understand my background ... they do not understand where I am coming from when I make a point or a comment' (PhD student of military background, funded by military). 'Both used to comfort ... here ... my wife is scared to go out ... house problems do interfere with my work'. 'I have not seen my husband for 7 months ... this week I am extremely happy as he is coming next Friday – I can't wait for that day – our separation affects my work'. '... here suddenly I was put in a very small room, not very clean and I had to share the bathroom, the toilet and kitchen with other people – this was very depressing ... in one year I had to move five times'. 'If they weren't in school I probably would find it very difficult here in England ... it is always a struggle ... bring them to school, collect them, make dinner, prepare lunch, give time to them, read to them'. 'English people are not easy to make friends with'. 'I do not spend much time on the campus, I come in specifically to see the seminars, to see my supervisors ... I rarely share my experiences with other students ... I used to meet them more during the methods course, sometimes a little before or sometimes a little after the sessions ... Sometimes I meet one or another of them in the corridor and ask "how are you getting on" but it is superficial'. (Deem and Brehony 2000: 154–155) Student poverty may compound a lack of access to decent housing and other facilities, especially in the case of students from less wealthy countries who are often less well funded or may have fewer additional resources on which to draw. Postgraduate students from countries outside of Europe who were surveyed by Humphrey and McCarthy (1999) in Newcastle upon Tyne were Working with second-language speakers of English 29 more likely to live in the city's poorest neighbourhood with the greatest social problems and poor housing stock as the rents were more affordable. This potential disadvantage was offset by the better-represented groups having well-organized support structures. However, as indicated by the students cited below, less well-off students may be struggling to afford photocopying or postage stamps for survey mailouts or be unsure as to whether they may use the departmental fax machine and phones, yet be reluctant to raise these matters with their supervisor for fear of crossing an invisible boundary. 'I think one of the major problems here is about the facilities that are offered to us. I'm not talking about computers or printers ... I'm talking about simple things like photocopying. I'm sure a lot of people go and get cards from the departments, but this is not for every student.' 'I'm not sure the things I can use ... I do think that things should be included ... even postage stamps ... Because you are sending out questionnaires. Because you are paying quite a lot, especially if you are an overseas student, and you don't see your supervisor that much.' 'Even now, after 2 years here, I don't know if I can use the telephone in the department.' (cited in Deem and Brehony 2000: 159) Cross-cultural communication: differing expectations As Mei's story illustrated, differing expectations of the student/supervisor roles and different communication styles can cause the relationship to founder. Students and supervisors will both have expectations about the process and relationships but because many of these expectations are implicit and based on a notion of trust there is always a risk that they will deteriorate if the implicit expectations of one partner are not reciprocated (Kiley 1998). Successful cross-cultural communication requires intensive negotiation and collaboration (Adams and Cargill 2003). Hockey (1996) argues that most supervisor–student relationships in the British context take the form of 'comradeship' – based on personal trust and characterized by a relaxed interactional style, the use of first names by both parties and with agreements as to timeframes and schedules being made orally and with little explicit negotiation of expectations of mutual responsibilities. The second-language student may come from an educational setting in which such informal relationships are most unusual and quite disconcerting. Uncertainty over the levels of formality in face-to-face interactions is often mentioned by second-language international students. The 'rules' governing these are often not easily discernible to outsiders. In many western, anglophone university settings, students and supervisors are regularly on 30 Working with second-language speakers of English first-name terms which may, as Myles and Cheng (2003) point out, be unsettling for students used to much more formal, distant relationships between student and professor. They may also mistake informality for friendship and not be aware of invisible boundaries circumscribing the relationship. An Indian student studying in Canada commented: Culture is different. We respect teachers a lot in my culture ... at first I felt so confused. I just don't feel good to call them David or ... I don't feel good to call them by their first names ... . You need to think every time which term I need to call them. (cited in Myles and Cheng 2003: 253) It may be that the student comes from a different 'politeness system' – one that relies more on demonstrating deference to a socially defined 'superior', whereas the supervisor, although perhaps only superficially so, is ambivalent towards such a system and wishes to appear more egalitarian (Cargill 1998). The issue of the use of the first name versus the academic title may be a surface manifestation of a more fundamental mismatch in communication styles, to which the supervisor needs to be sensitive. In cross-linguistic and crosscultural supervisory conversations, supervisors should, for example, be aware that pauses may have different meaning. In English, a longish pause may indicate that the other partner (the student) may now introduce a new topic. The student may, however, be from a culture in which the person with higher social status has the right to introduce the new topic so the student's silence may be interpreted as the student having nothing to say, while the student is in fact waiting for the supervisor to speak. If this is a persistent pattern, the supervisor may be tempted to 'fill in the gaps' and the student may come to be seen as linguistically less able than they may in fact be. For instance, Mei's perception of this mismatch of communication patterns was that her supervisor expected that she 'interrupt all the time and not worry about being rude. He wanted me to be more like the Australian students' (Aspland 1999: 31). As Kiley (1998) points out, differing expectations may affect students' ability to approach their supervisor. Indonesian postgraduate students in Australia, for example, may believe that it is the supervisor who needs to take the initiative in calling a meeting, whereas Australian supervisors often feel that it is up to the student to contact the supervisor if they have a problem and will assume that if they don't hear from the student then all is going well. She quotes 'Watie', an Indonesian student who commented: 'A supervisor should be understanding about the culture. Like here, if you don't ask anything then it means that everything is OK, but in Indonesia it means that everything is wrong' (Kiley 1998: 197). Dong (1998: 379) identified a similar potential for a mismatch in expectations among the second-language graduate students she surveyed: Working with second-language speakers of English 31 'if he [my advisor] can read and correct or even rephrase the whole thing, I will learn how the same thing could have been communicated in a rather effective manner' (Urdu speaker). 'I want my advisor to provide me with the newest research development and materials concerning my topics' (Korean speaker). 'just be more interested [in what I am doing]' (German speaker). '[my advisor] make me aware of the requirements of the school' (Tamil speaker). Similarly, in a laboratory situation, simply asking 'do you understand the problem?' may elicit 'yes' for an answer from second-language students experiencing difficulty with an experiment, but may be masking a lack of confidence or a feeling that asking for help is an expression of failure. Supervisors need to observe the student closely and to provide more explicit guidance and direction as well as trying to develop a relationship in which the student will feel more comfortable expressing uncertainty. Directing the student to other more established students in the laboratory may also help the student build support networks (Frost 1999: 106). In addition, students may have good written academic English skills but be less fluent in face-to-face oral communication or more colloquial English. Myles and Cheng (2003) cite the example of an international second-language student who felt her supervisor was critical of her English ability because she struggled with the more colloquial language needed to draft a questionnaire. Students with high entry-level test scores may still experience major difficulties with everyday interactions, both socially and academically, as well as with intercultural adjustment (Dong 1997). Similarly, students may also have difficulty communicating about emotional or personal matters directly affecting their study as they may not have the resources in English to express feelings that are tied to their first language or they may feel uncomfortable talking to someone from a different cultural background and/or gender (Bradley 2000). Yuriko Nagata, a Japanese woman who completed graduate studies in the US and Australia, commented on her early experience of studying in another language: 'I used to suffer from my own double perception of myself – the mature socially functioning person in my native language and the incompetent noncommunicator in the target language' (Nagata 1999: 18). An Australian study (Geake and Maingard 1999) found that whereas for supervisors, language- and writing-related problems were seen as highly significant, the second-language students believed that, having been admitted to the university, their language was appropriate for academic study. Supervisors should also be aware that studies of advanced language learners in academic settings consistently indicate that scientific vocabulary acquisition remains a difficulty for second-language speakers, even those who are relatively highly proficient in English (Banerjee 2003; Shaw 1991). Students 32 Working with second-language speakers of English may be familiar with terms in a written context but may also be unfamiliar with these terms in spoken English (i.e. when pronounced) and may not immediately understand what the supervisor is referring to. Politeness strategies may impinge on the students' ability to ask for clarification as they may not wish to appear not to know the meaning of a term. Supervisors should be aware that the use of indirect suggestions (e.g. 'perhaps you might want to look at X': a politeness strategy that suggests equality) may create the impression that the student has the option not to follow up on the suggestion when, in fact, the existence of the power relationship means that the student does not have an option. Similarly, students, when making suggestions, may be so tentative (not wanting to appear lacking in deference) that they may run the risk of appearing to lack drive and initiative (Cargill 1998). Second-language students may expect their supervisors to demonstrate a sensitivity to cultural diversity. Myles and Cheng cite a Taiwanese student studying in Canada who was critical of what she perceived to be a professor's limited awareness: Like if you want to teach, you need to know your students, right. And nowadays your students come from all over the world so should all the content they teach. [...] Do they point out their cultural bias or do they point out their conceptual baggage? [...] Like one Prof., it's a joke among international students here and he says, 'I went to the conference. We have planners from all over the world, Los Angeles, Vancouver, Toronto, Chicago, New York.' Actually all the cities he mentioned are U.S. and Canada. That's all over the world to them already. (Myles and Cheng 2003: 252) Access to research culture and social networks Several studies (e.g. Casanave 1995; Deem and Brehony 2000; Dong 1998) suggest that second-language and international students' access to the academic research culture of their field of study, to student peer culture and to research training is generally not equal to that of local, native-English-speaking students, despite the students' strong desire to access these. Academic research cultures include disciplinary or interdisciplinary ideas and values, particular kinds of expert knowledge and knowledge production, cultural practices and narratives, departmental sociability and intellectual networks (Deem and Brehony 2000). Student access to these cultures and to research training appears to depend, particularly in the social sciences and humanities, on 'chance and supervisors' (Deem and Brehony 2000: 158). Much of the knowledge of these practices is tacitly known to those who are successful 'insiders' and is therefore not easily articulated by supervisors to newcomers. Social sciences and humanities students moreover lack the team-based environments and the opportunities for ad hoc interactions with the supervisor and Working with second-language speakers of English 33 colleagues which the sciences and engineering provide. It appears that second-language speakers may be less able to access the informal learning opportunities which are important for postgraduate socialization. Deem and Brehony (2000) found that international students mentioned informal academic networks and encouragement to attend seminars and conferences much less often than did local students and concluded that implicit exclusion may be marginalizing international and second-language students. Sung (2000) identified a cluster of factors as contributing to the 'rounded socioacademic success' of a group of Taiwanese doctoral students. These included relationships with supervisors and fellow students as well as an active role in presentations and in departmental activities and social events. Dong's (1998) survey of over 100 first- and second-language students writing their master's or doctoral dissertation at two large US research universities revealed that social isolation was more of an issue for the second-language speakers than for their native speaker peers, despite the students typically working in a team or laboratory environment. Just over half of the second-language students stated that they talked to staff and other students about their theses/dissertations either infrequently or had not yet done so as compared with only 37 per cent of the native English speakers who had a similar response. Nearly half of the second-language writers reported having no help with their writing other than from their supervisor, although many expressed a desire for native speaker help with their writing. Close to one in five of the second-language students stated they had no interaction with their peers or other staff at all in regard to their writing. Dong found that the students tended to rely on students from their home countries for assistance and generally demonstrated little uptake of available resources. She concluded that a lack of social networks disadvantaged second-language students in terms of access to helpful resources and development opportunities such as publication and that the lack might be due to the poor communication skills of the second-language speakers as well as to native speakers' reluctance to interact with non-native speakers, possibly because of perceived communication difficulties. Sung (2000) found that the English language proficiency of the Taiwanese doctoral students she studied most directly influenced their academic performance in terms of being able to secure teaching or research positions, and also affected their interactions with their advisors and peers. Students' willingness to improve their English was a factor in their academic success. Those who cited time and workload pressure as the reason for not pursuing English support were often the students who most needed to work on their language and their poor language was hindering their progress. Dai's story outlined in Box 2.1 (on p.34) highlights the vicious circle that the challenges of being a second-language student in an unfamiliar context can lead to. 34 Working with second-language speakers of English Box 2.1 Dai's story Dai was a student from China in her late thirties who enrolled for a PhD at an Australian university. Her spoken and written English was poor and she also had little prior knowledge of the new area to which she was moving. In her supervisor's view she was effectively learning two languages – that of the new disciplinary area and academic English. Despite attending numerous writing courses and working very hard, she made very slow progress and her supervisor became extremely concerned. Making Dai's life harder was the fact that she had left her husband and young daughter in China and there was little likelihood that they would join her. Dai was socially isolated partly due to her poor language skills but also due to her total immersion in her study which was in part due to her poor language skills but also to the conceptual gaps. After a year, she returned home. She was awarded a Graduate Diploma, allowing her to salvage something from the situation. It later emerged that Dai had not met the university's English language requirements but a well-intentioned member of the faculty had exercised his right to admit her, despite her lack of previous work in the area. While it may seem self-evident that second-language students should seek to maximize their opportunities to interact in English with both native and non-native speakers, within the university and without, research into acculturation suggests that being supported by a community of co-nationals, particularly in the early stages, can help with transition issues (Al-Sharideh and Goe 1998; Myles and Cheng 2003; Sung 2000). It is certainly the case that international students desire contact with locals, and particularly with native speakers of English, and this is to be encouraged. Supervisors should however bear in mind that the local community of fellow country people may have a role to play in assisting the new student settle in and they may want to try to facilitate this contact, through, for example, linking the student to a national society on the campus. Supervisors should be aware of the role that informal social networks can play in facilitating student adjustment, particularly when there are a number of students from the same country who already participate in these networks. These can help with accommodation, child and spousal support, as well as providing informal mentoring. Humphrey and McCarthy (1999) found that students from countries with few students studying at their university tended to have the most unrealistic expectations as they were not able to benefit from advice from returning students or from existing informal networks on arrival in terms of accommodation and settling in. Bradley (2000: 428) reports that a Working with second-language speakers of English 35 student in the UK told her that 'students need the empathy and understanding from their own country' as locals appeared initially, but ultimately superficially, friendly. It is also important that students understand that the new environment is in fact a multicultural one, where the norm is that students and supervisors from a range of cultural and linguistic backgrounds interact on a daily basis and that this presents a unique opportunity (Myles and Cheng 2003). Sung contrasts two very different student experiences: We have an international lab. The majority is internationals, including my advisor. We have two Indian girls, 2–3 American guys, 2 Taiwanese guys, and other internationals. The atmosphere is relaxing. Some of my good friends are from the lab because we work every day together ... We have a lot of fun. (Taiwanese student in Chemistry, third year of doctoral programme; cited in Sung 2000: 182) Typically, I eat, sleep, spend time with my wife, and study. I don't socialize with Americans ... I went out of class immediately after class is dismissed ... We attend Chinese church ... This is the primary social activity I have. I don't attend departmental activities. I don't have a sense of belonging because of my English and stutter ... (Taiwanese student in Industrial Health, third year of doctoral programme; cited in Sung 2000: 120) Application Consider the tips provided below. Allow yourself to reflect on their relevance to you and your students. Having read these tips, do you think you might change the way you interact with students from different cultural or language backgrounds to your own in the future? List some changes you would like to make. Tips for increasing your cross-cultural sensitivity: recommendations for supervisors ● ● Orientate yourself to pick up information about other cultures. This can simply be a matter of keeping your eyes and ears open and does not necessarily involve a great outlay of time. It can involve reading books or attending social events run by or for students from diverse cultural backgrounds. Be aware of practices which may be subtly excluding second-language students from full participation in research culture and other networks. 36 ● ● ● ● ● Working with second-language speakers of English Be aware of cultural issues and of how they can lead to misunderstandings between supervisors and second-language students. Examine your implicit assumptions about second-language students; try to make them explicit and then question their validity. Initiate exploration with your second-language research students to clarify the meanings behind any verbal or non-verbal communication which makes you uncomfortable. Check your accent and speech patterns are being understood. Show an interest in the welfare of your second-language research students, but find out about appropriate support services so that you can refer to them should that become necessary. Be aware that some international students may be unfamiliar with counselling services and reluctant to make use of the university's formal support services. At the outset of each second-language student's research programme, devote specific attention to negotiating the respective roles of the supervisor and student and your mutual expectations (see Figure 2.2). (based on Cryer and Okorocha 1999: 117) 'Together we built a bridge that I could cross': 'hands-on' supervision Mei's choice of words to describe the outcome of her relationship with her second supervisor, as the joint construction of a bridge she felt able to cross, epitomizes the positive qualities of a successful supervisory relationship (Aspland 1999: 34). The study of supervisory practice referred to at the beginning of this chapter noted that 'hands-on' supervision was associated with a greater number of completions in minimum time (Sinclair 2005). The practices of 'hands-on' supervisors would seem particularly appropriate for assisting second-language students and are explicitly referred to as essential in a number of studies of second-language thesis and dissertation writers (e.g. Belcher 1994; Braine 2002; Swales 2004). Supervisors need not feel they are engaging in excessive 'handholding'; at the heart of supervision is a relationship that must be negotiated. The second-language student and the supervisor can both benefit from an explicit conversation about mutual expectations, roles and responsibilities. The key characteristics of hands-on supervision are described below. For all students, the first year is seen as vital for the establishment of this relationship. For the supervisor of the second-language student, hands-on engagement is imperative. The production of text is also essential from the beginning as it allows for early identification of problem areas in comprehension and writing, and candidates will benefit from regular and timely feedback. Hands-on supervisors provide more input earlier in the candidature and less input later. They constantly encourage and assist candidates to: Working with second-language speakers of English ● ● ● 37 draft thesis text; publish and present their research in journals and at conferences; go through a number of iterations of thesis and publication drafts. (Sinclair 2005) Hands-on supervisors establish 'consistent and viable relationships' based on the 'achievement of early and lasting agreement between supervisor's and candidate's expectations of each other' (Sinclair 2005: vii). These include negotiating a firm timetable for completion, particularly in relation to: ● ● ● ● available support and project logistics; institutional quality checks such as reviews; project-specific milestones such as the production of thesis text; the presentation and publication of conference and journal papers. In other words, the relationship moves from being one of informal comradeship to a more professionalized one in which mutual expectations are clearly articulated without necessarily losing the dimensions of trust which are also important. Linguistic and cultural issues referred to earlier suggest that the onus to initiate and follow through with such discussion lies clearly with the supervisor at the commencement of study. Adams and Cargill (2003) report on a supervisor who tries to avoid potential miscommunication by asking students to email her an outline of the main issues discussed and actions agreed on by both parties after their meetings. They also suggest that supervisors get to know their students personally so that they can be aware of daily life issues that may affect the students' research, while noting that this strategy is not viewed favourably by all supervisors. Application: the role perception scale The role perception scale is a simple instrument to help both