"我们可以在这一点上下功夫":探讨专业博士写作背景下导师的反馈方法

IF 1.8 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Jackie Tuck
{"title":"\"我们可以在这一点上下功夫\":探讨专业博士写作背景下导师的反馈方法","authors":"Jackie Tuck","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-01-2024-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>This paper aims to show how an Academic Literacies lens can contribute to a deeper understanding of writing for a professional doctorate (PD) by focusing both on the language of supervisors’ written feedback and on student and supervisor perspectives on feedback throughout Year 1 (Y1).</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>Firstly, written feedback summaries on formative assessments across two Y1 cohorts on a UK PD programme were analysed thematically to identify patterns in feedback practices. Secondly, two longitudinal, detailed student/supervisor case studies were developed, drawing on multiple data sources.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>Supervisors’ written feedback enacted an encouraging dialogue around assessed writing, discursively constructing a sense of solidarity on the doctoral journey, focusing on the “long view”. Case study analysis, however, revealed tensions centred around jarring discontinuities in students’ feedback experience as they transitioned from formative to summative assessment at the end of Y1.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\n<p>The paper demonstrates that an Academic Literacies approach can offer valuable insights into the specific, situated context of writing for a distance learning PD and makes the case for greater attention to writing in contexts of partly taught doctorates.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>Findings suggest that PD programmes should work towards providing continuity of feedback experience, through supervisor and examiner training and through assessment arrangements which support students to navigate challenging transitions between formative and summative phases of assessment.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This paper reports on an innovative research design which combined a textual “snapshot” of supervisory feedback, paying close attention to language, with detailed longitudinal case studies exploring perspectives on feedback over time. It contributes to doctoral writing research by throwing light on the relatively underexplored domain of writing in the taught phase of the PD. It contributes to doctoral education studies by highlighting the central role of feedback on writing in shaping the experience of PD researchers.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“We can work on this”: exploring supervisor approaches to feedback in the context of writing for a professional doctorate\",\"authors\":\"Jackie Tuck\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/sgpe-01-2024-0004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>This paper aims to show how an Academic Literacies lens can contribute to a deeper understanding of writing for a professional doctorate (PD) by focusing both on the language of supervisors’ written feedback and on student and supervisor perspectives on feedback throughout Year 1 (Y1).</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>Firstly, written feedback summaries on formative assessments across two Y1 cohorts on a UK PD programme were analysed thematically to identify patterns in feedback practices. Secondly, two longitudinal, detailed student/supervisor case studies were developed, drawing on multiple data sources.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>Supervisors’ written feedback enacted an encouraging dialogue around assessed writing, discursively constructing a sense of solidarity on the doctoral journey, focusing on the “long view”. Case study analysis, however, revealed tensions centred around jarring discontinuities in students’ feedback experience as they transitioned from formative to summative assessment at the end of Y1.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\\n<p>The paper demonstrates that an Academic Literacies approach can offer valuable insights into the specific, situated context of writing for a distance learning PD and makes the case for greater attention to writing in contexts of partly taught doctorates.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\\n<p>Findings suggest that PD programmes should work towards providing continuity of feedback experience, through supervisor and examiner training and through assessment arrangements which support students to navigate challenging transitions between formative and summative phases of assessment.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>This paper reports on an innovative research design which combined a textual “snapshot” of supervisory feedback, paying close attention to language, with detailed longitudinal case studies exploring perspectives on feedback over time. It contributes to doctoral writing research by throwing light on the relatively underexplored domain of writing in the taught phase of the PD. It contributes to doctoral education studies by highlighting the central role of feedback on writing in shaping the experience of PD researchers.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":42038,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-01-2024-0004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-01-2024-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本文旨在通过关注导师书面反馈的语言以及学生和导师在一年级(Y1)期间对反馈的看法,说明学术文学视角如何有助于加深对专业博士学位(PD)写作的理解。其次,利用多种数据来源,开展了两项纵向的、详细的学生/导师案例研究。研究结果导师的书面反馈围绕评估性写作开展了鼓励性对话,在话语上构建了博士历程中的团结意识,注重 "长远观点"。然而,案例研究分析表明,当学生在一年级结束时从形成性评价过渡到终结性评价时,他们的反馈体验中存在着令人不安的不连续性,这也是紧张局势的核心所在。研究局限/启示本文表明,学术文学方法可以为远程学习博士生写作的具体情境提供有价值的见解,并提出了在部分授课博士生的情境中更多关注写作的理由。实践意义研究结果表明,博士生培养项目应通过导师和考官培训,以及通过支持学生在形成性评估和终结性评估阶段之间进行具有挑战性过渡的评估安排,努力提供连续性的反馈体验。 原创性/价值本文报告了一项创新性研究设计,该设计将导师反馈的文本 "快照"(密切关注语言)与详细的纵向案例研究相结合,探索了随着时间推移对反馈的看法。该研究对博士生写作研究有所贡献,因为它揭示了在博士生培养的教学阶段写作这一相对欠缺探索的领域。通过强调写作反馈在塑造博士生教育研究者的经验方面所起的核心作用,该书为博士生教育研究做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“We can work on this”: exploring supervisor approaches to feedback in the context of writing for a professional doctorate

Purpose

This paper aims to show how an Academic Literacies lens can contribute to a deeper understanding of writing for a professional doctorate (PD) by focusing both on the language of supervisors’ written feedback and on student and supervisor perspectives on feedback throughout Year 1 (Y1).

Design/methodology/approach

Firstly, written feedback summaries on formative assessments across two Y1 cohorts on a UK PD programme were analysed thematically to identify patterns in feedback practices. Secondly, two longitudinal, detailed student/supervisor case studies were developed, drawing on multiple data sources.

Findings

Supervisors’ written feedback enacted an encouraging dialogue around assessed writing, discursively constructing a sense of solidarity on the doctoral journey, focusing on the “long view”. Case study analysis, however, revealed tensions centred around jarring discontinuities in students’ feedback experience as they transitioned from formative to summative assessment at the end of Y1.

Research limitations/implications

The paper demonstrates that an Academic Literacies approach can offer valuable insights into the specific, situated context of writing for a distance learning PD and makes the case for greater attention to writing in contexts of partly taught doctorates.

Practical implications

Findings suggest that PD programmes should work towards providing continuity of feedback experience, through supervisor and examiner training and through assessment arrangements which support students to navigate challenging transitions between formative and summative phases of assessment.

Originality/value

This paper reports on an innovative research design which combined a textual “snapshot” of supervisory feedback, paying close attention to language, with detailed longitudinal case studies exploring perspectives on feedback over time. It contributes to doctoral writing research by throwing light on the relatively underexplored domain of writing in the taught phase of the PD. It contributes to doctoral education studies by highlighting the central role of feedback on writing in shaping the experience of PD researchers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education
Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
17
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信