Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Dissertations, Academic
- All Subjects: Grammar Feedback
- Creators: Matsuda, Paul K
- Creators: Dyal, Samuel
Description
The current research examines the influence of disciplines, advisors, committees, language, culture, and previous experiences in students' search and selection of dissertation topics, as well as whether and how students react to those influences during this process. Invention has been an area of research for rhetoricians for centuries, but most modern research focuses exclusively on the pre-writing process in first composition classrooms (Young, 1976). The current research collected survey and interview data from second- and third-year Ph.D. students in natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities at a large research university in the United States. 80 second- and third-year Ph.D. students completed an online survey; 11 students and four of their advisors participated in a semi-structured interview. The results demonstrate that the majority of students spent over three months in the selection of dissertation topics, and the humanities students tended to spend longer time in this process than social sciences or humanities students. Additionally, students have much in common in their perception of the criteria they would use in the selection of dissertation topics, and those criteria are similar to what previous researchers (Isaac, Koenigsknecht, Malaney, & Karras, 1989; Kozma, 1997; Sessions, 1971) have identified. However, when it comes to the actual selection experiences, the interviews show that students do not necessarily apply those criteria rationally. Moreover, disciplines appear to have an overarching effect on students' topic selection. Natural sciences advisors appeared to have more direct involvement in students' topic choice than advisors in social sciences or humanities. The linguistic and cultural backgrounds of the eleven doctoral participants were not found influential in their selection of dissertation topics. Finally, although Ph.D. advisors generally have a good understanding of students' academic progress, their knowledge of the students' personal and professional concerns may differ, and the latter knowledge is crucial in their advising on students' dissertation topic choice. The current study suggests invention in the scholar and researcher level is significantly different from that of first-year composition classrooms. The successful invention of dissertation topics is indispensable of the influence of disciplines, programs as well as the intellectual and practical support students can receive.
ContributorsXia, Jing (Author) / Matsuda, Paul K (Thesis advisor) / James, Mark (Committee member) / Renaud, Claire (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
This study provides insights into the nature of L2 writers' engagement with written corrective feedback (WCF) - how they process it and what they understand about the nature of the error - to explore its potential for language development. It also explores various factors, such as individual, socio-contextual, and pedagogical, which influence the extent of student engagement. Data include students' revisions recorded with screen-capture software and video-stimulated recall. The video-stimulated recall data were transcribed and coded for evidence of processing, error awareness, and error resolution. In addition, I conducted interviews with students and their instructors, and through a thematic analysis, I identified individual and socio-contextual factors that appeared to influence students' engagement.
The findings of the study indicate that the processing of WCF and error awareness may be affected by pedagogical factors, such as the type of feedback and its delivery method. In addition, I found that while socio-contextual factors, such as grading policy, may influence students' attitudes toward the importance of grammar accuracy in their writing or motivation to seek help with grammar outside of class, such factors do not appear to affect students' engagement with WCF at the time of revision.
Based on the insights gained from this study, I suggest that direct feedback may be more beneficial if it is provided in a comment or in the margin of the paper, and that both direct and indirect feedback may be more effective if a brief explanation about the nature of the error is included. In addition, students may need to be provided with guidelines on how to engage with their instructors' feedback. I conclude by suggesting that if WCF is provided, students should be held accountable for making revisions, and I recommend ways in which this can be done without penalizing students for not showing immediate improvements on subsequent writing projects.
The findings of the study indicate that the processing of WCF and error awareness may be affected by pedagogical factors, such as the type of feedback and its delivery method. In addition, I found that while socio-contextual factors, such as grading policy, may influence students' attitudes toward the importance of grammar accuracy in their writing or motivation to seek help with grammar outside of class, such factors do not appear to affect students' engagement with WCF at the time of revision.
Based on the insights gained from this study, I suggest that direct feedback may be more beneficial if it is provided in a comment or in the margin of the paper, and that both direct and indirect feedback may be more effective if a brief explanation about the nature of the error is included. In addition, students may need to be provided with guidelines on how to engage with their instructors' feedback. I conclude by suggesting that if WCF is provided, students should be held accountable for making revisions, and I recommend ways in which this can be done without penalizing students for not showing immediate improvements on subsequent writing projects.
ContributorsUscinski, Izabela (Author) / Matsuda, Paul K (Thesis advisor) / Matsuda, Aya (Committee member) / James, Mark A (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
While PhD dissertations are typically accessible many other terminal degree projects remain invisible and inaccessible to a greater audience. Over the past year and a half, librarians at Arizona State University collaborated with faculty and departmental administrators across a variety of fields to develop and create institutional repository collections that highlight and authoritatively share this type of student scholarship with schools, researchers, and future employers. This poster will present the benefits, challenges, and considerations required to successfully implement and manage these collections of applied final projects or capstone projects. Specifically, issues/challenges related to metadata consistency, faculty buy-in, and developing an ingest process, as well as benefits related to increased visibility and improved educational and employment opportunities will be discussed. This interactive presentation will also discuss lessons learned from the presenter’s experiences in context of how they can easily apply to benefit their respective institutions.
ContributorsPardon, Kevin (Author) / Dyal, Samuel (Author) / Harp, Matthew (Author)
Created2017-05-02