Matching Items (6)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Rhetoric
- All Subjects: Dissertations, Academic
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
Increasing numbers of courses are offered online and increasing numbers of students are pursuing post-secondary studies. At broad-access institutions, such as land grant universities and community colleges, this presents a particular concern around student persistence--that is, the number of students who complete diploma, certificate, or degree requirements from an institution. Such increased access and increased enrollment also present unique challenges to first-year writing instructors, who are often the first professionals with whom first-year students are in contact. Here I explore the many reasons why student persistence should interest first-year writing instructors, in particular, those who are teaching online. Student persistence has important civic, economic, ethical, institutional, and disciplinary implications that first-year instructors cannot ignore. I propose a persistence-based pedagogy that involves six essential elements: designing learner-centered online writing courses, demonstrating mattering by valuing student writing, fostering self-efficacy by making assignments relevant, fostering student connections through collaboration and community, engaging virtual learners by fostering a sense of place and presence, and recognizing the challenges and minimizing the risks of teaching online. Such an undertaking is necessarily transdisciplinary and draws on scholarship in rhetoric and composition, instructional design, educational psychology, applied linguistics, and higher education administration. It connects pedagogical principles advanced nearly fifty years ago with digital pedagogies that are in their infancy and attempts to balance the social epistemic nature of writing instruction with the real-world demands of diverse student populations, increasing course sizes, and ever-changing technologies. Perhaps most importantly, this dissertation focuses on strategies that online writing instructors can adopt regardless of their theoretical leanings, academic training, or institutional requirements. While persistence-based instruction does not change the purpose or outcomes of first-year composition and does not replace proper placement measures or address early-term drop rates, it does provide a framework for facilitating online courses that is rooted in rhetorical theory and composition pedagogy and promotes informed teaching and lifelong learning.
ContributorsBergin, Jeffrey R (Author) / Roen, Duane (Thesis advisor) / Miller, Keith (Committee member) / James, Mark (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
Situated in the influx of Chinese students entering U.S. higher education and the L2 writing research growing interests in investigating learners’ experience to gain further insights into their emic perspectives on English literacy development, this dissertation argues that the identifying the beliefs as the underlying principle shaping and being shaped by our experience. In this dissertation, I propose a theoretical framework of beliefs and validates the framework by using it to examine multilingual writers’ learning experience in the context of First Year Composition. The framework advances a definition of beliefs and a framework demonstrating the relationship among three constructs—perception, attitude, and behavior. In order to develop the framework, I first synthesized existing literature on language learning beliefs and argue the scarcity of L2 writing researchers’ discussing belief when exploring learners’ experience. I define beliefs as an individual’s generalizations from the mental construction of the experience, based on evaluation and judgment, thus are predisposed to actions. I proposed a framework of belief, consisting three mental constructs—perception, attitude and action—to identify and examine factors contributing the formation and change of beliefs. I drew on drawing on Dewey's theory of experience and Rokeach's (1968) belief theory, and contextual approach to beliefs in the field of second language acquisition. I analyzed the interview data of twenty-two Chinses students accounting their English learning experiences across four different contexts, including English class in China, TOEFL training courses, intensive English program, and FYC classroom. The findings show that their beliefs were formed and transformed in the contexts before FYC. They perceived all the writing learning in those courses as similar content and curriculum, but the attitudes vary regarding the immediate contexts and long-term goal of using the knowledge. They believe grammar and vocabulary is the “king’s way,” the most effective and economic approach, which was emphasized in the test-oriented culture. Moreover, the repetitive course content and various pedagogies, including multiple revisions and the requirement of visiting writing center, have been perceived as requiring demonstration more efforts, which in turn prompted them to develop their own negotiation strategies, the actions, to gain more credits for the class. This dissertation concludes that the beliefs can be inferred from these all three constructs, but to change beliefs of learners, we need to make them explicit and incorporate them into writing instruction or curriculum design. Implications on how to further the research of beliefs as well as translating these findings into classroom pedagogies are also discussed. The dissertation concludes with a discussion of how the framework can be used to inform future research and classroom practices informed by writing beliefs identified in this study.
ContributorsYang, Yuching (Author) / Matsuda, Paul Kei (Thesis advisor) / Matsuda, Aya (Committee member) / James, Mark (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
Description
Honors colleges have offered an academically rigorous option for growing numbers of diverse students. This study took place at a large, public university that required undergraduate students to complete a thesis to graduate from the honors college. In 2017, 97% of students who began the honors thesis prior to senior year completed it. Thus, the aim of this study was to help more students begin the honors thesis process early.
Thesis Launch was a six-week intervention that was designed to provide support for students in the critical early steps of thesis work such as brainstorming topics, examining professors’ research interests, reaching out to professors, preparing for meetings with potential thesis committee members, and writing a thesis prospectus. Thesis Launch offered web-based resources, weekly emails and text message reminders, and was supplemented by in-person advising options.
A mixed methods action research study was conducted to examine: (a) students’ perceptions of barriers that prevented beginning thesis work; (b) self-efficacy towards thesis work; (c) how to scale the intervention using technology; and (d) whether participants began the thesis early. Quantitative data was collected via pre- and post-intervention surveys, journals, and prospectus submissions. Qualitative data came from student interviews, journals, and open-ended questions on the surveys.
Quantitative data showed that after students participated in Thesis Launch, they had higher self-efficacy to work with professors, perceived fewer barriers to thesis work, and greater proportions of students began thesis work early. The qualitative data were complementary and showed that participants overcame barriers to thesis initiation, built self-efficacy, preferred an online intervention, and began thesis work early. Findings also showed that a primarily technology-based intervention was preferred by students and showed promise for scaling to a larger audience.
Thesis Launch provided a framework for students to begin work on the honors thesis and have mastery experiences to build self-efficacy. Strategies that fostered “small wins” and reflective efforts also assisted in this aim. Participants accomplished tasks tied to thesis work and customized their personal thesis timelines based on work begun during Thesis Launch. Finally, a discussion of limitations, implications for practice and research, and personal reflection was included.
Thesis Launch was a six-week intervention that was designed to provide support for students in the critical early steps of thesis work such as brainstorming topics, examining professors’ research interests, reaching out to professors, preparing for meetings with potential thesis committee members, and writing a thesis prospectus. Thesis Launch offered web-based resources, weekly emails and text message reminders, and was supplemented by in-person advising options.
A mixed methods action research study was conducted to examine: (a) students’ perceptions of barriers that prevented beginning thesis work; (b) self-efficacy towards thesis work; (c) how to scale the intervention using technology; and (d) whether participants began the thesis early. Quantitative data was collected via pre- and post-intervention surveys, journals, and prospectus submissions. Qualitative data came from student interviews, journals, and open-ended questions on the surveys.
Quantitative data showed that after students participated in Thesis Launch, they had higher self-efficacy to work with professors, perceived fewer barriers to thesis work, and greater proportions of students began thesis work early. The qualitative data were complementary and showed that participants overcame barriers to thesis initiation, built self-efficacy, preferred an online intervention, and began thesis work early. Findings also showed that a primarily technology-based intervention was preferred by students and showed promise for scaling to a larger audience.
Thesis Launch provided a framework for students to begin work on the honors thesis and have mastery experiences to build self-efficacy. Strategies that fostered “small wins” and reflective efforts also assisted in this aim. Participants accomplished tasks tied to thesis work and customized their personal thesis timelines based on work begun during Thesis Launch. Finally, a discussion of limitations, implications for practice and research, and personal reflection was included.
ContributorsEardley, Trisha Lynn (Author) / Buss, Ray (Thesis advisor) / Henderson, Mark (Committee member) / Johnson, Melissa (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
DescriptionThe Task Force was charged to devise a plan for phased electronic publication of periodicals and monographs produced by the Society of American Archivists. The report offered over fifty possible next steps and includes several appendices addressing specific sub-topics.
ContributorsSpindler, Rob (Contributor)
Created2002-12-10
Description
This project emphasizes a complex, holistic, and additive view of content knowledge in the Discipline of Writing, advocating for balanced and affirming scholarship and pedagogy rather than a competitive approach that leads to an epistemology of erasure. As a composite project, the introduction contextualizes three articles linked by their articulation of holistically and additively thinking for students and scholars in the discipline of writing, preparing the reader to see the rhetorical steps that I attempt to take in each article along these lines. Article 1, “The Collaborative Work of Composition,” uses Marxian language of production to highlight the complexities of collaborative writing in a social microcosm drawing focus to the difficulties some students have collaborating, particularly those of linguistic and cultural minority groups, because they or their collaborators struggle to adopt an additive valuing system to position themselves and one another as part of a team with varying strengths. In Article 2, “An Integrative Translingual Pedagogy of Affirmation,” I build on this valuing of writers by advocating for an affirming pedagogy that allows teachers to help students see the complexity and value of their shared languages and their individual (L)anguage as well as the identity connected to these. Article 3, “Familia Académica: Translingual History and the Epistemology of Erasure,” draws on a deep and overlooked history that provides a more complex holistic lens for the current socio-politics of the discipline of Writing’s interaction with the translingual approach, re-orienting to a more additive blend of the extreme perspectives that key scholars have taken between second language writing and translingual writing. Finally, the last section of the dissertation acts as a metaconstruction of the discipline of Writing, pointing to moments within the previous three articles that indicate a sustained effort to complicate binaries and then provide an alternate symbiosis of scholarly perspectives for disciplinary discourse and identity in Writing. Most importantly though, the final section of the dissertation synthesizes the partial approaches introduced in the previous three articles which inform my understanding of disciplinarity. Further, this final section attempts to find equity in the variety of partial approaches developed in the previous articles and which I have since matured into what I call the 8 Aspects of Writing. The 8 aspects and their components move beyond individual issues presented in each article and synthesize a more holistic, additive, and systematic model of defining the content knowledge for the discipline of Writing.
ContributorsFields, Gregory Dale (Author) / Rose, Shirley K. (Thesis advisor) / Hannah, Mark (Committee member) / James, Mark (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019