Search

The uneven levels of writing support that dissertation writers receive throughout each stage of their PhDs has contributed to low completion rates and general dissatisfaction with the doctoral process. By offering both collective and individual assistance, the Café and one-to-one writing programming described herein centres students in their own work by examining the often-unspoken expectations that structure their PhDs. This programming establishes honest communication with dissertation writers in order to promote self-advocacy and intrinsic motivation so that they may take greater control over their projects. By modeling a reflective understanding of dissertation writing, this programming enhances longer term productive processes that enable higher completion rates and a greater sense of fulfillment with the PhD.

At one Estonian university, we have designed a course to support the writing skills of doctorate students who need to write scientific articles for publication in their L2 English. We provide this support by placing these students into small discipline-specific writing groups where they periodically give and receive written feedback on their draft articles. Knowing what may constitute an effective feedback comment will enable us to improve upon current pedagogical practices. In this study, we develop a coding scheme to measure the impact of both affective and non-affective feedback comments on the peer feedback process. We use this scheme in tandem with questionnaires to assess the effectiveness of postgraduate peer feedback comments as perceived by both L1 Estonian doctoral students and expert writing assessors. Within this context, the results suggest that cover letters and the tone of feedback comments have a noticeable impact on the peer feedback process. *** Tagasisidekommentaaride tajutud efektiivsus inglise keeles kui teises keeles teadusartiklite kirjutamise kursusel Oleme uhes Eesti ulikoolis valja tootanud kursuse, mille eesmark on arendada doktorantide kirjalikku valjendusoskust ning toetada neid teadusartiklite kirjutamisel inglise keeles kui teises keeles. Kursus on korraldatud nii, et uliopilased on jagatud vaikestesse erialapohistesse kirjutamisruhmadesse, mille liikmed annavad ja saavad regulaarselt oma artikli mustanditele tagasisidet. Teadmised selle kohta, millised tagasisidekommentaarid on efektiivsed, aitaksid praeguseid opetamismeetodeid parendada. Kaesolevas uurimuses esitatakse kodeerimisskeem, mille abil moota parandussoovitustega ja parandussoovitusteta tagasisidekommentaaride moju kaasoppijate vastastikuse tagasisidestamise protsessis. Parandamissoovitusega kommentaar (nt “sissejuhatus on liiga luhike”) suunab autorit oma teksti muutma. Parandamissoovituseta kommentaar (nt “vaga hea pealkiri!”) ei suuna autorit teksti muutma ja on olemuselt pigem afektiivne. Konealuse kodeerimisskeemiga paralleelselt kasutame kusimustikke, millega uurida, kuidas tajuvad doktorantide vastastikuse tagasisidekommentaaride efektiivsust eesti keelt emakeelena konelevad doktorandid ning Eesti, Soome, Rootsi ja Saksamaa ulikoolide kirjutamiseksperdid. Tulemused naitavad, et vaadeldud faktoritest mojutavad vastastikuse tagasiside protsessi kaaskirja olemasolu ja tagasisidekommentaari toon. Uuringu tulemused voimaldavad teadlastel ja praktikutel, kes opetavad vorreldavas kontekstis sarnasel metoodikal pohinevaid kursusi, votta kasutusele tapsemad, uurimistulemustel pohinevad opetamismeetodid.

Very few empirical studies have investigated programmes in which doctoral students act as peer facilitators in faculty writing groups. We report on the development of a centrally delivered doctoral student writing programme in which twenty student participants were mentored and provided with the resources to initiate their own faculty-based doctoral writing groups. ‘Legitimate peripheral participation’ was used as a conceptual lens to interpret the data collected during the establishment and evaluation of the programme. All student participants in the preparatory training course, which was developed in consultation with postgraduate students and research supervisors, went on to become doctoral writing peer facilitators of peer writing groups. Insights from seven of these showed how a well-structured and supportive programme harnessed the benefits of peer learning by bringing personal rewards to participants and building institutional capacity around doctoral research writing literacies. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Using data from two IRB-approved research studies, this panel presentation explores methods of and uses for coding tutors' and writers' written comments about documents. Half the presentation focuses on asynchronous online tutorial comments, and the other half focuses on graduate writing group members' comments on their peers' documents. The presentation demonstrates how coding methods have implications for writing center programming because they help us identify areas for potential additional tutor training by highlighting what tutors actually do in online sessions and because they clarify the type of positive impact a writing group might have over time.

Background I discuss a method of facilitation that I have used in my Creative Writing courses at the University of Lethbridge for many years. I tend to focus primarily on potentials and possibilities in third-year courses and then move on to questions of forms, genre, and structure in the “Advanced” or exit-year courses. These courses rely heavily on rapport and a specific structure which has the effect (most of the time) of opening the spigot of the students’ creative energies. Purpose of Study. Data from this pedagogy is plotted in a qualitative exploration using in-depth phenomenological “prompts” or thought experiments. This data will be presented in order to depict how art making or (in this case, Creative Writing journaling) contributes to mental health recovery and stability. The hope of our team is that this method may be deploy at a downtown satellite program open to street people and all and any who seek help. Sources of Evidence. An interpretative phenomenological approach is applied to data collected in several years of Creative Writing workshops at the University of Lethbridge. This data is broken down into three main categories: explanatory models of how the skills, qualities and approaches of the facilitator assisted recovery, on transformative characteristics of art making in this particular venue, and the wider social benefits of such art making. Main Argument. Using collaborative techniques grounded on the premise that the workshop is unconditionally a “safe place”, a progressive conversation is established in which the matter of the self is drawn into both language that is fresh and control of language that holistically conforms to the group dynamic. In this dynamic, remarkable recoveries may take place. I will focus the discussion on the structure of the collaborative journalizing, the purpose of which is to bring structure into the very production of personal and creative recovery. The journaling is an extended process-meditation, begun on the first day of a half-semester course and finished on the day a final portfolio is submitted for grading. I argue that the dream-journaling should have a basic structure in any case, and discuss several such schema as they have been used not only in Creative Writing but also in the community and in the literature of counselling and guidance. Conclusions. The findings provide a initial but profound exploration into art facilitators’ pragmatic knowledge and wisdom related to the health and recovery benefits of art making in the area of counselling and guidance. It also explores important skills and competencies required by those facilitating art making programs in mental health recovery contexts. Such data may help to inform policy and design of health recovery programs associated with Creative Writing workshops both in the college or university setting as well as the community health unit.

Doctoral candidates spend at least 2/3 of their degree outside of structured classroom instruction; most of their learning and writing takes place in their own time. Providing research degree candidates with writing help during their degree study is difficult. Candidates come into their degree with widely varying needs and levels of experience. Course work might seem to offer a way to create parity, but, according to the Australian Qualification Framework, mandated coursework can only occupy 1⁄3 of the degree

Providing help for research degree writing within a formal structure is difficult because research students come into their degree with widely varying needs and levels of experience. Providing writing assistance within a less structured learning context is an approach which has been trialled in higher education with promising results (Boud, Cohen & Sampson, 2001; Stracke, 2010; Devendish et al., 2009). While semi structured approaches have been the subject of study, little attention has been paid to the processes of informal learning which exist within doctoral education. In this paper we explore a 'writing movement' which has started to be taken up at various locations in Australia through the auspices of social media (Twitter and Facebook). 'Shut up and Write' is a concept first used in the cafe scene in San Francisco, where writers converge at a specific time and place and write together, without showing each other the outcomes, temporarily transforming writing from a solitary practice to a social one. In this paper we compare the experience of facilitating shut up and write sessions in two locations: RMIT University and Queensland University of Technology. The authors describe the set up and functioning of the different groups and report on feedback from regular participants, both physical and virtual. We suggest that informal learning practices can be exploited to assist research students to orientate themselves to the university environment and share vital technical skills, with very minimal input from academic staff. This experience suggests there is untapped potential within these kinds of activities to promote learning within the research degree experience which is sustainable and builds a stronger sense of community.