Search

Persuasive arguments attribute academics' persistent struggles in making time for writing to the increasing demands of a marketised sector on the academic role (Dickson-Swift et al. 2009; Macleod, Steckley, and Murray 2012). Whilst a significant body of literature promotes different writing interventions as potential solutions, the challenge of building and sustaining a culture in which their positive outcomes are maintained remains. In this paper, I explore the practices of academics writing for publication purposes. Drawing on the concept of academic writing as 'identity work (French 2020), I demonstrate that writing practices are entwined with wider academic and institutional identities, which either work for or against building sustainable writing cultures. I argue for a methodological shift in how writing initiatives are researched, drawing a distinction between my ethnographic case study of one writing group and others that focus either on retrospective accounts or analysing correlations between writing groups and productivity. Specifically, I argue for a focus on the ongoing process of becoming a writer rather than on its production. The study builds on existing literature to explain why writing groups are experienced as valuable to participants. It argues that they offer more than simply protected space for writing; they reframe participants' understandings of themselves and their academic identities and reintegrate research writing with other aspects of their role. This identity work occurs within visible, protected spaces for writing, where participants work both individually and in community, and reflection and dialogue are central. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Writing groups have been implemented in a variety of inpatient psychiatric settings, with reports that groups contribute to patients' sense of mastery and belonging. However, no published research has examined the impact of writing groups in forensic inpatient populations. Additionally, there is limited quantitative data on the impact of writing groups in adult mental health populations. In this study, 17 patients adjudicated Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity/Mental Health and court-committed to long term treatment at a forensic mental health hospital participated in at least one of four, week writing groups offered by the hospital's psychology department. Groups ran weekly for either 7 or 8 weeks and were either 45 or 55 min long. Overall, participants reported high satisfaction with the writing groups. Participants reported benefiting from having the opportunity to share their writing with their peers, writing about difficult topics, practicing communication and expression, and practicing real-world artistic skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Graduate students writing on their own often struggle with knowledge production and identity conflicts. Conversely, writing with others presents its own set of challenges, as collaborators struggle to define roles and expectations. To systematically foster and teach collaborative writing practices for graduate students, we performed a self study of collaborative writing. We utilized Winnicott's (1991. Playing and Reality. Psychology Press) theory of 'potential space,' based on the therapeutic alliance, to cultivate a communal writing space online. Our 'writing alliance' can model the socialization of graduate students across the many working relationships they forge: with colleagues (horizontal), with committees (vertical), and, in the case of learning support programs like ours, in a neutral 'third space.' Across these collaborative spaces, students come to see themselves as full and valued participants in knowledge formation in their discipline. We hope that these mutually-supportive experiences foster more inclusive practices in academia, particularly for students from marginalized backgrounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Publications are the mainstay of academic success, yet scientific writing requires consistent feedback and practice to build and maintain skills. In this study, we surveyed 342 environmental biology trainees (i.e., graduate students and postdoctoral scholars) about their writing habits. Our objective was to explore whether trainee writing habits align with suggestions from scientific writing guide books and articles, and how individual habits and attitudes may impact writing output. We found that the majority of respondents (>65%) felt negatively about writing and publishing, and few adhered to established advice such as scheduling writing time, setting attainable goals, or joining a writing accountability group. Our results show that trainees who dedicated more hours to writing each week and individually tracked their writing progress had more first‐author publications. In particular, graduate students who regularly scheduled writing time during the week and participated in writing groups also had more first‐author publications. Conversely, trainees who felt negatively about writing, wrote mainly before deadlines, and relied on "check‐ins" with advisors or writing groups to monitor writing progress had fewer first‐author publications. We describe ways that individuals, advisors, and institutions could improve trainee writing habits and assist them in developing more positive attitudes toward writing to ultimately help trainees achieve their writing goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic writing is an important skill in the development of researcher identity yet remains a hurdle to many. In this study, we examine the ways in which the exchange of social capital occurs in a writing group in Australia. We use Bourdieu’s theoretical concepts to examine data obtained from open-ended questions in an online survey that asked participants why they attend writing groups. Three key themes were constructed: navigating the gamut of researcher identity; formal structure engenders accountability; and pomodoro breaks facilitate connectedness. We find that there are elements facilitated in writing groups – beyond the act of writing – and suggest these informal settings are noteworthy sites where the exchange of academic disposition and competency occurs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim/Purpose Scholars and practitioners agree that feedback is critical to doctoral students' academic writing development, yet effective feedback processes are complex. The purpose of this case study was to examine the role of dialogue in a Writing Feedback Group (WFG) in facilitating the development of the scholarly writing of English as an Additional Language (EAL) doctoral students. The research question that guided this study was: How does dialogue within a writing feedback group create opportunities for EAL doctoral students to advance their knowledge and skills pertaining to scholarly writing? Background Traditional doctoral student writing feedback, characterized as monologic and unidirectional, positions students as passive learners and is difficult for students to use to improve their writing. Dialogic and bi-directional feedback positions students as active learners as they engage in ongoing verbal and/or written exchanges about their writing. Examinations of verbal feedback on doctoral writing show face-to-face exchanges are a source of motivation and necessary for indepth exchanges about ideas. There is limited understanding, however, as to how dialogue facilitates doctoral students' development as scholarly writers. This case study examines the dialogue of EAL doctoral students as they read and respond to one another's scholarly writing. Methodology This was a qualitative case study of an established writing group. Four EAL doctoral students and one faculty member participated in this study during a 16-week semester. Conversational turns during 12 feedback sessions were analyzed using inductive coding with an interpretive approach to allow research findings to emerge from the data. A constant comparative method was used to classify and compare codes and categories and identify themes related to the study's research question. Contribution The findings from this study contribute to the body of knowledge on the role of dialogic feedback in doctoral writing development. The findings show how doctoral students' dialogue about one another's writing created critical learning experiences for their writing development. This study provides an explicit and systematic approach to dialogue in writing feedback groups. Findings Dialogue scaffolded EAL doctoral students' translation of their complex knowledge to accessible text and helped them respond to the rhetorical context. Dialogue also facilitated doctoral writers' awareness of the importance of precise language and structural organization for readers of their academic writing. Recommendations for Practitioners The WFG established a platform for doctoral students to try out their writing and to actively engage with others in receiving and providing ongoing feedback. It is suggested that institutions of higher education create ongoing opportunities for doctoral students to discuss scholarly writing. Writing feedback groups can take many forms, including established groups embedded into coursework or between advisor and advisees. Recommendations for Researchers This study examined the dialogue of a writing feedback group whose process was highly structured. To develop a deeper understanding of the influence of dialogue on writing, it should be studied in various types of writing groups. Impact on Society Research and scholarship are critical to advancing our society. Doctoral students who speak English as an additional language bring distinctive cultural perspectives to research. Their voices and research are critical to future academic literature. Future Research The findings from this study highlight how dialogue in a writing feedback group afforded doctoral students ongoing opportunities to give and receive feedback on critical academic writing skills on their individual current writing projects. Further research is needed to understand the role of dialogue in the WFG on doctoral students' enduring understanding and the application of academic writing skills on future writing projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The need to publish is a pressure that academics face regardless of discipline. Counselor educators are subject to professional expectations including academic writing and mentorship. Structured writing groups and writing retreats are known to increase writing productivity. This practice based article describes the impact of a wellness-based writing retreat carried out by early career faculty and doctoral students. Suggestions for how to integrate wellness into academic writing retreats and its added benefit to mentorship are included. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Museum staff strive to create environments rich in opportunity for visitors to explore their relationship with their heritage, culture, art, or science. Their unique expertise in communicating and creating educational spaces are critical to the field of informal learning. Museum staff possess wide-ranging capabilities across various forms of communication, but many organisations do not employ specialist research staff whose day-to-day work includes writing and publishing in academic journals. Consequently, the academic research that takes place in museums is conducted and published with museum staff, rather than by museum staff. As part of the European science communication project, QUEST, an academic writing group composed of museum staff was established with the goal of creating a handbook to encourage and aid museum professionals in extending their communication skills so that they may convey their work in academic writing and take ownership of how their field is portrayed in the published literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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.

This study contrasts 33 Japanese English-as-a-foreign-language learners’ experiences using writing groups and artificial intelligence technology (ChatGPT-3.5) for editing and proofreading academic writing assignments. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence technology have significantly influenced academic writing, teaching and learning, prompting researchers to explore the practical application of these technologies in educational settings. In this study, participants edited and proofread their writing in class by using a writing group and experimenting with ChatGPT. After each activity, participants answered a questionnaire about their experiences. In the final questionnaire, participants compared their experiences of each activity and reported on which one they preferred. The results indicate that students mostly prefer using artificial intelligence technology for editing and proofreading. However, they acknowledge some value in writing groups. They assert that technology provides effective feedback, improving clarity and cohesion in their writing. Additionally, the findings reveal preferences for specific prompts to enhance their writing. Overall, this research demonstrates how teachers can use artificial intelligence in language classrooms to improve writing and practices, while emphasizing the importance of ethical implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the design for a virtual academic writing group (VAWG) supported by information and communications technology (ICT), implemented in graduate programs in humanities and education. The purpose of the VAWG was to strengthen the development of academic writing among the participants to publish scientific articles. First, theoretical information about academic writing groups and some previous experiences incorporating ICT are presented. Subsequently, the detail of the design of the group’s activities is presented, going through the initial stage, the pilot testing, and the first implementation. By interacting in an environment where participants share their writing with their peers, writers can enrich their writing processes with other participants, strengthening their writing and critical analysis skills. Furthermore, the VAWG uses ICT tools that the twenty-first-century demands of the new generations in work and daily life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim/Purpose It is increasingly recognized that doctoral education programs should better support doctoral students. In particular, it has been noted that students experience significant isolation during their PhD, which negatively affects their educational experiences and their personal wellbeing. Doctoral writing groups are collaborative learning communities that have in recent years received increasing attention to address this issue. This collaborative autoethnography explores the affective benefits (i.e., benefits associated with emotions and feelings) of these doctoral writing groups, particularly focused on the pastorally supportive nature of these learning communities. Background Writing groups have been shown to promote academic writing skills and build reflective practice, personal epistemology, and academic identity. We have found that a much more significant benefit of our writing groups has been the pastoral care we have experienced, particularly in relation to the turbulent emotions often associated with academic writing. This should, perhaps, not be surprising since it is clear that academic writing is a form of identity work. There is, therefore, a clear need to better support doctoral students, particularly with regard to the more affective components of academic writing. This prompted us to write this collaborative autoethnography to showcase what we consider to be the primary role of doctoral writing groups: pastoral care. Methodology We employ a collaborative autoethnographic methodology to integrate our personal reflections into the existing literature in the field. Contribution We argue that doctoral writing groups are vehicles of pastoral care as they promote wellbeing, foster resilience, provide academic care, and build social capital. Findings We demonstrate that doctoral writing groups foster students' sense of belonging through self-reflection and the sharing of experiences in a safe space, which builds perceived self-efficacy and self-awareness. Furthermore, through the selfreflection and discussion that is inherent in doctoral writing groups, students also develop a better understanding of themselves and their place within the academy. Recommendations for Practitioners Our research highlights that writing groups may be designed to teach academic communication skills, but they provide an affective benefit that cannot yet be quantified and which should not be underestimated. Incorporating writing groups into doctoral education programs can, therefore, have a positive influence on the educational experiences of PhD students and improve their overall wellbeing. This paper concludes by providing practical suggestions to help practitioners implement writing groups into doctoral education programs, particularly focused on how these groups can be made more pastorally supportive. Recommendations for Researchers This paper also extends the theoretical understanding of pastoral care by providing a framework for pastoral care within the doctoral writing group environment. We show how pastoral care can be conceptualized as the promotion of self-awareness, self-efficacy, reflection, and empowerment of doctoral students through nurturing communities where all members are valued, encouraged, guided, and supported. Our experiences, which we have integrated throughout this paper, also highlight the importance of relationship-building within the educational community, particularly when these relationships are characterized by mutual respect and shared responsibility. Impact on Society The poor well-being of doctoral students has now been well-established across the world, but strategies to improve the academic environment for these students are still lacking. This paper provides evidence that implementing writing groups as a strategy to embed pastoral care in a doctoral education environment helps doctoral students flourish. Ultimately, this can lead to an improved academic research culture into the future. Future Research Future research should explore other methods of better integrating pastoral care interventions into doctoral education programs in order to reduce isolation and promote student wellbeing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The student-advisor relationship is critical within the academic research environment in doctoral education. Like academic staff, doctoral students write papers, present data, and teach. As such, doctoral students communicate with academic staff to learn academic discourse as well as contribute to the output of research. In Japan, the relationship between doctoral student and advisor in a Japanese university context can be complicated by a lack of a common language between international doctoral students and Japanese advisors. Not all Japanese faculty are proficient in English and many international doctoral students are English Foreign Language (EFL) learners not proficient in Japanese. In addition, cultural traditions such as the senpai-kohai relationship that require deep respect of teachers by students can stifle communication between doctoral students and Japanese advisors. This qualitative study examines the use of English writing groups as a pedagogical tool and third-party facilitator as part of a communities of practice approach to improve English communication skills of doctoral student EFL learners in a Japanese university context. At a Japanese national university, we organized English speaking writing groups that consisted of eleven international doctoral students, three non-Japanese professors and one Japanese professor who met over a sixteen-week period. Despite the writing group’s aim to produce a research paper in English, results from this study show improvement in workplace communication skills of dialogue, presentation, and the ability to ask questions.

Last summer, a group of participants in ABO's #WriteWithAphra program joined a co-writing group that continues to meet each weekday. When presented with ABO's call for reflections in early 2020, we wanted to reflect as we have worked this past year: together. We share here our conversation from June 4, 2021 (edited for clarity) that addresses why we joined the writing group, as well as what we have gained, the challenges we have encountered, and why we are still here. We frame the conversation with a brief introduction that explores the feminist nature of co-writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Horizontes de Linguística Aplicada is the property of Revista Horizontes de Linguistica Aplicada and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Scholarship has shown that writing groups are important sites of authority negotiation for student writers, yet little empirical research has examined how groups negotiate authority through conversation or how these negotiations influence students' developing expertise. Drawing on observations and interviews of an undergraduate thesis and a graduate dissertation writing group, I use the concept of "presentification" to analyze conversational moments in which group members referenced advisors, "making present" advisor authority to influence group collaborations. Specifically, I analyze these moments to show how writing groups can serve as low-stakes communities in which students negotiate their emerging sense of authority. I found that whereas less experienced writers looked to advisors to solve writing problems and used advisor authority to stand in for disciplinary expertise, more experienced writers voiced advisor guidance to help pose writing problems and negotiate their own stance as disciplinary experts. This study thus theorizes one process through which student writers negotiate emerging authority across sites of literate practice and in collaboration with others who may not themselves be members of the same disciplinary community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the literature on doctoral writing groups suggests that these groups can have a substantial positive effect on doctoral dissertation completion, little is known about how group practices contribute to their success or failure. This collaborative autoethnography explores the experiences of five doctoral student participants in a peer writing group to discover how group participation either contributed to or disrupted each participant's personal writing ecology. While participants felt that the group supported them through personal and job-related stressors and helped them maintain connection to their academic disciplinary community, for some participants the group became an additional source of stress and failed to provide needed guidance. Analysis of individual and group experiences through the ecological perspective challenges the normative meaning of 'failure' for doctoral writing and doctoral writing groups, suggesting that the concepts of persistence and attrition may limit our understanding of the doctoral student experience, while the concept of seeking balance may enhance our understanding. We encourage doctoral students who form peer writing groups to consider how the group can be structured to support each member's writing ecology and to maintain flexibility with group practices as members' circumstances change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Changes in higher education internationally, including the corporatisation of universities, greater codification of research and teaching performance, and more precarious employment, have led to a chillier environment for academics. Employing an autoethnographic approach, we interrogate our career experiences as academic women and the important role our writing group has played in helping us navigate the competing calls on our time and energy, shape our careers, and heighten our career satisfaction. There are salient lessons about the value of adaptive group peer mentoring for those entering what is an increasingly uncertain academic environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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.

Incorporating social writing habits into your practice has many benefits, including new ideas, growth and development, accountability, networking opportunities, better-focused writing, and even increased productivity. In this commentary, we discuss the social habits of writing as described by Dr. Helen Sword in her book Air & Light & Time & Space and provide suggestions for how to incorporate these habits in order to elevate your academic writing. Social habits of writing include writing for others, writing with others, and writing among others. Writing for others highlights the important relationship between author and reader. As writers consider their audience, the goal is to share the efforts of their research or other learning, which includes lessons learned along the way. Serving as a peer reviewer can be beneficial to a writer's development and significantly contributes to the scientific community. Writing with others, or collaborating on a writing project, provides accountability, efficiency, and diversity of skills and viewpoints. When working with others, especially trainees, it is important to set clear expectations of roles, responsibilities, and timelines up front. Finally, writing among others, or working in concert with others but on different projects, can occur in person or virtually with the aid of technology. Writing among others can provide development, accountability, networking, and aid creativity. We can all work to elevate our writing through attention to the social habits of writing. Developing and using these techniques may take time to implement. Practically, making small changes may be the most successful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Writing groups have been implemented in higher education institutions in the US, UK and Australia as a means of supporting a writer's productivity (e.g., journal articles or book chapters) as well as developing their soft academic skills (e.g., collegiality). However, writing groups are seldom discussed in the Japanese context. Therefore, this study describes the development, facilitation and implications of writing groups at a Japanese university (i.e., graduate and faculty level groups who met on a weekly basis for eight to ten weeks). The ways in which the facilitator managed each group using structured and unstructured approaches are discussed focusing on a description of the social, theoretical and practical activities of each group. In order to analyze the efficacy of the writing groups, participant experiences were explored in terms of their initial assumptions, expectations and successes. Finally, the characteristics of the two writing groups are compared to previous research findings. The comparison demonstrates that both groups are similar to those in other contexts. Group members are faced with universal issues such as time pressures, motivation, and varying writing abilities. Overall, this study draws attention to the characteristics of two types of writing groups at this particular university, and begins the conversation regarding the development, facilitation and efficacy of these groups in the Japanese context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This qualitative study investigated the use of Facebook as an online social network site as a support tool for graduate students' and faculty's writing accountability, motivation, and productivity. The purpose of the study was to explore writing practices while using a Facebook group as a physical and virtual place to provide support and accountability. Data came from the Facebook group's postings and responses from group members to an online questionnaire. Through a sociocultural lens, the research team explored the social environment of the community, and the results suggest that the Facebook group offered participants a platform to support one another, while providing peer accountability and building a community for their academic writing. Overall, the qualitative data analysis showed evidence that group membership allowed for building a community, including face-to-face contact, with fellow academic writers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic writing is a peculiar phenomenon - it varies greatly from discipline to discipline and its requirements are rarely made overt. Taking on the writing practices of the academy has implications for identity and it is thus unsurprising that it is seen to be a risky endeavour. This article analyses the experiences of postgraduate scholars who have participated in writing groups that meet weekly to read each other's work and provide supportive critique. Thirty-two people provided detailed, anonymous evaluations of their writing groups and these were studied using a discourse analysis. Three main findings are discussed here. Firstly, writing circles allowed for academic writing development to be engaged with as a social practice, where the disciplinary norms could be made more explicit through peer deliberation, and where they could also be challenged. Secondly, the lack of hierarchical power in the writing groups was key to making safe spaces for agency development, and also for providing positive peer pressure whereby participants were spurred on to work on their writing. Thirdly, the fact that the groups were interdisciplinary, within cognate disciplinary families, provided an interesting challenge in that the students had to consider what these non-specialist readers would or would not understand. This process assisted students in clarifying their writing. Participants' evaluation of the writing groups revealed an overall sense that these contributed to postgraduate student wellbeing and were places of significant agential development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports on a writing group pilot programme implemented at a South African university. Drawing on literature, anonymous student evaluations and facilitator observations, it discusses the use of writing groups for supporting postgraduate academic writing practices. Developed within a broader postgraduate academic writing support programme, the paper discusses a case study of two pilot writing groups: a multidisciplinary long-term group and a disciplinary short-term ‘writing-intensive’ group. The findings indicate that the overall experience of the writing group was a positive one, with each group presenting varied ‘success’ aspects as well as challenges. Insights gleaned may contribute to our understanding of how these groups can be utilised to support postgraduate students and how different kinds of groups can be developed to serve particular student needs. The paper concludes with a discussion of the inclusion of a disciplinary expert, which proved particularly useful in this pilot. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Curriculum transformation is a central concern for higher education in response to rapidly expanding technologies, globalisation and the widening diversity of the student and staff body. This is particularly true for South Africa, which is still grappling with inequalities and pressure for social redress in its universities. Early responses to supporting students took the form of add-on, ‘deficit-model’ approaches which understood poor student retention and success rates as emerging from students’ lack of neutral literacy ‘skills’. Recent initiatives have begun to adopt more socio-cultural understandings of literacy that seek to challenge traditional power structures and cultivate horizontal peer-orientated spaces for learning with a focus on practice rather than on product. Writing groups, as spaces for academic writing development, embrace this orientation and are argued to provide a transformative framework that foregrounds proactive student learning and experience, while still accommodating disciplinary learning through peer engagement. Drawing on the successful implementation of such forms of support at a research-intensive university, this paper argues that writing groups can play a critical role in both personal (student) transformation and broader curriculum transformation. Data include anonymous questionnaires and surveys with participants and coordinators of the writing groups. An inductive, constant comparative analysis indicated that students feel empowered in this space to develop not only their writing practices but also their transforming identities as scholars. Writing groups were found to provide ‘safe spaces’ where academic practices can be made explicit and where they can be challenged. The paper therefore argues that writing groups can play a small but key role in broader transformation efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Copyright of Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu Aastaraamat is the property of Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Uhing (ERU) / Estonian Association for Applied Linguistics and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Research conducted by postgraduate students is a significant source of new knowledge in universities. While it is increasingly available in digital databases, it is not frequently published, and thus accessible, in the form of academic journal articles (Kamler, 2008; Kwan, 2010; Lassig, Dillon, & Diezmann, 2013). In this article we explore the notion of an academic writing group as a pedagogical arrangement to scaffold international postgraduate students into writing for publication. We draw from our experiences of facilitating collaborative writing workshops with five international postgraduate students from The University of Waikato. These workshops provided a pedagogic space for international students and academic mentors to collectively bridge the often obscured path between thesis writing and writing for academic publication. We explain how a focus on reflexivity offered a way of foregrounding the 'backstories' of each student's research experiences and established a platform from which scholars could discuss and write. We also give consideration to the linguistic and discoursal resources that supported emerging writers to foreground reflexivity in their published text. Each of the articles in this special section celebrate the outcome of this academic writing group by showcasing the published articles that have been written by the international postgraduate students involved in this collaborative writing project. We conclude this article by offering our experiences of a collaborative writing group as one way to facilitate a pedagogic bridge between thesis writing and writing for publication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increasing the quality and quantity of published research has become an imperative for many universities in South Africa, but academic staff need more than policy mandates to flourish as writers. In this article the authors aim to inspire academic staff developers and research managers to initiate and support strategies to help academics write more and better, and to take pleasure in writing. Drawing on published literature and our own experiences, we turn a critical eye on writing development strategies used in our own research-intensive institution in Johannesburg, and strategies used in other institutions, mainly, but not only, in South Africa. We weigh up the benefits and drawbacks of five writing strategies: writing courses and workshops; writing groups; writing mentoring and coaching; PhD bootcamps; and writing retreats. We also provide a summary table of the claims made for particular strategies to promote capacity building and productivity, on the one hand, and emotional and social aspects of writing on the other hand. We conclude that by thinking critically and creatively, research managers and academic staff developers can indeed help academics to flourish as writers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Few systematic efforts have been reported to develop higher degree by research student skills for writing publishable articles in science and technology fields. There is a need to address this lack in the light of the current importance of publication to science research students and the high supervisor workload entailed in repeated draft correction, especially when students use English as an additional language. An interdisciplinary teaching approach to address this need has recently been developed featuring analysis frameworks from applied linguistics (AL) research, with successful outcomes in short, stand-alone workshops facilitated by an applied linguist teaching alone or in teams with scientists. Its use by a scientist alone has not previously been investigated, although scientists are well placed to address this development need. We investigate the suitability and effectiveness of this approach for use by a scientist to embed training, in the context of the first two years of operation of a school-level writing group programme, and identify features of the approach that align with participants’ perceptions of benefit. Student response to the programme has been strongly positive, with increased confidence to write for publication and complete their degrees, and high activity towards publishing papers on their degree research. The presenter reports maintenance of his own publication output in spite of the time spent on this training, as a result of increased writing efficiency. Features of the approach that map to perceived benefit include its basis in AL frameworks for analysis of student-provided example papers; incorporation of relevant aspects of English usage and grammar in the frameworks; and inclusion of response to reviewer comments as an integral part of article writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu Aastaraamat is the property of Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Uhing (ERU) / Estonian Association for Applied Linguistics and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Writing retreats are an invaluable way of providing research students and early career researchers with opportunities for extended periods of time for their writing (MacLeod et al., 2012; Murray, 2013, 2014, 2015; Murray and Newtown, 2009; Murray et al., 2012; Petrova and Coughlin, 2012). This is important both for students who are under pressure for timely completion of their degrees and academic staff in the early stages of their careers who, once they have obtained an academic appointment, need to establish themselves in their fields as well as meet tenure track requirements that have been set by their employing institutions. This is as true for native speaking writers as it is for non-native speaking writers (Habibie, 2015), all of whom have to be able to write academically in English, the international language of research, and often face challenges in doing this. This paper discusses both the nature and benefits of writing retreats. It then provides an example of a writing retreat that focuses on writing for publication that has been on offer for the past four years at the University of Sydney, Australia. It describes how the retreat has evolved, how it is organized in its present form, and how participants have responded to the retreat. The paper concludes by arguing that writing retreats are a valuable opportunity for writing pedagogy, showing how both pedagogy and opportunities for extended writing can be brought together within the context of these retreats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Writing Groups for Doctoral Education and Beyond is a detailed text outlining collaborative writing pedagogies suitable for academics, doctoral students, and doctoral advisors. The text is broken into 3 sections with a total of 15 chapters. A variety of different paradigms are critically interpreted within the writing group setting, which offers the reader a look inside the pedagogy and practice of writing. In particular, the text supports qualitative thesis or dissertation writing and offers guidelines to help increase writing productivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]