A Guide to Supervising Non-native English Writers of Theses and Dissertations

Focusing on the Writing Process

John Bitchener

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781136218392
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Focused on the writing process, A Guide to Supervising Non-native English Writers of Theses and Dissertations presents approaches that can be employed by supervisors to help address the writing issues or difficulties that may emerge during the provisional and confirmation phases of the thesis/dissertation journey. Pre-writing advice and post-writing feedback that can be given to students are explained and illustrated.

A growing number of students who are non-native speakers of English are enrolled in Masters and PhD programmes at universities across the world where English is the language of communication. These students often encounter difficulties when writing a thesis or dissertation in English – primarily, understanding the requirements and expectations of the new academic context and the conventions of academic writing.

Designed for easy use by supervisors, this concise guide focuses specifically on the relationship between reading for and preparing to write the various part-genres or chapters; the creation of argument; making and evaluating claims, judgements and conclusions; writing coherent and cohesive text; meeting the generic and discipline-specific writing conventions; designing conference abstracts and PowerPoint presentations; and writing journal articles.

1
Introduction

In the Preface of this book, the aims and overall structure of the book were discussed, together with an explanation of why the book was considered necessary and who the intended reader was expected to be. Against this background, Chapter 1 begins with a consideration of the writing challenges that non-native dissertation students can encounter and why this may be the case. The chapter then proceeds to outline the approach that is taken in this book to help supervisors address the writing challenges of their non-native students. It explains that the provision of pre-writing advice and post-writing feedback are the two key ways in which supervisors typically instruct students about what is expected of them in the writing of their dissertation. Advice and feedback are discussed in terms of (1) what is meant by each of these approaches, (2) who gives the advice and feedback, (3) when the advice and feedback are given and (4) the content of the advice and feedback that is typically given. Thus the aim of this introductory chapter is to establish the type of content that the following chapters will provide.

The Writing Challenges that Non-native Dissertation Students Can Encounter

Over the past 15–20 years, a body of literature (see Appendix A for a summary of some of the key empirical research) has reported on the writing issues that supervisors have identified as problematic for both native and non-native writers of dissertations in English (e.g. Basturkmen, East & Bitchener, 2014; Bitchener, 2016; Bitchener & Basturkmen, 2006; Bitchener, Basturkmen & East, 2010; Cadman, 1997; Casanave & Hubbard, 1992; Cooley & Lewkowicz, 1995, 1997; Dong, 1998; Hyland, 2007). Specifically, the research has commented on writing difficulties (a) at the sentence level (e.g. grammatical and lexical errors), (b) at the paragraph and wider discourse level (e.g. coherence, cohesion, creation of argument), (c) in observing genre characteristics (e.g. achieving discourse move expectations, effective organisation and rhetorical structuring of academic argument), (d) in offering a level of criticality, (e) in justifying an individual stance or position and (f) in presenting theoretical and empirical justifications for claims and conclusions). In a recent publication, Bitchener (2016) refers to several additional challenges that supervisors in New Zealand and Australian universities say they need to respond to in their students’ dissertation writing: (a) discussing the results of their research in light of the big picture established in the literature review chapter(s); (b) drawing upon the methodology of other studies to explain divergent findings and on their own methodology to explain their findings; (c) referring to theoretical perspectives to explain their research findings; (d) writing coherent arguments/justifications; and (e) using source material appropriately and effectively. On the other hand, student accounts of difficulty (East, Bitchener & Basturkmen, 2012) report that these are oriented more towards difficulties and uncertainty in their use of academic and general English and in their ability to use the literature for its various purposes in different parts of the dissertation (e.g. to introduce the research, to justify the problem focus, to explain their findings and to justify their claims and conclusions). That non-native students encounter difficulties or challenges in these areas of their dissertation writing begs the question about why this is the case.

Why Do Some Non-native Writers Encounter Dissertation-Writing Challenges?

Recent migrants and international students who have not previously studied in an English-medium context may have had prior learning and teaching experiences that are different to those that native-writing students have had. Thus, the knowledge they have gained in former educational contexts may be different to that taught in English-medium contexts. Sometimes this is a result of different epistemological understandings of what constitutes appropriate knowledge and practice. On the other hand, they may not have had much experience in applying the knowledge they have been taught before enrolling in an English-medium university. They may enter the dissertation programme with assumptions about what is expected and, upon realising that some of them are not observed in the new learning context, become anxious and struggle to re-learn what is required and expected by the new academic community. Students in this situation are often more dependent upon their supervisors for explicit knowledge and guidance. This is something that, at doctoral level in particular, is not expected by some supervisors. However, the reality is that gaps in knowledge and experience need to be filled one way or another. The burden is typically placed on the primary supervisor who may have a tacit knowledge of what is expected but not an explicit knowledge that they can communicate to their students. This raises the question, then, about the extent to which the needs of supervisors are met by their institutions.

Approaches to Overcoming the Writing Challenges of Non-native Dissertation Students

At the institutional level, a range of learning support services are typically available for students (e.g. one-to-one and small group sessions) as well as seminars and/or workshops on various aspects of designing and carrying out research and on writing it up as a dissertation, but support services for supervisors tend to be more limited in terms of both availability and level of training that explains explicitly what is expected and how the expectations can be met. The aim of this book, then, is to suggest approaches that may help meet this need. The pre-writing advice and the post-writing feedback that are given in the following chapters is intended to provide supervisors with hands-on approaches they can adopt when giving advice and feedback on each of the dissertation chapters.

Pre-writing Advice and Post-writing Feedback to Address the Writing Challenges of Non-native Dissertation Students

In undergraduate and graduate study, students typically receive explicit instruction in timetabled classes but when undertaking research for a dissertation, the primary form of instruction for most students is advice and feedback from supervisors. Some doctoral programmes require their students to take course-work classes for one or two years before starting a dissertation so, for these students, instruction may be given on what is expected and/or required when designing, conducting and writing up dissertation research. Students in other contexts may have received some form of instruction about expectations and/or requirements when writing a Masters level thesis. Because the nature of such instruction can vary from context to context, it is best not to assume anything and find out in early meetings with each student what they know and what experiences they have already had. In my own context, during the early discussions with a new doctoral student, pre-writing advice is typically given about a wide range of topics and this continues throughout the supervisory process, especially before students start a new aspect of their work (i.e. in both their research and in their writing up of the research). Post-writing feedback, on the other hand, is reactive. It comments on the strengths and weaknesses of what the student has written and typically leads to further advice about what should be focused on next. The following sub-sections of this chapter explain in more detail what is meant by pre-writing advice and post-writing feedback.

Pre-writing Advice

What is Pre-writing Advice?

The term pre-writing advice can be used to refer to directives about what must be done, recommendations about what should be done or suggestions about options that students might do well to consider and act upon. Therefore, given the difference between mandatory and optional advice, advisors need, first of all, to be clear in their own mind about the extent to which they consider their advice to be mandatory or optional and then make sure that their students understand the difference and know what is expected and/or required with each piece of advice that is given. To some extent, the level of advice that is given will depend on factors such as who is giving it, when it is given, and what the advice is about.

Who Gives the Advice?

Advice may be given by anyone but, most frequently, it is given by the primary supervisor, other supervisors or advisors in the supervisory team, and, to a lesser extent, by learning support advisors/instructors, conference attendees, journal reviewers and doctoral peers. Most often, this advice is given in one-on-one meetings and exchanges but sometimes several members of the supervisory team will provide advice. University schools and departments sometimes have other meetings or events at which students are given advice. For example, at my university, students receive (a) formal advice from members of the faculty’s doctoral board when it considers the readiness of a student to be confirmed as a doctoral candidate or (b) more informal advice from delegates when presenting aspects of their work at internal conferences or research days.

In my own case, because I am supervising a large number of doctoral students and many of them are researching in similar areas to one another, I hold monthly cohort and pot luck meetings. The cohort meetings enable me to give advice to the cohort of students about matters of common interest. Frequently, the focus of these meetings will be advice on (a) writing up different parts of the dissertation, (b) oral presentations of sections of their work, especially before presenting at conferences, (c) meeting faculty and/or university requirements and (d) the topics/issues that they are investigating. At these meetings, there is also an opportunity for members of the cohort to provide advice on the topics being discussed. The pot luck component of the meeting is a shared meal. Each student brings a plate of food or a dish to share. Very often the contributions are from their own ethnic background. This informal time together facilitates the exchange of on-going advice from both the supervisor and the students on a wide range of topics or issues. Thus, there can be many providers of advice.

When Is the Advice Given?

The short answer to this question is throughout the enrolment period. As primary supervisor, I believe it is important to give pre-writing advice to my students before they start any new written task. Failure to give carefully considered pre-writing advice before students embark on a new aspect of their work can mean that more time ends up being spent on post-writing feedback. This initial advice includes a discussion of what students know and what experiences they have had in relation to the task ahead. Generally speaking, I find that they need more advice at the early stages of their enrolment even though they often think that they know what is required. Later in this chapter, I outline some of the key areas I discuss with students in the early weeks and months as well as the types of advice that are typically provided.

What Advice Is Typically Given to Dissertation Students?

The type of advice that is given to students tends to depend on the stage of the journey they are at and the supervisor’s understanding of what the student already knows and does not know. For example, it is most often the case that more advice, in the early stages, will be given on university and discipline expectations and requirements whereas advice that is given as students prepare to write a section or chapter of their dissertation will focus more on specific matters related to the part-genre or chapter they are preparing. For example, this advice will typically focus on clarifying the purpose of a chapter, the direction of the argument to be presented, the selection of content relevant to the chapter, and how the chapter can most effectively be organised to gain maximum rhetorical effect. Before the second and third iterations of a chapter are written, advice is often provided on more micro matters concerning the conventions expected by the discipline. In Chapter 3 of this book, I consider the pre-writing advice that is typically given on each of the key chapters of a dissertation and, in Chapter 4, I focus on the post-writing feedback that often needs to be provided on each of these chapters.

Post-writing Feedback

What Is Post-writing Feedback?

Feedback has been defined in a variety of ways over the years because its role and central activities can vary from context to context. At dissertation level, it can refer to written and oral comment on what students have done or written well and to what they might need to consider doing or writing next. The latter, in terms of writing, may involve adding to, deleting, modifying or amending what has been written so that the text more closely approximates the norms, values, expectations and requirements of the discipline in which the research is situated. The feedback may introduce new suggestions or ideas for the student to consider or it may refer to guidance and advice given earlier in pre-writing advice meetings and discussions with supervisors/advisors but which needs to be further attended to.

Who Gives the Feedback?

Written feedback can be a time-consuming activity so it is more often than not provided by those who have the primary responsibility for a student’s progress, that is, the primary supervisor and members of the supervisory team. In my own context, I tend to provide the feedback first and then invite others in this team to add to what has been provided. Because other members of the supervisory team offer a special area of knowledge or expertise, they are more likely to provide written feedback on certain pieces of written text rather than on all pieces of a text in the early drafting stages. For example, statistical experts will provide feedback on relevant sections of the methodology and results chapters but not on the literature review chapters until the first full draft of the dissertation has been assembled. Those who have provided written feedback are always invited to a meeting with the student so that they can (a) check that the student has understood the feedback and (b) provide further explanation or clarification if necessary. It is sometimes the case that a feedback issue is difficult to explain in a manageable way on a student’s text and that a detailed discussion is a more appropriate way to respond. While the supervisory team is more likely to provide feedback on the content of the student’s text and on the way in which the content has been organised to create an argument, learning support centres are more likely to provide written feedback on academic writing and linguistic accuracy/appropriateness issues.

When Is the Feedback Given and What Is Its Focus?

Written feedback is provided as a response to a piece of text that a student has submitted. The text may be at different stages of development. First, students may submit notes in different forms to see what the supervisor thinks of their ideas before they convert this material into text. As I explain in the following chapters, my students are asked to submit, first, a detailed table of contents of what they intend to include in various sections of a chapter. Then I ask them to explain this outline to me so that they and I can see if they need to add or delete anything before proceeding further. More will be said about this in the following chapters.

Once students have completed the first full iteration of a major section (or sometimes, if the student is particularly able, this may be when a whole chapter has been completed), they are given feedback on macro areas such as the selection of content, the coherence of the argument and the appropriateness of supporting arguments, evidence and examples. A feedback meeting is then scheduled for the purpose of discussing further the issues that have been raised in the written feedback.

The second iteration is usually submitted at a later stage in the journey. For example, if the first iteration was a student’s literature review, it would have been completed in the first year of enrolment and before the student’s confirmation in the programme. This iteration, including a revision of the first iteration, is not submitted until the student has completed as comprehensive a reading programme as possible. This second iteration would then include the additional literature that the student had read since submitting the first iteration. I require that my students submit this second iteration before they start data collection so that they don’t discover as they read further during or after the data collection process that they should have included another element in the study for which additional data would then be required.

The third iteration of the literature review chapter is not submitted until the student has analysed the data and written up the findings or results chapter. Once the findings have been determined, additional literature, relating to one or more findings, may need to be added to the literature review so that the finding(s) can be discussed in the discussion of results chapter. It is sometimes the case that parts of the literature review may need to be deleted or modified in some way as a result of the finding(s) that emerged from the analysis. Thus, the third iteration of the chapter is best completed after the findings have been described and before they are discussed.

Three iterations of the other chapters of a dissertation are also required. The timing and reasoning for this is discussed further in the following chapters. It should also be noted that between these iterations, some students may need to do more iterations of sections of a chapter before the three main iterations of the chapter are commented upon. For example, some students experience more difficulty with the creation of argument than others. If this is the case, I may provide additional feedback, both written and oral. In addition to the formal feedback on chapter sections and on full chapters, students will often receive feedback on short email or text questions that they have sent.

Thus, it can be seen that post-writing feedback is provided at different stages of the dissertation journey and that this depends on the chapter or part-genre of the dissertation being responded to. The advice and feedback approaches introduced in this chapter and described in detail throughout this book are those of an experienced supervisor of non-native writers of English. Some supervisors may provide less advice to students before they write the different parts of their dissertation while others may provide more advice, including some of the post-writing feedback areas that are referred to in this book. Finally, it should be realised that the areas covered in both the advice and feedback sections of the book are no...