| 1 |
Looking behind the Writing: The design and implementation of a framework to provide transitional support for the development of written articulacy at PG level – a University of Cambridge Case Study
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
Writing at postgraduate level is far more than simply writing – it is a complex process of knowledge creation. Yet despite its importance within academia, there seems to exist what has been referred to as a ‘non-pedagogy of osmosis’ when it comes to supporting the development of written academic articulacy for the novice postgraduate writer. This is a tenuous pedagogy at best even for the L1 postgraduate, let alone for those for whom English is an additional language. In order to provide more effective support, a conceptual framework was devised that postulated 1) that such support needed to penetrate beyond the mere superficial linguistic layer and understand what is going on behind the writing; and 2) that, drawing on Kaplan’s theory of contrastive rhetoric, the key additional challenge for L2 postgraduates was not linguistic, but was rhetorical transfer, namely, the transfer of the argumentational paradigms of their L1 into English. Using the University’s criterion for work submitted for assessment, namely, that it be ‘clearly written’ as a starting point, this study seeks to answer the following question: What does ‘clearly written’ actually mean with respect to postgraduate writing and how can we support postgraduates to produce work that meets the criterion of ‘clearly written’? A two-phase explanatory mixed methods design was used, which enabled a triangulation of methods, data collection and analysis, thus providing a convergence of evidence that was designed to reinforce the strength and validity of the research findings. Phase One of the study sought to explore what the components of this complex process are and what the impact of rhetorical transfer is for L2 writers. Phase Two sought to provide the how by designing a pilot answer in the form of Practical Materials. The two key findings of this study are 1) the centrality of argument to ‘clearly written’, and 2) the pertinency of rhetorical transfer to explain some of the ancillary challenges L2 postgraduates may experience. ; The EdD was funded by my employer: the Language Centre, University of Cambridge.
|
|
Keyword:
argument; contrastive rhetoric; rhetorical transfer; written articulacy
|
|
URL: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/329456
https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.76904
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
|
|
