Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
A Narrative Inquiry into Experience of A Taiwanese Ph.D. Student Participating in the TESOL Academic Community
Chiang, Tsung Yi
Chao, Chin Chi
Chiang, Tsung Yi
Community of Practice
|Issue Date:||2014-08-25 15:11:51 (UTC+8)|
|Abstract:||本研究為長期性的敘事研究，運用了Wenger (1998)的「實踐社群」社會學習理論(communities of practice)，以及Norton(1995)的投資理論 (investment)，研究目的是為了探索一位台灣的英語教學研究所博士生的學術成長經驗及其所衍生的意義，特別是針對他奮勉進行學術研究投稿、完成博士學位、並進而開啟他未來的學術生涯等等的過程。本研究主要追蹤了研究參與者在其博士生涯的三個形成階段中，他的學術投稿經驗的心路歷程，一路到研究參與者最後在全球的英語教學領域之學術社群中取得更完全的參與度階段。為了能夠對於研究參與者其經驗有深入的了解，本研究採用了「敘事研究法」，收集了研究參與者的學習經驗自傳、敘說訪談的錄音及其逐字稿、研究者的現場筆記及研究筆記、以及其他由研究參與者所提供的文件等資料，以便能分析參與者的言談資料、且對資料進行敘事性的分析、並進而產出情節故事作為研究結果。研究結果發現，研究參與者持續努力來達成其所認定的學術投稿要求，確實增長了他在學術素養的成長，並足以成為學術社群當中的一員。在其過程當中，研究參與者對於實踐其學術投稿的過程當中相關資源的運用方式，與在Wenger ‘s (1998) 「實踐社群」社會學習理論的非正式學習的特色是相互呼應的。研究參與者在學術社群當中所獲得的參與度，也表現出了其所累積的文化資產。最重要的是，從研究參與者的經驗透露出，就其受到英語教學社群的社會文化的影響之下來看，研究參與者埋首致力於學術投稿活動不僅僅是為了當下於英語教學社群的參與，也為了即將到來的終生志業進行Norton (1995)理論當中的個人投資的傾向。這樣的情況顯示出，要學習成為一個英語教學研究領域的學者，的確是涉及了諸多層面的複雜構面及諸多意義上的磋商。而就整個過程來說，也是與研究參與者，他身為初階的年輕學人，身處於台灣的社會情境當中，為了能夠符合全球各地諸多種類專業社群的規範，他以放遠全球的思維來，來實踐在地的行動，成長中的信念是有所共鳴的。最後，本研究將針對台灣高等教育環境中的英語教學研究領域之博士班課程提出建議並討論，以促進年青學人們在學術領域的發展。|
Drawing on Wenger’s (1998) social learning theory as well as Norton’s (1995) notion of investment, this longitudinal qualitative study aims to investigate and derive meanings from the academic experience of one former Taiwanese TESOL doctoral student as he struggled to write for scholarly publications, survived the Ph.D. program, and initiated his academic career. The study mainly traces the twists and turns of his publishing experience in three stages of his forming years till the participant finally has acquired a fuller membership in the global TESOL academic community. To capture and derive an in-depth understanding of the experiences, a narrative inquiry approach was adopted, collecting the young scholar’s written autobiography, recorded narrative interviews and transcripts, the researcher’s research notes and other related documents that the participant provided, so as to thematically analyze the narrative data and then exert the narrative analysis to configure the happenings and events into seven emplotted narratives as the research results. The findings indicate that the participant’s continual endeavor to meet the perceived and assumed requirements for publishing indeed rendered him the academic literacy development necessary to become a member of the academic community. In the process, the participant’s ways of utilizing resources situated in the practice of publishing echo the features of informal learning in Wenger’s (1998) social learning theory. The membership in the academic community gained by the participant also indicates the accumulated cultural capital. Most importantly, the participant’s experience as a doctoral student, being socially and culturally medicated by the TESOL academic community, reveals a tendency to engage in academic tasks for scholarly purposes not only for the current participation in the TESOL academic community but also for personal investment (Norton, 1995) for the coming life-long career. This suggests learning to become a TESOL scholar indeed involves multiple layers of complexity and challenges, and the whole process is also a resonant to his growing faith as a novice young scholar, situated in the social context of Taiwan, to act locally and think globally, in order to conform to norms of various discourse communities around the world. Suggestions for TESOL doctoral programs in Taiwanese higher education to help and support young scholars’ academic development are discussed.
|Reference:||Aitchison, C., & A. Lee. (2006). Research writing: Problems and pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education, 11 (3), 265–278.|
Aitchison, C. (2009). Writing groups for doctoral education. Studies in Higher
Education. 34 (8), 905-916.
Allison, D., Cooley, L., Lewkowicz, J., & Nunan, D. (1998). Dissertation writing in action: the development of a dissertation writing support program for ESL graduate research students. English for Specific Purposes, 17(2), 199-217.
Atkinson, R. (1997). The life story interview. (Qualitative Research Methods Series, Vol. 44). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Belcher, D.D. (2007). Seeking acceptance in an English-only research world. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 1-22.
Braine, G. (2002). Academic literacy and the nonnative speaker graduate student. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1, 59-68.
Burrough-Boenisch, J. (2003). Shapers of published NNS research articles. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 223-243.
Canagarajah, A. S. (1996). “Nondiscursive” requirements in academic publishing, materials resources of periphery scholars, and the politics of knowledge production. Written Communication, 13 (4), 435-472.
Casanave, C.P. (2005). Uses of narrative in L2 writing research. In P. K. Matsuda & T. Silva (Eds.), Second language writing: perspectives on the process of knowledge construction. (pp. 17-32). Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Casanave, C.P. (2010). ‘Taking risks?’: A case study of three doctoral students writing qualitative dissertations at an American university in Japan. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19, 1-16.
Casanave, C. P., & Li, X. (Eds.). (2008). Learning the literacy practices of graduate school: Insiders’ reflections on academic enculturation. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Cho, S. (2004). Challenges of entering discourse communities through publishing in English: Perspectives of nonnative-speaking doctoral students in the United States of America. Journal of Language Identity, 3 (1), 47-72.
Clandinin, D. J. & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.), New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Curry, M.J.&Lillis, T. (2004). Multilingual scholars and the imperative to publish in English : negotiating interests, demands, and rewards. TESOL Quarterly, 38(4), 663-688.
Damen, L. (1986). Culture learning: the fifth dimension in the language classroom. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Dollard, J. (1935).Criteria for the life story. New Heaven: Yale University Press.
Dong, Y,R. (1998). Non-native graduate students' thesis/dissertation writing in science: self-reports by students and their advisors from two U.S. institutions. English for Specific Purposes, 17(4), 369-390.
Flowerdew, J. (1999a). Problems in writing for scholarly publication in English: The
case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 243-264.
Flowerdew, J. (1999b). Writing for scholarly publication in English: The case of Hong
Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 123-145.
Flowerdew, J. (2000). Discourse community, legitimate peripheral participation, and the nonnative-English-speaking scholar. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 127-150
Flowerdew, J. (2001). Attitudes of journal editors to nonnative speaker contributions. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 121-150
Flowerdew, J. (2005). A multimethod approach to research into processes of scholarly
writing for publication. In P. K. Matsuda & T. Silva (Eds.), Second language writing research: perspectives on the process of knowledge construction. (pp. 65-77). Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Gosden, H. (1992). Research writing and NNSs: From the editors. Journal of Second Language Writing,1(2), 123–139.
Gosden, H. (2003). ‘Why not give us the full story?’: functions of referees' comments in peer reviews of scientific research papers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 87-101.
Grabe, W. & Kaplan, R.B. (1996). Writing for professional purposes. In Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistic perspective (pp.147-175). New York, NY: Longman.
Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage.
Hasrati, M. (2005). Legitimate peripheral participation and supervising Ph.D. students. Studies in Higher Education, 30 (5), 557-570.
Hasrati, M. & Street, B. (2009). PhD topic arrangement in 'D'iscourse communities of engineers and social sciences/humanities. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8, 14-25.
Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and research writing. London: Pearson Education.
Kamler, B. (2008). Rethinking doctoral publication practices: writing from and beyond the thesis. Studies in Higher Education, 33 (3), 283-294.
Kottak, C.P. (2007).Window on Humanity: A Concise Introduction to General Anthropology. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Kourilova, M. (1998). Communicative characteristics of reviews of scientific papers written by non-native users of English. Endocrine Regulations, 32, 107-114.
Kwan, B. S. C. (2008). The nexus of reading, writing and researching in the doctoral undertaking of humanities and social sciences: Implications for literature reviewing. English for Specific Purposes, 27(1), 42-56.
Kwan, B. S.C. (2009). Reading in preparation for writing a PhD thesis: Case studies of experiences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(3),180-191.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Leahey, E. (2007). Not by productivity alone: How visibility and specialization contribute to academic earnings. American Sociological Review, 72 (4), 533-561.
Lee, A. & Kamler, B. (2008). Bringing pedagogy to doctoral publishing. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(5), 511-523.
Leki, l., Cumming, A. & Sliva, T. (2008). Scholarly writing in L2. In A synthesis of research on second language writing in English. (pp.56-60). New York NY: Routledge.
Li, Y. (2006). Negotiating knowledge contribution to multiple discourse communities: a doctoral student of computer science writing for publication. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 159-178.
Li, Y. (2007). Apprentice scholarly writing in a community of practice: An intraview of an NNES graduate student writing a research article. TESOL Quarterly, 41 (1), 55-79.
Li, Y. & Flowerdew, J. (2007). Shaping Chinese novice scientists’ manuscripts for publication. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 100-117.
Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R. & Zilber, T. (1998). Narrative research: reading, analysis, and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lincoln, YS. & Guba, EG. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Norton Peirce, B. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29 (2), 9-31.
O’Donnoghue, T. (2007). Planning your qualitative research project. NY: Routledge.
Parker, R. (2009). A learning community approach to doctoral education in the social sciences. Teaching in Higher Education, 14 (1), 43-54.
Pecorari, D. (2003). Good and original: Plagiarism and patchwriting in academic second-language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 317-345.
Pike, K. L. (1954). Language in relation to a unified theory of the structure of human behavior. Part I. (Preliminary ed.). Glandale, Ca: The Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Polkinghorne, D. E. (1995). Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis. Qualitative Studies in Education, 8 (1), 5-23.
Richard, K. (2003). Qualitative inquiry in TESOL. NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Riessman, C.K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. (1998). Other floors, other voices: a textography of a small university building. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wenger, E. (1998). Community of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. NY: Cambridge University Press.
|Appears in Collections:||[英國語文學系] 學位論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.