Rethinking doctoral publication practices : writing from and beyond the thesis

This article addresses the importance of giving greater pedagogical attention to writing for publication in higher education. It recognizes that, while doctoral research is a major source of new knowledge production in universities, most doctoral students do not receive adequate mentoring or structural support to publish from their research, with poor results. Data from a case study of graduates in science and education are examined to show how the different disciplinary and pedagogic practices of each discourse community impact on student publication. It is argued that co-authorship with supervisors is a significant pedagogic practice that can enhance the robustness and know-how of emergent scholars as well as their publication output. There is a need, however, to rethink co-authorship more explicitly as a pedagogic practice, and create more deliberate structures in subject disciplines to scaffold doctoral publication - as it is these structures that influence whether graduates publish as informed professionals in their chosen fields of practice. <br /

Professional renewal through cross-generational mentoring and research

Internationally, normative discourses about literacy standards have rapidly proliferated and spaces for teachers to engage in serious intellectual inquiry seem to be shutting down. What counts, in current times, is increasingly only what can be counted. The onslaught of political and media attacks about standards has left many teachers with low morale and low energy. Many experienced teachers are doubting their own wisdom, despite years of successful practice; many novice teachers are wondering why they entered the profession.<br /

Getting abstracted: teacher educators as research writers

While the term \u27early career\u27 researcher, is a familiar identity label within competitive Australian Research Council grant writing and bidding, it is a strange appellation in Australian Faculties of Education, where many early career academics have, in fact, carried out successful professional careers in education for 10-15 years before they embark on mid-career doctoral work. In this sense, they are more mid than early career. While they are not novices, however, they are often positioned as beginners with regard to accessing the journal, conference and other discourse communities of the academy. This paper explores the tensions and anxieties experienced by mid-career researchers in teacher education as they begin to publish from their dissertations and extend the audience for their doctoral work. It focuses on the writing of abstracts, which it is argued is a rich site for both text work and identity work and a practice which goes beyond technique to questions of identity and the promotional economies of academic work.<br /

Gender and genre : a case study of a girl and a boy learning to write

This study addresses questions of gender and genre in early writing by drawing on systemic linguistic theory, It is a longitudinal case study that compares the writing development of two children, a boy and a girl/ who learned to write in classrooms that adopted an approach to writing known in Australia as \u27process writing1, The children\u27s written texts were analysed using the systemic functional grammar as developed by MAK, Hallidey and the models of genre and register as proposed by J,R, Martin. The children were followed for the first two and a half years of their schooling, from the first day of kindergarten to the middle of grade two. They were observed weekly during the daily ‘writing time’ and all texts were collected. Although the children were ostensibly \u27free’ to determine both the writing topics and text types they produced, systemic analysis revealed that: 1) the majority of texts written were of one genre, the Observation genre, in which the children reconstructed their personal experience with family and friends and offered an evaluation of it. 2) a significant pattern of gender differences occurred within this genre, such that the boy reconstructed experience in terms of the male cultural stereotype of being an active participant in the world, while the girl reconstructed experience in terms of the female stereotype of being a more passive observer of experience. It is the strength of systemic linguistic analysis that it revealed how the choices the children made in language were constrained by a number of social and cultural contexts, including: a) the teacher\u27s theoretical orientation to literacy; b) the models of spoken and written language available to the children; and c) the ideology of gender in the culture. In particular, the analysis made visible how children appropriate the meanings of their culture and socialise themselves into gender roles by constructing the ideology of gender in their writing. The study contributes to an understanding of genres by offering a revised description of the Observation genre, which derives from the Observation Comment genre originally identified by Martin and Rothery (1981). It also raises a number of implications for teacher training and classroom practice, including the need for: 1) increased teacher consciousness about gender and genre, especially an understanding that choices in language are socially constructed 2) a critical reassessment of the notion of \u27free topic choice’ promoted by \u27process writing\u27 pedagogy, a practice which may limit choice and tacitly support the gender status quo

Talking down \u27writing up\u27 or ten e-mails make a conference paper

This paper addresses the significant role that writing plays in research. We argue that too often writing is oversimplified, consigned to the final \u27stage\u27 of a research \u27process\u27 and designated as \u27writing up\u27. Research methodology textbooks rarely discuss writing as integral to research practice. The advice postgraduate students receive not only glosses over the difficulties of constructing an extended argument but also of working within the genres and power relations required by the academy. In this paper we examine a selection of research methodology texts to see how the notion of \u27writing up\u27 is constructed and with what effects. We offer an alternative view of writing as research and research as writing.</div

Abstract art or the politics and pedagogies of getting read

The writing of academic abstracts is more than a tiresome necessity of scholarly life. It is a practice which goes beyond genre and technique to questions of identity and the promotional economies of academic work. In this paper we deconstruct a series of abstracts from a variety of refereed journals and conferences and develop a set of questions that allow us to \u27read\u27 the representation of data, argument, methodology and significance. We argue that the rules of abstract engagement are fluid and increasingly important with the advent of online journals and global citation indices. We suggest that abstract art is now an obligatory aspect of postgraduate supervision.<br /