Research Writing Group Kit
Judy Maxwell and Jen Anderson
Study and Learning Centre
RMIT University
Research Writing Group Benefits
• Develop a learning community
• Increase publication output
• Increase motivation of thesis/exegesis writers
• Normalise research writing issues
(Aitchison, 2009, 2010; Aitchison & Lee, 2006; Boud & Lee, 2005; Cuthbert & Spark,
2008; Kamler & Thomson, 2006; Larcombe, McCosker & O’Loughlin, 2007)
Study and Learning Centre
2
Research Writing Groups: Theoretical underpinning
• Academic literacies
• Discursive social practice – (the scholarly voice)
• Peer learning (dialogic learning)
(Aitchison, 2009; Boud & Lee, 2005; Kamler & Thomson, 2006; Lea, 2004; Lea
& Street, 1998; Lillis, 2006; Wingate, 2006)
Study and Learning Centre
3
Research Writing Groups: Current models
Multidisciplinary
Multi-Disciplinary,
with 5 self-selecting
sub-groups
Discipline-specific?
Study and Learning Centre
4
Knowledge back and forth and in-between:
a complex messy business
Study and Learning Centre
5
Writing Group Kit: Rationale
• SLC staffing limitations
• The ideal
: many RWGs across RMIT
: self-selecting and semi-autonomous
: peer-facilitated
: encouragement from supervisors and research community
• RWG kit: a sustainable solution?
Study and Learning Centre
6
Writing Group Kit: Research informing development
1.
Action research with RWGs
•
•
•
•
2.
issues
observations of candidates in dialogue about text
resources developed upon request
feedback on processes, activities
Supervisor conversations
• methods to develop candidate as research writer
• recommendations for kit resources and RWG formation.
Study and Learning Centre
7
Research Outcomes: Key Ingredients
Writing groups can work independently.
Ingredient 1 - Facilitator who is NOT a teacher, but a peer.
Shana emailed me a paragraph of her writing. I spent time analysing it on PPT.
In fact this was unnecessary.
The students turned out to be excellent at analysis and drew out the best from
Shana – they could sense or see directly what was wrong and ask guiding questions
or make useful suggestions about changes…
They bring recent experience and expertise to the discussions – newly learned
information seems to be powerful in the telling – much more than what I can offer. I
like the collegiality of these sessions.
Jen Anderson reflective journal: 15 September 2011
Study and Learning Centre
8
Ingredient 2: Peer facilitator
What makes peers such effective mentors?
With writing from my group, i feel more ‘attached’ to the text as well as
being able to identify with it: "i write that way sometimes" / "i used to
write it like that" / "I can see why he/she did that".
Along with the discussions, i have the sense that i want to help my
peers in any way i can or the best i can.
I try to contribute/provide more feedback (i.e. the mind starts jogging).
I don’t feel as close or ‘attached’ to textbook examples. Perhaps it’s
because of the relation i have with the author: peer/friend /colleague
instead of “i don’t know who came up with this.”
Facilitator PCW, email correspondence with Jen Anderson, 3/10/11
Study and Learning Centre
9
Other key ingredients
• Negotiated group dynamics, facilitation and operation
• Kit design principles
• Facilitator training
Study and Learning Centre
10
Research Writing Group Kit: Content
• Beginning a Research Writing Group
• Research Writing Groups: Handbook for facilitators
• Research Writing Groups: Learning resources
• Useful publications for research writers
Study and Learning Centre
11
Research Writing Groups: Handbook for Facilitators
Main objective
Provide resources to enable successful facilitation and participation in
RWGs.
Specific objectives
Resources will demonstrate how to:
• set up and maintain a group
• establish roles and responsibilities (facilitator and group members)
• communicate effectively
• plan and run sessions
• identify and seek additional support/services
Study and Learning Centre
12
Research Writing Groups: The base approach
1. Dialogic Learning (vs Adversarial Debate)
2. Process
The writer
The reader/group
1. Emails to the group 1 week in
advance.
3. The writer sets the con for the
text.
2. The reader reads, thinks, makes
notes.
4. The group listens, makes notes.
5. The readers wonder aloud, ask
questions.
7. The reader looks to the text and
suggests ways in which this
meaning can be made manifest.
6. The writer explains and reexplains in response to
questions; makes notes.
8. The writer re-writes.
9. The reader reviews and
comments again.
10. The group identifies sticking points and searches for solutions.
Study and Learning Centre
13
Research Writing Groups: The base approach
3. Text analysis – noticing activities
• Identify text function and purpose/intention
(genre-section-paragraph)
• Relate to key discourse elements in text
• Compare and contrast across articles-thesespeer reviewed journals
• Call on the experts as necessary.
Abstracts/Summaries
NOTICING
Analyse abstracts in your
research field
Study and Learning Centre
1.
Order of presentation
2.
Verb tenses in each
sentence
3.
Opening sentence –
starter points
14
Research Writing Groups: Supplementary techniques
•
Mind-mapping
•
Guided peer questioning and critical questioning
•
Whole group writing and ‘stripping’
•
Writing and responding
•
Reading stimulus pieces for writing
•
Presentations
•
Drawing and writing
•
Read-discuss-write
•
Reflective journal
•
Show and tell
Study and Learning Centre
15
Research Writing Groups: Supplementary techniques
•
Mind-mapping
•
Guided peer questioning and critical questioning
•
Whole group writing and ‘stripping’
•
Writing and responding
•
Reading stimulus pieces for writing
•
Presentations
•
Drawing and writing
•
Read-discuss-write
•
Reflective journal
•
Show and tell
Study and Learning Centre
16
Research Writing Groups: Learning resources
(printable PDFs, PowerPoint slides with voice-over, etc.)
1. Confidence-builders (talk and write)
2. Engagement with the literature
3. Authority in writing
4. Discourse structures (genre, section, paragraph)
5. Paragraph development and cohesion
6. Academic style and grammar
Study and Learning Centre
17
Confidence builder: egs of three minute monologues
1. The three-minute thesis and spinoffs
2. Key thinkers/researchers
• Introduce ONE key thinker or researcher/research team in your field.
• Say what they did, what their contribution was, and why the contribution is important
in general.
• Explain how their work is relevant to your own research
3. Key themes, theories, ideas
………
7. I wonder: curious thoughts
8. It’s like this… (from words to figure/table; from figure/table to words)
Bring an image/table (your own or one developed in a text) and talk about it for three
minutes. Use the following questions as prompts for discussion:
• What does the image represent or convey?
• Why is it relevant to your research or your project?
Study and Learning Centre
18
References
Aitchison, C. (2009). Writing groups for doctoral education. Studies in Higher Education, 34 (8),
pp 905-916.
Aitchison, C. (2010). Learning together to publish. In (C. Aitchison, B. Kamler, & A. Lee, Eds)
Publishing pedagogies for the doctorate and beyond. London: Routledge. pp 83-100.
Aitchison, C. & Lee, A. (2006). Research writing: problems and pedagogies. Teaching in
Higher Education, 11(3), pp 265-278.
Boud, D. & Lee, A. (2005). Peer learning as pedagogic discourse for research education.
Studies in Higher Education, 30(5), pp 501-505.
Cuthbert, D. & Spark, C. (2008). Getting a GRiP: examining the outcomes of a pilot program to support
graduate research students in writing for publication. Studies in Higher Education, 33(1), pp 77 -88.
Lea, M. (2004). Academic literacies: A pedagogy for course design. Studies in Higher Education,
29(6), pp 739-756.
Lea, M. & Street, B. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach.
Studies in Higher Education, 23, pp 157-172.
Kamler, B. & Thomson, P. (2006). Helping doctoral students to write. London: Routledge.
Larcombe, W., McCosker, A. & O’Loughlin, K. (2007). Supporting education PhD and DEd
students to become confident academic writers: An evaluation of thesis writers’ circles. Journal
of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 4(1), pp 54-63.
Lillis, T. (2006). Moving towards an ‘Academic Literacies’ pedagogy: dialogues of participation. In
(L. Ganobcsik-Williams, Ed.) Teaching academic writing in UK higher education: Theories,
practices and models. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wingate, U. (2006). Doing away with ‘study skills’. Teaching in Higher Education (11)4, pp 457-469.
Study and Learning Centre
19