Writing with more authority and assertiveness
Download 4.13 Kb.
|
| Writing with more authority and assertiveness.
Thompson (2015) reports that ‘many a doctoral thesis has left an examiner underwhelmed because it doesn’t seem to be written by an expert researcher’. Additionally, she goes on to describe the typical student writer’s voice as “hesitant, deferential […] tentative, distant, impersonal and informal” (Thompson 2015). However, there have been great number of important studies which address the transition of the ‘apprentice’ academic writer from doctoral student to peer (Crow, 2012; Potts and Adams, 20014; Webster 2014) which note that this is a tricky period to navigate but is critical to success for those wishing to pursue an academic career. It’s interesting that experienced academic writers recommend therefore that the doctoral student try to get rid of this inner student voice in order to write more convincingly for academic peers (Rankin, 2001; Thompson, 2015; Webster, 2015). It could be argued that this approach would be of huge value to those students who are also beginning to write for publication, in identifying potential differences between the requirements, register, lexicon and discourse of the broader Academy versus that of the University; such a transition may necessitate a shift in self-perception and identity which often manifests in the authorial voice. The very liminality of this transitional threshold compounds an unstable heteroglossia within the authorial voice as it switches between identities and the discourses of authoriativeness appropriate to each. I believe that all students would benefit from the input of a more experienced writer in identifying those areas of their writing which seem to be less distinct and authoritative, and those which demonstrate a more individual, independent voice (Thompson 2015). It might be argued that common academic writing advice which has been reported as suitable for undergraduates such as ‘always write for the intelligent lay person’ (Webster, 2009) may not be relevant for doctoral students, and could in fact leave them unprepared for writing for a very specific audience of their peers, which may particularly be true of guidance on referencing concerning ‘common knowledge’ as it is generally known, as it is contingent on a particular ‘community of practice’ (Lave and Wenger 1991). Directory: fms fms -> Usda forest Service National Biomass Estimator Library fms -> Abstract, name, affiliation and paper title acis conference 4-6 December 2013 Karen Agutter University of Adelaide Italian Migrant Hostel Experiences fms -> Replace this line with your paper identification number fms -> Ladoke akintola university of technology, ogbomoso 001 Historical Background fms -> Clyde G. McShan, II experienc e summar y fms -> Course Description fms -> Field Medical Training Battalion Camp Lejeune fmso 1207 Don Mission-Oriented Protective Posture (mopp) Gear terminal learning objective fms -> Fms 302 U. S. Media Now Fall 2012 Professor fms -> Wanampi: rainbow serpent of the desert fms -> Design and construction standards Download 4.13 Kb. Share with your friends:
|