Professors as mediators of academic text cultures: An interview study with advisors and master's degree students in three disciplines in a Norwegian University

Written Communication

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 493-544

  Dysthe, Olga ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84883240644     PISSN: 07410883     EISSN: 15528472     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/074108802238010     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Bakhtin, M.M.(1981).The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin (M. Holquist, Ed.; C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
2. Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Eds.; V. W. McGee, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
3. Barab, S., & Duffy, T. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In D. H. Jonassen & S. M. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 25-57). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
5. Bazerman, C. (1994). Constructing experience. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
6. Bazerman, C., & Paradis, J. (Eds.). (1991). Textual dynamics of the professions. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
7. Becher, T. (1989).Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual inquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Stony Stratford, UK: Society for Research in Higher Education/Open University Press.
8. Berkenkotter, C., Huckin, T. N., & Ackerman, J. (1991). Social context and socially constructed texts: The initiation of a graduate student into a writing research community. In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions (pp. 191-215). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
9. Bialostosky, D. H. (1989). Dialogic, pragmatic, and hermeneutic conversations: Bakhtin, Rorty, and Gadamer. Critical Studies, 1, 108-119.
10. Blakeslee, A. M.(2001).Interacting with audiences: Social influences on the production of scientific writing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11. Bleikli, I. (1997). Kunnskap og makt: norsk høyere utdanning i endring [Knowledge and power: Norwegian higher education in transition]. Oslo, Norway: Tano Aschehoug.
12. Bowen, E., & Schneller, B. (1991). Writing about science. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13. Britton, J., Brugess, T., Martin, N., McLeod, A., & Rosen, H. (1975). The development of writing abilities (11-18). London: Macmillan.
14. Burgess, R. G. (1994). Postgraduate education and training in the social sciences. London: Jessica Kingsley.
15. Conrad, L. (1994). Gender and postgraduate supervision. In O. Zuber-Skerritt & Y. Ryan (Eds.), Quality in post-graduate education (pp. 51-58). London: Kogan Page.
16. Deem, R.,& Brehony, K. (2000). Doctoral students' accessto research cultures: Are some more unequal than others? Studies in Higher Education, 25, 149-165.
17. Delamont, S., Parry, O., & Atkinson, P. (1998). Creating a delicate balance: The doctoral supervisor's dilemma. Teaching in Higher Education, 3, 157-172.
18. Dysthe, O. (1993). Writing and talking to learn: A theory-based, interpretive study of three classrooms in Norway and the USA(Report No. 1). Tromsø, Norway: APPU, University of Tromsø.
19. Dysthe, O. (1996a). The multivoiced classroom. Written Communication, 13, 385-425.
20. Dysthe. O. (1996b). Det flerstemmige klasserommmet [The multivoiced classroom]. Olso, Norway: Gyldendal/Ad Notam.
21. Dysthe, O., & Breistein, S. (1999). Fagskriving og rettleiing ved universitetet: Intervjustudie ved Institutt for Adminstrasjon og organisasjonsvitenskap [Writing and supervision at the university: Interview study at the Department of Administration and organizational science]. Bergen, Norway: Program for læringsforskning, Universitetet i Bergen.
22. Dysthe, O., Hertzberg, F., & Hoel, T. L. (Eds.). (2000). Skriving for å lære: Skriving i høyere utdanning [Writing to learn: Writing in higher education]. Oslo, Norway: Abstrakt forlag.
23. Dysthe, O., & Kjeldsen, J. (1997). Fagskriving og rettleiing i faget religonsvitskap [Writing and supervision in the History of Religions]. Bergen, Norway: Program for læringsforskning, Universitetet i Bergen.
24. Dysthe, O., & Lied, L. (2000). Fagskriving og rettleiing ved universitetet: Intervjustudie ved Institutt for fiskeri- og marinbiologi [Writing and supervision at the university: Interview study at the Department of Fishery and Marine Biology]. Bergen, Norway: Program for læringsforskning, Universitetet i Bergen.
25. Faigley, L. (1992). Fragments of rationality: Postmodernity and the subject of composition. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
26. Faigley, L., & Hansen, K. (1985). Learning to write in the social context. College Composition and Communication, 36, 140-149.
27. Foster, D.,& Russell, D. R. (Eds.). (2002).Writing and learning in cross-national perspective: Transitions from secondary to higher education. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum.
28. Gadamer, H. G. (1985). Philosophical apprenticeship. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. Geisler, G. (1994). Academic literacy and the nature of expertise: Reading, writing, and knowing in academic philosophy. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30. Gere, A. R. (1987).Writing groups: History, theory, and implications. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
31. Gilbert, G. N., & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora's box: Asociological analysis of scientists' discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
32. Hutchings, P., & Shulman, L. S. (1999, September/October). The scholarship of teaching. Change, 11-15.
33. Johnson, L., Lee, A., & Green, B. (2000). The PhD and the autonomous self: Gender, rationality and postgraduate pedagogy.Studies in Higher Education,25(2), 135-147.
34. Kanigel, R. (1986). Apprentice to genius: The making of a scientific dynasty. New York: Macmillan.
35. Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36. Kvale, S. (1999). Research apprenticeship. Nordisk Pedagogik, 17, 3.
37. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38. Lauvås, P., & Handal, G. (1998). Hovedfagsveiledning ved Universitetet i Oslo: Rapport fra prosjektet "Vitenskapelig veiledning" [Supervision of graduate students at the University of Oslo: Report from the project "Research Supervision"]. Oslo, Norway: Universitetet i Oslo: Pedagogisk Forskningsinstitutt.
39. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
40. Lee, A. (1998). Doctoral researchas writing. In J. Higgs (Ed.),Writing qualitative research. Five Docks, Australia: Hampden.
41. Leonard, D. (1997). Gender issues in doctoral studies. In N. Graves & V. Varma (Eds.), Working for a doctorate (pp. 152-183). London: Routledge.
42. Linell, P. (1998). Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
43. Lotman, Y. M. (1988). Text within a text. Soviet Psychology, 24, 33-51.
44. MacDonald, S. P. (1994). Professional academic writing in the humanities and social sciences. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
45. Markova, I., & Foppa, K. (Eds.). (1990). Dynamics in dialogue. Hemel Hempsted, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
46. Markova, I., & Foppa, K.(Eds.). (1991). Assymmetries in dialogue. Hemel Hempsted, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
47. McCarthy, L. P. (1987). Astranger in strange lands: A college student writing across the curriculum. Research in the Teaching of English, 21, 233-265.
48. Miles, M.,& Huberman, M.(1994).Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49. Myers, G. (1990). Writing biology: Texts in the social construction of scientific knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
50. Myers, G. (1996). Out of the laboratory and down to the bay: Writing in science and technology studies. Written Communication, 13, 5-43.
51. Nystrand, M. (1992). Social interactionism versus social constructionism: Bakhtin, Rommetveit, and the semiotics of written text. In A. H. Wold (Ed.), The dialogical alternative: Toward a theory of language and mind (pp. 157-174). Oslo, Norway: Scandinavian University Press.
52. Nystrand, M. (1997). Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. Martin Nystrand with Adam Gamoran, Robert Kachur, & Catherine Prendergast. New York: Teachers College Press.
53. Øverland, O.(1988). Kandenorske universitetene bli bedre? [Can Norwegian universities improve?] Nytt norsk tidsskrift, 5, 63-70.
54. Øverland, O. (1994). Skriving ved det undervisningsgivende ogdet eksamensgivende universitetet [Writing at the "instruction giving and exam giving university"]. In O. Dysthe (Ed.), Skriving ved universitetet [Writing at university] (Report No. 1), Tromsø, Norway: UNIKOM, Universitetet i Tromsø.
55. Parry, S.(1999). Disciplinary discourseindoctoral theses.Higher Education,36, 273-299.
56. Pechenik, J., & Lamb, B. (1994). How to write about biology. London: HarperCollins.
57. Prior, P. (1991). Contextualizing writing and response in a graduate seminar. Written Communication, 8, 267-310.
58. Prior, P. (1994). Response, revision, disciplinarity: Amicrohistory of a dissertation prospectus in sociology. Written Communication, 11, 483-533.
59. Prior, P. (1998). Writing/disciplinarity: A sociohistoric account of literate activity in the academy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
60. Reddy, M. (1979). The conduit metaphor. In A. Oronty (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284-324). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
61. Rommetveit, R. (1974). On message structure. New York: John Wiley.
62. Ryan, Y. (1994). Contracts and checklists: Practical propositions for postgraduate supervision. In O. Zuber-Skerritt & Y. Ryan (Eds.), Quality in postgraduate education. London: Kogan Page.
63. Säljö, R. (2000). Lärande i praktiken: Ett sociokulturelt persptiv [Learning in practice: A sociocultural perspective]. Stockholm, Sweden: Prisma.
64. Shulman, L. S. (1999, July/August). Taking learning seriously. Change, 11-15.
65. Swales, J.(1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
66. Swales, J.,& Najar, H.(1987). The writing ofresearch article introductions. Written Communication, 4, 175-191.
67. Torrance, M. S., & Thomas, G. V. (1994). The development of writing skills in doctoral research students. In R. G. Burgess (Ed.), Postgraduate education and training in the social sciences (pp. 105-123). London: Jessica Kingsley.
68. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
69. Vygotsky, L.(1987).Thought and language(A. Kozulin, Ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
70. Walvoord, B., & Mc Carthy, L. (1990). Thinking and writing in college: Anaturalistic study of students in four disciplines. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
71. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
72. Wertsch, J. (1991). Voices of the mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
73. Wertsch, J. (1998). Mind as action. New York: Oxford University Press.
74. Wold, A. H. (Ed.). (1992). The dialogical alternative: Toward a theory of language and mind. Oslo, Norway: Scandinavian University Press.
75. Yeatman, A. (1998). Making supervision relationships accountable: Graduate student logs. In A. Lee & B. Green (Eds.), Postgraduate studies, postgraduate pedagogy. Sydney, Australia: Centre for Language and Literacy, University Graduate School, University of Technology, Sydney.
76. Zuber-Skerritt, O., & Ryan, Y. (Eds.). (1994). Quality in post-graduate education. London: Kogan Page.
77. Zuckerman, H. (1977). Scientific elite. New York: Free Press.