Speaking of writing: Supervisory feedback and the dissertation

Doctoral Education: Research-Based Strategies for Doctoral Students, Supervisors and Administrators

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 59-74

  Paré, Anthony ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84891428933     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-0507-4_4     Document Type: Chapter

References (39)

1. Aitchison, C. (2003). Thesis writing circles. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 97-115.
2. Aitchison, C. (2009). Writing groups for doctoral education. Studies in Higher Education, 34(8), 905-916.
3. Aitchison, C. (2010). Learning together to publish: Writing group pedagogies for doctoral publishing. In C. Aitchison, B. Kamler, & A. Lee (Eds.), Publishing pedagogies for the doctorate and beyond (pp. 83-100). London: Routledge.
4. Aitchison, C., & Lee, A. (2006). Research writing: Problems and pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 265-278.
5. Aitchison, C., Kamler, B., & Lee, A. (Eds.). (2010). Publishing pedagogies for the doctorate and beyond. London: Routledge.
6. Amundsen, C., & McAlpine, L. (2009). Learning supervision: Trial by fire? Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46(3), 331-342.
7. Artemeva, N., & Freedman, A. (Eds.). (2006). Rhetorical genre studies and beyond. Winnipeg: Inkshed Publications.
8. Bazerman, C. (2009). Genre and cognitive development: Beyond writing to learn. In C. Bazerman, D. Figueiredo, & A. Bonini (Eds.), Genre in a changing world (pp. 279-294). West Lafayette: Parlor and Fort Collins: The WAC Clearinghouse. (http://wac.colostate.edu/books/genre/).
9. Bazerman, C., & Prior, P. (Eds.). (2004). What writing does and how it does it. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
10. Berlin, J. A. (1987). Rhetoric and reality: Writing instruction in American colleges, 1900-1985. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
11. Bizzell, P. (1992). Academic discourse and critical consciousness. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
12. Burke, K. (1966). Language as symbolic action. Berkeley: University of California Press.
13. Caffarella, R. S., & Barnett, B. G. (2000). Teaching doctoral students to become scholarly writers: The importance of giving and receiving critiques. Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 39-51.
14. Coe, R., Lingard, L., & Teslenko, T. (Eds.). (2002). The rhetoric and ideology of genre: Strategies for stability and change. Cresskill: Hampton.
15. Ede, L. (2004). Situating composition: Composition studies and the politics of location. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
16. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
17. Giltrow, J. (2002a). Academic writing: Writing and reading in the disciplines (3rd ed.). Peterborough: Broadview.
18. Giltrow, J. (2002b). Academic reading: Reading and writing in the disciplines (2nd ed.). Peterborough: Broadview.
19. Green, B. (2005). Unfinished business: Subjectivity and supervision. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(2), 151-163.
20. Gross, A. G. (1990). The rhetoric of science. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
21. Gross, A. G. (2006). Starring the test: The place of rhetoric in science studies. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
22. Hall, S. (1996). Introduction: Who needs "identity"? In S. Hall & P. du Gay (Eds.), Questions of cultural identity (pp. 1-17). London: Sage.
23. Harris, J. (1997a). A teaching subject: Composition since 1966. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
24. Harris, R. A. (1997b). Introduction. In R. A. Harris (Ed.), Landmark essays on rhetoric of science: Case studies. Mahwah: Hermagoras.
25. Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press.
26. Kamler, B., & Thomson, P. (2004). Driven to abstraction: Doctoral supervision and writing pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education, 9(2), 195-208.
27. Kamler, B., & Thomson, P. (2006). Helping doctoral students write: Pedagogies for supervision. London: Routledge.
28. Lundell, D. B., & Beach, R. (2002). Dissertation writers' negotiations with competing activity systems. In C. Bazerman & D. Russell (Eds.), Writing selves/writing societies: Research from activity perspectives (pp. 483-514). Fort Collins: The WAC Clearinghouse and Mind, Culture, and Activity. (http://wac.colostate.edu/books/selves-societies/).
29. Paré, A. (1991). Ushering "audience" out: From oration to conversation. Textual Studies in Canada, 1(1), 45-64.
30. Paré, A., Starke-Meyerring, D., & McAlpine, L. (2009). The dissertation as multi-genre: Many readers, many readings. In C. Bazerman, D. Figueiredo, & A. Bonini (Eds.), Genre in a changing world (pp. 179-193). West Lafayette: Parlor Press and Fort Collins: The WAC Clearinghouse. (http://wac.colostate.edu/books/genre/).
31. Park, D. (1982). The meanings of "audience." College English, 44, 247-257.
32. Parry, S. (1998). Disciplinary discourse in doctoral theses. Higher Education, 36, 273-299.
33. Porter, J. (1992). Audience and rhetoric: An archaeological composition of the discourse community. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
34. Prior, P. (1998). Writing/disciplinarity: A sociohistoric account of literate activity in the academy. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
35. Rose, M., & McClafferty, K. A. (2001). A call for the teaching of writing in graduate education. Educational Researcher, 30(2), 27-33.
36. Rosenbaum, D. A., Augustyn, J. S., Cohen R. G., & Jax. S. A. (2006). Perceptual-motor expertise. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 505-520). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. Russell, David R. (1991). Writing in the academic disciplines 1870-1990: A curricular history. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
38. Starke-Meyerring, D., Paré, A., Graves, H., Graves, R., El-Bezre, N., & Sun, K. Y. (2009, May). Under new pressures? Practices, policies, and perceptions of doctoral writing at Canadian G13 universities. Presentation at the Canadian Association for the Study of Discourse and Writing, Ottawa.
39. Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.