Enhancing Research-Publication Competencies of EFL Doctoral Students in English Studies: A Follow-up Study on the Reframed Community of Practice Model
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
บทคัดย่อ
This follow-up study, the third phase of a longitudinal project, examined how the Research-Publication (Res-Pub) Training Workshop, grounded in the Disciplinary Writing Expertise (DWE) framework, influenced 20 doctoral students’ self-efficacy in key areas of the Reframed Community of Practice (CoP) model, which is built on the perspectives of Lave and Wenger (1991) and Wenger (1998). These students were in English Studies, whose research focused on areas within the Humanities and Social Sciences. It explored the participants’ self-efficacy in six elements of the Reframed CoP model that characterized their scholarly development post-workshop: Expert-Guided Collaborative Learning, Participatory Learning Dynamics, Academic Identity Formation, Cognitive Mastery of Academic Practices, Scholarly Professional Growth, and Constructive Adversities in Academic Publishing. The data from a 2019 self-efficacy survey and 2022 follow-up interviews revealed high overall self-efficacy (grand mean = 3.32), with the strongest efficacy in Participatory Learning Dynamics (mean = 3.70), Expert-Guided Collaborative Learning (mean = 3.65), Academic Identity Formation (mean = 3.62), and Cognitive Mastery (mean = 3.38). However, moderate efficacy in Constructive Adversities (mean = 2.82), and Scholarly Professional Growth (mean = 2.79) suggests that the participants have yet to fully embrace independent scholarship due to limited access to global academic discourse. Qualitative findings complimentarily strengthened the quantitative data, highlighting roles of research knowledge and experienced members of the community, and knowledge construction fostered by the Reframed CoP model. The findings suggest the need for enhanced pathways to support early career scholars’ development.
Downloads
Article Details
อนุญาตภายใต้เงื่อนไข Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
เอกสารอ้างอิง
Adunyarittigun, D., Thongrin, S., Sriharuksa, K., & Seenak, P. (2023). Thammasat University, Thailand. In M. Byram & M. Stoicheva (Eds.), The experience of examining the PhD: An international comparative study of processes and standards of doctoral examination (pp. 134-148). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003248569
Aitchison, C. (2009). Writing groups for doctoral education. Studies in Higher Education, 34(8), 905-916. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070902785580
Aitchison, C., & Guerin, C. (2014). Writing groups for doctoral education and beyond. Routledge.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Allyn & Bacon.
Baker, V. L., & Pifer, M. J. (2011). The role of relationships in the transition from doctoral student to independent scholar. Studies in Continuous Education, 33, 5-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2010.515569
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
Barnacle, R., & Mewburn, I. (2010). Learning networks and the journey of becoming a doctor. Studies in Higher Education, 35(4), 433-444. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070903131214
Belcher, W. L. (2007). Writing your journal article in twelve weeks: A guide to academic publishing success. University of Chicago Press.
Bitchener, J., & Basturkmen, H. (2006). Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(1), 4-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.10.002
Boice, R. (1992). The new faculty member. Jossey-Bass.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Canagarajah, A. S. (2003). A somewhat legitimate and very peripheral participation. In C. P. Casanave & S. Vandrick (eds.), Writing for scholarly publication: Behind the scenes in language education (pp. 233-248). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Canagarajah, A. S. (2013). Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. Routledge.
Casanave, C. P. (2011). Journal writing in second language education. University of Michigan Press.
Clarke, G., & Lunt, I. (2014). The concept of ‘originality’ in the Ph.D.: How is it interpreted by examiners? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(7), 803-820. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.870970
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Houghton Mifflin.
Cotterall, S. (2011). Doctoral students writing: Where's the pedagogy? Teaching in Higher Education, 16(4), 413-425.
Cranwell-Ward, J., Bossons, P., & Gover, S. (2014), Mentoring: A Henley review of best practice (2nd ed.). Palgrave MacMillan.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Curry, M. J., & Lillis, T. (2014). Strategies and tactics in academic knowledge production by multilingual scholars. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(32), 1-25.
Erwee, R., & Perry, C. (2018). Examination of doctoral theses: Research about the process and propoased procedures. In R. Erwee, M. Harmes, M. Harmes, & P. A. Danaher (Eds.), Postgraduate Education in Higher Education (pp. 1-16). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0468-1_4-1
Flowerdew, J. (2008). Scholarly writers who use English as an additional language: What can Goffman’s ‘stigma’ tell us? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(2), 77-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.03.002
Gay, L. R. (2009). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application. Prentice Hall.
Golding, C., Sharmini, S., & Lazarovitch, A. (2013). What examiners do: What thesis students should know. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(5), 563-576. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.859230
Heron, M., Dippold, D., Gravett, K., Ahmad, A., Aljabri, S., Al-Adwan, R. S. A., Ghosh, P., Kabooha, R., Makram, M., Mousawa, D. T., Mudhaffer, A., Ucar-Longford, B., Wang, L., Zhou, J., Zhu, F., Dippold, M., Ahmad, K., Aljabri, A., Ghosh, S., . . . Zhu, J. (2024). Building a community of practice through a doctoral research group. Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education, 15(3), 258-272. https://doi.org/10.1108/SGPE-10-2023-0098
Holbrook, A. (2007). Levels of success in the use of the literature in a doctorate. South African Journal of Higher Education, 21(8), 1020-1041. https://doi.org/10.4314/sajhe.v21i8.25757
Holmes, P., Reynolds, J., & Chaplin, M. (2020). Durham University, United Kingdom. In M. Byram & M. Stoicheva (Ed.), The Doctorate as Experience in Europe and Beyond: Supervision, Languages, Identities (pp. 52-88). Routledge.
Jameson, C. M., Torres, K. M., Mohammed, S. F. (2021). Virtual faculty strategies for supporting motivation of online doctoral students. Journal of Educational Research & Practice, 11(1), 295-305.
Jones, A., & Smith, B. (2022). A comparative study of formal coaching and mentoring programs in higher education. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 11(2), 213-231.
Kamler, B. (2008). Rethinking doctoral publication practices: Writing from and beyond the thesis. Studies in Higher Education, 33, 283-294. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070802049236
Kamler, B., & Thomson, P. (2006). Helping doctoral students write: Pedagogies for supervision. Routledge.
Kiley, M. (2009). Rethinking the Australian doctoral examination process. The Australian Universities’ Review, 51(2), 32-41. https://doi.org/10.3316/ielapa.159523534745605
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991), Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157-172.
Lee, A., & Kamler, B. (2008). Bringing pedagogy to doctoral publishing. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(5), 511-523. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510802334723
Lee, E. & Norton, B. (2003). Demystifying publishing: A collaborative exchange between graduate student and supervisor. In C. P. Casanave & S. Vandrick (Eds.), Writing for Scholarly Publication: Behind the scenes in language education (pp. 19-46). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Li, Y. Y. (2002). Writing for international publication: The perception of Chinese doctoral researchers. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 12, 179-193.
Lim, J. M. H. (2006). Method sections of management research articles: A pedagogically motivated qualitative study. English for Specific Purposes, 25, 282-309.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage.
Lovitts, B. E. (2007). Making the implicit explicit: Creating performance expectations for the dissertation. Stylus.
Maher, M. A. (2014). Transparent transactions: When doctoral students and their supervisors write together. In C. Aitchison & C. Guerin (Eds.), Writing groups for doctoral education and beyond (pp. 82-93). Routledge.
Maher, M. A., Timmerman, B. E., Feldon, D. F., & Strickland, D. (2013). Factors affecting the occurrence of faculty-doctoral student co-authorship. Journal of Higher Education, 84(1), 121-143.
Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13-22.
Morita, N. (2004). Negotiating participation and identity in second language academic communities. TESOL Quarterly, 38(4), 573-603. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588281
Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (2016). Getting published in academic journals: Navigating the publication process. University of Michigan Press.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage.
Roberts, L. (2021). “This is just what we do”: PhD students on becoming scholars in a Community of Practice. Communications in Information Literacy, 15(1), 75-94. https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2021.15.1.4
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.). Sage.
Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63-75. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-2004-22201
Sovacool, B. K., Axsen, J., & Sorrella, S. (2018). Promoting novelty, rigor, and style in energy social science: Towards codes of practice for appropriate methods and research design. Energy Research & Social Science, 45, 12-42.
Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2012). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills (3rd ed.). University of Michigan Press.
Thongrin, S. (2018). Developing an instructional model to teach Thai research assistants to write English scientific research articles. LEARN (Language Education and Acquisition Research Network) Journal, 11(2), 22-65.
Thongrin, S. (2020, October 24). Advancing scholarly publication skills for apprentice scholars of English. In Proceedings of The 2020 PKETA, KALS, NKAELL International Conference, “Nurturing English education through three branches: Linguistics, Literature, Education,” (pp. 21-60). Pusan National University, Online (ZOOM).
Tummons, J. (2012). Theoretical trajectories within communities of practice in higher education research. Higher Education Research and Development, 31, 299-310.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
Winter, R., Griffiths, M. & Green, K. (2000) The ‘academic’ qualities of practice: What are the criteria for a practice-based PhD?, Studies in Higher Education, 25, 25-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/030750700115993
Zimmerman, B. J., & Bandura, A. (1994). Impact of self-efficacy regulatory influences on writing course attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 31(4), 845-862.
