Page 54 - Igor Ž. Žagar in Ana Mlekuž, ur. ▪︎ Raziskovanje v vzgoji in izobraževanju. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut, 2019. Digitalna knjižnica, Dissertationes 37
P. 54
r aziskovanje v vzgoji in izobr aževanju
Getting started, narrowing down the topic, pinning down a research
question, and relating this to the larger academic context are among the
greatest challenges experienced by students (Roemmer-Nossek et.al, 2018).
While many methods address the “getting started problem” and homing in
on the research question, writing of the state-of-of the-art section does not
receive particular attention.
The task we are concerned within this paper must be solved during the
first two phases of a writing project: Whether the expected outcome of the
institution may by a formal exposé or not, before starting the “shitty first
draft” there must be clarity concerning the research question and the state-
of-the-art of research in the field. It is the latter we will focus on.
Tripping Hazards in Developing a Position
Developing a Position while Depersonalizing the Language
Learning to write professionally takes years and involves not only knowled-
ge of the genre, but also of the audience the text is addressed to (Kellogg,
2008). Academic writing is not only a kind of professional writing about
highly specialized content, academic writers are writing in order to par-
ticipate in and position themselves within a disciplinary discourse. The
characteristics of academic language obscure this fact by using verbs to do
with the process of research, thinking, and writing mainly in the passive,
avoiding references to people as the agents of these processes, and by re-
ferencing to published works as objects rather than to authors (Ivanič &
Champs, 2001). Despite there being increasing variation in disciplines, di-
scourses, and individual researchers, the use of the first person is experi-
enced as taboo by many students and academic writing generally as de-
personalized (Girgensohn, 2008). In contrast to the alienation experienced
by students, researchers highly identify with their work, not only becau-
se of their expertise, but also, because they are part of the community they
are contributing to – a community that exists outside most students’ envi-
ronment: in many disciplines the majority of students has not participa-
ted in conferences. As teachers they may not reflect that their environment
is fundamentally different from the students’ and so is the reason for wri-
ting, despite the fact that expectations towards genre characteristics may
be identical. Especially novice academic writers write to meet criteria of
the assignment and/or in order to acquire they do not understand academic
writing as a thinking tool. As part of the socialization into their discipline,
the students find themselves in a paradoxical situation; they are expected to
54
Getting started, narrowing down the topic, pinning down a research
question, and relating this to the larger academic context are among the
greatest challenges experienced by students (Roemmer-Nossek et.al, 2018).
While many methods address the “getting started problem” and homing in
on the research question, writing of the state-of-of the-art section does not
receive particular attention.
The task we are concerned within this paper must be solved during the
first two phases of a writing project: Whether the expected outcome of the
institution may by a formal exposé or not, before starting the “shitty first
draft” there must be clarity concerning the research question and the state-
of-the-art of research in the field. It is the latter we will focus on.
Tripping Hazards in Developing a Position
Developing a Position while Depersonalizing the Language
Learning to write professionally takes years and involves not only knowled-
ge of the genre, but also of the audience the text is addressed to (Kellogg,
2008). Academic writing is not only a kind of professional writing about
highly specialized content, academic writers are writing in order to par-
ticipate in and position themselves within a disciplinary discourse. The
characteristics of academic language obscure this fact by using verbs to do
with the process of research, thinking, and writing mainly in the passive,
avoiding references to people as the agents of these processes, and by re-
ferencing to published works as objects rather than to authors (Ivanič &
Champs, 2001). Despite there being increasing variation in disciplines, di-
scourses, and individual researchers, the use of the first person is experi-
enced as taboo by many students and academic writing generally as de-
personalized (Girgensohn, 2008). In contrast to the alienation experienced
by students, researchers highly identify with their work, not only becau-
se of their expertise, but also, because they are part of the community they
are contributing to – a community that exists outside most students’ envi-
ronment: in many disciplines the majority of students has not participa-
ted in conferences. As teachers they may not reflect that their environment
is fundamentally different from the students’ and so is the reason for wri-
ting, despite the fact that expectations towards genre characteristics may
be identical. Especially novice academic writers write to meet criteria of
the assignment and/or in order to acquire they do not understand academic
writing as a thinking tool. As part of the socialization into their discipline,
the students find themselves in a paradoxical situation; they are expected to
54
