ИНТЕРКУЛТУРАЛНОСТA И ИНТЕРДИСЦИПЛИНАРНОСТА ПРИ ПИШУВАЊЕТО ДИПЛОМСКИ ТЕЗИ: ВИДУВАЊА НА МЕНТОРИТЕ И НА МЕНТОРИРАНИТЕ СТУДЕНТИ
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Објавено:
Dec 25, 2022
##plugins.pubIds.doi.readerDisplayName##:
https://doi.org/10.37834/JCP2252077b
Клучни зборови:
дипломски трудови, менторирање, академска писменост, англоцентрични принципи на пишување, пишување на втор/странски јазик, меѓукултурни практики
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Апстракт
Во фокусот на ова истражување се неколку аспекти на англоцентричниот пристап на академска писменост промовиран во неанглиски академски контекст. Целта е да се разбере подобро како менторите, кои се обучувани и делумно стекнале образование во странски образовни институции, како и оние што никогаш не биле дел од образовен процес во англофони средини, влијаат врз процесот на пишување дипломски трудови/тези од кандидатите што ги менторираат. Со помош на неколку научни методи, како што се анализа на структурата на трудовите напишани на странски јазик (англиски), анкети и интервјуа со отворени прашања со ментори и нивни студенти што ги менторираат, ќе ги презентирам сознанијата за тоа што влијае на позиционирањето на студентите преку академскиот дискурс додека пишуваат дипломски трудови на англиски јазик, а притоа, истовремено се трудат да се приспособат на транскултурните насоки за пишување како и на барањата за академско пишување на локалната образовна институција. Тематската анализа на собраните податоци укажува на широк опсег образовни практики и поимања за процесот на пишување дипломски трудови. Тука се вклучени, од една страна, аспектите за тоа како студентите градат аргументација, разликуваат факти од лични мислења, стануваат пообјективни, избегнуваат плагијати, следејќи ги принципите на англофоната академска писменост. Но, од друга страна, се покажуваат практиките кај универзитетските професори што ги употребуваат своите разновидни лингвистички образовни ресурси за иста цел, без секогаш критички да ги доведат во прашање поставените доминантни англоцентрични вредности.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Како да цитирате
Беќар, Мира. 2022. “ИНТЕРКУЛТУРАЛНОСТA И ИНТЕРДИСЦИПЛИНАРНОСТА ПРИ ПИШУВАЊЕТО ДИПЛОМСКИ ТЕЗИ: ВИДУВАЊА НА МЕНТОРИТЕ И НА МЕНТОРИРАНИТЕ СТУДЕНТИ”. Journal of Contemporary Philology 5 (2), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.37834/JCP2252077b.
Рубрика
Selected Articles
Copyright © 2014 Blaže Koneski Faculty of Philology, Skopje
Journal of Contemporary Philology (JCP)
Современа филологија
Референци
Bekar, M, & Fay, R. (2020). Developing Anglo-centric literacy: Problematizing understandings of criticality. In A. Simpson, & F. Dervin (Eds.), The meaning of criticality in education research: Reflecting on critical pedagogy (pp. 23-45). Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.
Bekar, M., & Yakhontova, T. (2021). Dimensions of student writers’ self in qualitative research interviews. In L. M. Muresan and C. Orna-Montesinos (Eds.) Academic Literacy Development: Perspectives on Multilingual Scholars’ Approaches to Writing. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Canagarajah, S. (2013). Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. London: Routledge.
Delcambre,I,, & Reuter, Y. The French Didactics Approach to Writing, from Elementary School to University. In B. Daunay, I. Delcambre, Y. Reuter & V. d’Ascq (Eds.), Didactique du Français: Le Socioculturel en Question. Presses Universitaireds u Septentrion.
Donahue, C. (2009). Internationalization’ and Composition Studies: Reorienting the Discourse. College Composition and Communication 61(2): 212-243.
Edwards, V. (2004). Multilingualism in the English-speaking world. Oxford: Blackwell.
Filippou, K., Kallo, J., & Mikkilä-Erdmann, M. (2017). Students’ views on thesis supervision in international master’s degree programmes in Finnish universities. Intercultural Education, 28(3), 334–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2017.1333713
Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Seabury.
Grant, B. M. (2008). Agonistic Struggle: Master slave dialogues in humanities supervision. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 7(1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022207084880
Halse, C. (2011). Becoming a supervisor’: The impact of doctoral supervision on supervisors’ learning, Studies in Higher Education, 36(5), 557-570, DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2011.594593
Holmes, P., Fay, R., Andrews, J., & Attia, M. (2013). Researching multilingually: New theoretical and methodological directions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(3), 285–299.
Holmes, P., Fay, R., Andrews, J., & Attia, M. (2016). How to research multilingually: Possibilities and complexities. In H. Zhu (Ed.), Research methods in intercultural communication: A practical guide (pp. 88–102). London: Wiley.
Hu, Y., van der Rijst, R. M., van Veen, K., & Verloop, N. (2016). The purposes and processes of master’s thesis supervision: a comparison of Chinese and Dutch supervisors. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(5), 910–924. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1139550
Ives, G., and G. Rowley. (2005). “Supervisor Selection or Allocation and Continuity of Supervision: Ph.D. Students’ Progress and Outcomes.” Studies in Higher Education 30: 535–555.
Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification, and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In R. Quirk and H. Widdowson (eds.). English in the world: Teaching and learning of language and literature, 11-30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kobayashi, S., B. Grout, and CØ Rump. (2013). “Interaction and Learning in PhD
Supervision–a Qualitative Study of Supervision with Multiple Supervisors.” Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift 8: 13–25.
Mainhard, T., R. van der Rijst, J. van Tartwijk, and T. Wubbels. (2009). “A Model for the Supervisor–Doctoral Student Relationship.” Higher Education 58: 359–373.
Pennycook, A. (2010). Critical applied linguistics: a critical introduction. London, Routledge.
Roberts, L. D., & Seaman, K. (2018). Good undergraduate dissertation supervision: perspectives of supervisors and dissertation coordinators. International Journal for Academic Development, 23(1), 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2017.1412971
Scholefield, D., & Cox, G. (2016). Evaluation of a model of dissertation supervision for 3rd year B.Sc. undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Education in Practice, 17, 78–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2015.11.006
Sidhu et. al. (2014). Postgraduate supervision: Comparing student perspectives fromMalaysia and the United Kingdom. Procedia – Social and Behevioral Sciences 123, 151-159.
Simpson, A. (2020). Introduction: Beyond impotent criticality in education research? In A. Simpson, & F. Dervin (Eds.), The meaning of criticality in education research: Reflecting on critical pedagogy (pp. 23-45). Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.
Bekar, M., & Yakhontova, T. (2021). Dimensions of student writers’ self in qualitative research interviews. In L. M. Muresan and C. Orna-Montesinos (Eds.) Academic Literacy Development: Perspectives on Multilingual Scholars’ Approaches to Writing. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Canagarajah, S. (2013). Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. London: Routledge.
Delcambre,I,, & Reuter, Y. The French Didactics Approach to Writing, from Elementary School to University. In B. Daunay, I. Delcambre, Y. Reuter & V. d’Ascq (Eds.), Didactique du Français: Le Socioculturel en Question. Presses Universitaireds u Septentrion.
Donahue, C. (2009). Internationalization’ and Composition Studies: Reorienting the Discourse. College Composition and Communication 61(2): 212-243.
Edwards, V. (2004). Multilingualism in the English-speaking world. Oxford: Blackwell.
Filippou, K., Kallo, J., & Mikkilä-Erdmann, M. (2017). Students’ views on thesis supervision in international master’s degree programmes in Finnish universities. Intercultural Education, 28(3), 334–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2017.1333713
Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Seabury.
Grant, B. M. (2008). Agonistic Struggle: Master slave dialogues in humanities supervision. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 7(1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022207084880
Halse, C. (2011). Becoming a supervisor’: The impact of doctoral supervision on supervisors’ learning, Studies in Higher Education, 36(5), 557-570, DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2011.594593
Holmes, P., Fay, R., Andrews, J., & Attia, M. (2013). Researching multilingually: New theoretical and methodological directions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(3), 285–299.
Holmes, P., Fay, R., Andrews, J., & Attia, M. (2016). How to research multilingually: Possibilities and complexities. In H. Zhu (Ed.), Research methods in intercultural communication: A practical guide (pp. 88–102). London: Wiley.
Hu, Y., van der Rijst, R. M., van Veen, K., & Verloop, N. (2016). The purposes and processes of master’s thesis supervision: a comparison of Chinese and Dutch supervisors. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(5), 910–924. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1139550
Ives, G., and G. Rowley. (2005). “Supervisor Selection or Allocation and Continuity of Supervision: Ph.D. Students’ Progress and Outcomes.” Studies in Higher Education 30: 535–555.
Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification, and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In R. Quirk and H. Widdowson (eds.). English in the world: Teaching and learning of language and literature, 11-30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kobayashi, S., B. Grout, and CØ Rump. (2013). “Interaction and Learning in PhD
Supervision–a Qualitative Study of Supervision with Multiple Supervisors.” Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift 8: 13–25.
Mainhard, T., R. van der Rijst, J. van Tartwijk, and T. Wubbels. (2009). “A Model for the Supervisor–Doctoral Student Relationship.” Higher Education 58: 359–373.
Pennycook, A. (2010). Critical applied linguistics: a critical introduction. London, Routledge.
Roberts, L. D., & Seaman, K. (2018). Good undergraduate dissertation supervision: perspectives of supervisors and dissertation coordinators. International Journal for Academic Development, 23(1), 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2017.1412971
Scholefield, D., & Cox, G. (2016). Evaluation of a model of dissertation supervision for 3rd year B.Sc. undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Education in Practice, 17, 78–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2015.11.006
Sidhu et. al. (2014). Postgraduate supervision: Comparing student perspectives fromMalaysia and the United Kingdom. Procedia – Social and Behevioral Sciences 123, 151-159.
Simpson, A. (2020). Introduction: Beyond impotent criticality in education research? In A. Simpson, & F. Dervin (Eds.), The meaning of criticality in education research: Reflecting on critical pedagogy (pp. 23-45). Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.