The purpose of this grounded theory study was to examine the difficulties faced and strategies used by Chinese graduate students with English academic writing at an American university. Eight graduate students majoring in humanities and social sciences at different stages of their graduate studies were interviewed. The interview data illustrated the types of difficulties that these students encountered and the types of coping strategies they used in the process of adapting to the requirement of specific disciplinary written discourses. Difficulties and problems varied across the curriculum and the individuals. Some common problems included insufficient linguistic knowledge, being unfamiliar with academic writing conventions and gaps in the epistemological assumptions between U.S. and China’s academia. One of the biggest gaps is lack of critical thinking skills among Chinese students and different attitudes towards verification in writing. These difficulties and problems reflect the complexity of writing as a socially constructed activity that requires necessary linguistic knowledge as well as familiarization with cultural models, i.e., ways of thinking, believing and valuing that are associated with the disciplinary discourses. The results of the study suggest that this group of Chinese graduate students had received limited training in English academic writing before they came to U.S and they brought with them to the U.S. classrooms writing experiences that at times differ from the writing conventions of the American academia and, therefore, need assistance in order to successfully adjust to the new academic environment. This study also showed that there is not enough social help for those international graduate students. For most of them, adjusting to the U.S. academic written discourse is mainly a trial-and-error process. Therefore efficient social help from the peers, professors and curriculum is needed.
| Published in | International Journal of Language and Linguistics (Volume 7, Issue 6) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ijll.20190706.11 |
| Page(s) | 245-254 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2019. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Academic Writing Discourse, EAL Writers, Argumentative Writing, Critical Thinking
| [1] | Atkinson, D. (1997). A critical approach to critical thinking in TESOL. TESOLQuarterly, 31 (1), 71-94. |
| [2] | Bawa, P., & Watson, S. L. (2017). A phenomenological study of graduate Chinese students’ English writing challenges. The Qualitative Report, 22(3), 779-796. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol22/iss3/7 |
| [3] | Belcher, D., & Hirvela, A. (2005). Writing the qualitative dissertation: What motivates and sustains commitment to a fuzzy genre? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4, 187-205. |
| [4] | Casanave, P. C. (2002). Writing games: Multicultural case studies of academic literacy practices in higher education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. |
| [5] | Chang, Y., & Kanno, Y. (2010). NNES doctoral students in English-speaking academe: The nexus between language and discipline. Applied Linguistics, 31 (5), 671-692. |
| [6] | Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research designs: Choosing from five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. |
| [7] | Creswell, J. W., & Brown, M. L. (1992). How chairpersons enhance faculty research: A grounded theory study. Review of Higher Education, 16 (1), 41-62. |
| [8] | Gee, J. P. (1989). Literacy, discourse, and linguistics: Introduction. Journal of Education, 171, 5-17. |
| [9] | Gee, J. P. (1990). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses. London: Falmer Press. |
| [10] | Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). London: Taylor & Francis. |
| [11] | Gee, J. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. New York, NY: Routledge. |
| [12] | Gee, J. P. (2001a). Learning in semiotic domains: A social and situated account. Unpublished manuscript, Madison, WI. |
| [13] | Gee, J. P. (2001b). Reading as situated language: A socio cognitive perspective. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44, 714-725. |
| [14] | Hirvela, A. (2017). Argumentation & second language writing: Are we missing the boat? Journal of Second Language Writing, 36, 69-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.05.002 |
| [15] | Hyland, K. (2003). Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to process. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 17–29. |
| [16] | Hyland, K. (2016). Academic publishing and the myth of linguistic injustice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 31, 58-69. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.01.005 |
| [17] | Jones, C., Turner, J., & Street, B. (1999). Students writing in the university: Cultural and epistemology issues. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company. |
| [18] | Langum, V., & Sullivan, K. (2017). Writing academic English as a doctoral student in Sweden: Narrative perspectives. Journal of Second Language Writing, 35,20–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.12.004 |
| [19] | Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23 (2), 157-172. |
| [20] | Li, Y. (2006). A doctoral student of physics writing for international publication: A socio politically-oriented case study. English for Specific Purposes, 25,456-478. |
| [21] | Li, Y. (2007). Apprentice scholarly writing in a community of practice: An “intraview” of an NNES graduate student writing a research article. TESOLQuarterly, 41(1), 55-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00040.x. |
| [22] | Li, Y. (2016). “Publish SCI papers or no degree”: Practices of Chinese doctoral supervisors in response to the publication pressure on science students. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(4), 545-558. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2015.1005050. |
| [23] | Lillis, T., & Curry, M. (2006). Professional academic writing by multilingual scholars: Interactions with literacy brokers in the production of English-medium texts. Written Communication, 23(1), 3-35. 10.1177/0741088305283754 |
| [24] | MacKay, T. (2003). Gee’s theory of D/discourse and research in teaching English as a second language: Implications for the mainstream. 1-28. Unpublished manuscript, University of Manitoba. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252469631 |
| [25] | Matsuda, P. K., Saenkhum, T., & Accardi, S. (2013). Writing teachers’ perceptions of the presence and needs of second language writers: An institutional case study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(1), 68-86. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezp.lib.rochester.edu/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.10.001 |
| [26] | Mohan, B. A., & Lo, W. A. (1985). Academic writing and Chinese students: Transfer and developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly, 19 (3), 515-534. |
| [27] | National Science Foundation. (2017, June). 2015 Doctorate recipients from U.S. universities. Retrieved fromhttps://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17306/static/report/nsf17306.pdf |
| [28] | Qian, J., & Krugly-Smolska, E. (2008). Chinese graduate student’s experiences with writing a literature review. TESL Canada Journal, 26(1), 68-86. |
| [29] | Ruggiero, V. (1988). Teaching thinking across the curriculum. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers. |
| [30] | Shang-Butler, H. (2015). Great expectations: A qualitative study of how Chinese graduate students navigate academic writing expectations in U.S. higher education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rochester, Rochester. |
| [31] | Shi, L. (2012). Originality of expressions and formal citation practices. Writing and Pedagogy, 4, 43-67. |
| [32] | Shi, L., & Yang, L. (2014). A community of practice of teaching English argumentative writing in a Chinese university. System, 42, 133-142. |
| [33] | Silva, T. (1993). Towards an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing; The ESL research and its implication. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 657-677. |
| [34] | Stapleton, P. (2017). Ability to argue: Rooted in nature. Journal of Second Language Writing, 36, 83-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.05.007 |
| [35] | Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273- 285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. |
| [36] | Wang, A. (2007). Teaching aviation English in the Chinese context: Developing ESP theory in anon-English speaking country. English for Specific Purposes, 26, 121-128. |
| [37] | Zhang, Z. (2011). A nested model of academic writing approaches: Chinese international graduate students’ views of English academic writing. Language and Literacy, 13(1), 39-59. |
| [38] | Zhu, W. (2001). Performing argumentative writing in English: Difficulties, processes, and strategies. TESL Canada Journal, 19 (1), 34-50. |
APA Style
Fei Wang. (2019). Linguistic and Epistemology Challenges in Research Writing: An Exploratory Study of Chinese Graduate Students’ Academic Writing Experiences. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 7(6), 245-254. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20190706.11
ACS Style
Fei Wang. Linguistic and Epistemology Challenges in Research Writing: An Exploratory Study of Chinese Graduate Students’ Academic Writing Experiences. Int. J. Lang. Linguist. 2019, 7(6), 245-254. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20190706.11
AMA Style
Fei Wang. Linguistic and Epistemology Challenges in Research Writing: An Exploratory Study of Chinese Graduate Students’ Academic Writing Experiences. Int J Lang Linguist. 2019;7(6):245-254. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20190706.11
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ijll.20190706.11,
author = {Fei Wang},
title = {Linguistic and Epistemology Challenges in Research Writing: An Exploratory Study of Chinese Graduate Students’ Academic Writing Experiences},
journal = {International Journal of Language and Linguistics},
volume = {7},
number = {6},
pages = {245-254},
doi = {10.11648/j.ijll.20190706.11},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20190706.11},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijll.20190706.11},
abstract = {The purpose of this grounded theory study was to examine the difficulties faced and strategies used by Chinese graduate students with English academic writing at an American university. Eight graduate students majoring in humanities and social sciences at different stages of their graduate studies were interviewed. The interview data illustrated the types of difficulties that these students encountered and the types of coping strategies they used in the process of adapting to the requirement of specific disciplinary written discourses. Difficulties and problems varied across the curriculum and the individuals. Some common problems included insufficient linguistic knowledge, being unfamiliar with academic writing conventions and gaps in the epistemological assumptions between U.S. and China’s academia. One of the biggest gaps is lack of critical thinking skills among Chinese students and different attitudes towards verification in writing. These difficulties and problems reflect the complexity of writing as a socially constructed activity that requires necessary linguistic knowledge as well as familiarization with cultural models, i.e., ways of thinking, believing and valuing that are associated with the disciplinary discourses. The results of the study suggest that this group of Chinese graduate students had received limited training in English academic writing before they came to U.S and they brought with them to the U.S. classrooms writing experiences that at times differ from the writing conventions of the American academia and, therefore, need assistance in order to successfully adjust to the new academic environment. This study also showed that there is not enough social help for those international graduate students. For most of them, adjusting to the U.S. academic written discourse is mainly a trial-and-error process. Therefore efficient social help from the peers, professors and curriculum is needed.},
year = {2019}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Linguistic and Epistemology Challenges in Research Writing: An Exploratory Study of Chinese Graduate Students’ Academic Writing Experiences AU - Fei Wang Y1 - 2019/10/10 PY - 2019 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20190706.11 DO - 10.11648/j.ijll.20190706.11 T2 - International Journal of Language and Linguistics JF - International Journal of Language and Linguistics JO - International Journal of Language and Linguistics SP - 245 EP - 254 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2330-0221 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20190706.11 AB - The purpose of this grounded theory study was to examine the difficulties faced and strategies used by Chinese graduate students with English academic writing at an American university. Eight graduate students majoring in humanities and social sciences at different stages of their graduate studies were interviewed. The interview data illustrated the types of difficulties that these students encountered and the types of coping strategies they used in the process of adapting to the requirement of specific disciplinary written discourses. Difficulties and problems varied across the curriculum and the individuals. Some common problems included insufficient linguistic knowledge, being unfamiliar with academic writing conventions and gaps in the epistemological assumptions between U.S. and China’s academia. One of the biggest gaps is lack of critical thinking skills among Chinese students and different attitudes towards verification in writing. These difficulties and problems reflect the complexity of writing as a socially constructed activity that requires necessary linguistic knowledge as well as familiarization with cultural models, i.e., ways of thinking, believing and valuing that are associated with the disciplinary discourses. The results of the study suggest that this group of Chinese graduate students had received limited training in English academic writing before they came to U.S and they brought with them to the U.S. classrooms writing experiences that at times differ from the writing conventions of the American academia and, therefore, need assistance in order to successfully adjust to the new academic environment. This study also showed that there is not enough social help for those international graduate students. For most of them, adjusting to the U.S. academic written discourse is mainly a trial-and-error process. Therefore efficient social help from the peers, professors and curriculum is needed. VL - 7 IS - 6 ER -
Information
Email: