Hania Salter-Dvorak

Tracking the learning experiences of MA students:

Hurdles faced by the researcher

outline

• The study: aims & design• My aspirations: text and context• Front stage/backstage• Front stage: hurdles• Back stage: hurdles• Two ethical dilemmas• Conclusions on ‘insider’ field work in

educational settings

Working title

Entering ‘the argumentative fray’ of Anglophone academia: How learner identity and agency interact with affordances.

Research questions

1. How do learners ‘acquire’ the discourses of EAP and develop a ‘shared awareness of academic genres and rituals that successful players use’?

2. How do learners transfer the EAP discourses to specific disciplines?

3.What evidence is there of factors relating to language/agency/ identity/ affordances affecting participation on the Masters course?

Phases of project

Phase 1 Oct – Dec 2007

Collection of data from case studies on my Postgraduate Academic English classes

Phase 2Jan 2008 – Jan 2009

Collection of data from case studies on Masters courses.

Design and methodology

• situated ethnographic longitudinal study

• eclectic approach to data collection• learners take centre stage• learners’ perspectives triangulated

with my own (as their EAP lecturer) and those of their subject lecturers and peers.

• dynamic interaction of the processes that affect the cognition of learners, by viewing them as ‘embedded’.

Lillis: Text and Context

‘research lens goes beyond the text and the researcher adopts an openness to writer-insider’s comments, perspectives and discourses, whether or not these relate to a research focus pre-defined by the researcher’ (2008:361)

‘deep theorising between text and context’ (2008:356)

Goffman

Front stageWhat happens in the classroomWhat happens in tutorials What happens in talk around texts

Back stage What students say about the aboveWhat lecturers say about the above

Front stage data

• What happens in the classroom• Observation 6 observations - field

notes

• What happens in tutorials • Observation? recording? I

recording

• What happens in talk around texts between students and lecturers

• High tech? Deception? No data

Back stage data

•What students say about the classroom/ tutorials/talk around texts38 recorded interviews

•What lecturers say about the classroom/ tutorials/talk around texts15 recorded interviews

Front stage: Hurdles

1. Will university research ethics committee

give permission for the research to take place?

2. Will the students/lecturers agree to participate?

3. What will I be able to see/hear in class?

4. How can I capture what I see/hear without being obtrusive?

Back stage: Hurdle

‘role relations may crucially influence the research process and outcome’

Sarangi and Roberts, 1999 :23

Back stage: Hurdles

Interviews with students

identities:

lecturer/advisor/colleague/friend

Interviews with lecturers

identities:

colleague/co-researcher/language &literacy expert/amateur interviewer

Dissertation advisors: discourses and identities

1. Wants to address problem in department Internationalisation & EAPWhat are we going to do with them?

2. Wants to enter into a dialogue on learning Professional development & L2 writingWhat do you think we should be doing?

3. Wants to develop provision/learn from trial and errorEvidence based practice with L2 studentsWhat have we learnt ?

‘entry into the back regions is not only an index of rapport but of success as an ethnographer’

(Berrerman, 1968:362, quoted by Sarangi and Roberts, 1999:23)

Conclusion

Data capture – How do people think, behave and learn?

1.What is feasible?

2. What is ethical?

3. What is reportable?

References

Lillis, T. (2008) Ethnography as Method,Methodology, and ‘Deep Theorising’ Closing the Gap between Text and Context in Academic Writing Research. Written Communication 25:3 pp 353-370.

Sarangi, S & C. Roberts. (1999) Talk, Work and Institutional Order Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.