首页> 外文学位 >A Macdonald's sentence style disciplinarity analysis of honors theses in three genres.
【24h】

A Macdonald's sentence style disciplinarity analysis of honors theses in three genres.

机译:麦克唐纳(Macdonald)对三种类型的荣誉论文的句子风格学科性分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This dissertation examines the development of expert discourse in writing across the disciplines and specifically the transition from novice to expert in student writers. The novice writing examined is a sample of honors theses from three distinct disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. The honors theses represents a high level of academic writing in the undergraduate university setting and as a genre seeks to approximate expert disciplinary prose. To facilitate comparison between novice, honors theses prose and expert prose, the study applies Susan Peck MacDonald"s Method for Analyzing Sentence-Level Differences in Disciplinary Knowledge Making (1992) and MacDonald"s 1994 data based on expert prose for comparison. Each sentence subject of three honors theses each from Literature, History, and Anthropology respectively were coded as either epistemic or phenomenal and compared to MacDonald"s expert results as comprehensively as possible. Findings indicate that the literature students were like the experts phenomenlogically, with an emphasis on particulars; history students were remarkably similar to their expert counterparts epistemically, and the anthropology results were incoherent. An exceptional phenomenological "I" code had to be added to account for novice forms of academic agency. The implications of this project include some institution specific trends in honors education and the need to rethink academic agency for novices. A reformulation of the subject/object assumption used in MacDonald"s coding scheme is suggested. The reformulation of the subject/object dichotomy s theorized using Pearce"s notion of abduction.
机译:本文考察了跨学科的写作专家话语的发展,特别是从学生新手到专家的过渡。审查的新手著作是来自人文和社会科学三个不同学科的荣誉论文样本。荣誉论文代表着大学本科水平的高水平学术写作,并且作为一种流派试图接近专家纪律散文。为了促进新手,荣誉论文和专家散文之间的比较,该研究采用了Susan Peck MacDonald的“学科知识制作中句级差异的分析方法”(1992年)和MacDonald 1994年基于专家散文的数据进行比较。文学,历史和人类学三个荣誉论文的每个句子主题分别被编码为认识论的或现象学的,并与麦克唐纳的专家结果进行了尽可能全面的比较。研究结果表明,文学学生在现象学上像专家一样,并且强调特殊性;历史学生在认识论上与他们的专家相当相似,人类学的结果也不连贯;必须添加特殊的现象学“ I”代码来说明新手形式的学术机构,该项目的含义包括某些机构荣誉教育的具体趋势以及对新手的学术机构的重新思考的需求,建议对MacDonald编码方案中使用的主观/客体假设进行重新表述。用皮尔斯的绑架概念对主客二分法进行了重新表述。

著录项

  • 作者

    Goldstein, Dayna Virginia.;

  • 作者单位

    Kent State University.;

  • 授予单位 Kent State University.;
  • 学科 Education history.;Sociolinguistics.;Education.;Reading instruction.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2015
  • 页码 246 p.
  • 总页数 246
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号