首页> 外文期刊>Quality Assurance in Education >Academic writing: contested knowledge in the making?
【24h】

Academic writing: contested knowledge in the making?

机译:学术写作:正在形成的有争议的知识?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose – This paper seeks to consider whether academic writing should be regarded as knowledge in the making and why all such writing should be continuously challenged. Design/methodology/approach – The approach is that of a reflective discussion which considers academic writing in context, knowledge, reflectiveness and helping others to contest academic writing. Findings – The paper concludes with the view that all academic writing and concept-mongering are properly open to rigorous challenge. Research limitations/implications – The paper is limited by its presentation of one writer's stance or point of view. Some may also consider this a strength. Practical implications – Academic developers and those interested in helping train academic writers especially, but not exclusively, at the postgraduate level should find the ideas presented useful sources for further conversations. Originality/value – The main value of the paper is that it summarizes a view of academic writing not as objective or neutral but as personal stance and counter-stance.
机译:目的–本文旨在考虑是否应将学术写作视为创作中的知识,以及为什么所有此类写作都应受到不断挑战。设计/方法/方法-方法是进行反思性讨论的方法,该方法考虑上下文,知识,反思性的学术写作,并帮助其他人对学术写作提出质疑。调查结果–本文的结论是,所有学术写作和概念交流都应适当面对严峻挑战。研究的局限性/意义–这篇论文受到其作者立场或观点的限制。有些人可能会认为这是一种优势。实际意义–学术开发人员和那些有兴趣特别是(但不仅限于)在研究生阶段帮助培训学术作者的人员,应该找到提出的想法,以进行进一步的对话。原创性/价值–本文的主要价值在于,它总结了学术写作的观点,而不是客观或中立的,而是个人立场和反立场。

著录项

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