一位台灣博士生於英語教學學術社群的參與經驗之敘事探究 - 政大學術集成

全文

(1)國立政治大學英國語文學系博士班博士論文. 指導教授: 招靜琪博士 Advisor: Dr. Chin-chi Chao. 一位台灣博士生於英語教學學術社群的參與經驗之敘事探究. 政治大. A Narrative Inquiry into Experience of A Taiwanese Ph.D. Student Participating in the TESOL Academic Community. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. 研究生: 蔣宗益 Name: Tsung-yi Chiang 中華民國 103 年 7 月 July, 2014. v.

(2) A NARRATIVE INQUIRY INTO EXPERIENCE OF A TAIWANESE PH.D. STUDENT PARTICIPATING IN THE TESOL ACADEMIC COMMUNITY. A Dissertation Presented to Department of English. 立. 政治大. National Chengchi University. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. n. iv. InCPartial Fulfillment hengchi Un of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. by Tsung-yi Chiang July, 2014.

(3) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. First of all, I would like to thank my advisor, Prof. Chin-chi Chao, who has patiently guided me through these nine years of my doctoral study and inspired confidence in me. She is a diligent and professional scholar. Although she is always busy with teaching and doing research, she would still spare time discussing with me about my dissertation in her office whenever I make an appointment with her. As a professor, her kindness and gentleness have led me to take her as a role model in my future life-long career. Without her guidance, I would never be able to finish my. 治政 dissertation and get the degree. I really thank her! 大立 ‧ 國. 學. I would like to appreciate my research participant, Andrew (pseudonym), who. ‧. spent much time meeting me regularly during the data collection period. His warm. sit. y. Nat. personality, openness, and generosity have made this research journey enjoyable and. io. er. learnable. He is really a promising young scholar, and he is energetic and enthusiastic.. al. His scholarly achievements and his humble attitudes always make me impressive. I. n. iv n C am so grateful to have Andrew to be participant. hmy e nresearch gchi U. I also want to express my gratitude to my parents and all my family. Without their support and encouragement, I might not be able to have such an opportunity to continue my study in the doctoral program. I love all my family.. Finally, I would thank all the professors, faculty members, classmates, and friends whom I have met and communed with on the campus or in the TESOL academic community, for your friendship and sincere support!. iii .

(4) TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledges………………………………………………………………......... iii. Chinese Abstract…………………………………………………………..….….. x. English Abstract……………………………………………………………….…. xii. Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………..…..... 1. Background of the Study……………….…………………….……...... 1. Graduation Requirements in TESOL Ph.D. Programs in Taiwan…….. 3. Purpose of the Study………………………………….………………. 4. Significance of the Study…………………………………..…………. 4. Starting from the Personal Curiosity………………………..………... 5. The Researcher’s Narratives about His Own Experience..………....... 5. Narrative I: A narrative about my experience in a TESOL doctoral program in the social context of Taiwan………………..……………. 6. Narrative II: Awareness of the future challenges………..…………. 8. Definitions of Terms………………………………………………….. 9. 2: LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………….……... 12. Studies about NNS Scholars Submitting for Scholarly Publication…………………………………………..………………... 9. Studies about NNS Doctoral Students Submitting for Scholarly Publication…………………………………………………..………... 16. Studies about Completing the Doctoral Dissertation…………….…... 18. Theoretical Framework ………………………………………………. 22. Research Questions…………………………………………….……... 27. 3: METHDOLOGY……………………………………………….…..…... 28. The Research Paradigm ……………………………………………... 28. Justifying the Approach to Collect the Research Data………..…….. 30. iv.

(5) The Research Participant ………………...……………………..….... 32. The research participant’s background…………………………... 32. How the researcher participant was recruited…………….…..…. 33. The reasons why the research participant was recruited……..…. 36. The interaction in the first narrative interview………………..…. 37. Data Collection ……………………….…………………………….. 38. Autobiography………………………………………...……….. 39. Narrative Interview…………………………..………………... 39. Weekly Logs………………………………………………..….. 42. Researcher’s research notes…………………………….…..….. 43. Related documents given by the participant…………...………. 43. Data Analysis………………………..………………………………. 44. The Researcher-Composed Narratives………………………..…..…. 46. Establishing the Truthworthiness of the Findings………………….... 49. 4: SEVEN NARRATIVES ABOUT ANDREW’S EXPERIENCE………. 51. Narrative 1 Title: Preliminary Learning and Enlightenment. 52. Stage & Time: Master’s Study (Sep. 2003- Jun. 2006)…………….... Story I: Presenting at conferences in the early stage……………... 54. Story II: Searching for research topics for term projects……….... 55. Story III: Participating in related academic writing activities….... 56. Narrative 2 Title: A Brand-New Start: Trials and Errors Stage & Time: The First Two Years of Ph.D. study (Sep. 2006-Jun. 2008)……………………………………………………………….…. 58. Story I: Being motivated by people around ………………..…... 59. Story II: Effective strategies applied for productivity………….. 61. Story III: Valuable experiences acquired at conferences….……. 64. v.

(6) Story IV: Reflections on gained experiences……….…................. 69. Narrative 3 Title: Taking Off: Progressing and Harvest Stage & Time: The Third and Fourth Years of Ph.D. Study (Jul. 2008-Jun. 2010)……………………………………………….……….. 68. Story I: A series of chances to present at conferences…………...... 72. Story II: Insisting on his research interests to conduct research…... 76. Story III: Dealing with copyright issues………………..…..……... 78. Narrative 4 Title: Getting Matured: Concentration and Withdraw Stage &Time: The Fifth and Sixth Years of Ph.D. Study (Jul. 2010-Jun.2012)……………………………………………………..…. 80. Story I: The self-initiative study based on Andrew’s insistence and personal beliefs………………………………………………......... 82. Story II: An unforgettable but learnable conference presentation experience………………………………………………………..... 84. Story III: Building a vision for contributing to learners………….. 86. Story IV: Changing the mindset and concentrating on the task at hand………………………………………………………..…….. Narrative 5 Title: A Series of Strategic Decision Makings: Selecting the Right Journals Stage & Time: All the Six Years of Ph.D. Study (Jun 2006 - Oct 2012)…………………………………………………………………... 87. 92. Story I: Endeavoring to get his manuscripts published in journals ……………………………………………………….….. 94. Story II: A prolonged duration of being under review………...…. 103. Story III: The personal definitions for a right journal………….... 104. Narrative 06 Title: Learning through Practice: The Dialogues with Experts Stage & Time: All the Six Years of Ph.D. Study (Jun 2006 - Oct 2012)……………………………………………………………..….. vi. 107.

(7) Story I: Learning to negotiate with the reviewers based on literature and theories.……………………………………………. 109. Story II: Learning about the tips of theoretically making survey questions…………………………………………………..…...…. 111. Story III: Figuring out the essence of a research gap…………….. 107. Narrative 7 Title: Going through Challenges: From Ideal to Practical Stage & Time: The Last Two Years of Ph.D. Study (July 2010 – July 2012)……………………………………………………………..…... 117. Story I: The changing research scope: from ideal to practical …………………………………………………….….... 120. Story II: Developing the survey questions: learning from the previous experiences.………………………………………..…... 125. Story III: Learning from different approaches of analyzing the quantitative data…………………………………………………. 127. Story IV: A learning journey of writing up the dissertation…….. 129. Story V: Withdrawing from the online sharing archive………..... 137. 5: DISCUSSION…………………………………………………………. 143. 6: CONCLUSION………………..………………………………………. 152. Addressing the Research Questions…….…………………………... 152. Questions1……………………………………………………….. 152. Questions2……………………………………………………….. 156. Concluding Remarks………………………………………………... 157. Pedagogical Implications……………………………………………. 158. Research Limitations...………………………………………………. 159. Directions for Future Studies………………………………………... 160. REFERENCE…………………………………………………………..…...…. 161. APPENDIXES……………………………………………………………..…... 166. Appendix I: The Timeline for Data Collection……………………….. vii. 166.

(8) Appendix II: Prompt Questions as Guidance for Writing the Weekly Logs:………………………………………………..….. Appendix III: The Overview of Andrew’s Academic Development .... 167 168. Appendix IV: Development of Andrew’s Doctoral Dissertation Research…………………………………………………..………….. 169. Vita………………………………………………………………………..…..... 171. viii.

(9) LIST OF TABLES Table. 1.1. TESOL Academic Community…………………………………….... 9. 3.1. The Content of Researcher-Composed Narratives…………………... 48. 4.1. Development of Andrew’s Papers for Journal Submissions………... 101. 4.2. Andrew’s Manuscript Submission History………………………….. 102. ix.

(10) 國立政治大學英國語言學系博士班博士論文提要論文名稱: 一位台灣博士生於英語教學學術社群的參與經驗之敘事探究指導教授 : 招靜琪教授研究生 : 蔣宗益論文提要內容:. 本研究為長期性的敘事研究，運用了 Wenger (1998)的「實踐社群」社會學習理論(communities of practice)，以及 Norton(1995)的投資理論 (investment)，研究目的是為了探索一位台灣的英語教學研究所博士生的學術成長經驗及其所衍生的意義，特別是針對他奮勉進行學術研究投稿、完成博士學位、並進而開啟他未來的學術生涯等等的過程。本研究主要追蹤了研究參與者在其博士生涯的三個形成階段中，他的學術投稿經驗的心路歷程，一路到研究參與者最後在全球的英語教學領域之學術社群中取得更完全的參與度階段。為了能夠對於研究參與者其經驗有深入的了解，本研究採用了「敘事研究法」，收集了研究參與者的學習經驗自傳、敘說訪談的錄音及其逐字稿、研究者的現場筆記及研究筆記、以及其他由研究參與者所提供的文件等資料，以便能分析參與者的言談資料、且對資料進行敘事性的分析、並進而產出情節故事作為研究結果。研究結果發現，研究參與者持續努力來達成其所認定的學術投稿要求，確實增長了他在學術素養的成長，並足以成為學術社群當中的一員。在其過程當中，研究參與者對於實踐其學術投稿的過程當中相關資源的運用方式，與在 Wenger ｀s (1998) 「實踐社群」社會學習理論的非正式學習的特色是相互呼應的。研究參與者在學術社群當中所獲得的參與度，也表現出了其所累積的文化資產。最重要的是，從研究參與者的經驗透露出，就其受到英語教學社群的社會文化的影響之下來看，研究參與者埋首致力於學術投稿活動不僅僅是為了當下於英語教學社群的參與，也為了即將到來的終生志業進行 Norton (1995)理論當中的個人投資的傾向。這樣的情況顯示出，要學習成為一個英語教學研究領域的學者，的確是涉及了諸多層面的複雜構面及諸多意 iv.

(11) 義上的磋商。而就整個過程來說，也是與研究參與者，他身為初階的年輕學人，身處於台灣的社會情境當中，為了能夠符合全球各地諸多種類專業社群的規範，他以放遠全球的思維來，來實踐在地的行動，成長中的信念是有所共鳴的。最後，本研究將針對台灣高等教育環境中的英語教學研究領域之博士班課程提出建議並討論，以促進年青學人們在學術領域的發展。關鍵字: 學術投稿、文化資產、實踐社群、投資. iv.

(12) ABSTRACT Drawing on Wenger’s (1998) social learning theory as well as Norton’s (1995) notion of investment, this longitudinal qualitative study aims to investigate and derive meanings from the academic experience of one former Taiwanese TESOL doctoral student as he struggled to write for scholarly publications, survived the Ph.D. program, and initiated his academic career. The study mainly traces the twists and turns of his publishing experience in three stages of his forming years till the participant finally has acquired a fuller membership in the global TESOL academic community. To capture and derive an in-depth understanding of the experiences, a narrative inquiry approach was adopted, collecting the young scholar’s written autobiography, recorded narrative interviews and transcripts, the researcher’s research notes and other related documents that the participant provided, so as to thematically analyze the narrative data and then exert the narrative analysis to configure the happenings and events into seven emplotted narratives as the research results. The findings indicate that the participant’s continual endeavor to meet the perceived and assumed requirements for publishing indeed rendered him the academic literacy development necessary to become a member of the academic community. In the process, the participant’s ways of utilizing resources situated in the practice of publishing echo the features of informal learning in Wenger’s (1998) social learning theory. The membership in the academic community gained by the participant also indicates the accumulated cultural capital. Most importantly, the participant’s experience as a doctoral student, being socially and culturally medicated by the TESOL academic community, reveals a tendency to engage in academic tasks for scholarly purposes not only for the current participation in the TESOL academic community but also for personal investment (Norton, 1995) for the coming life-long career. This suggests learning to become a TESOL scholar indeed involves multiple layers of complexity and challenges, and the iv.

(13) whole process is also a resonant to his growing faith as a novice young scholar, situated in the social context of Taiwan, to act locally and think globally, in order to conform to norms of various discourse communities around the world. Suggestions for TESOL doctoral programs in Taiwanese higher education to help and support young scholars’ academic development are discussed.. Key Words: Scholarly Publication, Cultural Capital, Community of Practice, Investment. v.

(14) CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION. Background of the Study. Academic writing for scholarly publications has been playing an important role in the academic career, but scholars are usually hindered from publishing successfully in the mainstream Anglophone journals because of various challenges, either due to the conventional linguistic and rhetorical requirements in academic writing, journals’. 治政 biased selection of preferred research content, researchers’ 大 limited access to resources 立 for conducting research and submitting for publication, or the discursive processes of ‧ 國. 學. negotiating feedback from journals (Belcher, 2007; Canagarajah, 1996; Gosden, 1992;. ‧. Grabe & Kaplan, 1996; Hyland, 2002; Leki & Sliva, 2008; Swales, 1990). For several. sit. y. Nat. decades, being able to write for scholarly publication in English has become a. io. er. prerequisite among scholars around the world. Scholars in different professional fields. al. are eager to publish their research by presenting their research in conferences or. n. iv n C getting their manuscripts publishedhin international refereed e n g c h i U journals. Scholars do so maybe because they want to contribute to professional knowledge in their fields, to maintain their disciplinary reputations, to develop their expertise, or to get upgraded in the rank for their positions in the academia. No matter for what reasons they publish their research, one fact that cannot be neglected is that the rate of being accepted by international journals is usually rather low and the process of submitting for journal publications can be time-consuming and frustrating. In fact, the difficulties for being accepted successfully by journal editors and reviewers may vary. For example, gatekeepers or referees might consider whether the research content is suitable, where there is a research niche, whether the requirements of writing 1 .

(15) 2 . conventions are achieved, or whether the language use in the texts is appropriate or not and so forth (Flowerdew 1999a, 1999b). As a result, for scholars around the world, it would really take much effort in submitting their manuscripts for scholarly publication and finally successfully get published in international refereed journals.. Although it seems that all scholars around the world may experience similar difficulties in writing for scholarly publications, for scholars who are non-native speakers of English (NNS scholars), they may encounter more linguistic or rhetorical challengers in meeting the requirements of writing conventions (Cho, 2004;. 治政 Flowerdew, 1999a, 1999b). English has become a dominant 大 required language for 立 scholarly publication for many decades in most international discourse communities ‧ 國. 學. around the world. Under this circumstance, for all the NNS scholars, no matter. ‧. pursuing a doctoral degree or in an EFL context or in the western countries where. sit. y. Nat. English is spoken as a native language, it has been challenging to engage in the. io. al. er. scholarly publication (Li, 2002, 2007; Li & Flowerdew, 2007).. n. iv n C Moreover, it seems there is no doctoral students under the trend of hexception e n g cfor hi U getting research published. In fact, doctoral students as well as novice scholars around the world are all striving with much effort to come up with research ideas, conduct the research, writing up the papers, and then submit their manuscripts for publication. There have been studies conducted to investigate the experiences of NNS doctoral students in writing for academic purposes or for scholarly publication, with the view to enhancing the doctoral education (Cho, 2004; Kwan, 2008, 2009, 2010; Li, 2002, 2007; Li & Flowerdew, 2007; Lee & Kamler, 2008). Those studies report the challenges those NNS doctoral students have encountered, and some pedagogical suggestions are given. However, a full picture of the experiences of the doctoral.

(16) 3 . education in the context of Taiwan is actually missing, especially about the Taiwanese doctoral students’ experiences in developing their academic literacy to survive their dissertation research or writing for scholarly publication to gain career advancement.. Graduation Requirements in TESOL Ph.D. Programs in Taiwan. A quick survey on the overall situation of the TESOL doctoral programs in Taiwan shows that currently there are five national universities and one private university that offer a TESOL doctoral program in Taiwan. The six TESOL doctoral. 治政 programs have different policies in terms of providing 大 courses at the doctoral level 立 and graduation requirements for their doctoral students, particularly publication ‧ 國. 學. requirements. For example, one program requests the doctoral students to publish at. ‧. least three refereed journal papers, together with one required experience of. sit. y. Nat. presenting research at an overseas international conference. Another program requests. io. al. er. the doctoral students to have two research papers published in either refereed journals or presented in international conferences, with the premise as the individual author of. n. iv n C their papers. Another program also h asks the doctoral students e n g c h i U to publish papers either. in refereed journals or to present research at international conferences, but they do not indicate the exact number of papers. Some would offer the chances for the doctoral students to waive their qualifying exam if they have any publications accepted by refereed journals. Some would encourage their doctoral students to present in either international conferences or to publish in refereed journals by offering financial sponsorship. Almost all of the TESOL doctoral programs in these five universities in Taiwan have a common goal --- to lead their doctoral students to equip themselves with the essential scholarly competence before they get the doctoral degree and move on to the next stage of their future career in the TESOL academia..

(17) 4 . Purpose of the Study. This study aims to investigate the academic development process of a Taiwanese doctoral student studying in a TESOL doctoral program in a university in the social context of Taiwan, especially about his experiences in presenting his research in conferences, publishing his research in refereed journals, and in conducting his doctoral dissertation research and writing it up.. Throughout the period as a graduate student in a TESOL doctoral program, the. 治政 processes of how the participant coped with challenges大 by making essential decisions, 立 applying needed strategies, and utilizing resources available, how he was ‧ 國. 學. socio-culturally mediated by significant people around him, and how he perceived. ‧. those experiences throughout the way to acquire his doctoral degree in TESOL would. er. io. sit. y. Nat. be depicted and interpreted.. n. a l Significance of the Study i v n Ch engchi U. With the purpose to investigate an TESOL doctoral student’s experiences in the TESOL academia during the doctoral education period within and beyond the EFL context, this study aims to contribute to several aspects of the higher education, especially the TESOL doctoral program in Taiwan. This research may shed light on some issues related to the challenges the research participant was facing as a TESOL graduate student in submitting research for and presenting research at conferences, submitting research for and publishing research in peer-reviewed journals, and completing his dissertation research and writing it up. In addition, the research may illuminate the similarities and/or differences between the experiences of the research.

(18) 5 . participant and the experiences of other NNS scholars and/or NNS doctoral students situated in other countries in related literature.. Starting from the Personal Curiosity. Drawing on the concepts from Clandinin and Connelly (2000) and Casanave (2010), the researcher of this current study started this research from his personal curiosity and decided to take the risk of adopting a narrative inquiry approach to investigate the experience of another Taiwanese TESOL doctoral student in the. 治政 context Taiwan. When this study was initiated, the researcher 大 of this research was also 立 a TESOL doctoral candidate in a university situated in the social context of Taiwan. In ‧ 國. 學. order to gain a better understanding about the participant’s experiences, the researcher. ‧. took an “emic” point of view, with the purpose to describe the culture of the TESOL. sit. y. Nat. community “in its own cultural terms” and also from the perspective of an insider of it. io. al. er. (Pike, 1954 as cited in Damen,1986, pp.59). Thus, in the following, the researcher. n. would begin from his own stories in the TESOL community.. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. The Researcher’s Narratives about His Own Experience. Two narrative accounts below depict the researcher’s experience in a TESOL doctoral program in Taiwan as well as the interpretations of it. This is necessary because the researcher’s personal points of view and attitudes towards the academia social context where the researcher is in is exactly where this research is situated..

(19) 6 . Narrative I: A narrative about my experience in a TESOL doctoral program in the social context of Taiwan. The activities that I have been engaged in during these years in the doctoral program include a series of compulsory academic tasks in the programs, some self-initiated ones outside the program, teaching part-time in colleges, and working as a part-time assistant on campus. First of all, during the first three years after I entered the program, I had to attend courses provided in the doctoral program because they are the requirements. A plenty of courses in relation to theories and practice in SLA, TESOL, and applied linguistics were offered while I was in the program, and I submitted for conference presentations with term papers for the courses I had taken. To finish this stage, five or six semesters would be an average duration for one to complete, and I spent six semesters during this coursework stage. To move forward, I struggled to prepare and study for the qualifying exams. The processes were painful but learnable to me because I striven to pass those exams several times before I really made it. It was also demanding to get ready for the dissertation proposal defense, because I had to figure out the domain and the paradigm I would be in so as to proceed with my dissertation research design as well as to demonstrate my understanding of related previous studies and the research issues that I intended to explore. It was the time I started to feel that conducting the dissertation research required more than what I had thought needed. After the proposal, it was time for the tasks of conducting the research for the dissertation, which included collecting the research data, analyzing the data, and coming up with the preliminary results for a rough draft. Those tasks really took me much more energy and time than I had expected due to the time-consuming processes of transcribing the audio clips and summarizing the information from multiple resources of research data. Finally, most important of all, it would be the obligatory and endless effort to write up the dissertation research as what I am doing now, and only by finishing a decent dissertation with a certain contribution to the field can I officially obtain the admitted qualification and get the degree. So far, this has also been a torturing but learnable process. However, time constraints and the quality of my dissertation are always what I am concerned about most.. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. In addition to the above-mentioned required tasks in the doctoral program, during these years, I also took chances to give myself opportunities to learn from the context outside the program. For example, I went to conferences to be a speaker by.

(20) 7 . presenting my term papers or to be just one of the audiences to update myself with the current research trends and learn from others. Plus, I also attended several workshops to acquire more understanding about the theoretical perspectives and the experience from the real practice about conducting research and methodology. Furthermore, I also worked hard by cooperatively participating in a study group with other doctoral student peers, so as to enhance my abilities to cope with the demands from the qualifying exams. I would say I had also been substantially nurtured academically from the above learning experiences in those contexts. In order to maintain the needed financial capacity, I always needed to work part-time by teaching English courses in colleges so as to make money and support myself. But, another important motive for doing so is to gain the teaching experience and to conduct research. With the accumulated teaching experience, I often regarded teaching part-time in colleges as quite rewarding, but sometimes I also felt worried that I had spent a big amount of time on the part-time teaching jobs. Besides, I also worked part-time as an on-campus research and teaching assistant to make extra money and gain the experience as well as the explicit and implicit knowledge from the contextual experience shared by some professors I regarded as role models.. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. Everything I did was for the purpose to survive, either academically or economically, so as to go through these processes in the doctoral program and to equip myself with the competence to conduct research and write scholarly papers. In other words, what I have been doing is not only for the demands from the doctoral program but also for my own expectations to become a competent scholar in TESOL, to work in the academia or to teach in a college, to be able to contribute to the knowledge field, and so forth.. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. Besides, being a Taiwanese TESOL doctoral student educated in Taiwan has led a certain belief in my mind. That is, I felt that it would be beneficial to be an exchange student in a certain foreign country where English is spoken. For example, I used to dream of being an exchange scholar doctoral student with the scholarship from the government, like the Ministry of Science and Technology, even though finally I abandoned that plan. I had that intention to be an exchange student scholar when I entered the program because I was very aware of my existence as a homemade (Made in Taiwan) TESOL Ph.D. one day. To expand the horizons by staying in the U.S. for academic purposes for a period of time, I thought, would be one of the solutions to reduce my apprehension over the fact that I would be a homemade TESOL Ph.D. Even though I did not have a chance to prove whether or not it is beneficial to be an.

(21) 8 . overseas exchange scholar, I have been occupied with the thought during these years. Now, when I recall my personal experience as a TESOL doctoral student during these years, it is easy for me to be aware that my attitudes towards myself were changing along with the stages I was in. As I was just entered the doctoral program, whenever I was inquired by people what I am doing and who I am, I would tell them that I am a TESOL Ph.D. student, and I felt so proud of that. Then, when I had the chances to present my term papers in some conferences, I felt that I was a young scholar because I was at the conference venues, interacting with other people from the TESOL academia. Later, when I was striving again to pass the qualifying exams, I hesitatively and timidly replied to others’ question about my identity, "Yes, I am a TESOL Ph.D. student, but I am still working on my qualifying exams." Then, after I passed the qualifying exams and became a candidate, I felt I was willing to discuss with others about my plans for the future because I thought I was close to graduation. Then, when I was done with the dissertation proposal oral defense and started to conduct my dissertation research, I finally came to realize the meaning of what others at conferences used to tell me that they were ABDs. It seems that what I could achieve may influence my perceptions of who I am!. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. Narrative II: Awareness of the future challenges. y. Nat. sit. n. al. er. io. Under the social context of the academia in Taiwan and around the world, it is no doubt that to be able to conduct research and successfully publish scholarly publications is the basic requirement or the threshold for being a competent scholar or continually getting promoted to be as a professor in a college. People in the academia would acknowledge the merits from scholarly publications, which may reveal one's scholarly expertise and the capacity to produce scholarly papers. The capacity requirement has caused people in the academia to invest much more time and energy on conducting research, for writing scholarly papers and contributing to the knowledge field. It is no exception to the doctoral students in general, who are endeavoring to get their research published, no matter it is due to the formal graduation requirements from the doctoral program or due to one's own intention to accumulate more entries of scholarly papers on his/her curriculum vita for future job position searching. As a TESOL doctoral student in Taiwan, I know I am learning under such a demanding and competitive contextual atmosphere, and I have been working hard to equip myself with the needed competence to survive in the academia in the future. However, I have also been curious about what other peers are doing, what they have achieved, how they feel about themselves, or how they strive to survive. Ch. engchi. i Un. v.

(22) 9 . in the processes of achieving a doctoral degree.. Definitions of Terms. The definitions of terms adopted in this research are elaborated as the following:. TESOL academic community In this research, the term TESOL refers to the conventional meaning as teaching English to speakers of other languages, and the term TESOL academic community. 政治大. may comprise at least two subordinate communities---(1) the community of TESOL. 立. academia and (2) the community of graduate school program of TESOL, as. ‧ 國. 學. indicated in Table 1.1 below. First, the community of TESOL academia is concerned about the people related to refereed journals and conferences, and it has. ‧. both the local and the global contexts. Second, the community of graduate school. y. Nat. io. sit. program of TESOL pertains specifically to the population related to the graduate. n. al. er. school program that offers the master’s degree or doctoral degree to the research participant.. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. Table 1.1 TESOL Academic Community Community. TESOL academic community. Items Subordinate. (1) the community of TESOL academia. communities. (2) the community of graduate school program of TESOL. Academic. submitting for and presenting at. conducting research for and writing up. tasks. conferences in local or global context;. master’s thesis. submitting for and publishing in. conducting research for and writing up. journals in local or global context. doctoral dissertation.

(23) 10 . Narrative inquiry The term, narrative inquiry, used in this research may include two perspectives. One is from Clandinin and Connelly (2000), and the other is from Polkinghorne (1995).. First, according to Clandinin and Connelly (2000), narrative inquiry means the “phenomena under study” and the “method of study (p.4).” The phenomena under study means the data collected from the participant (e.g. oral history, written autobiography, or documents), and the method of study means the ways of. 治政 analyzing the data and interpreting the data, based on 大“situation, continuity, and 立 interaction” (p.49). ‧ 國. 學 ‧. Second, according to Polkinghorne (1995), there are two types of narrative inquiry:. sit. y. Nat. (1) paradigmatic-type narrative inquiry, also called as “analysis of narratives,”. io. al. er. which is based on the “traditional logical-scientific mode of knowing” (Bruner,. n. 1985) and (2) narrative-type narrative inquiry, also named as “narrative analysis,”. C h (Bruner, 1985).U n i which is based on “storied knowing” engchi. v. Thus, in the research, the research collected the narrative data (e.g. autobiography, narrative interviews, written logs, and documents) from the participant to analyze them and categorize the narrative data from the participant into various themes of participant’s stories. Then, the researcher wrote seven narratives by configuring these participant’s stories into seven researcher’s narratives based on the researcher’s understanding of the participant’s experiences to gain the meanings of the participant’s experience. Meanwhile, the researcher also referred to Clandinin and Connelly’s (2000) “situation, continuity, and interaction” to interpret the.

(24) 11 . meanings while writing the seven narratives for chapter four.. Narrative (= the researcher-composed narrative), Story, and Event In this research, there are seven narratives in chapter four, which are composed by the researcher to analyze and interpret the participant’s experience. In each narrative, there are several stories to deal with the participant’s experiences of various topics, and each story may consist of several events.. Academic visibility. 治政 In this research, it refers to the extent people know one’s 大 academic works. Leahey 立 (2007) defines “visibility in an academic field” as the situation when “people know ‧ 國. 學. your name, are familiar with your works, and think highly of your intellectual. . y. sit. al. n. . io. . er. . Nat. . ‧. contributions” (p.537).. Ch. engchi. i Un. v.

(25) CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW. Reviewing relevant previous studies, in order to connect the existing literature with this current research, the researcher synthesized a variety of research on different research subjects/participants who are English nonnative speakers, including scholars submitting for scholarly publication, doctoral students submitting for scholarly publication, and doctoral students completing their dissertations. Besides, the. 治政 theoretical framework for this study is provided and elaborated. 大立 ‧ 國. 學. Studies about NNS Scholars Submitting for Scholarly Publication. ‧. sit. y. Nat. Since two more decades ago, there have been more and more studies conducted. io. er. to explore the issues related to professional writing in English for scholarly. al. publication around the world, especially about the experiences of scholars who are. n. iv n C English non-native speakers (Belcher, Burrough-Boenisch, 2003; Canagarajah, h e2007; ngchi U 1996; Curry & Lillis, 2004; Flowerdew,1999a, 1999b, 2000, 2001, 2005; Gosden, 2003; Kourilova,1998).. Scholars from around the world, where English is not spoken as a first language, as well as those scholars who are English native speakers, are all eager to participate in their professional scholarly communities through scholarly publication , for example, publishing in international refereed journals, in order to contribute to the knowledge field of a certain kind, and English, as a lingua franca, has become a dominant language (Belcher, 2007; Canagarajah, 1996; Curry & Lilis, 2004; 12 .

(26) 13 . Flowerdew, 2000).. For nonnative English speaker scholars around the world, in order to submit their manuscripts for scholarly publication to a certain scholarly community, for example, a scholarly journal, there would be some requirements given by the peer-reviewed journal editors and reviewers as gatekeepers because they are the people who would review the manuscripts first and give feedback and decide whether to reject the submission or to suggest revision and resubmission again (Gosden, 2003). In fact, most of the processes are not transparent, and there are some studies aiming to. 治政 uncover the requirements behind those processes, in which 大 NNS researchers try to 立 communicate with journal editors and reviewers through their comments and replies. ‧ 國. 學. First of all, Gosden (1992) highlights the importance of the linguistic and. ‧. socio-pragmatic skills needed for the researchers to reply to the comments from. sit. y. Nat. journal editors and reviewers. Other researchers also give similar suggestions to those. io. al. er. nonnative English speaker researchers. Kourilova (1998) indicates that to get accepted, NNS researchers not only should have the “professional ideas” but also the “academic. n. iv n C literacy”(p.114). He also concludeshthat the “socio-cultural e n g c h i U sensitivity and. pragmalinguistic competence” are the prerequisites for the researchers to get accepted and “fit in both professional and socially as members of the scientific community” (p.114). Gosden (2003) also indicates that the process of reviewing the manuscripts is a complicated process that may demand the “socio-cultural sensitivity” and “pragma-linguistic competence” (p.87). In other words, the process of submitting to peer-reviewed journals is not just related to the research, but it is also related to the understanding the requirements from the journal editors and reviewers and the communication with. As a result, Gosden suggests that it is essential for the young researchers to understand properly “the motivation behind the referees’ comments”.

(27) 14 . (p.87). Belcher (2007) also indicates that the processes of communicating with those gatekeepers should be negotiable, and she also suggests that with the “authorial persistence, that is, willingness to continue revising and resubmitting when faced with extensive critical commentary from reviewers, can result in publication” (p.1). Thus, from the above, it can be concluded that in submitting manuscripts for scholarly publication, it would be necessary to learn to communicate and negotiate with the journal editors and reviewers when encountering criticisms.. In addition, there are some problematic aspects when journal editors and. 治政 reviewers review NNS manuscripts. For example, Flowerdew 大 (2001) investigates the 立 attitudes of journal editors and reviewers when reviewing the manuscripts from NNS ‧ 國. 學. researchers, and he found some problematic aspects from NNS manuscripts, such as. ‧. the “surface language errors”, “parochialism,” which means "the failure to show the. sit. y. Nat. relevance of the study to the international community"(p.135), and the inability of. io. al. er. NNS researchers to carve out a niche (p.136). Besides, Curry and Lillis (2004) also indicate another common problem that many NNS researchers have, that is, the. n. iv n C insufficient language proficiency ofhEnglish. They indicate e n g c h i U NNS “scholars often feel frustrated with the way English functions as an obligatory additional academic medium” (p.681). Indeed, NNS researchers are under increasing pressure because of the requirement of using English as a language to write for their academic works; however, most of the NNS researchers are short of the good language skills, especially writing for academic purposes. However, Belcher (2007) does not just elaborate on the criticisms given by the editors and reviewers, but instead she suggests that journal editors can help “to support off-network scholars through careful choice of reviewers and clear-as-possible correspondence with authors” (p.19), and “in communicating the reviewers’ and their own recommendation to authors, should do so.

(28) 15 . in as unambiguous a manner as possible” (p.19). It seems that the responsibilities of publishing in peer-reviewed journals should be shared by both the contributors and the editors and reviewers, instead of the NNS contributors. This concept also echoes what Flowerdew (1999a) claims that “compensatory measures of an international nature” should be considered (p.260). One of the measures he suggests is to enhance the awareness of the editors and reviewers while reviewing the works from NNS contributors .Thus, although editors and reviewers as gatekeepers have the authority to identify flaws in NNS manuscripts, some of them are willing to take the responsibility to enhance the clarity of their language in giving comments and. 治政 feedback as well as to give support. 大立 ‧ 國. 學. Given the problematic aspects that NNS scholars may have in submitting for. ‧. scholarly publication, some studies also suggest solutions to help to enhance the. sit. y. Nat. possibilities for NNS manuscripts to be accepted. For example, Burrough-Boenisch. io. al. er. (2003) indicates the necessity for NNS authors to hire the copy-editor to enhance the quality of the NNS researchers’ manuscripts because the editing part can be left to the. n. iv n C journal’s copy-editors, so that the quality can be raised enough to h e nofgthec manuscripts hi U meet the requirements form the journals (p.238). This echoes what Flowerdew’s. (1999a) suggestion for the compensatory measure, in which the “mentoring service” can be given to assist the contributors’ writing proficiency. However, Leki and Sliva, (2008) point out there might be some problem with that. They indicate that around the world there is a big amount of people who are copy-editors in English language and are working as an industry to help NNS researchers to improve their manuscript quality by editing and rewiring the texts, but this might cause many problems (p.59). For example, one of the concerns is who the owner of the texts is after the texts are adjusted and refined, and the manuscripts are published (p.59) because the texts might.

(29) 16 . be adjusted and rewritten based on the English proficiency level of the language editors. Another concern is if the English-language editor is an insider and is quite “familiar with the disciplinary discourse and can be of greatest assistance” (p.59), then the English-language editors might commit the ethical problem because the content of the manuscripts might not be the original work of the NNS author. Besides, some other studies suggest the collaboration with native speaker scholars (Curry & Lillis, 2004; Flowerdew, 1999a; Leki & Sliva, 2008). They suggest either work with a co-author or collaborate with other NS scholars to enhance the quality of manuscripts. All in all, scholars should be cautious about committing ethical problems when asking. 治政 for the help from the copy-editor or proof-reading service 大in revising their texts. 立 ‧ 國. 學. Studies about NNS Doctoral Students Submitting for Scholarly Publication. ‧. sit. y. Nat. Doctoral students around the world are often regarded as the emerging scholars,. io. al. er. novice doctoral scholars, and apprentice scholars, who can also contribute to the knowledge field by submitting for publication to different discourse communities, and. n. iv n C there is no exception to NNE doctoral There are some studies that have been h estudents. ngchi U conducted to investigate these processes and experiences (Cho, 2004; Li, 2006, 2007; Li & Flowerdew, 2007, Kamler, 2008; Kwan, 2010, 2013).. Some studies investigate the processes of NNS doctoral students during their doctoral study periods taking efforts in trying to submit their research for scholarly journal publication. Cho (2004) points out the experiences of the four research participants in her study revealed many challenges, including language challenges, co-authoring with supervisors or colleagues, and looking for proof-reading assistance from NSs. Besides, Li (2006) investigates the processes of a NNS computer science.

(30) 17 . doctoral student publishing under the pressure from” the graduation requirements,” the contribution to the “home research group,” and “her personal academic record” by submitting her manuscripts to “three layers of communities”, so as to contribute to the disciplinary knowledge.. Many studies that suggest the necessity of giving pedagogical guidance from experienced supervisors or colleagues to NNS doctoral students while writing for scholarly publication (Kamler, 2008; Kwan, 2008, 2010, 2013; Lee & Kamler, 2008; Li, 2006, 2007). First, Li (2006) suggests the necessity to help doctoral students. 治政 understand the “generic variations” in and to help them大 able to reuse the appropriate 立 language in research writing (p. 175). This study also highlights the importance of ‧ 國. 學. embedding the “discussions of issues” in EAP classrooms, which may help learners to. ‧. develop the knowledge of “epistemological procedures” of certain discipline as well. sit. y. Nat. as to cultivate the learners to be independent writers who are able to articulate their. io. al. er. voices and project their identities in their writing (p.175). Besides, Li (2007) examines a NNS doctoral student’s experiences in engaging with his communities of. n. iv n C practice, such as “the local researchhcommunity,” “theU e n g c h i laboratory data,” “his own experience of writing research articles,” and “the global specialist research. community” (p.55). Li herself in the study works as an EAP practitioner to give the assistance to the subject. However, Li also questions if there would be “enough TESOL practitioners in non-Angolophone contexts” who can offer the needed help and support to students (p.74). Furthermore, Lee and Kamler (2008) also suggest that there should be the pedagogy that can help to “explicitly” give the doctoral students the guidance of participating in the “the world of peer-reviewed publication” (p.511). However, they do not recommend the “master class” because they regard the traditional master class is usually given by those “published writers, significant.

(31) 18 . figures in the field, journal editors and publishers”(p. 512) because they think this type of pedagogical process is usually occasional and theme-specific (p.512). Instead, they suggest the pedagogical assistance should be on a regular based in the doctoral education (p.512). In other words, such type of courses should be embedded into the doctoral course. They argue that there should be the “explicit and well-theorised pedagogies of writing and publishing in, for and beyond the doctorate” (p.512). In other words, doctoral students should be instructed to publish before and after they graduate. Third, likewise, Kamler (2008) also indicates the need to give attention to the formal pedagogical instructions to doctoral students because most of the doctoral. 治政 students do not have the chance to receive “adequate mentoring 大 or structural support” 立 to make their own research published (p.283). They also suggest co-authoring with ‧ 國. 學. supervisors because in their study “co-authorship with supervisors” plays a important. ‧. role in giving assistance to doctoral student to writ papers for peer-reviewed. sit. y. Nat. publications (p.287). Finally, Kwan (2010) examines the “instruction in research. io. al. er. publication (IRP) given in the universities in Hong Kong, indicating that IRP needs to be given some priority in doctoral programs in the Asian contexts” (p.55). Some. n. iv n C domains of competence are recommended developed in order to publish h e n tog be chi U. internationally, such as “scholarly communication, strategic, research conception, strategic management of publishing” (p. 55). All the above studies stress the importance of pedagogical instruction or guidance given to NNS doctoral students for publishing in refereed journals.. Studies about Completing the Doctoral Dissertation. Some studies also give attention to the processes of doctoral students’ completing the dissertation (Aitchison, 2009; Aitchison & Lee, 2006; Allison et.

(32) 19 . al.,1998; Dong, 1998; Hasrati, 2005; Kamler, 2008; Lee & Boud, 2003; Lee & Kamler, 2008). To give support to doctoral students while fulfill their dissertation requirements, different studies give a variety of suggestions in terms of their own contexts. First of all, Allison et al (1998) investigate the supporting program in an English center given to NNS graduate students in Hong Kong while writing up their theses or dissertations. Through their investigation, they try to figure out what areas that students’ shortcomings might be located, such as failure to create a research space, failure to substantiate arguments, inability to organize information, and other local writing problems. They try to develop the program and give assistance to NNS graduate. 治政 students based on their diagnostic framework and the writing 大 program, which is based 立 on the macro textual level of students’ written texts of their dissertations. ‧ 國. 學 ‧. However, suggestions from other studies might incorporate more than the writing. sit. y. Nat. itself (Aitchison, 2009; Aitchison & Lee, 2006; Done, 1998; Parker, 2009). For. io. al. er. example, Dong (1998) examines the experiences of graduate students and advisors in two universities in the U.S. and finds NNS graduate students are short of the “social. n. iv n C networks and use of writing resources” and they suggest EAP classes teach h e(p.369), ngchi U. “knowledge transformation skills” (p.369), the necessity to build “helping networks,” and the need of a “collaboration among disciplines on audience/genre/discipline specific writing instruction” (p.369). Other studies all suggest the use of peer writing group or study group. For example, Parker’s (2009) study is on the “collaborative and collective forms of doctoral education” which is realized in the form as a “scholarly writing group” in Australia, and it draws on the concept of the social learning approach, the community of practice (p.44). Besides, Aitchison (2009) suggests the writing group approach drawing on the concept of Lave and Wenger’s (1991) “legitimate peripheral participation” for doctoral education to cultivate doctoral.

(33) 20 . students from different disciplines to engage in discussions on their own writing texts so as to learn by “critiquing” each other’s texts and also gain the “working knowledge” of academic writing needed for doctoral students (p.909). The above studies all highlight the benefits from the form of group learning among peers to enhance their learning from mutual interactions or sharing.. For the strategies to survive in the doctoral program, studies offer their suggestions in different angles (Casanave, 2010; Hasrati, 2005; Hasrati & Street; Kwan, 2008, 2009). First of all, Hasrati (2005) examines the process of “academic. 治政 socialization” of doctoral students in five UK university 大with the concept of 立 “legitimate peripheral participation” (Lave & Wenger, 1991), specially about the ‧ 國. 學. relationship between students and supervisors. The study highlights the “informal. ‧. routes to learning” found in the doctoral students participants who “learned most what. sit. y. Nat. they needed through information interactions with their supervisors and other Ph.D.. io. al. er. students” (p.567). Hasrati and Street (2008) investigates the doctoral students’ experiences with research topics for their dissertation research in UK universities.. n. iv n C They find doctoral students from engineering are usually assigned a topic by h e n g cmajor hi U their supervisors, while students from social sciences or humanities mostly select their own topics. They suggest that the EAP course should redefine the concept of discourse, which should consist of both “linguistic and non-linguistic aspects of advanced academic literacy” (p.14). Finally, Kwan (2008) indicates strategic preparation for writing literature review through the combination of reading, writing, and researching. Kwan (2009) also investigates the role of reading in preparing for writing for a doctoral dissertation, especially about how doctoral students as ”insiders” of a certain discipline develop their understanding of the related literature on “theoretical and methodological works”(p.188) and apply the knowledge to their own.

(34) 21 . writing needs for research articles and thesis writing. She indicates that selecting what discipline literature to read for review is “socially mediated, ” and for this reason, research articles may serve the “socialization” function as to leading students to a certain “research community” (p. 188).The above-mentioned studies all contribute to the understanding of the processes of or the preparations for completing dissertation or theses.. Having reviewed related studies concerning the experiences of scholarly publication by NNS scholars or by doctoral students as well as the related issues about. 治政 the processes of completing the dissertations, a better understanding about the whole 大立 pictures and the features of discourse communities of NNS scholars and doctoral ‧ 國. 學. students and their related experience or challenges is gained. However, there seems to. ‧. be an obvious lack in the literature related to the experiences of NNS TESOL doctoral. sit. y. Nat. students situated in the context of Taiwan, presenting the research in conferences,. io. al. er. submitting for scholarly publication, and completing the dissertation. Until now, Taiwanese TESOL doctoral students’ experiences in submitting papers for scholarly. n. iv n C purposes and going through the processes the dissertation requirements h e nofgfulfilling chi U. have not been documented. To inform the policy makers for the higher education in Taiwan and to contribute to the knowledge about how doctoral students situated in the social context of Taiwan would cope with challenges or utilize resources, either to survive or to enhance their learning, throughout the period of doctoral study, compared with the examples from previous studies, conducting a study aiming to investigate doctoral students’ experiences in their development of writing for scholarly purposes is justifiable. As a result, this research is expected to contribute to the TESOL academic community or the doctoral education in the context of Taiwan or worldwide. Hence, this current research would investigate the experience of a.

(35) 22 . Taiwanese TESOL doctoral student in writing and submitting for scholarly purposes as well as fulfilling the dissertation.. Theoretical Frameworks. The research is premised on several theoretical assumptions, including the characteristics of discourse community defined by Swales (1990), the concepts of communities of practice from Lave and Wenger (1991) and Wenger (1998), and the notions of academic literacy by Braine (2002) and Casanave and Li (2008).. 立. 政治大. First of all, it is the notion of ‘discourse community’ defined by Swales (1990). ‧ 國. 學. that may depict the phenomena of conforming to requirements of academic writing. ‧. for scholarly publications, especially when scholars around the world are eager to. sit. y. Nat. publish in refereed journals through English. In such a social context, members of a. io. al. er. certain community are required to follow “patterns and conventions which reflect the sociocultural understandings of that community”(Hyland, 2002, p.41) if they want to. n. iv n C share their professional knowledge h with other members. e n g c h i U Swales (1990) defined it as a ‘discourse community’(p.20) with the following features:. 1. A discourse community has a broadly agreed set of common public goals. 2. A discourse community has mechanisms of intercommunication among its members. 3. A discourse community uses its participatory mechanisms primarily to provide information and feedback. 4. A discourse community utilizes and hence possesses one or more genres in the communicative furtherance of its aims..

(36) 23 . 5. In addition to owning genres, a discourse community has acquired some specific lexis. 6. A discourse community has a threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discourse expertise.. Swales (1990) gave the meaning of ‘discourse community’ as “the socio-rhetorical character of communities organized to accomplish common goals through their use of particular genres” (Swales, 1990, p.24-26). In other words, this definition given by Swales (1990) refers mainly to the rhetorical features of genres at that time. Then,. 治政 Swales (1998) redefined the meanings of it as “a group大 of people who typically work 立 together with a sense of the group’s roles and purposes, an evolved range of genres, ‧ 國. 學. some consensus on work patterns and a way of initiating novices into its practices”. ‧. (Swales, 1998, as cited in Hyland, 2002, p. 42). Both definitions for this metaphor. sit. y. Nat. ‘discourse community’ imply that members of the communities have to follow the. io. al. er. requirements of conventions or norms in their written knowledge productions of texts,. n. so as to communicate with other members in the same community.. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. Second, this current research adopts the concept of community of practice by Wenger (1998) in order to interpret the phenomena of social learning. Wenger’s theory was developed based on an observation of medical claim processors working in their workplace, an insurance company in the U.S. In that context, those processors informally get together and learn from each other in order to meet the demands from the institution by forming communities in the workplace to learn from each other (p.46). In this context, they develop their own ways of doing things, which are more effective than what the official training courses would offer. The skills or tips of doing things that they commonly develop can be defined as the “practice” (p. 47). Thus, the.

(37) 24 . members have the chances to form their communities of practice so as to engage mutually with each other, to work for their joint enterprises, and to develop their shared repertories (p.72). Through participation and reification in the inform context, based on the social relations, they learn from each other, negotiate the meaning in the process, and gain their membership in practice, as what Wenger (1998) indicates:. [This book,] Communities of Practice, presents a theory of learning that starts with this assumption: engagement in social practice is the fundamental process by which we learn and so become who we are. The primary unit of analysis is neither the individual nor social institutions but rather the informal ‘communities of practice’ that people form as they pursue shared enterprises over time.. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. The social learning theory of Wenger’s communities of practice dwells on learning in the informal rather than the formal context. Thus, it is suitable for this current. ‧. research. The central reason for adopting the social learning theory as the lens to. Nat. sit. y. interpret the experiences of the doctoral student in this research is that most of the. n. al. er. io. resources of knowledge or occasions of learning in learning to submit to and present. i Un. v. at conferences, to submit to and publish in peer-reviewed journals, and to complete. Ch. engchi. the dissertation research are not directly offered by the institutional courses. But, instead, the doctoral student may have to learn by doing or by participating in a certain real context to engage with others. In other words, this social learning is not directly taught in the classroom context.. Third, Braine (2002) defines “academic literacy” as the abilities not limited to reading and writing, but related to a more comprehensive and wide range of abilities that graduate students should develop:.

(38) 25 . ....the acquisition of "academic literacy" that is essential for graduate studies is more than the ability to read and write effectively...graduate students not only need to build interactive relationships with their teachers, thesis supervisors, and peers, and develop effective research strategies and good writing skills, they also need to adapt smoothly to the linguistic and social milieu of their host environment and to the culture of their academic departments and institutions ( p.60).. This concept may be in line with the situation that the doctoral student in this research is in because what the doctoral student has to be faced with is not just related to reading and writing, but also to a broad range of norms or requirements in the academic context.. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. Likewise, Casanava and Li (2008) also define “academic literacy” as the concept of “participatory practice,” which is concerning “literacy-related issues” (p.16):. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. In short, looking at academic literacy as participatory practice involves looking at what people do, particularly in relationship to other community members, not just at what they write. The activities students become involved in and the alliances they forge while pursuing graduate degrees immerse students in a variety of practices within disciplinary communities heretofore unknown to them even if they are familiar with disciplinary subject matter (p.17).. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. In this research, the doctoral student is situated in the social context of TESOL academic communities, which may include the academia of TESOL and the graduate school programs of TESOL, in which the doctoral student, while pursuing the degrees, is seeking advice from other members or is socially mediated by other members in a variety of informal contexts. Hence, this research draws on the notions of “academic literacy” defined by Braine (2002) and Casanava and Li (2008).. Finally, Norton (1995) adopts the concept of “investment” instead of the general.

(39) 26 . wording “motivation” to depict one’s intention to learn the target language:. The concept of investment…signals the socially and historically constructed relationship of learners to the target language, and their often ambivalent desire to learn and practice it (p.10).. Norton’s concept of “investment” is derived from Bourdieu and Passeron’s (1977) notion of ‘cultural capital’ (Bourdieu and Passeron, 1977, as cited in Norton, 2000, p.10).” Norton further explains:. 政治大. If learners invest in a second language, they do so with the understanding that they will acquire a wider range of symbolic and material resources, which will in turn increase the value of their cultural capital. Learners expect or hope to have a good return on that investment--- a return that will give them access to hitherto unattainable resources (p.10).. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. Nat. sit. y. According to the above notion for “investment” by Norton, learners might invest in. n. al. er. io. learning a second language with the intention to enhance the value of their cultural. i Un. v. capital. Although Norton’s (1995) definition of “investment” is related to second. Ch. engchi. language learners, the notion of “investment” can be applied to this research by analogy because it may be regarded as the intention of doctoral students to engage in academic tasks for scholarly purposes.. Thus, combining the above-mentioned concepts, including academic literacy (Braine, 2002; Casanava & Li, 2008), the community of practice theory (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998), and the notion of investment (Norton,1995), this research explored the experiences of a Taiwanese TESOL doctoral student who was struggling to engage in various academic tasks for scholarly purposes as well as.