Obstacles, facilitators, and needs in doctoral writing: A systematic review

IF 1.9 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Studies in Continuing Education Pub Date : 2022-01-30 DOI:10.1080/0158037X.2022.2026315
Lina Calle-Arango, Natalia Ávila Reyes
{"title":"Obstacles, facilitators, and needs in doctoral writing: A systematic review","authors":"Lina Calle-Arango, Natalia Ávila Reyes","doi":"10.1080/0158037X.2022.2026315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Writing is one of the main challenges doctoral students face in their process of becoming researchers. Nonetheless, institutional initiatives to support writing processes are relatively recent and not necessarily research-grounded. This systematic literature review aims to address this gap by answering the questions: What obstacles and facilitators in the writing process do doctoral students encounter in the areas of SS&H? And what clues do these offer about students’ needs for institutional support? To do so, we focus on empirical student-centred research. Systematizing the evidence may strengthen pedagogical decisions and programmatic orientations focused on the students’ experiences and writing processes. We analysed a total of 38 studies on these topics collected from mainstream databases and identified patterns of recurring results that illustrate obstacles and facilitators from which the needs arise. Negative self-perceptions and low self-regulation are among the main obstacles of the writing process, while shared writing experiences foster affective dimensions self-regulation, and improve familiarisation with the discursive community. Lastly, institutional spaces specifically dedicated to writing as well as sustained positive and constructive feedback emerged as needs.","PeriodicalId":46790,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Continuing Education","volume":"45 1","pages":"133 - 151"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Continuing Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2022.2026315","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

ABSTRACT Writing is one of the main challenges doctoral students face in their process of becoming researchers. Nonetheless, institutional initiatives to support writing processes are relatively recent and not necessarily research-grounded. This systematic literature review aims to address this gap by answering the questions: What obstacles and facilitators in the writing process do doctoral students encounter in the areas of SS&H? And what clues do these offer about students’ needs for institutional support? To do so, we focus on empirical student-centred research. Systematizing the evidence may strengthen pedagogical decisions and programmatic orientations focused on the students’ experiences and writing processes. We analysed a total of 38 studies on these topics collected from mainstream databases and identified patterns of recurring results that illustrate obstacles and facilitators from which the needs arise. Negative self-perceptions and low self-regulation are among the main obstacles of the writing process, while shared writing experiences foster affective dimensions self-regulation, and improve familiarisation with the discursive community. Lastly, institutional spaces specifically dedicated to writing as well as sustained positive and constructive feedback emerged as needs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
博士写作的障碍、促进因素和需求:系统回顾
写作是博士生在成为研究人员的过程中面临的主要挑战之一。尽管如此,支持写作过程的机构倡议是相对较新的,并不一定是基于研究的。这篇系统的文献综述旨在通过回答以下问题来解决这一差距:博士生在SS&H领域的写作过程中遇到了哪些障碍和促进因素?这些数据又提供了哪些关于学生对机构支持需求的线索呢?为此,我们专注于以学生为中心的实证研究。系统化的证据可以加强教学决策和注重学生经验和写作过程的方案导向。我们分析了从主流数据库中收集的关于这些主题的总共38项研究,并确定了反复出现的结果模式,这些结果说明了产生需求的障碍和促进因素。消极的自我认知和低自我调节是写作过程中的主要障碍,而共享的写作经历促进了情感维度的自我调节,并提高了对话语社区的熟悉程度。最后,专门用于写作的机构空间以及持续的积极和建设性反馈成为需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in Continuing Education
Studies in Continuing Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Studies in Continuing Education is a scholarly journal concerned with all aspects of continuing, professional and lifelong learning. It aims to be of special interest to those involved in: •continuing professional education •adults learning •staff development •training and development •human resource development
期刊最新文献
Managers’ sociocognitive conflicts in collaborative learning Learning, instruction and assessment in the workplace: applying and augmenting Communities of Practice theory A work-integrated educational intervention in health and social care – professionals’ experiences of joint education Improving the quality of allied health placements: student, educator and organisational preparedness Feeling like an academic writer: an exploration of doctoral students’ struggle for recognition
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1