I will attempt to state my research questions and the reasons for their inclusion.
1. How is knowledge constructed in undergraduate psychology writing?
This questions assumes that all knowledge is constructed and that this construction can be seen in the sentences themselves. The construction of knowledge has been explained well in the Lit rev. I am not sure whether I have explained explicitly enought the second idea though, that analysis of sentences may reveal this construction and its nature. All the following questions contribute to answering this first one.
2. Are statements presented as facts or is there recourse to epistemic warranting?
This may be related to the hard or soft nature of knowledge in the discipline. Hard knowledge is often presented as fact and soft knowledge as contested with more epistemic warranting. I could include textual and experiential themes here as a kind of warranting. Textual themes can be seen as authorial intervention that guides readers through the text and tells them explicitly how to link ideas. Perhaps this is more linked to argument than warranting. Experiential Themes can be seen as warranting, I think, as they limit the scope of the proposition. Perhaps I should leave out textual theme completely or should I have a separate research question for it? Maybe, To what extent is the author guided through the argument explicitly?
3. What forms do the epistemic warrants take?
Do psychology students back up their knowledge claims with reference to research, theories, methods, their own point of view? Literature indicates that methods are seen as important. It might also be expected that students refer to others work rather than their own views as they are novices.
4. How visible is the author?
This question aims to look more closely at the authors interventions into the text and examine how direct they are. Students may become more indirect as they progress as indirect intervention is thought to develop later than direct intervention (Shleppegrell). Disciplinary norms may also be involved as science prefers more indeirect intervention in the empirical tradition. I need to check what the requirements are in Psychology, perhaps by looking at the APA style guide.
5. How does the author refer to previous research?
Again this question aims to loook more closely at one aspect of warranting, that of reference to previous research. Hyland's study shows disciplinary differences in reference to research with harder disciplines making references les visible. I also need to check what the APA style guide says about this issue. I may abandon this question as I cannot use Theme to measue the differences between visible and less visible references as less visible references will not be included in an analysis of theme.
6. What is the nature of the phenomena being studied?
This question will highlight what psychology students write about. Do they write about theories, important figures in psychology, the people studied, methods. Is student writing in psychology as abstract and epistemological as the professional writing studied by MacDonald? I also need to mention Gardner's study herre and Lewin, Fine and Young.
Comments
]]>
There is very little difference amount of Topical and Marked Theme in different years of study. There is some difference between disciplines though. I am looking at Topical theme now. I should finish this analysis tomorrow and start sorting out the results and writing the discussion on Monday.