Linguistic Diversity and Doctoral Assessment: Exploring Examiner Treatment of Candidate Language
Saved in:
| Title: | Linguistic Diversity and Doctoral Assessment: Exploring Examiner Treatment of Candidate Language |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Holbrook, Allyson, Burke, Rachel, Fairbairn, Hedy |
| Source: | Higher Education Research and Development. 2022 41(2):375-389. |
| Availability: | Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 15 |
| Publication Date: | 2022 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Doctoral Programs, Doctoral Students, Second Language Learning, Native Language, English (Second Language), Comparative Analysis, Foreign Students, Doctoral Dissertations, Engineering Education, Humanities, Art Education, Social Sciences, Science Education, Majors (Students), Evaluators, Intelligibility, Language Usage, Cultural Differences, Foreign Countries, Case Studies, Nonstandard Dialects, Language Variation |
| Geographic Terms: | Australia |
| DOI: | 10.1080/07294360.2020.1842336 |
| ISSN: | 0729-4360 |
| Abstract: | Overseas students who have learned English as a second or foreign language (L2) form a prominent subgroup of research students in Australian universities. However, there is a paucity of research exploring the linguistic experiences of this population in connection with thesis examination and in comparison with first language users of English (L1). Drawing on a two-phase design, we utilised an archived corpus of de-identified PhD examiner reports (n = 2117) that incorporated demographic data on candidate language background to determine if there were significant differences in examiner emphasis between L1 and L2 English speakers in three Broad Fields of Study (BFOS): Health; Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences (HASS); Science and Engineering. We found some significant differences in content emphases in examiner comments between L1 and L2 candidates by BFOS but no significant differences in examiner recommendation or committee decision between these groups. This suggested examiners were accommodating language differences. To explore this more closely, we identified 27 reports where examiners had surmised an L2 background and examined these informed by Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT). The case analyses confirmed that rather than rejecting or responding negatively to non-standard language, overall, examiners were accommodating of unconventional style (where meaning is not impaired) taking considerable effort to instruct the candidate in instances where intelligibility was obstructed. The findings are particularly apposite in light of widening postgraduate participation by students from linguistically diverse backgrounds. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2022 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1338510 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Overseas students who have learned English as a second or foreign language (L2) form a prominent subgroup of research students in Australian universities. However, there is a paucity of research exploring the linguistic experiences of this population in connection with thesis examination and in comparison with first language users of English (L1). Drawing on a two-phase design, we utilised an archived corpus of de-identified PhD examiner reports (n = 2117) that incorporated demographic data on candidate language background to determine if there were significant differences in examiner emphasis between L1 and L2 English speakers in three Broad Fields of Study (BFOS): Health; Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences (HASS); Science and Engineering. We found some significant differences in content emphases in examiner comments between L1 and L2 candidates by BFOS but no significant differences in examiner recommendation or committee decision between these groups. This suggested examiners were accommodating language differences. To explore this more closely, we identified 27 reports where examiners had surmised an L2 background and examined these informed by Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT). The case analyses confirmed that rather than rejecting or responding negatively to non-standard language, overall, examiners were accommodating of unconventional style (where meaning is not impaired) taking considerable effort to instruct the candidate in instances where intelligibility was obstructed. The findings are particularly apposite in light of widening postgraduate participation by students from linguistically diverse backgrounds. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0729-4360 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/07294360.2020.1842336 |
