1887
Volume 32, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0213-2028
  • E-ISSN: 2254-6774
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study investigates the predominant moves and move patterns used in the separate final conclusion chapters of 48 PhD theses of computer science at a UK university. The focus is on the most salient connections of steps in the review of the study (Move 1) with steps for the consolidation of research space (Move 2). The most common combinations relate (1) a summary of the thesis work to the product and the evaluation of the product, (2) the purpose, thesis statement or hypothesis to the findings or results, (3) the research questions to the methodology, product or claim, (4) a problem or need to a specific methodology, a new product and/or a claim, and (5) a summary of the work done in each thesis chapter to the findings and claims. Some findings are specific of the field of computer science. The study has pedagogical implications for courses of English for Academic Purposes (EAP).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/resla.16034.sol
2019-07-24
2019-09-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Asunción, T. Z. S. & Querol, M. B.
    (2013) Rhetorical moves in the introductions of masters’ theses. Graduate Research Journal, 6(1–2), 65–85.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Badley, G.
    (2009) Academic writing as shaping and reshaping. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(2), 209–219. 10.1080/13562510902757294
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510902757294 [Google Scholar]
  3. Basturkmen, H.
    (2009) Commenting on results in published research articles and masters dissertations in Language Teaching. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8, 241–251. 10.1016/j.jeap.2009.07.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2009.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2012) A genre-based investigation of discussion sections of research articles in dentistry and disciplinary variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(2), 134–144. 10.1016/j.jeap.2011.10.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.10.004 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bhatia, V. K.
    (2004) Worlds of written discourse. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bitchener, J. & Basturkmen, H.
    (2006) Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5, 4–18. 10.1016/j.jeap.2005.10.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.10.002 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bunton, D.
    (2002) Generic moves in PhD thesis introductions. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp.57–75). London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (2005) The structure of PhD conclusion chapters. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4, 207–224. 10.1016/j.jeap.2005.03.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.03.004 [Google Scholar]
  9. Cotos, E.
    (2014) Genre-based automated writing evaluation for L2 research writing: from design to evaluation and enhancement. New York: Palgrave McMillan. 10.1057/9781137333377
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137333377 [Google Scholar]
  10. Cumming, A. , Lai, C. & Cho, H.
    (2016) Students’ writing from sources for academic purposes: A synthesis of recent research. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 23, 47–58. 10.1016/j.jeap.2016.06.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dewey, J.
    (1997) (1910) How we think. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications Inc. (originally published in 1910 byDC Heath and Co, Publishers: Boston).
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Dudley-Evans, T.
    (1986) Genre analysis: an investigation of the introduction and discussion sections of MSc dissertations. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Talking about text. Discourse analysis monographs13 (pp.219–228). English Language Research: University of Birmingham.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Geng, Y. & Warton, S.
    (2016) Evaluative language in discussion sections of doctoral theses: Similarities and differences between L1 Chinese and L1 English writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 22, 80–91. 10.1016/j.jeap.2016.01.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  14. Holmes, R.
    (1997) Genre analysis and the social sciences: An investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 321–337. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(96)00038‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(96)00038-5 [Google Scholar]
  15. (2001) Variation and text structure: The discussion section in economics research articles. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics, 131–132, 107–135. 10.1075/itl.131‑132.06hol
    https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.131-132.06hol [Google Scholar]
  16. Johns, A. M.
    (2001) An interdisciplinary, interinstitutional learning communities program: Student involvement and student success. In I. Leki (Ed.), Academic writing programs: Case studies in TESOL practice (pp.61–72). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. (2002) Destabilizing and enriching novice students’ genre theories. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives (pp.237–348). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Johns, A. M. & Swales, J. M.
    (2002) Literacy and disciplinary practices: Opening and closing perspectives. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1, 13–28. 10.1016/S1475‑1585(02)00003‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(02)00003-6 [Google Scholar]
  19. Kuteeva, M. & Negretti, R.
    (2016) Graduate students’ genre knowledge and perceived disciplinary practices: Creating a research space across disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 41, 36–49. 10.1016/j.esp.2015.08.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2015.08.004 [Google Scholar]
  20. Kwan, B.
    (2006) The schematic structure of literature reviews in doctoral theses of applied linguistics. English for Specific Purposes, 25, 30–55. 10.1016/j.esp.2005.06.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  21. Lewkowicz, J.
    (2009) Concluding your master’s level thesis. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 59, 63–72.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. (2012) The challenges of writing a successful thesis conclusion. In R. Tang (Ed.), Academic writing in a second or foreign language (pp.107–125). London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Lim, J. M. H.
    (2014) Formulating research questions in experimental doctoral dissertations on Applied Linguistics. English for Specific Purposes, 35, 66–88. 10.1016/j.esp.2014.02.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  24. Lim, J. M. H. , Loi, C. K. & Hashim, A.
    (2014) Postulating hypotheses in experimental doctoral dissertations on Applied Linguistics: A qualitative investigation into rhetorical shifts and linguistic mechanisms. Ibérica, 27, 121–142.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Lim, J. M. H. , Loi, C. K. , Hashim, A. & Liu, M. S. M.
    (2015) Purpose statements in experimental doctoral dissertations submitted to U.S. universities: An inquiry into doctoral students’ communicative resources in language education. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 69–89. 10.1016/j.jeap.2015.06.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  26. Lindeberg, A.
    (1994) Rhetorical conventions in the discussion/conclusion sections of research articles in finance, management and marketing. In M. Brekke , O. Anderson , T. Dahl & J. Myking (Eds.), Applications and implications of current LSP research. Proceedings of the 9th European LSP symposium (pp.761–779). Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Paltridge, B.
    (2002) Thesis and dissertation writing: An examination of published advice and actual practice. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 125–143. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(00)00025‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00025-9 [Google Scholar]
  28. Paltridge, B. , Starfield, S. , Ravelli, L. J. & Tuckwell, K.
    (2012) Change and stability: Examining the macrostructures of doctoral theses in the visual and performing arts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11, 332–344. 10.1016/j.jeap.2012.08.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  29. Paltridge, B. & Woodrow, L.
    (2012) Thesis and dissertation writing: Moving beyond the text. In R. Tang (Ed.), Academic writing in a second or foreign language (pp.88–104). London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Parkinson, J.
    (2011) The Discussion section as argument: The language used to prove knowledge claims. English for Specific Purposes, 30, 164–175. 10.1016/j.esp.2011.03.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.03.001 [Google Scholar]
  31. Peacock, M.
    (2002) Communicative moves in the discussion section of research articles. System, 30, 479–497. 10.1016/S0346‑251X(02)00050‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00050-7 [Google Scholar]
  32. Peng, J.
    (1987) Organizational features in chemical engineering research articles. ELR Journal, 1, 79–116.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Posteguillo, S.
    (1999) The schematic structure of computer science research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), 139–160. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(98)00001‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00001-5 [Google Scholar]
  34. Ridley, D.
    (2012) (2008) The literature review. A step-by-step guide for students. Second edition. London: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Samraj, B.
    (2008) A discourse analysis of master’s theses across disciplines with a focus on introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(1), 55–67. 10.1016/j.jeap.2008.02.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.02.005 [Google Scholar]
  36. Soler-Monreal, C.
    (2015) Announcing one’s work in PhD theses in computer science: A comparison of Move 3 in literature reviews written in English L1, English L2 and Spanish L1. English for Specific Purposes, 40, 27–41. 10.1016/j.esp.2015.07.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2015.07.004 [Google Scholar]
  37. (2016) A move-step analysis of the concluding chapters in computer science PhD theses. Ibérica, 32(fall), 105–132.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Soler-Monreal, C. , Carbonell-Olivares, M. & Gil-Salom, L.
    (2011) A contrastive study of the rhetorical organisation of English and Spanish PhD thesis introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 30(1), 4–17. 10.1016/j.esp.2010.04.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2010.04.005 [Google Scholar]
  39. Soler-Monreal, C. & Gil-Salom, L.
    (2010) Moves, steps and linguistic signals in RA Discussion sections. In W. Hahn & C. Vertan (Eds.), Fachsprachen in der Weltweiten Kommunikation / Specialised Language in Global Communication. Proceedings of the XVIth European Symposium on Language for Special Purposes LSP). Series Sprache in der Gesellschaft, Band 30 / Language in the Society, volume 30 (pp.519–528). Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Swales, J. M.
    (2004) Research genres. Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524827
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524827 [Google Scholar]
  41. Swales, J. M. & Feak, C. B.
    (2000) English in today’s research world: A writing guide. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press. 10.3998/mpub.9059
    https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9059 [Google Scholar]
  42. Yang, R. & Allison, D.
    (2003) Research articles in applied linguistics: Moving from results to conclusions. English for Specific Purposes, 22, 365–385. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(02)00026‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00026-1 [Google Scholar]
  43. Yayli, D.
    (2011) From genre-awareness to cross-genre awareness: A study in an EFL context. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10, 121–129. 10.1016/j.jeap.2011.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.02.001 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/resla.16034.sol
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/resla.16034.sol
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): computer science , conclusion , conclusión , informática , move , movimiento , paso , PhD thesis , step and tesis doctoral
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error