|
چکیده
|
Abstract The research article (RA) is one of the most widely researched genres in academic writing which is realized through some rhetorical moves and discursive steps to achieve a communicative purpose. Over the past decades, there has been a plethora of interest in possible challenges encountered by researchers while publishing RAs in various English for academic purposes (EAP) disciplines. However, unanimity has not been achieved in the past research on what Research Article Writing Competence (RAWC) should entail. Moreover, no common frame of reference has yet been developed in order to evaluate this competence. Notwithstanding, such a lack necessitates the need to define a synthesized model of EAP RAWC and develop a reliable and valid scale to assess it. Thus, this study aimed at proposing a model of RAWC applicable in writing RAs in different EAP fields of study. Given this, a mixed method approach was adopted, including the procedures of two main phases of model development and scale development. The first phase of the study aimed to propose a model of RAWC based on a meta-synthesis of current studies, introspective analysis of EAP researchers’ rejection emails, and follow up interviews. In the meta-synthesis stage, a ‘qualitative meta-synthesis’ (Walsh & Downe, 2005) approach was adopted as the research method. A meta-synthesis exercise was framed and the currently available literature was investigated. 473 relevant abstracts and 345 full papers were selected and screened and a number of 173 studies were appraised for final inclusion. The coding process in the stage of meta-synthesis resulted in a total of 1342 codes, 23 subthemes, eight themes, and three concepts. Afterwards, a complementary introspective study was done. This stage intended to explore how a sampled number of EAP Iranian researchers perceive features of academic RA writing competence, the major reasons for RA rejection, and difficulties the authors face in writing up publishable RAs. Data for this stage came from an examination of rejection emails and follow-up interviews with a number of researchers. Analysis of the data following the steps of Grounded theory (Strauss & Corbin, 1990) in the introspective stage resulted in 545 codes, 40 subcategories, and six core categories. The main categories emerging from thematic coding include: the potential reasons of RA rejection; the authors’ challenges in RA writing; RA linguistic features; RA stylistic features; essential elements of writing RA sections; and the features of RA citation and referencing. As a result, the phase of model development yielded a reductionist yet inclusive account of EAP RAWC with a three-tire taxonomy: RA Writing Organizational Competence with two subthemes, namely RA Writing Grammatical Competence VI and RA Writing Textual Competence; RA Writing Pragmatic Competence consisting of Functional Competence and Sociolinguistic Competence; and RA Writing Academic Maxims Competence with four subthemes of RA Writing Quantity Maxim, RA Writing Quality Maxim, RA Writing Relation Maxim, and RA Writing Manner Maxim. Then, the phase of scale development was initiated by creating a bank of items amenable for different aspects of the conceptual model of RAWC. The pool of items was revised during several consecutive sessions and seeking expert opinion. Finally, an inventory of 90 items was administered to a sample of 380 EAP researchers. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were run to ensure the factor structure of the questionnaire and develop a valid and reliable scale. This led to the removal of 11 items in the sample loaded, resulting in a final 79 EAP RAWC inventory with a significant reliability and validity indices. The study bears several implications for the practitioners and researchers. Key words: RA writing competence; RA writing competence model; qualitative meta-synthesis;
|