Fostering Epistemic Expertise and Research Rigor among EFL Doctoral Students in English Studies: A Follow-Up Study Using a Self-Efficacy Lens
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This follow-up study examines whether participation in the Research-Publication (Res-Pub) Training Workshop influenced the epistemic expertise and research rigor of 20 doctoral students in English Studies. The workshop was designed using a reframed Community of Practice (CoP) approach situated within the Disciplinary Writing Expertise (DWE) framework. To enhance research publishability, this study introduces the Scholarly Rigor-Expertise (SR-E) model, integrating eight methodological components—(1) Critical Literature Navigation, (2) Domain-Specific Knowledge, (3) Epistemological Awareness, (4) Conceptual Framework Development, (5) Methodological Justification, (6) Transparent Data Collection Design, (7) Analytical Rigor and Interpretation, and (8) Reflective and Contextual Conclusions. A mixed-methods design integrated a self-constructed self-efficacy survey with qualitative data from focus groups and in-depth interviews. Findings showed strong self-efficacy in six areas (means = 3.26 -3.42) and moderate self-efficacy in Conceptual Framework Development, and Reflective and Contextual Conclusions (means = 3.20, 3.14). Qualitative data enrich the quantitative findings, offering deeper insights into the SR-E model’s effectiveness. Focus groups interviews emphasized Domain-Specific Knowledge, while in-depth interviews deepened Methodological Justification–both central to research expertise. The findings suggest the Res-Pub Training Workshop, grounded in the Reframed CoP model, could enhance the participants’ scholarly rigor and expertise, fostering research and practice to support doctoral students and young scholars’ development.
Article Details
References
Adunyarittigun, D., Thongrin, S., Sriharuksa, K., & Seenak, P. (2023). Thammasat University, Thailand. In M. Byram & M. Stoicheva (Eds.), The experience of examining the PhD: An international comparative study of processes and standards of doctoral examination (pp. 134-148). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003248569
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines. Open University Press.
Belcher, W. L. (2019). Writing your journal article in twelve weeks: A guide to academic publishing success (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Open Court.
Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034006003
Borg, S. (2018). Teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices. In P. Garrett & J. Cots (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language awareness (pp. 75–91). Routledge.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
British Educational Research Association. (2018). Ethical guidelines for educational research (4th ed.). https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2018
Canagarajah, A. S. (2002). A geopolitics of academic writing. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Chiang, S. Y. (2020). Doctoral students’ academic writing development: A journey of becoming. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57(2), 136–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2019.1617184
Clarke, G., & Lunt, I. (2014). The concept of ‘originality’ in the Ph.D.: How is it interpreted by examiners? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(7), 803–820. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.870970
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Sage.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage.
Donnelly, C. A., Boyd, I., Campbell, P., Craig, C., Vallance, P., Walport, M., Whitty, C. J. M., Woods, E., & Wormald, C. (2018). Four principles for synthesizing evidence. Nature, 558(7710), 361–364.
Durkheim, E. (1897). Suicide: A study in sociology. Routledge.
Erwee, R., & Perry, C. (2018). Examination of doctoral theses: Research about the process and proposed procedures. In R. R. Erwee, M. A. Harmes, M. K. Harmes, & P. A. Danaher (Eds.), Postgraduate education in higher education (pp. 359-375). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0468-1_4-1
Flaster, A., Glasener, K. M., & Gonzalez, J. A. (2020). Disparities in perceived disciplinary knowledge among new doctoral students. Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education, 11(3), 215–230. https://doi.org/10.1108/SGPE-05-2019-0053
Flowerdew, J. (2001). Attitudes of journal editors to nonnative speaker contributions. TESOL Quarterly, 35(1), 121–150. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587862
Gadamer, H.-G. (1975). Truth and method (J. Weinsheimer & D. G. Marshall, Trans.). Sheed & Ward.
Gee, J. P. (2014). How to do discourse analysis: A toolkit. Routledge.
Goldman, A. I. (1999). Knowledge in a social world. Clarendon Press of Oxford University Press.
Golde, C. M., & Walker, G. E. (2006). Envisioning the future of doctoral education: Preparing stewards of the discipline. Jossey-Bass.
Golding, C., Sharmini, S., & Lazarovitch, A. (2013). What examiners do: what thesis students should know. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(5), 563-576. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.859230
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative
research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of
qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Sage.
Gube, J., Ho, A. H., & Wang, X. (2017). Overcoming intellectual barriers: Developing insider knowledge for successful academic publishing. Journal of Academic Publishing, 46(2), 89-102. https://doi.org/10.1080/2045039X.2017.1254324
Hall, S. (1997). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices. Sage.
Hart, C. (1998). Doing a literature review: Releasing the social science research imagination. Sage Publications.
Heron, J., & Reason, P. (1997). A participatory inquiry paradigm. Qualitative
Inquiry, 3(3), 274–294.
Holmes, P., Reynolds, J., & Chaplin, M. (2020). Durham University, United Kingdom. In M. Byram & M. Stoicheva (Eds.), The doctorate as experience in Europe and beyond: Supervision, languages, identities (pp. 52–88). Routledge.
Hyland, K. (2012). Disciplinary identities: Individuality and community in academic discourse. Cambridge University Press.
Kiley, M. (2009). Rethinking the Australian doctoral examination process. The Australian Universities’ Review, 51(2), 32–41. https://doi.org/10.3316/ielapa.159523534745605
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Kyvik, S., & Thune, T. (2015). Assessing the quality of PhD dissertations: A survey of external committee members. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(5), 768–782. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.956283
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991), Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
Lee, A., & Kamler, B. (2008). Bringing pedagogy to doctoral publishing. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(5), 511-523. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510802334723
Li, Y. (2022). Challenges and support in article publication: Perspectives of non-native English-speaking doctoral students. SAGE Open, 12(2), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221095021
Lillis, T., & Curry, M. J. (2010). Academic writing in a global context: The politics
and practices of publishing in English. Routledge.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
Lovitts, B. E. (2005). Being a good course-taker is not enough: A theoretical perspective on the transition to independent research. Studies in Higher Education, 30(2), 137–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500043093
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Mercer, J. (2007). The challenges of insider research in educational
institutions: Wielding a double‐edged sword. Oxford Review of
Education, 33(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054980601094651
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage publications.
Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13-22.
Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (2016). Getting published in academic journals: Navigating the publication process. University of Michigan Press.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage publications.
Porte, G. K. (2002). Appraising research in second language learning: A practical approach to critical analysis of quantitative research. John Benjamins.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press.
Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in
qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-2004-22201
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford University Press.
Smith, J. K., & Deemer, D. K. (2000). The problem of criteria in the age of
relativism. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of
qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 877–896). Sage.
Thongrin, S. (2018). Developing an instructional model to teach Thai research assistants to write English scientific research articles. LEARN (Language Education and Acquisition Research Network) Journal, 11(2), 22-65.
Thongrin, S. (2020, October 24). Advancing scholarly publication skills for apprentice scholars of English [Paper Presentation]. The 2020 PKETA, KALS, NKAELL International Conference, “Nurturing English education through three branches: Linguistics, Literature, Education,” Online (ZOOM).
Thongrin, S. (in press). Enhancing research-publication competencies of
EFL doctoral students in English Studies: A follow-up study on the
Reframed Community of Practice model. Journal of Liberal Arts, Thammasat University, 25(1).
Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121
Walker, G. E., Golde, C. M., Jones, L., Bueschel, A. C., & Hutchings, P. (2007). The formation of scholars: Rethinking doctoral education for the twenty-first century. Jossey-Bass.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
Winter, R., Griffiths, M., & Green, K. (2000). The ‘academic’ qualities of practice: what are the criteria for a practice-based PhD? Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 25-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/030750700115993
Zimmerman, B. J., & Bandura, A. (1994). Impact of self-regulatory influences on writing course attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 31(4), 845–862.
