Boba Samuels | Wilfrid Laurier University (original) (raw)
Papers by Boba Samuels
How students learn to write in the disciplines is a question of ongoing concern in writing studie... more How students learn to write in the disciplines is a question of ongoing concern in writing studies, with practical implications for academia. This case study used ethnographic methods to explore undergraduate writing in two upper year anthropology courses at a Canadian university over one term (four months). Student and professor interviews, classroom field notes, surveys, and students’ final papers were analysed using a framework drawn from activity theory and informed by genre
theory. Four themes emerged from the data: anthropology as school; the familiar vs. unfamiliar; reading; and hidden rhetoric. Findings suggest students approach disciplinary work primarily as students rather than emerging professionals, and this role is adopted because it is familiar and few opportunities are provided to practice other professional activities. Extensive reading was seen as important by students and professors. Students demonstrated high skill levels in finding and using sources, but expressed frustration and resistance to the use of discipline-specific jargon, especially that of theoretical/sociocultural anthropology. While professors linked extensive reading with writing development, students did not make this connection. The rhetorical nature of literacy tasks was largely overlooked or hidden, and explicit instruction on disciplinary writing was infrequently provided to students, who felt they were expected to already know how to write research papers. Analysis of student papers showed a variety of rhetorical moves in their introductions, though familiar academic moves such as including a thesis statement were seen frequently while more sophisticated moves such as establishing ethos were little seen. Papers that used more sources and were longer received higher grades. Overall, students demonstrated a range of levels of writing development and disciplinary enculturation. The activity theory framework used in this project was useful in providing a model to structure analysis. Its explanatory power, however, is limited unless an alternate conceptualization of activity (such as Ilyenkov’s) is used that integrates the notion of genre as social action. In conclusion, adequate study of activities such as disciplinary writing requires theoretical and methodological complexity and is best conducted in research collaborations that include expertise in a variety of methods and from a
variety of approaches.
Professional collaboration in academia is valued because it is believed to encourage the generati... more Professional collaboration in academia is valued because it is believed to encourage
the generation and synthesis of ideas, to enhance workplace environments, and
to comprise a key element in mentoring practices. Collaboration in writing is
often of two types: formal co-authorship or informal commentary on colleagues’
work. Formal co-authorship is a topic that usually draws more attention for its
problems and potential controversies than for its putative benefits. In our study,
we examined professional academic co-authorship. Focusing on the field of education,
we identified four research sub-fields (general education, educational psychology,
language studies, and literacy studies) and analysed academic peer-reviewed
journals from each of these sub-fields to establish how much
collaboration exists in published articles. We then examined the extent to which
graduate students are co-authors in these publications and what role this collaboration
takes. Implications for collaboration with and between graduate students
are discussed.
Mind, Brain, and Education, 2009
ABSTRACT— The new field of Mind, Brain, and Education (MBE)—sometimes called educational neurosci... more ABSTRACT— The new field of Mind, Brain, and Education (MBE)—sometimes called educational neuroscience—is posited as a mediator between neuroscience and education. Several foundational concerns, however, can be raised about this emerging field. The differences between neuroscience and education are many, including differences in their histories, philosophies, and epistemologies. Historically, science and education have demonstrated separate, but interwoven, influences on society; philosophically, the values by which they operate are often in opposition; and epistemologically, the fields have relied on different conceptualizations of knowledge. Discussion about these differences has been largely absent in attempts to promote MBE. Two steps are proposed to respond to this omission. First, encouraging discussion about disciplinary differences and assumptions may enable better understanding between disciplines and facilitate the establishment of a more collaborative research community. Second, a transdisciplinary framework that focuses on salient issues of interest across disciplines should be considered. Transdisciplinarity aims for the creation of an inclusive research environment that transcends traditional disciplinary approaches to complex problems. This article initiates an exploration of disciplinary differences and proposes commitment to transdisciplinarity as a guiding principle that may increase the viability of MBE as a mediating field between neuroscience and education.
Written Communication, 2010
How students learn to write in the disciplines is a question of ongoing concern in writing studie... more How students learn to write in the disciplines is a question of ongoing concern in writing studies, with practical implications for academia. This case study used ethnographic methods to explore undergraduate writing in two upper year anthropology courses at a Canadian university over one term (four months). Student and professor interviews, classroom field notes, surveys, and students’ final papers were analysed using a framework drawn from activity theory and informed by genre
theory. Four themes emerged from the data: anthropology as school; the familiar vs. unfamiliar; reading; and hidden rhetoric. Findings suggest students approach disciplinary work primarily as students rather than emerging professionals, and this role is adopted because it is familiar and few opportunities are provided to practice other professional activities. Extensive reading was seen as important by students and professors. Students demonstrated high skill levels in finding and using sources, but expressed frustration and resistance to the use of discipline-specific jargon, especially that of theoretical/sociocultural anthropology. While professors linked extensive reading with writing development, students did not make this connection. The rhetorical nature of literacy tasks was largely overlooked or hidden, and explicit instruction on disciplinary writing was infrequently provided to students, who felt they were expected to already know how to write research papers. Analysis of student papers showed a variety of rhetorical moves in their introductions, though familiar academic moves such as including a thesis statement were seen frequently while more sophisticated moves such as establishing ethos were little seen. Papers that used more sources and were longer received higher grades. Overall, students demonstrated a range of levels of writing development and disciplinary enculturation. The activity theory framework used in this project was useful in providing a model to structure analysis. Its explanatory power, however, is limited unless an alternate conceptualization of activity (such as Ilyenkov’s) is used that integrates the notion of genre as social action. In conclusion, adequate study of activities such as disciplinary writing requires theoretical and methodological complexity and is best conducted in research collaborations that include expertise in a variety of methods and from a
variety of approaches.
Professional collaboration in academia is valued because it is believed to encourage the generati... more Professional collaboration in academia is valued because it is believed to encourage
the generation and synthesis of ideas, to enhance workplace environments, and
to comprise a key element in mentoring practices. Collaboration in writing is
often of two types: formal co-authorship or informal commentary on colleagues’
work. Formal co-authorship is a topic that usually draws more attention for its
problems and potential controversies than for its putative benefits. In our study,
we examined professional academic co-authorship. Focusing on the field of education,
we identified four research sub-fields (general education, educational psychology,
language studies, and literacy studies) and analysed academic peer-reviewed
journals from each of these sub-fields to establish how much
collaboration exists in published articles. We then examined the extent to which
graduate students are co-authors in these publications and what role this collaboration
takes. Implications for collaboration with and between graduate students
are discussed.
Mind, Brain, and Education, 2009
ABSTRACT— The new field of Mind, Brain, and Education (MBE)—sometimes called educational neurosci... more ABSTRACT— The new field of Mind, Brain, and Education (MBE)—sometimes called educational neuroscience—is posited as a mediator between neuroscience and education. Several foundational concerns, however, can be raised about this emerging field. The differences between neuroscience and education are many, including differences in their histories, philosophies, and epistemologies. Historically, science and education have demonstrated separate, but interwoven, influences on society; philosophically, the values by which they operate are often in opposition; and epistemologically, the fields have relied on different conceptualizations of knowledge. Discussion about these differences has been largely absent in attempts to promote MBE. Two steps are proposed to respond to this omission. First, encouraging discussion about disciplinary differences and assumptions may enable better understanding between disciplines and facilitate the establishment of a more collaborative research community. Second, a transdisciplinary framework that focuses on salient issues of interest across disciplines should be considered. Transdisciplinarity aims for the creation of an inclusive research environment that transcends traditional disciplinary approaches to complex problems. This article initiates an exploration of disciplinary differences and proposes commitment to transdisciplinarity as a guiding principle that may increase the viability of MBE as a mediating field between neuroscience and education.
Written Communication, 2010