|تعداد مشاهده مقاله||49,919,735|
|تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله||13,144,804|
Demystifying Problems and Opportunities of the Persianophone Physical Education Ph.D. Academic Writers in Writing English Research Article Abstracts for International Journal Publication
|Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning|
|دوره 13، شماره 28، اسفند 2021، صفحه 147-171 اصل مقاله (754.68 K)|
|نوع مقاله: Research Paper|
|شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22034/elt.2021.46264.2399|
|Behnaz Hosseingholipour* 1؛ Zari Saeedi1؛ Esmaeel Ali Salimi1؛ Sara Keshkar2|
|1Department of English Language and Literature, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran.|
|2Department of Sports Management, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran.|
|Writing effective and persuasive manuscripts for submission to the high-indexed Iranian and international English-medium journals for the purpose of publication deserves having to-the-point knowledge and proficiency, which the Non-Native English writers of the non-English speaking countries seem to be lacking. Therefore, researchers need to identify problems and challenges that the group of writers encounter in the field of English for Research Publication Purposes (ERPP). Therefore, this study aims to identify the ERPP needs of the Physical Education Ph.D. students and writers. Hence, interviews were conducted with a group of Physical Education content experts and Ph.D. students to identify the writers’ problems and challenges. The interviews were tape recorded as the participants had already been informed of the recordings and research aim. The tape recordings were then transcribed and analyzed in the thematic analysis and the grounded theory methods. The data analysis came up with four major themes (gained in the selective coding stage), 20 sub-themes (gained in the axial coding stage) and 83 themes (gained in the initial/open coding stage). The four major themes were `problem with language,’ `problem with content,’ `problem with journals,’ and `the demotivating factors.’ The fourth major theme, i.e., `the demotivating factors’, consisted of the sub-heading the technological illiteracy problem, which should be regarded as the novelty feature of this paper. The research is useful for material designers and instructors of the English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP) and others to offer tailor-made education to the tertiary level Physical Education students.|
|َArticle؛ ERPP؛ ESAP؛ Manuscripts؛ Perceptions؛ Sports؛ Technology؛ Writers|
Agampodi, S. (2013). What are the most popular reasons editors usually reject your paper for? Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_are_the_most_popular_reasons_editors_usually_reject_your_paper_for/520bb222d039b1a219c3b72c/citation/download.
Atai, M. R., Karimi, M. N., & Asadnia, F. (2018). Conceptions of research publication among Iranian doctoral students of applied linguistics: Cherish the wish to publish or rush to perish. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21(1), 29-65.
Belcher, D. D. (2007). Seeking acceptance in an English-only research world. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(1), 1-22.
Bordage, G. (2001). Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: The strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports. Academic Medicine Journal, 76(9), 889-896.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research in the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York, NY: Greenwood Press.
Campanario, J. M., & Acedo, E. (2007). Rejecting highly cited papers: The views of scientists who encounter resistance to their discoveries from other scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(5), 734-743.
Chien, S. C. (2019). Writing for scholarly publication in English for Taiwanese researchers in the field of English teaching. SAGE Open, 9(3), 1-15.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA Pearson.
Flowerdew, J., & Li, Y. (2009). English or Chinese? The trade-off between local and international publication among Chinese academics in the humanities and social sciences. Second Language Writing, 18(1), 1-16.
Giraldo, F. (2019). An English for Research Publication Purposes course: Gains, challenges, and Perceptions. GiST Education and Learning Research Journal, 18, 198-220.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
Hyland, K. (2008). Disciplinary voices: Interactions in research writing. English Text Construction, 1(1), 5-22.
Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. London: Longman.
Jafari, S., Jafari, S., & Kafipour, R. (2018). English article writing of Iranian doctoral students. American Journal of Educational Research, 6(9), 1251-1256.
Khadilkar, S. S. (2018). Rejection blues: Why do research papers get rejected? The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India, 68(4), 239-241.
Khatri, N., Varma, A., & Budhwar, P. (2017). Commonly observed shortcomings in manuscripts submitted to management journals. IIMB management review, 29(3), 203-209.
Klimas, J. (2015). Fifty shades of rejection. UniversityAffairs.ca. Retrieved from https://www.universityaffairs.ca/opinion/the-black-hole/fifty-shades-of-rejection/
Lillis, T., & Curry, M. J. (2011). Academic writing in a global context: The politics and practices of publishing in English. Abingdon: Routledge.
Mansouri Nejad, A., Qaracholloo, M., & Rezaei, S. (2020). Iranian doctoral students’ shared experience of English-medium publication: the case of humanities and social sciences. The International Journal of Higher Education Research, 80(2), 255-271.
McGrath, (2014). Parallel language use in academic and outreach publication: A case study of policy and practice. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 13, 5–15.
McKinley, J., & Rose, H. (2018). Conceptualizations of language errors, standards, norms and nativeness in English for research publication purposes: An analysis of journal submission guidelines. Journal of Second Language Writing, 42, 1-11.
Mukherjee, D. (2018, March 7). 11 reasons why research papers are rejected [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://blog.typeset.io/11-reasons-why-research-papers-are-rejected-3e272b633186
Mungra, P., & Webber, P. (2010). Peer review process in medical research publications: Language and content comments. English for Specific Purposes, 29(1), 43-53.
Nezakatgoo, B. & Fathi, J. (2019). Second language writing through blogs: An investigation of learner autonomy. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, 11(2), 131-160.
Pierson, D. J. (2004). The top 10 reasons why manuscripts are not accepted for publication, Respiratory care. 49(10), 1246-1252.
Rezaei, S., & Seyri, H. (2019). Iranian doctoral students’ perceptions of publication in English. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 11(4), 941-954. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-02-2019-0040
Saeedi, Z., & Hossein-Gholipour, B. (2019). Cross disciplinary rhetorical-linguistic variations in Physical Education research article Abstracts in English as a lingua franca for academia context. Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(4), 64-85.
Schuler, E. (2013). An empirical study of Chinese subsidiaries’ decision-making autonomy in Germany. Asian Business & Management, 12, 321–350.
Shohamy, E. (2008). Language policy and language assessment: The relationship. Current Issues in Language Planning, 9(3), 363-373.
Swales, J. (1996). Occluded genres in the academy: the case of the submission letter. In Ventola, E; Mauranen, A. (Eds). Academic writing: Intercultural and textual issues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tahririan, M. H., & Sadri, E. (2013). Peer reviewers’ comments on research articles submitted by Iranian researchers. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 32(3), 107-123.
Uzuner, S. (2008). Multilingual scholars’ participation in core/global academic communities: A literature review, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7, 250–263.
Von Elm, E., Costanza, M. C., Walder, B., & Tramèr, M. R. (2003). More insight into the fate of biomedical meeting abstracts: a systematic review. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 3(1), 12–22. Available at http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471–2288/3/12. Accessed August 11, 2004
Wincka, J.C., Fonsecab, J.A., Azevedob, L.F., Wedzichac, J.A. (2011). To publish or perish: How to review a manuscript. Rev Port Pneumol. 17(2), 96-103.
Zare, J., Mahmoudi-Gahrouei, V., Ketabi, S., & Keivanloo-Shahrestanaki, Z. (2016). English for research publication purposes: The case of scholarly peer review comments. Ibérica, Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, (32), 153-177.
Zhang, H., Patton, D., Kenney, M. (2013). Building global-class universities: Assessing the impact of the 985 projects. Research Policy, 42(3), 765–775.
Zheng, Y., & Guo, X. (2018). Publishing in and about English: Challenges and opportunities of Chinese multilingual scholars’ language practices in academic publishing. Language Policy, 18(1), 107–130.
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 296
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 190