| Title: |
More than Words: PhD Students and Critical Reading |
| Language: |
English |
| Authors: |
Beverly FitzPatrick; Mike Chong; James Tuff; Sana Jamil; Khalid Al Hariri; Taylor Stocks |
| Source: |
Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education. 2024 15(3):306-322. |
| Availability: |
Emerald Publishing Limited. Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, West Yorkshire, BD16 1WA, UK. Tel: +44-1274-777700; Fax: +44-1274-785201; e-mail: emerald@emeraldinsight.com; Web site: http://www.emerald.com/insight |
| Peer Reviewed: |
Y |
| Page Count: |
17 |
| Publication Date: |
2024 |
| Document Type: |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
| Education Level: |
Higher Education; Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: |
Doctoral Students; Critical Reading; Reading Comprehension; Participatory Research; Content Area Reading; Reading Processes; Reading Strategies |
| DOI: |
10.1108/SGPE-06-2023-0050 |
| ISSN: |
2398-4686 |
| Abstract: |
Purpose: Many PhD students have strong reading comprehension, but some struggle with how to read critically. The purpose of this study is to understand what reading looks like for PhD students, what they are doing when they read scholarly texts and how they bring these texts to life in meaningful ways. Design/methodology/approach: The authors conducted a self-study using a phenomenological research approach. Five PhD students collected data on their academic reading for three weeks, including the references, purpose for reading, and what they did as part of the reading process. Second, students analyzed their reading processes according to Paul and Elder's (2006) intellectual standards. Third, students participated in two semi-structured discussions about the standards in relation to doctoral reading. Findings: Reading is inseparable from thinking, with Paul and Elder's (2006) intellectual standards (e.g. clarity, relevance, logic and fairness) playing an essential role in the academic reading process. Alongside these cognitive aspects of reading, the affective domain also contributes to the reading process. Originality/value: This study is important because being able to read scholarly work is crucial for completing doctoral programs, conducting research, and publishing. We suggest that just as we need to teach writing, we need to acknowledge that many doctoral students need guidance to read scholarly texts, they need to be educated on the intellectual standards, and supervisors must rest their assumptions about doctoral reading and explicitly teach these processes. |
| Abstractor: |
As Provided |
| Entry Date: |
2024 |
| Accession Number: |
EJ1436778 |
| Database: |
ERIC |