My research, situated in writing centers, focuses on oral response to L2 writing. I used conversation analysis (CA) to describe and analyze 23 video-recorded interactions between graduate-student tutors and graduate-student L2 tutees. Analyses focused on the sequential nature of talk-in-interaction and the strategies used by interactants to initiate, continue, and repair interactions.
Analyzed descriptions are provided of the structure and function of three of the four components of tutorials—the opening, agenda-setting, and closing components. Opening components include (minimally) summons and responses. Additionally, they may include greetings, introductions, identity checks, invitations to begin the tutorial, small talk, and institutional business. Agenda setting components typically include determining the what, the priority, and the how of the agenda and may also include institutional business. Finally, closing components may begin with possible pre-closings such as assessments, time checks, and "anything else?" questions. Closing components must include a terminal sequence; however, they may also include summaries, prescriptions, appreciations, and institutional business.
Analyses reveal tensions caused by inequalities or perceived inequalities in epistemic authority and interactants orientation to those inequalities. Discussion explores what it means to be an international student with sufficient educational capital to be accepted into a program at a research university in the U.S. but still struggle without the "new" educational capital required. Analyses also reveal that writing center tutors need more effective training. In particular, tutors should spend the first few minutes learning about the tutee and informing the tutee about the writing center tutorial.
Future research should focus on tutorials in a variety of institutions of higher learning with participants including both L1 and L2 undergraduate, graduate, and adjunct-faculty tutors and tutees. Differences and similarities among immigrants, international students, and other L2 participants (both tutees and tutors) must be examined. More comparisons also need to be made about first time and returning tutees including the schemas they have or have not developed and their expectations for the tutorial. Finally, we need to know more about how the genre of the text affects the trajectory and outcome of the tutorial.
|Commitee:||Bergmann, Linda, Blythe, Stuart, Roberts, Felicia|
|School Location:||United States -- Indiana|
|Source:||DAI-A 74/07(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Bilingual education, Communication, Language|
|Keywords:||Conversation analysis, International graduate students, Second language writers, Talk-in-interaction, Tutorials, Writing centers|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be