La escritura académica como herramienta fundamental en la formación investigativa de estudiantes de posgrado: una revisión bibliográfica
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71068/gp000001Palabras clave:
escritura académica, alfabetización académica, formación investigativa, posgrado, revisión bibliográfica, retroalimentación.Resumen
La escritura académica constituye uno de los ejes vertebradores de la formación investigativa en el posgrado, aunque con frecuencia permanece invisible en los diseños curriculares. Este artículo presenta una revisión bibliográfica cuyo objetivo fue analizar el papel de la escritura académica en la formación de estudiantes de maestría y doctorado a partir de la literatura científica publicada preferentemente entre 2018 y 2022 en bases de datos Scopus y SciELO. Se examinaron 36 estudios empíricos y teóricos mediante un protocolo de análisis temático que consideró cuatro dimensiones: concepciones de la escritura, dificultades documentadas, estrategias didácticas y mecanismos de retroalimentación. Los resultados, derivados exclusivamente del análisis de la literatura revisada, indican que la escritura actúa como proceso sociocultural con valor epistémico, que las principales dificultades se concentran en la articulación de la voz propia con las fuentes y que las estrategias más efectivas combinan talleres de género, grupos de escritura, retroalimentación dialógica y coautoría supervisada. Se concluye que la formación investigativa depende de una institucionalización deliberada de la enseñanza de la escritura, que supere el supuesto de que el estudiante de posgrado "ya sabe escribir", y que articule la dimensión cognitiva, afectiva e identitaria del proceso.
Referencias
1. Gupta, S., Jaiswal, A., Paramasivam, A., & Kotecha, J. (2022). Academic writing challenges and supports: Perspectives of international doctoral students and their supervisors. Frontiers in Education, 7, 891534. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.891534
2. Inouye, K., & McAlpine, L. (2019). Developing academic identity: A review of the literature on doctoral writing and feedback. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.28945/4168
3. Badenhorst, C., Moloney, C., Rosales, J., Dyer, J., & Ru, L. (2019). Identity, voice and agency in two EAL doctoral writing contexts. Journal of Second Language Writing, 43, 4–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2018.05.001
4. Rey-Castillo, M., & Gómez-Zermeño, M. G. (2021). Dificultades en la escritura académica de estudiantes de maestría. Revista Electrónica Educare, 25(2), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.25-2.4
5. Lei, J., & Hu, G. (2019). Doctoral candidates’ dual role as student and expert scholarly writer: An activity theory perspective. English for Specific Purposes, 54, 62–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2018.12.003
6. Neupane Bastola, M., & Hu, G. (2021). ‘Chasing my supervisor all day long like a hungry child seeking her mother!’: Students’ perceptions of supervisory feedback. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, 101055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101055
7. Oluwole, D. O., Achadu, O. J., Asfour, F., Chakona, G., Mason, P., Mataruse, P., & McKenna, S. (2018). Postgraduate writing groups as spaces of agency development. South African Journal of Higher Education, 32(6), 370–381. https://doi.org/10.20853/32-6-2963
8. Colombo, L., Bruno, D. S., & Silva, V. S. (2020). Writing groups, social bonds and affectivity at the postgraduate level. Praxis Educativa, 24(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.19137/praxiseducativa-2020-240310
9. Lokhtina, I., Löfström, E., Cornér, S., & Castelló, M. (2022). In pursuit of sustainable co-authorship practices in doctoral supervision: Addressing the challenges of writing, authorial identity and integrity. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 59(1), 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2020.1799839
10. Jeyaraj, J. J., Too, W. K., & Lasito, E. E. (2022). A framework for supporting postgraduate research writing: Insights from students’ writing experiences. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(2), 405–419. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1849037
11. Langum, V., & Sullivan, K. P. H. (2020). Academic writing, scholarly identity, voice and the benefits and challenges of multilingualism: Reflections from Norwegian doctoral researchers in teacher education. Linguistics and Education, 60, 100883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2020.100883
12. Wang, M., & Parr, G. (2021). A Chinese doctoral student’s experience of L2 English academic writing in Australia: Negotiating practices and identities. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 49, 100944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100944
13. Doyle, S., Manathunga, C., Prinsen, G., Tallon, R., & Cornforth, S. (2018). African international doctoral students in New Zealand: Englishes, doctoral writing and intercultural supervision. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1339182
14. Carter, S., Sun, Q., & Jabeen, F. (2021). Doctoral writing: Learning to write and give feedback across cultures. Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education, 12(3), 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1108/SGPE-07-2020-0054
15. Xu, L., & Grant, B. (2020). Doctoral publishing and academic identity work: Two cases. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(7), 1502–1515. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1728522
16. Xu, L., & Hu, J. (2020). Language feedback responses, voices and identity (re)construction: Experiences of Chinese international doctoral students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57(6), 724–735. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2019.1593214
17. Xu, L., Teng, L. S., & Cai, J. (2021). Feedback engagement of Chinese international doctoral students. Studies in Continuing Education, 43(1), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2020.1718634
18. Sun, X., & Trent, J. (2022). Promoting agentive feedback engagement through dialogically minded approaches in doctoral writing supervision. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 59(4), 387–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2020.1861965
19. Liu, F., Du, J., Zhou, D., & Huang, B. (2021). Exploiting the potential of peer feedback: The combined use of face-to-face feedback and e-feedback in doctoral writing groups. Assessing Writing, 47, 100482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100482
20. Vacek, K., Donohue, W. J., Gates, A., Lee, A. S.-J., & Simpson, S. (2021). Seeking balance within personal writing ecologies: A collaborative autoethnography of a doctoral student writing group. Studies in Continuing Education, 43(1), 104–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2019.1703670
21. Kumar, V., & Aitchison, C. (2018). Peer facilitated writing groups: A programmatic approach to doctoral student writing. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(3), 360–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1391200
22. Cutri, J., Freya, A., Karlina, Y., Patel, S. V., Moharami, M., Zeng, S., Manzari, E., & Pretorius, L. (2021). Academic integrity at doctoral level: The influence of the imposter phenomenon and cultural differences on academic writing. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 17, 8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-021-00074-w
23. Johnson, E. M. (2019). Towards an enhanced view of doctoral writing environments: Learning alliances to reconceptualise practice. Policy Futures in Education, 17(2), 140–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210318774441
24. Mochizuki, N. (2019). The lived experience of thesis writers in group writing conferences: The quest for ‘perfect’ and ‘critical’. Journal of Second Language Writing, 43, 36–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2018.02.001
25. Kirkpatrick, K. J. (2019). Online doctoral students writing for scholarly publication. Computers and Composition, 52, 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2019.01.012
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2023 Luis David Bastidas González (Autor/a)
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
