Brian, i'd like to have a stab at answering your question if I may:

"Why does the language of MPhil/PhD writing have to be couched in such
a way to be acceptable to a minority audience in universities but
alien to the world  of practice?"

I think it may be because people doing a MPhil/PhD are implicitly, or
maybe explicitly aware that if they write in terms that an audience of
teachers may be comfortable with the unintended consequence of this is
that they may well be advised to change their language by supervisors,
or face losing marks when academics who mark their paper do not
observe what they envisage as 'a good thesis'. What is considered
'good writing' or a 'good thesis' is indeed subjective, and often
tacit I think, and meeting the expectations of one group, academics,
seems to involve ignoring the expectations of the other,
professionals. It seems that there is more to lose, such as good marks
and positive feedback, by ignoring the expectations of the
professionals rather than the academics- so this is a common course of
action.

Do you agree that changing the language that is used when completing
and MPhil or PhD would have the consequences described above?

Cheers,
Aaron
P.S. I am new to this group so probably nobody knows me. I became
interested in Living Theory Action Research through my correspondence
with Moira Laidlaw when working as a teacher trainer for VSO in Ghana.
I'm currently teaching early primary in a remote indigenous school in
Australia- my home country.

On 1/14/13, Brian wakeman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> This discussion echoes previous contributions of mine about 'language'.
> Jack and L.Stenhouse before him differentiated between education research
> and educational research.
> Sadly, if the language of "educational research" is inaccessible to to the
> professionals I meet regularly in the course of mentoring, then we are
> shooting ourselves in the foot.
> The very people we wish to reach, and perhaps influence, are put-off by the
> technical and 'non-professional' (not un-professional) language research
> reports can use.
> Why does the language of MPhil/PhD writing have to be couched in such a way
> to be acceptable to a minority audience in universities but alien to the
> world  of practice?
>
>  I recently reviewed a paper for a professional research journal about
> mentoring practice with trainee/probationary teachers. I was immediately
> captivated by the narrative, relating what seemed to be relevant in the
> paper  to my practice. This naturalistic generalisation can be a powerful
> means of implementing insights of research to readers' situations.
>
> I have appealed before that we beware of language that only group initiates
> understand.
> Why the suspicion I meet in staffrooms about 'research suggests
> that.......'.?
> Why the apparent gap between the language, density and inaccessibility of
> some research papers and the real professional discourse?
>
> Of course, happily this is not true of many papers, but the issue of
> 'audience' is very real.
> A ditty for a happier New Year:
>
> Audience
>
> Is  'audience' is everything
> And
> 'genre' the next best thing?
> A
> dense academic style
> (References
> by the pile)
> Is
> fine for the 'viva'
> For
> the academy survivor.
> But
> for a professional read,
> For
> practitioners I plead:
> Write
> with clarity
> With
> accessibility
> For
> the profession.
> During a writing session
> Look
> to see who is 'peering'.
> Write
> for those who are hearing.
>
> From one who
> reads and reviews
> Papers that Journals refuse,
> Publishing what
> folks on the floor
> Alas, will
> simply ignore.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>________________________________
>> From: Robyn Pound <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Sent: Monday, 14 January 2013, 9:49
>>Subject: Re: Researching Our Own Practice
>>
>>
>> Thank you Lesley. I apreciate your honest believable explanation.  I was
>> wondering how things had changed over such a short time.  Sounds like its
>> going to take strong values, determination and time and points to the
>> importance of what you are doing. (Found you in my spam bex if you find
>> replies are slow coming)
>>Robyn
>>.
>>
>>
>>>________________________________
>>>From: Lesley Wood <[log in to unmask]>
>>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>>Sent: Saturday, 12 January 2013, 9:52
>>>Subject: Re: Researching Our Own Practice
>>>
>>>
>>>Hi Margaret, Pip and all
>>>We have found that one has to be very careful in terms of language, I
>>> don't think we academics realise how we come across some times. In our
>>> community work, a Principal colleague has coined the term "indigenous
>>> script" - he has realised that he needs to find a language that his
>>> community members, who are English second language and often barely
>>> literate in any language, understand, without being too condescending.  I
>>> do agree that we can communicate even complicated ideas in a clear manner
>>> - see the writing of Jean McNiff and Ortrun Zuber-Skerritt for evidence
>>> of this, as well as Yolande.
>>>
>>>On the subject of Jack's original e mail, we, a group of colleagues and
>>> myself , would like to form part of this conversation.  I will ask them
>>> to subscribe themselves.  We are working at a traditionally Afrikaans
>>> campus, which, due to business decisions, has positioned itself as the
>>> leading Afrikaans university in South Africa - the traditional ones such
>>> as Stellenbosch and Pretoria have transformed more than most Afrikaans
>>> parents are comfortable with. Decisions on curriculum, language, social
>>> events etc at our campus is often dictated by what the PARENTS of the
>>> students want,because they pay very high fees, and so the unversity
>>> experience for our students, while a very nice one for them (it is a
>>> wonderful campus, with great hostels and sport facilities), does not help
>>> to challenge the ideas they have grown up with.  They leave university,
>>> thinking the same way that their parents think - and this is not really
>>> helping to transform our society.
>  An example is that HIV and AIDS was removed from the curriculum for
> pre-service teachers because the parents objected to its inclusion (you
> might talk about sex to their children) - this in a country which has the
> highest HIV rates in the world and where teachers can play such an important
> role in helping to turn the tide.  It is not so much the language policy
> that is the problem, but the culture associated with it, which is so imbued
> with specific political/historical ideologies that are racist and exlusivist
> - in direct contrast to our desire as academics to influence students
> towards a more relational and inclusive ontology, and encourage celebration
> of diversity.
>>>
>>>As a research professor, this affects my work, since the approach to
>>> research in education is mostly traditional, conservative and still
>>> places the academic as the expert. I must admit that it is easier for me
>>> to challenge this, as I have been successful in attracting funding and
>>> slowly a small body of the younger/newer researchers are showing interest
>>> in more participatory and self reflective methodologies. So, I am
>>> privileged in this way to be able to influence post graduate students and
>>> colleagues.  The university has proclaimed this campus to be a research
>>> campus and are pushing internationalisation, so change in research
>>> paradigms is needed and should be easier to attain than change in the
>>> under graduate curriculum.
>>>
>>>However, my colleagues who come from a non-white background, and who are
>>> teaching at under-graduate level, are finding  it very difficult to live
>>> out their values in this climate.  i will let them speak for themselves,
>>> but one confided to me she feels she is only "half living", because she
>>> has to compromise her values so much.  Although nothing is said directly,
>>> the ruling belief is that" the Afrikaans way is the right way and we
>>> intend to keep it that way", mainly because it attracts so much
>>> business. As a white person, many things are said in front of me that
>>> indicate a racist and non-transformed ideology still rules. Since my
>>> values reject any form of discrimination, racial superiority or bigotry,
>>> I  often feel frustrated and downright sad. We do believe that many want
>>> change, and often cultural insensivity is not intended -  there is a
>>> need to raise consciousness about this. However, many attempts at
>>> transformation are shut down by
>  university management - and people are scared to speak their minds in case
> it harms their career chances.  It is a great place with great potential, so
> we are keen on working to influence change.
>>>
>>>sorry for the long e mail, but it has been rather cathartic for me!
>>>
>>>Lesleyx
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>PROF LESLEY WOOD
>>>Professor: Research Focus Area
>>>Faculty of Education Sciences
>>>(Potchefstroom Campus)
>>>NORTH-WEST UNIVERSITY
>>>POTCHEFSTROOM
>>>South Africa
>>>Tel +27-18-299 4770
>>>Mobile: +27 082 290 9202
>>>Fax+27-18-299 4788
>>>http://www.nwu.ac.za
>>>( http://www.hreid.co.za/ )
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Xtra 01/11/13 9:14 PM >>>
>>>
>>>Hi Margaret
>>>
>>>
>>>Thanks for this reply. One of the things it shows me is the difficulty of
>>> communicating via email. I was NOT arguing for non-use of academic voice,
>>> rather for a greater awareness by academics of the need to induct
>>> students into this way of writing.
>>>
>>>
>>>For that reason, your reference to the Swales and Feak book will be useful
>>> for our Student Learning Centre, now part of a wider Centre that our
>>> Teaching Development Unit is in. I will certainly pass that on. And I do
>>> know both Yoland Wadsworth's work, and the woman herself. You are right;
>>> she does a lot of work with community groups and it is for them that she
>>> probably wrote the social research book. I have attended several action
>>> research conferences in Australia now, at which some of these folk
>>> (Yoland's 'on the ground' researchers) have attended. They have commented
>>> on the disinviting language used by some of the university-based
>>> attendees, so it is probably to help them to make sense of ways of doing
>>> research that Yoland wrote the book.
>>>
>>>
>>>Basically, I think we need 'both/and' not 'either/or'. I hope this makes
>>> sense to you Margaret, and thank you again for your considered response
>>> to the conversation.
>>>
>>>
>>>Warm regards
>>>
>>>
>>>Pip
>>>
>>>On 12/01/2013, at 6:54 AM, Margaret Riel <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>Diane and Pip,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Academic writing does not have to be "off putting" (to use a non academic
>>>> phrase) or difficult to read (more formal).  You can write in a formal
>>>> stance and yet still communicate clearly with multiple audiences.  If
>>>> you replace "ah-ha moments" with "insights," that still gets the idea
>>>> across and might even do so in a clearer way.  A more formal way of
>>>> writing is like more formal dress, it can communicate a sense of respect
>>>> for others.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I was motivated to respond because I there is a book  I recently acquired
>>>> by Yoland Wadsworth-- Do it yourself social research.  The author seems
>>>> to have positions in Melbourne and the University of Cincinnati.   The
>>>> book is an attempt to make social science accessible to community action
>>>> groups that might find social science language and concepts difficult to
>>>> understand.  While I find the content quite useful, I don't use the book
>>>> with my students because of an overall anti-intellectual or
>>>> anti-research approach that I find counter-productive. With just a bit
>>>> of editing of langauge, the book would be so helpful.  I have spent my
>>>> career trying to bridge the lack of respect that exists between teachers
>>>> and educational researchers, and books like this don't help.  Both sides
>>>> of the dividie are responsible for the lack of connection.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Imagine if doctors and medical researchers were dismissive of each
>>>> other's work.  Where would that leave medicine?  Would you want to see a
>>>> doctor that ignores all medical research as useless?  Or would trust
>>>> medical research team that never made any effort to work with or
>>>> communicated with doctors?  No, we want these groups to work together.
>>>>  It sometimes causes trouble-- doctors receive financial incentives to
>>>> engage in certain practices or prescribe a particular drug--but that is
>>>> why we get multiple opinions.  Even with these problems we don't assume
>>>> that the solution is for the two groups to ignore each other's work.  We
>>>> want them to overlap.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>In education we seem to have educators and researchers in almost
>>>> non-intersecting loops.  This became even more apparent one year when we
>>>>  took our master level students to a research conference in place of an
>>>> education conference.  A number of our mid-career teachers said they
>>>> were completely unaware that there were all of these people studying
>>>> what they do.  They were so disconnected from research that they did not
>>>> know these people existed!  That is the disconnect in education.
>>>>  Teachers talk to teachers and researchers talk to researchers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>So I am advocating for a formal language that communicates ideas in
>>>> elegant ways to multiple audiences.  Let's not assume that
>>>> conversational language is needed to  talk to practitioners.   It think
>>>> this can be insulting.  It takes some work to dress up language but the
>>>> effect is more lovely prose.  A book I highly recommend to my student is
>>>> Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Tasks and Skills. This
>>>> book by Swales and Feak has many exercises to help students master
>>>> academic writing.  For example in one exercise students  replace phrases
>>>> with research verbs. So  "looking into" becomes "investigate, " or "came
>>>> up with" is replaced by "developed."  These are small changes, but the
>>>> taken together these more formal word choices  create a document that
>>>> appears more elegant and is more enjoyable to read.  On the other hand,
>>>> I  urge my researcher colleagues NOT to create and use acronyms. Again
>>>> one small thing, but I don't think a
>  reader  should be expected to learn a new language to make sense of a
> paper.  Space is not the precious, and language is much more elegant that
> these strings of letters that quickly lose meaning.  Writing elegantly and
> simply is a goal to strive for.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I hope you will these post as both respectful and helpful.  I don't want
>>>> to elevate one way of speaking as better-- any more than I would say
>>>> that suits are better then sweats.  They each have their purpose.  But I
>>>> think that as educators, we should learn how to look and talk like
>>>> professionals when it is appropriate, and also know to joke and converse
>>>> in a comfortable way in other contexts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Cheers!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Margaret
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>>Margaret Riel <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>Chair M. A in Learning Technologies
>>>>Pepperdine University
>>>>   Phone: (760) 618-1314
>>>>   http://faculty.pepperdine.edu/mriel/office
>>>>   BLOG: http://mindmaps.typepad.com/
>>>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>>
>>>
>>>Vrywaringsklousule / Disclaimer:
>>> http://www.nwu.ac.za/it/gov-man/disclaimer.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>>