Understanding how International Graduate Students in Canada Reconstruct their Writing Identities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was designed to explore the reconstruction of writing identity of international students in Canada. This study was conducted based on the concepts of writing identity proposed by Ivanič, who classified writing identity as autobiographical self, discoursal self, self as author and possibilities for self-hood, to inform that writing identity is (re)constructed in the light of various influential factors. The data were collected from interviews and journals of four Chinese international graduate students from the University of Calgary regarding their intercultural perceptions and experiences of writing. Results indicated that the process of reconstruction of writing identity is fluid. Participants transformed their positionings as English academic writers in relation to the following impacts: (1) different disciplines and requirement of writing; (2) previous experiences; (3) ambient environment; and (4) discourse. In order to fit into the new academic discourse, some of the participants developed their L1 writing identity to a L2 writing identity, while some of them reconciled L1 and L2 writing identity to a hybrid identity or a shifted identity. The implications of this study revealed the importance of teaching international students with conventions of academic writing, and helping them change the Chinese way of writing and thinking since writing is likewise an interacting between their written texts and thoughts. Meanwhile, the discipline-specific workshops and courses were found useful in facilitating international students’ improvement on writing performance and (re)construction of their writing identity as English academic writers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".