Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives
This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education a...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2015transfer abstract |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Umfang: |
11 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries - Gerardo, Michael L. ELSEVIER, 2014transfer abstract, JEAP, Amsterdam [u.a.] |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:17 ; year:2015 ; pages:63-73 ; extent:11 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
ELV034431977 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ELV034431977 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230625200852.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 180603s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a GBVA2015005000023.pica |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)ELV034431977 | ||
| 035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S1475-1585(15)00008-9 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | |a 400 | |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 400 |q DE-600 |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 570 |q VZ |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 540 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 35.17 |2 bkl | ||
| 084 | |a 58.50 |2 bkl | ||
| 084 | |a 43.12 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2015transfer abstract | |
| 300 | |a 11 | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. | ||
| 520 | |a This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. | ||
| 650 | 7 | |a Discourse |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Reader perceptions |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Institutional contexts |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Personal statement |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a PhD application |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Interviews |2 Elsevier | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |n Elsevier Science |a Gerardo, Michael L. ELSEVIER |t Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries |d 2014transfer abstract |d JEAP |g Amsterdam [u.a.] |w (DE-627)ELV017542022 |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:17 |g year:2015 |g pages:63-73 |g extent:11 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 35.17 |j Katalyse |q VZ |
| 936 | b | k | |a 58.50 |j Umwelttechnik: Allgemeines |q VZ |
| 936 | b | k | |a 43.12 |j Umweltchemie |q VZ |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 17 |j 2015 |h 63-73 |g 11 | ||
| 953 | |2 045F |a 400 | ||
| author_variant |
y l t c ylt yltc |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
chiuyuanlitiffany:2015----:esnlttmnipdplctosaeeprea |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2015transfer abstract |
| bklnumber |
35.17 58.50 43.12 |
| publishDate |
2015 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 doi GBVA2015005000023.pica (DE-627)ELV034431977 (ELSEVIER)S1475-1585(15)00008-9 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 400 DE-600 570 VZ 540 VZ 35.17 bkl 58.50 bkl 43.12 bkl Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany verfasserin aut Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives 2015transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. Discourse Elsevier Reader perceptions Elsevier Institutional contexts Elsevier Personal statement Elsevier PhD application Elsevier Interviews Elsevier Enthalten in Elsevier Science Gerardo, Michael L. ELSEVIER Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries 2014transfer abstract JEAP Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV017542022 volume:17 year:2015 pages:63-73 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_70 35.17 Katalyse VZ 58.50 Umwelttechnik: Allgemeines VZ 43.12 Umweltchemie VZ AR 17 2015 63-73 11 045F 400 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 doi GBVA2015005000023.pica (DE-627)ELV034431977 (ELSEVIER)S1475-1585(15)00008-9 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 400 DE-600 570 VZ 540 VZ 35.17 bkl 58.50 bkl 43.12 bkl Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany verfasserin aut Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives 2015transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. Discourse Elsevier Reader perceptions Elsevier Institutional contexts Elsevier Personal statement Elsevier PhD application Elsevier Interviews Elsevier Enthalten in Elsevier Science Gerardo, Michael L. ELSEVIER Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries 2014transfer abstract JEAP Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV017542022 volume:17 year:2015 pages:63-73 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_70 35.17 Katalyse VZ 58.50 Umwelttechnik: Allgemeines VZ 43.12 Umweltchemie VZ AR 17 2015 63-73 11 045F 400 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 doi GBVA2015005000023.pica (DE-627)ELV034431977 (ELSEVIER)S1475-1585(15)00008-9 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 400 DE-600 570 VZ 540 VZ 35.17 bkl 58.50 bkl 43.12 bkl Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany verfasserin aut Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives 2015transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. Discourse Elsevier Reader perceptions Elsevier Institutional contexts Elsevier Personal statement Elsevier PhD application Elsevier Interviews Elsevier Enthalten in Elsevier Science Gerardo, Michael L. ELSEVIER Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries 2014transfer abstract JEAP Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV017542022 volume:17 year:2015 pages:63-73 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_70 35.17 Katalyse VZ 58.50 Umwelttechnik: Allgemeines VZ 43.12 Umweltchemie VZ AR 17 2015 63-73 11 045F 400 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 doi GBVA2015005000023.pica (DE-627)ELV034431977 (ELSEVIER)S1475-1585(15)00008-9 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 400 DE-600 570 VZ 540 VZ 35.17 bkl 58.50 bkl 43.12 bkl Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany verfasserin aut Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives 2015transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. Discourse Elsevier Reader perceptions Elsevier Institutional contexts Elsevier Personal statement Elsevier PhD application Elsevier Interviews Elsevier Enthalten in Elsevier Science Gerardo, Michael L. ELSEVIER Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries 2014transfer abstract JEAP Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV017542022 volume:17 year:2015 pages:63-73 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_70 35.17 Katalyse VZ 58.50 Umwelttechnik: Allgemeines VZ 43.12 Umweltchemie VZ AR 17 2015 63-73 11 045F 400 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 doi GBVA2015005000023.pica (DE-627)ELV034431977 (ELSEVIER)S1475-1585(15)00008-9 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 400 DE-600 570 VZ 540 VZ 35.17 bkl 58.50 bkl 43.12 bkl Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany verfasserin aut Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives 2015transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. Discourse Elsevier Reader perceptions Elsevier Institutional contexts Elsevier Personal statement Elsevier PhD application Elsevier Interviews Elsevier Enthalten in Elsevier Science Gerardo, Michael L. ELSEVIER Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries 2014transfer abstract JEAP Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV017542022 volume:17 year:2015 pages:63-73 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_70 35.17 Katalyse VZ 58.50 Umwelttechnik: Allgemeines VZ 43.12 Umweltchemie VZ AR 17 2015 63-73 11 045F 400 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:17 year:2015 pages:63-73 extent:11 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:17 year:2015 pages:63-73 extent:11 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| bklname |
Katalyse Umwelttechnik: Allgemeines Umweltchemie |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Discourse Reader perceptions Institutional contexts Personal statement PhD application Interviews |
| dewey-raw |
400 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2015-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
ELV017542022 |
| dewey-sort |
3400 |
| id |
ELV034431977 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV034431977</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230625200852.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">180603s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">GBVA2015005000023.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV034431977</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S1475-1585(15)00008-9</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">400</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">400</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">570</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">540</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">35.17</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">58.50</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">43.12</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Discourse</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Reader perceptions</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Institutional contexts</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Personal statement</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">PhD application</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Interviews</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Gerardo, Michael L. ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries</subfield><subfield code="d">2014transfer abstract</subfield><subfield code="d">JEAP</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV017542022</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:17</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:63-73</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">35.17</subfield><subfield code="j">Katalyse</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">58.50</subfield><subfield code="j">Umwelttechnik: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">43.12</subfield><subfield code="j">Umweltchemie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">17</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield><subfield code="h">63-73</subfield><subfield code="g">11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="953" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="2">045F</subfield><subfield code="a">400</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany |
| spellingShingle |
Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany ddc 400 ddc 570 ddc 540 bkl 35.17 bkl 58.50 bkl 43.12 Elsevier Discourse Elsevier Reader perceptions Elsevier Institutional contexts Elsevier Personal statement Elsevier PhD application Elsevier Interviews Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives |
| authorStr |
Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)ELV017542022 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
400 - Language 570 - Life sciences; biology 540 - Chemistry & allied sciences |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
elsevier |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
400 400 DE-600 570 VZ 540 VZ 35.17 bkl 58.50 bkl 43.12 bkl Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives Discourse Elsevier Reader perceptions Elsevier Institutional contexts Elsevier Personal statement Elsevier PhD application Elsevier Interviews Elsevier |
| topic |
ddc 400 ddc 570 ddc 540 bkl 35.17 bkl 58.50 bkl 43.12 Elsevier Discourse Elsevier Reader perceptions Elsevier Institutional contexts Elsevier Personal statement Elsevier PhD application Elsevier Interviews |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 400 ddc 570 ddc 540 bkl 35.17 bkl 58.50 bkl 43.12 Elsevier Discourse Elsevier Reader perceptions Elsevier Institutional contexts Elsevier Personal statement Elsevier PhD application Elsevier Interviews |
| topic_browse |
ddc 400 ddc 570 ddc 540 bkl 35.17 bkl 58.50 bkl 43.12 Elsevier Discourse Elsevier Reader perceptions Elsevier Institutional contexts Elsevier Personal statement Elsevier PhD application Elsevier Interviews |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
ELV017542022 |
| dewey-tens |
400 - Language 570 - Life sciences; biology 540 - Chemistry |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)ELV017542022 |
| title |
Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV034431977 (ELSEVIER)S1475-1585(15)00008-9 |
| title_full |
Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives |
| author_sort |
Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany |
| journal |
Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries |
| journalStr |
Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
400 - Language 500 - Science |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2015 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
63 |
| author_browse |
Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany |
| container_volume |
17 |
| physical |
11 |
| class |
400 400 DE-600 570 VZ 540 VZ 35.17 bkl 58.50 bkl 43.12 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 |
| dewey-full |
400 570 540 |
| title_sort |
personal statement in phd applications: gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives |
| title_auth |
Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives |
| abstract |
This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. |
| abstractGer |
This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_70 |
| title_short |
Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| ppnlink |
ELV017542022 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T21:06:08.822Z |
| _version_ |
1803865260107497472 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV034431977</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230625200852.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">180603s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">GBVA2015005000023.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV034431977</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S1475-1585(15)00008-9</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">400</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">400</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">570</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">540</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">35.17</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">58.50</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">43.12</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chiu, Yuan-Li Tiffany</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This paper explores academic readers' views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics' interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Discourse</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Reader perceptions</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Institutional contexts</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Personal statement</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">PhD application</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Interviews</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Gerardo, Michael L. ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries</subfield><subfield code="d">2014transfer abstract</subfield><subfield code="d">JEAP</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV017542022</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:17</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:63-73</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">35.17</subfield><subfield code="j">Katalyse</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">58.50</subfield><subfield code="j">Umwelttechnik: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">43.12</subfield><subfield code="j">Umweltchemie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">17</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield><subfield code="h">63-73</subfield><subfield code="g">11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="953" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="2">045F</subfield><subfield code="a">400</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4023743 |