Developing your 'researcher voice' in your publications and thesis
- Shared screen with speaker view
Nicole Phelan
13:56
Welcome to tonight's webinar Developing your 'researcher voice' in your publications & thesisby Cassily Charles
Nicole Phelan
14:10
If you have any questions please post them in the Q&A box on your screens
Nicole Phelan
14:23
If you have any tech issues please let me know here :)
Nicole Phelan
15:17
If you have not downloaded the hand out here it is https://www.digitalhealthcrc.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/HANDOUTDevelopingResearcherVoiceDHCRC2020.pdf
Annie Hepworth
18:31
Annie, PhD student studying delirium at UTS. No chooks but a cute dog.
Senada Meskin
18:45
Hi, my name is Senada. I am an PhD candidate at University of Canberra. No chickens here, few kangaroos though
Alex Lascu
18:48
I study skill acquisition and talent development for female cricketers, I'm at the bottom of Mt Stromlo in Canberra and I'm thankful there are no chooks in my apartment
rachael beldham-collins
19:01
Hi I am a radiation therapist interested in research capacity in a clinical setting.
Kathleen de Boer
19:01
Hi, I am Kathleen, doing a PhD in clinical psychology in Melbourne and I have recently adopted a cat
Robin Ladwig
19:06
Hallo, my area is queer studies and business management. Renovating the kitchen at the moment.
Millicent Crowe
19:10
Hi Everyone, Millie in Newcastle here again (#webinarstan) PhD in geoscience. No chooks but have a family of birds that have gone from 3 to 12 in the last couple of years. I think their nest is in our back tree - yet to confirm
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
19:11
Hello Cassily, My name is Varalakshmi and first year student of Phd in WSU.
Annie Hepworth
19:11
Interventions to manage delirium in acute hospitals
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
19:41
Health science
Alanoud Alobaidly
19:55
Hi Alanoud from Kuwait, looking into healthcare perceptions of working in a multidisciplinary team in managing T2DM.. No chooks here, just very hot and dry weather (end of summer)!
Naila Mukhtar
20:10
Hi, I am Naila. PhD stud from Macquarie University, working on embedded system security... no chooks but with my little kid hope he lets me focus:D
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
20:39
No chooks
Siobhan Heatwole
20:42
Hi everyone! I'm Siobhan, in my 3rd year of my PhD studying social behaviour in coral reef fishes :) No chooks, but two housemates! And lots of cute clownfish in the lab
Minh Quach
21:02
I am Minh, 2nd year at RMIT, working on Transnational education policy
Roheena Tahir
22:08
Roheena from Flinders University, Adelaide SA.
Sarah Turnbull
25:40
clarity
Millicent Crowe
25:48
Voice is clear
Lijun Summerhayes
25:56
research voice = independent voice
Rachael Wilks
26:03
efficiency
Farshid Anvari
26:20
do we use first person or third person
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
26:24
Confidence
Alex Lascu
26:32
Understood by all despite complexity
Robin Ladwig
26:35
Power structures
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
26:52
Clarity
Alex Lascu
27:25
Carl Woods always tells a wonderful story even with difficult concepts
Farshid Anvari
27:34
which discipline voice matters - in science it is simple
Sarah Turnbull
27:45
Richard Kearney
Millicent Crowe
32:39
Is it possible for individuals to change the TO in their chat .. ieTo: All panellists and attendeesSo we can all see what you are typing to Cassily? Some reason the default is set it to panellists only
Jenny Care
33:41
Millicent click the down arrow where it says all panellists and change it to all panellists and attendees
Sarah Yu
34:17
All good
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
34:30
Good
Martina Hale
34:39
Makes sense.
Jenny Care
34:53
:)
Alimila Hayixibayi
34:57
All good:)
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
36:01
avoid informal language
Jenny Care
41:10
yes
Senada Meskin
41:12
yes
Alimila Hayixibayi
41:14
yes
Lijun Summerhayes
42:19
cautious voice
Siobhan Heatwole
42:22
They disagree
Jenny Care
42:36
Non-committal
Jenny Care
44:13
Taking a position
Lijun Summerhayes
44:14
assertive
carolyn minnie
44:15
Clear
Megan Brewer
44:18
stronger
Jacki Johnson
44:19
more clear of their posirion
David Lim
44:20
an affirmative
Sarah Turnbull
44:22
clearer
Naila Mukhtar
44:27
clear
Senada Meskin
44:31
taking position
Siobhan Heatwole
44:34
Clearer statement of oppostion
Monojit Chakma
44:34
clear about Gorman's view
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
44:59
According to Gorman (2004a, 2004b),
Jenny Care
45:02
Stronger again
Sarah Yu
45:04
taking very strong stance
Zhao Koh
45:05
firm position
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
45:05
Good
carolyn minnie
45:06
critics of what?
Alimila Hayixibayi
45:06
More critical
anne marie halton
45:07
stronger opinion comes across
Jacki Johnson
45:08
Assertive
Rachael Wilks
45:09
agressive
Senada Meskin
45:10
consise
Jenny Care
45:11
when it says clearly demonstrate
Charmaine Hugo
45:11
confident in their claim
Megan Brewer
45:11
much more negative about Gorman
Julie Nixon
45:12
a bit defensive
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
45:14
Strong
Lijun Summerhayes
45:16
very strong
David Lim
45:18
an enforcement
Senada Meskin
45:34
defensive
Jenny Care
45:34
Defensive
carolyn minnie
45:34
Too aggressive, not respectful
Jacki Johnson
45:36
defensive
Megan Brewer
45:36
overly dramatic
Siobhan Heatwole
45:42
Defensive
Millicent Crowe
45:42
powerful
Rachael Wilks
45:46
polarising
MEREDITH BOX
46:05
nice
Alimila Hayixibayi
46:08
Mild
Lijun Summerhayes
46:10
supportive
Senada Meskin
46:12
not clear of the position
Naila Mukhtar
46:13
polite
Monojit Chakma
46:16
neutral
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
46:19
Formal
Jenny Care
46:19
Less clear
Gauri Sharma
46:19
lacks clarity
David Lim
46:19
a supportive opinion
carolyn minnie
46:22
Not as clear as 1
Rachael Wilks
46:22
facts
Jacki Johnson
46:23
less clear
Siobhan Heatwole
46:28
Not as clear, not stating the differences
anne marie halton
46:29
less critical of Gorman
Hir Jani
46:32
diplomatic
Megan Brewer
46:43
Connection between the two sentences is less clear
carolyn minnie
47:16
1
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
47:17
2
Alimila Hayixibayi
47:18
1
Minh Quach
47:18
Option 1
Senada Meskin
47:20
1
Jacki Johnson
47:22
1 and 2
Roheena Tahir
47:24
1
Zhao Koh
47:24
1/2/4
Annie Hepworth
47:25
1 and 4
Jenny Care
47:25
Health 1
Hir Jani
47:26
1 and 2
Megan Brewer
47:26
Original 1 and 2
Monojit Chakma
47:27
1
MEREDITH BOX
47:29
The earlier statements seem aggressive, and therefor less confident.
Rachael Wilks
47:29
4
Charmaine Hugo
47:34
4
Martina Hale
47:34
1, 2 or 4
Lijun Summerhayes
47:35
2
Millicent Crowe
47:36
all
David Lim
47:38
1 and 4
Alanoud Alobaidly
47:41
1,2 and 4
Sonia Curll
47:42
not 3
Naila Mukhtar
47:42
1 and 4
anne marie halton
47:47
not 3
Siobhan Heatwole
47:52
3 probably not acceptable, the rest ok depending on context
Gauri Sharma
47:54
1
Sarah Yu
47:55
1 or 4, but 4 seems not quite the same as the original paragraph
Xiaochi Liu
47:56
original one, 1, 2
Sarah Turnbull
48:08
I find 4 boring
Jenny Care
48:18
I agree with that sentiment re: 4
Monojit Chakma
48:18
4 is too tame
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
48:21
1 and 2 - strong approach
Yuwei Sun
48:25
Prefer 1 or 2
Monojit Chakma
48:29
3 is too strong
Jenny Care
48:54
attack, vindicate
Sarah Yu
48:55
"repeated attack"
Zhao Koh
48:56
attack
Sonia Curll
48:59
attack and vindicate
Senada Meskin
49:00
attack, vindicate
Martina Hale
49:01
attack & vindicate
carolyn minnie
49:02
repeated attack, vindicate
Monojit Chakma
49:02
attack
Hir Jani
49:03
vindictive
anne marie halton
49:06
repeated attack, vinducated
Jenny Care
49:06
vital
Charmaine Hugo
49:06
attack vs discussion
David Lim
49:08
repeated attack, vindicate
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
49:10
Repeated attack
Alanoud Alobaidly
49:11
attack and vindicate
Annie Hepworth
49:14
repeated attack, vindicate, vital
Jenny Care
49:43
our findings
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
49:50
our
Megan Brewer
49:54
The
carolyn minnie
49:55
The findings
David Lim
49:55
neutral
Jenny Care
49:55
current study
Megan Brewer
49:57
findings
Alanoud Alobaidly
49:58
current study
Hir Jani
50:00
present study
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
50:07
Current study
Siobhan Heatwole
50:09
Confidence of the author's about their study differ
Charmaine Hugo
50:09
vindicate vs suggest
Jenny Care
50:37
fascinating
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
50:41
No
Siobhan Heatwole
55:15
Could not download the handout unfortunatley
Jenny Care
55:25
Four we's, one I, on our
carolyn minnie
55:48
Jo is a practising teacher educator and uses personal pronouns to identify her voice in the text.
Zhao Koh
55:49
we (researchers of RIPPLE) I (author)
Naila Mukhtar
55:54
we and I, our
Senada Meskin
55:54
semi-visible. implying group writing referring to her self as "we" "our". I am non-English speaker, maybe there is something I do not know.
Jacki Johnson
55:56
Use of We and I
Hir Jani
56:02
Clearly visible. Repeatitve use of I and we
Annie Hepworth
56:02
'I explore'
Sarah Yu
56:11
sense of community
anne marie halton
56:16
we= community, I = researcher
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
56:18
We, I
Hir Jani
56:21
Different.
carolyn minnie
56:26
I am invisible in my thesis.
Senada Meskin
56:27
no pronouns in my writing, I am invisible.
Jenny Care
56:29
I tend to avoid I's and we's
Megan Brewer
56:31
Similar though less to use "I" mainly because the research is group based
David Lim
56:32
she's speaking with a collective voice
carolyn minnie
56:37
It is this research
Sarah Yu
56:41
won't be using I or we in my discipline
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
56:42
Similar
Jenny Care
56:44
rather use the authors
Rachael Wilks
56:45
We usually specify "this study"
Alanoud Alobaidly
56:46
speaking as a ythird erson
Annie Hepworth
56:50
different
Hir Jani
56:58
Third person is preferred.
Charmaine Hugo
57:38
different to what used to but am now doing qualitative research (thus really need to find and be comfortable with my “voice”)
Anggelia Essi Christian
58:01
passive sentences to avoid using "I, we, us, our, etc.."
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
58:22
Third person
Senada Meskin
01:04:41
yes
Hir Jani
01:04:42
Yes
carolyn minnie
01:04:44
Definitely
Naila Mukhtar
01:04:46
yes
Jenny Care
01:04:48
Tend to use the last one
Valeria Macalupu
01:04:48
Yes I use "this study" a lot!
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:04:50
This study - yes
Lijun Summerhayes
01:04:52
I use this a lot - “this study explores….”
Mohammad Morshedul Islam
01:05:08
Yes
Siobhan Heatwole
01:05:12
I use of all of these in scientific writing
Julie Nixon
01:05:39
do you stay in active or passive voice in a paragraph or whole section or can you change it
Jenny Care
01:06:07
challenge
Siobhan Heatwole
01:06:07
challenge
Zhao Koh
01:06:08
challenge
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:06:08
explore
Valeria Macalupu
01:06:09
challenge\
Hir Jani
01:06:11
challenge
carolyn minnie
01:06:11
challenge
Sarah Yu
01:06:12
challenge
Senada Meskin
01:06:13
challange
Lijun Summerhayes
01:06:15
challenge - riskier
Alimila Hayixibayi
01:06:15
challenge
MARY CASSAR CARTER
01:06:16
challenge
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:06:18
chellenge
Annie Hepworth
01:06:19
challenge
Mohammad Morshedul Islam
01:06:26
Challenge
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:06:41
Claim- explore
anne marie halton
01:07:29
challenge is more specific, explore is more open
Siobhan Heatwole
01:09:13
Even different words in place of challenge can sound less harsh e.g. challenge vs in contrast to, challenge vs contrary to what was found previously etc
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:11:01
noun groups
Zhao Koh
01:14:08
Sorry Cassily, one question - some english writing text that I read suggests that nominalisation may make the text harder for the readers, is this true?
Zhao Koh
01:15:14
Thanks Cassily
carolyn minnie
01:17:09
That can be cultural though, I am South African and consistently use must, should.
carolyn minnie
01:17:32
Am getting better.
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:19:17
4th one
Senada Meskin
01:19:42
Can you please ask everyone to click "all panelists and attendees" so we could see all comments. Thanks!
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:22:55
2
Jenny Care
01:23:13
Authors have shown that the children are the future (Houston)
Samia Michail
01:23:19
Houston (1986) has shown that children are the future
Senada Meskin
01:23:35
Huston's (1986) study shows that children are the future.
Thu Ha Dang
01:23:37
Research has shown that the children are the future (Houston, 1986)
Siobhan Heatwole
01:23:37
The study indicates that children are the future
anne marie halton
01:23:45
This study suggests ways in which children are the future
Yuwei Sun
01:23:47
Extensive evidence support that passive smoking is harmful to children. For example….
Sunil Abraham
01:23:50
Houston(1986) indicates that children are the future
Nicole Cormier
01:23:51
I would just remove the first sentence of the second example
Annie Hepworth
01:23:52
it is reported that children are the future (Houston)
Jenny Care
01:23:56
Several studies have shown.....
Jacki Johnson
01:24:02
Researchers have shown children are the future Houston (1986)
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:24:09
Houston point out that children…
Samia Michail
01:24:27
Several studies have found increased respiratory symptoms among children who parents smoke which may show passive smoking is harmful to children.
Siobhan Heatwole
01:24:32
Several studies have found increased respiratory symptoms among children whose parents smoke, indicating smoking can be harmful to children.
carolyn minnie
01:25:03
Several studies have suggested that passive smoking might increase respiratory symptoms amongst children.
MEREDITH BOX
01:25:06
Studies considering families of smoking parents suggest it has a flow-on impact to children.
Millicent Crowe
01:25:49
Increased respiratory symptoms have been linked to children whose parents smoke, inidicating passive smoking may be harmful to children.
Senada Meskin
01:26:29
Studies show that secondhand smoking is harmful for children.
Jenny Care
01:26:37
I agree
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:26:47
Agree
Alimila Hayixibayi
01:27:11
Softening from 1 to 3
Jenny Care
01:27:11
First one is the riskiest but is correct!
Thu Ha Dang
01:27:15
the level of risk is reduced from 1 to 3
Siobhan Heatwole
01:27:15
Different degrees of commitment/strength.
anne marie halton
01:27:16
clearly-likely-may and should-could-might
Anggelia Essi Christian
01:27:16
less riskier
Annie Hepworth
01:27:19
clearly, likely, may be
Megan Schroder
01:27:19
clearly vs likely vs may be
Charmaine Hugo
01:27:20
clearly - likely - may be
MEREDITH BOX
01:27:22
3rd one is by the lolly makers
Lijun Summerhayes
01:27:26
3-least riskier
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:27:27
Consumption of fat and salts
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:27:36
clearly
Megan Brewer
01:27:37
increasing word number dilutes the message strength both in language and word count
Dan Dai
01:27:37
some
Jenny Care
01:27:39
Yes Meredith
Millicent Crowe
01:27:39
Adding in extra softening words - some cases, worth conisdering
Siobhan Heatwole
01:27:41
1
Millicent Crowe
01:27:41
1
Jenny Care
01:27:42
1
Alimila Hayixibayi
01:27:42
1
rebecca chen
01:27:42
1
Charmaine Hugo
01:27:42
1
Naila Mukhtar
01:27:43
1
Megan Schroder
01:27:44
1
Martina Hale
01:27:45
1
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:27:46
1
carolyn minnie
01:27:50
If something is true and has been proved, should it be sugar coated??
Rowina Belapuna
01:27:58
1
Jenny Care
01:28:08
Good question Carolyn
Thu Ha Dang
01:28:17
how strong is the claim depends on evidence, I think
Megan Brewer
01:28:21
Carolyn I like your pun - intended or not
Siobhan Heatwole
01:28:45
That pun was sweet :)
Megan Brewer
01:29:16
Siohban!!! :)
Rachael Wilks
01:30:41
IT's just rare that some things have been definitively proven, so Is risky not to sugar coat
carolyn minnie
01:31:16
Just thinking that!
carolyn minnie
01:31:22
Who will read it?
Jenny Care
01:31:31
Problem is that direct causal effect takes years to be revealed
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:31:43
My topic related childhood obesity
Jenny Care
01:32:02
How strong is the evidence Varalakshmi?
Lijun Summerhayes
01:32:32
so should we consider the potential reader group when taking risky approach in writing? it could become very political if the statement is too radical
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:32:43
children physically inactive and consume more fatty foods
Jenny Care
01:33:09
Does sugar come up in the research? Very interested, naturopath talking here
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:33:34
yes
Millicent Crowe
01:33:43
Plays in the grey area
Jenny Care
01:34:04
thanks Varalakshmi!
Jenny Care
01:34:53
I think that makes the difference when using modalities and how strong to make the claim - the evidence
Megan Brewer
01:35:56
Yes - if the modality verb doesn't match the level of evidence that can open up questions. And it goes both ways - if you use too soft a modality but have strong evidence you can come across too fearful
Jenny Care
01:36:22
Yes, Megan. Need to be true to what you've found
Rachael Wilks
01:36:59
Yes, may indicate doubt in your own research
Siobhan Heatwole
01:37:16
Lijun I think we need to tailor how we write to the audience - consider what message you want them to hear and then what way of speaking to them will get the best impact
Mohammad Morshedul Islam
01:38:03
Is it better communicating doubt than confidence in research writing?
Rachael Wilks
01:38:57
perhaps better communicating facts rather than opinions
Lijun Summerhayes
01:39:26
Siobhan - agreed, can be difficult though when your audience could be a mix of academia and community members and policy makers
Jenny Care
01:39:31
Sometimes though the evidence comes from evidence such as qual research which isn't so clear cut
Millicent Crowe
01:42:36
V. interesting
Jenny Care
01:42:36
all good
Anggelia Essi Christian
01:42:40
all good
Alimila Hayixibayi
01:42:42
All good
Jacki Johnson
01:42:42
helpful
Samia Michail
01:42:47
Sometimes I alternate between these to stop being boring
carolyn minnie
01:43:27
significant
Megan Brewer
01:45:10
many of us need a p-value to use "significant" :)
carolyn minnie
01:45:44
Cassily, what about "of concern to this research"
carolyn minnie
01:46:12
If you find something that is concerning
Zhao Koh
01:47:03
is it okay to use phrases like “frowned upon”?
Jenny Care
01:47:08
No, it's clear
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:47:25
Cassily, your way of teaching is phenomenal…
Zhao Koh
01:47:50
yes, a past concept/idea is frowned upon
carolyn minnie
01:48:18
Frowned upon may be construed as being judgemental?
Zhao Koh
01:48:23
cool thanks Cassily
Zhao Koh
01:49:12
great that’s very helpful
Yuwei Sun
01:49:15
My supervisor told me to avoid using split infinitive because it may cause ambiguity. But I haven’t figure out the reason.
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:49:18
Subjective- information that is based on personal opinion
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:49:37
objectives- factual evidence
Jenny Care
01:49:55
Can someone split an infinitive for me please?
Jenny Care
01:50:11
serious question
carolyn minnie
01:50:14
Jenny Care, :)
MARY CASSAR CARTER
01:50:17
To boldly go
Yuwei Sun
01:50:20
Thanks!
MEREDITH BOX
01:50:26
if you are going to be assessed by people who care about the great SI, take care!
Jenny Care
01:50:37
got it, I use them all the time
Jenny Care
01:50:46
I use really really really
MEREDITH BOX
01:51:24
I avoid them. I was a translator for Japanese corporate clients and they cause panic!
Jenny Care
01:51:24
but not in writing lol
Annie Hepworth
01:52:01
differences in reveals, claims and seems
Jenny Care
01:52:16
seems to believe, rather than reveal
Charmaine Hugo
01:52:17
3 is rather sarcastic
Lijun Summerhayes
01:52:19
reveals - more critical
Jenny Care
01:52:19
claims
Senada Meskin
01:52:21
third is more critical
Millicent Crowe
01:52:22
author likes the study less in number three
Valeria Macalupu
01:52:25
the third one
Megan Schroder
01:52:26
3
MEREDITH BOX
01:52:27
2
Yuwei Sun
01:52:27
3
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:52:28
3
Samia Michail
01:52:28
3
Jenny Care
01:52:29
1
David Lim
01:52:30
3
Alanoud Alobaidly
01:52:30
third
Thu Ha Dang
01:52:30
3
ying guo
01:52:30
3
Senada Meskin
01:52:31
3
Sarah Turnbull
01:52:31
3
Alimila Hayixibayi
01:52:31
2
Martina Hale
01:52:31
3
MARY CASSAR CARTER
01:52:32
3
Jacki Johnson
01:52:32
3
carolyn minnie
01:52:33
3
Annie Hepworth
01:52:33
3
Monojit Chakma
01:52:35
3
Dan Dai
01:52:38
2
MEREDITH BOX
01:52:42
2, 3
Majid Alsubaie
01:52:55
2
carolyn minnie
01:53:05
So findings seem to suggest.... spells doubt?
Valeria Macalupu
01:53:07
agree
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:53:37
Neutral-2
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:54:07
identify
Megan Brewer
01:55:40
comes back to the objective / subjective difference - the first seem more objective but the "in the head" ones suggest subjectiveness
Megan Brewer
01:56:22
it is really fascinating and now that you have pointed it out - I will probably keep seeing :)
Alimila Hayixibayi
01:56:25
reveal
Sarah Yu
01:59:24
2
Jenny Care
01:59:25
second one
rebecca chen
01:59:27
2
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
01:59:28
2
Annie Hepworth
01:59:28
2
Zhao Koh
01:59:28
2
Senada Meskin
01:59:28
2
Alanoud Alobaidly
01:59:29
2
Lijun Summerhayes
01:59:29
2
carolyn minnie
01:59:33
2
Valeria Macalupu
01:59:34
2
Aileen Lane
01:59:38
2
Jenny Care
01:59:57
That is so interesting
Lijun Summerhayes
02:01:24
the reference for Aitchison & pare is also newer, 2012 vs 2001
Rachael Wilks
02:01:32
good for delivering bad news :)
Valeria Macalupu
02:03:34
yep :)
Senada Meskin
02:03:34
all the time
Samia Michail
02:03:37
I use this already unconsciously
Jenny Care
02:03:38
as from tomorrow yes
Alimila Hayixibayi
02:03:40
Yes
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
02:03:42
yes
Anggelia Essi Christian
02:03:45
yes
Martina Hale
02:03:48
yes
Millicent Crowe
02:03:49
I get a 'feeling' but now I understand why
Sunil Abraham
02:03:53
yes
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
02:06:39
3
David Lim
02:06:51
3
Senada Meskin
02:06:56
1-3, 2-2, 3-1
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
02:07:02
Text 3- 1
Sunil Abraham
02:07:22
1 3
Sarah Yu
02:07:30
Q1 text 3 Q2 text 5 Q3 text 4
Jenny Care
02:07:37
I'm finding this hard
Mohammad Morshedul Islam
02:07:43
3
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
02:07:49
Text 5-2
Charmaine Hugo
02:07:50
3 1 2
carolyn minnie
02:07:51
1 -3, 2-1, 3-2
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
02:08:07
Text 4-3
Samia Michail
02:08:10
Not really
Jenny Care
02:08:10
No, never
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
02:08:11
yes
David Lim
02:08:11
yes
Martina Hale
02:08:16
No
Valeria Macalupu
02:08:17
not quite
Jacki Johnson
02:08:21
Haven’t thought about it so useful prompt
Senada Meskin
02:08:22
still just assuming,
Senada Meskin
02:08:37
first year of PhD and all :)
Sunil Abraham
02:08:46
2-1
carolyn minnie
02:08:54
There is a paucity in research and literature relating to my topic, so it is hard for me to "belong" to a group.
Senada Meskin
02:09:52
yes
Anggelia Essi Christian
02:09:53
yes
Millicent Crowe
02:09:55
y
MEREDITH BOX
02:10:01
yes. I have varied it. I have found great difficulty in shifting to a applied linguistics data reporting format which makes the process of arriving at results almost invisible.
Sunil Abraham
02:10:05
3-2
Millicent Crowe
02:11:18
Best it gets in my field is with a humours title - usually but well known researchers
Senada Meskin
02:11:24
masters write with more ease and creativity
Jenny Care
02:11:56
Jon Wardle, Are there really monsters under the bed - cracker opening. https://www.academia.edu/download/47903455/Are_there_really_monsters_under_the_bed_20160808-24603-15epk4j.pdf
Samia Michail
02:11:59
I think you have tube a good writer first before you can try something like humour or metaphors
Senada Meskin
02:12:21
so true
Jenny Care
02:12:30
Professor Jon Wardle, one of my supervisors
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
02:12:30
True
Megan Schroder
02:12:34
After reading one of Sword's books, I tried this with my writing. My supervisor insisted I take all the colour out and I'm in the field of creativity.
carolyn minnie
02:12:36
I did a book review and one of the chapters written by Susan Baum used beautiful metaphors and analogies that made reading such a pleasure.
Senada Meskin
02:12:57
difficult to be different when you are expected to write certain way
Martina Hale
02:13:44
I think it is possible in the design fields
carolyn minnie
02:13:57
Please go on...
Majid Alsubaie
02:14:26
Thank you.
Sarah Turnbull
02:14:31
thanks Cassily
Lijun Summerhayes
02:14:32
I will explore the voice type and style in my field
Senada Meskin
02:14:34
Thank you so much Cassily, this was amazing!
Martina Hale
02:14:36
Thank you.
Varalakshmi Sivanesan
02:14:36
Thanks a lot Cassily.. This session was very useful and informative.
Zhao Koh
02:14:37
Thanks Cassily for this great workshop, it cleared up some of my confusions.
Sarah Jones
02:14:39
Many thanks Cassily
carolyn minnie
02:14:45
Thank you so much!!!!
Megan Schroder
02:14:47
Thank you Cassily. Lots of food for thought.
Annie Hepworth
02:14:49
Thanks Cassily!
Valeria Macalupu
02:14:49
thank you so much Cassily!
Anggelia Essi Christian
02:14:49
thank you!!
Sarah Yu
02:14:52
Thanks for the session
Megan Brewer
02:14:56
Thanks Cassily - that was great
Hir Jani
02:14:56
Thank you! :-)
Ali Siddiq
02:14:58
thank you
rebecca chen
02:14:58
Thanks Cassily !
Julie Nixon
02:15:06
Thankyou- so helpful
Charmaine Hugo
02:15:07
thanks Cassily!
Rachael Wilks
02:15:08
Thanks everyone!
Luz Stefani Sotomayor Valenzuela
02:15:09
Thank you for the session
David Lim
02:15:16
Thanks for breaking down the structure for having a critical voice. It has helped a lot.
Jenny Care
02:15:32
Thanks Cassily, as always this session has been great for my learning.
David Lim
02:15:40
Thanks Mel for organising this.
Jenny Care
02:15:43
Bye Mel