Scholarly Paper Requirement (MA Plans B and C; Advanced Graduate Certificate)

General: The Scholarly Paper requirement was instituted in 1983 by the SLS Graduate Faculty to substitute for the previously required Plan B Comprehensive Examination, and as further evidence of scholarly achievement for Plan C students. One Scholarly Paper (SP) is required in order for a student to qualify for graduation. These same guidelines apply, with the exception of the deadlines for submission, to the final research paper of the Advanced Graduate Certificate in Second Language Studies, established in 2000 by the SLS Graduate Faculty.

Purpose: The main purpose of the SP requirement is for the faculty to assess a student’s ability to engage in scholarly writing that is beyond that normally required in a term paper. In order to do this evaluation, the Graduate Faculty requires each student to prepare one paper that is of sufficient quality to be submitted to a refereed journal (see example journals below). Thus, the standard set by the Graduate Faculty is papers that could be given serious consideration for publication by journal editors. In fact, a number of UH SLS SPs have been published later in one form or another.

Content: SPs can deal with any issue in the field of second language use, learning, or teaching. There are two principal types of paper: empirical research exploring a significant issue in the field, and a conceptual or theoretical paper comprised of an original literature review and discussion (a bibliographical essay). Whatever topic or issue is chosen, it should be of some general importance, making a contribution to the field.

The following are general guidelines that can be used in preparing a literature review or a research report. Both sets of guidelines are simply suggestions for the preparation of an SP. (See similar guidelines under MA Thesis Information.) They are not obligatory; variations on them are possible.

Literature Review

  1. identify and define the main issues and/or variables to be discussed. Both theoretical and operational definitions (i.e., the way the issues/variables are identified and measured for research purposes) should be considered.
  2. review the main points of view and research studies pertaining to the issue under discussion. Include critical comments of theoretical issues and of any relevant research.
  3. attempt to reconcile, integrate or choose between alternative points of view or findings.
  4. propose an original point of view or interpretation of the issues or research results. The final “statement” can be 1) an original theoretical point of view; 2) a new interpretation of old research findings; 3) new directions for research; 4) pedagogical implications; or 5) a combination of the preceding.

Research Report

  1. an introduction that includes a description of the phenomenon or issue investigated along with a review of relevant research and theory; the introduction should lead to a justification for the research along with a statement of hypotheses or research questions.
  2. a description of the methods used, and a justification for them; methods include subjects, materials, data collection procedures, and analysis (e.g. statistical or inductive analyses and procedures).
  3. presentation of the findings.
  4. a discussion of the findings, their significance and their relationship to other research findings and to theory.

Preparation and consultation with faculty: There are several ways in which students typically plan and develop an SP.

  1. One possibility is a paper extending the work done in one or several courses, perhaps with a replication of a pilot study, or an extended theoretical essay on a topic covered by earlier term papers. A second possibility is a thorough rewriting and editing of a paper that has been previously submitted as a term paper. Students should be aware that it is rare for a course term paper to be sufficiently rigorous to pass as an SP without substantial revisions.
  2. The writing of an SP may be viewed as an independent exercise. However, a student may, at his/her own discretion, approach any SLS graduate faculty member to be an SP advisor. This relationship is voluntary, that is, not obligatory on the part of the student or faculty member.
  3. The role of the SP advisor is to serve as the primary guide throughout the process of producing the SP, from the formulation of issues and questions, through the development of appropriate design and/or procedures, where appropriate, development of data collection instruments, and up to and including the reading and commenting on various drafts of the paper.
  4. On recommendation by the SP advisor, the student should consult with another faculty member about the purpose and approach adopted for the SP. This will enable the student to obtain feedback from the faculty members who, to the extent it is administratively feasible, will be readers of the submitted SP.
  5. Other faculty may also be recommended for consultation on appropriate points in the development of the SP. Faculty will not assist in the preparation of SPs by calculating statistics, however.
  6. Students are encouraged to consult with one another at all stages of preparation—share ideas and drafts of the paper before submitting it. It is also advisable to consult recent SPs in the SLS/Linguistics Reading Room.
  7. In most cases, a Plan B student is likely to benefit from taking at least one research methods course appropriate to the nature of their study.
  8. If human subjects are involved in the SP work, and the student anticipates publication of the SP, exemption or approval must be obtained (in advance of beginning data collection) from the UH Committee on Human Studies (see Human Subjects Guidelines).

Style and Format: Each paper should follow APA format. Journals that may be considered for the appropriate level of content include, but are not limited to, Anthropology in Education Quarterly, Applied Linguistics, Applied Psycholinguistics, Foreign Language Annals, IRAL, Journal of Child Language, Journal of Reading, Language in Society, Language Learning, Language Testing, The Modern Language Journal, The Reading Teacher, RELC Journal, Second Language Research, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, and TESOL Quarterly. The quality and content of a paper should reflect that of articles normally appearing in the journal at which it is aimed. Therefore, students should look through several issues of the journal before writing the paper in final form.

All papers must be machine typed or printed, double-spaced, with appropriate margins. The paper should be between 20 to 30 pages (5000 to 7500 words), excluding footnotes, bibliography, appendices, tables and figures, etc., along with a 200-word (approximate) abstract.

All papers must be written in accurate, academic English. Native and non-native writers alike should have their SP drafts and final versions carefully proofread in advance of submitting them to faculty.

Joint Authorship: Joint authorship of an SP by two students is permitted. All SP authors file an attestation as to the authorship of the paper. In cases of joint authorship, each student must attest to an equal contribution to the paper. Students wishing to submit co-authored papers must receive permission from the Graduate Chair. Evaluators will take double authorship into account in judging the overall quality of the submission.

Submission: The final version of an SP that is to be officially read and given an evaluation should be submitted to the two SP readers (usually the SP advisor first, then the second reader) for final approval. This may be done at any time in the academic year. However, certain dates have been established to ensure that papers which are sufficiently well prepared may be read by the faculty and evaluated positively in time for a recommendation for graduation, that is, prior to deadlines set by the Graduate Division during a particular semester. The appropriate dates are:

Fall Semester: Deadline – November 1

Spring Semester: Deadline – April 1

Summer: Deadline – July 1

These deadlines allow the faculty two weeks to read and comment on the submission, and one week for the candidate to complete a fully revised final copy, assuming that at least the judgment of “Acceptable with minor revisions” was obtained. Candidates are still responsible for submitting this required final copy of the SP to the Graduate Chair two days before the Graduate Division deadlines for examinations. This copy will then be kept in the department files in the Reading Room. Papers may be submitted after these dates, but the Department cannot guarantee prompt reading and notification of results. Students should be aware that faculty are not officially on duty during the summer sessions and, hence, are normally not available to read SPs. Therefore, if submitted in this period, SPs may not be evaluated promptly enough to meet graduation requirements by the end of Summer (but will be read in the Fall).

Evaluation of Papers: Each SP will be read by two members of the Graduate Faculty, one of whom will usually be the SP advisor. The second reader will be a faculty member who may also have contributed advice on the preparation of the SP.

  1. Each reader assigns a grade of Acceptable, Acceptable with minor revisions, Revise and resubmit, or Unacceptable. For exceptionally well-done papers, the grade of Acceptable with Honors may be given. Readers’ comments may make specific recommendations that the student can use in rewriting the paper. Or, the readers may determine that the paper should not be rewritten, and that another paper on a different topic must be submitted.
  2. The Scholarly Paper (SP) represents a capstone accomplishment. Its review process can generally take two different paths: physical paper or electronic. The processes follow the following steps. Each candidate should consult their readers in advance on the readers’ preference of reviewing a hard or electronic copy.

Directions to candidate:

Physical Paper

  1. Print two copies of your scholarly paper.
  2. Affix one copy of the SP Review page to each copy of the scholarly paper.
  3. Give one copy with the page attached to each of your readers.
  4. When both readers have approved the paper, give the signed copy of the SP Review page to the Graduate Chair, OR ensure that your readers have reported your grade directly to the Graduate Chair.
  5. Submit a “pdf” electronic file of the paper to the Graduate Chair .*

Electronic

  1. Send each reader a MSWord or RTF file of your scholarly paper.
  2. When both readers have approved the paper, submit a “pdf” file of the paper to the Graduate Chair.
  3. Confirm with the readers that they have sent email with a grade to the Graduate Chair.
  4. Submit a “pdf” electronic file of the paper to the Graduate Chair .*

Directions to readers:

Physical Paper

  1. Provide a grade for the scholarly paper.
  2. Sign and date this page.
  3. Return the SP Review page to the candidate or notify the candidate of acceptable grade and return the page (hard copy or electronic) to the  Graduate Chair.

Electronic

  1. Provide a grade for the scholarly paper.
  2. Notify the Graduate Chair of the acceptable grade.

*Note: The notification of completion to Graduate Division will not be done until after the receipt of the final “pdf” file.

  1. The members of the Graduate Faculty have approved the following criteria by which SPs will be evaluated. In writing SPs, students are advised to keep them in mind.
    1. Significance of the problem
      1. Is the topic or issue significant to the field?
      2. Does the treatment of the material demonstrate this significance?
    2. Scholarship and objectivity
      1. Are all relevant sources and information reviewed?
      2. Are sources and materials used accurately and effectively?
      3. Are interpretations of theoretical perspectives and research findings appropriately critical, accurate, and cogent?
      4. In the case of research reports, are research methods and data analyses and procedures appropriate and accurate?
    3. Clarity of presentation
      1. Are the issues, points of view, findings and conclusions presented clearly?
      2. Is the overall organization of the paper appropriate and effective?
      3. Is the paper well-written and readable?
    4. Insight and perspective
      1. Does the paper take an original approach?
      2. Does the student demonstrate original insights into the topic or material discussed in the paper?
      3. Do the conclusions, implications, or outcomes of the paper make an original contribution to the field?
      4. Does the paper acknowledge its own limitations?
      5. Are future directions for the field stemming from the study indicated?
 

Comments are closed.