Inextricable: Doctoral writing, engagement, and creativity
Engagement is an important issue for doctoral students since many feel a sense of isolation or alienation. In this paper we link doctoral writing to student (dis)engagement and suggest that creative writing practices are crucial to overcoming disaffection. Using autoethnography and arts-based methods (collage and narratives), we draw on our experiences from our different positionalities as doctoral student and doctoral supervisor to explore creativity, writing and doctoral student engagement. We find that creativity plays two roles: the individual insight and inspiration needed generate novel and original research ideas and conclusions; and the social-cultural interactions that result in community participation and building ideas off one another. Engaging in creative practice is not without challenges because of the conflicting discourses inherent in the concept, yet the benefits are surprising and valuable. We concluded that creative practices need to be mediated to encourage a critical consciousness; that these activities help to work through periods of being “stuck” and to value these liminal spaces; and finally, that the focus on creativity allows students to in chaotic research spaces in flexible ways.
Adams, T.E., & Holman Jones, S. (2018). The art of autoethnography. In P. Leavy (Ed.), Handbook of arts-based research. New York: The Guilford Press.
Aitchison, C. & Paré, A. (2012). Writing as craft and practice in the doctoral curriculum. In A. Lee & S. Danby (Eds.), Reshaping doctoral education: International approaches and pedagogies (pp.12-25). New York, NY: Routledge.
Aitchison, C., & Lee, A. (2006). Research Writing: Problems and Pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 265-278.
Ali, A., & Kohun, F. (2006). Dealing with isolation feelings in IS doctoral programs. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 1, 21-33.
Amell, B. & Blouin-Hudon, E.M.C. (2018). Engaging with play and graduate writing development. Canadian Journal for Studies in Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie, 28, 33-56.
Amell, B., & Badenhorst, C.M. (2018). Introduction: Play, visual strategies and innovative approaches to graduate student writing development. Canadian Journal for Studies in Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie, 28, 26-32.
Arnold, J. (2012). Practice led research: Creative activity, academic debate and intellectual rigour. Higher Education Studies, 2(2), 9–24.
Badenhorst, C., & Guerin, C. (2016). Post/graduate research literacies and writing pedagogies. In C. Badenhorst & C. Guerin (Eds.), Studies in writing: Research literacies and writing pedagogies for masters and doctoral writers (Vol. 31, pp. 3–28). Leiden, NL: Brill.
Badenhorst, C.M., Moloney, C., Rosales, J., & Dyer, J. (2016). Thinking through play: “Visual” approaches to post/graduate research writing. In C.M. Badenhorst, & C. Guerin (Eds.), Research literacies and writing pedagogies for masters and doctoral writers. Leiden, NL: Brill.
Baptista, A. Frick, L., Holley, K., Remmik, M., Tesch, J., & Âkerland, G. (2015). The doctorate as an original contribution to knowledge: Considering relationships between originality, creativity, and innovation. Frontline Learning Research, 3(3), 55-67.
Brill, J., Balcanoff, K., Land, D., Gogarty, M., & Turner, F. (2014). Best practices in doctoral retention: Mentoring. Higher Learning Research Communications, 4(2), 26-37.
Brodin, E. (2017). The stifling silence around scholarly creativity in doctoral education: Experiences of students and supervisors. Higher Education, 75, 655-673.
Burford, J. (2017). Conceptualising doctoral writing as an affective-political practice. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 12, 17-32.
Butler-Kisber, L. (2010). Qualitative inquiry: Thematic, narrative and arts-informed perspectives. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Camargo-Borges, C., (2018). Creativity and imagination: Research as world-making. In P. Leavy (Ed.), Handbook of Arts-based research. New York: The Guilford Press.
Castelló, M., Pardo, M., Sala-Bubaré, A., Suñe-Soler, N. (2017). Why do students consider dropping out of doctoral degrees? Institutional and personal factors. Higher Education, 6(74), 1053–1068. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-016-0106-9
Chang, H. (2008). Autoethnography as method. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast.
Coate, K., & Boulos, A. (2012). Creativity in education: Challenging the assumptions. London Review of Education, 10(2), 129–132.
Cotterall, S. (2011). Doctoral students writing: Where's the pedagogy? Teaching in Higher Education, 16(4), 413-425. doi:10.1080/13562517.2011.560381
Denzin, N. K. (2006). Analytic autoethnography, or déjà vu all over again. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35(4), 419-428. Doi: 10.1177/0891241606286985. Retrieved from http://jce.sagepub.com/content/35/4/419
Di Pierro, M. (2012). Strategies for doctoral student retention: Taking the roads less traveled. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 35(3), 29-32.
Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28(2), 122-128
Emmioğlu, E., McAlpine, L., & Amundsen, C. (2017). Doctoral students’ experiences of feeling (or not) like an academic. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 12, 073-090.
Frick, L. (2012). Pedagogies for creativity in science doctorates. In A. Lee & S. Danby (Eds.), Reshaping doctoral education: International approaches and pedagogies (pp.113-127). New York, NY: Routledge.
Harper, S.R. & Quaye, S.J. (2009). Beyond sameness, with engagement and outcomes for all. In S. R. Harper & S.J. Quaye (Eds.), Student engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations (pp. 1-15). New York, NY: Routledge.
Hunter, K., & Devine, K. (2016). Doctoral students’ emotional exhaustion and intentions to leave academia. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11, 035-061.
Hyland, K. (2011). Disciplines and discourses: Social interactions in the construction of knowledge. In D. Starke-Meyerring, A. Paré, N. Artemeva, M. Horne, & L. Yousoubova, (Eds.), Writing in knowledge societies (pp.193-214). Fort Collins, Colorado: The WAC Clearinghouse and Parlor Press.
Janta, H., Lugosi, P., & Brown, L. (2014). Coping with loneliness: A netnographic study of doctoral students. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 38(4), 553-571.
Jazvac-Martek, M., Chen, S., & McAlpine, L. (2011). Tracking the doctoral student experience over time: Cultivating agency in diverse spaces. In L. McAlpine & C. Amundsen (Eds.), Doctoral education: research-based strategies for doctoral students, supervisors and administrators (pp. 17–36). Dordrecht: Springer.
John-Steiner, V. (1997). Notebooks of the mind: Explorations of thinking (Rev. ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Jones, A. (2011). Seeing the messiness of academic practice: exploring the work of academics through narrative. International Journal for Academic Development, 16(2), 109-118. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2011.568282
Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758-773.
Kamler, B., & Thomson, P. (2006). Helping doctoral students write: Pedagogies for supervision. New York, NY: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203969816
Kohli, W. (2016). The dialectical imagination of Maxine Greene: Social Imagination as critical pedagogy. Education and Culture, 32(1), 15-24.
Lee, A. & Danby, S. (Eds.). (2012). Reshaping doctoral education: International approaches and pedagogies. New York, NY: Routledge.
Leijen, Ä., Lepp, L., & Remmik, M. (2016). Why did I drop out? Former students’ recollections about their study process and factors related to leaving the doctoral studies. Studies in Continuing Education, 38(2), 129-144.
Lovitts, B. E. (2008). The transition to independent research: Who makes it, who doesn't, and why. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(3), 296-325. 10.1353/jhe.0.0006
Mannay, D. (2010). Making the familiar strange: can visual research methods render the familiar setting more perceptible? Qualitative Research, 10(1), 91-111. DOI: 10.1177/1468794109348684
McWilliam, E., & Dawson, S. (2008). Teaching for creativity: Towards sustainable and replicable pedagogical practice. Higher Education, 56(6), 633-643. 10.1007/s10734-008-9115-7
Meyer, J., & Land, R. (2006). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: issues of liminality. In J. H. Meyer & R. Land (Eds.), Overcoming Barriers to student understanding: Threshold concepts and troublesome (pp. 19–46). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Mizzi, R. (2010). Unraveling researcher subjectivity through multivocality in autoethnography. Journal of Research Practice, 6 (1), Article M3. Retrieved 18 February 2013, from http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/201/185
Ngunjiri, F.W., Hernandez, K.A., & Chang, H. (2010). Living autoethnography: Connecting life and research. Journal of Research Practice, 6, E1. Available online: http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/241/186
Nilson, L. (2016). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Paré, A. (2009). What we know about writing and why it matters. Compendium2: Writing, Teaching, and Learning in the University, 2(1). From: https://ojs.library.dal.ca/C2/article/view/3720/3408
Paré, A. (2011). Speaking of writing: Supervisory feedback and the dissertation. In L. McAlpine & C. Amundsen (Eds.), Doctoral education: Research-based strategies for doctoral students, supervisors and administrators (pp. 59-74). Dordrecht, NL: Springer Netherlands.
Paré, A. (2017). Re-thinking the dissertation and doctoral supervision. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 40(3), 407-428. 10.1080/02103702.2017.1341102
Pelais, R. (2003). The academic tourist: An autoethnography. Qualitative Inquiry, 9 (3), 369-373.
Phipps, A. (2010). Drawing breath: Creative elements and their exile from higher education. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 9(1), 42-53.
Puryear, J. S. (2014). Inside the creative sifter: Recognizing metacognition in creativity development. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 50(4), 321-332. 10.1002/jocb.80
Quicke, J. (2012). Narrative strategies in educational research: reflections on a critical autoethnography. Educational Action Research, 18(2), 239-254.
Schneider, M. (2014). Epistemological Obstacles in Mathematics Education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education (pp. 214–217). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4978-8_57
Tierney, W.G. (2012). Creativity and organizational culture. In M.N. Bastedo (Ed.), The organization of higher education (pp. 160–180). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Van Cleave, J., Bridges-Rhoads, S., & Hughes, H.E. (2018).
Work/think/play in doctoral education. Qualitative Inquiry, DOI: 10.1177/1077800418767215.
Wisker, G., & Savin-Baden, M. (2009). Priceless Conceptual Thresholds: Beyond the “Stuck Place” in Writing. London Review of Education, 7(3), 235–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/14748460903290207
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).