‘Accept with revisions’: regulating the language of student writing

Abstract

This article focuses on the regulation of student writing by exploring a specific form of such writing, the maturity test. In Finnish universities, the maturity test is a compulsory part of a bachelor's degree in which students demonstrate their familiarity with the topic of their bachelor's thesis, as well as their mother tongue skills. Maturity tests are written, revised and assessed in a multiphase process in which students receive both written and oral feedback on their texts before submitting the final version for acceptance. The focus of this paper is on feedback conversations between the student and the reviser. The questions explored are: (1) what aspects of the texts and their acceptability are brought up in the conversations and by whom, and (2) what kinds of normative systems do the participants orient to? The findings suggest that there are several kinds of these systems, and that the participants orient to polycentric systems of norms, which are tied to a various centring institutions. The data include regulatory documents, maturity tests, and feedback conversations.

OKAY as a content word: Regulating language and constructing centres of norms in Finnish, Finland-Swedish, and Sweden-Swedish academic writing consultation meetings

“…We adopt a discourse-analytical view on norms and language regulation in writing consultations (see Hynninen 2018, Mäntynen 2018. From this perspective, norms are construed in discursive and linguistic practices.…”

“…Although there are known institutional and social norms per se, which are typically represented and mediated by experts and professionals in a particular field such as Finnish language studies, norms are also construed and reinvented situationally (Pietikäinen & Mäntynen 2019). In writing consultations, for example, the counsellor acts as a normative centre by mediating the norms for academic writing in Finnish or Swedish, and in addition to that, other norms and normative centres such as disciplines and disciplinary instructions may become relevant during the discussion (Mäntynen 2018; see also Blommaert 2010:40-41, 99). Blommaert (2010:139) discusses networks of multiple centres of norms through the concept of polycentricity, which 'represents an image of a world in which power and authority are shared by various concrete actorscentresfrom whom normative guidelines can be expected and are being adopted'.…”

“…The Finnish consultation meetings are obligatory for students, and the text under discussion is a one-page abstract written as part of a maturity test in which they demonstrate their academic literacy skills and their familiarity with the topic of their thesis (for further details, see Mäntynen 2018). These meetings typically consist of relatively short interactions and last between 5 and 15 minutes, although there are some longer discussions too (the longest meeting in the current data set lasted 25 minutes).…”

“…Previous studies (e.g. Mäntynen 2018) have shown that it is common to bring in other normative centres to consultations on academic writing, such as vocabularies, grammar books, and writing manuals. In our data, most of these examples are in the fields of evaluating or advising.…”

Määräyspatteristo vai krumeluuriteksti – kielipoliittiset dokumentit yliopistojen hallintohenkilöstön näkökulmasta

“…Useissa hankkeissa on tuotu esiin näkökulmia arjen käytäntöihin: miten kielilinjauksia jalkautetaan, miten kielenkäyttäjät orientoituvat kielen säätelyyn ja miten normeista neuvotellaan tilanteisesti (esim. Mäntynen 2018;Solin & Hynninen 2018;Hynninen 2020).…”