Acceso usuarios
Our purpose in this paper is to throw light on the tension, or even internal conflict, tertiary-level students experience when they struggle to negotiate the rhetorical norms of disciplinary writing and the changes in their authorial voice that necessarily occur in this socialization process. With this goal in mind, we designed and conducted the study to gain insights into the perceptions Management and English Philology students have as to what constitutes a convincing authorial voice and the discourse-level features employed to realize this. Twenty-six study participants created a diverse group with regards to nationality, gender, study level, disciplinary affiliation and cultural and linguistic background. Their evaluations of voice were first analyzed from their responses to a questionnaire and then expanded through interviews. The findings reveal that a reader-inclusive voice, which requires the use of de-jargonized language, clear purpose and structure, and creates room for reader’s own interpretation, is crucial for a text to be convincing. We also argue that students’ preference for reader-sensitive academic writing should be supported and encouraged through the provision of strategic academic writing pedagogy.
