50 research outputs found
McCall crew portrait, 1976
No full textA group portrait of the crew for the McCall Smokejumper base.
Front Row: Wayne Kaaen, Martin Gabica, Del Catlin, Jim Anderson, Bill Newlun, Chris Palmer, Bill Yensen.
Middle Row: Ray Henderson, Jim Deiderich, Gay Johnson, Dennis Golik, Steve Paulson, Clay Morgan, Berry Koncinsky.
Back Row: Ryn Corbeil, Jerry Blattner, Clark Noble, James (Duke) Norfleet, Jack Firestone, Mark Eames, Pat Durland.
Missing: Edward Abromeit, Lowell Adams, James Amell, Eldon Askelson, Richard Blanton, Larry Boehm, David Butler, Dennis Campbell, Douglas Certain, Neal Davis, Thad Duel, Lynn Glock, Thomas French, Richard Halligan, Dean Hovdey, Leland Jensen, Kim Lindquiat, Issac Martinez, Michael, McCraken, Kenneth Kiser, Steven Mello, Carl Rosselli, James Rush, Paul Schulz, Robert Shoemaker, Timothy Simmons, Jerry Waters, James Williams.https://dc.ewu.edu/nsa_crewpics/1297/thumbnail.jp
The eschatology of Margaret Fell (1614-1702) and its place in her theology and ministry
No full textEThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo
Competitive strategies and barriers to achieving competitive advantage : a study of two Saudi Arabian industries.
No full textThis study focuses on how organisations achieve and sustain competitive
advantage and the possible barriers to this advantage. It first deals with a
theoretical framework by examining related literature on developing a better
understanding of competitive advantage and generic strategies, as well as the
important aspects that may affect a firm's achievement and the sustainability of
its competitive advantage. This study extends the strategic management
literature on competitive advantage and generic strategies mainly based on
Porter's (1980, 1985) work. In particular, instead of the two generic strategies
(differentiation and cost leadership) put forward by Porter, four competitive
strategies are developed. These are (1) price leadership, (2) low cost
differentiation, (3) imitation and (4) differentiation.
Barriers to competitive advantage are conceptionalised in terms of
"strategic coherence" model, which has three aspects. Competitive strategies
require internal consistency referred to as 'competitive coherence'. In addition,
'organisational coherence' needs to be built, involving the structure of internal
and external elements affecting an organisation's ability to achieve its
competitive advantage. The creation of this structure is not automatic. The
difficulties increase with growing dynamism and complexity of the environment
in which an organisation is operating. While competitive and organisational
coherence might exist accidentally, the third aspect developed in this study is
called 'cognitive coherence'. The lack of coherence in one or more of these
aspects is a barrier to a firm achieving and sustaining its competitive advantage.
Secondly, this study reports empirical evidence on the validity of the theoretical
framework. This study takes the case of two different industries (petrochemical
and food) in Saudi Arabia.
Results indicate that all four competitive strategies are possible and
statistically defined. In addition, high-performing firms, in both industries, have
more strategic coherence than lower performing firms. The results suggest that
high-performing firms are able not only to achieve their competitive advantage
but also to sustain it over time. Moreover, in each industry, firms with different
competitive strategies have different barriers to achieving their competitive
advantage. These results are consistent with those found in the existing
literature, lending support to the view that western strategy models seem to be
applicable to developing countries such as Saudi Arabia
Novalis's idea of "Experimentalphilosophie" : a study of Romantic science in its context.
No full textPhDThis thesis seeks to examine Novalis's philosophy of practical knowledge
and to position it within the context of the work of other Romantic natural
philosophers and some aspects of contemporary science. His views on Ritter's
galvanism and the latter's significance for his thought in general are treated here
for the first time in full.
Contrary to most previous views, it is argued that a major part of Novalis's
outlook stems from his concept of practical knowledge and his reflection over the
term "experiment", which proves to be an extremely complex and central idea in
his thought. It is shown how this philosophy of his finds most explicit expression
in the idea of a symbolic notation or a "phenomenal" calculus. These notions
merge in Novalis's idea of productive "Plastisirung". Particular attention is paid to
the symbolic use of phosphorus in the pneumatic debate and Ritter's galvanic
interpretation of the nerve. Beyond contemporary science, it is further shown how
broad an historical base Novalis channels into his notion of practical knowledge.
This should lead to a clearer understanding of Novalis's position within Romantic
natural philosophy, his debt to tradition, and his originality.
In the light of these findings, it is argued that Novalis's concern for
practical knowledge provides the basis for a possible form of consensus in his
thought. It is shown that there is an increasing tendency in his writings away from
a programme for classifying knowledge in general towards the idea of individual
knowledge and the case study, as is exemplified in his reception of Ritter's work.
It is also advanced that Novalis's notion of practical knowledge is a significant
methodological statement of early Romantic science, which also puts a new
perspective on thinkers such as Goethe, Humboldt, Schelling and Ritte
Foucault and Arendt: the tensions and integrity of critical thinking
No full textIn this work, I present an interpretation of two thinkers, Foucault and Arendt. I place these thinkers within a tradition of critical theory running from Kant to Nietzsche. The opposition between modernism and postmodernism, between its philosophical sources, Kant and Nietzsche, has been widely overstated, for example, in the polemical stance taken by Habermas in The Philosophical Discourse ofModenfity (1987). 1 am concerned to show that this way of mapping does Foucault and Arendt an injustice. Foucault and Arendt accept Nietzsche's critique of reason and Western thought and attack Kant's official philosophy, an analytical philosophy of truth. Yet they also appropriate Kant's reflection on the Enlightenment and revolution (Foucault) and his aesthetic judgment (Arendt). More importantly, Foucault and Arendt embrace postmodern sensibility not as an absolute given but as an attitude that must be - at the risk of inviting Nietzschean scorn - constantly checked and examined. For them, critique is based as much on a serious and sustained interrogation of historical experience as it is on a deconstruction of metaphysical philosophy. Recognizing the problems of attaching labels to Foucault's work and that of Arendt, I focus on the tensions and complexity of their work. There are tensions in Foucault's thought between totalizing/detotalizing impulses, discursive/extra-discursive theorization, macro/micro perspectives, and domination/resistance relations as well as between ethical-political commitments and archaeological detachment. There are also tensions in Arendt's thought between creative rupture and exercise in retrieval, between agonism and consensus as well as between existential engagement and philosophical withdrawal. Critical thought, which is experiment as well as problematization, must constantly live within a field of tension. In this light, I argue that these tensions provide the elements for the uniqueness and coherence of their work and that viewing these tensions as a source of flagrant contradiction fundamentally distorts their intentions
Biographies 4
No full textMr. Richard Goldmann ; Mr. Nathan Gould ; Mr. Martinus William Goetz ; Mr. Martinus Andries Goetz ; Mr. W. J. Grout ; Mr. Barnett Goldman ; Mr. William Harries Goldsbury ; Mr. Harry Graumann ; Mr. Alfred Goldberg ; (Extract from "The Cape Times," Monday, July 21, 1890.) Deep-level gold mining ; Mr. Charles Goldmann ; Mr. Frederick Giddey ; Mr. Thomas James Orbell Greenwood ; Mr. Reinhald Gregorowski ; Mr. Harry Denis Griffith ; Mr. John Edward Carter Gillett ; Mr. Herbert Melville Guest ; Major William Goddard ; Mr. Joseph Heymann ; Mr. William John Green ; Mr. Herbert John Goodrich ; Mr. Izaak Jacob Haarhoff ; Mr. T. R. Haddon ; Mr. R. C. Hemming ; Mr. W. T. Harvey ; Mr. T. Faulkner (photograph) ; Mr. C. G. Godfrey (photograph) ; Mr. J. H. I. Findley (photograph) ; Mr. E. Hompes (photograph) ; Mr Robert Hamilton ; Mr. Cecil Ernest Hawes ; Mr. Arthur Richard Hands ; Mr. Percy Cato Haw ; Mr. Maitland Hathorn ; Mr. Percy Hamilton ; Mr. Robert John Hogan ; Mr. William Taskers Hallimond ; Mr. John Hendricks ; Mr. Frederick Hellmann ; Mr. Walter Henderson-Cleland ; Dr. Frederick Henry Hatch ; Mr. James Bernard Haytread ; Mr. Gustave Hartog ; Dr. Pieter Henry Haylett ; Dr. Albert Heymans ; Mr. James Joseph Hartley ; Mr. William Hope Henderson ; Mr. William Miles Harwin ; Mr. Frank Hilner ; Mr. George Herbert Hillary ; Mr. George Morgan Hofmeyr ; Mr. Edward Hancock ; Mr. George Wright Higgins ; Mr. George Hurry ; Ferreira gold mining company. Whitehead's company in distance (photograph) ; Mr. James Johnson Hoyle ; Mr. John MCLelland Henderson ; Mr. Jacob Horwitch ; Mr. Arundel Arthur Hutchings ; Mr. William George Holford ; Mr. Louis Edelbert Heitzman ; Mr. Samuel Hosken ; Mr. Henry John Hofmeyr ; Mr. Samuel J. Halford ; Mr. William Heath ; Mr. David Holt ; Major Joseph Huneberg ; Mr. Frank Field Hathorn ; Mr. Ernest Austin Halliwell ; Mr. Alec Maurice Holloway ; Mr. Henry Charles Hull ; Mr. Edward George Heather ; Mr. Frederick Hopley ; Mr. William Hosken ; Colonel Edward Oliver Hutchinson ; Mr. Richard Hosken ; Mr. David Stewart Howie ; Mr. R. Ward Jackson ; Solomon Barnato Joel ; Mr. J. B. Joel ; Knysna Lakes (photograph) ; Mr. Robert Irvine ; Mr. John Jack ; Mr. William Martin Izdebski ; Mr. Harmen Hendriks Jager ; Mr. Andrew Johnston ; Mr. Albert Henry Jacob ; Mr. Carl Jeppe ; Mr. Harry Hewitt Jordan ; Mr. Benjamin Owen Jones ; Mr. Duncan Stuart Johnston ; Mr. Charles Jerome ; Dr. Ralph Tennyson Jupp ; Mr. William Johannes Jooste ; Mr. Lancelot Laurens Joubert ; Mr. John Jolly ; Mr. Jacobus Peter Jooste ; Mr. Sidney Jennings ; Mr. Malcolm Campbell-Johnston ; Jan Carel Juta ; Mr. Hendrik Christian Jorissen ; Mr. William Cawood Ridger ; Mr. William St. John Kearney ; Mr. Simon Ludwig Kling ; Mr. Emanuel Kaufmann ; Dr. David J. Kelly ; Dr. James Alexander Kay ; Mr. Richard Nelson Kotze ; Mr. George Kent ; Dr. I England Kerr ; Jan Kemp ; Dr. Robert England Kerr ; Mr. L. Kearns-Jacobs ; Johan Balthazar Knobel ; Mr. Robert Kuranda ; Captain Horation King ; Mr. John Wilkinson Kirkland ; Baron Roderick Kellersperg ; Mr. Astley Cooper Key ; Mr. Arthur Nicholas De Kock ; Mr. James Chabaud Kirkwood ; Mr. James Smith King ; Mr. William Robert Kennerley ; Mr. John Johnston Kirkness ; Mr. Abraham A. De Kock ; Mr. George king ; Mr. Johannes Cysbertus Kraan ; Mr. Louis Klippert ; Mr. Henry Barnard Kruger ; Mr. George Vantier Lambe ; Mr. Charles Long ; Mr. William Fuller Lance ; Mr. Lewis Levy ; Mr. Frederick William Lewis ; Mr. Ernest Charles Lowe ; Mr. Philip Lapin ; Mr. C. Lane ; Mr. Martinus Willem Reinier Lubbers ; Mr. Thomas Leask ; Mr. Harry Richard Lee ; Mr. William Louch ; Mr. Simeon Lissack ; Mr. Meyer Lichtenstein ; Mr. Frederick John Lunnon ; Mr. Austin Leech ; Mr. William Edwin Smith Lewis ; Mr. Otto Lenz ; Mr. Ernest J. Lezard ; Mr. Ernest Lezard ; Mr. Richard Lunt ; Mr. John Glen Leary ; Mr. Charles Lipp ; Mr. Horace Septimus Lidlle ; Mr. James Lillico ; Mr. Lorentz ; Mr. Andries Langerbrink ; Mr. Richard Kelsey Loveday ; Mr. Frederick Victor Lloyd ; Mr. John M. Maxwell-Lyte ; Mr. George Thomas Morice ; Mr. William Ramsay MacNab ; Mr. Thomas John MacFarlane ; Dr. Ronald Pierson MacKenzie ; Mr. James MacKay ; Mr. George Angus Mulligan ; Mr. Alfred MacHugh ; Mr. P. J. Marais ; Mr. Andrew Mauritz Mostert ; General Solomon Gerhendus Maritz ; Mr. Johannes Jacobus Marais ; Mr. Francois Duminy Marais ; Mr. Hugh F. Marriott ; Mr. Peter Johannes Marais ; Mr. Charles Martlew ; Mr. John Blair MacKinlay ; Mr. John Hugh Martin ; Mr. Melt Marais ; Mr. Phillip Simeon May ; Mr. Joseph Solomon Masur ; Mr. Gerald Francois Mijnhardt ; Mr. Edward Mosely ; Mr. Bernard De Rockstro Malraison ; Mr. Paul Mare ; Mr. John Abram Moffat ; Mr. James Morris ; Mr. William Anderson Martin ; Edward P. Mathers ; Dr. Gordon Bonnington William Messeum ; Major T. Marcus McInerney ; Mr. George Mitchell ; Mr. M. C. A. Meischke ; Mr. Harry Middleboro ; Mr. Arthur Meikle ; Mr. Leopold Francis Melvill ; Mr. Sampson Marks ; Mr. Edward Harker Vintcent Melvill ; Mr. Hermann Michaelis ; Mr. Peter Gerherd Myburgh ; Dr. W. J. van der Merwe ; Dr. George Michie ; Dr. Henry Temple Mursell ; Mr. John Hunter McKlea ; r. Johannes Lodevicus van der Merwe ; Mr. John T. Murray ; Mr. Joseph Petrus van der Merwe ; Mr. Johannes Christoffel Minnaar ; Mr. Stephanus Issac Minnaar ; Mr. Johannes Petrus Masuriek ; Mr. Arthur Benjamin Mortimer ; Mr. Arthur Edward Miles ; Mr. Samuel Marks ; Mr. John Francis McNellan ; Mr. C. Schofield Mann ; Dr. J. Wright Matthews ; Mr. George Marais ; Mr. George St. John Mildmay ; Mr. Charles Murray ; Dr. Gustaaf Adolf Frederick Molengraaff ; Mr. Petrus Jacobus Mostert ; Mr. James Macintosh ; Mr. Alexander McLagan ; Mr. Johannes Marthinus Moller ; Mr. Arthur Ernest Morris ; Hon. Charles Gideon Murray ; Dr. George Alfred Everitt Murray ; Mr. Max Nathan ; Mr. Emil Nathan ; Mr. George Nathan ; Mr. Manfred Nathan ; View of Premier Diamond Mine (photograph) ; Mr. H. Rose Innes (photograph) ; Mr. J. P. jones (photograph) ; General Joubert (photograph) ; Dr. David William Johnston (photograph) ; Mr. Ernset Percival Niemeyer ; Morning Market, Johannesburg, early days (photograph) ; Mr. David Nimmo ; Mr. Sigismund Neumann ; Mr. Alfred H. Nicolson ; Mr. Ebenezer Steven Norrie ; Mr. Alexander Archibald Noble ; Mr. John Arthur Noble ; Mr. Charles Edward Nelson ; Mr. John Wylie Craig Niven ; Diamond Sorting, Kimberley (photograph) ; Mr. Adam Young Niven ; Mr. Robert Niven ; Mr. Temple Maynard Cracroft Nourse ; Mr. Johannes Adriaan Neser ; Mr. Harrison Ralph Nethersole ; Mr. Hugh Austin Neame
The Internalization of Advertising Services: An Inter-IndustryAnalysis
No full textThe common perception appears to be that vertical integration of advertising services is more the exception than the rule in the U.S. advertising industry. This study investigates the extent of such outsourcing and examines inter-industry variation in the use of in-house rather than independent advertising agencies by U.S. advertisers. While the vast majority of large advertisers employ outside agencies, it comes as a surprise to find that when advertisers of all sizes are considered, about half operate some form of in-house agency. Internalization of advertising services is much more widespread than has hitherto been appreciated and varies widely across industries. To explain this variation, we draw on concepts from research on scale economies and transaction costs to develop a set of hypotheses which we test in cross sectional analyses of data covering 69 two digit SIC industries at two points in time, 1991 and 1999. Across industries, we find that the likelihood of internalization of advertising services decreases as the size of advertising outlays increase but increases as advertising intensity and technological intensity increase and is greater for "creative" industries.Advertising Agencies, In-House, Vertical Integration, Make or Buy
필자 목소리 쓰기 지도가 한국 EFL학습자들의 쓰기 능력 및 필자 목소리 언어적 표지 사용에 미치는 효과
No full textThe present study investigated the effectiveness of author voice writing instruction in the English as Foreign Language (EFL) context, as compared with that of organization-focused writing instruction. The author voice writing instruction developed in the study can be defined as a systematic framework of teaching key voice features to construct students’ individual and social voice appropriately given in a discourse community. The framework for author voice writing instruction was constructed based on theories and accounts of voice features (e.g., Hyland, 2008; Issac, 2012; Martin & White, 2005; Matsuda & Tardy, 2007; Tardy & Matsuda, 2009). The framework for organization-focused writing instruction was designed on the basis of paragraph-pattern elements and organization features from English as Second Language (ESL) writing textbooks (Beck & Jeffery, 2007; Brandon, 2008; Folse & Pugh, 2010; Hyland, 2005; Knapp & Watkins, 2005; Oshima & Hogue, 2006). The study examined the effects of the two types of writing instructions on the quality of writing and the use of two types of different linguistic voice features (appraisal and involvement).
The participants of the study were 59 Korean university students enrolled in an English course that aimed to develop the students’ English language proficiency in an academic setting. One class of 32 students received author voice writing instruction to examine the effects of the instructional framework designed for the study. The other class of 27 students was offered organization-focused writing instruction for comparison with the experimental group. The students of each group were divided into two writing proficiency levels, high- and low-proficiency.
Over the eight-week period of writing instruction, the students in the experimental group received intensive instruction in author voice writing practices for reaction and argumentative papers with a focus on specific voice features (e.g., self-mention, attitude, graduation, engagement, interaction, social affiliation, and delivery mode). The control group also wrote the same two types of academic papers, highlighting organization features (e.g., text organization, coherence, frame markers, transition markers, code gloss, conclusion markers, endophoric markers, evidential, and punctuation). Both the experimental and control group took identical pre- and post-treatment writing tests before and after the instructions for each type of written genre. In addition to the writing tests, the experimental group completed pre- and post-treatment questionnaires to investigate students’ perceptions of the author voice awareness and practices in writing instruction prior to and after the instruction.
The findings of the present study are summarized in response to the research questions. First, the results of the study reveal partially positive effects of the author voice writing instruction on the quality of writing in two levels of writing proficiency and two types of written genres. The analysis of the holistic and analytic scores indicates a statistically significant, positive effect of author voice writing instruction in the analytic scores of writing, but not in the holistic scores. To be specific, the author voice writing instruction was significantly more effective for low-proficiency students’ ability to write a reaction paper than the organization-focused writing instruction. The low-proficiency students achieved significantly higher scores in the overall writing quality and all six writing dimensions (i.e., idea, accuracy, fluency, appropriacy, voice, and organization), although the high-proficiency students obtained significantly higher scores only in fluency, appropriacy, and voice. The significant effect of author voice instruction on the argumentative papers was also found, particularly for low-proficiency students. The low-proficiency students accomplished significantly higher scores in the overall writing quality and the six writing dimensions, while the high-proficiency students benefited from author voice instruction in the overall writing quality and the three writing dimensions (i.e., idea, fluency, and voice).
Second, the author voice writing instruction has partially beneficial effects on the students’ use of linguistic voice features—appraisal and involvement. The most frequently and effectively used voice features varied with the students’ levels of writing proficiency and the types of written genres. With regard to reaction papers, compared to other linguistic appraisal voice features, the author voice writing instruction was significantly more effective for high-proficiency students in the use of appreciation and force markers. For low-proficiency students, the author voice writing instruction was significantly more meaningful in the use of affection markers. On the other hand, among linguistic involvement voice features, the author writing voice instruction was significantly more positive for the high-proficiency students, especially in the use of reader-mention markers. The low-proficiency students showed no increase in the use of linguistic involvement voice features.
With argumentative papers, compared to the other linguistic appraisal features, the author voice writing instruction was significantly more beneficial to the high-proficiency students in the use of force and disclaim markers. For the low-proficiency students, the author voice writing instruction was significantly more effective in the use of proclaim markers. In contrast, among the linguistic involvement voice features, the author voice writing instruction for the high-proficiency students was significantly more positive in the use of genre convention markers. For the low-proficiency students, it had positive effects on the use of reader-mention markers after the author voice instruction.
Third, beneficial effects of the author voice writing instruction is revealed partially on the students’ perceptions of author voice awareness and practices. The results indicate that the effect of author voice writing instruction was significant for improving the high-proficiency students’ awareness of author voice. All of the high-proficiency students demonstrated a statistically higher understanding of concepts and expressions about author voice after practicing through the author voice writing instruction. The results also suggest that, for the low-proficiency students, the author voice writing instruction was meaningful in advancing their pleasure of writing in English and their concepts and expressions about author voice. Furthermore, the author voice writing instruction was positive in their perception of the usefulness of learning vocabulary/grammar about author voice as well as learning linguistic appraisal voice features.
The results of the analyses of the holistic and analytic scores and the linguistic voice features reveal that the author voice writing instruction has a positive effect partially on the high- and low-proficiency students’ reaction and argumentative paper writings. The favorable responses in the questionnaires also indicate that most of the student writers in the EFL context perceive the awareness and practices of author voice to be helpful. The findings from the study also imply that the effect of author voice writing instruction depend on writing proficiency levels and types of written genres. They suggest the need of proficiency-level differentiated instruction of author voice writing in EFL academic writing.;필자 목소리(Author Voice)란 일반적으로 쓰기 담화에서 나타나는 글쓴이의 자아를 뜻하는 용어이다. 최근 필자와 독자와의 상호작용이 강조되면서 글 속에서 필자의 개인적 목소리와 사회적 목소리를 함께 나타내는 필자 목소리(dialogic as voice)에 대한 관심이 높아지고 있다. 그러나 여전히 영어 쓰기 교육에서는 객관성이 강조되는 학문목적 글에서 필자의 자아가 드러나지 않는 것을 바람직하게 인식하고 있으며, 필자의 목소리에 대한 연구도 미비한 편이다. 특히 영어 쓰기 교육에서 명제에 대한 필자의 견지와 주장을 사회 공동체와 장르의 기대에 맞게 효과적으로 표현하는 방법에 대한 지도는 거의 없는 실정이다.
이에 본 연구는 한국과 같은 ESL/EFL 쓰기 환경에서 필자가 자신의 목소리를 글에서 효과적으로 드러낼 수 있는 방법의 일환으로 필자 목소리를 나타내는 언어적 표지를 지도하는 수업 방안을 고안하고, 필자 목소리 쓰기 지도가 한국 대학생들의 영어 쓰기 능력 및 필자 목소리를 드러내기 위한 언어적 표지 사용에 미치는 영향을 조사하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 또한 학생들의 필자 목소리에 대한 인식과 필자 목소리 쓰기 지도 효과에 대한 반응을 살펴보고자 한다.
본 연구에서는 선행 문헌 연구와 이론에서 도출된 필자 목소리의 언어적 표지 중심으로 필자 목소리의 분석 및 지도 모형을 고안하여 반응 보고서(reaction paper)와 논설문(argumentative paper) 쓰기 수업을 진행한 후, 상·하위 수준 학생들 작문에서 나타난 전반적 변화를 총괄적 및 분석적 채점영역으로 나누어 평가하였다. 이외에도, 두 장르에 나타나는 필자 목소리의 언어적 특성을 조사하기 위해, 상·하위 학생들의 작문에서 드러나는 필자 목소리 언어적 표지 형태를 세부적으로 분석하였고, 필자 목소리의 개념에 대한 인식과 필자 목소리 쓰기 지도 효과에 대한 반응을 알아보기 위해 설문조사도 병행하였다.
본 실험의 연구 대상은 교양 영어 수업을 듣는 59 명의 대학생들로, 이들은 실험 집단과 비교 집단으로 구성되고 다시 사전 쓰기 평가 점수를 바탕으로 각각 상·하위로 나누어져서 8 주간의 실험이 진행되었다. 실험 집단은 필자 목소리 쓰기 지도를 통해 필자 목소리의 중요한 언어 자질에 대한 집중적 훈련을 받았다. 즉 필자 목소리를 나타내는 언어적 표지를 유형별로 학습하고 이를 실제 사용하여 작문하는 연습을 하였다. 반면에, 통제 집단에게는 구조 중심 쓰기 지도를 통해 글의 구성 중심으로 학습하는 쓰기 수업이 진행되었다. 두 집단의 학생들은 실험 전·후 동일한 주제에 대한 글을 읽고 목표 장르 유형의 글을 작성하는 과제를 수행하였고, 실험 전·후 설문조사는 실험 집단의 학생들만 참여하였다.
실험 결과, 필자 목소리 쓰기 지도를 활용하여 작문 교육을 받은 실험 집단은 상·하위 학생들의 반응보고서와 논설문에서 통제 집단보다 분석적 채점 영역에서만 쓰기 능력이 유의미하게 높아진 것으로 나타났다. 학습자의 수준별로 세부적인 차이를 살펴보면, 반응 보고서의 경우는 실험 집단의 상위 학습자는 유창성, 적합성, 목소리 영역에서 통계적으로 유의미한 효과가 나타나고, 하위 학습자는 모든 쓰기 영역에서 유의미한 것으로 밝혀졌다. 한편, 구조 중심으로 학습한 통제 집단은 상위 학습자들은 적합성과 구조 영역에서, 하위 학습자들은 구조 영역에서만 통계적으로 유의미한 것으로 나타났다. 논설문의 경우는 실험 집단의 상위 학습자는 전반적 글의 인상, 유창성, 아이디어, 목소리 영역에서 유의미하게 향상된 것으로 나타나고, 하위 학습자는 모든 영역에서 효과가 유의미한 것으로 밝혀졌다. 그러나, 통제 집단의 상위 학습자들은 구조 영역에서만, 하위 학습자들은 아이디어와 유창성 영역에서만 통계적으로 유의미한 향상을 나타냈다.
필자 목소리의 언어적 표지 사용 분석 결과, 실험 집단은 반응보고서의 경우 언어적 평가(appraisal) 자질 영역의 감정(affection), 사물평가(appreciation), 강조(force), 핵심(focus), 주장(proclaim) 표지와 언어적 참여(involvement) 자질 영역의 독자 언급(reader-mention)의 언어적 표지 사용이 통제 집단보다 통계적으로 유의미하게 증가하였다. 한편 논설문의 경우는 언어적 평가(appraisal) 자질 영역의 강조(force), 반박(disclaim) 표지와 언어적 참여(involvement) 자질 영역의 독자 언급(reader-mention)의 언어적 표지 사용이 통계적으로 유의미하게 증가한 것으로 나타났다. 학습자의 수준별 세부적인 차이를 살펴보면, 반응 보고서의 경우, 실험 집단의 상위 학습자들은 사물평가(appreciation)와 강조(force) 그리고 독자언급(reader-mention) 표지 사용에서, 하위 학습자들은 감정평가(affection) 표지사용에서만 유의미한 빈도수 향상을 보였다. 논설문의 경우, 실험 집단의 상위 학습자들은 강조(force)와 반박(disclaim) 표지에서, 하위 학습자들은 독자언급(reader-mention)과 장르적 관례(genre convention) 표지에서 유의미한 빈도수 향상을 나타냈다.
마지막으로, 실험 집단을 대상으로 한 설문 분석 결과, 필자 목소리 쓰기 지도를 통한 집중적 작문 지도는 상·하위 학습자 모두의 필자 목소리 개념과 언어적 표지에 대한 이해력을 증가시켰으며, 하위 학습자의 경우는 영어 글쓰기에 대한 즐거움이 증가한 것으로 밝혀졌다. 또한 하위 학습자들은 필자 목소리를 표현할 때 필요한 영어 어휘와 문법 학습과 명제에 대한 필자의 의견을 표현할 때 필요한 언어적 평가(appraisal) 자질 학습에 있어 긍정적 반응을 보였다. 결론적으로 필자 목소리 쓰기 지도를 활용한 작문 교육은 학습자의 쓰기 능력과 필자의 목소리를 표상적으로 나타나게 하는 언어적 표지 사용 능력에 있어 부분적으로 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났고, 특히 그 효과는 학습자의 수준과 장르 유형에 따라 다양한 것으로 밝혀졌다. 이에 본 연구는 필자 목소리 쓰기 지도가 본 연구의 결과를 바탕으로 학습자 수준과 장르 유형을 고려하여 효과적으로 사용되어야 함을 강조한다. 그리고 더 많은 후속 연구를 통해 필자 목소리에 관한 다양한 쓰기 지도가 개발되어, 필자의 개인적 목소리와 사회적 공동체가 요구하는 사회적 목소리를 효과적으로 나타내는 필자 목소리 쓰기 학습이 더욱 효율적으로 이루어질 수 있어야 한다고 본다.I. INTRODUCTION 1
A. Purpose of the Study 4
B. Research Questions 9
C. Organization of the Study 10
II. LITERATURE REVIEW 12
A. Conceptions of Voice in Writing 12
1. Individual Aspects of Voice 12
2. Social Aspects of Voice 15
3. Dialogic Aspects of Voice 19
B. Theoretical Approaches to Voice in Writing 22
1. Pragmatic Approach 22
2. SFL Approach 30
C. Studies on Voice in Writing 41
1. Voice and Writing Quality in L1 and L2 Writing 42
2. Linguistic Voice Features in L1 and L2 Writing 44
3. Voice Writing Instruction in L1 and L2 Writing 50
III. METHODOLOGY 54
A. Pilot Study 54
B. Overall Design 57
C. Participants 58
D. An Analytical Framework for Author Voice 65
E. Instructional Frameworks 70
F. Materials 76
1. Pre- and Post-treatment Writing Tests 76
2. In-class Writing Instruction Task Sheets 77
3. Pre- and Post-questionnaires 78
G. Data Collection Procedures 79
H. Data Analysis 81
1. Scoring of Writing Tests 81
2. Analyzing Frameworks for Linguistic Voice Features 84
3. Analysis of Questionnaires 87
4. Statistical Analyses 88
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 90
A. Analysis of Writing Performance 90
1. Analysis of the Writing Scores in Reaction Papers 91
2. Analysis of the Writing Scores in Argumentative Papers 99
B. Analysis of the Use of Linguistic Voice Features 110
1. Analysis of Linguistic Voice Features in Reaction Papers 110
2. Analysis of Linguistic Voice Features in Argumentative Papers 135
C. Analysis of Questionnaire Responses 162
V. CONCLUSION 169
A. Main Findings of the Study 169
B. Pedagogical Implications and Suggestions for Further Research 175
REFERENCES 180
APPENDICES 194
A. In-class Writing Tasks for Author Voice Writing Instruction 194
B. In-class Writing Tasks for Organization-focused Writing Instruction 198
C. Pre-and Post-treatment Writing Tests of Reaction Papers 203
D. Pre-and Post-treatment Writing Tests of Argumentative papers 205
E. Example of In-class Author Voice Writing Instruction Task Sheets 207
F. Example of In-class Organization Writing Instruction Task Sheets 210
G. Pre-and Post-treatment Questionnaires for the Experimental Group 215
H. Criteria for Assessing Written Genres 217
I. Frequency List of Linguistic Voice Features in Pre- and Post-treatment Papers 220
ABSTRACT IN KOREAN 24
