5.3.1 Differences(RQ1)
5.3.1.1 Differences in Moves
Table 10 shows the number of theses containing each move and metatexts in the three sub-corpora,each of which contains 30 opening sections.Move 2 Providing Rationales is the most widely employed move,occurring in all 90 theses.Move 4 Presenting the Study is the second most widely used move,found in 88 out of 90 theses.Move 1 and Metatexts were identified in 82 out of 90 theses.Move 3 Establishing a Theoretical Framework is unequally distributed among the three sub-corpora,appearing in 20 out of 30 theses in the America sub-corpus,but in all 30 theses in the China sub-corpus and 29 out of 30 theses in the New Zealand sub-corpus.The differences among the three groups in Move 1,2 and 4 are not very obvious in terms of distribution since they have a high occurrence in the opening sections written by students in all three communities.
Table 10 The number and percentage of opening sections containing the moves
Table 11 shows the length of each move and metatexts in the three sub-corpora.Since the size of the three sub-corpora is not equal(CN:191,812;NZ:305,062;US:177,477),the length is standardized by dividing it by the size of each sub-corpus.The sum of the length of the four moves and metatexts does not equal to the size of the corpus because some texts serve other functions such as justifying methodology,which is usually included in the Method chapter.I did not add these less-used moves to the move model of the opening section since they are not typical features of the opening section,together only taking up less than 3% of the corpus.
As shown in Table 11,Move 2 Providing Rationales is the longest move,taking up 38% of the opening section on average,followed by Move 3 Establishing a Theoretical Framework which takes up 37%.Move 4 Presenting the Study is the shortest move,taking up 5% on average.Unsurprisingly,the average length of Move 3 in the China sub-corpus(50%)is much longer than that in the America sub-corpus(26%)since there are more opening sections containing the move in the China sub-corpus(The range,median and interquartile of Move 3 in individual opening sections are presented below.).In the case of Move 2 Providing Rationales,though it is almost evenly distributed in the three sub-corpora(CN:30/30;NZ:30/30;US:30/30),a noticeable difference in standardized length is identified across the three sub-corpora:whereas Move 2 takes up 27% of the China sub-corpus,it accounts for 51% of the America sub-corpus.The average length of Move 2 in the America opening sections is nearly double that in the China opening sections.
Table 11 The length and proportion of each move in the three sub-corpora
As shown above,differences in the length of moves are observed in the descriptive data.To examine the significance of the differences,statistical tests were conducted using a data matrix containing the length of each move in each opening section.As mentioned in the method section,outliers were winsorized for the purpose of statistical comparison.Overall,a MANOVA test produces very strong evidence against the null hypothesis,suggesting that there is a significant difference among the three sub-corpora in terms of the length of moves(V=0.47,F(10,168)=5.09,p＜0.001).A post-hoc test of Kruskal-Wallis reveals significant differences in Move 2(H(2)=15.95,p＜0.001),Move 3(H(2)=18,12,p＜0.001),Move 4(H(2)=9.22,p＜0.05),as well as in metatexts(H(2)=6.74,p＜0.05).The following paragraphs describe where the differences lie exactly in the three moves and metatexts among the three local communities.
Move 2 is the most widely distributed(90/90)and longest move(38% on average)in the corpus.As shown in Figure 7,students in America have the longest Move 2(Mdn:53.5%,Interquartile:31.25%,70.75%),New Zealand students in the middle(Mdn:37.5%,Interquartile:23%,49%)and students in China the shortest(Mdn:25%,Interquartile:14%,38.25%).A pair-wise comparison using Mann- Whitney U test reveals significant differences between China and America(U=204.50,z= -3.63,p＜0.001,r = -0.47),China and New Zealand(U=284.50,z= -2.45,p＜0.05,r= -0.32),and New Zealand and America(U=299.00,z = -2.23,p＜0.05,r = -0.29).
Figure 7 Boxplots of the standardized length of Move 2 in the three sub-corpora
On average,Move 3 is the second longest move(37% on average)used in the opening section of Master’s Theses.As shown in Figure 1,students in China(Mdn:46%,Interquartile:39%,60%)use more of their opening sections to establish theoretical frameworks than their peers in New Zealand(Mdn:37%,Interquartile:21%,49%)and America(Mdn:20%,Interquartile:0%,39%).A pair-wise comparison(Mann-Whitney U test)reveals significant differences between the groups of China and America(U=187.50,z= - 3.89,p＜0.001,r= - 0.50),New Zealand and America(U=309.50,z= - 2.08,p＜0.05,r= - 0.27),and China and New Zealand(U=259.50,z= - 2.81,p＜0.01,r= - 0.36).
Move 4 is a frequently used move(88/90)but does not take up much of the opening section(5% on average).As shown in Figure 3,the rank of the standardized length of Move 4 in the three sub-corpora is similar with that of Move 2,with American students ranking top(Mdn:5%,Interquartile:3%,10%),New Zealand students come second(Mdn:4%,Interquartile:3%,8%)and students in China at the bottom(Mdn:3%,Interquartile:2%,4%).The only difference revealed by pair-wise comparison is between the groups of China and America(U=314.50,z= - 2.02,p＜0.05,r = - 0.26).
Figure 8 Boxplots of the standardized length of Move 3 in the three sub-corpora
Figure 9 Boxplots of the standardized length of Move 4 in the three sub-corpora
Metatexts,though they do not take up much space(4% on average),have a high occurrence(82/90)and are a typical feature of thesis and dissertation.As shown in Figure 4,students in the New Zealand community(Mdn:6%,Interquartile:3%,7%)use more metatexts in the opening section than students in China(Mdn:4%,Interquartile:3%,5%)and America(Mdn:3%,Interquartile:2%,5%).A pair-wise comparison reveals significant differences between China and New Zealand(U=311.00,z= - 2.07,p＜0.05,r= - 0.27)and between America and New Zealand(U=297.50,z= - 2.27,p＜0.05,r= - 0.29).The difference between China and America is not statistically significant(U=393.00,z= - 0.86,p=0.39,r= - 0.11).
Figure 10 Boxplots of the standardized length of Metatexts in the three sub-corpora
5.3.1.2 Differences in the Realization of Moves
Move 1 Familiarising Readers with the Field
Move 1 introduces readers to the research field of the thesis.It is a move used by writers to acquaint readers with the background of the study.The present study identified 1,461 rhetorical units in total and 208 of them are Move 1.This move occurs in both the Introduction and Literature Review chapters,though more writers use them in Introduction(78/90)than in Literature Review(48/90).The six steps of this move identified in New Zealand sub-corpus(see Study 1)have all been employed by writers in China and America.A Chi-square test reveals a significant association between the steps used to realise Move 1 and the community which the writers belong to(χ2(12)=26.48,n=208,p＜0.01).
Step 1a Centrality
The step of claiming centrality was used by 27 writers in total.Though more favoured by students in the China community(13),it occurs in all sub-corpora(see Table 12).Basically,this step informs readers that the field under examination has many researchers involved and draws much attention from the academic community.To claim centrality,writers maintained that many studies have been done in the area,and then make a generalization about what kind of studies have been done or refer to claims of established researchers in the field to back up the centrality claim.
Table 12 The number of theses employing each step in the realization of Move 1
Students from the three communities follow similar ways to claim centrality,but two differences were noticed in close examination.First,the linguistic realization of claiming centrality shows a varied focus and style among the three groups.As shown in the first excerpt below,students in China community use“more and more”,“increasing”and“growing”to indicate that there are not only many studies now,but the field will continue to gain popularity.American students focused on the present,stating that there are“a wide range of”,“many”,“a significant amount of”research focus on the particular field(see the second excerpt).Compared with Chinese and American students,New Zealand students claimed centrality in a more direct way,stating that the particular area“lie at the heart of”,or“hold a central place”in a larger field,or claiming that the particular topic under discussion is“a popular topic”(see the third excerpt).It is interesting to see that two Chinese students in the New Zealand community followed the typical way of centrality claiming in Chinese,using“increasing”and“growing”interest to indicate that the particular field is a central one.
Planning studies in second language acquisition(SLA)have attracted more and more attention in recent years.(CN:Song,2013)
There is a wide array of research and literature focusing on second language(L2)classroom interactions...(US:Ko,2009)
Tasks hold a central place in current SLA research and also in language pedagogy.(NZ:Ashcroft,2009)
The second difference lies in the way of backing up the centrality claim.Students from all three communities made generalizations about the focus of the“many”studies of the field under discussion,using“researchers”,“experts”,“scholars”or“teachers”to substitute the names of authors in the field.But most American students,after giving the generalization,inserted a list of in-text citations on which the generalization is based.Citations were often left out in the writings of students in the China and New Zealand community.
Step 1b Importance
This step was used by 28 writers in total(CN:10;NZ:6;US:12).The importance of the research was claimed in a similar manner in the three local communities,usually involving writers stating that the specific topic of their study contributed to language learning or teaching,and backing up the statement with claims of established researchers in the area or findings from well-known studies(see the excerpt below).Compared with students in New Zealand and America,some students in China started by emphasizing the importance of learning English and then the importance of the specific area(e.g.Wang,2011).
The lexical-chunk approach has offered a promising new direction for language teaching(Nattinger &DeCarrico 2000),and is also considered as one of effective methods in teaching English writing.(CN:Dong,2013.txt)
Step 1c Terms,theories and/or seminal works
Introducing terms,theories and/or seminal works is the most frequently used step in order to familiarise readers with the field(37 in total).The majority of instances of this step occurred in the Introduction chapter(35/37).In the Literature Review chapter,terms and theories were also reviewed but for the purpose of establishing a theoretical framework.The realization of the step is similar in the three sub-corpora.Terms,theories or seminal works were usually presented in chronological order,narrating the history of a research topic following the thread of the development of a term,a theory or seminal works.
Step 1d The broad field
Introducing the broad field is the only step in Move 1 that occurred more often in the Literature Review chapter(22)than in the Introduction chapter(10).The step is more widely used by students in China(12)and New Zealand(11)than students in America(6).The broad field refers to the research area in which the topic of study lies.For example,Wu(2013)examined the influence of ESP teachers’related work experience on their classroom teaching.She introduced the field of ESP as the broad field and reviewed the development of the field from 1960s to 2000s.Apart from presenting history,the step was also realised by introducing concepts,theories,seminal works and debates in the area.The difference between Step 1c and 1d is that the concepts,theories or seminal works introduced in 1c are directly related to the research topic,whereas those reviewed in 1d may not be used in the study but just for the readers’information,mapping the whole area before narrowing down to specific points.
Step 1e Context
Twenty-six writers described related context of their study,including the history and development of a particular community or learner group under examination or a setting in which the study was carried out.For example,Lee(2013)explored Spanish language maintenance and shift in the Chilean community in Auckland and she introduced the history of the Chilean community in Auckland as the context of study.This step enables writers to narrow down the research topic and to pinpoint a specific setting or a group of interest.The occurrences of this step are roughly evenly distributed among the three groups.
Step 1f Related personal experience
Over half of the occurrences of Step 1f appear in the New Zealand sub-corpus(12/19).By sharing related personal experience,writers viewed the research field from their own perspective,informing readers of their position in the research as an insider or having access to insiders’views and sometimes acknowledging their bias towards the topic.For instance,Martin(2006)examined perceptions of teacher bilingualism.He acknowledged that as a manager at an Auckland language school,he had pre-existing views on this topic before conducting the research,in his own words:“The present writer is aware from his own experiences in management positions at Auckland language schools that the above issue has often been controversial,if unarticulated”(p.32).This step is less used by students in China(2)and America(5).
Move 2A Providing Practical Rationales
Move 2A is used to justify the choice of a topic by claiming that the research can solve real-world problems.In total,146 units of Move 2 were identified and they were realised by one of the four steps,namely stating a real-world problem or need,showing evidence of problems,and evidence or claims of usefulness of the topic in addressing the problems,and articulating significance of the study.No statistically significant difference is identified in the use of steps in Move 2A among the three local communities(χ2(6)=5.82,n=146,p=0.44),though more students in China(27/30)justified their study than their peers in New Zealand(22/30)and America(20/30).
2A-a Real world problems or needs
Practical rationales are the most popular kind of rationale in the corpus.Writers described a real-world problem or need and then claimed that their study was useful in solving the problem.Step 2A-a presents problems or needs.As shown in Table 4,44 out of 90 writers adopted this step.It was employed by more students in China(19/30)than students in New Zealand(14/30)and America(11/30).Social and political problems were mentioned by writers in all three communities,though the exact problems may not be the same.For example,the argument that globalization heightens the need of learning English was very much preferred by students in China(e.g.Zhang,2013),while the problems raised by American and New Zealand students were more diverse and more closely related to their specific topic such as the impact of the development of technology on language learning(Albaddi,2013).
Table 13 The number of theses employing each step in the realization of Move 2A
2A-b Evidence of problems from empirical studies
In Step 2A-b,thesis writers reviewed relevant studies for empirical evidence of a problem.Eighteen theses contain this step,with slightly more students in America(8)using it than students in China(4).The main purpose of this step is to provide practical rationales rather than empirical rationales for the choice of a research topic,since the empirical evidence was given to show a real-world problem or need.
2A-c Evidence or claims of usefulness of the topic in solving the problem
Step 2A-c was used to discuss the usefulness of a topic area in solving the problems described in 2A-a and 2A-b.In the corpus,2A-c was often realised by stating the advantage or significance of the topic,as in the excerpt below.
The significance of learner beliefs has been related to several aspects of the language learning processes.Firstly,it has been related to mismatches between teacher and learner agendas in the classroom(Barcelos &Kalaja 2003).Additionally,learner beliefs have also been linked with students’use of language learning strategies...(Moosa,2005)
2A-d Implications,significance or contribution
Unlike Step 2A-c in which the significance or usefulness of the topic area was introduced,in 2A-d,writers discussed the significance and contribution of the study itself.As the most widely used step in Move 2A,48 out of 90 writers employed this step,with more students in China(21)using it than students in New Zealand(16)and America(11).Writers in the three local communities realised this step in similar ways:apart from revisiting the real-world problems that a study intended to solve,some writers mentioned other contributions.For example,in the excerpt below,the author articulated the theoretical and empirical contributions.
Theoretically,this study attempts to further our understanding of the effects of planning time on language learning;it could make contributions to the literature on the influence of planning time on L2 oral production…(Song,2013)
Move 2B Providing Empirical Rationales
Providing Empirical Rationales is a move in which relevant empirical studies are reviewed and gaps in previous studies are pointed out in order to prepare for introducing the present study.It is the most widely used move(89/90)and the second most frequent move in the corpus(328 occurrences).The units of Move 2B in the corpus were realised by three steps,namely reviewing relevant studies,pointing out gaps and reporting mixed findings or debate.The distribution of the three steps in the three sub-corpora follows a similar pattern and no statistical significant difference is identified(χ2(4)=0.60,n=328,p=0.96).
Table 14 The number of theses employing each step in the realization of Move 2B
Step 2B-a Relevant studies
Step 2B-a was employed by 84 thesis writers out of 90 and is the most widely used step in the corpus.As mentioned in Study 1,the difference between 2B-a and 2B-c lies in the way of organizing relevant studies,that is,whether studies are reviewed in the chronological order according to research areas(2B-a)or in two opposite camps(2B-c).Nearly all writers in the three local communities employed 2B-a,though a difference is perceived in the aspects of empirical research reported by writers in the three communities.That is,when reviewing empirical studies,the majority of New Zealand and American writers presented data collection and analysis methods adopted as well as data size and then report findings,whereas a considerable number of writers in China skipped details on method and reported findings immediately after introducing the topic of the study reviewed,or only reported research topics in a synthesized manner.
Step 2B-b Gaps
Seventy-five out of 90 writers pointed out gaps in previous studies.As shown in Table 14,the step of indicating gaps is almost equally distributed in Introduction(51)and Literature Review(61).Taking the China sub-corpus for example,only half of Step 2B-a Relevant studies in the Literature Review chapter(26)is followed by 2B-b Gaps(13).Without indicating gaps,the function of reviewing studies is only to contextualize the author’s own study and locating his/her project within the area.No difference was perceived in the way of pointing out gaps across the three sub-corpora,but the gap-pointing units located in the Introduction chapter were articulated more generally(such as the first excerpt below)than those in the Literature Review chapter(such as the second excerpt).
Many of the expatriate studies have been done on the western context and comparatively few pay attention to the Chinese cultural environment.(Qin,2009)
The instruments for measuring L2 WTCI and WTCO developed by Maclntyre,Baker,Clement and Conrod(2001)were intended to be used in the western contexts.As a result,problems arise when they were used to investigate L2 WTC in EFL contexts in China.(Liu,2011)
Step 2B-c Mixed findings or debate
As mentioned above,in Step 2B-c,writers reviewed literature in opposite camps.The way of organizing studies suggests that the topic under examination is open for discussion and thus more research needs to be done in this area.Thirteen theses contain this step,including two in the China sub-corpus,seven in the New Zealand sub-corpus,and four in the America sub-corpus.No obvious difference was perceived in the way of presenting this step across the three sub-corpora.
Move 3 Establishing a Theoretical Framework
In Move 3,writers reviewed definitions of key constructs and related theories to establish a theoretical framework for their own study.In total,176 units of Move 3 were identified and they either reviewed existing theories and constructs or presented their own theoretical framework.No statistically significant difference was identified in the selection of steps of Move 3 among the three local communities(χ2(2)=3.36,n=176,p=0.18),though,as shown in Table 15,there are more students in China(12)employing Step 3b than their peers in New Zealand(4)and America(6).
Table 15 The number of theses employing each step in the realization of Move 3
Step 3a Theories and constructs
The step of reviewing theories and constructs was used by 79 out of 90 thesis writers and more frequently appeared in the Literature Review chapters(74/79).There are fewer writers in America(20/30)employing this step compared with their peers in China(30/30)and New Zealand(29/30),where reviewing theories and constructs was observed in every sample.Theories and constructs were introduced in a similar manner across the three sub-corpora,in which the main components of a theory were explained and important definitions of key constructs were presented and sometimes were contrasted.
Step 3b Theoretical framework of the present study
Step 3b always appeared with 3a,in other words,thesis writers always build their own theoretical framework on existing theories and constructs.Twenty-two writers described their framework directly,including 12 writers in China,four in New Zealand and six in America.In Step 3b,writers presented the definitions of key constructs and theories that were adopted in their own study and sometimes explained why a particular definition or a theory was chosen in many.Writers in China preferred to articulate their framework clearly.Close examination of scripts reveal that New Zealand and American writers only presented theories and definitions that they intended to use in their framework,while writers in China reviewed relevant theories and they chose one to use.For New Zealand and American writers,the process of reviewing theories and definitions is presenting their own theoretical framework.
Move 4 Presenting the Study
Though it is a short move that only takes up 5% of an opening section on average,Move 4 is the second most widely used move in the opening section(88/90)and the most frequent move in the corpus(334 occurrences).Seven types of steps were identified in this move.However,since there are too many steps in Move 4 occurring less than five times in each of the three sub-corpora,it is not possible to perform statistical tests to explore the difference in the preference of steps among the three groups in Move 4.The most widely used steps of Move 4 include introducing research aims(83/90),research design(58/90)and research questions(55/90).Another interesting step in Move 4 is discussing researchers’role(4g)that occurs often in the New Zealand sub-corpus but rarely used by students in the other two communities.The use of the steps in the three groups is reported below.
Table 16 The number of theses employing each step in the realization of Move 4
Step 4a Aims
Introducing aims is a widely used step by students in all three local communities.It was observed in every text in the New Zealand community(30/30).Writers in the three groups presented aims in similar ways.The expressions like“the purpose of the study”and“the study aims to”were frequently used.Apart from presenting the overarching research aim,some writers also listed specific aims(e.g.Dai,2011).
Step 4b Research questions
Compared with students in New Zealand(23/30)and America(21/30),fewer students in China(11/30)articulated their research questions clearly in their opening section.There is a possibility that the research questions were presented at the beginning of the Method chapter.But the findings of the present study alone show that students in China less frequently articulated research questions in their opening sections,compared with their peers in New Zealand and America.
Step 4d Research design
Step 4d is like a summary of the Method chapter.The information varies in studies following different research approaches.For example,for experimental studies,writers introduced their experiment design(e.g.Nichols,2009)while for ethnographic studies,writers described participants(Lee,2013).But most of the writers described the source of data,reported and sometimes justified their data collection method.In general,New Zealand and American students gave more details on research method and process than students in China.For example,the following two excerpts were taken from two experimental studies.The first one was written by a student in China and the second a New Zealand student.The Chinese student introduced the process of the experiment in a highly summarized way,describing the process simply as“training and instructing the subjects”,whereas the New Zealand student gave explicit information on pre-test/post-test,duration of research,groups of participants,etc.
The study centres on the training of certain reading strategies in English majors’extensive reading course,which involves training and instructing the subjects in grasping and applying reading strategies in their studies(Liu,2009).
The study utilised a quasi-experimental approach…and involved an experimental group and a control group.A pre-test/post-test design was adopted in order to collect data over a four month period ...In addition,a student questionnaire was administered to collect demographic information about the participants.Lastly,a post-data collection email was sent to the experimental group participants,to investigate their perceptions of the recasts they were exposed to during the treatment sessions(Nichols,2009).
Step 4g Researchers’role
Step 4g was often used by New Zealand students,with eight New Zealand students having it in their opening section,while only one American student employed it.No one from the China community discussed their roles in the research.Some writers positioned themselves as an insiders or a friend of insiders who have access to insiders’view of the research community(e.g.Yu,1998;Lee,2013).Others described their close relationship or interest with the topic,and acknowledged potential bias that they may hold towards the issue under examination(e.g.Halstead,2002).
5.3.1.3 Summary
The result of statistical tests shows a significant difference among the three local communities,suggesting that the genre practices of Master students in China,New Zealand and America in composing the opening section of thesis varies.Quantitative and qualitative comparisons among the three sub-corpora reveal differences in all four moves and metatexts in terms of the length and the realization of moves at the step level.
For Move 1 Familiarising Readers with the Field,a statistically significant difference was identified at the use of steps among the three groups,with students in China making more centrality and importance claims,students in America less presenting the broad field,and New Zealand students presenting more related personal experience(χ2(12)=26.48,n=208,p＜0.01).
For Move 2 Providing Rationales,American and New Zealand students paid more attention to positioning their research in the field and making space for their own study than Chinese students(F(2,87)=9.29,p＜0.001).The analysis at the step level suggests that American and New Zealand students provided more details on the methodology of research reviewed than students in China.
For Move 3 Establishing a Theoretical Framework,a significant difference was revealed at the length of scripts used to establish theoretical frameworks,with Chinese students having longer Move 3,American students having the shortest Move 3 and New Zealand students in the middle(F(2,87)=10.87,p＜0.001).The analysis at the step level shows that Chinese students(12),compared with their peers in New Zealand(4)and America(6),preferred to articulate their own framework clearly after reviewing others’theories and/or definitions of major constructs.It seems that New Zealand and American students regard the process of selecting and reviewing certain theories or definitions as the process of building their own theoretical framework.
For Move 4 Presenting the Study,there is evidence suggesting that American students use more words presenting their own study than Chinese students(F(2,87)=6.23,p＜0.01).The analysis at the step level reveals that fewer Chinese students presented their research questions in the opening section(11)compared with New Zealand(23)and American(21)students.New Zealand and American students described their research design and methodology explicitly while Chinese students introduced their methodology generally in the opening section.Some New Zealand students(8)discussed their roles in the research and acknowledged any bias they may have while only one American student did so.Furthermore,New Zealand students used longer metatexts than students in China and America(H(2)=6.74,p＜0.05).In the next section,I will discuss possible reasons underlying the differences reported in this section and compare my findings with those of previous genre analyses.