In UW20 student-writers are asked to make complex intellectual, analytical, and rhetorical moves in their thinking and writing. Often our everyday language forms are not particularly well suited to such tasks as handling multiple perspectives at once, to forging connections between abstractions and examples, synthesizing ideas from a matrix of sources.
Fortunately, discourse communities (like disciplines, professions, and fields of study) develop specialized traditions of language used to do this complex kind of communicative work. Part of what UW20 students learn is how to recognize, appropriate, and revise these specialized language forms for their own expert writing situations.
The following post provides sample language templates developed by UW20 Professors Eric Drown and Rachel Riedner (inspired by and in dialogue with Graff's and Birkenstein's They Say/I Say) to handle some of the more frequently encountered rhetorical situations that will arise in argumentative writing.
Note: Some instructors may be concerned that such templates might stifle students' originality or do too much of the hard work of thinking for them. We disagree. Professor Drown agrees that "students should think for themselves, but I don't think these templates do the thinking for the students. I'm persuaded by my experience that these templates help students in the ways described by Birkenstein and Graff: which is to help them "bring out aspects of their thought" that they wouldn't have recognized without the templates' prompt. I think these sentence-forms give order to student's ideas, invite students to question their beliefs, and to situate their ideas in relationship to the ideas of others. What the templates do is make key rhetorical moves available to students in way that enables them to develop their ideas in much the same ways more seasoned scholars do."
Professor Riedner uses these templates in her UW20 classes not as formulas but as exercises to begin the writing process. The templates get students to recognize moves of academic writing and to make explicit how they're working with the writing of other authors. Professor Riedner stresses that as students develop their ideas and develop their own language, they should move beyond the templates.
Arguing for an approach to your material and setting up an argument (that will emerge in the paper). These sentences could be worked into an introductory section of a research paper, helping you set up what the paper is doing, what your approach adds to existing knowledge on your subject, and why your approach is important. A strong argument makes a claim that requires analysis to support and evolve and offers some point about the significance of your evidence. It promotes thinking, prompts further questions and draws attention to specifics. It often tends to “push back” against a different view of the topic.
Describing your topic: I am studying __________, in order to learn/explain ___________, which is significant because _________. NOT: I’m “doing” X.
Justifying your approach: I approach [my material/object of study]___ [in this specific way] _______ to support and expand points about the significance of ________. My approach allows us to see evidence __________, prompting further questions about _________ and drawing attention to ________. As a result, my work expands/challenges/argues against _______ view of evidence, and allows us to see ________ [that may have not been considered or understood before].
Developing your ideas and claims: These strategies allow you to produce analysis and develop arguments based on your analysis. These strategies can help you work rigorously with your evidence, help you explain how you’re interpreting it, how you’re adding to existing analysis, how you’re developing key ideas and concepts, how you’re contributing to existing scholarship and knowledge on your subject.
Complication: This explanation gets us __ [only so far] __ as we try to explain [whatever it is we’re explaining]. ___ [Key pieces of evidence] __ don’t fit this explanation in ___ [this particular way] __. Consequently, [Reformulate the argument in light of this]. Repeat.
Complication: Unfortunately, what I have just said is not enough to explain _______. To adequately understand _____, we’ll have to consider ________. Or, The case isn’t so simple, rather _______.
Querying key terms: [These key terms in my argument] __ need to be queried because ___ . Having developed these terms, [reformulate the argument and retest against evidence analyzed in the new terms].
Considering argument as part of something larger: While it may appear that _________ are insignificant, when understood as________, they [significance of new understanding].
Reformulate argument by refusing to go along with the conventional wisdom: Most commentators on ______ tend towards [their understanding] ________. If we consider it in [different] _________ terms, it becomes possible to generate such new insights as _________.
Clarification: Although it might appear that I am saying ________, I really mean ________. Or, Said another way, _________.
Definition/Redefinition: Although this term is usually understood in this [simple] way __________, in the context of my work it means this [more complex, nuanced, specific, specialized thing] __________ . This more subtle meaning is important because ____________.
Introducing and exiting a quote: According to X, a scholar of [source of authority], ________ [paraphrase of the larger argument of the quoted piece]. In “___title___” she writes: _____________. What she means in the context of this paper is _______. If X is right about ______, then __[return to your own ideas considered in light of the quote or as a way to redirect the insights of the quote] ___.
Attributing Sources: According to X, ________. In historian X’s view, ________. In “title of piece,” essayist X argues that “__________.”
Revealing an implication: [Following a discussion of specific details in a writer’s piece] These details add up to the unstated assumption that _________. Or, Although X doesn’t say so explicitly, she appears to mean that ___________.
Revealing a questionable assumption: X’s claim that _____ rests on the questionable assumption that _______.
Contextualizing a specific insight: [This specific thing I’m talking about] is best understood as part of _______ . Or, [This specific thing I’m talking about] is specific example of ___[this larger pattern] ___. By seeing this thing in context, we discover that _______.
Specific insights confirm a more general claim: So as we can see from these aspects of _________, that X more generally tends to ________.
Moving from a general claim to a specific piece of support: [After making the general claim]. For instance, ________. To take a case in point, ________.
Representing the state of dialogue in a field: Such scholars as X and Y have argued recently that ______. This view stands as an important correction to that of Z who classically argued that ______. This shift has enabled the field to ______, producing a better understanding of _______. In light of my own research, ________.
Extending and developing a point of agreement: I agree that _________, and would even add ________. This extension of this idea is productive because ________.
Using summary of someone else’s work to develop a point: In light of what I’ve been arguing, it’s instructive to consider what X has to say about a similar topic: _______. As s/he argues __________. If X is right/wrong about ______, then my ideas __[need to develop; should alter what X thinks…]__.
Allow a counter-argument to develop your point: Some people object that ______. Although I concede __________, I ________[reformulate my point to account for the apt criticism]______.
Conclusion
Getting at the significance of your work [NOT just summarizing what you’ve already said]: At stake in this argument is _______. Or, While most other scholars have argued _______, my work reveals ______. This new insight is significant because _______.
*Developed in response to Gerald Graff’s and Cathy Birkenstein’s work in They Say/I Say: The Moves that Matter in Academic Writing (NY: W. W. Norton, 2006).
Friday, April 17, 2009
How to Make Key Rhetorical and Intellectual Moves in Expert Writing
Friday, March 13, 2009
How to Get Started on Research as an Emergent Researcher
Most high schools and many college writing courses teach "Research" as a set of skills to be mastered, which can be applied to any "research problem." In the First Year Writing Program, we believe that research is a methodical, but organic and essentially thought-driven process. Simply put "research" are the situational but rigorous strategies that intellectuals use to observe the world (be it in the form of text, human behavior, social structures, or natural phenomenon) and to develop defensible and productive knowledge-claims about it. The faculty believe that first-year students are not only ready to conduct real research on authentic problems, we believe that their findings, analyses, and interpretations are worth reading. The toughest problem for emergent researchers working to develop methodical but organic strategies for observing the world in particular research situations is knowing how to manage multiple new concepts, processes, and techniques at the same time as they are becoming experts in the subject and field of their project.
In this post, Professors Phyllis Ryder & Eric Drown, and librarians Dolsy Smith & Deborah Gaspar offer advice on how to get started on research as an emergent researcher. Please, whether you're an emergent or experienced researcher, leave a comment or question derived from your own research experiences.
According to Prof. Drown, "emergent researchers have to embrace a substantive mind shift as they make the move from doing research assignments to rehearse research skills to conducting authentic research on open questions of active interest. In a 'research skills' approach, students are taught to answer questions definitively by seeking, evaluating, and presenting information. The work of the researcher is to collate, judge, and perhaps to recommend. In contrast, researchers working on authentic research problems have to construct objects of study, figure out the appropriate and meaningful questions to ask, locate scholarly communities of interest, determine or invent supple and reliable methods of observation and analysis, and test their knowledge-claims for accuracy, sufficiency, and productivity in particular discourse communities. In this model, the researcher observes, explores, creates, interprets, forges connections, persuades, serves and participates in communities of interest."
This all sounds very complicated, but librarian Dolsy Smith's"very unlibrarian-like" approach to his research-work captures the spirit of an organically developing matrix of essentially curiosity-driven tasks that makes up a useful research process:
"Research never really begins (just as it never really ends). You 'start' your research by sorting through what you already know or think or wonder about a subject, from the assumptions and impressions you bring to it, from whatever in your experience has drawn you to this subject in the first place. But this is hardly a limitation. In fact, if you neglect this part of the process, you'll have a hard time identifying your own stake in the subject matter, by which I mean that once you start juggling what others have already said about it, you won't know what you yourself have to say.
I start my research in a very exploratory mood: I spend a lot of time poking around, indulging in free association, following various angles and leads, looking for the hook that will catch my interest. Often I hop from footnote to footnote until I hit on a text that allows me to think about the subject from an unexpected perspective or with a vocabulary that I'm not used to. This kind of text need not relate directly to the subject I'm researching; indeed, it can work better if it doesn't. That's because the point of research and argument is to introduce fresh points of view on [even] familiar subjects, and the most important arguments are those that draw connections between things that no one had considered relevant to each other before. "Relevance" is not given; for any particular subject, there is not a finite set of relevant sources waiting to be discovered. The task of the researcher is to construct the relevance of what she finds. Something I read makes me think of something else--I test out a connection--if it doesn't click, I have to be prepared to go back and look (and think) again. But the key components of research are reading and writing and thinking."
Follow Mr. Smith's advice and you'll end up developing the "sense of interest in and curiosity towards your subject" that librarian Deborah Gaspar says is a key trait of successful researchers. According to Ms Gaspar, you can create that sense of curiosity by using research skills that you already have. In early stages of the project, she advises, researchers should "do a kind of mental inventory--ask yourself what you already know about your subject. Make a list of words and look for links between different ideas. This will set you up to think about what you want to know or are curious about a subject. There's nothing wrong with Googling your topic to help you in this idea-generating phase. Just use the results list (and search suggestions) to see how the search and summary algorithms connect words, ideas, examples, events, and people to one another and to see what your brain-based algorithms (intuition, insight) make of the material you've fished up."
Prof. Ryder's suggestions aim at helping emerging researchers understand what they're looking for and how to work with what they find. She says:
"Don't research just to find 'fact'; research to find arguments. While you might find some 'facts' useful for setting up the background of your essay, the real heart of your work will be to figure out the many ways people argue about the issue. It's rare to find two people who define the problem exactly the same way; fewer still define it the same way and recommend similar courses of action. More likely, you'll find that people disagree about what's going on, about whether what's going on is productive or harmful, about whether a solution fits the problem and so on. Look for the arguments and figure out how you can group them. Who is talking to whom about what part of the problem? Which part of this discussion will be most useful for you?
As you find some articles that really seem to speak to the question you've found, pause to read them. Write a "coming to terms" (a la Joe Harris in Rewriting) identifying the overall purpose of the piece, how it develops, and what its uses and limits are. This kind of close reading and writing as you go will help you keep track of the conversation you're following. You can start seeing patterns; you'll start noticing when a lot of people agree on the same point and when there is disagreement.
On a real practical level: Sign up for a session on how to use Refworks (the free citation manager GW libraries make available) and then use it to capture all the articles and books you think you might use. keeps track of what you found and where you found it, and will later format your bibliography for you. Using it from the start will save you time down the road."
Whether your research is in the humanities, social sciences, or sciences; whether you're seeking narrow answers to specific questions, opening broad new lines of inquiry, looking at familiar things in a new way, or clearing away previous wrong answers, research is a creative act of knowledge-making situated in the needs, habits, and interests of communities of interest. Just as what counts as "good writing" varies in different disciplinary, professional, cultural, or civic settings, so too does what counts as "good research." As you get more familiar with the research practices of the communities of interest you seek to join, you'll feel more comfortable with the ways members of those communities construct their objects of study, organize matrices of data, create frameworks of meaning, and make knowledge-claims. But, as Ms Gaspar advises, "if you think of yourselves as engaged in a conversation with other writers interested in similar concerns, and observe the ways they do things, you'll quickly learn how to contribute to, extend, and even change the scholarly conversation."
Please, whether you're an emergent or experienced researcher, leave a comment or question derived from your own research experiences!
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
How to Start UW20 on the Right Foot!
Every semester students needlessly underperform in UW20. And not because they're ill-prepared or "bad writers." They perform below their abilities because their expectations of what the course is meant to accomplish for them don't match the University’s expectations of the course’s functions.
Confronted with a course that's more challenging, less rule-bound, and less focused on grammar, style, and technique than expected, some students resign themselves to simply getting through the course with minimum effort. They not only risk having to retake the course, but also miss out on a major educational opportunity that the University values so highly that it’s the only course that the University requires of every single first-year student.
Approaching UW20 with the right attitude is vital to making the most of the course. So let's dispel some myths about the course and offer you some success strategies.
One last thing before we get on with it: I'd love to hear what you think about all this. Please leave a comment by clicking on the link at the end of this post.
UW20 is not remedial. It's not the University's way to ensure that you can write competently or proficiently. It's the University's way to introduce you to the intellectual practices and communication conventions of an institution dedicated to creating new and productive knowledge. Think of UW20 as the University’s way to invite you to become full participants in our most important mission.
UW20 does not teach “good” writing according to some arcane universal and timeless standards (like “concision” or “one-idea-per-paragraph”). Communities of people who create and use pieces of writing to do work establish local standards of what counts as “good” writing, “good” argument, “good” style, “good” research, and so on. As you might expect, what counts as “good” in one locale might be deemed “bad” writing in another, depending on the needs, customs, and purposes of the local discourse community. Since UW20 is designed to introduce students to the ways of writing and the habits of mind of academics and public experts, you’ll need to expect a class where the “rules” for writing well are contingent, flexible, and dependent on idea, audience, and purpose.
Accordingly, UW20 is not an extension of the kind of writing required of students in High School or other first-year University classes. The writing tasks assigned to you in UW20 are not simply longer, more complicated, and more intense than what you’ve done in HS and other first-year classes. In the main, they will be qualitatively and purposively different. In UW20 you’re not just working on developing clear and logical expressions of ideas. More than any other course early in your GW career, this one asks you to think of yourself as an emerging scholar, capable of creating new knowledge. With this change come new standards, new motives for writing, new analytical and argumentation techniques, and new responsibilities to readers.
Our best advice: EMBRACE CHANGE!
Don't trust that what worked in HS will work to the same degree or at all in UW20. Expect that you'll probably have to change your beliefs about yourself as a writer, as well as about what writing is and does. You’ll definitely have to change your work processes, and the standards by which you evaluate your achievement.
Change your self-image with regard to your role in UW20. When you think of yourself as an emerging scholar, not a first-year student learning a “skill,” you’ll expect more of yourself and see writing both as part of the way you learn something new, and the way you teach that new thing to other people in a way that enables them to do something with the knowledge.
Develop effective study methods for doing more than memorizing and reproducing facts or expert opinion. Ask your peers, professor, or librarian for help.
Expect more frequent, more complex, and more interrelated homework assignments, ones that will directly shape your abilities to do the major projects of the course. Poor work on the supporting assignments will make success on the larger assignments far more difficult.
Realize that grading will be more process/results-oriented and less related to amount of effort.
Develop a conviction that responsibility for passing the course rests primarily with you, although your instructor and your librarian are there to help you do your best.
Work on the course frequently, diligently, and consistently. Don't think you can fall behind by a couple of weeks and catch up in a marathon session the night before the paper is due. All you’ll do is lose sleep, miss the deadline, and have to re-do the project.
Use office hours—early and often, and not just when you’re experiencing problems.
Go along with the learning processes your professors have designed for you, even if you don't fully understand them (but do ask lots of questions to better comprehend what's being asked of you and why).
Try to do the tasks assigned at the level of complexity with which they're presented to you. Don't substitute what you know how to do from high school for what is being asked of you. Don't reduce "interpretive synthesis" to "compare and contrast" or "write a persuasive argument" to "have an opinion."
Expect revision to be more about testing and developing ideas, rather than simply correcting errors in style, grammar or working on clarity of expression. Revision will be ongoing throughout the writing process. Editing for grammar, style, and clarity will come at the end of the project.
Don't believe in the myth of writing as a talent. It's a craft—something that can be learned through practice and response. No one is inherently a "bad" writer. Everyone can improve their ability to communicate complex, interesting, and useful ideas more persuasively. But you have to work well and effectively at it.
Don't believe that “proper” writing instruction should focus primarily on skills, techniques, style or grammar. Because academic and expert public writing seeks to provide its communities with rich, productive, and transformative knowledge, time spent working on reading, interpretation, idea-development will enhance your writing.
Don't quit on the course when: a) it gets difficult, b) it gets confusing, c) the instruction you’re getting doesn’t match what you learned in other settings, d) you don't get the grade you wanted, e) you realize that you’re going to have to change your approach to academic or expert public writing. Instead, get help—Fast. Form a study group, ask a peer for help, visit your librarian or professor.
Don't browse the internet, check your e-mail, update your Facebook page, tweet or text in class or while you’re working on your UW20 homework. Recent scientific research shows that multitasking strongly disrupts learning, particularly the kind of complex analytical and logical operations you’re setting out to learn in this class (http://www.webmd.com/balance/guide/20070201/multitasking-hurts-learning). So while you might have been able to listen to music, chat with a friend, watch YouTube, do some algebra problems, and write your history report in HS, you’re very likely to be sabotaging your chances of success if you apply the same strategies to your UW20 work.
Expect to work on UW20 outside of class, between 8 to 12 hours a week.
Expect to be pushed well beyond your current capacities—no matter what level of proficiency you bring to the course.
Go to class, every time.
Be well prepared for class, every time.
Do assigned work to the best of your aspirations, not to meet minimum expectations.
Participate fully and actively in every class.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Top Tips to Finish UW20 Strong!
13. Use the Writing Center!!!! (UW20 student Ashley Dennee).
12. Primary sources are your friends! (UW20 student Alyson Corbett).
11. When you find sources, capture the information. Write it down; print it out; "print to screen." Otherwise, you end up searching for an essay or a primary source for hours without any luck (UW20 student, anonymously submitted).
10. Sleep enough. Eat well. Minimize sugar intake. Avoid the Red Bull! Get some exercise (endorphins are stress-relieving). Have some fun--but not so much that you can't work the next day! (Prof. Drown).
9. Give your writing, revising, and final researching the time that it needs. Do a little bit every day (Prof. Fruscione).
8. Contact your professor and librarian. They can help you find valuable resources (UW20 student Ashley Dennee).
7. Instead of trying to write new material at the beginning of your writing session, try to start a period of writing/revising by rereading what you did during the previous session. This can be a helpful way of easing back in to the writing process, instead of hitting the ground running (Prof. Fruscione).
6. Be ruthless with yourself when it comes to revising. If material doesn't belong, it should be taken out.
5. Give yourself a physical and mental break--take a short walk, do some yoga, go for a jog, or something else to get you away from the computer for a bit (Prof. Fruscione).
4. Sometimes, it is good to work on just one section of the paper, for a couple of hours, and then return the next day, to work on another section (UW20 student, anonymously submitted).
3. You have many different sources for sources available to you, DON'T be afraid to use something other than the internet! (UW20 student, anonymously submitted).
2. Expect that your end-of-the-semester tasks will take longer than you think (Prof. Drown).
1. Don't revise when your tired. You miss a lot of stuff. Instead, take a nap beforehand. It's better to say up a little later revising and not be tired because you took a nap than it is to rush through revisions while exhausted and get to bed early (UW20 student Joanne George).
Posts
