May 31…Becker (Ch. 1)
Do you see any overlaps between Becker’s talk about writing and
what we’ve discussed so far in this class?
June 19…Ed. Research and the Question of Quality
Chapters 8 and 9 together raise a lot of interesting questions about just how objective we can hope to be with social science/educational research and, consequently, about the potential worth or these sorts of inquiry. He also discusses action research as a potential way to do work that matters…discuss.
Michael Here:
ReplyDeleteBecker’s discussion about writing in the chapter one of his book feels intuitively correct. As a doctorate student who has just finished his first year, I felt incredibly anxious about the writing I was/am submitting to classes and professors. Sometimes, and this is still true, I will read and re-read an email several times to ensure I appear well spoken and clear. I don’t remember feeling this way in undergraduate, and I remember handing in some poorly composed papers. There is a shift which occurs in the thinking and writing of a would-be scholar, or at least this is what I feel has/is currently occurred/occurring.
As a doctorate student, there has been a lot of talk of publishing, and how important it is to create articles which can be published because when you apply for jobs institutions will look for how many articles you have to your name, and this may be true. Becker seems to support Learning Communities, which Bryk cites in his article; yet, there has little talk about developing this community as a doctoral student. Maybe it is implicit, but there seems a need to admit to new scholars that even tenured professors are constantly in conversations which inform their research and publications.
I like that you bring up having to publish. I remember discussing this in Foundations I last semester and someone made the point about full-time students/those who have GA positions having more opportunities to publish than part-time students. I wonder if full-time students/GAs in the program find that this is true? How would part-time students try to be productive while juggling both full-time work and the demands of pursuing a doctoral degree?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBecker’s first chapter inspired me to use this blog as a platform to admit my own rituals and fears, similar to those explained in the book. No rhyme or reason here, just thoughts in first draft fashion.
ReplyDeleteI found myself writing notes in the margins of the syllabus, elements within the text I wanted to comment on. Admittedly, I am a procrastinator and would argue that my best writing happens at the last hour (yet, I also know this is not true). I, too, generate ideas in my mind before writing them on paper. I use voice recognition in the car and sometimes to dictate long portions of a manuscript because once I get going, my fingers can’t keep up with my thoughts and I lose the point – I hate that.
Before I started writing this, I went to the kitchen and cleaned my countertops as I concocted what I wanted write in my head. Of course I laughed because I had just read about the cleaning ritual and noted that this was mostly a female practice. “Am I that predictable?” I wondered. I thought about the statement regarding students not knowing their peer’s writing or work habits, which is true in my case. I thought it might be a good idea to talk about the fear of writing, fear of critique, and shame of procrastination in class. I mean, why not get it out? I’m a therapist by profession and encourage it all the time.
I like the “getting it right” point: a good paper is one that asserts an argument that is successfully demonstrated. Easier said than done, I would say. So, how do we encourage valuable critique and editing? I will agree to bringing a past paper to class to be edited by a peer. I also like the activity of everyone contributing a sentence on a topic to create a short paper to (maybe) build upon. How cool would that be? My motivation to write after reading this chapter is twofold, start earlier to allow for unraveling of raveled thoughts and don’t be afraid to be humble.
Hannah:
ReplyDeleteBeckner's first chapter, in my opinion, is in place to help the reader feel comfortable with any unease they feel towards writing. Through this chapter he presents multiple examples of individuals, from all stages of their academic career, struggling with writing "successfully". I appreciated his transparency on the frequency that people were frustrated with writing, but also have conflicting feelings on the notion of "good" academic writing in general. I understand that it is important to communicate an idea in a concise, and successful manner, I also know that academic writing standards are based upon standards that are exclusionary to people outside of a certain class. It is more problematic when you consider that the certain class has been historically exclusionary to those outside of a certain gender/race. I understand that at this time, it is still important to adhere to the standards in academic writing that are presented to us, but I wish that it also came with more discussions on the complications of those standards so that we may slowly start to undo them.
On that note, I would like to leave a link of a Harvard student who rapped for his final thesis in lieu of submitting a book of poetry, novella, or short story: http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/22/us/rapper-harvard-thesis-trnd/
I read about the same student too, and actually got to hear some of his work. It is interesting, and I agree with you on the rules of "good" academic writing. Does the idea of "good" mean adhering to a standard form required by the respective discipline and being clear and concise, or does the idea of "good" merely refers to the ability to communicate in a clear and concise manner?
DeleteThis is taking the conversation in a completely different direction, but your thoughts on undoing complications of these standards also reminded me of the conversation we had last semester on becoming public intellectuals. If undoing the complications of standards of "good" writing eventually leads to increasing access to academic research, then would that not be somewhat beneficial to society as a whole?
Cassandra
ReplyDeleteThere was overlap in the brief discussion on professors not necessarily being experts in the whole field of education as he writes he was teaching a course on writing while professing there were many criticisms of his writing. I enjoyed the first chapter and wished that VCU had a similar course for students. I have searched other institutions and have found that many offer some writing courses similar to students. I also picked up several nuggets of information I can use, or stop using. I have my rituals as well including having to have a clean workspace. Before I begin writing this, I folded clothes, dusted and cleaned my shower. Like Margaret Ann, I thought how predictable, but that ritual helps clear my mind. I also like to handwrite things in a notebook. After I read an article or a book, I will dump my brain of thoughts and notes. I will go back to that notebook throughout the writing process.
I also agree with Hannah that there are groups of students matriculating that may need more assistance than others. Participating in the writing center and their events is a huge help, and Dr. Phillipsen recommended a great book How to Write a lot that I purchased and has been my writing class so to speak. I do think, however, that the University should offer a more structured approach to writing than just reading and discussing it.
Shannon
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Becker’s first chapter, I couldn’t help but think of the unique position of doctoral students in education. As Becker notes, and many of us have discovered, writing as a graduate student is much different from writing as an undergraduate. But, thinking back to our discussion last week, I do wonder how much the experience of teaching, and even what we teach, can impact the relationship with writing. My background in history and years of prepping students for AP tests certainly steers my writing in a specific direction (and makes it almost PAINFUL to write in first person). I’ve had to work to break myself of specific writing “rules” I would teach my students that no longer apply in academic writing. I’d imagine the same is true for others with P-12 experience, particularly Language Arts teachers.
As for the ritual of writing itself, I’ve found I write best over time in shifting lines and paragraphs. I’m not one to knock out a paper in a few hours, but gradually build and add thoughts to a document over several weeks (so I can come back and re-word, move, or eliminate what I wrote last time).
Virginia here:
ReplyDeleteBecker’s first chapter on writing was a salient piece that sheds light on many aspects of the writing process in graduate school. After teaching the beginning stages of writing in kindergarten and first grade the past seven years, I certainly had many fears beginning this doctoral program in regards to academic writing. I was not sure I even remembered how to construct a paper anymore and feared failure like many of Becker’s students.
However, at the start of this program some of my peers suggested peer editing the papers we had to turn in. In a couple of the classes I have taken so far professors have had us exchange papers in class, peer edit outside of class, and in one class we even read parts of our papers aloud. This forced writing collaboration was terrifying, but also an eye opening, learning experience. Dr. Tefera stressed the importance and value of being in a writing group by telling us in 702 that she participates in weekly writing meetings with a few of her former graduate school and post-doc peers.
I agree with Michael that the idea of collaborative writing does reflect Bryk’s suggestions of PLCs. I also think writing and developing confidence in a particular style of writing is reflected in our class discussion of Dreyfus’ model of skill acquisition and what is means to be an expert. As beginners in a doctoral program we are probably heavily relying on the rules of academic writing and have not gotten to the point of being able to write freely about our interests.
I enjoyed this chapter as well. The Master's program I was in was fairly writing-intensive, and because it was set up in a way that we took classes alongside doctoral students, I always felt a little insecure about my quality of writing. Unfortunately, I still feel the same way and perhaps even more so knowing that expectations are higher now that I am in a doctoral program. The chapter reminded me of a conversation with my husband a couple of weeks ago (when I was talking about writing the final paper for Foundations I). I used to read his papers when he was in grad school, and he asked why I never solicited his help in doing the same thing. I had to think about my response for a second because it was one of those moments that made me go “Hmmm, I never really thought about that.” But then eventually I realized that it was because I was really self-conscious about my own writing and didn’t want anyone to read it and go “Oh gosh that’s really bad writing.” or “That’s a really stupid idea.”
ReplyDeleteMy self-consciousness and apprehensions about allowing someone else to edit my writing also calls into mind imposter syndrome. Having been advisor to a lot of graduate students throughout the years, I have always been the one to talk students down the proverbial ledge when they feel inadequate or that they don’t have what it takes to be in a doctoral program. Now that I am in a doctoral program myself, I definitely feel like an imposter from time to time – if not most of the time!
Jen U (a.k.a. Sewing Jen):
ReplyDeleteI thought Becker's first chapter was very instructive and sets a good tone for doctoral level writing. The practical information and unmasking assumptions about how other people write helped me feel more confident about my own writing and rituals. The chapter also made me think about our class conversation last Wednesday, when we talked about the difference between researchers and practitioners, and how the doctoral program is a process that pushes people to change from a practitioner identity to a primarily researcher identity. The way we write speaks a lot to our role and our mindset. Changing the way I write is a big step toward changing my identity from practitioner to researcher/scholar. Much like I think the best researchers are the ones who maintain roots and connections with practitioners, I think the best writers are ones whose scholarly writings are still able to be read and understood by practitioners.
And, as Hannah wrote about, there is a larger social justice issue around "academic" writing and how it is often used as a gatekeeper to keep students with certain ideas or backgrounds either out of the field or to make them conform to the field. People in power set and reproduce academic writing conventions, which serve to reproduce educational inequality at all levels. The higher ed establishment is still predominantly white, predominantly male, and typically not a first generation college student. We need to make sure that students who do not come from these backgrounds are given the tools and information to succeed, but we also need to figure out how to broaden the definition of good academic writing to encompass a wider range of values, experiences, and viewpoints.
Jen Gellock
ReplyDeleteBecker’s first chapter resonated with me in many ways. The big one that stood out to me was when he discussed how he has his students bring papers in to class to be edited be each other. One student remarked she was not able to bring one because she did not have one. However, the real reason was—she did not feel she had one that was good enough. This was literally me the beginning of this semester when I had a faculty member at another institution who I connected with because of similar lines of research interests asked me to send her a paper so she could “see what my writing was like”. I had the EXACT same reaction as Becker’s student—“I don’t have one that’s good enough to send!” How could I have made it through a first semester of a doctorate program, MBA, and undergraduate career and still feel like I could not send her a final piece of my writing? It was definitely refreshing to hear that I may not be the only one who feels this way at this moment of my educational pursuits.
Another big take-away I took from this chapter was that rough drafts help us shape our future decision-making in the writing process. It allows us to see how our thoughts have been shaped and developed from previous drafts as we continue to write. We have these drafts and our job is to continue to “make it clearer” for our intended audience. By editing and re-rereading/writing rough drafts this process allows us to develop these skills. Thanks Becker for allowing for a nice exhale, and the understanding that not everything needs to be perfect the first go-around.
Ashlee:
ReplyDeleteBecker emphasizes the idea that writing as a doctoral student is different than that of an undergraduate student in that the first draft doesn't cut it. He states that undergraduate students often don't have the time for writing to be an iterative process. However, when I consider my own journey into academia and the journey of scholars around me; I cannot imagine that I have much more time as a graduate scholar. I agree with Becker that writing should be an iterative process of editing, refining, and rewriting, but this seems much more complicated and time consuming than he suggests. On pg.18 Becker discusses the importance of writing for various audiences, which reminded me of our brief discussion of public intellectualism from last week's readings. In this discussion we acknowledged that the work of engaging with various audiences is time consuming and difficult. In a field that seems to encourage rapid publication and dissemination to various stakeholders, how does one accomplish it all and still engage in the iterative process of developing good writing that Becker is advocating for?
One piece of Becker's chapter that I particularly appreciated was the discussion on the decisions that have already been made prior to writing the first word. I often reflect on this in terms of how my paradigm influences the way I think about a question or even write about it. However, Becker extends this idea beyond the influence of our paradigms to consider how our methodological decisions also have an affect on our writing. I think this is important to keep in mind as I approach my future writing. How do my previous choices (perspectives, research design, theories, data analysis, etc.) influence the writing that I will / can produce?
Melissa Cuba
ReplyDeleteBecker’s beliefs about the importance of writing overlap with Richardson’s perspective on how, as social scientists, our work within the field of study will inform the enterprise. To some extent I agree that some graduate students may have a fear of being wrong in their writing, but I disagree with Becker’s perspective on the need for more causal statements as if it were a remedy. Scientists are cautious about making these assertions and they should be. While I was reading, I also thought about how we pick up writing habits, such as writing alone, and stick with them. Becker speaks of pluralistic ignorance in academia yet how is the process of collaborative writing supported in schools and universities. The first time I co-wrote a paper was at the end of my M.Ed. program and that was a painful process.
Josh here:
DeleteI agree that it's a somewhat dangerous throwaway comment to say what you mean at the expense of what empirical evidence shows. I think I see where he's coming from though, in that the process of peer review reduces writing to a boring, inoffensive hum by intimidating authors from making bold claims or writing with flourish that may confuse a portion of readers. I am reminded of a depressing expression a Dutch friend of mine once told me, "the head of wheat that stands above the rest is cut off by the scythe." I think what Becker is alluding to is that good writing should be authentic to our ideas as well as our data.
Jessica:
ReplyDeleteI had to chuckle while reading this, as a few points really jumped out at me. First and foremost, like Margaret Ann, was the cleaning point. It was not a ritual that I was particularly aware of, yet when I reflected as read the introduction to this chapter, I had to acknowledge that I do it. Before I sit down to do my writing, I clean the kitchen and do the laundry – every time. They are mindless tasks that allow me to organize myself and my thoughts. For the most part, up to this point, I have had the fortune of writing about the topic that fuels my passion, therefore, my brain flows faster than my fingers type, so it is necessary to have some sort of the outline assembled in order for the paper to not be a HOT MESS.
The next train of thought that I had while reading this chapter was the journey that I have had as a first year Doc student. In the series of classes that our cohort has taken, we have written a lot and done a fair amount of peer editing, in a similar domain of Becker’s description. Looking back, I see my evolution in his explanation. I was that writer that could bang out a (short) paper in high school, undergrad, or even my prior professional life with little to no effort. However, the transition to longer, more centered, researched based pieces, has been a journey for sure this year – one that continues. I see growth, yet there is still room to continue to grow!
Josh here:
ReplyDeleteBecker examines the awkwardness of the academic writing, review, and publication process through the lens of a class of new PhD students. Through his description of their frustrations, mistakes, solutions, and the eventual coming together of their community, he holds a light to the phenomenon of practitioners becoming indoctrinated into the rituals of academia that Labaree and Richardson articulated in the field of education. The shock and dismay of a budding author receiving voluminous red ink from a peer is parallel to the angst some teachers feel about swapping out the classroom for the academic sphere.
I have to admit that Becker has exactly identified and described my fears over the last two semesters that any writing talent I had was gone, only to then figure out that my one shot process of churning out undergraduate and Master’s length papers that I could contain and organize in my head, no longer worked for longer PhD level papers. It’s also interesting to me the degree to which anxiety drives much of the rituals and practices surrounding people’s writing.
Morgan DeBusk-Lane
ReplyDeleteI’ve read many books on writing. Most recently, Schimel’s “Writing Science,” Silvia’s “How to Write a lot,” and William and Colomb’s “Style: Lessons in clarity and grace.” None of which have made me into a prolific writer by any stretch.
To write well, seems largely in part to finding a team of support or peers to help mold—as Becker discussed a few times. Everyone has their peculiarities, or rituals, that get words on the paper, however, what you do thereafter is arguably the most important. To that point, much of defining what a discipline, field, or concentration is relies upon a formal agreed upon path that leaves much to be developed. We all reside within broad categories or “discipline/fields” (tracks) and have required classes that are institutionally bound. These structures, much like the formalized mechanics of writing, are seemingly set to allow freedom. This makes sense, as doctoral education suggests we are “experts” or are to be “experts” at something within our broad disciplines.
Aside from viewing writing as its own discipline and skill (which, of course, it is), writing’s macro-process seems to easily mimic that of becoming skilled or an expert on any given topic. The process, by which we take classes, conduct research, and publish, is an iterative process that is continually defined, criticized, and changed. Those that define, criticize, or alter the process are likely the same that define what a discipline is or what should amount to tenure, professorship, and ultimately success within the confines of academia. Therefore, it seems plausible that to adhere to the conventions that are set requires those that aspire success, publishing, or notoriety (expert status) to follow the rules, fit in, and conform. There seems to be, both in writing and academia, little room to deviate.
However, no marked step of scientific accomplishment that advances civilization has truly been because someone followed the set rules.
Therefore, my opinion of writing and academia is that there are certainly rules and structures to follow as a guild, but you must seek the creative, risk, and find your own. Or conform—but what fun is that?
But the social organization of writing and reputation changes in graduate school. Teachers talk about your papers, for good or bad, to their colleagues and to other students. With luck, the papers grow in qualifying papers or dissertations, read by several faculty members.
ReplyDeleteGraduate students also write longer papers than undergraduates do. Students expert and the one-shot term paper cannot hold a longer paper in their heads so easily. That’s when they start losing their ability to write. They cannot produce a one-draft paper and be confident that it will not provoke ridicule and criticism. So they don’t write. (Becker, 2007, 11).
I believe we discussed multiple conceptions of the writing process in class. Going on a long walk and thinking is writing. Making dinner is writing. Art education complicates the writing process because visual communication does not require verbal language. However, lexical communication is critical to demonstrate competency and conduct research in art education and education in general. I am so excited by the prospect of using my writing in new ways beyond strictly academic purposes. Writing that I produce in a class has a captive audience who is paid to care about what I have to say. When I was working on my M.A.Ed. I found my professors intimidating, despite their best efforts. I was very nervous when I presented my thesis and it was excruciating. However, when the Ph.D. in art education program came into existence at VCU I knew I had a new purpose for writing the thesis. I focused on the construct of disposition in teachers of artistically talented students. My hope was that it would demonstrate that I was interested in the field of art education. I was very lucky to get into the program. I have only published peer reviewed work in undergraduate journals.
I hope to write an essay about my recent experience in a glass blowing class and relate the process of creating a glass vessel to creative development in an art student. The way the glass is initially gathered from the furnace and shaped for further work is critical to adding additional complexity to the piece. The glass cools rapidly so one must be methodical and highly intentional while working, at the same time using the random developments to continue to push the shape in a direction. The process typically requires teamwork to create anything complex. Also, there are numerous situations where one can make mistakes that cannot be fixed, the vessel could become useless, malformed, or shatter.
I am trying to build upon what I have learned from writing my thesis to guide my future work. I am working on a grant application as part of my GA that I want very much to succeed. The grant was initially very onerous but now I feel that it can become useful to both myself and others and I hope that it does. I understand the difficulty one can feel when faced with a long writing assignment, especially when it is in a different format or subject than what I am familiar with. However, the factor with the biggest impact on my writing ability and academic success in general is my health. I have a disability that has a major effect on my life. When I am well I can be quite productive, when I am sick any progress I have made can be destroyed quite impressively.