Predicator Variables/ The Future of Composition Research by Cindy Johanek & Writing in High School/ Writing in College: Research Trends and Future Directions ByJoanne Addison and Sharon James McGee

Johanek seems to pose a war between MLA style and that of APA. Evidently, she quite prefers APA and wants all writers to agree on its importance and superior qualities. The problem is I, like many people in the English field, am unfamiliar with APA, and therefore have no grounds for comparison. She also concedes her preference may be the result of: “…my interest in science and psychology and in numerical evidence” (190). I personally have never felt confined by MLA, and cannot grasp her argument, but her writing reflects different schools of thought than mine, probably supporting her support of APA.

Her next focus on “big storytellers” and the need to establish oneself to gain the privilege of having a voice seems like a frustrated complaint; in all fields, one must earn their place to be heard, so this is not unusual. Everyone has stories—particularly in the field we are discussing! But not all stories can be heard at once, and each storyteller has to find their voice, and arrive at the place where they are not only heard, but can make a difference. That takes time, talent, and hard work. While one is finding their place, the lessons of those big names are fuel for success.

Johanek does express the ease some undergraduate peer tutors have in telling stories; she illustrates the top and bottom of this literary hierarchy and the ability for these opposite ends to be heard. At the same time, she ascertains that grad students (like us), new Ph.D’s, and non-tenured professors must first “earn the privilege” (196) before having a voice of interest. Although initially this sounds awful, it is actually the way of the world. When we are young students we are encouraged to speak out and as we acquire knowledge, our voice becomes more refined as we learn what and how we are to make an imprint. Also, we listen and learn from those who have already made their mark, and embrace the lessons they provide.

Boyer’s four kinds of scholarship model puts research in a broader place for professor’s scholarly works; it appears a very sound plan to me. Teachers teaching their research—is that not what we are reading and studying in these pages? Personally, I feel it is beneficial to both the researcher and the student. And Johanek makes a solid point: “Teaching our research will make us more accountable for that research…” (199). The discussion about researchers needing a statistics class seems to be a person’s preference. I had a statistics class and do not feel it has been either a help or hindrance to my research work. If one wants to run studies and create graphs to prove a literary point, perhaps work with people who are skilled in that field, as we discussed in class. There should be some math studies in any degree program, even if only a core course, but that should not be the main focus unless one is pursuing that field.

Lastly, I am relieved I will not be thrown out of grad school for not publishing (considering I never thought I needed to…)

Moving on to the Addison and McGee study, this was very interesting and seemed to bridge many various types of schools, teachers, and students. It was slightly dated at six years old, but seemingly that does not matter too much, since the same issues and concepts are still in focus. I enjoyed the surveys but was puzzled at the ratio of faculty to students. Assuming that was what they were able to get as reliable “subjects” for their survey, they covered a number of important issues in writing..

I personally found the five Scales very well thought through and remember from my children’s high school days some of these practices being implemented. My high school days would have incorporated four of the five but that last one would have been on a largely different scale from students of today. The Stanford Study of Writing was fascinating to me; the variety of writing through the four years would seemingly prove beneficial for these students (and across the board, all students) when they moved on to the work place.

The discovery that many students do not take the advice of faculty and go to a writing center is not a big surprise; many students are uncomfortable with that undertaking. Also, they might have time issues or simply feel it won’t make a difference. The only possibility might be to ask (or even require) to see their revised work after they have taken the steps for help. Some writing centers may be more effective than others, depending on the schools financial situation and amount of help available.            

 

The one time I went to a writing center for assistance with citing my sources in an annotated bibliography, the only “help” I was given, was the name of a book for citing available at the bookstore. I had genuinely hoped that someone would have taken some time with me and perhaps given me an example or two, but that was not the case. I, of course, bought the book and figured it out myself  (which was not as easy as it sounds!) BUT if I had been a student with greater needs, I wonder if I would have received any worthwhile assistance. (This did not happen here at Kean, but at the OCC campus; the result was I never returned to see if I was on the right track, as I felt so uncomfortable.) Students need more encouragement than I received to achieve success with writing questions; I hope other writing centers are far more supportive then my experience suggests.

Numbers, Narrations, and He vs. She

Qualitative Research or Number Crunching...in My English Class??

This chapter covered a lot of ground and paid attention to the numerous essays and lengthy research papers that we have all read and often disliked intensely, because of their endless mention of statistics or inclusion of confusing graphs. I am actually a fan of math, and like to be offered proof in simple terms which often means a numeric count to back up the pros and /or cons of any topic in question.

As I used the annotation tool I noticed Martha’s comments often reflected my own feelings; she also felt the use of numbers to prove results on a survey is the norm. It did occur to me, as the bowling scores were being manipulated, that numbers can also be skewed in a variety of ways and that could affect the argument. The author’s personal distaste for statistical proof or avoidance of math in general might be the root of this discussion. My personal reaction still accepts the use of statistics—in English and anywhere that numbers both clarify and prove the validity of any research in question. While numbers can be manipulated, words are far easier to use in deceptions. And writers are quite adept at both using and misusing words to their benefit.

Thinking along these lines, I was taken aback when Colin made a very insightful comment that I had not considered. He asked: ”…what if the students interviewed as part of the gathered “data” are not invested in the study and give the easiest or more popular answer simply to fulfill a requirement?” That was something I had not even considered! Perhaps a criteria for being involved in such a survey would need to be a genuine interest or personal investment. His point is valid and would definitely lead to an invalid numeric outcome BUT would also lead to the same falsity if using qualitative answers. In truth, that question would need to be considered by the researchers before they started any study.

One thing that was unsettling as I read this chapter was the tone of Johanek, often in accordance with her cited sources. It seemed they were treating female English research-writers, in a different fashion than men. And that makes absolutely no sense as each writer, male or female, has their own style, and preferred manner of research methods. Ultimately, they should choose their most powerful tool to prove the importance of any outcomes their research has unearthed. Enos’ decision to omit her supporting data, thus omitting the full scope of the outcomes, highlights the ridiculous concept of only providing a narrative. I don’t want to be “told a story.” I want the facts when research is involved! If women repeatedly adapt their writing style to gain approval from an “other” in an allegedly male-dominated field, they can never reach their personal degree of expertise, and contribute freely as research-writers.

How can masculine writing be more scientific? That is a bold generalization, especially for someone (like me) who has embraced Shakespeare, and spent time, tears, and hours of research on his works. Yet, I never noticed that detail… Albeit, they are discussing male research-writers vs. female, and suggesting that women should tell the story and create the research as a narrative. BUT WHY?  Many men (Peter Elbow anyone?) also present their findings in this manner, and many women include statistical data to empower theirs. Writing, any writing, should always be the writer’s decision and interpretation of their story.

I imagine that some of the statements about women needing to write in a different style can be attributed to the original publication date of this text. My reaction is that women have proven repeatedly over the centuries their power of the pen, and their mastery of capturing the story. Emotional writing should not only be associated with women any more than rational writing assigned only to men. That is a sexist idea and one I have never associated with one particular sex; a healthy balance of both is an integral part of any writer’s personal style.

Liminal Spaces and Research Identity:The Construction of Introductory Composition Students as Researchers by James P. Purdy and Joyce R. Walker

Reading this essay, I became very defensive about the misconception of first-year college students and their ability to research properly. Being a late-life, returning student myself, I had become somewhat adept at all manners of research as a source of survival. Four children over six years, a husband who assumed the homework was magically completed by elves, and minding the responsibilities of  home, kids, work, and, of course, school-mom-volunteer who ran shows and various other functions, afforded a necessity for honing my research skills with whatever reliable tools were available. As an incoming freshman, I was trying to cross the threshold from mom to student-researcher, and was open to all possibilities that would enhance my work. Despite my age, I felt the pressure of transition to college-life and the urgency of perfecting college-level research tools. This article stressed the importance of using both the old proven resources (textbooks) but stressed the obvious fact--most students are more adept at online research than any other resources available!their threshold to a robust teaching experience just as new college students liminal space is their threshold to attaining the full potential of a college-level researcher. I have always felt the benefit of a textbook as a model for curriculum, but I know many of my younger peers do not benefit at all from the use of a textbook in the classroom. In order for instructors to reach their students, there needs to be a middle ground and a sense of acceptance when the use of online sources is involved. And they will be more involve--actually the norm--with each passing year. Because I hope to be one of those Grad-students, first-year professors soon, I want to fully grasp the importance of utilizing the best tools available to help freshman transition into college-level researchers. I believe they have the ability, most of the skills required, and should be treated with some level of respect for what they already know but should still be offered the other tools available, as an ends to the means of becoming the best they can be in the ever-changing land of research-writing.

I also realize that Martha, who dwells in this scary land of novice writers, probably could lend some wise thoughts (and wise-cracks) on this entire situation from an up-close and personal level! I may simply be a wide-eyed dreamer, with undue optimism. But I enjoyed this essay and the direction it went as it covered the possibilities for emerging student-researchers.

The need for crap detection is definitely a must for these novice writers, but one cannot disregard the benefits of their immersion in computer resource gathering--started at an early age. I was amazed by the ease of finding resources and quickly learned to separate better, scholarly sources from B.S. sites. The speed with which things change in today's global society necessitate the careful use of online sources as well as the ability to differentiate the scholarly from the bullcrap. The essay goes on to explain that many of these composition instructors are graduate students or first-year professors themselves--trying to develop their style, lessons, and manner of advice for their students best research results. This means that Grad students liminal space is their threshold to a robust teaching experience; it also means that new college students liminal space is their threshold to attaining full potential as a college-level researcher. Because research often takes many detours, and other times seems to travel in a circular pattern, different leads will bring one on an interesting journey. Linial patterns of expected steps will not usually be the means to an end but instead one of many paths to a great beginning.