English 203: Introduction to Professional Writing Research
Content © 2008 by the individual author. Sponsored by Professional Writing at Purdue.
User login
Navigation
Reading for Thursday, March 20th
Tue, 03/18/2008 - 17:17 — Santosis
Two selections from The Craft of Research: pages 75-107 and 185 to 207.
- Santosis's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
Santos' reading notes:
1. Research involves wandering... strategically. Here's where I would stress index hunting, and bibliography tracking.
--Chronicle of Higher Ed, CompPile-- don't forget to go back with new names, etc.
--Don't be afraid to "hunt the stacks"- you can find some incredible things among the shelves, just walking around. This is the power of the "stumble-upon."
2. Book is dated when it comes to the internet- except you always want to be sure that an internet source is trustworthy. What are some simple ways of determining if a source is trustworthy?
3. Avoiding plagiarism begins with attribution (page 93). At this stage, I'm not asking you for an original argument as much as I am asking you to chart a conversation, to gather and present information. Later, as the project matures, you will argue for wikipedia and britannica's strengths and or weaknesses.
4. Reading for evidence- track down the original source (93).
5. A note on notes: here's what I do. I type the citation I want to use. Typing it makes me really read it, to become familiar with it in a more intimate way. Then I write a few sentences on the importance of the piece- in a sense, I write a sentence similar to the attribution on page 93. I try, as I'm taking notes, to imagine where and how a direct quotation will fit into my overall project. I would do this even if you only plan on paraphrasing, to avoid possible plagiarism down the road.
6. Speedy Reading- good stuff.
7. Drafting- there's no real way to teach how to start writing; writing on a team project can be even more difficult. By this stage, I hope each group has a rough outline ready and can begin plugging in text to work the document together.
8. A pit fall to avoid in this case is especially Don't Just Summarize Sources. What you need to find is a way to organize your presentation of material- a meaningful way (here's where you might begin your outline with critical points in britannica and wikipedia, then butress those points, expand your outline, w your research...). I want your presentation to reflect our research goals.
9. Taking care of quotations--before and after the text. Booth et al don't necessarily stress what to do after the quotation, although this is equally important. A sophisticated writer will often provide a paraphrase of a longer block quote. This builds ethos by demonstrating you understand the passage. More importantly, it highlights what you consider to be the most important parts of the passage. After such paraphrase, you should move on to analysis/explication. ALWAYS BE CERTAIN TO EXPLICATE HOW A PIECE OF EVIDENCE RELATES TO YOUR ARGUMENT. Never, never, never assume this to be self-evident; don't leave it up to your reader to make connections. State them explicitly.
Santos' reading notes:
1. Research involves wandering... strategically. Here's where I would stress index hunting, and bibliography tracking.
--Chronicle of Higher Ed, CompPile-- don't forget to go back with new names, etc.
--Don't be afraid to "hunt the stacks"- you can find some incredible things among the shelves, just walking around. This is the power of the "stumble-upon."
2. Book is dated when it comes to the internet- except you always want to be sure that an internet source is trustworthy. What are some simple ways of determining if a source is trustworthy?
3. Avoiding plagiarism begins with attribution (page 93). At this stage, I'm not asking you for an original argument as much as I am asking you to chart a conversation, to gather and present information. Later, as the project matures, you will argue for wikipedia and britannica's strengths and or weaknesses.
4. Reading for evidence- track down the original source (93).
5. A note on notes: here's what I do. I type the citation I want to use. Typing it makes me really read it, to become familiar with it in a more intimate way. Then I write a few sentences on the importance of the piece- in a sense, I write a sentence similar to the attribution on page 93. I try, as I'm taking notes, to imagine where and how a direct quotation will fit into my overall project. I would do this even if you only plan on paraphrasing, to avoid possible plagiarism down the road.
6. Speedy Reading- good stuff.
7. Drafting- there's no real way to teach how to start writing; writing on a team project can be even more difficult. By this stage, I hope each group has a rough outline ready and can begin plugging in text to work the document together.
8. A pit fall to avoid in this case is especially Don't Just Summarize Sources. What you need to find is a way to organize your presentation of material- a meaningful way (here's where you might begin your outline with critical points in britannica and wikipedia, then butress those points, expand your outline, w your research...). I want your presentation to reflect our research goals.
9. Taking care of quotations--before and after the text. Booth et al don't necessarily stress what to do after the quotation, although this is equally important. A sophisticated writer will often provide a paraphrase of a longer block quote. This builds ethos by demonstrating you understand the passage. More importantly, it highlights what you consider to be the most important parts of the passage. After such paraphrase, you should move on to analysis/explication. ALWAYS BE CERTAIN TO EXPLICATE HOW A PIECE OF EVIDENCE RELATES TO YOUR ARGUMENT. Never, never, never assume this to be self-evident; don't leave it up to your reader to make connections. State them explicitly.