I just imagined the whole class having a wrestling match. We could throw chairs and ladders and everything.
Maybe a tamer idea would be to just build a bunch of jigsaw puzzles together.
That being said, I'm not sure what puzzles me or what I'm wrestling with in regards to the articles.
I know what bugs me though.
I have a problem with studies that have such small sample sizes. Moreover, none of these social experiments seem to have control groups or repeatable elements.
I think the reason why we argue so much in class over the discrepancies in the "study" articles we've looked at is because these articles can't really come anywhere near giving proper findings. I appreciated it when Dr. Rickly said that many of these articles are just meant to be testimonials--Hey, this is what I did and it worked. Try it out.--But I wish that there were more feasible studies that really could help give solutions to some of the questions about writing process, group work, etc. Are there no studies out there with large sample sizes that have been conducted over several years?
Maybe I'm just tainted by my job where I look at IMRAD methods all day long and critique my authors' scientific method. But couldn't pedagogical theory be just as practical if we spent time on more extensive studies? Surely this is worth a dissertation topic or two. Maybe I haven't looked hard enough.
Okay...so I'm wrestling with this. And I guess I'd really like to punch these shallow studies in the face. Bam!
Sunday, October 5, 2008
How important is theory/are theories in our academic work? Why are they/aren't they important? Is it important for us to be familiar with theories t
Theory is obviously important in academic work. Or at least...the concepts behind the theories are important. I feel though, that people tend to naturally drift into theories. For the sake of articles and job interviews for academia, it helps to be able to define one's own theoretical slant. I am not sure if missing a theory course, however, would seriously deter anyone from exploring a certain topic. I was speaking to a professor the other day, who will remain nameless, and he/she does not think theory courses were that applicable to his/her work.
Theory almost seems to be an outdated practice. Most current scholarship tends to focus on a survey of scholarly literature on their topic rather than focus on differing theoretical practices. Certainly, there is a place in some arguments for theoretical debate, but today it seems like much of the criticism of articles focuses on the validity of the argument based on evidence, not on the theoretical framework.
For pedagogy, it might be more helpful to understand theory. Many of us are thrown into the teaching profession with little to no knowledge of pedagogical theory. I anticipate that I will probably glance back at some of these articles from class in the future and try to define my teaching style or try to find different ideas for teaching effectively.
All this being said, I don't think theory should be as canonical as it is. Leave it for the Philosophy or Psychology department.
Theory almost seems to be an outdated practice. Most current scholarship tends to focus on a survey of scholarly literature on their topic rather than focus on differing theoretical practices. Certainly, there is a place in some arguments for theoretical debate, but today it seems like much of the criticism of articles focuses on the validity of the argument based on evidence, not on the theoretical framework.
For pedagogy, it might be more helpful to understand theory. Many of us are thrown into the teaching profession with little to no knowledge of pedagogical theory. I anticipate that I will probably glance back at some of these articles from class in the future and try to define my teaching style or try to find different ideas for teaching effectively.
All this being said, I don't think theory should be as canonical as it is. Leave it for the Philosophy or Psychology department.
. . .
It's interesting that I've just spent the past 5 minutes trying to think of a title for this blog and couldn't think of anything. What was my process? I sat at the screen and stared. Chatted on Facebook on one internet screen while I kept the blog up on the other.
I am sitting in a dark office with one tiny lamp lit, casting vertical light beams in the corner of the room. It's dark outside too. I can see a few raindrop remnants in the bottom left corner of the window because of the lights from the courtyard.
I feel like writing for fun in this setting. Instead, I'm writing to finish assignments. I have to get blogs done, write bibliographies, and writing for publication assignments.
Multiple deadlines definitely do not help my writing process.
This weekend I have a conference paper coming up. I am excited about it, and I think that the process of writing this particular paper is similar to most of the work I do in which I am actually interested. My other writing (dictated by academic or other necessity) has no real process. I usually procrastinate until I run out of time and am forced to do things. This semester is particularly bad because I am taking 12 hours. Back to the point--I am going to have fun writing this conference paper, and I am actually aware of my writing process for this type of work. So here it is.
I come up with an idea. These ideas really do happen to be determined by the whims of the muses. Once I have my idea, I research the topic as much as possible. (Even if it is fiction, I research anything that could be related to the idea). Then I spend countless hours writing outlines. I jot them down everywhere. I write them in class while I am supposed to be taking notes. I write them in church during sermons. I also write down any minor ideas I might have about the topic. They find their way into my day planner, on sticky notes, written on my refrigerator or pinned to my bulletin board. I have to talk to people to get my ideas to really start to solidify, so sometimes I don't even have notes. But conversations help.
My organizational system is non-existent at this point. I am trying really hard to start organizing ideas on Google Docs so that I can always find my brainstorms. Unfortunately, I don't always have time to transcribe my written notes.
Once the outline is written and nailed down, my stress is totally gone. I then start to write the paper out in my head. This is completely unintentional, but while I'm at the gym, or riding my bike, or driving my car, or taking a shower, if the paper drifts into my thoughts, it stays there until I have worked out problems.
When I write, I definitely have to be in the right mood. My office at home is really warm and inviting. My bookshelves surround me like guardians of my thoughts. And it's comforting to see all my books around me. I think...other people have written far more words than me...this shouldn't be that hard.
I pop in a CD (usually Mozart's Requiem, some Cistercian monk chants, boys' choirs, or something celtic), pull out some notebook paper, gather any and all outlines that I have written. Then I finalize the outline (again). Then I start writing.
It usually takes about 5-8 hours to get 20 pages done. I do it all in one sitting. I may take 5 minute breaks in between. I feel totally anxious and nervous the whole time I write. Then, when it's done. I don't look at it for a couple hours.
I'll revise it the next morning maybe. That usually just consists of copyediting. I tend to trust my first instincts on drafts.
This is how I write any paper or conference paper.
But conference papers have additional steps. When I'm done with my 10 pages or so, I don't look at them for a while. I keep talking about the paper to people. I brainstorm ideas some more. I think about my audience--would they prefer a more conversational style or a formal, read paper?
I make corrections the night before. I read my paper for time. I usually read it aloud 3 times because I am making corrections the whole time I am reading. The accurate time estimate comes from the 3rd or 4th read.
That's my process. After that it's just turn the paper in or deliver it.
I am sitting in a dark office with one tiny lamp lit, casting vertical light beams in the corner of the room. It's dark outside too. I can see a few raindrop remnants in the bottom left corner of the window because of the lights from the courtyard.
I feel like writing for fun in this setting. Instead, I'm writing to finish assignments. I have to get blogs done, write bibliographies, and writing for publication assignments.
Multiple deadlines definitely do not help my writing process.
This weekend I have a conference paper coming up. I am excited about it, and I think that the process of writing this particular paper is similar to most of the work I do in which I am actually interested. My other writing (dictated by academic or other necessity) has no real process. I usually procrastinate until I run out of time and am forced to do things. This semester is particularly bad because I am taking 12 hours. Back to the point--I am going to have fun writing this conference paper, and I am actually aware of my writing process for this type of work. So here it is.
I come up with an idea. These ideas really do happen to be determined by the whims of the muses. Once I have my idea, I research the topic as much as possible. (Even if it is fiction, I research anything that could be related to the idea). Then I spend countless hours writing outlines. I jot them down everywhere. I write them in class while I am supposed to be taking notes. I write them in church during sermons. I also write down any minor ideas I might have about the topic. They find their way into my day planner, on sticky notes, written on my refrigerator or pinned to my bulletin board. I have to talk to people to get my ideas to really start to solidify, so sometimes I don't even have notes. But conversations help.
My organizational system is non-existent at this point. I am trying really hard to start organizing ideas on Google Docs so that I can always find my brainstorms. Unfortunately, I don't always have time to transcribe my written notes.
Once the outline is written and nailed down, my stress is totally gone. I then start to write the paper out in my head. This is completely unintentional, but while I'm at the gym, or riding my bike, or driving my car, or taking a shower, if the paper drifts into my thoughts, it stays there until I have worked out problems.
When I write, I definitely have to be in the right mood. My office at home is really warm and inviting. My bookshelves surround me like guardians of my thoughts. And it's comforting to see all my books around me. I think...other people have written far more words than me...this shouldn't be that hard.
I pop in a CD (usually Mozart's Requiem, some Cistercian monk chants, boys' choirs, or something celtic), pull out some notebook paper, gather any and all outlines that I have written. Then I finalize the outline (again). Then I start writing.
It usually takes about 5-8 hours to get 20 pages done. I do it all in one sitting. I may take 5 minute breaks in between. I feel totally anxious and nervous the whole time I write. Then, when it's done. I don't look at it for a couple hours.
I'll revise it the next morning maybe. That usually just consists of copyediting. I tend to trust my first instincts on drafts.
This is how I write any paper or conference paper.
But conference papers have additional steps. When I'm done with my 10 pages or so, I don't look at them for a while. I keep talking about the paper to people. I brainstorm ideas some more. I think about my audience--would they prefer a more conversational style or a formal, read paper?
I make corrections the night before. I read my paper for time. I usually read it aloud 3 times because I am making corrections the whole time I am reading. The accurate time estimate comes from the 3rd or 4th read.
That's my process. After that it's just turn the paper in or deliver it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
