Monday, February 29, 2016

blog 2

CH 7 - Predictor Variables


The issue of present and past tenses in research writing is really interesting, and one that I had never even thought about. I only recently became aware that I often write in the present tense; I became aware of this when my boss at the newspaper told me to "watch my tenses, you're reviewing something. It'd always in the past." And until reading this passage, I couldn't understand why I was having such a hard time doing something that is so elementary. I never realized that when we discuss literature, we always do so in the present. Of course we all know that written work is frozen in the time it was written, but now I'ms starting to wonder: what does that say about how we see the author? Apparently we believe they too are frozen in time. Super interesting, and so simple! Like why hadn't I ever thought of this before? I also never realized how limiting that is. (Reasons 1 - 4 say it all). Although I think it is supposed to be the researcher's job to try and combat these issues.

I agree that APA is worth discussing in a comp class. And it's weird that APA is often cast off in comp courses in lieu of MLA whent he reality is most of the students we encounter (or will encounter for future teachers) will use APA a lot more than MLA. Yet because it is a comp course, we tend to view it strictly as an English course, when really composition spans across all majors.

Interesting contrast in this reading compared to the last one we did; specifically how this author disagrees with the "personal voice"/ storytelling method while the previous author praised it. Furthermore, this text justifies appropriate times for storytelling (namely, after you have made a recognizable name for yourself in the field).

"Guilt from not studying absolutely everything" this made me laugh, because that is exactly how it feels.

I never thought about how shielded (excluded?) students are from the research of their teachers. But now that I'm thinking about it, I've never read a single thing by any of the professors I've had, even though I knew they had or were in the process of writing/ researching. However, it always seemed that my professors were only researching/writing in order to keep their jobs. Not necessarily to advance their own knowledge as the texts suggests. The idea of  teacher discussing their research with us (as a class) seems to violate the standard social norms of the classroom. Like I actually think a professor discussing their children and spouse would seem less intrusive than them sharing their research.

"publish or perish" this seems to be more complicated by the fact that virtually anyone can publish anything, anywhere. It really raises the bar and makes it that much harder for those of us who want/need to publish  for work. How do we make our voices distinctive in a sea of them? And what's more, if we do get published, how impressive will it actually look? And as for having "substantial" publishing experience, it's that awful cycle that first-time job hunters encounter: I need a job to gain experience, but I need experience to get a job. ("Preferably a book"! As if it was that easy. Publishing a book is the dream, and this nameless job is heavily implying that it as a requirement.)

Again, there is contrast between this week's reading and last week's. Although this reading brings up the many ways in which math IS important, and how it doesn't automatically;y trigger panic attacks in those who use it.

Sunday, February 21, 2016

blog 1

My overall impression of the article was that it was good, despite the fact that it went in an unexpected series of directions.

I thought it started strong with its discussion of numerical research and narrative research. I liked that section specially because, as someone who is not very strong in math, I could relate to what the author was saying. However, I did disagree, as did others, that the degree of math aversion is not quite as strong as Johanek described. Especially in the context of research. Firstly, I am not sure how much numerical research English and Lit people deal with; secondly,  I feel that many people outside the English field would prefer numerical data, as the biggest problem with English is "there is no right answer" (which can be distressing to science and math people who deal with absolutes on a daily basis). We all know at least one person (my guess is more, though) that find writing too hard and would rather do anything else. They have a writing aversion. It depends on the person I think. Personally, I think that having numbers is helpful and often times helps put a study into perspective for me.

I thought the section on feminism was interesting, although I didn't find myself agreeing with as much as I did in the previous section. Although I am not an expert nor do I even retain a novice's understanding of feminism, to me the writing just seemed to affirm certain stereotypes of women and that to me seems like what feminism is trying to avoid. The example that comes to mind for this is the idea that "stories" are more substantial than "statistics."

In part three, I especially liked the bit about making the narrative about the researcher, not the research to create more diversity within the research field. Not only do I think that is great because it is the researcher who asks these very important and unique questions that need answering, but also because research papers are generally pretty boring to read. And why are research papers boring to read? because they all have to sound professional and factual and polished. And writing that way- stripping the individual of their voice - makes everything sound the same. Who wants to read the same thing over and over again? I have long thought that writing should focus on the writer. It is the writer who brings things to life, it only makes sense to throw our attention to them. Especially in research.