Research Lab #6 post-game and reminders for the weekend

Announcement: I don't have plans to be in my office after 2:00 this afternoon, so if you want to see me later in the afternoon please email to make an appointment and I'll stay for you.  

Lab Exercise: Evaluate the two sample essays according to letter grades in the following categories... Ideas, Argument, Language, Research.

Sample 1

Sample 2

Lab Exercise: Concept map or paragraph outline of your research essay.

Reminder: Make sure your first draft is ready for peer review during Monday's class!

Clarification: Your first draft needs a bibliography. Whether it's annotated or not is your choice; eventually you will remove these.

Link: Another former Baltimore city cop makes an unusual argument to draw attention to the dysfunctionality of our current prison system... here is the Amazon link in case that article doesn't load... the book is called In Defense of Flogging

Research Lab #5 post-game and reminders for Wednesday

Exercise #1: Personals ad. In keeping with the dating metaphor I used last week, imagine the perfect research source or "soulmate," the one with all of the wonderful qualities that your present sources lack. The one who completes you and brings fulfillment to your research life. Or at least fills in some of the gaps that the others are currently missing. Try to think about what this ideal source would be like, and write a few sentences of description. This ought to make it easier to do one last round of database searching. Post to the comments below.

Exercise #2: Most of you are having what Marlo called "one of them good problems," namely too many good ideas from your research sources. I recommend that you create a simple list with two columns, one of which is your Major sub-topics, and the other your Minor sub-topics. If you are successfully analyzing major topics in a research paper, the appropriate move to mark off a minor topic is something like: "This also leads us to consider XYZ. Unfortunately a full consideration of XYZ falls outside the scope of this study, but in general we can say ABC. Someone surely ought to study XYZ in more detail. Anyhow, getting back to my main topic..." 

Reminders: Make sure you have all of your citations and annotations available for Wednesday's class. We will be creating outlines for the upcoming draft.

Link: Have you heard about the Three Cups of Tea guy? It's kind of like, what if Scott Templeton started a charity?

Research Lab #4 post-game and reminders for the weekend

Cheerleading Section: Since I've just met with almost all of you in the proposal conferences, I can now generalize and say... wow holy shit are you guys on top of it so far with the research paper. Amazing topics, amazing preparation. I am really excited and relieved and proud all in one. Have a great Easter/Passover/Running-to-the-pharmacy-for-Claritin weekend.

Apology section: 1/3 of you got your essay #2 grades Thursday night, 1/3 will get them by sunrise on Saturday, and the remaining 1/3 by sunrise noon on Sunday.

For those who missed class Wednesday, here are the two exercises we did.

1) Search Term Scattergories... explain your project to a partner, and have her come up with at least 10 search strings (words or phrases) that you haven't thought of yet.
2) Thesis Formation... again, explain your project to a partner, and have her write a they say I say style thesis for you. She'll be less hesitant to commit than you are since it isn't her project.

Important: If anyone is having off-campus library access issues, let me know. Most other research problems are pretty easy to fix at this point by using a better subject area database, a better search string, a subject specialist librarian, or a slight shift to the topic. Oh, and do not rely on those Mason e-links embedded in your database search hits. Take the journal title and put it back into the E-Journal search on the front page of the library site. That always seems to work better.

Iffy thesis model: Most people think topic X is one way, but I say it's another way.

Why iffy? Because this is a research paper. What "most people" think is nothing more than a starting point. We are looking for different theys within whatever research community(ies) you've chosen.

Better thesis model: Most people think topic X is one way, but I say it's another way. A growing body of research literature backs this up, but within that research we find many different models/controversies/differences of viewpoint. Some favor explanation A, some favor explanation B, and some favor explanation C. Each of these is compelling, but I will argue that B seems to be the most useful way of framing the issue.

Other better thesis model: Most people think topic X is one way, but I say it's another way. The research literature about topic A backs this up, as does the research literature about topic B and topic C. These ideas naturally fit together, but their convergence has not been well recognized or well stated, so I want to show how they can combine to form a good model for understanding the topic.

Actual student example of better thesis: The common consensus among educational researchers and scholars today is that methods of tracking and ability grouping negatively impact students, especially those that would be considered to be grouped in the “lower” track. I agree that the the methods used for grouping students may have been skewed in the past, such as for racist reasons, and that even today, ability grouping may be just as harmful to
students and educators as tracking once was. Jo Worthy, former elementary and middle school teacher and present University professor, believes that there is no foundational difference between tracking and ability grouping, and that, as she refers to in one of her scholarly articles, “only the names have changed.” On the other hand, methodological studies from organizations such as the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness and the Journal of Education Research have found some positive correlation between within class ability grouping and elementary reading achievement. Tracking has been strongly related to the negative view of tracking, there is much controversy on whether or not implementing ability grouping in today’s school systems would create more harm than help. After further research, I agree with researchers such as Jeannie Oakes, one of the founder of the great tracking debate, but argue that at some level, within class ability grouping for elementary learners may be particularly helpful when teaching foundational subjects such as reading. Aaron's meany-pants footnote: All studies are methodological because all studies use methods. So that word doesn't really mean anything the way she's using it. 

Reminder: All Thursday and Friday proposal conferences are in SciTech II, room 008. Please arrive 5 minutes early and please make sure that both you and I can read your proposal at the same time.

Reminder: By Monday you need to be up to 15 total sources with at least 10 of those annotated. For those who want to reverse an incomplete grade on the proposal, I will let you resubmit a new proposal on Monday, but for full credit it needs to be caught up to speed to the 10/15 point rather than just this week's 5/10 point.

Link: For those working on education related research projects, this is an interesting article about Obama's civil rights watchdog in the U.S. Education Department.

Link: David Simon gets himself tangled up in a real live city planning controversy in New Orleans.

Because Google Docs Keeps Defying Me: Here is the proposal template in PDF, and also the conference schedule.

Dear Anonymous Rate My Professor Commenter or Commenters: Although your appraisal that I "relish the sound of [my] own voice, ooze arrogance, cut people off to talk more about [my]self" and that my class is a "boring" place where students "learn very little" because of my "extremely irritating... ego" is the single most negative thing anyone has said about my teaching in eight years, I have to admit that at my worst moments this is disturbingly true. Especially the cutting people off point, which I struggle with, and which my wife is constantly smacking me for. So I thank you for this bracing look in the mirror. However I do want to take issue with your comment that the course is somehow not appropriate for English majors. The course is not an English course; it is a required writing course for everyone on campus which just happens to live in the English department and be staffed by the English department. So I think you may misunderstand what the course is. Further, for you to complain, of all things, that the scene analysis exercise doesn't help you develop skills related to your English major is surely your most bizarre and unexpected twist. I am not clear what English majors do other than try to link detailed analysis of the technical features of an artistic creation to some kind of broader historical or theoretical framework that might explain them and be explained by them. So that really threw me for a loop. I was kind of expecting you to say, "what does any of this have to do with writing?" or "why the unrealistic workload?" Which are the more cutting criticisms, and the more fair ones, though I am doing my best to address them this month. I also hope you will reconsider your non-chili pepper rating in light of today's festive spring wardrobe, but here again you may be maintaining a tough but fair appraisal. In conclusion, and with all intended irony, what the fuck did I do?

Research Lab #3 post-game and reminders for Wednesday

Thanks for your input in class today. I hope we made things clear about how to do the proposal and annotated bibliography.

As I said in the 9:00 class, the frustrating thing about research is that you want it to be 100% efficient and it just isn't. You run into many dead ends and have to take a step back. This is a normal part of the process, so don't feel like you're doing something wrong if it doesn't all go according to plan. I compared this wasteful aspect of the research process to what happens at Pfizer and Merck and all the other big pharmaceutical companies that employ scientists to do laboratory research... most of what they do never winds up being a successful product, but there's no other way to get there. So maybe out of the first 10 sources you come across in a database search, only 3 have good potential for your bibliography. Go back, change your search terms, use a different database, follow the forward and backward bibliographic chains. Then maybe you get 10 really good ones, but a few days later you're feeling stranger danger on a couple of those because your topic has shifted, and you also feel like there's something new about the topic you want to know, so you go back for more sources. That's just how it works.

Reminder: Wednesday's class will be devoted mainly to a thesis workshop, though anyone can always come forward and share his/her research troubles with the group, Bubbles style.

Link: This is the list of library infoguides with the subject specialist librarians highlighted in blue.

Apology: Essay #2 grades have not been posted, so you can stop hitting refresh on Google Docs. I had to go to NY for my sister's 50th birthday to talk to Brother Mouzone this weekend. I will attempt to pull double duty and grade them on Wednesday-Thursday-Friday night after the proposal conferences.

Random: Interview with Wendell Pierce (Bunk Moreland).

Research Lab #2 post-game and reminders for the weekend

Thanks for your attentiveness yesterday. I know it's a dry subject, albeit an important one.

If you missed class, you missed a lot, but this video on popular vs. scholarly sources and this website on primary vs. secondary sources will cover some of it.

And then Aaron's 302H research project got _really_ wild.

Homework: Find 5 good research sources that really fit your topic. This might mean browsing through a lot of other ones first. Don't forget the "forward" and "backward" methods of bibliography surfing I showed you, and also recycling/rearranging keywords found at the bottom of database search hits. You need to have these available for Monday's class, so make a Google Doc, or email them to yourself, or put them on a flash drive, or post them to the course blog, or whatever.

Homework: They Say I Say doesn't cover research, so I am giving you two additional chapters from another book. Read both of them: part 1, part 2.

Other Useful Research Links:
-Main GMU library site
-Databases by discipline/subject
-When you find the articles you want, put the title of the journal here to look for an online copy.
-Google Scholar

Reminder: Don't forget to look at the topic and question brainstorms your classmates generated on Monday & Tuesday. There are a lot of good ideas in there. Just click on the comments to the next post, and they're all posted there.

Reminder: You have all been shared to a Google Doc called "302-grades-nonames." Make sure you can open it, and double check your essay #1 grade. I made at least one transcription error.

Clarification: Because I stressed that the research paper needs to have a true thesis and argument instead of just being a 'book report' compiling information from sources, some of you have expressed concern to me about the need for originality. The truth is that originality, and original research in particular, are very rare things in this world. Synthesizing, summarizing, reframing, applying, extending, translating something from one context to another... those are all "value-added" research activities, and important ones that make up the bulk of scholarship. Bolts of pure genius striking down from the sky are comparatively rare. That's why I gave you the they-say-I-say model... all you need to do is capture the current nature of a disciplinary conversation about a topic, and nudge it forward the slightest little bit. You don't have to invent the McNugget. One model thesis would be: Some people say X about this topic, and some people say Y, and some people say Z. I am inclined to favor... because... Or perhaps: Some people say X about this topic and some people say Y, but I think both of them are asking the wrong question. What about Z, which other people are saying about a related topic?

Keeping a Promise: I said I would write a summary post to the exercise I gave you guys a couple of weeks back about disciplinary differences in writing tasks and rules. This is becoming all the more salient since you are now going to be writing somewhat different research papers pursuing various disciplinary and interdisciplinary topics. So here's what I found interesting.

-Language rules. Different grammatical and syntactical patterns in English vs. other languages.
-Use of technical terms. This is partly an issue of mastery, but also an issue of audience. Many of you have to switch between technical and non-technical audiences, which can be difficult.
-Detail vs. concision. Many of those entering professional fields expressed this dilemma. It can be hard to find a balance, and you don't deal with this as much in school essays.
-Control of emotional tone. Especially in customer-oriented professions. Someone mentioned the utility of "yes, but" as a rhetorical tactic. 
-English majors getting a rude awakening that most of the writing they have to do is analytical rather than creative. (Read the label, ha ha.)
-Reviews of current exhibits/productions. A review is actually somewhat different than an analysis, since it usually contains a judgment of value. You'll notice this is different than the writing I've had you do.
-People in the PR end of the communications field talked about the idea of tailoring for multiple publics, and the importance of persuasion. Persuasion is another task we're not really taking on this semester. It's somewhat different than being convincing about an argument.
-Many of you mentioned the importance of context for various writing tasks. Simon/Burns have hopefully offered an importance lesson about that.
-Evolution of language due to texting, email, etc. How to do this well, but also respect the more formal types of writing. How to switch back and forth.
-In the sciences, the importance of attending to research methodology. I try to put some focus on this area.
-Differing standards by field about the need for 'originality,' and what originality actually means.

Research Lab #1 post-game and reminders for Wednesday

For those who missed it, here was today's exercise. You'll see some student examples in the comments to this post and the next post.

1a. Potential Topic for research paper

1b. Why does this topic interest you?

1c. How does this topic relate somehow to The Wire?

1d. What are 10 questions about this topic that you'll need to know the answers to if you choose to research it?

2a-2d. Repeat for a second topic

3a-3d. Repeat for a third topic.

I will be making some concrete determinations about the research paper, but it's looking like something in the ballpark of 1500-2000 words & 10-15 cited sources. We will begin with a proposal (150-250 words, 7-10 source bibliography) and personal conference. Proposal will likely be due around April 20th. Final draft will be due around May 8th.

Late Night Note: In case I forget tomorrow. I notice that most of the topics people are choosing are related to social problems and very often social science methodologies. This follows naturally from a connection to The Wire and is wonderful, but I want to emphasize that since this is a humanities section of 302, there are many topics related to art, culture, literature, history, philosophy, etc. etc. that could also be thematically related to The Wire. So don't feel that you are compelled to write about something you don't want to.

Pet Peeve: I have been seeing this in many of the recent essays. "In Lynne Viti's article, "Lawyering and Ethics," she argues that..." This is redundant. In "Lawyering and Ethics," Lynne Viti argues that... Or, Lynne Viti's article "Lawyering and Ethics" argues that...

Class #19 Post-Game and Reminders for the weekend

Your elected officials are more like you than you thought.

I am posting this now before I forget!

Announcement: All remaining class meetings will be in the Enterprise 420 computer lab. (4/11, 4/13, 4/18, 4/20, 4/25, 4/27, 5/2, 5/4)

Reminder: Final draft of second essay due Tuesday night. Interpret "Tuesday night" freely.

#&*#@^&$: I just learned this whole thing about the Abdi Dahir arrest. You guys are supposed to keep me up to speed on what's happening on campus! How did we not talk about this in class? Just joking, but I'm am mad at myself for missing this:  Part 1, Part 2. This may be the one exception to our "not talking about things besides the research paper from now on" rule. And a great topic for the paper as well.

Link: This is a huge story in the world of education. It will also sound all too familiar to viewers of The Wire. Apparently Michele Rhee might have raised the standardized test scores in DC schools by...

Link: Interesting article about the debate over standards for college writing courses.

Link: This article may be most interesting to the journalism/comm. majors, but it's about a larger issue which is the idea of teaching personal branding in a university course and to what extent it is harmonious with other educational goals. The article also uses a familiar metaphor: "the game."

Random: I would encourage any sports fans to think about potential research paper topics in that area. I think mine would be about NBA moms.

Clarification: I mentioned in class that "nounification," the transformation of simple verbs and adjectives into abstract nouns, is often a sign of unconfident or overly formal writing. I realized there is an exception, which is if you want to present a couple of major concepts in an essay. It can be useful to label those by nouns. Like if your thesis is about why protagonists in American pop culture fictions seem to wear leather jackets so often, you could say, "this paper investigates what I'll call the leather jacket effect." So like many other rhetorical devices, nounification is something that works if you do it strategically, but not if you overuse it indiscriminately.

Opportunity: "The George Mason Review is currently hiring students to work as Peer Reviewers on their editorial board. Peer Reviewers are vital members to the board, who evaluate and choose submissions to be published in the journal. These positions will give students the opportunity to work in a professional publication setting – an experience that will look excellent on a resume. Those who are interested, and would like additional information, can contact at Managing Editor Candace Baker, cbaker7_at _masonlive.gmu.edu " This was an email sent to me. Note for clarity: at most colleges a publication ending in "review" usually belongs to whatever student group represents conservatives on campus, but that's not what this is.

Class #18 Post-Game and Reminders for Wednesday

Officer Winter is on stakeout right now in Enterprise 314 until about 4:00. For anyone who wants to talk; I promise Chris & Snoop won't shoot you.

Reminder: Wednesday's class will consist of workshops for transitions and metacommentary, so be sure to read They Say I Say chapters 8 and 10. Even if your essay isn't due until Thursday, you will benefit from coming to class with something reasonably complete. We don't have the lab yet, so you'll want to print out your draft or bring it to class in some other readable form.

Essays Due Tuesday 2pm: Schwartz, Toder, Holmes, Powers, Barney, Regier, Semenov, Baldino, Stevens, Laudiero, Symons, Velazquez, Kim, Garney, Abed, Mailey, Musgrave, Elam 
Essays Due Wednesday at the start of class: Moyers, Stockmann, Klein, Annatone, Hagos, Wright, Shahidi, Johnson, Cohen, Ambrosio, Werner, Price, Foreman, Brahim, Taweechaisuntis, Fogg
Essays Due Thursday 2pm: Lawrence, Liggett, Perez, Guevara, Yorgen, Pollack, Peji, Brown, Thacker, Spencer, Bowman

Watch This Space: Since we spent more time on the introductions workshop today, I'll post here about the disciplinary writing discussion.

Opportunity: These are topics we will cover in class this month, but for more depth the Writing Center is giving a workshop on "evaluating and integrating sources" in your research. It meets on Monday, April 11 from 2:30-4:30 pm in Student Union Building II, VIP Room II. There is also a workshop on "citing sources" in the same place and at the same time on Tuesday April 12. To reserve a spot for one or both of the workshops, email wcenter@gmu.edu . Definitely a good idea to attend if it suits your schedule.