Effective Strategies for Academic Writing 9789046966549, 9046966542

Table of contents :
Preface
Table of contents
Introduction
Website
I Setting the scene: procedures, process, and product
1 The writing process: dos and don’ts
2 Getting started
II Making a plan: the what, why, and how of planning
3 Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?
4 Picturing your research: how
5 The thesis: table of contents, time schedule, and writing out the plan
III Interlude: between making a plan and writing the text
6 Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)
7 Reading: why, what, and how
8 Getting feedback: how, who, and when
IV Writing the text
9 Preparing and writing the first draft
10 The first revision: content, structure, and external structure
11 The second revision: style and finishing
Final thoughts
References
Index
About the Author

Citation preview

Effective Strategies for Academic Writing

Joy de Jong

u i t g e v e r ij coutinho bussum 2017

c

www.coutinho.nl/effectivestrategies Your study material is available online. Go to www.coutinho.nl/effective­strategies to access it.

© 2017 English edition Uitgeverij Coutinho bv © 2017 English translation Patrick Graman Original title Handboek academisch schrijven, Uitgeverij Coutinho bv, 2011 All rights reserved. No parts of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, storing in an informational retrieval system or otherwise, without prior permission from the publisher, unless it is in accordance with the exemptions established in the Copyright Law of 1912. For reprographic reproduction as permitted on the basis of Article 16h of the Copyright Law of 1912, the legally required fee should be paid to Stichting Reprorecht (PO Box 3051, 2130 KB Hoofddorp, the Netherlands, www.reprorecht.nl). Enquiries concerning the reproduction of parts of this publication in anthologies, readers and other compilations (Article 16, Copyright Law 1912) should be made to the publication and reprographic rights organization: Stichting PRO, PO Box 3060, 2130 KB Hoofddorp, the Netherlands, www.stichting-pro.nl). Uitgeverij Coutinho PO Box 333 1400 AH Bussum The Netherlands [email protected] www.coutinho.nl Cover design: Bart van den Tooren, Amsterdam Note from the publisher Every effort has been made to trace copyright holders. Persons or organizations wishing to assert specific rights are kindly requested to contact the publisher. ISBN e-book: 978 90 469 6654 9 ISBN boek: 978 90 469 0505 0 NUR: 623

Preface Effective Strategies for Academic Writing is the English edition of my Handboek academisch schrijven (Handbook Academic Writing), published in 2011 by Coutinho. This English edition is based on the same principles as the Dutch version: • much attention is paid to the process of academic writing; • it contains step-by-step instructions for the various sub-activities; • there are elaborate procedures for narrowing down the topic and for carefully formulating the relevance and the central question and sub-questions (picturing your research); • the material is broadly applicable to different writing assignments and multiple disciplines. The English edition is suitable for Bachelor and Master students but also for PhD students. The book was written with the European university context in mind, but it will prove useful for writers outside Europe as well. Extensive experience with Bachelor, Master, and PhD students has taught me that academic writers benefit mainly from strategies that help them work in a more structured and therefore more efficient way. This affects structure on three levels: (1) the structure of the writing process, (2) the structure of the research, and (3) the structure of the text. They form the three main subjects of this book. The steps and strategies described provide structure to the writing process. For the structure of the research, I use the structure model of the central research problem by Heinze Oost (1999, p. 300). This part of the book (chapters 3–6) can be regarded as a tribute to my great Utrecht mentor Heinze Oost. By creating this template, he has provided an important instrument for designing a sound research plan. Lastly, the structure of the text is discussed in the final three chapters on outlining, writing, and rewriting. I thank everyone at Coutinho Publishers, my colleagues at Radboud in’to Languages, and the Nijmegen Centre for Academic Writing for their support and co-readership. Working with translator Patrick Graman proved both pleasant and instructive. Finally, I owe my gratitude to the PhD students from Wageningen, Nijmegen, and universities in various African countries. They have provided me with new insights into their writing situation and stimulated me to refine strategies and templates.

I hope that this book will be a helpful and useful support for writers in an academic context. All comments and suggestions that lead us closer to that goal are more than welcome. Joy de Jong Utrecht, November 2016

Table of contents Introduction

13

Website 15

I Setting the scene: procedures, process, and product

17

1 The writing process: dos and don’ts

19

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

19 20 20 21 22 23 24

Introduction: your own writing process Pitfalls for academic writers 1.2.1 Doing too much at once 1.2.2 Working without a plan Writing strategies; more or less effective Tips to take on the challenges Misconceptions to dispel

2 Getting started

27

A BA/MA writers (essay, paper, report, thesis et cetera) 27 2.1 Introduction 27 2.1.1 An essay is an essay? 27 2.1.2 And yet: characteristics of academic writing 29 2.2 Identifying the procedure: how are things organized? 31 2.2.1 Why do we need information on the procedure? 31 2.2.2 Where do you find information about the procedure? 31 2.2.3 Questions on the procedure 32 2.3 Identifying the process: what am I expected to do? 33 2.3.1 Why do we need information about the process? 33 2.3.2 Demonstrating what you are capable of 33 2.3.3 Where can you find information on the process? 35 2.3.4 Questions on the process 35 2.4 Questions about the product: what am I expected to produce? 37 2.4.1 Why do we need information on the product? 37 2.4.2 Where will you find information on the product? 38 2.4.3 Questions on the product 39 2.5 Identifying the subject: what is a suitable topic for my thesis? 40

B

PhD writers (thesis, journal article) 43

2.6 The doctoral thesis: identifying the procedures, process, and products 43 2.6.1 Why pay attention to procedures, process, and product? 43 2.6.2 Where can you find information on procedures, processes, and products? 43 2.6.3 Questions on the procedures, processes, and products 44 2.7 A journal article: identifying procedures, process, and products 45 2.7.1 Why pay attention to procedures, process, and product? 45 2.7.2 Where can you find information on procedures, processes, and products? 45 2.7.3 Questions on procedures, processes, and products 45



Final thoughts on setting the scene 46

II Making a plan: the what, why, and how of planning 48 3 Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why? 51 3.1 Introduction 53 3.2 Working your way from topic to research plan 54 3.3 The model step by step 55 3.4 Picturing the what: narrowing down the topic 60 3.4.1 Introduction 60 3.4.2 The steps 60 3.5 Picturing the what: positioning the topic in its academic field (disciplinary embedding) 63 3.5.1 Introduction 63 3.5.2 The steps 64 3.6 Picturing the what: formulating the question 66 3.6.1 Introduction 66 3.6.2 The steps 67 3.7 Picturing the what: formulating the answer 71 3.7.1 Introduction 71 3.7.2 The steps 72 3.8 Concluding the what question 77 3.9 Picturing the why: reason, relevance, objective 78 3.9.1 Introduction 78 3.9.2 The steps 78

4 Picturing your research: how 83 4.1 Picturing the how: determining logical sub-questions 83 4.1.1 Introduction 83 4.1.2 The steps 84 4.2 Picturing the how: working out operational sub-questions 97 4.2.1 Introduction 97 4.2.2 The steps 97 4.3 Picturing the how: determining research methods 101 4.3.1 Introduction 101 4.3.2 The steps 101 4.4 Concluding the how question 104

5 The thesis: table of contents, time schedule, and writing out the plan 107 5.1 Making a preliminary table of contents for your thesis or article 107 5.1.1 Introduction 107 5.1.2 The steps 108 5.2 Making a time schedule for your thesis 110 5.2.1 Introduction 110 5.2.2 The steps 111 5.3 Writing out the plan in full 113 5.3.1 Introduction 113 5.3.2 Why write out the plan in full? 113

III Interlude: between making a plan and writing

the text 116

6 Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper) 119 6.1 Introduction 119 6.2 Picturing the research – What: narrowing down the topic 120 6.2.1 Introduction 120 6.2.2 The steps 121 6.3 Picturing the research – What: formulating a main question 126 6.3.1 Introduction 126 6.3.2 The steps 126

6.4 Picturing the research – How: determining the logical sub-questions 129 6.4.1 Introduction 129 6.4.2 The steps 130 6.5 Finding answers: collecting, arranging, and recording information 137 6.5.1 Introduction 137 6.5.2 The steps 138 6.6 Finding answers: analysing and interpreting information 140 6.6.1 Introduction 140 6.6.2 The steps 141 6.7 Finding answers: in conclusion 142 6.7.1 Final addition 142 6.7.2 What will the outcome be? 143

7 Reading: why, what, and how 145 7.1 Introduction: why do we read too much? 145 7.2 Efficiently working with literature 146 7.3 Reading for setting the scene: exploring the topic 147 7.4 Reading for planning: picturing the what, why, and how of your research 147 7.5 Reading in the research phase: collecting and interpreting data/answers 148 7.5.1 Reading in the pilot study 148 7.5.2 Reading during the main research 149 7.6 Reading in the writing phase: reporting on the research 151

8 Getting feedback: how, who, and when 153 8.1 8.2 8.3

Introduction: receiving and understanding feedback 153 8.1.1 Receiving feedback 153 8.1.2 Understanding feedback 154 Dealing with staff: teachers, supervisors, and professors 154 8.2.1 What kind of supervision would you like? 154 8.2.2 Find out what the procedure is 155 8.2.3 Prepare your meetings thoroughly 156 8.2.4 Actively participate in the conversation 156 8.2.5 Write a report of the meeting 157 Feedback from peers or peer tutors: when and how 157 8.3.1 Feedback on the overall picture of your research 157 8.3.2 Feedback on the execution of the research 158 8.3.3 Feedback on writing 158

8.4 Writing support groups 159 8.4.1 Goals of a writing support group 159 8.4.2 Effects of a writing support group 159 8.4.3 Some practical rules and suggestions for making writing groups work 160

IV Writing the text 163 9 Preparing and writing the first draft 167 9.1 Setting the scene for writing 167 9.1.1 Introduction 167 9.1.2 The steps 167 9.2 Making an outline 176 9.2.1 Introduction 176 9.2.2 The steps 178 9.3 The first draft: uninterrupted (speed) writing 186 9.3.1 Introduction 186 9.3.2 The steps 188

10 The first revision: content, structure, and external structure 191 10.1 About revising the first draft 191 10.1.1 Introduction to the procedures 191 10.1.2 Preparing the revision 194 10.2 Revising content 195 10.2.1 Revising information 195 10.2.2 Revising argumentation 198 10.3 Revising the structure 202 10.3.1 Revising cohesion 202 10.3.2 Revising the hierarchy 204 10.3.3 Revising the sequence 205 10.3.4 Summary 206 10.4 Revising external structure: between structure and style 206 10.4.1 Introduction 206 10.4.2 How can you make the structure visible? 207 10.4.3 Layout, headings and introductions 208 10.4.4 Explanation of the structure, topic sentences, best placement 210 10.4.5 Signposting 213

10.4.6 Bullet lists, typographic support, and charts, graphs and diagrams 216 10.4.7 Summary 216 10.5 Finding co-readers 217

11 The second revision: style and finishing 219 11.1 What is style? 219 11.1.1 Introduction 219 11.1.2 Precision 221 11.1.3 Complexity 222 11.1.4 Information density 223 11.1.5 Attractiveness/liveliness 224 11.1.6 Distance 225 11.2 Setting the norm for your own text 226 11.3 Evaluating and improving the style 227 11.3.1 Introduction 227 11.3.2 Precision 228 11.3.3 Complexity 232 11.3.4 Information density 234 11.3.5 Attractiveness/liveliness 237 11.3.6 Distance 239 11.3.7 And, sometimes, everything comes together 240 11.4 General rewriting tips 241 11.5 The finishing touches 243 11.5.1 Language use 243 11.5.2 Useful websites for academic writing in English 243 11.5.3 Layout 244 11.5.4 Literature references and titles 244 11.5.5 Final elements 245



Final thoughts 246

References 251 Index

253

About the Author 259

Introduction Content and goal of this book This book is about academic writing. It is intended as a tool to help you write assignments and tasks in a scientific context. Examples of these include papers, essays, reviews, research plans, grant proposals, journal articles, and theses. This book deals with academic writing tasks where 1 the content is based on scientific research; 2 the text is intended for an audience of scientists. Academic writing tasks may vary in all kinds of ways: in size (hours, pages), supervision, type of research, topics, goals, text features (structure, style), et cetera. This book takes this diversity into account, so the guidelines provided are useful in different phases (Bachelor, Master, PhD), for different genres and different disciplines.

Organization of the book The goal of the book is to offer you tools to carry out academic writing assignments. The chapters describe the steps that you need to take in order to accomplish them successfully. Please keep in mind, however, that you will probably still have to move back and forth between the different parts and chapters, especially if you are working on a larger task. A central position in the book is occupied by the various structure aspects. Chapter 1 explicitly deals with the structure of the writing process. In chapter 2 you will find steps and questions to help you clarify your task – what is expected of you in terms of procedures, processes, and products. Once you have a clear picture of that, you can work more efficiently. When you have set the scene of the task at hand, you can move to planning your research. This is covered by the chapters in part 2. At this point you determine the structure of your research: you narrow the topic down to a suitable central question and decide how you are going to answer that question. This is a crucial phase in academic writing; most of the problems in academic writing can be traced back to an insufficiently detailed main structure for the research. Even when you have already finished your research, it can make sense to map the main structure once again before you start writing. Chapters 3, 4, and 5 deal with designing a proper structure; for that purpose, they offer step-bystep procedures, background information, and examples. In chapter 6, the same is done for short writing assignments.

13

Effective Strategies for Academic Writing

After the planning, you carry out the research: collecting, processing, and interpreting data. In part 3 we will deal with this, but only as far as literature research is concerned. The way you handle empirical research is strongly determined by the methodology in your academic field. That is why you should consult methodological handbooks on the type of research that you are conducting. Chapter 6 deals with doing research for short writing assignments and also offers planning guidelines specific to such assignments. Reading is also a form of research, and many writers tend to tackle this in a less than efficient way. In chapter 7 you can find some effective reading strategies. Feedback is a powerful tool in writing processes, at least if you deploy it at the right time and in a proper way. Strategies are included in chapter 8. The final part of the academic writing process is the actual writing – reporting the research. Chapters 9 through 11, which make up part 4, cover this topic. They explicitly deal with writing a text that is meant for someone else. In the phases prior to this one, you have already written down all kinds of things; if you haven’t, you run the risk of forgetting a lot. However, the writing you have done thus far is mainly for yourself and perhaps also for supervisory meetings. In chapter 9 we assume that you are able to take writing one step further: writing for a different reader. The book also offers strategies for that type of writing: to set the scene and get started, to make an outline, to write a first draft (chapter 9), to revise the content and the structure of the text (chapter 10), to revise the style, and to finish the text (chapter 11).

How can you use this book? This book is more of a workbook than a reading book. It is most effective when you set to work with the strategies after you have read about them. It is recommended for each step, however, that you go through the entire section or chapter before you carry out the step itself. Since a complex process such as academic writing seldom follows a tight and perfectly predictable schedule, it is not unusual to find yourself having to go back a few pages every now and then. For example, you may have to skip back to elements of the research plan (chapters 3-6) while you are making an outline (chapter 9). This book is meant to serve you in different writing tasks and assignments. If you are doing a short assignment, you will probably not study the entire book; that is something you can do when you start working on a thesis or a journal article. That means you can use it more than once in your academic life.

14

Explanation of the pictograms This pictogram accompanies references to study material on this book’s ­website. This pictogram accompanies the lists of writing steps.

Website On www.coutinho.nl/effectivestrategies you will find the online study material accompanying this book. This material consists of: • forms and templates for the different steps of the writing process, which you can fill in yourself; • extra theory; • extra examples.

15

I

Setting the scene: procedures, process, and product



The what, why, and how of getting started What? When you have a writing task, it is worth the effort to find out what exactly the work entails. This is the part in which you assess the work at hand. The purpose of this part is to get an overview of: • the procedure: how is everything arranged? • the process: which activities are required/allowed and which are not? • the product: which requirements should the text meet?

Why? Do we even need such an overview? Can’t you just start? Not if you want to work efficiently. If you were simply to start, you would run the risk of not fulfilling the task well enough. You wouldn’t be the first writer to have to start again because the professor, supervisor, or journal turns out to have completely different expectations than you. By assessing the situation properly, you have a better chance of knowing what to submit, how, and when.

How? Information on an academic writing task should be provided by the professor, the department, the supervisor, or the journal. That means you need to actively look for manuals and instructions and read course books and syllabuses. Your professor or supervisor may give you additional information. Sample texts prove to be very informative to obtain a picture of what the product (the text) is supposed to look like.

17

1

The writing process: dos and don’ts 1.1 Introduction: your own writing process

1.2 Pitfalls for academic writers 1.2.1 Doing too much at once 1.2.2 Working without a plan

1.3 Writing strategies; more or less effective



1.4 Tips to take on the challenges



1.5 Misconceptions to dispel

18



The writing process: dos and don’ts

1.1

Introduction: your own writing process

I  Setting the scene

1

III Interlude

Before you continue reading about pitfalls and tips, it is sensible to take a minute and reflect on how this process normally goes in your case. Which steps do you undertake and how does that work out for you? For that purpose, you should complete the table below. You can also download a version that you can fill in via the website (Your writing process, under ‘Forms’). Imagine you start writing the article or chapter, or if you have already started, reconstruct how you went about it.

II  Making a plan

Academic writing does not always come easily. That is why so many books are written on the subject. Unlike most writing books, which start with the moment you write your first draft, this book devotes a lot of attention to the activities that precede that moment. Think of things like planning those activities, finding out what the framework is and which requirements are relevant, determining exactly what your research is about, carrying out your research, and preparing the writing (planning the text). The way you carry out those activities determines to a great extent how the entire writing process will take place and what the text will be like.

Table 1.1

What exactly do you do? For example: go for a walk, make an outline, arrange articles around you, simply write …

How does that work for you? What works for you? What does not work for you?

Can you think of why some things work for you and why some things do not?

IV  Writing the text

1 2 et cetera a tip (or a ‘do’) a pitfall (or a ‘don’t’)

19

1  The writing process: dos and don’ts

1.2

Pitfalls for academic writers Basically, there are only two big pitfalls for academic writers: 1 doing too many things at the same time; 2 working without a plan. These two pitfalls are explained below. Tips to prevent them are included in section 1.4.

1.2.1 Doing too much at once In the 1970s, two American psychologists, Linda Flower and John R. Hayes, studied how writers operate. They gave students an assignment such as ‘write a piece about your work for the readers of the magazine Seventeen’. Students were given an hour to write the text. They had to do this ‘thinking out loud’: they expressed all their thoughts, which were recorded on tape. An analysis of these ‘thinking aloud protocols’ showed that writing is a very complex activity. For example, writers think about their assignment, about the content, the structure, and the language; they delve into their memories to retrieve all kinds of information; and on top of that, they reflect on the text they have already written. This entire process contains a high risk of ‘cognitive overload’, which may lead to the writer losing his hold on the writing process, or ending up with a bad product in an inefficient manner. Writers who did manage appeared to differ from weaker writers mainly in the way they handled the process: they planned more and were more goal-oriented. If those writers struggle to produce a page and a half, how difficult will it be to produce an academic essay of 5 pages, an article of 15, or a thesis of 60 or even 300 pages? These texts are characterized by very complex content (scientific research) as well as a complex rhetorical situation (various critical readers with all kinds of interests and preferences that the writer is not always aware of). Such a process demands segmenting the task at hand. You need to divide the work into steps (sub-tasks, sub-activities) and work on them one at a time. It is impossible to think about the content of your story and word it in beautifully constructed sentences at the same time. You may easily find yourself in a situation where you start to doubt halfway through the first sentence. You sense that your supervisor is looking over your shoulder, knowing that she demands very precise wording at all times; you hear the voice of supervisor number two in your mind, knowing he insists on a research perspective from a certain paradigm. Didn’t colleagues say the other day that the text could use some more peppiness? While you are writing, the questions keep surfacing: what was the convention on quoting literature again? Do you put a comma between the author and the year of publication? What is a synonym for the word ‘reliable’

20

1.2  Pitfalls for academic writers

1.2.2 Working without a plan Working without a plan equals working without a goal. In order to end up with a good text, you need to develop different activities, including reading, writing, thinking, calculating, and consulting. These activities all have different goals in different phases. Here are some examples:

II  Making a plan

1 Reading can have the objective of finding out whether your research question has already been answered, of finding a proper definition, but also of finding an answer to your research question. Reading is also an activity you can easily lose yourself in, especially since virtually all literature is available by clicking a few buttons. If you fail to keep in mind why you are reading while you are searching for literature, you may soon wind up in an endless search through all kinds of interesting studies and theories that will not give you the answer you are looking for (see chapter 7). That is not an efficient way to tackle this issue.

I  Setting the scene

that I have already used three times now? How on earth can I support that claim? Let’s check that Brown article, let’s check … An hour later you compose yourself only to find you have read all kinds of material but produced only two sentences, if that.

2 Writing also may have various purposes. Sometimes you only write to record something, for example, considerations for making certain choices, interesting ideas from the literature, results from your research. The only objective is not to lose it. It is important that it be complete and retrievable when you need it. When you write for this purpose, do not spend too much time on phrasing your text creatively. After all, at this point it is often difficult to estimate what the text should look like in the end. Chances are considerable that you will need to scrap much of it eventually or make changes and additions to these draft chapters. Then it would be a waste of all the time spent on formulating and finishing. That is not an efficient way to go about it.

III Interlude

3 Sometimes you are not writing for someone else but only for yourself. An example would be when you want to demonstrate how far you have come: are you getting the story on paper yet or what could the structure look like? If that is your goal, all you need to do is write a very rough version. If you spend time on elaborate wording or a fancy layout in that situation, you would need a very long time to figure out how far you have come with your story. You may discover that you still have some research to do. Your beautifully phrased story might have to be scrapped. If you write with this goal in mind, the most important thing is that you do it fast (see chapter 9).

IV  Writing the text

21

1  The writing process: dos and don’ts

1.3

Writing strategies; more or less effective Below are some characteristics of writing processes as they appeared in several studies done by Flower & Hayes in the late 1970s in the USA.

‘Poor’ writer

‘Good’ writer

•• Starting point: the information collected what you know

•• Starting point: the goal of the information collected what you want to do with what you know

•• The writer tells what he knows about the subject writer-based

•• The writer tells what the reader wants to know about the subject reader-based

•• Text is a collection of facts and ideas knowledge telling

•• Text is the answer to a question knowledge transforming/problem solving

•• The writer selects some topics and for each topic writes what he knows about it knowledge telling strategy

•• The writer evaluates and integrates the information reflective strategy

•• The writer works linearly from content to text What do I want to say? ↓ content space How am I going to write this down? ↓ rhetorical space

•• The writer works cyclically from content to text and from text back to content What do I want to say? ↓ content space How am I going to write this down? ↓ rhetorical space Is what I have written really what I w ­ anted to tell? ↓↑ content space

•• If the writer reflects upon his writing, he uses the same words he used for writing thinking of

•• If the writer reflects upon his writing, he is able to think and talk ‘freely’ about his writing, using different words than he used in the text thinking about

•• The writer works sentence by sentence; text structure is ‘growing’ along with the sentences local planning

•• The structure of the text is designed before writing takes place global planning

•• The writer predominantly pays attention to formulating what he wants to say writing

•• The writer predominantly pays attention to preparing his writing and reflecting on what he has written prewriting and rewriting

•• The writer pays attention to words and sentences surface level

•• The writer pays attention to the goal and the meaning of the writing deep level

22

1.4  Tips to take on the challenges

1.4

Tips to take on the challenges I  Setting the scene

The tips to navigate these pitfalls are straightforward: 1 divide the work into steps (phases and sub-activities); 2 formulate the goal of each of those steps; 3 pause regularly to check whether you are still working towards realizing your goals (reflecting). In this book, you will find step-by-step procedures for the different sub-activities. In each part, the procedures will guide you towards an effective approach. We are talking about the following sub-activities that are part of the academic writing process:

4 Producing and rewriting the text This encompasses: a identifying content, structure, and length (writing a ‘bin version’); b making an outline: a list that shows the main ideas and the structure of something that you are planning to write (Macmillan English Dictionary);

23

IV  Writing the text

3 Carrying out the research This encompasses: a collecting data (answers to your sub-questions); b recording the data; c analysing the data; d drawing conclusions.

III Interlude

2 Picturing the research; designing a research plan This means ‘circling around’ the research problem: a formulating the main research question; b positioning the subject within the discipline(s) (= disciplinary embedding); c formulating the reasons for that question (= relevance); d describing the sub-questions and methods (= researchability); e formulating the exact domain and variables involved in the answer(s) (= precision).

II  Making a plan

1 Getting an overview of the task This encompasses: a The procedure: how are things organized? Think of deadlines, consultations, co-authorship, division of tasks, et cetera. b The process: what are you supposed to do? For example using specific methods, literature, writing several drafts, et cetera. c The product: what should the text look like? You could think of length, content, structure, style, et cetera.

1  The writing process: dos and don’ts

c writing the first draft; d rewriting: 1 evaluation and revision of content and structure; 2 evaluation and revision of style and language; 3 more evaluation and revision; 4 more evaluation and revision; 5 more … e final editing: adding the finishing touches (spelling, references, layout, et cetera).

1.5

Misconceptions to dispel The message in the previous sections was, ‘Don’t do too much at the same time. Instead divide the work into sub-activities and carry them out with a sense of purpose’. This chapter about the writing process ends with a few common misconceptions that many writers struggle with. 1 Writing is a talent and I just don’t have it This is not true: writing is a skill you can develop. Practice makes perfect, especially in the case of writing. If you have little experience, it may take awhile before you have mastered all the sub-skills, but each writing task is another opportunity to further develop your writing skills. Develop your own perfect strategy by: a trying out new strategies; b stating clear goals at every stage; c reflecting on what you are doing; d adjusting a strategy if it does not work. 2 I can skip the tasks I don’t like (for example: making an outline, revising the text) This is not true. Planning, writing, and revision activities have to be done in one way or another and at set moments in the process. Sub-activities may be performed at various stages. That is partly a matter of personal preference. Do bear in mind you will need to make time for everything at some point, for example: a if you don’t plan in advance, you will have to think about your content and structure later (and make sure there is time for that …); b if you don’t analyse your data before writing, you will have to do it later; c at some point you really will have to start writing … 3 Writing is an individual, lonely process, so I need to do it all by myself This is not true. Academic writing is about research, and doing research is building collectively on a body of knowledge. Additionally, academic writing

24

1.5  Misconceptions to dispel

I  Setting the scene

is about conventions within a discipline. We need mentors and peers to guide us through this discourse, not only to reflect on what our research shows, but also to reflect on how we can present the research in the best way to one or more audiences. So you could: a talk with your supervisors and advisors about plans, outlines, and drafts; b find peer students to discuss your writing with; c find readers who are not directly in your field of study to get feedback about the readability of your drafts; d form or attend a writing support group; e visit a writing tutor at a writing centre. See also chapter 8 on Getting Feedback.

II  Making a plan

4 Writing is just hard, rigorous labour This is partly true, but writing becomes easier and more agreeable if you allow yourself to segment the process (see section 1.4) and to write more informally (for fun). So write as much as possible: a try to write every day; b for at least thirty minutes; c preferably concerning your research; d but in an informal way; e like keeping a log. This will increase the ease with which you write and make you more flexible (Eik-Nes, 2008).

III Interlude IV  Writing the text

25

2

Getting started A BA/MA writers (essay, paper, report, thesis et cetera)

2.1 Introduction 2.1.1 An essay is an essay? 2.1.2 And yet: characteristics of academic writing 2.2

Identifying the procedure: how are things organized? 2.2.1 Why do we need information on the procedure? 2.2.2 Where do you find information about the procedure? 2.2.3 Questions on the procedure

2.3

Identifying the process: what am I expected to do? 2.3.1 Why do we need information about the process? 2.3.2 Demonstrating what you are capable of 2.3.3 Where can you find information on the process? 2.3.4 Questions on the process

2.4

Questions about the product: what am I expected to produce? 2.4.1 Why do we need information on the product? 2.4.2 Where will you find information on the product? 2.4.3 Questions on the product





2.5 Identifying the subject: what is a suitable topic for my thesis?

B PhD writers (thesis, journal article)

2.6 The doctoral thesis: identifying the procedures, process, and products 2.6.1 Why pay attention to procedures, process, and product? 2.6.2 Where can you find information on procedures, processes, and products? 2.6.3 Questions on the procedures, processes, and products 2.7 A journal article: identifying procedures, process, and products 2.7.1 Why pay attention to procedures, process, and product? 2.7.2 Where can you find information on procedures, processes, and products? 2.7.3 Questions on procedures, processes, and products

26



I  Setting the scene

2

Getting started



Introduction Setting the scene means identifying the conditions, criteria, and constraints that apply to your writing task. This section contains strategies for Bachelor and Master students to set the scene for their essay, paper, or thesis. Section B is meant for PhD students writing a journal article or thesis.

II  Making a plan

2.1

A BA/MA writers (essay, paper, report, thesis et cetera)

2.1.1 An essay is an essay?

A frequently set task is ‘write an essay’. You often see this in university education but also as an admission requirement. Suppose you want to enrol in a Master’s programme at one of the technical universities. You read on their website that you are required to submit a writing assignment:

What do they mean exactly by an essay? You investigate. On the Internet you find a definition on the Dutch Wikipedia site (originally in Dutch): An essay is an expository piece of prose on a scientific, cultural, or philosophical subject, in which the author provides his or her personal view on contemporary phenomena, problems, or developments. (…) The essay (…) is u ­ sually

27

IV  Writing the text

The assignment consists of writing an essay of maximum 2,000 words on a technological development of your choice in which you use concepts that are discussed in one of the three selected articles.

III Interlude

In this section, we use the essay as an example to demonstrate that frequently used words can be interpreted in many different ways. In university practice, the term ‘essay’ appears to be used to indicate a wide variety of text types. That means it is important to find out what your professor or supervisor means by it.

2  Getting started

a literary text which is meant to render a convincing argument, without explicit scientific justification. The essayist likes to make cross-connections that are generally frowned upon within specialized scientific disciplines. (…) An essay may be anything between a short text and an entire book.

This is a surprising definition: no explicit scientific justification yet done in a scientifically responsible manner? Personal opinion? Literary text? Convincing argument? You had expected a more ‘formal’ writing assignment for a technical­Master’s programme. Are there any other definitions? Interestingly, the Wikipedia definition in English is different (consulted in March 2016): An essay is usually a scholarly piece of writing that gives the author’s own argument – but the definition is vague, overlapping with those of an article, a pamphlet, and a short story. Essays can consist of a number of elements, including: literary criticism, political manifestos, learned arguments, observations of daily life, recollections, and reflections of the author. Almost all modern essays are written in prose, but works in verse have been dubbed essays (…). While brevity usually defines an essay, voluminous works like (…) are counterexamples. In some countries (e.g. the United States and Canada), essays have become a major part of formal education. Secondary students are taught structured essay formats to improve their writing skills; admission essays are often used by universities in selecting applicants, and in the humanities and social sciences essays are often used as a way of assessing the performance of students during final exams.

So yes, indeed, admission essays are often used by universities to select applicants. But what kind of essay would they have in mind? Google the word essay, and you will find that there are many different kinds of essays: argumentative, descriptive, academic, persuasive, narrative. Google further and you will find the following definition (originally in Dutch): What is an essay? The term essay usually refers to the English meaning of the word: an argumentative, informative, and stimulating story. The author gives an outspoken and well-argumented opinion on a social or economic topic. However, an essay may also be expository or narrative. The difficult thing about an essay is to keep it gripping. An essay often does not exceed eight pages, so there is hardly any room for lengthy descriptions or discussions on literature. In contrast with many other reports, essays are not usually divided into chapters. (www.scribbr.nl/category/essay/, 28 March 2016)

28

2.1 Introduction

The term ‘essay’ is used for all kinds of texts. Sometimes, it is used to refer to essayistic texts, sometimes more scientific texts are meant, such as reports on research or literature. Apart from ‘essay’, you also hear vague references like ‘paper’, ‘piece’ or ‘report’. Always check exactly what your professor expects from you.

Below is another example taken from practice, which demonstrates that an essay at a Dutch university may be a different text type from what Wikipedia and Scribbr are describing. This assignment was taken from a study guide. The very first sentence uses the word essay to refer to a research report, and it becomes clear that what is expected from the student is nothing ‘personal’ and ‘literary’:

II  Making a plan

So what have you found out so far? Although you may not be completely sure what ‘essayistic texts’ are and what characterizes ‘more scientific texts’, it has become clear that an essay can be just about anything in academic practice and that you need to search for concrete guidelines.

I  Setting the scene

That is quite something. An outspoken opinion? A gripping piece on a technical development? Such an essay type seems more familiar to professional authors than to your run-of-the-mill student (even one with a technical background). Happily, you have come across the following warning from Groningen University just in time (www.rug.nl/noordster, originally in Dutch):

III Interlude

The research in block 3 is reported in a research report, the essay. The essay has to be divided into an introduction, two or three sections, a conclusion, and a reflection on the research. In the essay, you need to link the existing literature with the theme and the empirical material you have collected yourself. This empirical material consists of six interviews along with any observations and media coverage if applicable. (…) You will give an account of your method and the literature you have used. You should state your sources carefully and in full, and sharply distinguish between your own ideas and claims made by others. Quotes and paraphrases must be exact.

We have seen that there is a great variety of texts that boast the name ‘essay’. If such variation is typical for academic texts, is it even possible to say anything about what is characteristic of academic writing? That is indeed risky, given the differences in ideas on the topic. And still it is worth a try, if only to make a point about the type of texts that this book is about: writing tasks on scientific research for an audience of scientists. The goal of academic texts therefore is

29

IV  Writing the text

2.1.2 And yet: characteristics of academic writing

2  Getting started

usually to inform other scientists convincingly about scientific research. This definition can be used to deduce a few characteristics. First of all, we have the content of academic texts. Scientific research – what is that? Generally speaking, scientists are in search of knowledge about the world. Each discipline studies a certain part of that world, and each branch of science has its own research domain. Psychologists study the human mind, literary scientists study literature, and biologists study ‘life’. Scientists want to discover the rules governing objects and processes in their domain: they want to know and understand how that part of the world is organized and how it works. Those rules they then describe in the form of theories. These theories are constantly tested, adjusted, and refined, and that is the core of scientific research. Scientists need to work together to develop and improve theories. Different researchers work on small parts (objects and/or aspects) of a research domain. If researchers want to formulate theories that describe more of their research domain than the little piece they have studied themselves, results will need to be shared. That way they can compare different results with each other and create a better picture of and better insight into the studied phenomenon. Researchers talk with each other at conferences and seminars, as well as in other places. Written communication in science is done through books, papers, and articles. These academic texts therefore have an essential function for the development of theories. Besides content and function, academic texts are also meant for a specific audience – other scientists. They need research information from each other to expand on and refine joint knowledge and theories. However, scientists are often very busy, and there is a large supply of texts. This too, can be used to deduce a number of text characteristics. As a preview of what the next chapters hold, here is a list of text characteristics that follow from the above: • Academic texts are about research. • They usually describe how the topic fits within the theories of the discipline, so readers know what part of that theory has been studied and which questions have been answered. • The importance of the study is generally well described, because scientists only want to devote reading time to relevant research. • Reliability is a factor because scientists only want to devote reading time to reliable research. • The text describes very precisely what has been studied and how, so readers can decide if the results are useful.

30

2.2  Identifying the procedure: how are things organized?

The words ‘generally’ and ‘usually’ are used for a reason. Academic texts may also deviate from the ‘rules’ for any number of reasons. In the following sections, you will find tools to determine which rules apply to the assignment you need to complete.

2.2

I  Setting the scene

• Important claims are substantiated, so readers know if they are sufficiently well-founded to build on. • Important information in the text is easy to find so readers can quickly see if the information is important to them. • Texts are usually concise so no reading time is lost.

Identifying the procedure: how are things organized?

2.2.2 Where do you find information about the procedure?

Information on Bachelor’s and Master’s theses should be provided by your department too. There must be regulations, and possibly also manuals. Here, too, you should actively look for them yourself. Some departments organize information sessions for thesis writers. Attend them: you will receive useful tips, and there will be someone to ask questions to. Do bear in mind that the procedure surrounding theses is partly governed by the schedule and the

31

IV  Writing the text

Information about the procedure should be provided by your department. For shorter writing assignments that are part of a course, these matters of process are often easier to find and better described than for larger writing tasks. You will find them in a syllabus, course manual, or electronic learning environment such as Blackboard, Nestor, or WebCT. Actively look for them because they are not always explained during the lectures. Also make sure you don’t look for them too late, and mark the important dates in your calendar right away.

III Interlude

It may seem trivial to dive deeply into the procedures for a writing assignment, but your plans can be seriously jeopardized if there is a lack of clarity about them. Many diploma ceremonies have had to be postponed because students failed to find out the exact deadline for submitting their thesis in time. Quite a few students have panicked when their supervisor turned out to be on vacation exactly in the period that they had hoped she or he would evaluate the draft version of their thesis. Lots of students have become desperate because they assumed that they were eligible for a resit, only to find out a first version was required for that. In short, take the time to find out what is expected in terms of deadlines, submitting your work, co-reading, supervision, et cetera.

II  Making a plan

2.2.1 Why do we need information on the procedure?

2  Getting started

preferences of each individual supervisor, so you should definitely discuss any questions you might have on the procedure with your own supervisor. If all this fails to provide you with sufficient information, ask around among your peers. Perhaps your fellow students have found out more. You can also ask senior students, because they usually know from experience what to take into account.

2.2.3 Questions on the procedure Below you will find a number of questions to help you get a good picture of the procedure that applies to your writing assignment. Click ‘Forms’ on the website to find the form Setting the scene for BA/MA writers, a more detailed version that allows you to fill in answers as well as add your own questions. This form can be reused for each new writing assignment. What you see below is that list in telegram style. General • Where can I find information on the assignment? • Do I need to register anywhere? • Individual or in a group? • Individual or group mark? Time planning • How much time (hours, credits)? When is the deadline? • For Bachelor’s or Master’s thesis: when is the final version due? • When is the final draft version due? • When is the supervisor unavailable (holiday, conferences)? Topic • Free choice of topic? • Link content to course? Supervision • Fixed moments for supervision and completion? • Where can I find a supervisor? • How often do we meet? • What do we discuss? • Discuss in writing or in person? • Fixed times? • My own initiative? • Submit in advance? • Meeting report? Who writes it?

32

2.3  Identifying the process: what am I expected to do?

Handing in and Assessment • How to hand in the texts? • Where? • How are they assessed: in writing or orally, grades or otherwise? • Requirements for resits? • Will I receive feedback from the teacher? • Can I meet with the teacher about this?

2.3

Identifying the process: what am I expected to do? 2.3.1 Why do we need information about the process?

III Interlude

When you receive a writing assignment or are about to start on a Bachelor’s or Master’s thesis, you will no doubt have many questions. These may include: what steps do I need to go through? What is expected from me? What does a study like that look like? How should I tackle the writing? It is not strange not to know the answers to all those questions. We saw earlier that there may be quite a lack of clarity about academic writing assignments, as you may remember from the task ‘write an essay’. That is why it is important to clarify the requirements of the process. Since process and product are tightly interwoven in academic writing, this section on process will occasionally deal with aspects of the product too. After all, when you have completed certain activities (= the process), this will partly show in the text (= the product).

II  Making a plan

Once you have answered all these questions, you can start mapping what you are expected to do for this assignment.

I  Setting the scene

• Other possibilities to meet (fellow students)? • Possibilities for extra supervision or courses, e.g. writing centre, language centre, student dean, study advisor?

2.3.2 Demonstrating what you are capable of

33

IV  Writing the text

The requirements for academic writing tasks may differ considerably and are sometimes unclear, but one thing is certain: you will always need to show something. A paper, essay, or thesis is always a demonstration of your competence. The big question is then: what do you need to demonstrate in terms of knowledge and skills? In the following sections, you will be given some tools to find out.

2  Getting started

Process requirements for short writing assignments In general, the requirements are increasingly strict as you progress in your education. During the first years, shorter writing assignments will be set which do not call for writing research plans or searching for all the literature yourself. The requirements regarding theoretical argumentation are less demanding than later on in your studies. In addition, it is good to realize that writing assignments that are linked to a course are usually meant for you to demonstrate that you have read and understood certain articles. Such a writing assignment is a sort of open-book exam with one open question: ‘what can you tell in a coherent story about the content of the articles?’. Demonstration of knowledge is more important in that stage than developing new knowledge or improving your writing skills. Process requirements for a Bachelor’s or Master’s thesis This knowledge testing is also common in larger writing tasks. As a rule, in chapters entitled ‘Theory’, ‘Theoretical Framework’, ‘Background’, or ‘Context’ you are expected to demonstrate that you have read and understood the relevant literature on your topic. Generally, the difference with smaller writing assignments is that a thesis requires you to do more complicated things, and master complex skills. Those are what you demonstrate in the thesis. The department often explicitly indicates what you need to show in terms of knowledge and skills. Below you will find two examples taken from manuals for Bachelor’s and Master’s theses: In the so-called Bachelor’s thesis, you demonstrate that you are capable of: • critically processing scientific literature; • independently searching for relevant scientific literature; • developing a research question based on the literature; • designing an appropriate research plan to answer that question; • collecting, analysing, and interpreting the required data; • reporting on them in accordance with academic conventions.

Starting in chapter 3 we discuss the sub-activities from bullet 3 onward. It is also clear that both the process and the production play parts in the demonstration. That also becomes apparent in the following description of a Master’s thesis. The general norm for a Master’s thesis is that it should demonstrate that the student is capable of interpreting the scientific debate on the discipline in question. This means that students can position the chosen topic and the question within the current state of knowledge and discussion in the discipline. The thesis demonstrates that (with some supervision) the student is capable of designing and performing a historical study. In it, the student demonstrates

34

2.3  Identifying the process: what am I expected to do?

2.3.3 Where can you find information on the process?

2.3.4 Questions on the process

II  Making a plan

The examples from the previous section indicate that thesis manuals, regulations, and syllabuses are the most important sources of information. In addition, you can get information on the process at the information sessions for thesis writers we mentioned earlier, from your professor/supervisor, and from fellow students. There is another very specific source of information, the socalled Dublin Descriptors. They have laid down the requirements European university courses should meet. Since the learning objectives come together in the Bachelor’s and Master’s thesis, these descriptors are used by many universities as inspiration to describe the requirements for their Bachelor’s and Master’s theses. The Dublin Descriptors are on the Internet, but we have also included them on the website accompanying this book, under ‘Theory’.

I  Setting the scene

not only mastery of general scientific skills, but also insight into the specific character of the historical discipline (…).

Since an academic writing process has three major sub-activities besides setting the scene, questions about the process have also been arranged according to those sub-activities: • making a plan; • carrying out the research; • writing the text. III Interlude

Below you will find the questions for the process, in telegram style. The more detailed versions are included in the form Setting the scene for BA/MA writers on the website. What is required in the planning phase?

IV  Writing the text

Procedure • What supervision is possible? • How independent should or can I perform this? • How much time for the plan? Making a Plan • Strong definition of topic? • Formulate question (problem)? • Deduce question from literature? • Different source possible? • Work out theoretical/scientific use? • Work out practical use?

35

2  Getting started

• • • •

Formulate sub-questions? Formulate hypotheses? Build table of contents? Make time schedule?

What is expected in the execution phase? Procedure • What supervision is possible? • How independent should or can I perform this? • How much time for the research? Carrying out research: literature study • Purpose of the literature study: for example yield question, yield hypotheses, yield analysis model, answer question? • Search for literature myself? • How much? • According to what method? • What kind of literature? • What are good sources? • Which theories in any case? • How to analyse information? • Do more than summarize? • If so, what? • Representative summaries or selecting what I need? Carrying out research: empirical research (if applicable) • Certain research method, e.g. interviews, document analyses, observations, questionnaires? • Search for data myself? • How to analyse data (information)? What is expected in the writing phase? Procedure • What supervision is possible? • How independent should or can I perform this? • How much time for the writing? Writing the text • Make an outline? • Submit draft chapters? • Ask feedback on my products?

36

2.4  Questions about the product: what am I expected to produce?

As announced, some of the process questions come close to the product questions. However, there are a few more things you need to know about that product.

2.4

I  Setting the scene

• What type of feedback can I expect, e.g. detailed and/or general, orally and/or in writing? • Which aspects of my process and/or product? • Write self-evaluation (self-reflection) report?

Questions about the product: what am I expected to produce?

Setting the scene for the product is done for the same reason as setting the scene for the process; it is not clear from the start what type of text or texts you are expected to produce. For example, do you discuss the articles one at a time or thematically? How is a theoretical framework organized? What is academic style? Different scientists will have different answers to these questions: your professors and supervisors will too.

Let’s ignore Lagendijk and admit emotion, rhetoric, belles-lettres, metaphors and hyperboles, wild ideas and digressions in scientific text.

III Interlude

Usually those differences are largely ignored, but sometimes they feature in the national press. In the Netherlands in the fall of 2009, a debate arose in the quality newspaper NRC Handelsblad on what would constitute an adequate writing style for scientific prose. Marita Mathijsen, professor of modern Dutch literature, criticized the style advice given by Ad Lagendijk, professor of physics and author of Survival Guide for Scientists. Mathijsen writes:

II  Making a plan

2.4.1 Why do we need information on the product?

Lagendijk, in turn, argues that his scientific field uses a language (English) that is the mother tongue of no more than perhaps twenty per cent of researchers:

In short, let us not assume that there is one single academic style that can please every scientist. All the more reason to check carefully what product your professor would like to see for a particular assignment.

37

IV  Writing the text

If Marita Mathijsen’s recommendations were followed, it would mean that some eighty per cent of the people who practise natural science would face additional obstacles. They would have a lesser understanding of what is being published in scientific journals, and they would not be able to write any of them themselves.

2  Getting started

2.4.2 Where will you find information on the product? In most manuals and instructions you will find requirements for the text. However, a word of warning is in order here: these requirements are sometimes vague and obscure. An example: Upon successful completion of the Bachelor thesis, the student will have demonstrated (…) in a relatively independent fashion that he or she is capable of transforming the findings of his own study into a text that contributes to the current state of scientific research, and which meets the demands set in the discipline in terms of structure, use of language, and layout.

This will not help you a great deal. It is often the case that text requirements are worded in very general terms whereas the assessment is rather strict. In those cases, it is sensible to search for sample texts. If you know a senior student who took the course and passed this writing assignment, ask if you can have a look at the text. For larger writing tasks, look for a thesis that was written under the same supervisor or professor and which was well received. Sometimes these are available in the department library, but you could also ask your supervisor for a good example. Good sample texts will allow you to answer a number of important questions quickly and will give you a picture of the type of text you are going to write. For example: • What is the size of the text? How many pages? • What elements does the text consist of? Is there a cover page? Preface? Table of contents? Introduction? Numbered chapters or sections? Theory? Method? Results? Conclusion? Summary? Footnotes? Bibliography? Acknowledgements? Appendices? • What is the size of the different elements? • Do they have titles, and if so, what kind of titles? • Do the sections have numbers? • What is the general content of those elements: what is each element about? • What kind of style is the text written in (see also section 10.4 and chapter 11)? Formal or colloquial? Complex or simple? Precise or vague? Concise or elaborate? Many or few structure sentences and signalling words? Dry or vivid? • How do they refer to their sources? Frequently, sporadically, or not at all? In the text, between brackets? Using numbers? Footnotes at the bottom of the page? Endnotes? Which system was used?

38

2.4  Questions about the product: what am I expected to produce?

2.4.3 Questions on the product The form Setting the scene for BA/MA writers on the website contains the extended versions (click ‘Forms’). There are four questions on the research plan and the preliminary reports. However, most questions concern the draft and final versions of the text.

III Interlude

Requirements for the research plan and preliminary reports • What is the goal? • Which elements? • Story written in full or outline only? • What will/won’t the supervisor/lecturer evaluate?

II  Making a plan

And last but not least, do not give in to the temptation of copying what someone else has produced. You will run the risk of being accused of plagiarism. If you want to know more about plagiarism and how to prevent becoming guilty of it, first check if your department has a plagiarism policy. There are also various websites that provide information on the subject. Try the following query, for example: ‘how to avoid plagiarism’.

I  Setting the scene

If you let yourself be inspired by another text, note the following: • Be sure that the sample text has been evaluated positively (if you can, also find out what the feedback entailed). • Be sure that your assignment is the same as the one for the sample text. • Be sure that your assignment is going to be evaluated in the same way (preferably by the same teacher). • Treat the sample critically. Do its structure, layout, content, and style fit your topic/problem/question as well?

Requirements for draft and final versions General • What type of text, e.g. essay, paper, report? • Minimum and maximum lengths? • Submit in which format?

IV  Writing the text

Content • How strictly is the content evaluated? • What will/won’t the supervisor/lecturer evaluate? • Which elements? • Function/purpose of the elements? • What information to put in – all the elements or not? • Argumentation requirements – when is the support sufficient?

39

2  Getting started

Structure • How strictly is the structure evaluated? • What will/won’t the supervisor/lecturer evaluate? • Is there a set order of the elements? • How can I ensure coherence between the elements? Language use/style • How strictly is the style evaluated? • What will/won’t the supervisor/lecturer evaluate? • How visible or obscure should the structure be? • How concise or wordy should I be? • How exact or how vague? • How complex or simple? • How vivid or dry? • How formal or colloquial? Finishing • How strictly is the finishing evaluated? • What will/won’t the supervisor/lecturer evaluate? • Which system should I use for citing sources, e.g. APA, MLA, Vancouver, Chicago? • What layout? • How should I present figures, pictures, graphs, tables, and such? • Conventions for margins, line spacing, font, et cetera?

2.5

Identifying the subject: what is a suitable topic for my ­thesis? The final part of setting the scene is getting an idea of what could be a suitable topic to write about. There are three factors that make a topic suitable for research. 1 Interesting Since it will take a substantial investment of your time, it is important that you choose a topic that you find interesting, that generates curiosity, and that will allow you to stay motivated. 2 Researchable The second criterion for the suitability of a thesis topic is researchability. The topic must be researchable, and in particular, well researchable by you. Ask yourself what research methods you prefer to work with: holding interviews or performing careful document analysis, literature research or conducting

40

2.5  Identifying the subject: what is a suitable topic for my thesis?

3 Fits your academic field The third criterion for the suitability of a thesis topic is that it fits your studies or academic field. Your topic should link to themes and questions in your scientific field.

Below, the pros and cons of these three ways are listed. You will recognize the three criteria for a suitable thesis topic: (1) interesting, (2) researchable, and (3) fitting the discipline.

41

IV  Writing the text

The advantage of using projects that have been defined by others is that it will enable you to formulate your own research plan much more quickly because some of the preliminary work has already been done. This preliminary work will usually have resulted in the topic being researchable (criterion 2) and fitting within the discipline (criterion 3). It is usually stimulating to cooperate with others on a larger research project: you learn from others, and the results of the research are actually going to be used. The disadvantage is that you do not have as much freedom of choice and are not always in a position to choose the angle or method that you find interesting. That may at times clash with criterion 1. A second possible disadvantage of working on an existing project is that supervisors may have other interests than merely supervising you on your thesis: they want to collect data for their own research. It happens that students are put under pressure to work very quickly and in strict accordance

III Interlude

1 Research projects carried out by others Lecturers of many academic studies have created thesis projects that Bachelor and Master students can contribute to. These projects are often part of a PhD programme. In some cases, students are obliged to participate in one of those projects; in others, they are free to choose their own topic. Make enquiries with your department (lecturer, study guide) about your freedom of choice (cf. the questions on the procedure in 2.2.3).

II  Making a plan

Where can you find a topic? There are three ways of finding a topic: 1 research projects carried out by others; 2 topics that were covered during your studies; 3 topics from actual practice, for example, work, internship, the media, and such.

I  Setting the scene

experiments? What form of research do you favour and which ones do not come easily to you? If you choose a topic that can only be researched using quantitative methods and you happen to hate statistics and be bad at them, it makes sense to scout for other topics.

2  Getting started

with the ideas of the researcher, making it difficult to find the space to learn and develop oneself into an independent researcher. 2 Topics that were covered during your studies If you can (or have to) pick your own topic and you find it hard to get inspiration, check the material that was covered during your classes again. Which subjects did you find interesting? Were there any specific articles or any particular studies that appealed to you? Is there anything interesting to research about those topics? Here are some possible leads: • Were any suggestions given for (future) research? Do they include anything interesting? • Are there any other additional questions? For example, what would the situation be like if the researcher had opted for different variables, a different target group, a different method, or different questions? • Are there any articles that make contrary claims? If you can find a topic in this way, you will be able to select something you find really interesting (criterion 1). Literature that comes with your curriculum almost by definition fits the discipline (criterion 3). You will still need to give researchability (criterion 2) some serious thought, though, if you take your topic from the literature. 3 Topics from actual practice, for example, work, internship, the media, and such You may also find a possible topic for your thesis outside the university. You may encounter problems at work or during your apprenticeship or internship that science does not provide answers to or that contradict what you have learned during your training. But even discussions in the media may provide material for research. Examples include the consequences of global warming, the causes of young top athletes’ sudden deaths, the influence televised debates have on election results, the possibility of life on Mars, the question how to increase the number of organ donors, the microeconomic effects of winning the soccer world cup, et cetera. A topic that is found in this manner will at least appeal to you (criterion 1). Criteria 2 and 3, however, will not automatically be met. Especially in the case of topics from outside the university, you will need to pay particular attention to the question of how to research them and how the topic ties in with the theories from your academic field. For the latter, you will find some useful tools in section 3.5.

42

2.6  The doctoral thesis: identifying the procedures, process, and products

I  Setting the scene

In short: • Look for a topic: 1 in an existing project; 2 in subjects (literature) that have been dealt with in your curriculum; 3 at work, during your internship, or in the media. • Decide whether that topic meets the following criteria: 1 Is it interesting to you? 2 Is it researchable by you? 3 Does it fit within your discipline? Once you have decided on a preliminary topic in this way, you can proceed with the next step – developing the topic into a research plan (chapter 3).

2.6

II  Making a plan



B PhD writers (thesis, journal article)

The doctoral thesis: identifying the procedures, process, and products 2.6.1 Why pay attention to procedures, process, and product? This dialogue is frequently heard during supervision training courses:

III Interlude

Supervisor: I expect the PhD students to tell me if there is anything they don’t like about the supervision. Trainer: But do your PhD students know this? Supervisor: Yes, I think they do. Trainer: Have you explicitly told them this? Supervisor: No, I have not, as a matter of fact. That is a good idea actually.

2.6.2 Where can you find information on procedures, processes, and products? There are four major sources of information: (1) formal, written sources, (2) the supervisor, (3) fellow PhD students, (4) sample texts.

43

IV  Writing the text

In the supervision process, much remains implicit; there are many so-called tacit assumptions. Little is said about how things are arranged, about what is expected of each other. Supervisors don’t always realize that what is daily practice for them is completely new to a PhD student. And, let us be honest, supervisors tend to differ in the ways they work and in what they expect from their PhD students. It is well worth the effort to find out what your supervisor’s stance is on this issue.

2  Getting started

The importance of (1) formal information sources cannot be overstated. Universities often have so-called Doctoral Degree Regulations or Doctorate Regulations in place. These are formal legal documents with articles containing requirements that every PhD student, supervisor, and university has to comply with. These regulations offer important prerequisites but usually fail to give details about the course of the PhD process. Therefore, it is important to meet with (2) your own supervisor. Try to arrange a meeting at an early stage and use it to discuss your mutual expectations (see below). At the start, PhD student and supervisor often draw up a detailed plan for training and supervision (this plan is often dubbed a TSP, Training and Supervision Plan). The third source of information is (3) fellow PhD students. Many graduate schools have PhD student networks and/or meetings (lunches, drinks). It will be useful to take part, because your colleagues may not only have good tips regarding the content of your work, but also about the way things are arranged, how to deal with supervisors, or where to find information. To get a good picture of the product you have to create, the best thing to do is look for a good (4) sample text, a thesis from your own academic field. It is not only the academic field that has to match; the type of research also has to be comparable to yours.

2.6.3 Questions on the procedures, processes, and products The most important questions are: 1 How are things arranged (procedures)? This concerns questions like: what about my position? How often and in what way do we meet? What are the duties, roles, and responsibilities of the promoter and daily supervisors? What are the most important deadlines? How is the evaluation organized? 2 What is expected of me (process)? Think about questions like: what are your activities in the first year (Elaborating the research proposal? Writing a literature review?)? What type of research do you have to do? Which tasks can you delegate? What are your duties in the writing process? 3 What type of texts am I expected to write? If you have a good example of a doctoral thesis, you may get an idea of the size, the number of chapters, the structure, use of titles, writing style, citing style, and the way the various articles have been placed in the book.

44

2.7  A journal article: identifying procedures, process, and products

2.7

A journal article: identifying procedures, process, and products

I  Setting the scene

On the website we have collected a number of questions that are interesting for Setting the scene for PhD writers, under ‘Theory’. You can also check to see if the orientation questions for BA/MA writing yield any relevant additions.

2.7.1 Why pay attention to procedures, process, and product?

II  Making a plan

There may be vast differences between journals. It is important to give some proper thought to the question of where you are going to submit an article. There are differences in terms of content (research topics), methodology (e.g. quantitative versus qualitative approach), and audience. It is sensible at an early stage to get a picture of what specific journals require. That way you prevent double work. The choice of journal can also be governed by its status. If you make an analysis of bibliometric data, you should be able to retrieve the relative impact factor of a journal.

2.7.2 Where can you find information on procedures, processes, and products?

III Interlude

Before you submit a journal article, you need to study the guidelines that the journal employs. This is especially the case when you want to see your article published at a certain point in time. Almost all journals have established guidelines; these can usually be found on the journal’s website, or they are provided on request. However, the best impression of what your text should look like can be gotten from studying a number of articles from the journal in question.

2.7.3 Questions on procedures, processes, and products

Journals often also have guidelines for the form of the article – the structure and style. The website contains the form A journal article: identifying procedures, process and products which you can use to get an overview on writing an article for a journal, under ‘Forms’.

45

IV  Writing the text

In the guidelines you will often find answers to questions on procedure such as: • How should the article be submitted? • What happens next? • What type of reviews will I receive? • From whom? • Will I get a chance to revise? • How long will the procedure take?

Final thoughts on setting the scene Changing science Terms like ‘scientific’ and ‘academic’ prove not to be as set in stone as we would perhaps like. The exact interpretation differs between disciplines, but it also changes over time. This is illustrated by a quote from a book by Douwe Draaisma called Ontregelde Geesten (Disordered Minds). It is about the chance of having a phenomenon you discovered named after you. The author shows why that is so much less likely nowadays than, for example, in the days of Parkinson, Alzheimer, Asperger, and Korsakov. The ideas about what is scientifically sound and what is not have changed dramatically in the course of the centuries. The quote deals with Charles Bonnet Syndrome, a condition that is prevalent among the elderly. Someone who may be mentally and psychologically perfectly healthy will suffer from all kinds of hallucinations around dusk. (…) the discovery has to be registered. Every time has its conventions for that purpose. Bonnet described his observation in a book; nowadays neurologists and psychiatrists communicate through journals, which have their own requirements for research and the presentation of findings. A case study, in which only a single case is described of a special phenomenon, is generally not authoritative these days. The aspiring name giver would have to collect a large sample of similar cases – a hundred rather than fifty – and report on their characteristics, including age, sex, eyesight, medicine use and level of education. He would have to offer an explanation and preferably also experiments that made it clear which factors affected seeing these images. Next, the beginning of some sort of consensus would have to emerge within the scientific community on the question if indeed we are dealing with a phenomenon that cannot be classified under some other psychiatric or neurological disease. Then a colleague who carries some authority – or alternatively a committee – would have to propose attaching the author’s name to the disease. Only once the scientific community actually starts referring to the name, would a new ‘discoverer’ go down in the history of neuroscience (Draaisma, 2006, p. 8).

So, times have changed, and our names will not live on in a phenomenon as easily. On the bright side, that should not discourage us. There is plenty to discover in science, even on a smaller scale and in all modesty.

46

Final thoughts on setting the scene

Forewarned …

Should sample texts fail to provide sufficient guidance, they will simply have to do, and you should get to work. Once you submit a concrete product, teachers and supervisors will be able to indicate what is good about it and what not. That is why it is helpful if you can discuss your draft versions with your supervisor. In the course of the process you will get a clearer image of the requirements for the plan, the execution of the research, the writing process, and the text.

III Interlude

What is critically, independently, relevant, appropriate? What conventions are there? How do you demonstrate that insight? What are the demands?

II  Making a plan

What if your quest for answers yields nothing but vague answers? It is often difficult for teachers and supervisors to indicate exactly what level they are expecting from their students. That is also apparent from the examples in this chapter. The following terms from the manuals quoted in chapter 2A beg for elucidation: • critically processing; • independently; • relevant literature; • appropriate research plan; • in accordance with academic conventions; • insight into the specific character of the historical discipline; • meets the demands set in the discipline.

I  Setting the scene

So, to set the scene for the writing task, you paint yourself a picture of what is expected of you: the procedures (regulations) you have to comply with, the process you have to go through, and the product that has to be the result. The answers to all the questions can be recorded on the form Setting the scene for BA/MA writers, which you will find on the website (click ‘Forms’). That will be your guide for the remainder of the process. For each next step you need to start by looking at the orientation questions and answers because they are the framework for making your plan, carrying out the research, and writing the text respectively.

IV  Writing the text

47

II

Making a plan: the what, why, and how of planning What is planning? Planning means plotting the road towards your goal. In setting the scene (chapter 2), you analysed the writing task and mapped out what the procedures are, what process you need to follow, and what requirements the product should meet. The planning described in this chapter is meant to determine exactly where you want to go (i.e. the goal), how to get there, and which steps will take you towards that goal. In the case of academic writing tasks, the first concern is not planning your schedule but rather planning the content. You first need to establish exactly what it is you are going to do before you can decide when to do it. Time does play a role in deciding what you are going to do, but only as a conditional framework: you must be able to complete the work you are planning within the given time (see also the orientation questions on the procedure). What type of work does an academic writing task involve then? In most cases, the information for your text is not available yet. You need to find it and process it. Finding and processing information for an academic writing task can be considered research. Therefore, planning is all about demarcating what it is you are going to research and about wording the central question of your writing task. This question must meet a number of requirements. It must fit the research area, be relevant, researchable, and worded precisely. Step by step, this part will lead you to a question that meets those requirements. Once you have reached that point, you can make a preliminary chapter outline and a time schedule.

Why plan? Having a good plan ensures that you are able to do the research and write the text in an efficient manner. If you work without a plan, you take quite a risk. An estimated eighty per cent of the problems surrounding academic writing are caused by not having a clear basic structure with a carefully defined central question and matching sub-questions. As a result, some writers accumulate vast amounts of information and then discover that it is quite a challenge to come up with a structure to fit all that information into. The researcher almost always reaches the conclusion that a large part of the information he has gathered is superfluous. Having a good plan reduces the risk of such tiresome, laborious, and inefficient processes.

48

Proper planning increases your chances of working efficiently because it helps to: • oversee the process because you know which steps you are going to take; • collect information because you know exactly what you are looking for; • classify the information because you are not randomly collecting information, but rather looking for answers to (sub)questions. You will already know where the information should go; • manage the information so that, if you find more than you are looking for, you will know exactly what is relevant and what is not; • structure the text. If the research is well structured, you have a solid basis for the structure of the text; • defend your plans. You have carefully contemplated all the aspects and are able to explain what choices you have made and why.

When to plan? Under normal circumstances, you make a plan before you start a job. It makes sense to take your time. To give you an indication, here is an overview of the average time the academic writing process should take: Orientation

10% of the total project time

Planning

20% of the total project time

Researching

50% of the total project time

Writing

20% of the total project time

It is highly recommended that you plan as much as you can before you start. It reduces the risk of gathering information in the research phase that you do not need or of writing sections in the writing phase that you cannot fit in on second thought. That would be a waste of time. There are people – scientists – who will tell you, ‘I wouldn’t be able to write such a plan in advance because I won’t know what the question is going to be until I have carried out the research or perhaps even until I have started writing’. That may indeed be the case, especially for so-called exploratory research, that is, research into a topic that has not been previously researched. As a consequence, it is difficult to determine in advance what the relevant questions or hypotheses are since the knowledge required for that purpose is still lacking. In that case, planning in advance is indeed difficult. Be that as it may, there will come a point when you need to determine exactly what your topic is and what makes all the information coherent. That means you will need to deploy the twenty per cent for planning in some later phase.

49

You cannot economize on the time allotted for planning. If you fail to plan in advance, the thinking must be done at a later stage. We call that the reconstruction of the research structure.

How do you make a plan for an academic writing task? There is a difference between making a plan for a thesis or a journal article, and making a plan for a short essay. Therefore, we will deal with the planning of longer and shorter writing tasks in separate chapters. We will start with the larger writing tasks (chapters 3, 4, and 5) and continue with the shorter writing task in chapter 6. To make a plan for a larger writing task (Bachelor’s, Master’s or PhD thesis or journal article) you need to follow these steps (after finding a suitable topic): • narrow the topic down; • place the topic within the academic field; • formulate a main question; • reason out the relevance of the question; • determine sensible sub-questions; • work out a more detailed sub-question structure; • determine the research methods; • determine exactly what the answer relates to (domain and variables); • make an outline for the text; • create a time schedule; • possibly write the plan out in full. In this book, we have defined a small writing task as an assignment for a course that is not meant to lead to new insights, with a partially given topic or question that you answer using literature that is partially set as well. We are talking about a text that is two to ten pages long at the most and is sometimes written in groups. Following all steps of the thesis plan will not be required for small writing assignments. In most cases, for example, you do not have to come up with a research method or describe the scientific and/or practical use of the question (the relevance), let alone create a chapter division or time schedule. That leaves the following steps: • narrow the topic down; • formulate a main question; • determine sensible sub-questions; • work out a more detailed sub-question structure. See chapter 6 for more detailed information.

50

3

Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?



3.1 Introduction



3.2 Working your way from topic to research plan



3.3 The model step by step

3.4 Picturing the what: narrowing down the topic 3.4.1 Introduction 3.4.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Choose a subset from the topic ՔՔ Step 2 Check if it is researchable in its entirety ՔՔ Step 3 If necessary, narrow it down even more

3.5 Picturing the what: positioning the topic in its academic field (disciplinary embedding) 3.5.1 Introduction 3.5.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Write down the topic ՔՔ Step 2 Describe your academic field and specialisation ՔՔ Step 3 Reconstruct the subsets that lie between the topic and the academic field 3.6 Picturing the what: formulating the question 3.6.1 Introduction 3.6.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Choose a question type ՔՔ Step 2 Formulate the beginning of the question ՔՔ Step 3 Fill in the blanks with the narrowed down topic 3.7 Picturing the what: formulating the answer 3.7.1 Introduction 3.7.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Formulate the answer ՔՔ Step 2 Check the connection between question and answer

3.8 Concluding the what question

51

3.9 Picturing the why: reason, relevance, objective 3.9.1 Introduction 3.9.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Demonstrate that the question has not been (sufficiently) answered yet ՔՔ Step 2 Demonstrate that the answer is useful ՔՔ Step 3 Demonstrate that the effort is worth it

52

3.1

I  Setting the scene



3

Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why? Introduction

1 2 3 4 5

II  Making a plan

Making a plan involves various steps: Finding a suitable topic. Working your way from topic to research plan. Making a preliminary division of the chapters. Making a time schedule. Writing out the plan in full.

Making the plan: a cyclic process Although you are working step by step when you make a plan, you will need to check regularly what effect the step has on previous choices you have made. For example, if you create a time schedule (step 4), you may discover that you will need twice as much time as you have available. In that case you need to go

53

IV  Writing the text

Since this what, why, and how is so crucial to the entire thesis process, the research plan will take a prominent place in this book. Chapters 3 and 4 deal with it exclusively. You only divide chapters and draw up the time schedule (chapter 5) once it is clear exactly what you are going to do (and why and how).

III Interlude

The research plan (step 2) is by far the most important part of your thesis plan. In it, you describe what you are going to research, why you have decided to do this, and how you are going to proceed: • What: you narrow down the topic, place the topic in its academic context, formulate a main question, and determine exactly what the answer is going to cover. • Why: you reason out the relevance of the question. • How: you determine what the logical sub-questions are, make the subquestions operational, possibly work out a more detailed sub-question structure, and determine the research methods.

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

back to your research plan (step 2) and narrow down the research. Making the research plan itself is seldom strictly linear though. Another example: when you are working on the question why you want to do the research, you are considering the relevance of the results. In other words, What can we do with the answers to the central question I have formulated? Perhaps the answer is a little disappointing, and you discover along the way that you would really like to see some different outcomes. Then it makes sense to look at your central question again and make a new choice: what is it exactly you are going to research? You see that different parts of the plan engage with one another and cannot in reality be completely disconnected, and yet this is exactly what we are doing in this book. Although you will probably move back and forth between the different plans and steps (a cyclic process), in a linear book there is no other option than describing them separately.

3.2

Working your way from topic to research plan As indicated before, the research plan of the thesis basically revolves around three things: the (1) what, (2) why, and (3) how of your research. Once you have established what you are going to research, why you are going to do it, and how, the result will be a main question that you can be sure: 1 ties in with the knowledge within your discipline; 2 is relevant; 3 is researchable; 4 will lead to an answer that you are looking for. This process can be graphically illustrated. In 1999, Heinze Oost designed his ‘Structure Model of the Research Problem’. This model is based on a substantial body of literature and depicts the criteria for a good research plan. It helps you in clearly picturing the core elements of your study: the what, how, and why of the main research question or problem. Picturing your research is not only picturing these elements but also picturing the relationships between those elements. This is what makes this model more useful than many other tools that simply depict the elements one by one. This model appears to be a splendid tool for academic writers, be they in the first, middle, or final stage of the process. In the first stage, the model supports you in designing the research plan (see section 1.4, stage 2) or in reworking a research proposal into a more detailed research plan. In the middle stage, when data are being collected, the model might help manage those data: do they still help you in answering the main and sub-questions? What do these

54

3.3  The model step by step

3.3

The model step by step

II  Making a plan

In the next chapters, we will first describe the elements of the model. From section 3.4 on you will find the steps for designing a clear and logically consis­ tent picture of your study.

I  Setting the scene

data mean for your research plan? Are adjustments needed? In other words, it might be useful to evaluate and refine the picture after data have been gathered and analysed. In the final stage of writing the text, filling in the model can assure you that you have indeed formulated the research question in the most accurate way, that you have a firm story about the relevance of your study, that all answers to sub-questions are relevant in terms of answering the main question, that the conclusion exactly fits the question, and, finally, that the discussion refers to the theoretical framework your research is embedded in. More specifically, filling in the model might be a good preparation for writing the introduction because in the introduction you try to convince your reader that this is a relevant and good piece of research.

Criteria (for a good research question) = Aspects of / perspectives on the research question III Interlude

Main research question

Figure 3.1 • Model of the research problem (Oost, 1999)

55

IV  Writing the text

The model pivots around the main question of the research, that one question around which the entire research revolves; the question that the researcher is ultimately looking to answer. There are a number of criteria that apply to a good research question. Those criteria are the result of different perspectives on that research question.

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

Discipline(s) Embedded in (a) discipline(s)

Main research question

Figure 3.2 • Model of the research problem: first criterion (Oost, 1999)

The first criterion is that a scientific question is embedded in one or more disciplines; in other words, that it is derived from the themes that are researched in those disciplines. You can check this by reconstructing step by step the choices you have made between the greater subject of your discipline and the very much narrowed down topic of your research. More about this in section 3.5. Discipline(s) Embedded in (a) discipline(s)

Reason

Main research question

Relevant

Figure 3.3 • Model of the research problem: second criterion (Oost, 1999)

The second criterion for a good research question is that it is relevant: there should be good reasons to invest time and money in this research. That relevance is strongly linked to the way the research is embedded in the discipline. Something that may be extremely relevant in one field may be rather pointless to other researchers. That means you cannot determine the scientific relevance until you know which disciplines to place your research in. In addition, your research may serve a public interest. This may be less strongly connected to the way the research is linked to the disciplinary embedding. More about this in section 3.9.

56

3.3  The model step by step

Discipline(s)

I  Setting the scene

Embedded in (a) discipline(s)

Reason

Main research question

Relevant

Precise

II  Making a plan

Answer Figure 3.4 • Model of the research problem: third criterion (Oost, 1999)

The answer to that question is the reason you are doing the research; the link will enable you to check if your story about the relevance ties in seamlessly with the outcomes that your research can be expected to yield (see figure 3.5 on the next page).

There is also a link between the strategy and the discipline. Researchers tend to use operationalizations and methods that are common in their field of research. Of course, there may be pressing reasons to decide against this, but that means you would have some additional explaining to do. More about this in chapter 4.

57

IV  Writing the text

The fourth and final criterion is researchability. This can be checked by ­making explicit the strategy you are using to tackle the question. To do this, you formulate the sub-questions and methods you intend to use. Then you check if this is the sure but also shortest route to the answer (hence the arrows between those elements).

III Interlude

Then we come to what at first sight may seem odd in this model: the answer to the question. The criterion that corresponds with it is ‘precision’. The question must be phrased as specifically as possible so that it will lead exactly to the answer the researcher is looking for. In order to check whether this is indeed the case, it is sensible to formulate the answer in advance. How that is possible without your having even conducted the research yet is explained in sections 3.7.

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

Discipline(s) Embedded in (a) discipline(s)

Strategy:

Reason

sub-questions & methods

Researchable

Main research question

Relevant

Precise

Answer Figure 3.5 • Model of the research problem: fourth criterion (Oost, 1999)

The final graph clarifies that this is in fact the picture that tells the what, how, and why of the research: Discipline(s) Embedded in (a) discipline(s)

Researchable

Reason

Main research question

ha

w Ho

W

Strategy:

sub-questions & methods

t

Precise

Relevant

Answer

Figure 3.6 • Complete model of the research problem (Oost, 1999)

58

W hy

3.3  The model step by step

III Interlude

How the model is linked You will see that all elements are connected to the question and that there are dual arrows between the elements. This signifies that all the elements are related to each other. This relationship has two consequences. First of all, when you work out the five elements of your plan, you will notice that elements overlap at a certain point. That is not a bad thing. After all, we are not dealing with elements that can be strictly separated but rather with dimensions of the question or perspectives on it. Secondly, each choice requires you to check if the elements in the other boxes still match, whether the mutual connection (arrows) indeed still exists between the elements. For example, if you are working on the strategy but you discover that the main question is too broad, you need to change that main question. With that, the answer changes along with the reason for that question.

II  Making a plan

The order of the steps It does not matter which part of the model you start with as long as the final picture is right. Be that as it may, it may be worth your while to start by working out the elements that are already set or those that are already very clear. Perhaps you have a clear idea of where your research should take you; in that case, you can start with the last (bottom) element – the answer. Is there a pressing problem that you desperately want to fix? Then the relevance (reason) is a good starting point. If you already know what you want to do during the research, then the ‘how’ question would be a good lead. If you are inspired by one or more articles, it is probably easiest to sketch how the question fits within the discipline, the first (top) element in the image. And yet we have opted in this book to present the steps according to a different, not entirely illogical way. We start with the ‘what’ (the axis of the graph), continue with the ‘why’ (right-hand side), and finally deal with the ‘how’ (lefthand side).

I  Setting the scene

In order to end up with a sound research plan, you should complete all the elements of this template. Later in this chapter and in chapter 4, we will offer you detailed steps for this purpose. Before we continue with this, there are still two things that need to be said about the model itself. They have to do with the order of the steps and the connection between the elements.

IV  Writing the text

Eventually, you are working towards a research plan in which: • all elements have been clearly defined; • all elements are seamlessly linked to each other.

59

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

3.4

Picturing the what: narrowing down the topic 3.4.1 Introduction The first task of working out the research plan is to answer the ‘what’ question. In order to define more precisely what the research is about, there are three ways of looking at the research: from the perspective of the topic, from the perspective of the question you are going to answer, and from the perspective of the answer it will give you. We will start with the topic. Let us assume that you have a rough idea of your research topic that you need to narrow down to a size that will fit your project; after all, you need to be able to research it within the given time frame (see chapter 2) and report on it. Narrowing down is the first part of the ‘what’ question, but in the course of the entire research process, there may be grounds to narrow down the topic even more (or expand it, for that matter, although that is considerably less common in practice). In other words, you are only preliminarily narrowing down.

3.4.2 The steps The steps involved in narrowing down the topic are: 1 Choose a subset from the topic. 2 Check if it is researchable in its entirety. 3 If necessary, narrow it down even more.

STEP 1  Choose a subset from the topic In itself the technique of narrowing down is not that hard; you continuously take a subset of the topic. To give a technical example, suppose your research is about anorexia. Narrowing it down may look like this: •• •• •• •• ••

anorexia anorexia in girls anorexia in girls under the age of twelve anorexia in girls under the age of twelve who have working parents et cetera

The topic of anorexia is the starting point from which to choose subsets, making the topic smaller and smaller.

60

3.4  Picturing the what: narrowing down the topic

STEP 2  Check if it is researchable in its entirety

III Interlude

If you measure your topic in this way, you discover its true scope and will be able to determine whether that size is workable or not.

II  Making a plan

•• All aspects of anorexia: all kinds of causes (psychological, social, economic, spirit of the times), all sorts of consequences (economic, physical, psychological), et cetera? •• All forms of anorexia: mild and serious, different forms of taking in/not taking in food and drink, different forms of losing/not losing food and drink, et cetera? •• All girls under the age of twelve: different ages, different socio-economic backgrounds, different personalities, different psychological features, as a single group, et cetera? •• All sorts of working parents: both mother and father, working both fulltime and part-time, working both away and from home, different level jobs? •• Anywhere: west or east, north or south on the planet, developed or underdeveloped country, different religions and/or cultures? •• Always: since the phenomenon arose (became known)?

I  Setting the scene

When you are content with the first step in narrowing down your topic, you should ask yourself the question, Can I say something in this research about all aspects of all its forms, always and anywhere? You can ask this question for every term in the topic. For the topic given above, the question would be, Does this involve all aspects of all forms of anorexia in all girls under the age of twelve with all sorts of working parents, anywhere and always? In order to answer that question seriously, you have to imagine what that question entails in the way it is currently phrased. Allow your fantasy to run wild for a moment, for example, like this:

STEP 3  If necessary, narrow it down even more

61

IV  Writing the text

And finally, narrow down your topic even more. How does that work? What do you base your choices on? In academic writing, you select sub-topics because you expect that they will make for interesting research. That almost puts you in the area of the ‘why’ question of the research: you research a certain topic because it is interesting. That may be confusing, but you can also look at it as an advantage. If, during the narrowing down, you think carefully about the reasons behind certain choices, you are effectively working on the why and as a consequence also on the relevance of your research.

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

Further narrowing down is done based on knowledge, especially knowledge of research in your academic field. That knowledge is usually the result of what you have read in books and journals. That means you need literature or theories to properly narrow down your topic. For example, if you narrow down the topic ‘anorexia’ to ‘anorexia in girls under the age of twelve’, this implies that • there are girls with anorexia who are younger than twelve. This is an assumption. The sensible thing to do is to check whether this assumption is correct; otherwise, you may find yourself working on quicksand. The best way of checking this is to see what the literature in your academic field contains about girls with anorexia under the age of twelve. • there is something interesting about this group of young girls with anorexia. For example, because it is a particularly small group; because it appears to be a group with specific characteristics; because anorexia only manifests itself in such young girls under special circumstances, or because it does not; because that is the very question you want answered; because this group has hardly been researched yet; et cetera. You need to consult the literature or theories from your academic field to address all these questions. • this is a better choice than a different one. Why did you opt for the age group under-twelves instead of under-fourteens or under-tens, for example? For each choice you make, you therefore need to ask yourself these questions: • Am I correct in my assumption that this subset exists? • What is interesting about this choice? • Why are other choices less attractive? If you check these aspects by consulting the literature, you are simultaneously working on the elements in the so-called theoretical framework. More about that later. In this way, you will come to a very specific description of the topic. Do not be alarmed – the narrower the topic, the more words you will need. For example, the topic ‘anorexia in girls under the age of twelve who have working parents’ (twelve words) may have grown after the narrowing down process, resulting in something like ‘the different ways in which anorexia develops in girls under the age of twelve both of whose parents work full-time, in girls with one parent occasionally at home during weekdays, and in girls with one stay-at-home parent, as found in research conducted in the United States from 1990 on’ (48 words).

62

3.5  Picturing the what: positioning the topic in its academic field

3.5

3.5.1 Introduction

This technique would allow you to reconstruct, for example, how the topic of anorexia fits in the field of psychology. You would consider which subsets of psychology would include the topic, and in this way, trace as it were the different subsets that lie between the field of psychology and the preliminary topic anorexia. By doing this, you position the topic within your academic field. Eventually, the reconstruction could look something like this (again with the largest subset at the top): •• •• •• •• ••

III Interlude

psychology psychological disorders psychological disorders in adolescents present-day psychological disorders in adolescents present-day psychological disorders in adolescents connected with appearance •• eating disorders •• anorexia

II  Making a plan

The technique of narrowing down (choosing subsets) can also be used to reconstruct what choices were made in the narrowed down topic. You are actually working the other way around then, from small to big, and should continuously ask yourself, What is this topic a subset of? Such a reconstruction is especially useful for academic writing assignments because it gives you an idea of the themes and discussions connected to your topic. If the topic fits within your academic field (criterion 3 for a suitable thesis topic, see section 2.5), the reconstruction should lead you to the largest subset – your academic field or discipline.

I  Setting the scene

Picturing the what: positioning the topic in its academic field (disciplinary embedding)

63

IV  Writing the text

You should look at such a reconstruction as a kind of funnel: the topic at the top is very broad (the entire academic field), and each choice results in a smaller topic with increasingly more aspects falling outside the scope. When you reconstruct which choices you have actually made, it becomes apparent how you ‘view’ the topic; in the example above, anorexia is seen as a disorder that adolescents suffer from. If you described it that explicitly when you narrowed the topic down, you will know that anorexia among adults is therefore outside the scope of your research. If that is not what you want, you should choose a different subset on the third line.

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

If you want to see more elaborate examples, check out the website. Click ‘Examples’ and download the Example research recontruction for a reconstruction of the topic for a Master’s thesis on ‘problems with the presentation of the minority policy of the City of The Hague’. The sample reconstruction clarifies how that topic fits the academic field of Dutch language and literature. The second example is from a PhD student who researched livelihood strategies developed by poor urban households in the Caribbean to secure or enhance their well-being.

3.5.2 The steps The steps for disciplinary embedding are: 1 Write down the topic. 2 Describe your academic field and specialisation. 3 Reconstruct the subsets that lie between the topic and the academic field. You can use the form Disciplinary embedding to place your topic in its academic field (click ‘Forms’).

STEP 1  Write down the topic Write down what you would say if someone asked you now, ‘What is your research about?’ Put this at the bottom of a piece of paper.

STEP 2  Describe your academic field and specialisation At the top of the page, write down your academic field or discipline. The second step is then your specialisation. and the third is the topic to research within that specialisation. For example: •• law •• constitutional and administrative law •• the structure of the Dutch government

64

3.5  Picturing the what: placing the topic in its academic field

Looking at the topic of your thesis (step 1) and the research subject of your discipline (step 2), you will find that various choices must have been made along the way, choices dealing with perspectives, elements, place, time, aspects, et cetera. You fill in the gaps on your page between the topic and the discipline so you get a proper funnel of subsets. A law student would, for example, complete the reconstruction below by filling in relevant subsets on the dotted lines:

II  Making a plan

law constitutional and administrative law the structure of the Dutch government … [reconstruction] … labour law … … … … the justification of the current law on termination of employment … [further narrowing down of topic] …

I  Setting the scene

STEP 3 Reconstruct the subsets that lie between the topic and the academic field

65

IV  Writing the text

The Example research context reconstruction on the website (click ‘Examples’) demonstrates the ways in which these insights surface.

III Interlude

Virtually every student and doctoral candidate who makes such a reconstruction finds it a useful exercise. It often yields a number of useful insights: • You will know for sure that the topic fits within the discipline. That means you need to make sure that each box contains a subset of the previous box. If you change direction along the way or add things instead of selecting them, then you jeopardize this certainty. • You will see what falls outside the scope of your research; after all, you will make the choices explicit. As a consequence, during the writing and researching process, there will be no need for you to constantly rethink whether an element fits in or not. It helps to regulate your research. • You will get an idea of related topics, especially the bigger themes that the chosen topic is a part of. This will give you an indication where to look for literature on definitions, operationalizations, assumptions, methods, and such. • The reconstruction also provides ideas to work out the why question.

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

3.6

Picturing the what: formulating the question 3.6.1 Introduction Have you narrowed down the topic of your research? Then your next step is to determine what you want to learn about the topic. Try to transform that into the central question of the research. To avoid misunderstandings, we will first discuss two frequently asked questions. Why formulate a question? Shouldn’t formulating a topic be enough to make a plan? Do you have to ask a question? No, in some disciplines it is not actually required, but consider it a missed opportunity if you don’t. The problem with a topic is that it allows you to talk about it endlessly. In a research plan, however, you are looking for the boundaries of the research; after all, you want to make sure you only collect information that contributes to the story and you only write texts that add to building the story. Working with a question will allow you to proceed in a more goal-oriented manner than just working with a topic. At some point you may realize that the question has been answered and decide that this concludes your research. If you ignore that possibility and only formulate a topic, you will miss an opportunity. Hence an urgent piece of advice: formulate a central question for your research. One or multiple questions? Many academic writers wonder if they should formulate a single question or multiple ones. If we look at the arguments in favour of formulating the question, it follows that it is preferable to formulate a single question. That will result in one clear endpoint, a clear point beyond which you may not venture. Should you still find yourself having more questions, then three things may be at work: • The questions are unrelated. This will result in multiple parts of your thesis being unrelated. This is usually not what people expect from a thesis. • The answers to the questions together lead to one single answer. In that case you should try to formulate the question that encapsulates that single answer. Formulating the sub-questions (section 4.1) may help you with that. • One or more questions are subordinate to the others. In that case, you need to find out what the end question is and which questions are required to act as intermediate steps to come to an answer to that end question. The end question is usually the central question. See also the section on the sub-questions.

66

3.6  Picturing the what: formulating the question

3.6.2 The steps

I  Setting the scene

The steps to formulate the main question are: 1 Choose a question type. 2 Formulate the beginning of the question. 3 Fill in the blanks with the narrowed down topic.

STEP 1 Choose a question type

II  Making a plan

Different question types When you formulate a central question, your first concern is the type of information you want to find out about the topic. Each type of information has specific sub-questions; that is the easy part. In this book, we use seven different types of questions, and as a consequence seven different types of information (Oost & Markenhof, 2002, p. 51-52): description; comparison; definition; evaluation; explanation; prediction; and design or advice. Below we have indicated for each question type what you should do and what type of answer this will result in, and we have included some possible wordings of that particular question type. Note that these wordings do not involve sub-questions (they will be dealt with later), but rather variations of a certain question type.

67

IV  Writing the text

2 Compare: • In a comparison, you determine what the differences and/or similarities are between two or more phenomena. • The answer to a comparative question is invariably an overview of the differences and/or similarities. • Examples of a comparative question are: what are the differences? What are the similarities? In what ways do they differ? Which aspects are similar?

III Interlude

1 Describe: • The aim of a description is to map a phenomenon. • The answer to a descriptive question consists of a number of characteristics, elements, phases, aspects, and the like. • Examples of a descriptive question include: what are the characteristics? What features does it have? What elements does it consist of? Who or what is involved in it? What are the main phases? What does it look like?

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

3 Define: • When you define, you determine the relationship between a phenomenon and a certain class. • The answer to a defining question is a statement on the extent to which a phenomenon may or may not be classified in a certain way. • Examples of a defining question include: how can it be classified? Does it belong in this family? How can it be defined? What is it an example of? 4 Evaluate: • In an evaluation, you assess one or more research elements against a certain standard. • The answer to an evaluative question is a statement about the positive and/or negative characteristics of the phenomenon. • Possible formulations of an evaluative question would be: What is the value of it? How well does it work? What are the positive and/or negative aspects? How suitable is it? How useful? What are the advantages or disadvantages? 5 Explain: • In an explanation you try to find out what causes a phenomenon. • The answer to an explanatory question is a statement about the causes of a phenomenon. • Examples of an explanatory question are: how come? What caused it? What is this a result of? How could this have happened? 6 Predict: • When you make a prediction, you assess what will happen next. • The answer to a predictive question is a statement about the events you may expect in the future. • Examples of a predictive question are: what will this lead to? What can we expect? What should we be prepared for? 7 Design or advise: • In a design or advice, you propose a measure or interference that may solve or reduce a problem or that may achieve a goal. • The answer to a design and advice question is a reasoned solution. • Examples of a design question are: what can be done about it? How can it be improved? How should we …? What are appropriate measures? What should be done and what should not? These explanations of the question types should enable you to choose an interesting question about your topic. You can take these three different perspectives:

68

3.6  Picturing the what: formulating the question

I  Setting the scene

• Does a certain type of question and its consequences appeal to you? For example, do you think it is more interesting to design something (formulate advice), find differences and similarities (compare), or make an assessment (evaluate)? • Do you find the answer type interesting? Would you want to conclude your research with it? • Is there a certain way of formulating the question that fits the topic you want to research? You could run through all seven of them and choose what seems best to you at this moment. Remember that you need to find a question that you eventually (at the end of your research) want to be able to answer.

So when can we expect to find a descriptive question? A descriptive question is reserved for research domains about which very little is known. For example, if an archive is opened, the first step will be to describe what is in it. If a new

69

IV  Writing the text

There is something strange about this question type. Present researchers with the list we have just made and ask them which type of question they have selected, and nine out of ten will say a descriptive question. This only occasionally holds true, though. How does that work? First of all, you could describe each question type in terms of a ‘description’: I describe the similarities and differences (= compare), I describe the causes (= explain), the advantages and disadvantages (= evaluate), et cetera. It is easy to identify one’s question with it. Secondly, all research consists of descriptions, but this is seldom the ultimate goal. Purely descriptive main questions are rare, although every piece of research contains a number of descriptive sub-questions.

III Interlude

Beware of the ‘describing’ question type for your main question One word of advice regarding the choice of a descriptive question (type 1). A description is only about mapping the characteristics and aspects. At the end of a description, you will be able to give a summary of the characteristics. If you want more, you will have to choose a different question type for your main question.

II  Making a plan

Do not be afraid to choose Perhaps you are still unsure about the question type. Not to worry, the plan has not been finalized yet. If the next step reveals that the question you are choosing now is not the best one after all, you can reconsider that choice. In particular the division into sub-questions (see chapter 4) may lead to your reconsidering the main question. Still, it is important to make a preliminary choice now as it will enable you to continue.

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

disease is found, they will start with a description of the symptoms. The discovery of a new country will start with an inventory of the features of this new area. But even then, scientists will want more. They might want to evaluate the usefulness of the archive, compare the disease with other diseases, or define new plant or animal species. What could possibly be against calling a research descriptive? Well, there are two reasons to be careful. First, a description can be tricky because it has no end. It is like writing about a topic. A descriptive question is often not much more specific than, What is there to be said about …? In addition, although phenomena can be segmented into elements, aspects, phases, and such, a description is not governed by iron logic that leads you from a question to an answer. Therefore, it is harder to find a proper structure to hold on to. Second, it makes sense to be careful because scientists usually want to do more than just list features, and ‘more’ requires a suitable research structure with additional sub-questions. If you fail to take those into account in the planning phase, in the end you will be unable to make the statements you are actually searching for – perhaps without even being aware of this. You may find yourself with a whole list of features of a disease but unable to say to what extent this disease compares to related disorders although that is what you intended. In order to make such a comparison, you would also need the features of those related disorders. The question is then whether you still have time to describe them. In short, if you choose to use a description even though your actual goal is not descriptive, you will run into problems in the end. You will have failed to collect the right data to make any statement except a descriptive one. What question fits an argumentative essay or critical opinion piece? If your text has to be an argumentative essay, it can be difficult to choose a question type. Since this mostly occurs in the case of shorter writing assignments, we will discuss this matter in chapter 6 (section 6.4.2, step 4). There you will find an explanation of how to translate that kind of assignment into a question type and matching sub-questions. That usually results in an evaluative question. What question best suits development, factor, influence, role, or ­connection? This can best be explained using sub-questions. Information on this topic can be found in chapter 4, section 4.1.2, step 3.

70

3.7  Picturing the what: formulating the answer

STEP 2 Formulate the beginning of the question

I  Setting the scene

Make it easy for yourself and organize your research clearly by formulating the question in such a way that the question type is apparent. Here are some examples: • Do you want to compare? Start the question with, What are the similarities and differences between …? • Do you want to explain? Start the question with, What are the causes of …? • Do you want to offer advice or come up with a design? Then start your question with, What is a good way to solve …?

STEP 3 Fill in the blanks with the narrowed down topic

3.7

Picturing the what: formulating the answer

III Interlude

What are the similarities and differences between the development of anorexia in girls under the age of twelve in different family situations? Does it make a difference if (1) both parents work full-time, (2) one parent is home occasionally on weekdays, or (3) one parent is always at home on weekdays?

II  Making a plan

Until now you have only used the question type, but remember that the question also deals with a topic. Take your description of the narrowed down topic (see section 3.4.2) and add that to the beginning of the question. Does that result in a monstrosity of a sentence? Do not fret. You can always tinker a bit with the formulation in order to avoid a congestion of choices (a ‘stuffed sentence’). The best remedy is to extract a number of elements from the question and use them to formulate a new question. For example:

3.7.1 Introduction

The strong connection between question and answer may not be as obvious as you think. There is something peculiar about that connection. For example, if you ask a researcher what statement he would like to make at the end of his research, this will often prove to be something other than an answer to the

71

IV  Writing the text

You have now narrowed down the topic and formulated a question. The final step for now concerning the what is formulating the answer. But how can you formulate the answer if you have not carried out the research yet? That is possible because restricting the topic and choosing the question type already reveal much of what the answer is going to be, and, perhaps more importantly, what the answer cannot be to the question you have formulated.

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

question he asked. It happens to regular students and PhD students but also to post-docs and other academics that the question and the intended answer do not match perfectly. This may be caused by a failure to formulate the question sufficiently precisely, but also sometimes because that question has changed in the course of the process of definition and specification while the original answer stuck in the researcher’s mind. That is why it is sensible to imagine as specifically as possible what you feel you will be able to assert at the end of your research and to check whether the question you have formulated will take you there.

3.7.2 The steps 1 Formulate the answer. a Write down any possible results of your research. b Write down the conclusion. c Form the possible results and the conclusion into an answer. 2 Check the connection between question and answer. a Check the logical connection, the question type. b Check the content connection, domain and variables. c Check the connection between open versus closed question and answer.

STEP 1 Formulate the answer

1a Write down any possible results of your research Of course you do not know yet what the results will be exactly, but you should be able to make an inventory of the type of statements you want to make. Imagine you have finished carrying out your research; what could the results be? Write all of this down, and do it in telegram style if you must. An example. The preliminary main question is, To what extent do various migrants participate in different sectors of the labour market in Costa Rica in the period 1995 to the present? If you think of the possible results, you could end up with something like the following list: •• North American migrants more often hold jobs in Costa Rica than South Americans. •• Migrants mostly work in agriculture and industry rather than services. •• In the past five years, migrants have increasingly found jobs in the tourist industry.

72

3.7  Picturing the what: formulating the answer

Once you have made such a list, you may reach the conclusion that many different answers are possible. This means that you have many variables in your research. Variables are the elements in the question that you have questions about. You can only find the exact value of that element once the research has been completed; until that time, it is still a variable. Ask yourself whether researching all those variables is feasible and limit the topic further if necessary.



1c Form the possible results and the conclusion into an answer Check the list of possible results and compare it with the conclusion you have just written. Does that conclusion cover all the partial results? Does it adequately capture all the possible outcomes? If not, you have some thinking to do: what should the final result of your research be?

II  Making a plan

1b Write down the conclusion Imagine your thesis is finished or your article is going to be published. What do you hope to be able to say at the end? And/or, imagine a newspaper article is written about your research. What would the headline read?

I  Setting the scene

•• Migrants who speak both English and Spanish will most likely find jobs in Costa Rica. •• et cetera

STEP 2 Check the connection between question and answer

2a Check the logical connection: the question type The final statement must match your question type. For example, if you pose an explanatory question, the eventual statement should concern causes, factors, influences, and such. For a comparative question the answer will be about similarities and differences. That is why you need to check if the answer is for-

73

IV  Writing the text

Whenever you discover that something is out of sync, you have a problem to solve. Essentially, that should not be too difficult; adapt the question to the answers or realign your expectations of the results in the direction of the question.

III Interlude

Check whether the answers and the conclusion perfectly match the question you formulated – or not. A perfect fit between answer and question has three aspects: 1 logical connection; 2 content connection; 3 connection between open versus closed question and answer.

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

mulated in terms of the central question. If that is not the case, you have a logical problem. Determine what best fits your idea of the thesis. If that is the answer, then reformulate the question in such a way that it logically fits the answer. If it is the question, then reformulate the answer. An example A student writes the following: Problem statement Is the MMPI-2 questionnaire valid when used as a psycho-diagnostic instrument in different cultures in Dutch mental health care? Preliminary answer After the research has been completed, I want to be able to say whether the MMPI-2 can be used as a diagnostic instrument for immigrants and whether it can be used in the same way as for Dutch people. If not (my expectation), what is the reason for this, what are the shortcomings (do they concern the entire test or only parts of it?), and what changes could be made to improve the test.

Something is not right about the logical connection here. The question is an evaluation, but the answer also provides an explanation and basically a design. The answer covers more than the question. If the student strictly follows the question, he will not come to the answer he has formulated here. In order to do that, he should formulate a design question, for example, How can we make the MMPI-2 suitable as a diagnostic instrument for people with different cultural backgrounds?

2b Check the content connection: domain and variables The answers you desire must also fit the question with regard to the topic. Check if the topics of the answers match the topic of the question. By comparing the question with possible answers and aligning them properly, you will be able to define exactly what the research is about. That is after all the purpose of the what question at hand. The topic of the research is also called the domain. The description of the domain incorporates the following elements: • unit of analysis, e.g. migrants, metacognitive skills, Beethoven’s piano sonatas; • number of units: all? some? ten?; • place or area, e.g. Costa Rica, the left arm; • time, e.g. after WWII, from 2000 on. All answers must fit within that domain.

74

3.7  Picturing the what: formulating the answer

I  Setting the scene

Your chances of a sound content connection between question and answer increase significantly if you use the same wording to formulate both question and answer. The entire idea behind formulating question and answer is that the foundation of your research (and therefore your thesis) is not only carefully described but also extremely transparent. Many academic writers tend to go the opposite way, using many different words in their research plans. As a result, their plans lose clarity, and it is increasingly difficult to check if they connect logically and in terms of content. An example A law student writes the following:

II  Making a plan

Topic The margin in criminal law to take into account the culturally defined behaviour of winti. Question type Explanatory Research question In criminal law, why is the margin to take into account the culturally defined behaviour of winti so limited in a judge’s decision?

III Interlude

Preliminary answer Criminal law is a law of superiors. Sometimes the rights of the inferior must be taken into account, but not so in the case of winti. In criminal law, other principles outweigh an alternative treatment of cases involving winti. I shall include the motivation of the judge + motivation author x + my own opinion.

75

IV  Writing the text

This plan is slightly flawed. The question does not completely cover the topic (the difference in length is also striking). The topic should really be ‘the limited manoeuvring ability judges have to take into account …’ If we carefully look at the question itself, we could doubt whether this is an explanatory question: ‘why’ does not so much refer to an explanation (what is the cause) as it does to a reason, an argument. When we consider the answer, this reason(ing) appears to be what we are dealing with: what arguments are there not to make an exception for winti. Viewed logically, that is more of an evaluation: the student is about to demonstrate that it is justified (justifiable, defendable, et cetera) that winti have no special status, and why.

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?



2c Check the connection between open vs. closed question and answer The third aspect of a perfect fit between question and answer is about what is known and unknown about your topic, in other words, what you consider as a given and what is still unknown to you. This is another way to improve the precision of your question. The less you know, the more open your question will be and the more difficult it will be to plan your research. When you study something that has not been researched before, that topic needs to be explored first. The researcher has an open mind, finds out what there is to see, and formulates a corresponding open question such as, What happens during thesis supervisory meetings? What are common rituals in the tribes of southeastern Congo? More commonly you will look for a connection with a domain that has been researched before. There will be information available about your topic, and what is known does not require further research (or the question will not be relevant; more about that later). You incorporate this knowledge into your question, and it allows you to formulate your question more precisely. Literature can therefore also be used to specify your question. An example Two pedagogy students want to do research on intellectually gifted children in primary school. They know of a math programme that offers advanced material for these children. The students start with the open question how this works, but the literature gives input to formulate more specific ideas on how this works. It can be expected that the method will lead mainly to gifted children being more motivated and solving problems more effectively. As a result of this, the big question ‘How does the math programme work?’ has been specified into: ‘Does the math programme increase the motivation and the problem-solving ability of Dutch gifted children aged 6-8 years in primary school?’

This question provides much more direction to the research than the broader question, What works well for gifted children in primary education? A more specified question increases the chance of an efficient writing process. The central question is formulated somewhere on the continuum of ‘very open’ to ‘very closed’. At the end of that spectrum lies the hypothesis you use to test if it holds true or untrue, as we did in the example with the math programme. If you end up with such a polar question, you should consider whether you would be happy with a yes or no answer. If you would not be, then you need to formulate the question so it is slightly more open, for exam-

76

3.8  Concluding the what question

3.8

Concluding the what question

What?

II  Making a plan

In the previous sections, we discussed the steps to narrow down the topic, choose the question type, and make the expected results explicit. Click the ‘Forms’ button on the website for the form Picturing the what, which you can use to complete the ‘what’ for your task. It also includes a checklist. Throughout the process, but especially during the final step, it is important that everything ties in together. The question should concern the topic, and the answers should relate to that topic and to the question type. That completes the axis of the template and ensures the connections fit.

I  Setting the scene

ple, by using question phrases like ‘in which cases’ or ‘to what extent’. A clear division between known (question) and unknown (answer) also allows you to clarify for yourself what you are looking for in your research.

topic field

III Interlude

Question

What? answer

One last remark needs to be made about those tight connections, and it relates to the description of the scope of the topic. The answer (the conclusion) might cover a larger domain than the field you are actually researching. You could, for example, interview 1,000 full-time working mothers with small children to make a statement about all full-time working mothers with small

77

IV  Writing the text

Figure 3.7 • The axis of the template

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

children (in the Netherlands). You research a selection or a sample from the total set you want to make statements about, because that provides you with a good picture of the entire set. But the domain you have researched is in fact much smaller than the domain you would be able to make statements about at the end of the research.

3.9

Picturing the why: reason, relevance, objective 3.9.1 Introduction When you are looking to answer a certain question, there must be a good reason for it. In science we don’t do anything without reason. Research should yield something useful, be relevant. In the case of academic writing tasks, your peers will decide if the research is relevant – research must be useful within a certain academic field. This is an explicit academic prerequisite: science demands that a research question can be placed within the body of knowledge of one or more disciplines. Therefore the relevance is related to the disciplinary embedding (see section 3.5). As an academic researcher you are not a loner working on an isolated problem but an up-and-coming psychologist, physicist, historian, jurist who answers a question that lies within the field of psychology, physics, history, law and is considered important there. Therefore, you need to know what space in the discipline is occupied by the problem you are researching and how the research problem (the central question) ties in with certain relevant research areas, paradigms, themes and theories in your academic field. One of the prerequisites for relevance is that your question falls clearly within the scope of your academic field. In addition to that prerequisite, there are three conditions. If you can prove that your research meets those three conditions, you have sufficient grounds to start researching the question. These three conditions are found in the steps for arguing the relevance.

3.9.2 The steps The steps for describing the relevance are: 1 Demonstrate that the question has not been (sufficiently) answered yet. 2 Demonstrate that the answer is useful. 3 Demonstrate that the effort is worth it.

78

3.9  Picturing the why: reason, relevance, objective

If a question has not been answered yet, we are dealing with a knowledge gap. One such knowledge problem may be: • a gap (we don’t know …); • a contradiction (one researcher says x, another says y); • a discrepancy (the theory predicts a, in reality we see b).

79

IV  Writing the text

Some more tips: • Search especially for recent literature, otherwise you cannot be certain that your question has not already been answered. • Read selectively in a goal-directed manner, and do not study or summarize the articles from start to finish. For the moment, you are browsing to see if the topic is suitable for a thesis. You are looking for a question, not an answer. • Record how you conducted your search (search systems, queries, and key words). • Record what ‘evidence’ you have found of the knowledge gap. • Note down all the source data that seem useful; you will need those data for the bibliography, and you might want to read the article more closely in a later stage.

III Interlude

In order to find out if your question has already been answered, search for literature on the topic of your question. Such a search differs for each academic field. We offer only some general tips here: • Use the search engines and search systems that are common in your discipline. • Search especially for literature reviews and specific review journals if you can. They are the quickest way to get an overview of the research. • Search for words from your preliminary topic; use the filter application if you get too many hits. • Search for author if your field can boast some especially renowned researchers. • Once you find an answer to your question, you will need to look for a new question (see for example the ‘discussion’ section) and do another search.

II  Making a plan

As a researcher, you need to prove that the knowledge gap exists. It may be the case that a renowned scientist has recently shown that your question is as yet unanswered, but it is more likely that you yourself will need to conduct systematic literature research to be certain that nobody has previously researched your question, or not sufficiently. Such literature research is part of the planning phase because you need it to formulate a relevant question.

I  Setting the scene

STEP 1 Demonstrate that the question has not been (sufficiently) answered yet

3  Picturing your research: what are you going to research and why?

• Discuss your findings with your supervisor. He or she may be able to assess if you have covered a sufficient number of publications. While using this method to demonstrate that your question has not been answered yet, you simultaneously get an overview of what has been researched on your topic. What do we know? What do we agree on? In what ways do theory and reality align? This information can be used to write the ‘story of relevance’. Here, the relevance once again lies in reconstructing the restriction (section 3.5) because you work out how the topic fits within the research in your field.

STEP 2 Demonstrate that the answer is useful The answer – and therefore also the posing of the question – is useful if the newly gained knowledge leads to positive results, if it contributes to solving a problem and/or reaching an objective. This problem may be theoretical or practical. Generally, arguing the relevance consists of a chain of problems or objectives, for example: We still know too little about what causes certain topics to suddenly find their way on to the political and public agenda and how they subsequently change public opinion. As a result, it is difficult to influence public opinion. This leads to a failure to dissuade people from travelling by car, which is necessary to reduce CO2 emissions or solve the congestion issue. That is why I am researching the way in which certain topics generate general interest.

In order to develop such an argument, you can use the following ‘formula’: If we knew what/how … (central question)    Then we would know …      And we would know/be able to …        Which is desired because then we could … (solve problem x)         Which is important because …

The advantage for you as a researcher is that you are creating a clear picture of what your research should lead to. During the time you carry out your research, this provides you with a foundation that allows you to check whether each step does indeed take you closer to that goal.

80

3.9  Picturing the why: reason, relevance, objective

STEP 3 Demonstrate that the effort is worth it

II  Making a plan

The website also contains the form Relevance for completing these steps (click the ‘Forms’ button).

I  Setting the scene

Deciding if something is worth the effort is a matter of weighing the costs against the benefits. Costs are not only expressed in money but also in the time (including supervision time!) required to carry out the research. These costs should be outweighed by the benefits, the results of the research. You have mapped those benefits in the previous step, but you will only be able to estimate the costs realistically once you know how you are going to conduct the research. In other words, you need some idea of the strategy (see chapter 4). On the other hand, the expected return should play a part in determining the strategy. At this point, both criteria are very closely connected.

III Interlude IV  Writing the text

81

4

Picturing your research: how

4.1 Picturing the how: determining logical sub-questions 4.1.1 Introduction 4.1.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Use the main question to determine the question type (see section 3.6.2) ՔՔ Step 2 Find the corresponding matrix of sub-questions and ­complete it with your topic or topics ՔՔ Step 3 If necessary, translate the terms in the question ՔՔ Step 4 If necessary, unravel complex questions 4.2 Picturing the how: working out operational sub-questions 4.2.1 Introduction 4.2.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Mark all the important terms (variables) in the sub-­ questions ՔՔ Step 2 For each term, decide how you can make it operational ՔՔ Step 3 Do the same for parallel sub-questions to create sub-subquestions ՔՔ Step 4 Check the divisions in the literature ՔՔ Step 5 If necessary, design a pilot study 4.3 Picturing the how: determining research methods 4.3.1 Introduction 4.3.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Work on one sub-question at a time ՔՔ Step 2 Find out if the answer to the sub-question is already waiting for you somewhere ՔՔ Step 3 Make an inventory of the methods that your field allows ՔՔ Step 4 Find out what results these methods yield ՔՔ Step 5 Find out what these methods cost ՔՔ Step 6 Make a choice and discuss it with your supervisor

82

4.4 Concluding the how question



Picturing your research: how

4.1

Picturing the how: determining logical sub-questions

I  Setting the scene

4

83

IV  Writing the text

Is this about the table of contents? No, this chapter is not about the individual text parts but only about the subquestions for the research. Sometimes it is suggested that you make a table of contents immediately after formulating the main question. This suggestion springs from the view that the structure of the thesis (the structure of the text) is identical to the structure of the research. Although this may often be so, a thesis contains much more information than is strictly required to answer the problem statement. Think about the introductory chapters that explain the context of a problem or the theoretical state of the art. It does happen that such introductory chapters get out of hand because the author does not have a clear picture of the purpose of those chapters; they are separate chunks of text containing all kinds of information. This can be avoided by first mapping exactly what the research entails and only then making a table of contents.

III Interlude

In the previous chapter, we addressed the ‘what’ and ‘why’ of the research. The final question that needs to be answered in the research plan is, How are you going to research that? How do you get from question to answer? The first step is to divide the main question into sub-questions. The collection of subquestions is also referred to as the ‘shopping list’ of the research. You use it to decide what you need in order to answer the central question, as if you are listing the ingredients for a dinner party. The function of it is comparable. If you tried to answer the main question in one single effort, it would be like going to the shop and buying everything you liked. The result might be surprising and innovative, but preparing the meal would be much more challenging than if you knew exactly what everything was for. What is more, you would no doubt have food left that you would have to throw out because it does not go with anything. If you have a well-considered research structure, you determine in advance exactly what you need and what to use the ingredients for.

II  Making a plan

4.1.1 Introduction

4  Picturing your research: how

That is why we first take the researcher perspective and then the author perspective. For the latter, see section 5.1. Criteria for good sub-questions When you decide what the logical sub-questions are, you are basically designing an efficient structure for your research. Such a structure contains: 1 all the sub-questions needed to provide you with the final answer; 2 only those sub-questions needed to provide you with the final answer. The useful thing about the seven question types (section 3.6) is that, based on the question type, you can deduce a number of sub-questions. Let’s start there.

4.1.2 The steps The steps to determine the logical sub-questions are: 1 Use the main question to determine the question type. 2 Find the corresponding matrix of sub-questions and complete it with your topic or topics. 3 If necessary, translate the terms in the question. 4 If necessary, unravel complex questions. Since this part (dividing the main question into sub-questions) is not only crucial to an efficient thesis writing process but is also the most complicated part, the explanation of the sub-questions for each of the different question types is rather extensive. Below, you will find the question sets for the seven types of main questions. Use them to make a first selection of sub-questions. If you don’t quite succeed, you will find some tips at the end to help you translate and unravel.

STEP 1 Use the main question to determine the question type (see section 3.6.2) If you used the procedure described earlier to formulate a main question, this will tell you what type of question it is. If all has gone well, the start of the question should reveal if we are dealing with a description, comparison, evaluation, et cetera. If you are not sure what question type this is, you can work your way back. Check what is required to give a particular answer and compare it with the question types and the matrices below. An example. You believe that at the end of your research you will be able to make a statement like ‘North American migrants more often have work in Costa Rica than do South Americans’. If a comparative takes a central position

84

4.1  Picturing the how: determining logical sub-questions

1 How many North Americans have work in Costa Rica? 2 How many South Americans have work in Costa Rica? 3 What is the difference between 1 and 2?

I  Setting the scene

in the answer (‘more often’), you can assume that this is a comparative question. If you then check the sub-questions that you need to make a statement like the one above, you will find the following:

You will recognize these questions later in the matrix for the comparison.

STEP 2 Find the corresponding matrix of sub-questions and complete it with your topic or topics

Description 1 What are the features of phenomenon a1? 2 What are the features of phenomenon a2? 3 What are the features of phenomenon a3? zz So what can we say about the features of phenomenon a?

85

IV  Writing the text

The thing you need to do to arrive at sub-questions for a descriptive question is divide the topic (the phenomenon you are researching) into, for example, elements (spatial), aspects, or phases (chronological). What makes for a logical division depends on the phenomenon; we cannot tell you much else about that. Sometimes the academic field offers standard lists, for example, for the description of a medical condition (symptoms, morbidity, causes, and such). It therefore makes sense to look for examples from your discipline, not only if you have a descriptive main question, but especially also because every research contains descriptive sub-questions. See section 4.2 on working out the sub-questions.

III Interlude

1 Describe The first question type, the description, is the odd one out. We spoke about this before; a description in itself contains no logic, it is just a series of elements. The end of a description cannot be much more than a summary of the described features. Dividing a descriptive main question into sub-questions means you distinguish between different descriptive questions, for example:

II  Making a plan

The matrices for the different question types can be found below. The idea is that you complete those sub-questions with the phenomenon you want to research. Along the way, you will come across some examples. This is the first level of dividing the main question into sub-questions. Working out sub-questions and terms, and dividing them further, is dealt with in section 4.2.

4  Picturing your research: how

2 Compare Like describing, comparing is a basic form of research. Just as every research has descriptions, most research has comparisons. Question type 2 is about a ‘pure comparison’: the researcher only wants to describe similarities and differences. The basic shape of a comparison looks like this: Comparison 1 What are the features of phenomenon a? 2 What are the features of phenomenon b? (What are the features of phenomenon c, d, et cetera?) 3 What are the similarities between a and b? (What are the similarities between a and c, b and c, d, et cetera?) 4 What are the differences between a and b? (What are the differences between a and c, b and c, d, et cetera?) zz So what can we say about the extent to which the phenomena are alike? This basic form is in itself quite simple which is why it is so useful: when you can clearly recognize this structure, your research strategy has a solid foundation. If you have a comparative question, you write down what your features a, b, c, et cetera are. 3 Define If you ask a defining question, you intend to eventually make a statement about the extent to which a phenomenon fits a certain class. Examples include the biologist or botanist who wants to classify a certain plant species, the psychologist who researches whether ADHD is a personality disorder, or a theatrologist who analyses if a play is absurdist. In a definition, you compare the phenomenon with a class. The basic form is: Definition 1 What are the features of the class? (When do we call something …?) 2 How do you weigh these features? 3 What are the features of phenomenon a? 4 What are the similarities between the class and phenomenon a? 5 What are the differences between the class and phenomenon a? zz So what can we say about the extent to which the phenomenon fits this class?

Compared to the comparative matrix, the basic form contains an extra question, one about the weighing. This can be illustrated by means of an example. Suppose you want to answer the question, Was former Prime Minister Thatcher a true conservative in her time? The first sub-question would be, What were

86

4.1  Picturing the how: determining logical sub-questions

III Interlude

Evaluation 1 What are the features of the norm? (When do you call something …?) 2 How do you weigh these features? 3 What are the features of phenomenon a? 4 What are the similarities between the norm and phenomenon a? 5 What are the differences between the norm and phenomenon a? zz So what can we say about the value of the phenomenon?

II  Making a plan

4 Evaluate An evaluation is about making a statement on the value of something, the positive and/or negative aspects of it. The basic form closely resembles that of the definition. Your evaluation is shaped by comparing the phenomenon with a norm. If it is generally in line with the norm, the evaluation is positive, but if there are too many differences, the evaluation is negative. If the norm is something negative (for example if you want to know how serious a problem is), the reasoning is reversed: if it corresponds mainly with the norm, then it is negative, but if there are many differences, then the evaluation is positive. That is why an evaluation always starts with the question of what features the phenomenon you research must have in order to be evaluated in a certain way. For example, what are the features of a just law, of a good study, of an effective way of teaching, et cetera.

I  Setting the scene

the characteristics of a true conservative in the time of Margaret Thatcher? That will result in a list of characteristics. The fact that you ask the question means that there is doubt (or there would not be sufficient reason for the question); in other words, you are considering the possibility that Thatcher does not have all the characteristics. What if that indeed proves to be the case? Does the first mismatch suffice to justify closing the research, because it proves that Thatcher was not a true conservative? Or is the matter more subtle than that? If so, should she have a majority of the characteristics or are certain of them essential or do they outweigh others? This type of question requires close consideration in advance.

The completed basic matrix looks like this: 1 When do we call passing a law desirable? 2 How do you weigh these features? (Are the criteria for desirability all equally important?) 3 What are the features of the American law?

87

IV  Writing the text

Perhaps an example will clarify how that works. You want to see if it would be desirable to pass a certain American law in the Netherlands as well. Then you would have an evaluative question because of the value term ‘desirable’.

4  Picturing your research: how

4 What are the similarities between the features of the desirability and those of the American law? 5 What are the differences between the features of the desirability and those of the American law? zz So what can we say about the desirability of passing the American law?

5 Explain Descriptions, comparisons, definitions, and evaluations have relatively simple basic patterns. The following three question types (explanations, predictions, and designs) are a little more complex. We will start with the explanation. If you want to explain something, you need to think carefully about the question based on which you might be able to explain a phenomenon. In daily life we are quick to do this: ‘No wonder Peter fails his exams; he does not study hard enough’; ‘Global warming is caused by man’; ‘The Dutch national team lack the quality to win the world cup’. In science, however, explanations are subjected to close scrutiny; you have to come up with proper evidence or arguments. The definition of ‘proper’ varies by discipline. If you want to answer an explanatory question, you need to sit down with your supervisor and determine what your discipline considers to be good strategies for this purpose. Three forms of explanation are commonly found in academic research: a explanations from the literature b theoretical explanations c empirical explanations a Explanations from the literature If you want to explain something, you could search for explanations in the literature. The question is, however, in this way, are you explaining it yourself? No, you are describing someone else’s explanation. Therefore it is a description instead. Perhaps you compare different theories with each other or you critically evaluate those explanations; how sound are they? In the latter case, you are evaluating which means you should use the corresponding basic form: the explanatory theory is then the phenomenon that you are evaluating. You will find elaborated examples of this in chapter 6, on short writing assignments. If you look at what a researcher does with explanations from the literature, you are not really dealing with an explanation. b Theoretical explanations In this form of explanation, you compare the phenomenon with an explanatory theory. This form of explanation can be applied if you have some more general theories that explain phenomena similar to those in your research. For example: no wonder Peter fails his exams; he does not study hard enough. If

88

4.1  Picturing the how: determining logical sub-questions

III Interlude

c Empirical explanations In an empirical explanation, you try to prove that two phenomena not only correlate but that they are also connected in terms of cause, which means that one phenomenon leads to the other. The difference from the theoretical explanation is that you yourself develop the theory, as it were. This is no easy task if you want to prooduce a scientifically sound explanation. An example of a line of reasoning for an empirical explanation would be, ‘At the end of the summer, people are more tanned than before the summer. How is that possible? Something must have changed in the meantime (before and after the summer) that can cause a tan. One hypothesis is that people are more tanned at the end of summer than at the beginning because their bodies are exposed to sunlight more than before the summer, and the sun causes a tan’.

II  Making a plan

Explanation based on theory 1 What does the theory hold on the features of causes (x) and effects (y)? 2 What are the features of the circumstances x’ and the phenomenon y’? 3 What aspects of x’ and y’ match with what the theory holds? 4 What aspects of x’ and y’ differ with what the theory holds? zz So what can we say about x’ as possible cause of y’?

I  Setting the scene

you want to substantiate this idea theoretically, you could search for a theory that explains the causes of study results. Does that theory say anything about ‘studying hard’? Then you could look at the extent to which all the elements in the theory are similar to the phenomenon you are about to explain. In this case, some relevant features could include: does the theory relate to the type of education that Peter is enrolled in? Does it relate to the type of exam Peter is taking? Are there any other factors according to this theory? Are all conditions that correlate studying hard with passing exams equal to those in Peter’s case? This is the type of consideration that makes the matrix of comparison below useful for an ‘explanation based on theory’:

If you want to test this hypothesis, you need to know:

IV  Writing the text

1 How much sunlight was the human body exposed to before the summer, and how tanned was the human skin at that time? 2 How much sunlight was the human body exposed to during the summer and how tanned was the human skin at that time? 3 What are the differences (and similarities) between sunlight at the beginning and at the end of the summer? 4 What are the differences (and similarities) between tanned human skin before and after the summer?

89

4  Picturing your research: how

5 To what extent do differences (and similarities) between sunlight and tanning correlate? (Were comparable differences found for questions 3 and 4?)

The basic form of an empirical comparison is therefore: Empirically based explanation 1 What are the features of x and y at time 1? 2 What are the features of x and y at time 2? 3 What are the similarities and differences between x t1 and y t1? 4 What are the similarities and differences between x t2 and y t2? 5 To what extent do differences and similarities between x t1 ↔ y t1 and x t2 ↔ y t2 correlate? zz So what can we say about the extent to which x can cause y?

As you can see, an empirical explanation requires proving the correlation between the values of two phenomena. For that reason, these phenomena are often referred to as variables. In an explanation, you assume that one variable determines the value of another. The other variable depends on the first and is therefore the dependent variable. The cause is referred to as the independent variable. However, the correlation of phenomena is not sufficient to conclude that causality exists; the independent variable must actually constitute an explanation of the phenomenon. Extra questions must always be asked: could other variables have caused the effect? Or is there perhaps another cause that could explain the correlation? Another example to illustrate the difference between correlation and causality: ‘Significantly more drownings occur when ice cream sales increase. Therefore, ice cream is dangerous’. This is a strange line of reasoning. We know that ice cream is not healthy, but ‘dangerous’? The explanation for the increase in the number of drownings lies not in the consumption of ice cream, but rather in the underlying factor which is high temperatures. When it is hot, people eat more ice cream, and they also swim more often. The latter leads to more drownings. Correlation of variables does not automatically mean causality. The extensive form of an empirical explanation therefore looks like this: Empirically based explanation 1 What are the features of x and y at time 1? 2 What are the features of x and y at time 2? 3 What are the similarities and differences between x t1 and y t1? 4 What are the similarities and differences between x t2 and y t2? 5 To what extent do differences and similarities between x t1 ↔ y t1 and x t2 ↔ y t2 correlate?

90

4.1  Picturing the how: determining logical sub-questions

Eventually, you will have to add a theory or story to your empirical explanation in order to prove convincingly that one phenomenon causes another phenomenon. However, explanations always remain hypothetical: we assume correlations but are seldom able to guarantee them 100 per cent. The rules of statistics determine when the correlation of phenomenon can be called significant rather than coincidental. If you do not have statistics at your disposal, your explanation is less secure. In non-statistical qualitative research, scientists tend to disagree more frequently on the explanations. Here is an example from a history book:

a Prediction from the literature As with the explanation, logically viewed, a prediction from the literature is not a real prediction but more of a description, comparison, or evaluation.

91

IV  Writing the text

b Theoretical predictions The most common predictions involve the weather. Although not very explicitly, they are theory driven. Theories have been used to develop models that can predict that, given a certain air pressure, wind speed, wind direction, et cetera. certain weather conditions are to be expected. Meteorologists study how reality resembles the variables depicted in the models. The matrix looks like this:

III Interlude

6 Predict Logically speaking, a prediction is closely related to an explanation; only the starting point differs. In an explanation you take an effect and look for the cause. In a prediction you take a cause and look for possible effects. What you are looking for are the different extremes of the same type of argument. As a result, a prediction comes in the same three forms as the explanation: a predictions from the literature b theoretical predictions c empirical predictions

II  Making a plan

Historians are still undecided about whether this conquest is the result of an unfortunate coincidence or of plotting by unscrupulous rulers. (Jansen, 1978, p. 188)

I  Setting the scene

6 Are there any other possible causes? 7 Are there plausible reasons to assume a causal relationship? zz So what can we say about the extent to which x can cause y?

4  Picturing your research: how

Prediction based on theory 1 What does the theory hold on the features of causes (x) and effects (y)? 2 What are the features of the circumstances x’ and the phenomenon y’? 3 What aspects of x’ and y’ match with what the theory holds? 4 What aspects of x’ and y’ differ from what the theory holds? zz So what can we say about y’ as possible effect of x’?

c Empirical predictions An empirical prediction starts with a description of a causal process in the past. Next, you decide how much that process resembles the situation of the phenomenon you are currently researching. An example: are we on the brink of a new world war? The situation in several European countries at first sight resembles that of Germany in the 1930s. It is generally assumed that this situation led to World War II. How big is the risk that this will happen again now that we are in an economic crisis and the tolerance towards certain ethnic groups is dwindling? In order to make statements about this, you need to compare the situation in Germany (the effect of which we are aware of) with the situation in Europe today. If those situations are similar in all relevant aspects, there is a big chance that a similar effect will occur. The sub-questions are much like those for an empirical explanation. There we also found a basic set of five questions that compare the situations. To that set we have added the same two questions that allow us to compare the content of this comparison. Empirically based prediction 1 What are the features of situation x at this moment (t1)? 2 What are the features of situation x and effect y at previous moments (t2, t3, et cetera)? 3 What are the similarities and differences between x t1 and x t2, x t3, et cetera? 4 What are the similarities and differences between y t2 and y t3, y t4, et cetera? 5 To what extent do differences and similarities between x t2 ↔ y t2 and x t3 ↔ y t3 correlate? 6 Is it possible that other factors are at play? 7 Are there plausible reasons to assume a causal relationship? zz So what can we say about the probability of y in the future?



92

7 Design or advise A design question is a special type of question because you are the one who creates the solution, whereas other types of research ‘merely’ require you to gather knowledge. If your thesis is about a solution that already exists, you

4.1  Picturing the how: determining logical sub-questions

II  Making a plan III Interlude

1 In order to solve a problem, you must first describe the problem. A problem description is a form of evaluation: you evaluate the current situation in the light of the preferred state. The preferred state is the norm to which you compare the existing situation. 2 Next, you explain this problem. You can do this in any of the three ways described earlier: explanation based on the literature, theoretical explanation, and empirically based explanation. Given that the design research is quite extensive, researchers try to reach the explanation as efficiently as possible. In many cases, this will mean an explanation based on the literature or a theoretical explanation. 3 Once you know what the cause of the problem is, you think about ways to remove that cause or reduce its impact. For this part of the research, it is difficult to give further instructions because finding a solution might or might not involve a lot of work, and expert knowledge is needed to elaborate on this. It is clear, however, that a well-defined problem is easier to solve than an ill-defined one. For example, if it transpires that mobile phones break down after one year because the material used to build them only lasts for one year, then a solution is obvious: use materials that last longer. 4 If you want to deliver a good design, you close the research with an evaluation of it. You could, for example, analyse the advantages and disadvantages of more sustainable material for making mobile phones. That would allow you to include criteria such as cost, technical possibilities and impossibilities in your research.

I  Setting the scene

should check what other question type you want to answer in connection with it. This might be a description of the realization (explanation) or an evaluation. Real design questions are particularly common in applied sciences, for example, technical disciplines, policy studies, communication studies, and medicine. Always check if a design question fits within your discipline. A scientific design suggests a certain way of reasoning. Below we have worked out the specifics of this reasoning, so it becomes clear what the background of a design matrix is.

A matrix of this example could look like this: IV  Writing the text

Design Problem: evaluation of the situation 1 What should x be/What should x be like? 2 What is x/What is x like? 3 In what aspects does x differ from the preferred state?

93

4  Picturing your research: how

Explanation 4 What causes the problem? Solution 5 What can be done to ensure that x is more like x should be? Evaluation of the solution 6 What criteria must be involved – and in what way – in the assessment of the proposed solution? What are the features of the norm? 7 In what aspects does the proposed solution match the norm? 8 In what aspects does the proposed solution differ from the norm? zz So what can we say about the way to tackle x?

It is important to realize that designing a scientifically sound solution is an intensive job, and it may not always be feasible for a thesis. Students (and other researchers) often choose to plot another course in the process; they might opt to give a meticulous description of the problem and/or explain the problem. Designing and evaluating a solution are then left to the next generation of researchers. Investigate closely what you can do in the time you have allotted for your thesis; often, a good explanation is worth the effort (compare the third criterion for a relevant question, section 3.9.2) more than a flimsily substantiated design. That concludes the explanation of the sub-questions that can be used to answer the seven question types. You should now be able to complete the sub-questions for your central question. If that is not the case yet, you will find more clues in steps 3 and 4 below. Incidentally, that information might also be useful for working out the sub-questions. It will be worth your while to read this section in any case.

STEP 3 If necessary, translate the terms in the question If you have been unable to recognize your main question in one of the matrices, you may want to look at a way to translate the question into the terms of the question types. This can be illustrated using a number of terms that are frequently used in questions: • development • factor/influence • connection • analysis

94

4.1  Picturing the how: determining logical sub-questions

Develop If someone asks ‘How has this developed?’, the answer will be something about the features over the course of time, something like, ‘First there was this, then that, and finally it became …’. How do you reach such an answer? By making a comparison between the features of the phenomenon at different times. Subquestions therefore include:

II  Making a plan

What are the features of phenomenon x at time 1? What are the features of phenomenon x at time 2? What are the features of phenomenon x at time 3? What are the differences between the features of phenomenon x at times 1, 2, and 3? What are the similarities between the features of phenomenon x at times 1, 2, and 3? zz So what can we say about the way phenomenon x has developed?

I  Setting the scene

Chapter 6 (on short writing assignments) deals with translations of a paper or an essay, be it explanatory, expository, or argumentative.

95

IV  Writing the text

Connections and relationships What if you are looking for a connection or a relationship between x and y? This will often be a causal link – thus an explanatory question – although this is not necessarily the case. Sometimes a researcher is only looking for a correlation of variables. Such a connection can be found by making a comparative research: correlation is after all a ‘similarity’. Whether we are dealing with a comparison or an explanation should follow from the research. If a research into connections was intended to solve a practical problem, you are always dealing with an explanatory connection; otherwise, it will be logically impossible to make the step towards a solution. Compare the ice cream and drownings story: there is a connection, but if you want

III Interlude

Factors that are at play or can have an effect Researchers who use words such as ‘factor’, ‘role’, and ‘influence’ are often reluctant to say out loud that they are making explanatory statements, although that is the only logical interpretation of these terms. If something is a factor, it is at work; it plays a role. And isn’t playing a role nothing more than leading to something, which is close to causing something? Note: it does not have to be the sole or main cause, but that is not necessarily the case in an explanation. The same thing applies to influence. If something has an influence, it leads to something that is a result of the influence. Therefore, it contributes at least partially to the occurrence of the effect. Without the influence, the effect would not exist. Asking about the effect is therefore an explanatory question.

4  Picturing your research: how

to reduce the number of drownings, a ban on ice creams would not be the best way to go about it. Analysing and understanding how it works What is analysing? Literally, it means to unravel or dissect. Which question type fits with that? A description seems to match: a researcher describes the parts or elements. Understanding how it works is slightly more complicated, though. That can mean two things, even though the difference is subtle. First of all, it can point to a description, generally a chronological one: first this happens, then that, and then that. In this way, you may come to an understanding of the steps used to pass a law. But understanding equally involves comprehending the mechanics of it, for example, understanding what caused a law to be passed, which brings us back to the explanation.

STEP 4 If necessary, unravel complex questions It is likely that your research is more complex than the matrices below depict. If that is the case, you need to find out how everything is organized. Research can revolve around a question such as, Which of four possible explanations offers the most important cause of …? The word cause refers to an explanation, but it does say the most important cause, meaning you need to find the best explanation, which in turn points to an evaluation. Since this is about ‘the best’, it also implies an (evaluative) comparison. What consequences does this have for the research structure? On the first level, there is the evaluation. The first question that needs to be answered is, On what grounds do we decide that something is an important cause? The answer to that question could be something like, ‘The cause that most closely resembles what the theory holds’ (compare the matrix dealing with explaining). Next, the four causes must be compared, describing how important each cause is. At that moment, the explanation matrix is back in the picture. In terms of content, explanation is the most important aspect for the researcher, but the research has the form of an evaluation/evaluative comparison because we are looking for the best evaluation. Now try to capture the basic structure of your research in a matrix. You can use the form Strategy main questions, sub-questions and methods to help you with that on the website (click ‘Forms’). That basic structure is required to work out the next stage.

96

4.2  Picturing the how: working out operational sub-questions

4.2

Picturing the how: working out operational sub-questions

In section 4.1 we dealt with the logical steps to take us from the main question to the answer. But a sub-question also deals with something that can be subdivided into parts. These also become sub-questions. (They are actually sub-subquestions, but for the sake of readability we will call everything a sub-question that is not a main question). The smaller and more concrete the phenomena are that those sub-questions deal with, the easier they are to answer. That makes the research clearer and easier to carry out.

II  Making a plan

4.2.2 The steps The steps to make the sub-questions more concrete are the following: 1 2 3 4 5

I  Setting the scene

4.2.1 Introduction

Mark all important terms (variables) in the sub-questions. For each term, decide how you can make it operational. Do the same for parallel sub-questions to create sub-sub-questions. Check the divisions in the literature. If necessary, design a pilot study.

STEP 1 Mark all the important terms (variables) in the sub questions III Interlude

The important terms in the sub-questions are actually the ‘phenomena’ or situations that are described. Other elements of comparison are also important, such as the norm in an evaluation, the class in a definition, or the theory in an explanation or prediction.

STEP 2 For each term, decide how you can make it operational

1 How many North Americans work in Costa Rica? 1.1 How many North Americans work in agriculture in Costa Rica? 1.2 How many North Americans work in factories in Costa Rica? 1.3 How many North Americans work in the tourism industry in Costa Rica?

97

IV  Writing the text

Making the terms operational can sometimes be done using general knowledge of the world. A research into labour participation in different labour market sectors might result in the following distinctions:

4  Picturing your research: how

You can also consult sources for inspiration. Sometimes, manuals contain useful ideas. Suppose you want to research academic writing processes; you want to know if writing a Master’s thesis differs from writing a Bachelor’s thesis. If you want to describe both processes, you could find inspiration in this very book. Sub-questions could follow the division in chapters. For example: 1 How do you write a Bachelor’s thesis? 1.1 How do students set the scene for their theses? 1.2 How do they make a plan for their theses? 1.3 How do they carry out the research? 1.4 How does the writing phase proceed?

You can imagine that these sub-questions can also be made more concrete. After all, the questions are still rather open (cf. section 3.7.2 about open and closed questions) and they can still be specified further. For example question 1.1: do students read the information of the curriculum, and how? Do students look at sample texts? What do students know about the requirements for procedure, process and product? Et cetera. This process of making constructs more concrete is also called operationalization. You translate the terms in such a way that you can work with them, that they become operational. In a thesis, having operational constructs makes the difference between being able or unable to answer the questions. So manuals can sometimes prove useful for tracking down sub-questions, but your sources of choice should be mainly scientific articles and books from your field. That is where you will find theoretically justified divisions for the topics. This applies to the research objects themselves, but most certainly also to making operational norms (evaluation), classes (definition), or theories (explanation and prediction) more concrete. When a law student studies the desirability of a new bill (compare the example in the evaluative matrix), this student will have to use legal terms such as ‘subsidiarity’ and ‘proportionality’ in order to make the construct ‘desirable’ more operational. You see that, at this level, the difference in disciplines becomes discernible. A sociologist will probably use different norms to examine the desirability of a law, for example, the consequences it will have for social cohesion.

STEP 3 Do the same for parallel sub-questions to create sub-sub questions Once you have made the sub-question more concrete, you can work out the other sub-questions in a similar manner. This is certainly required if you are going to compare the answers to both questions with each other. That is obvi-

98

4.2  Picturing the how: working out operational sub-questions

I  Setting the scene

ous in the case of a comparison. There is even an expression for non-parallel sub-questions: comparing apples and oranges. Suppose you are comparing two books of poetry. You need to ensure that you describe the same features of each book. If you don’t, you will not be able to make a statement at the end about how similar the books are. If you were to study the theme of one book (apples) and the form of the other (oranges), this would be a useless exercise in terms of similarities and differences. We have seen that the sub-questions of the question, What are the features of a? come back verbatim in, What are the features of b? c? and so forth. You can use the same division for the comparison itself (i.e. looking at the differences and similarities). Then you would get a matrix like this one:

1 How do students write a Bachelor’s thesis?

II  Making a plan

Table 4.1 • Example matrix with sub-questions for a comparison

3 What are the ­differences?

4 What are the similarities?

1.1  How do students set the scene for their Bachelor’s thesis? (= sum of sub-questions 1.1.1 to 1.1.3)

2.1  How do students set the scene for their Master’s thesis?

3.1  What are the differences in how Bachelor and Master students set the scene?

4.1  What are the similarities in how Bachelor and Master students set the scene?

1.1.1  How do Bachelor students read information about their studies?

2.1.1  How do Master students read information about their studies?

3.1.1  What are the differences in how Bachelor and Master students read information about their studies?

4.1.1  What are the similarities in how Bachelor and Master students read information about their studies?

1.1.2  How do Bache- 2.1.2  How do Mas- 3.1.2  What are the lor students use sam- ter students use differences in how ple texts? sample texts? Bachelor and Master students use sample texts?

3.1.2  What are the similarities in how Bachelor and Master students use sample texts?

(= sum of sub-­ques­tions 1.1 to 1.4)

2.1.3 …

1.2  How do Bachelor … students plan their Bachelor’s thesis?

…

…

…

…

IV  Writing the text

1.1.3 …

III Interlude

2 How do students write a Master’s thesis?

99

4  Picturing your research: how

It takes some time to draw up a matrix like this, but you can probably see that it makes looking for answers easier. It helps to make carrying out the research more clear and transparent. This parallelism is necessary for each type of comparison, not only for the pure comparison, but also for the other question types that are based on the comparison. For example, the following sub-questions need to be worked out into sub-sub-questions in a parallel way : Definition 1 What are the features of the class? (When do we call something …?) 2 What are the features of phenomenon a? Evaluation 1 What are the features of the norm? (When do you call something …?) 2 What are the features of phenomenon a? Theory-based explanation 1 What does the theory hold about the features of causes (x) and effects (y)? 2 What are the features of the circumstances x’ and phenomenon y’? Theory-based prediction 1 What does the theory hold on the features of causes (x) and effects (y)? 2 What are the features of the circumstances x’ and phenomenon y’?

STEP 4 Check the divisions in the literature As indicated above, you can allow yourself to be inspired by the scientific literature when you make the division into sub-questions. If you have not done this yet but instead made divisions ‘merely by logical thinking’, the sensible thing to do is to check those divisions against the literature. Is your division similar to the way people in your academic field operationalize such a term? Are there alternative divisions of writing processes, desirability of laws, features of absurdist plays, et cetera?

STEP 5 If necessary, design a pilot study Sometimes you may not succeed entirely in making the sub-questions concrete, or you may not be satisfied that the existing theories are suitable to describe the phenomenon that you are researching. In such cases, you might

100

4.3  Picturing the how: determining research methods

4.3

I  Setting the scene

want to consider doing a pilot study. A pilot study is a small, defined piece of research with the objective of discovering the relevant variables. Note that the results of the pilot study will not get you any nearer to the answer directly, but only indirectly: it will take you closer to the road you need to travel to come to that answer. If you get stuck in making the sub-questions more operational, put them aside for a while and consult your supervisor about the usefulness of a pilot study. See also section 7.5.1.

Picturing the how: determining research methods 4.3.1 Introduction

II  Making a plan

The issue of research methods brings us to the final stage of the research plan. Sometimes the research method (and occasionally even the entire data set) is determined by the supervisor, in which case there is no room for discussion or alternatives. But even then it makes sense to consider why others think that the prescribed method is the best one. Since choosing the research method is very much a matter of content (each scientific field has its own options and preferences), we will only deal with a number of main aspects that are involved in choosing and justifying the research methods. The starting point when working out the steps is that there is some room for choice.

4.3.2 The steps III Interlude

The steps to determine the research methods are the following: 1 Work on one sub-question at a time. 2 Find out if the answer to the sub-question is already waiting for you somewhere. 3 Make an inventory of the methods that your field allows. 4 Find out what results these methods yield. 5 Find out what these methods cost. 6 Make a choice and discuss it with your supervisor.

Scientific research often uses a combination of methods. Of course there are literature studies, but every so often the methods are a combination of literature research and empirical research. Sometimes different forms of empirical research are used, for example, questionnaires and document analysis. In short, not all sub-questions are researched in the same manner. That means

101

IV  Writing the text

STEP 1 Work on one sub-question at a time

4  Picturing your research: how

you should look at the best way to answer the question per sub-question. To make this step, you need to have a structure with main questions and subquestions (see section 4.2).

STEP 2 Find out if the answer to the sub-question is already waiting for you somewhere You know that the main question has not been answered by someone else yet (or it would not be relevant, see section 3.9), but that may not be the case for all the sub-questions. A comparison, for example, may involve phenomenon a, little of which is known, whereas phenomenon b has been extensively described in the literature. If that helps to answer your sub-question, you will not have to do that research again. We are discussing the difference between direct and indirect research here. In the former, you yourself research the phenomena or objects that you posed questions about. In the latter, you look at what other people have observed about the phenomenon or object of your research. Direct research is also referred to as empirical research or field research/field work. Indirect research is mainly known as literature research or theoretical research.

STEP 3 Make an inventory of the methods that your field allows Especially for empirical research, you can find all kinds of classifications such as the difference between experimental and observational research. In the former, you change the circumstances (conditions) in reality and observe how the phenomenon behaves. For example, you send an experimental group on a training course and watch how they perform afterwards (compared to the control group), or you add substances to laboratory experiments and observe how the solution reacts. In observational research, you only observe reality as it is, you do not interfere. You observe how teachers teach, how whales migrate, or how members of parliament debate. Experimental research is a daily occurrence in the natural and social scenes, but it is less common in fields such as history or literature. In addition, there is a popular distinction between quantitative and qualitative research. Generally speaking, quantitative research is about figures; you would count the ‘what’ and ‘how much’ of a phenomenon. In qualitative research, the answers are formed by words or stories; you describe. The emphasis often lies on the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of a phenomenon. Within all these distinctions, you can find all sorts of concrete means of research such as the interview, questionnaire, or experiment but also document analysis and various other forms of analysis and observation. The manu-

102

4.3  Picturing the how: determining research methods

STEP 4 Find out what results these methods yield

103

IV  Writing the text

The most important costs involved in research are money and time. Some research methods cost a lot of money, for instance because expensive equipment or materials are required. For most Bachelor and Master research projects, however, the question of cost will focus mainly on the time the research will take. The question therefore is how much time does it take to answer a sub-question using a certain method? That will be different for each method, but one thing is clear: literature research usually takes less time than empirical research. After all, you only have to read the research instead of designing it and carrying it out. And conducting oral interviews takes more time than drawing up and sending out written questionnaires.

III Interlude

STEP 5 Find out what these methods cost

II  Making a plan

This question can be interpreted in two ways: what results does a method produce and how much knowledge does the method yield. A method generally enables you to gather a particular type of information. Take the questionnaire; when you distribute it, you get information on what the respondents themselves think. If you want to solve the traffic congestion problem and start by explaining the problem (the ‘proper’ order for a design question, see section 4.1), a questionnaire sent to road users may not be an appropriate method; that will only result in information about what they think is the cause, which does not necessarily have to be the actual cause. The question about the amount of knowledge is also important. In general, literature research produces more knowledge than empirical research, simply because it is less time-consuming (see the next step). Using literature research allows you to cover a larger domain (cf. section 3.7.2) than you can with empirical research. If, however, you want to research a new phenomenon, literature research will not be sufficient. Truth be told, there is a third point; how does the method benefit you as a student? This is not insignificant, because the thesis is also a learning process and a test. You are often expected to learn from carrying out a certain type of research and showing that you can manage it. In addition, a thesis is a wonderful opportunity for you to gain experience with a type of research that you are interested in mastering.

I  Setting the scene

als from your discipline will no doubt provide overviews of the methods common in your field.

4  Picturing your research: how

STEP 6 Make a choice and discuss it with your supervisor These considerations on the most suitable method are directly associated with the relevance part in which you have to explain that your research is worth the effort (cf. section 3.9). After all, that part also deals with the question of whether the way you intend to carry out the research is the best way in terms of cost and profit. Always discuss the considerations with your supervisor, as knowledge of the field is indispensable for making this kind of decision.

4.4

Concluding the how question The methods conclude the final stage of the research plan. Now you can complete the entire Strategy form (see on the website, under ‘Forms’), and you can check the connections: • Does the main question concern the narrowed topic? • Do the joint answers to the sub-questions lead to the answer of the central question? • Do the methods lead to the answer to the central question? • Do the sub-questions and methods fit within your discipline? • Is the answer an answer to the main question both in terms of logic and content? • Is that answer sufficiently relevant? • Is the topic relevant within your discipline?

104

5

The thesis: table of contents, time ­schedule, and writing out the plan

5.1 Making a preliminary table of contents for your thesis or article 5.1.1 Introduction 5.1.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Check which text type is expected ՔՔ Step 2 Work out how you are going to fit the answers to the subquestions into the required structure 5.2 Making a time schedule for your thesis 5.2.1 Introduction 5.2.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Write down the activities you are going to undertake ՔՔ Step 2 Indicate how much time you will spend on those activities ՔՔ Step 3 Indicate when you are going to perform them 5.3 Writing out the plan in full 5.3.1 Introduction 5.3.2 Why write out the plan in full?

106

5.1

I  Setting the scene



5

The thesis: table of contents, time ­schedule, and writing out the plan

5.1.1 Introduction

107

IV  Writing the text

A table of contents clarifies what the content and structure of your thesis or article will be. You can illustrate the content by means of headings, but it is even better to also formulate what questions you will be answering in each chapter or section. What applies to the research (section 3.6.1) also applies to the text; questions provide a lot more direction and guidance than topics. That is why they will be used later to plan the text (section 9.2). The structure of the text manifests itself in the sequence of the topics and in their hierarchy. That hierarchy is often indicated using numbers and decimals. When you make the preliminary table of contents, you could allow yourself to be inspired by the conventions in your discipline (expectations of the professor or supervisor, guidelines of the journal) and by the research structure that emerges in the research plan.

III Interlude

When you drew up the research plan (chapters 3 and 4), you mapped what you are going to research, why you are doing it, and how. This may be sufficient to start carrying out the research, but it may also be sensible to use this phase to look ahead to the text you are going to have to write later. The most important reason for this is to avoid that you will be unpleasantly surprised when writing (chapters 9-11) because your supervisor expects a completely different type of text than you had in mind. If all is well, you will have thought about this question, about what type of text is expected (compare chapter 2). Now you can fill in the outline of the text because you know what the research will look like.

II  Making a plan

Making a preliminary table of contents for your thesis or article

5  The thesis: table of contents, time schedule, and working out the plan

Do bear in mind that in this phase you don’t know exactly what will be in the text later; after all, you still have to carry out the research. You have questions, but you still need answers. That is why we call it a preliminary table of contents.

5.1.2 The steps The steps toward making a preliminary table of contents are: 1 Check what text type is expected. 2 Work out how you are going to fit the answers to the sub-questions into the required structure.

STEP 1 Check which text type is expected In section 2.4, 2.6 and 2.7 on identifying the product, we mentioned that you needed to find out what type of text you were expected to write. Below, we will remind you of the questions that are relevant for the table of contents: • What elements should the text contain? • What is the purpose (the goal) of the different elements (introduction, theoretical framework, conclusion) for the reader and/or for the story? • What should the various elements therefore describe? • What information is not required? • Is there a fixed order of content elements? There are various conventions governing the organization of academic texts that usually apply to the discipline and/or type of research (e.g. quantitative versus qualitative). The different text types are usually referred to as genres. One such common genre is the research report organized according to the socalled IMRD (or IMRaD)-model: • Introduction • Methods • Results (and) • Discussion This model is frequently used in the social and natural sciences. In itself, it provides a clear structure, yet many academic writers struggle with the question where to describe the theories they are using. That is indeed a difficult question. You read all kinds of things during your thesis process, but where to put it all in your text? Each discipline has its own ‘headings’ for that purpose, e.g. ‘status questions’ (history), ‘context’, ‘background’, ‘theoretical framework’, or just ‘theory’. It may also be the case that the theory belongs in part I of IMRD, in the introduction.

108

5.1  Making a preliminary table of contents for your thesis or article

I  Setting the scene II  Making a plan

So we see that processing the theory can prove difficult. Many handbooks and manuals are quick to offer suggestions to solve this problem. It may help to ask yourself what the purpose is of those bits of theory, what function does the theory have in your thesis? Below, as an example of such reasoning, we have included a brief overview of the function – and therefore also of the place – the theory has in the various parts of an IMRD thesis or article: 1 In the chapters on planning, it will have become clear that in order to develop a research plan, you need to use theories. This literature will probably be covered in the introduction, but it may also be dealt with separately in a later chapter. 2 To work out the sub-questions and for methodical choices, you also refer to the literature; that is included in a theoretical chapter or in the chapter on methods. 3 It may very well be possible that you answer one or more sub-questions using literature. That means you will also include theory in the chapter on results. 4 Finally, many researchers use the discussion chapter to refer back to the literature in order to interpret the results. In chapter 7 you can find more information about processing the literature.

III Interlude

Other sections or chapters can also be chosen to think about the function. What do you want to achieve with your reader? The goal of the introduction could be ‘Read me!’ The next question is then, What content and structure will help to achieve this purpose? What will stimulate my readers to read this article or thesis? What will my readers find interesting? Next, you could check out a sample text or any additional information on writing centre sites such as those from Purdue (Online Writing Lab) or Chapel Hill, North Carolina, (search for ‘handouts’) or on a site like Using English for Academic Purposes (uefap). Don’t forget to discuss your plans and ideas with your supervisor. For this step, we have included the form Steps for checking which type of text is expected on our website. Simply click ‘Forms’.

In most cases, the research structure is clearly visible in the text since the subquestions are covered in separate chapters and sections. However, if you write an IMRD text, these central and sub-questions are part of the R, the Results section. The answers to the sub-questions are your results, after all. In case of a less strict model, you can often still number the sub-questions as consecutive

109

IV  Writing the text

STEP 2 Work out how you are going to fit the answers to the sub-questions into the required structure

5  The thesis: table of contents, time schedule, and working out the plan

chapters. Usually you need to describe your modus operandi and explain your choices at some point. If there is no special Methods chapter for that purpose, include the methodical description and justification in the chapters of each sub-question. This can lead to a very logical structure if you are using different methods for different sub-questions. One final remark about the possible difference between the research plan and the text outline. In the research plan you choose a sequence (sub-question 1, 2 et cetera) that is convenient for carrying out the research. Suppose you are conducting a comparative study into Beethoven’s piano sonatas. From a researcher’s perspective, it would be ideal to analyse the sonatas one at a time and to organize the sub-questions accordingly: 1. What are the features of sonata 1? 2. What are the features of sonata 2? Et cetera. However, the question is whether it would be agreeable for the reader if you presented your findings in that order too. Perhaps the text would be more readable if you first wrote a chapter on the structure of the sonatas, then a chapter on the melodic construction of the sonatas, and so on. We call that ‘flipping’ the structure. A ready example of this can be found in section 9.1.2. Whether this flipping is required is best looked at and decided once you have collected all the data, but do remember that the table of contents is preliminary in this sense as well. Whatever you do, make sure that you compile a concrete outline that gives a clear overview of the entire study with all the questions, sub-questions, and topics involved. If you don’t, you are putting off any problems related to content, and that is not wise. It often turns out to be quite a puzzle to find the right place for all the different elements. The sooner you think about this, the better. An added advantage of such a concrete preliminary table of contents is that your supervisor will be better equipped to evaluate the plan, whether it will lead to a coherent text, and if it meets the requirements set for content and structure of the text.

5.2

Making a time schedule for your thesis 5.2.1 Introduction The plan is almost finished. As a last check you should make a time schedule, to ensure the plan is feasible. In a time schedule, you write down what you are going to do, when you are planning on doing it, and how long it will take you.

110

5.2  Making a time schedule for your thesis

5.2.2 The steps

I  Setting the scene

The steps in making a time schedule are: 1 Write down the activities you are going to undertake. 2 Indicate how much time you will spend on those activities. 3 Indicate when you are going to perform them.

STEP 1 Write down the activities you are going to undertake

111

IV  Writing the text

It is always a challenge to estimate how long these activities will take you. The best method is still empirical. Time yourself while you are studying an article. How many pages can you do in an hour? How much time will it therefore take you to cover all the literature that you have found? You can also use this method to estimate how much time you should allocate to carrying out an empirical study. Note down the time involved in recording and working out an interview, processing a questionnaire, analysing a document, writing an observation report, or whatever it is you do for your research. Add up the hours or days you estimated. What is the total? How much time do you have for your thesis or article? How do they all relate to each other? Is this feasible? Don’t kid yourself: limit your research if the time planning proves that you have been too ambitious. Realize that most studies take longer than planned. Allow a buffer.

III Interlude

STEP 2 Indicate how much time you will spend on those activities

II  Making a plan

Start with an overview of the activities you have to undertake. Roughly, there will be three of them: researching, writing, and discussing. Your central question and sub-questions offer a convenient starting point for making a time plan for the research. Go over the questions again and decide what data you need to answer each question and what you need to do to get those data. Make this as concrete as possible. If you are conducting interviews, for example, the list will read: composing interview questions, selecting and inviting respondents, arranging technical matters (recording equipment, laptop?), doing test interviews, editing interviews, having the final interviews (travel?), processing interviews (how?), et cetera. The writing is also something you have to plan. What sub-activities are involved? Think making outlines, writing a first draft, co-reading, rewriting. Discussing consists mainly of the intermediate contact with your professor or supervisor. Also consider if it would be helpful to discuss your activities with peers or colleagues who are also working on their theses. Some branches of study organize support groups for that very purpose. See also section 8.4.

5  The thesis: table of contents, time schedule, and working out the plan

STEP 3 Indicate when you are going to perform them When you know what you are going to do and you have estimated how much time it will take, you can determine when you are going to do each specific task, in what order and at what time. First the big picture. Will you be writing a draft chapter per sub-question or are you going to write it all at the end? There are various options (Oost & De Jong, 1997, p. 51): 1 You follow the steps in the sequence they are presented in this book strictly: you collect, analyse, and interpret all the data of the research, and then you write the entire text. Although that is a splendid strategy for smaller writing assignments, most research projects are too extensive to separate the phases strictly in such a way. 2 You work on one sub-question at a time. This way, you do not collect all the information in one fell swoop, but you work your way from research question to research question. You collect data per question, which you then analyse and process to text. This approach is common for literature research and research that requires the findings for one question to be able to answer the following question. This is also the approach to writing journal articles. 3 You use a combined approach. This combined approach often makes sense when your research combines literature research with empirical research. That may look something like this: you answer the first question by means of literature research; you use option 2 for this purpose, which means you finish the whole thing and produce a draft chapter. The following sub-questions are answered using empirical research. For this you choose option 1; you no longer work on individual sub-questions, but you collect and analyse all the answers to the sub-questions first and write everything down later. So, you have a choice in the order in which you carry out and write your research. The ‘when’ part should come with a schedule too; you indicate when you are planning to perform those activities. Do you know at what time of day you are most productive? Can you think most clearly in the morning? Are you a night writer? Is the after-lunch dip a good time for you to plan some routine jobs? Try to find out in the course of the process which are the best moments for you to carry out certain activities. Apart from the time of day, you could also look at the division in weeks. Many researchers feel it is very effective to occasionally plan a ‘writing week’ or even multiple ‘writing weeks’. That means you make sure that nothing else is scheduled in that period (no lab work, no classes) and that there is as little distraction as possible. Some academic writers swear by secluded places like cottages to concentrate on their article or chapter.

112

5.3  Writing out the plan in full

5.3

Writing out the plan in full

II  Making a plan

It is important to discuss the time schedule with your supervisor. He or she will then not only check if the planning fits his or her schedule and expectations, but may also help you estimate how realistic your planning is.

I  Setting the scene

Look online for ‘empty calendars’ that you can use to make a time schedule. Try completing one with all your activities. See the website for an example (click ‘Forms’ and download the Time schedule). Don’t forget to plan discussion rounds with your supervisor, especially at crucial moments. These include the moment you have finished the picture of your research, the moment you have finished collecting your first data, halfway through the analysis of the data, and the moment you have completed writing your draft texts which in larger writing tasks is perhaps after each chapter. Bear in mind that you will need to submit material a few days or perhaps a week prior to the supervisory meeting. And check whether you are still on schedule for the date you had in mind to finalize your Bachelor’s, Master’s, or PhD project.

5.3.1 Introduction

There are two ways of shaping a thesis plan. You can create a completed template or write it out in full. A plan in the shape of a template is useful when you are developing ideas, as the ‘bareness’ keeps it transparent. On the other hand,

113

IV  Writing the text

5.3.2 Why write out the plan in full?

III Interlude

You could say that the plan is finished once you have written the time schedule. There is really only one decision left to make, How are you going to shape this plan? You could also say, In what form will you present it to your professor or supervisor? We have dealt with this earlier, on several occasions – you should always discuss the thesis plan with your supervisor. Even more importantly, you should ‘seduce’ your supervisor into giving a lot of useful feedback. The more concretely you word your plans, the more critical the comments of the supervisor can be. That may be an unwelcome or even frightening prospect, but eventually it will increase your chances of success because that criticism may safeguard you from problems in the execution. There is no way you will benefit from keeping matters vague or undecided; that will most likely blow up in your face sooner or later in the process. Clearly show what you have in mind, including the things you are unsure about. Ask your supervisor to join in the thinking process.

5  The thesis: table of contents, time schedule, and working out the plan

writing out the plan in full can yield great advantages in this phase. It is recommended for the following reasons: 1 A plain text gives you the opportunity to do one final content check of the plan. In a text, you are forced to make connections between sentences and paragraphs explicit and to write arguments out in full. That is when unclear, unresolved, and illogical issues emerge, generally more pronounced than in a schedule. That means your supervisor will also pick up on them more easily. 2 You are delivering a first sample of your writing work. That way, you are creating an opportunity for yourself to gain some experience in writing, and in an early stage at that. It may lead to your discovering early in the process that you have certain writing idiosyncrasies or problems. You may find that you work very slowly, that you find it hard to get anything on paper, that you are having trouble wording your ideas, or perhaps, on a happier note, that you write reassuringly quickly. Through this experience you will know what lies ahead of you. Any changes you need to make in the writing work will have surfaced. 3 The research proposal written in plain text should be considered a first draft of the introduction. The introduction (alternatively, one or more introductory chapters) mainly consists of information that you have collected and devised in the planning phase. After all, that is where you introduce the what, why, and how of your research. One or two things will probably need to be changed for the final version, but it is normal for a first version to differ from the final text. In any case, you will have laid the foundation. 4 It is useful to write that introduction at this very moment, now when everything is still fresh in your mind. At the end of your research, that will be different, according to Nederhoed (1985, p. 120): Many introductions are incomprehensible (…) That is because at the end of their research – which may have taken months or even years – the researchers find it hard to go back to the start. They are unable to imagine the starting point of their research, the situation where they knew little to nothing about their topic. That situation must always be the starting point for writing the introduction.

After all, that situation is the one the reader is in when he or she starts reading the text.

114

5.3  Writing out the plan in full

II  Making a plan

6 Finally, if you show a text to your supervisor in this early phase, he or she can give you feedback on your writing. Especially when you are insecure about the requirements set in terms of content, structure, style, and finishing of your text, submitting a piece of text is recommended. Supervisors are seldom able to clarify in advance what requirements they have for a text, but when they are confronted with one, they are quick to tell you what they like about it and what not. To be on the safe side, ask your supervisor to look also at the way you have written it; is that the proper way to do it in the rest of the thesis? If you receive feedback at an early stage, you will know if you need to change anything in the way you write. You can start looking for a good handbook, useful websites, a course, or individual writing coaching.

I  Setting the scene

5 The introduction is a manageable piece to start with. If you leave all the writing to the final phase, you run the risk of perceiving it as an insurmountable task. Dividing the writing into parts (known otherwise as segmenting) will make the job more manageable and the deadlines seem less threatening.

In short, although it takes extra time to transform the plan into a text, there are plenty of reasons to do it anyway. If you find it hard to produce a text, you should check chapters 9 and 10 of this book.

III Interlude

This concludes all the planning: the what, why, and how of your research have been specified (template), the time schedule has been drawn up, you have a preliminary table of contents, and perhaps you even have a written version of it all. You are all set to go carry out the research.

IV  Writing the text

115

III

Interlude: between making a plan and writing the text If you finished your research plan, you can start carrying out the research. This should be done before you start writing your text because the results of your research, be it empirical or a literature study, will become the content of your text. So you need those data before you can plan your storyline. This research phase, however, is beyond the scope of this book because too much content knowledge is involved. Moreover, methodological handbooks are available in large quantities and in each discipline. They deal with various empirical methods, quantitative as well as qualitative, such as a survey, test, an interview, or experiment. We can, though, give some strategies for a literature study. In this Interlude you can find them in chapter 6 and 7. Chapter 6 deals with short writing assignments such as an essay. A short writing assignment usually goes without empirical research. Chapter 6 describes the steps to take when making a plan for the essay, but it adds three sections on collecting and analysing information. This information can be relevant for longer literature studies too. Chapter 7 in its entirety is about reading. More specifically you can find strategies for efficient reading in a process of academic writing, because we all tend to read much more than we actually need to. The third chapter in this interlude, chapter 8, is on getting feedback. We discuss the differences between feedback given by teachers and supervisors on the one hand, and feedback given by peers on the other hand. Both feedback givers can be very useful if you know when and how to approach them. Writing support groups appear to be very powerful for getting and giving feedback, for improving your writing skills and, maybe evenly important, keeping motivated. In section 8.4 you can find tips for organising an effective writing group.

116

6



Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper) 6.1 Introduction

6.2 Picturing the research – What: narrowing down the topic 6.2.1 Introduction 6.2.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Study the scope of all the terms ՔՔ Step 2 Narrow the topic down by selecting subsets ՔՔ Step 3 Find an interesting angle ՔՔ Step 4 Note which topic you have selected and check its scope 6.3 Picturing the research – What: formulating a main question 6.3.1 Introduction 6.3.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Choose a question type ՔՔ Step 2 Formulate the beginning of the question ՔՔ Step 3 Fill in the narrowed down topic in the blanks 6.4 Picturing the research – How: determining the logical sub-questions 6.4.1 Introduction 6.4.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Find the sub-question chart that corresponds to your ՔՔ question type ՔՔ Step 2 Complete the question with your topic or topics ՔՔ Step 3 If necessary, dissect complex questions ՔՔ Step 4 If necessary, translate the terms in the question 6.5 Finding answers: collecting, arranging, and recording information 6.5.1 Introduction 6.5.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Make an inventory of what you have found so far ՔՔ Step 2 Look for additional sources ՔՔ Step 3 Collect and arrange the information

117

6.6 Finding answers: analysing and interpreting information 6.6.1 Introduction 6.6.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Consider if a claim needs to be supported ՔՔ Step 2 Describe the claim and the arguments ՔՔ Step 3 Evaluate the line of reasoning 6.7 Finding answers: in conclusion 6.7.1 Final addition 6.7.2 What will the outcome be?

118

Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)

6.1

I  Setting the scene

6

Introduction

119

IV  Writing the text

What is academic about it? Before we come to the steps, it makes sense to go briefly into the difference between the writing you may be accustomed to and the writing that is expected of you at university. When you write an essay or give a presentation in secondary school, it is generally all right to simply tell a story about a subject. You tell the audience everything you know about your home town, the book you have read, the development of the digital camera, to name but a few topics. Once you are expected to write in an academic setting, though, it is best if you leave that way of communicating behind you. Knowledge telling is basically reserved for exams. If

III Interlude

These texts go by very different names including essay, paper, review, or report. It may be the case that your assignment is somewhere between a large and a small writing task. If you need more detailed information about a certain aspect while you are reading this section, check if one of the previous chapters has covered it; they deal with making a plan for a larger writing task, for example, a Bachelor’s thesis or Master’s thesis.

II  Making a plan

In this chapter, you will find steps to help you plan a short writing assignment. Think of an assignment that largely fits the following description: • It is an assignment set as part of a course. • The most important objective is to familiarize yourself with the content. • The topic, main question, or hypothesis is set or partly set. • The research is not necessarily meant to lead to new scientific knowledge. • The assignment does not require any empirical research on your part; literature research suffices. • The literature is set or partly set. • The text should be between two and ten pages long. • Sometimes, group work is encouraged or obligatory.

6  Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)

that happens to be the sole objective of your current assignment (for example, because you are only required to summarize an article), you could consult a general writing manual or interpret the text as one having a descriptive main question (see section 6.4.2). In academic writing assignments, though, you are commonly expected to do more than just write down what you know – it is about knowledge transforming. How can you transform knowledge? The easiest way is to formulate a good question. Next, you use the information to answer that question; you transform what you have read into an answer to the question. That works better than topic-based writing. After all, the problem with a topic is that, in itself, it is not limited; you can talk endlessly about Shakespeare’s sonnets, about anorexia in girls under the age of twelve, about the effect advertising has on consumer behaviour, or about NMR spectroscopy in organic compounds. Although knowledge telling is usually an important objective of small writing assignments (cf. section 2.3.2), you need to turn that knowledge into a story of its own with a beginning, middle, and end, a story with a question and an answer. In the rest of this section we will assume your small writing assignment has the following characteristics: • The text starts with a question and ends with an answer to that question. • Everything between the question and the answer is functional in the sense that it contributes to the justification or answer of that question. • Everything we read is meant to be taken literally. • The text is based on literature (books, articles), but you do more than simply convey what is in the literature. The steps A plan for a small writing assignment requires the following steps: 1 Narrowing down the topic (section 6.2). 2 Formulating a main question (section 6.3). 3 Determining logical sub-questions (section 6.4).

6.2

Picturing the research – What: narrowing down the topic 6.2.1 Introduction The question that your text revolves around must be answerable within the short time frame you are given for the assignment. That is why you need to

120

6.2  Picturing the research – What: narrowing down the topic

The main task in such assignments is usually to demonstrate your ability to process the literature that comes with the course into a coherent story, a story in which all the information contributes to answering a question. It is important to determine exactly what the piece is about and what not.

I  Setting the scene

narrow down the topic. Since this section deals specifically with writing short papers (such as essays), we start from the premise that the topic is determined by the course that the writing assignment is part of. If that is not the case, you will find more information about selecting a topic in section 2.5.

6.2.2 The steps The steps involved in narrowing down the topic are:

II  Making a plan

1 Study the scope of all the terms. 2 Narrow the topic down by selecting subsets. 3 Find an interesting angle. a Narrow the topic down starting from practice or current affairs. b Narrow the topic down starting from a single article. c Narrow the topic down starting from multiple articles. 4 Note what topic you have selected and check its scope.

STEP 1 Study the scope of all the terms

121

IV  Writing the text

If you cannot answer all those questions affirmatively, you need to narrow your topic down further.

III Interlude

Consider the following sentence for the introduction, ‘This paper deals with the causes of anorexia in girls under the age of twelve’. How literally can we take this statement? Is it really about all the phenomena and people, always and everywhere? In order to check that, you need to ask yourself for every term or question, Will it be covered in its entirety? • The causes: will the paper deal with all possible causes? • Anorexia: will the paper deal with all forms of anorexia? • Girls under the age of twelve: will the paper deal with all girls under the age of twelve with anorexia? • Girls under the age of twelve: will the paper deal with all girls under the age of twelve with anorexia all over the world? • Will the paper deal with all forms of anorexia in girls under the age of twelve always (present, past, and future)?

6  Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)

STEP 2 Narrow the topic down by selecting subsets When you narrow down the topic, you should continuously ask yourself the question, Can I say something about that topic in my paper? If not, you need to take something out. In itself, the technique of narrowing down is simple; you repeatedly take a subset of the topic you had in mind. An example. If you want to write a paper about anorexia, this is how you could narrow the topic down: •• •• •• •• ••

anorexia anorexia in girls anorexia in girls under the age of twelve anorexia in girls under the age of twelve who have working parents et cetera

The strange thing is that each time you narrow down the topic, the description of it grows. The initial topic is ‘causes of anorexia in girls under the age of twelve’ (ten words) and it could look like this once you have narrowed it down, ‘parental presence as possible cause of anorexia in girls under the age of twelve, as found in research conducted in the United States from 1990 on’ (26 words).

STEP 3 Find an interesting angle Step 2 is about the ‘mechanical’ side of narrowing down, but what are sensible choices to make when you narrow down the topic? In academic writing assignments, you don’t randomly pick a topic; you select what is interesting. In doing so, you can allow yourself to be directed by your own interests, but in the context of an academic writing assignment, there is another criterion that you need to take into consideration – the topic needs to fall within the scope of your academic domain. Topics are interesting when researchers in your discipline consider them to be interesting. The fact that they are interested is apparent because they research it and publish about it. That means you need to find something about that angle in the literature on your field. Below you will find more tips and strategies, but first we need to give you some advice about how to work with literature in an efficient way. In order to find out what has been published, you need to dive into the literature, which causes many students to drown in it. Handle the literature efficiently In order to narrow down the topic, you need to read. In terms of the process, that can be confusing because reading is also a method that you will use later on to find the answers to the questions. An additional complication for

122

6.2  Picturing the research – What: narrowing down the topic

II  Making a plan

Many academic writers lose a lot of time narrowing down the topic by meticulously studying large numbers of articles, even before they have decided what the research is going to be about. Later on, it will transpire that most of the articles are not so relevant after all, and much of the reading has been in vain. You can prevent this by using the literature in a goal-directed manner: you read in order to explore your topic and to see within which limits and perspectives you can find articles. The most efficient way of doing this is to scan potentially interesting articles for usability. Simply reading the abstract, introduction, and/or conclusion is enough for that purpose. Suitable sources in this phase are mainly handbooks and reviews, preferably as recent as possible because then you will know what the ‘latest news’ is in your academic field. See also chapter 7 on reading.

I  Setting the scene

small assignments is that the execution phase immediately follows the planning phase. You run the risk of having the phases flow into each other unnoticed, and you can find yourself having written a piece before you have decided exactly what the angle is going to be. In that way, you might end up with a sloppy text without a clear focus.

Now back to the interesting angle on a topic. How can you find one? You have three options: start from practice or current affairs, from a single article, or from multiple articles.

IV  Writing the text

123

III Interlude

3a Narrow the topic down starting from practice or current affairs The first option usually presents itself via something that triggers you in your daily life or in your reading connected to the topic of your essay or paper. The most important question is then if it indeed fits within your discipline. To find that out, you need to do some research on what the people in your discipline write articles about. An example. You are a law student in the Netherlands, and you have to write an essay on the consequences of the formation of the Committee on the Evaluation of Closed Criminal Cases, which studies cold cases. This has led to at least three prisoners being released because they turned out to be innocent of murder after all. In the Dutch media, much attention was paid to these three people (Lucia de Berk , Cees B, and Ina Post). Following these cases, you wonder how it affects people when they are wrongly convicted, and you start to look for information about it. You will probably not find much on this perspective in the law library. In the psychology library, on the other hand, your chances will be better; it is sure to contain articles on the psychological consequences of wrongful convictions. Such a refocus on psychological consequences would then make interesting research for a psychology student, but probably not so much for someone in law school. Law students should try to look for a different angle in this case.

6  Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)



3b Narrow the topic down starting from a single article Literature can provide interesting angles. Anything that can be found in your discipline is by definition interesting, but how can you find an interesting angle on it? The starting point is that the writing assignment is linked to the curriculum and that you can or have to use articles that were dealt with in class. You could start with one single article that you find interesting. That article probably ends with ‘suggestions for future research’, although these are usually questions that are much too broad for a small literature research project. In most cases, it will be up to you to search for interesting angles or questions. If you start with one single article, a good question to start with is, How would it (= phenomenon central to the article) work out with other … A few examples: • … with other variables? • … with other subjects? • … with other material/other data? • … in a different period? • … in a different place? • … with other methods? • … with different sampling? • … with other definitions? • … ten years later? • et cetera In short, would it be interesting to know how a phenomenon is perceived (which characteristics the topic has) if different choices are made? This search for an angle based on one single article can also be carried out for each term in the topic. The idea behind this is the following; apparently, the subject of this article is interesting within that discipline, but one single article gives a limited, possibly one-sided picture of this interesting phenomenon. Other angles and different choices will yield additional interesting information. An example. You are a history student and you are reading an article on the question of how nationalistic the news coverage in British newspapers was during WWII. For each of the terms you could ask the question, How would that work out with …? For example: • How nationalistic: apart from the degree of nationalism, you could describe what the British newspapers reported on and what they ignored (selection of content), or the degree to which they were morally judgmental or used ‘suggestive language’. • British: British newspapers are interesting, but what is known about Dutch, American, and other newspapers of the Allied forces?

124

6.2  Picturing the research – What: narrowing down the topic

I  Setting the scene

• And what about the news coverage in enemy papers? German, Italian, and others? • Newspapers: there are other media besides newspapers. Has any research been done into news coverage on the radio, in films, magazines, et cetera? • WWII: has any research been done into news coverage in other wars besides the Second World War? What about the First World War, the Vietnam war, the Balkan wars, the wars in Kosovo, Africa, et cetera? When you find articles that describe such an additional perspective, the obvious thing to do is to compare the data from the two articles (see below). Then you would instantly be doing something ‘more than merely writing down what it says in the articles’; you would be transforming knowledge. 3c Narrow the topic down starting from multiple articles If you already have more than one article on a certain topic, it is often worth the effort to compare them to determine if you need more material for an interesting perspective. If the authors contradict each other, the question rises who is the more reliable or credible. You could then evaluate both articles (how credible or reliable is the research) or look for a third and/or fourth article that provides more clarity on the value of both ideas. More information about how to work out such a question can be found in section 6.4.

III Interlude

If the authors do not contradict but rather complement each other, the question is which additional perspectives are possible to come to a more complete picture. In effect, you are following the same procedure as when you started from a single article. For example, British and German newspapers have been studied; research into Russian newspapers would complete the picture. In this way, you try to add up all the information from different articles. Two are better than one.

II  Making a plan



STEP 4 Note which topic you have selected and check its scope

125

IV  Writing the text

Based on your quest in the previous step, try to come to a description of the topic that you feel is interesting. Recheck the scope, as you did in step 1. Perhaps you will need to go through the entire procedure multiple times before you find a suitable topic: select, check, read, select, check, read, select, et cetera.

6  Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)

6.3

Picturing the research – What: formulating a main ­question 6.3.1 Introduction As covered before: in small academic writing assignments, such as papers and essays, you have to work the information (literature) into a story. A good central question can make a useful signpost if it not only designates the start but also the end (what type of answer we can expect) and the road to that answer (steps or sub-questions). Based on these three elements of the question (start, intermediary steps, and end point), you should be able to distinguish these central questions according to their question type. In the academic world, countless lists full of these types go around. We are using the question types developed by Utrecht University (Oost & Markenhof, 2002, p. 51-52). Seven question types are distinguished, depending on the type of answer that is incorporated in the question: description, comparison, definition, evaluation, explanation, prediction, and advice or design. For a small literature study, only the first four question types are really relevant. They are described in detail below. Types 5 to 7 are dealt with in the chapters on large writing tasks (section 3.6 and chapter 4). The steps that lead you to a main question are the same for small and large writing tasks. The differences lie in working out the details.

6.3.2 The steps The steps to formulate the main question are: 1 Choose a question type. 2 Formulate the beginning of the question. 3 Fill in the narrowed down topic in the blanks.

STEP 1 Choose a question type You can choose between a description, a comparison, a definition, and an evaluation. 1 Description A description results in a summary of a phenomenon’s features. For the type of task involved here – a small literature study – a descriptive question would mean that you describe the features of the literature, which in academic texts would

126

6.3  Picturing the research – What: formulating a main question

3 Definition A definition aims to determine whether a certain phenomenon belongs to a specific class. For example, it seeks an answer to the question of whether a novel is postmodern or if a certain plant belongs to the cactus family. It is about the relationship between a specific object and a class of objects.

127

IV  Writing the text

Tips in advance a Many writers think they have a descriptive question, whereas in actual fact – and after some critical probing – their ambitions lie beyond mere description. One should really avoid the descriptive question altogether. Of course you will describe the literature, but that is not the ultimate objective of your research. You want to do more than merely summarize what the literature says; not knowledge telling but knowledge transforming. Purely descriptive main questions are rare, but every study contains some descriptive sub-questions. If you want to learn more about the how, what, and why of descriptions, check out section 3.6.2 (step 1). b Try to formulate one simple question. Don’t use questions like, What is … and how …? They are compound questions, which you can recognize from the use of the word ‘and’. Especially for a small writing assignment, one single question should suffice. In order to find it, you need to decide what

III Interlude

4 Evaluation With an evaluative question, you are trying to give a value judgment about one or more phenomena. You give a substantiated judgment on positive and negative features. Statements may include whether the studied phenomenon is positive or negative, desired or not, problematic or not.

II  Making a plan

2 Comparison A comparison is about the differences and/or similarities between two or more phenomena. The comparison, much like the description, is a basic form that you will recognize in virtually all studies. We call the main question comparative if the sole objective is to demonstrate to what extent and/or in what ways two or more phenomena resemble each other. A comparison will allow you to make statements about the relationship between two or more phenomena. That means you are doing more than simply giving separate summaries of the features of those phenomena. For example, you could draw conclusions about the question of whether or not there are differences, how similar they are, if any developments have occurred (if it involves a comparison with a time factor), and so forth.

I  Setting the scene

often boil down to the features of the research it describes. A description allows you to give a summary of the features at the end. If you want to do more than that, you should select a different question type for your main question.

6  Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)

statement you want to make at the end of your paper. In section 3.6.2 you will find some additional information. c An explanatory question is very rare in small literature studies. The reason for that is because in such a small assignment, you will most likely not offer an explanation yourself, but mostly describe, compare, or evaluate explanations given by others. See also section 4.1.2 (step 2) which contains various types of explanations. d If you have to write something like an argumentative essay, a critical essay or analysis, or if you have to defend a claim, it can be difficult to translate that into the four question types. Section 6.4.2 (step 4) contains some tips on how to do this. e If you find it hard to describe the question type because your topic is about developments, factors, connections, analyses or things like that, read section 4.1.2 (step 3).

STEP 2 Formulate the beginning of the question There is a certain kind of wording for each of the four question types that can be used to formulate the beginning of your question. Below, you will find a number of options for each type: Description • What are the features of …? • Which features does … have? • What does … consist of? • What does … look like? Comparison • What are the differences between …? • What are the similarities between …? • In what ways do … and … resemble each other? • In what ways do … and … differ from each other? Definition • Does … belong to class …? • Which class does … fit into? • What is … typical of? Evaluation • What are positive features of …? • What are negative features of …? • How … (e.g. desirable) is …?

128

6.4  Picturing the research – How: determining the logical sub-questions

Small writing assignments almost always involve a (small) literature study. As a result, the questions will essentially be, What does the literature tell us about …? ‘Literature’ is again a term that begs to be narrowed down. If we allow ourselves to be very precise, we will always end up with something like, What do articles x, y and z tell us about …? But such questions are rare, and in most disciplines it is uncommon to formulate the questions this precisely.

I  Setting the scene

• What is the value of …? • How well does … work?

STEP 3 Fill in the narrowed down topic in the blanks

Always check which forms are common in your discipline and which are allowed for presenting the central question.

6.4

III Interlude

Central in this paper is the question of what causes anorexia in girls under the age of twelve. I have limited myself to the period 1990-present because that is the only period with available data. Those data are related to girls in the United States. I am particularly interested in finding out if anorexia in very young girls has anything to do with the frequency of the parents’ presence at home.

II  Making a plan

If all is well, the steps in section 6.2.2 have resulted in a topic that is sufficiently narrowed down. All you need to do now is fill in the blanks in the question and you have your main question. That can result in a question that is too long to be clearly readable. In that case, you should check to see if you can split it up between a subject and a question on the subject. A form you often find is a relatively broad question that is immediately followed by a restriction. For example:

Picturing the research – How: determining the logical subquestions

Once you have selected a main question and know which type it is, you will find that a number of logical sub-questions can be deduced from that type alone. In steps 1 and 2, we will explain how that works. That is also where you will find the schedule with the sub-questions that belong to the types of main questions. Sometimes, however, it is not immediately clear which main and which sub-questions belong to a writing assignment. Steps 3 and 4 will help you to translate them to the question charts.

129

IV  Writing the text

6.4.1 Introduction

6  Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)

6.4.2 The steps The steps to determine the logical sub-questions are: 1 2 3 4

Find the sub-question chart that corresponds with your question type. Complete the question with your topic or topics. If necessary, dissect complex questions. If necessary, translate the terms in the question. a Write a critical analysis of … b Write an argumentative essay on … c Write an essay on …

STEP 1 Find the sub-question chart that corresponds to your question type Below you will find the sub-question charts that are logical for each of the four question types that were discussed in the previous section: description, comparison, definition, and evaluation. 1 Description Although it is not advised to use a descriptive main question, you often find descriptive sub-questions. And they usually require splitting up into sub-questions themselves. How do you do that? A descriptive question can be split up by dividing your research object (the subject of the question) into parts. These can be actual parts (of a car, a person, a course book), but also dimensions, phases, aspects, et cetera. Example of sub-questions of a description 1 What were the features of phenomenon a in period 1? 2 What were the features of phenomenon a in period 2? 3 What were the features of phenomenon a in period 3? et cetera zz So what can we say about the features of phenomenon a?

If you describe the literature on a certain topic (which is usually the case in a small writing assignment), there are two ways to go about it, methodical and content-based. If you describe an article methodically, you follow the elements of the research: problem definition, objective, sub-questions, method, material, sample, results, and discussion. You can also use the content as a starting point to describe your article; you divide it based on what the author has to say about certain aspects of the subject.

130

6.4  Picturing the research – How: determining the logical sub-questions



2 Comparison In a comparison, you have at least two descriptive questions; after all, you describe at least two things that you compare with each other. However, that is not the end of the description; you also need questions that link the two descriptions to each other, sub-questions about differences and similarities. In a schedule, this is what that looks like:

III Interlude

Example of sub-questions for a comparison 1 What are the features of phenomenon a? 2 What are the features of phenomenon b? (What are the features of phenomenon c, d, e, et cetera?) 3 What are the similarities between a and b? (What are the similarities between a and c, b and c, d, et cetera?) 4 What are the differences between a and b? (What are the differences between a and c, b and c, d, et cetera?) zz So what can we say about the extent to which the phenomena resemble each other?

II  Making a plan

Example of sub-questions for a description based on the content of an article 1 What does author X write about the features of disease a? 2 What does author X write about the causes of disease a? 3 What does author X write about the therapies for disease a? et cetera zz So what can we say about what author X writes about disease a?

I  Setting the scene

Example of sub-questions for a methodical description of an article 1 What is the problem definition of the study described in article a? 2 What is the objective of the study described in article a? 3 What are the sub-questions in the study described in article a? et cetera zz So what can we say about the features of the study that is described in article a?

3 Definition A definition aims to determine whether a phenomenon belongs to a certain class or species, if it is a specific type. In order to determine that, you need to make a comparison; the features of the phenomenon must be compared with

131

IV  Writing the text

If you want to compare one or more articles or studies, you could describe each of them according to the methods above (methodical or content). It is important to describe the same features for each of the phenomena you want to compare. Otherwise you get the infamous apples and oranges.

6  Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)

the characteristics of the class. If there are many similarities, you could argue that the phenomenon belongs to the class. It is, however, important to give some thought to the question how many features the phenomenon should exhibit in order to belong to a certain class or be a certain type. We call that weighing the features. Sometimes, a phenomenon has to have a majority of the features, whereas in some cases there are one or more features that the phenomenon must have at the very least. Or a combination of the two. Example of sub-questions for a definition 1 What are the features of the class? (When do we call something…?) 2 How do you weigh these features? 3 What are the features of phenomenon a? 4 What are the similarities between the class and phenomenon a? 5 What are the differences between the class and phenomenon a? zz So what can we say about the extent to which phenomenon a belongs to the class?



4 Evaluation In the evaluation, we meet the comparison again. After all, your evaluation is shaped by comparing the phenomenon with a norm. If it is generally in line with the norm, the evaluation is positive, but if there are too many differences, the evaluation is negative. If the norm is something negative (for example, if you want to know how serious a problem is), the reasoning is reversed; if it mainly corresponds with the norm, it is negative, but if there are many differences, the evaluation is positive. That is why an evaluation always starts with the question what features the phenomenon you research must have in order to be evaluated in a certain way. For example, what are the features of a just law, of a good study, of an effective way of teaching, et cetera. Next, as with a definition, is the weighing question. Example of sub-questions for an evaluation 1 What are the features of the norm? (When do we call something …?) 2 How is the norm weighed? Based on what do I decide that something does or does not meet the norm? 3 What are the features of the phenomenon? 4 In what ways does the phenomenon coincide with the norm? 5 In what ways does the phenomenon differ from the norm? zz So what can we say about the quality of the phenomenon?

132

6.4  Picturing the research – How: determining the logical sub-questions

STEP 2 Complete the question with your topic or topics

III Interlude

If you have the content of a question schedule, you also have the steps for the next phase; carrying out the research. The execution phase consists of collecting, processing, analysing, and interpreting answers. If you have a plan with a topic that is properly narrowed down and has a sound structure of main and sub-questions, you will have an excellent overview of the answers you need to find and the steps you need to take in order to carry out the literature research. The question chart will also provide extra support in the phase that follows the execution; the writing. You can imagine that the text will largely follow the research structure later on. With a good research plan, you are well on the way to devising a good plan for your text.

II  Making a plan

Perhaps it makes sense to search for more literature in order to work out the sub-questions in greater detail. This time, your focus should not be on finding a suitable angle, but on making the question chart more operational. Examples of questions that you can perhaps answer by reading: • In what way are articles organized? (methodical description of an article) • What features are mentioned in the literature? (descriptions) • What are interesting features to compare? (comparisons) • How is such a class defined? (definitions) • How are norms defined? (evaluations)

I  Setting the scene

Have you found the right chart? Then you can fill in your topic (section 6.2.2) wherever it says ‘phenomenon a’ and so on. But we are going one step further. Further divide all those sub-questions, adding content to your chart and making it more operational. For example, if you compare three studies, those studies are your phenomena a, b, and c. Next, you write down the questions you are going to answer about those articles. You can find examples in the explanation to the description (step 1). That way, you can create a form to complete with the various sub-questions. In section 4.2.2 you can find an example.

STEP 3 If necessary, dissect complex questions

133

IV  Writing the text

Compound questions are frequent in both short and long academic texts. Especially the ‘evaluative comparison’ is used a lot. To illustrate how you can dissect complex questions, we have provided an analysis of the evaluative comparison. This question type was discussed during the option of the contradicting authors (section 6.2.2), ‘then the question arises who is the more reliable or credible’. The evaluative element is in the terms reliable and credible; they require a value judgment. The comparative aspect is in the more;

6  Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)

this requires a comparison of qualities. In other words, we are dealing with a double comparison: the comparison between both authors and a norm (the evaluation) and the comparison between the two authors (the comparison). In an evaluative comparison, you intertwine both question types. This type of research is very common, outside the academic world as well. Think about the studies about which refrigerator (mobile phone, car insurance) is the best, which is the cheapest, and which has the best price/quality ratio? Below you will find some examples of sub-questions that are suitable for comparing the quality of research. That is often an issue in small writing assignments; which researcher/author is the most trustworthy? Quality was translated to validity and reliability here, but you can use any term you like as long as it fits best within the vocabulary of your discipline (e.g. acceptability, adequacy, or generalisability). Comparison of the quality of studies 1 What are the features of the norm? When do we call a study valid and reliable? 2 How is the norm weighed? Based on what do I decide that something does or does not meet the norm? 3 How valid and reliable is study a? a What are the features of study a? b In what ways does study a adhere to the norm? c In what ways does study a deviate from the norm? 4 How valid and reliable is study b? a What are the features of study b? b In what ways does study b adhere to the norm? c In what ways does study b deviate from the norm? 5 What are the similarities between the validity and the reliability of a and b? 6 What are the differences between the validity and the reliability of a and b? zz So which study is the most valid and reliable?

STEP 4 If necessary, translate the terms in the question So far we have tried to come up with a question based on the literature, which in turn you intend to answer using literature. However, it may well be the case that your assignment involves writing an essay of some kind that fails to disclose how it fits the question-answer model. Below, we have included some possible ‘translations’ of three common assignments.

134

6.4  Picturing the research – How: determining the logical sub-questions

1 Nuclear energy should be used on a greater scale. 2 Shakespeare’s sonnets are typical for the sonnets in his time. 3 Organizations should replace their paper personnel magazines with electronic ones as soon as possible.

II  Making a plan

4b Write an argumentative essay on … An argumentative essay is a text that defends a claim or statement. How does such a claim relate to a question? Terms like problem statement and thesis statement suggest a relationship which indeed exists. A statement can be easily turned into a question. Some example statements to illustrate this:

I  Setting the scene

4a Write a critical analysis of … Being critical means that you check or weigh every aspect of something. You may recognize the evaluation in this approach. In a critical analysis, it is also important to carefully formulate what criteria you are going to use to measure the quality. Only in that way can you make it clear to the reader what your critical eye is based on, an important requirement to convince your academic readers. In order to produce a critical analysis, you should therefore draw up an evaluation schedule (see step 2).

If you want to defend these statements, you have to ask the question, Why (on what grounds) is that (= the statement) plausible or desirable? If you can answer that question, you will have thought of arguments that can substantiate the statement (see also section 6.6 and 10.2.2 on argumentation). III Interlude

Do you recognize the evaluation? Desirability and plausibility are terms that carry a value judgment; they concern positive and negative characteristics. You therefore need to evaluate the statements, again bearing in mind to carefully determine what the benchmark is going to be. Below you will find an application for the three statements above. Statement 1 Nuclear energy should be used on a greater scale.

IV  Writing the text

Question Why is it desirable that nuclear energy be used on a greater scale? Translation Using nuclear energy on a greater scale is desirable if I can prove that it is safe, clean, and affordable.

135

6  Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)

Questions •• When does something qualify as safe? When … (certain experts say it, few accidents happen, et cetera) •• When does something qualify as clean? When … •• When does something qualify as affordable? When …

This statement would gain credibility if nuclear energy were compared to other forms of energy. Then the translation would be: ‘Using nuclear energy on a greater scale would be desirable if I could prove that it is at least as safe, clean, and affordable as other forms of energy (oil, gas, coal, wind energy, solar, bio fuel, et cetera).’ You see something here that is very common when you work out the main question in greater detail: the topic or the question is much broader than you initially thought. In other words, many more steps are needed to answer the question than you had anticipated. In that case, you need to narrow down the topic even more, especially if your assignment is only a short essay or paper. Then you don’t have to be ambitious about the scope of the topic: less is more. In the example on nuclear energy, you could opt for including only the safety criterion. That would mean adapting the statement, of course. Statement 2 Shakespeare’s sonnets are typical for the sonnets in his time. Question Why is it plausible that Shakespeare’s sonnets are typical for the sonnets in his time? Translation Typicality for his time is plausible if I can prove that: •• there were other sonnets in his time; •• there were different sonnets earlier and later; •• Shakespeare’s sonnets have more similarities with other sonnets in that time than with earlier and later sonnets.

This schedule can be used to make a definition outline. The question is if Shakespeare’s sonnets belong to the class of ‘sonnets in that time’. Statement 3 Organizations should replace their paper personnel magazines with electronic ones as soon as possible.

136

6.5  Finding answers: collecting, arranging, and recording information

Translation This is desirable if I can prove that electronic personnel magazines have more advantages than disadvantages compared to paper personnel magazines: •• What are the benefits of electronic personnel magazines compared to paper ones (e.g. effectiveness)? •• What are the costs of electronic personnel magazines compared to paper ones (e.g. money, time)?

4c Write an essay on … This is a tricky one. The essay was discussed in chapter 2, where we saw that it is very unclear as a text type; many writing assignments carry this name, each more vague than the other. The essay will often resemble one of the sub-genres described; a literature study, a critical essay, or an argumentative essay.

6.5

III Interlude

In conclusion If everything has gone according to plan, you will have narrowed down the topic for your paper or essay, found an interesting angle that fits within your discipline, and formulated a nice question about it. Based on the question types and a further division of the topics into sub-questions, you have made an outline illustrating all the sub-questions. Check once again if: • the questions will render enough information to answer the main question; • all the questions are necessary to answer the main question.

II  Making a plan

In order to get a clear overview of the steps, these two sub-questions should be worked out in greater detail in order to make more sub-questions. As you may have noticed, the appropriate format is the evaluative comparison.

I  Setting the scene

Question Why is it desirable that organizations replace their paper personnel magazines with electronic ones as soon as possible?

Finding answers: collecting, arranging, and recording information

The first step in carrying out your research is collecting information that is required to answer the research questions. Given that our memory has a limited capacity, it is sensible to record the information immediately while you are collecting it. This is best handled in an organized manner because you want

137

IV  Writing the text

6.5.1 Introduction

6  Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)

to keep an overview of the collection. For that reason, we consider collecting, arranging, and recording a combined activity. The process of conducting your research runs parallel with the structure of main question and sub-questions that you drew up in the planning phase. There is no need for you to do more or less in the execution phase than finding the answers to the questions you formulated there. If all went well, you will have carefully checked whether the sub-questions are sure to lead you to answering the main question. That means you can now start searching for information that is needed to answer those sub-questions.

6.5.2 The steps 1 Make an inventory of what you have found so far. 2 Look for additional sources. 3 Collect and arrange the information.

STEP 1 Make an inventory of what you have found so far The basic premise is that, during the planning phase, you have already used a number of sources (books, articles). That information, together with the question chart (main question and sub-questions), forms the starting point for this first step. • Take the question outline. • For each of the questions, add the sources that contain information on it. • For each of the questions, write down what you have already found out or collected in terms of answers. Do this efficiently. That means that you don’t start writing pieces of text yet, but limit yourself to short summaries or cutting and pasting. • Check what information is still missing. • Make an inventory of where to find that information, for example, in articles you have already found or in articles you still need to look for.

STEP 2 Look for additional sources If you need more articles or books to answer your questions, search for additional literature in a systematic way. Here are some tips on how to do this:

138

6.5  Finding answers: collecting, arranging, and recording information

II  Making a plan

Select • Read with a firm purpose. Do not study the articles from beginning to end or summarize elaborately. You are looking for answers to questions.

I  Setting the scene

Search • Consider what you have learned about how the library works and how to do literature research in your discipline. • Use the knowledge that is available in various university libraries. They may organize workshops or courses on the use of library systems, and library assistants are usually keen to help you with your search. • Use the search engines and systems that are common in your discipline. • Search for terms from your questions or sub-questions. • Search for authors if your topic can boast some very respectable researchers. • Search mainly for recent literature. • Check if there are any useful reference tools that you can use for this purpose. Examples include Endnote, Mendeley, and support features included in Word.

Record • Record how you conducted your search (search systems and queries). • Write down all the source data that seem useful. You may need these data later for your bibliography, and you may want to read an article more closely in a later stage. III Interlude

Finally, if you have the opportunity, discuss your findings with your supervisor (do it by email if that is more convenient). He or she may give you ideas on additional literature.

STEP 3 Collect and arrange the information

139

IV  Writing the text

• Use this information to complete the question outline. That way you get an overview of the answers you have found. See also the literature matrix below. • You can create a separate category called ‘rest material’ in which to place the information that you suspect you will need later although you are not exactly sure what for. • Like you did in step 1, make a short summary using key words or by cutting and pasting.

6  Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)

Literature matrix A schedule that outlines literature is also referred to as a literature matrix. There are different ways of organizing such a matrix. It is designed to help you arrange information, so it should illustrate the information in a clearly organized way. This example was taken from a study of personnel magazines: Table 6.1 • Literature matrix

Sub-question 1.1 What are the goals of personnel magazines?

Article 1: author (year)

Article 2: author (year)

Article 3: author (year)

3 goals: a … (p. …)* b … (p. …) c … (p. …)

4 goals: a … (p. …) d … (p. …) e … (p. …) f … (p. …)

3 goals: b … (p. …) c … (p. …) g … (p. …)

Sub-question 1.2 Which requirements must a good personnel magazine satisfy? * Always immediately write down the page number where you found your information.

On the website, click ‘Forms’ for a Literature matrix that you can complete yourself.

6.6

Finding answers: analysing and interpreting information 6.6.1 Introduction So far you have only selected and arranged information. The research does not stop there; you also need to decide what all that information means and what it is worth. Why would you first analyse and interpret the information? Quite a few authors skip this step and move straight from collecting to writing. This often leads to texts that are very list-y and contain no more than summaries or quotes of what other articles say. As mentioned before, as an academic you are expected to do more than that. By devoting more attention to the analysis of the information, you can prevent criticism from supervisors. In the case of essays and papers (but also for theses), this criticism is often directed at poor information processing. Some of the more common comments by supervisors include: • The text is a chain of quotes. • The text lacks depth. • The author limits himself to pasting fragments from abstracts.

140

6.6  Finding answers: analysing and interpreting information

Analysing and interpreting are forms of critical thinking. The ultimate leading question in analysing and interpreting the collected information is, Is this sufficient to answer the question or sub-question convincingly? In the example above, you will have to compare the various goals of personnel magazines. You will analyse in what ways the goals are similar and in what ways they differ. What else you are going to do with it depends on the entire question structure, but you will probably come to a list of goals to guide you in the rest of your research. Then you will need to argue why you are making that decision, so it is about critically assessing the arguments and claims of others and yourself.

I  Setting the scene

• This is nothing more than cutting and pasting (patchwork). • We are missing a clear storyline.

II  Making a plan

6.6.2 The steps 1 Consider if a claim needs to be supported. 2 Describe the claim and the arguments. 3 Evaluate the line of reasoning. (Steehouder et al., 1992, p. 118 ff.)

STEP 1 Consider if a claim needs to be supported

IV  Writing the text

141

III Interlude

You cannot support every claim, because each argument in itself is another claim that can be supported in turn. This would be a infinite exercise. So what determines whether or not you need arguments? At the very least, you have to provide arguments to support your claims if: 1 The recipient refuses to accept the claim just like that. If you are certain that your readers will accept your claim, you do not need to support it. 2 It involves an important claim. On the other hand, if the claim is only secondary (answers to sub-sub-questions), the argumentation is not quite as necessary. 3 You are making a strong claim. On the other hand, if you make very careful claims, then your duty to support them is less pressing. 4 The text genre demands it. In journalistic articles, for example, you can take greater liberties than in an academic piece. Academic writing assignments will likely require that you provide arguments for the claims you make. Scientists are not often all that interested in what your opinion is; they would much rather learn how you came to your idea and what evidence or arguments you present to support it.

6  Planning and reading for a short writing assignment (essay or paper)

STEP 2 Describe the claim and the arguments Before you can critically evaluate the line in an argument, you need to know exactly what it entails. For that purpose, you analyse the claim that you are defending and the arguments that are offered in its defence: 1 What conclusion is being defended? 2 Which arguments are being offered?

STEP 3 Evaluate the line of reasoning This step is all about critical thinking. In order to evaluate the line of reasoning, ask yourself the following questions: 1 Are the arguments acceptable in themselves? 2 Does the claim or conclusion logically follow from the arguments? Does this always apply – ‘if argument, then conclusion’? 3 What can be argued against this reasoning? 4 How can we refute counterclaims? On the website, click ‘Theory’ to find Different types of argumentation and control questions, a checklist containing questions that are specifically suited to checking different types of argumentation. It will help you evaluate lines of reasoning even more critically. Do bear in mind that each discipline has its own set of rules and conventions on what is acceptable and logical. Even within disciplines, there is debate. Science is not always interested in ‘the truth’ but in an interpretation of reality that is contestable; that is why we refer to it as a ‘theory’. Critical thinking and proper argumentation are therefore essential to the scientific debate. You can practise these in small writing assignments.

6.7

Finding answers: in conclusion 6.7.1 Final addition Once you have critically evaluated all the information, you should carefully check that all sub-questions have been answered. If that is the case, check if they answer your main question. Should you find that you need more information, you need to go back to the collection phase, step 2. In short, before you enter into the next and final phase (the writing phase), you still have to check if the information you have collected fits into your question outline: • Does all the information from the sub-questions lie within the scope of the main question?

142

6.7  Finding answers: in conclusion

If you collect, classify, and analyse the information in this way, you will end up with: • the knowledge that you will be able to answer the question; • a solid basis for the content and the structure of the text you are about to write; • a lot of brainwork out of the way, enabling the writing process to take place with exceptional efficiency.

III Interlude

If this is all in place, and you do not have to carry out any empirical research, you will be fully prepared to write. For writing, see chapters 9 to 11.

II  Making a plan

6.7.2 What will the outcome be?

I  Setting the scene

• Ask yourself for each element, What would happen if I scrapped it? That way, you make sure that everything that is left on the list contributes to the story. • What will be the answer to the main question? • Does that answer exactly cover the topic of the main question? • Does the type of answer match the question type (see also section 3.7.2): −− Descriptive question? Then the answer will contain words like characteristics, features, properties, and such. −− Comparative question? Then the answer will contain terms about similarities and differences. −− Defining question? Then the answer will contain terms referring to being part of a class or not. −− Evaluative question? Then the answer will contain terms about positive and negative characteristics.

IV  Writing the text

143

7

Reading: why, what, and how



7.1 Introduction: why do we read too much?



7.2 Efficiently working with literature



7.3 Reading for setting the scene: exploring the topic



7.4 Reading for planning: picturing the what, why, and how of your research

7.5 Reading in the research phase: collecting and interpreting data/answers 7.5.1 Reading in the pilot study 7.5.2 Reading during the main research

144

7.6 Reading in the writing phase: reporting on the research



Reading: why, what, and how

7.1

Introduction: why do we read too much?

I  Setting the scene

7

145

IV  Writing the text

There are different ways of reducing the risk of over-reading. In the remainder of this chapter, you will find explanations of these tips:

III Interlude

Why do we read so much anyway? If you ask this question to academic writers, four factors emerge. First of all, we keep reading because we are afraid that we know too little to conduct our research properly or to write a good text. That is why we want to take in more and more knowledge. However, this is a road with no end. We can never know everything. There is simply too much writing going on; an advisory report to the Dutch government estimated that the rather small Dutch scientific community produced 42,000 articles in 2013 alone. Secondly, many researchers feel that they are doing a good job if they study what others have written; they are hard at work. That may be the case – you are definitely busy – but the question is whether or not you are doing a good job if the job has no specific goal. What is more, perhaps the researcher should be doing something else instead. That brings us to the third point; some researchers read so they don’t have to write. Reading is easy in the sense that you mainly consume. In order to write, you must create, and that is a lot harder for most people. Reading, in that case, is a product of procrastination. Finally, many researchers take insufficient time to properly manage their own reading. They read without purpose or plan, and in that way it remains unclear what has been achieved and what still needs to be done.

II  Making a plan

Researchers and students do quite a bit of reading. That is good and useful, but a lot of time is wasted studying literature that on reflection contributes very little to the final result. You find an article, start reading, and think ‘interesting’; you find references to a different study, look it up, start reading, and think ‘interesting’ again; you find references to a different study, et cetera. That way you end up easily reading more than you need to. The big challenge in literature research is to work efficiently, to know why you are reading! That is why this chapter deals with strategies for efficient reading.

7  Reading: why, what, and how

• • • • •

7.2

know what you are looking for, what your goal is; check regularly that you are still working towards the goal you set; continuously monitor your findings in the light of your goal; change your strategy if reading does not bring you closer to your goal; stop reading when you have reached your goal.

Efficiently working with literature Before we take a closer look at reading in the different phases of research, let us first examine some general tips for an efficient reading process. 1 Write down what you are looking for. This is usually referred to as the query. Examples of queries include: • I am looking for a definition of good education. • I am looking for an example of an analysis of a science fiction film. • I am looking for an answer to a sub-question. 2 Use search systems from your discipline (cf. the tips in section 3.9.2, step 1). 3 Record as much of what you are doing as you can. That may take extra time, but you will benefit from it in the end. You see, no research develops in a strict linear pattern. Researchers often need to take one step back because research results raise new questions or shed new light on previous thoughts. So you need to take into account that you will need to retrace earlier steps at one point or another. Nothing is more frustrating than having to go through all the steps again because you are unable to trace back their results. This also means that you need to take notes (they can be brief) of what you have found but decided not to use (yet). 4 Record all relevant information immediately as an answer to a question, for example in your template or literature matrix (see section 6.5). That way, you collect and classify at the same time. 5 Be careful not to go writing full stories yet, but just include the relevant information you have selected into the outline in the form of a summary or as quotes. 6 While you are at it, make an annotated literature list; this is a description of your sources that contains some notes with each title, for example: • key words; • short descriptions (taken straight from the summary or the abstract if you like); • pros and cons; • ideas about what you can do with them – but only in relation to your query!

146

7.4  Reading for planning: picturing the what, why, and how of your research

I  Setting the scene

Check if there are any useful reference tools you can use for this purpose. For example Endnote, Mendeley, RefWorks or support features included in Word. 7 At least every hour, reflect on what you are doing: • What was the query again (cf. tip 1)? • What have you found so far? • What do you still need? • What is your query now? In this way, you maintain control over your search process.

7.3

Reading for setting the scene: exploring the topic

7.4

III Interlude

Material and approach In this phase, you mainly concern yourself with finding reviews and overviews in books and articles. Check if your academic field can boast any special review journals. How do you study them? Make sure that you do not scrutinize these articles word for word. After all, you are only exploring at this stage. Instead, look mainly at introductions and abstracts. If you read more, do it by scanning; keep your goal in mind at all times.

II  Making a plan

Goal: what will the outcome be? When setting the scene (cf. section 2.5), you read in order to discover what the possibilities for your preliminary topic are. You want to find out if you can work it into an interesting researchable problem. Reading in this phase therefore needs to provide you with: • a picture of the factors that are linked to a topic; • a picture of what has and has not been researched on the topic; • ideas on what might be interesting angles on the topic.

Reading for planning: picturing the what, why, and how of your research

147

IV  Writing the text

In this phase, reading should help you to (1) specify the research question and (2) justify the questions. In other words, by reading you will be able to fill the gaps and resolve obscurities and inconsistencies in your template (see chapters 3 and 4).

7  Reading: why, what, and how

Goal: what will the outcome be? • a proper definition of the topic; • a good understanding of the way your topic is embedded in your discipline, its relationship with research themes in your discipline; • ‘proof’ that your question has not been researched yet; • ‘proof’ that your research is important to your discipline; • ideas about how you may be able to operationalize or split the constructs in your question; • ideas about how you can divide your main question into sub-questions; • ideas for appropriate methods; • ideas for the structure of the text. Material and approach In this phase, it may be useful to read more articles that deal with research related to your research question. You read the articles with more attention to detail than you did in the first phase because your queries are more detailed. Nevertheless, reading selectively is important here too, otherwise you risk getting lost in the literature. In short: • research papers as well as overview papers; • selective reading; only take from the articles that which links directly to your information needs; • classify information straight away into the elements of your plan.

7.5

Reading in the research phase: collecting and interpreting data/answers 7.5.1 Reading in the pilot study Research can kick off with a pilot study that works out the details of the research plan. A pilot study is a study that precedes the main research. It is a study that is necessary in order to determine how the main research is going to be organized. You make certain elements of the plan operational in such a way that you can begin to carry out the main research. In this sense, you could look at it as part of the planning phase; after all, the pilot study does not directly lead to answers to the main question. As a result, you could consider it to be the part that concludes your planning. You could decide to do a pilot study when you notice during the development of your plan that a certain element cannot be completed without a more extensive study of the literature or the phenomenon you are researching.

148

7.5  Reading in the research phase: collecting and interpreting data/answers

II  Making a plan

Material and approach Reading during the pilot study and reading during the main research are much alike in terms of material and approach. See section 7.5.2 below.

I  Setting the scene

Goal: what will the outcome be? Literature research as a pilot study is usually aimed at making the questions operational, for example: • Descriptive: which aspects are relevant/suitable to describe the phenomenon you are studying? • Comparative: which aspects are relevant/suitable to compare the phenomena you are studying? • Definition: which classifications are or which class is relevant/suitable to define the phenomenon you are studying? • Evaluation: which aspects are relevant/suitable to evaluate the phenomenon you are studying? • Explanation: which causal claims from which theories are relevant/suitable to explain the phenomenon you are studying? • Predictive: which causal claims from which theories are relevant/suitable to make predictions about the phenomenon you are studying?

7.5.2 Reading during the main research

Goal: what will the outcome be? • answers to the research questions; • interpretations of answers.

Record what you are doing as much as you can. Take notes of what you are looking for, what you have found, and what you are thinking. Get yourself a notebook (paper or electronic version), and at the end of each day write down the most important research activities, events, results, and considerations.

149

IV  Writing the text

Material and approach In this phase, the query is even more specific which means you will have to look for specific information and focus on: • articles that contain very specific information on aspects of the query; • selective reading, only taking from the articles what directly links to your information needs; • classifying information at once as answers to your research questions.

III Interlude

Other reading work during the research will serve to answer the research questions. Sometimes literature is the main source for the answers, but it may very well be that the main data are found in the real world (empirical) and the literature serves the interpretation of those empirical data.

7  Reading: why, what, and how

There comes a moment when you will have collected and selected enough literature for a certain element (e.g. a sub-question), the information on the source (author, publisher, year of publication, et cetera) has been recorded, and the most important information is incorporated into the research questions template by means of key words or quotes. Now what? Start writing? No, not quite yet. Many researchers skip the processing of the information in this phase. They move straight from selection to writing the text. That approach carries a number of risks: 1 You will not reach the knowledge transformation level, where you transform the information into content that fits your story. 2 The story will be no more than a chain of quotes or summarized chunks of literature. 3 Different fragments from the literature will not be discussed in connection with each other. 4 Writing is more complicated because you still need to do a lot of thinking. 5 At the end of the writing you might find that certain information does not contribute to your line of reasoning after all. 6 At the end of the writing you might discover that certain information is still missing. Reading critically To reduce these risks, it may be better to devote some attention to the information you found in the research phase. Now is the time to read critically. Below, you will find some questions that may be of use to you. The main idea is that you work on one question at a time (sub-question by sub-question) and you write down a summary of the selected information below that subquestion. 1 What does it say exactly? Try to paraphrase the content of each fragment of the article, so say it in your own words. 2 Can you agree with it or does it contain any contestable claims? 3 How does this information compare to the other information you wrote down for this question? 4 What does this information mean for the question you are linking it with? 5 Is the information required for the question you want answered? What would happen if you did not have this information? 6 Is the information sufficient to answer the question? By critically answering these questions, you will find out whether this part of the literature research can be considered finished or if you still need to search, select, or process more literature.

150

7.6  Reading in the writing phase: reporting on the research

7.6

Reading in the writing phase: reporting on the research I  Setting the scene

If we assume that you will not start working on the text until you have collected, classified, and analysed (interpreted) all the data, you will have close to no reading left to do in the writing phase. There might perhaps be the odd sample paper to get some ideas on what your text may look like. You may find in the writing phase that you still lack certain knowledge. In that case, some additional reading may be required. Finally, many researchers do additional reading in this phase in order to find explanations for their results. Goal: what will the outcome be? • specific information to be used as building blocks for the text; • ideas about more general conclusions on the outcomes of the research.

II  Making a plan

Material and approach In this phase, it is important to bear the following in mind: • look for articles that fill very specific gaps in what you have collected; • stay within the boundaries of your topic; • keep reading and writing separated in order to prevent your text from becoming a long line of quotes.

III Interlude IV  Writing the text

151

8

Getting feedback: how, who, and when

8.1 Introduction: receiving and understanding feedback 8.1.1 Receiving feedback 8.1.2 Understanding feedback 8.2

Dealing with staff: teachers, supervisors, and professors 8.2.1 What kind of supervision would you like? 8.2.2 Find out what the procedure is 8.2.3 Prepare your meetings thoroughly 8.2.4 Actively participate in the conversation 8.2.5 Write a report of the meeting

8.3

Feedback from peers or peer tutors: when and how 8.3.1 Feedback on the overall picture of your research 8.3.2 Feedback on the execution of the research 8.3.3 Feedback on writing

8.4

Writing support groups 8.4.1 Goals of a writing support group 8.4.2 Effects of a writing support group 8.4.3 Some practical rules and suggestions for making writing groups work

152



Getting feedback: how, who, and when

8.1

Introduction: receiving and understanding feedback

I  Setting the scene

8

II  Making a plan

Feedback can be a great tool for writers. Writers who are new in a certain community, for example the academic world, can use feedback to discover what they have achieved in terms of mastering the language or register of this new community. But experienced writers also benefit from feedback, simply because it is difficult being both writer and reader at the same time. It is hard to take a step back from what you have written yourself and imagine how different readers will react to your text. In this chapter, we will discuss who can give you feedback and what you can organize yourself to make full use of feedback. Before we take a closer look at feedback from different people, you should read two more general remarks about receiving and understanding feedback.

In many rules on giving feedback you will find that feedback has to be provided in the form of a sandwich: criticism embedded in praise. This means it should include what is good about someone’s work. In practice, however, you will mostly receive feedback in the form of negative criticism. It may feel as if you are being attacked, and we tend to adopt a defensive attitude when this happens, for example:

This type of response shows that the writer has not taken enough time to process the remark and investigate what he or she can do with it. Our advice is therefore to thank the feedback giver for the comment and let the feedback ‘sink in’.

153

IV  Writing the text

Reader: I don’t understand this bit. Could you reword it more clearly? Writer: Well, to be honest, I thought long and hard about it. I think it is pretty clear.

III Interlude

8.1.1 Receiving feedback

8  Getting feedback: how, who, and when

8.1.2 Understanding feedback When you receive feedback, you can simply accept it and carry out the suggestion. In the case of written feedback involving suggestions made by means of Track Changes, you can accept them in one fell swoop, but what will you learn from that? If you do get feedback, it is useful to learn from it if you can. Especially when you are enthusiastic about a suggestion, you could ask yourself the following questions: • What aspect of the text is this about. Is it a suggestion or improvement at content, structural, or stylistic level? • What problem does the suggestion fix? • What has the feedback giver done (what strategy has he applied) to solve the problem? • Will I be able to recognize a similar problem myself next time? • And solve it with the same strategy? When you deal with feedback in this way, you will develop into an increasingly competent writer.

8.2

Dealing with staff: teachers, supervisors, and professors Most student writers have a professor or researcher who supervises them in the process. That is great, because these people, especially at the start of the project, are more knowledgeable on the discipline and may be able to make suggestions for relevant literature and suitable methods. A supervisor can also give you tips and provide you with useful feedback on the analysis of the data and the writing. However, supervision is often also a source of complaints, both from students and supervisors. The process does not run itself, and your chances of a fruitful cooperation increase if you actively invest in that cooperation. Take responsibility for this part of the process by assuming a constructive and critical attitude. And remember that supervisors are people too, people who appreciate being treated with kindness and respect. That is the way to gain the most from your supervision. Below, you will find some questions and tips that may help you in organizing communication with your supervisor.

8.2.1 What kind of supervision would you like? What do you expect from your supervisor? This subject is not often discussed in supervisory meetings, but research has shown that student and supervisor often have different ideas about roles, responsibilities, and preferences. Even though your supervisor may not bring it up, it is a good idea to think for your-

154

8.2  Dealing with staff: teachers, supervisors, and professors

II  Making a plan

Especially if you are not happy with the way you are being supervised, it may be useful to reflect on the role your supervisor is playing. What does your supervisor do mainly, and is that what you need?

I  Setting the scene

self about what type of supervision you want. A supervisor can take on many roles, for example: • The role of educator/teacher. This means teaching the student something that is required for going through the process. • The role of supervisor. This means advising and stimulating the student going through the process. • The role of coach/mentor. This means supporting the student with the personal aspects of the process. • The role of assessor/examiner. This means making claims about the quality of the process and product of the student. • The role of corrector/editor. This means correcting mistakes and providing a little co-writing on the product. • The role of co-author. This means that the supervisor’s name will be on the paper and he is responsible and accountable for the quality.

In addition, there is the quantitative aspect; how intensively do you want to be supervised? Would you rather have a supervisor who is more on top of things or do you prefer a supervisor who stays in the background and only comes into action when requested to?

155

IV  Writing the text

This issue was raised when we discussed the information needed about the procedures and the process (sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.6, 2.7). Try to get a clear understanding of your supervisor’s thoughts on the practical matters. We are listing the most important questions once more below: • Are there set times for supervision and completion? • How often can you meet with your supervisor? • How much time (in hours) does your supervisor have available for you? • What questions can you discuss? • Apart from meetings, can you also communicate via email or telephone? Can you do that at any given time? • Are the meetings scheduled on fixed days or times? • Are you meant to take the initiative when you want to meet? • Prior to the meeting, is there anything you need to hand in? When is the deadline? • Is anyone taking minutes? Who? • Are there other possibilities to meet, for example, with fellow students, other lecturers, experts from other institutes?

III Interlude

8.2.2 Find out what the procedure is

8  Getting feedback: how, who, and when

• Can you get any additional supervision or courses, for example through a writing centre, language centre, student dean, study advisor, support organized by your graduate school?

8.2.3 Prepare your meetings thoroughly Good preparation is not just important to satisfy your supervisor but also to increase the chance of putting some issues on the agenda that are important to you. Tips: • think about what you want to discuss with your supervisor, what you want to get out of the meeting (goals); • submit material for the meeting well in advance; • make sure it looks reasonably neat (that means not too many typos and mistakes); this can help prevent irritation. Submit what you have been working on but also provide some explanation: • mention the ‘status’ of your work (draft, pre-final version, …) and indicate what you would and would not like feedback on (e.g. I would like feedback on the line of argumentation, but not on the writing style yet); • clarify what you have done; • give a short self-evaluation: what are you satisfied with (and why) and what not (and why not); • formulate the questions you would like to discuss with your supervisor. Also indicate what you have already done to answer that question or solve that problem yourself. In short, demonstrate that you have been proactively and seriously working on self-evaluation and reflection.

8.2.4 Actively participate in the conversation Supervisors tend to talk a lot, especially when they are discussing a draft text from a student. It is your job to make sure that your questions are not lost in the barrage of your supervisor’s feedback. At the start of the meeting, always try to clarify what you are going to discuss, how much time you have, and what your questions are. If your issues are in danger of becoming overpassed, bring them up again and remind your supervisor of your questions in a friendly manner. A supervisory meeting can involve discussing many often complex issues. As a result, you run the risk of misinterpreting your supervisor or missing certain important information. That is why supervisors should check if you have fully understood the message. Only a few supervisors do this, however – as research

156

8.3  Feedback from peers or peer tutors: when and how

I  Setting the scene

shows (De Jong, 2006) – so as a student, you could take the initiative there. Summarize occasionally, and check if your version matches that of the supervisor, for example, ‘So if I understand correctly, I should … is that correct?’ or ‘Can I check if I have understood this? Do you mean …?’ If your supervisor talks too much and you need more time to process everything, it may help to take notes. That also gives you the opportunity to buy a little time by saying, ‘I would like a minute to write this down. Is that OK?’ With a little luck, your supervisor will be silent for a minute.

8.2.5 Write a report of the meeting

8.3

II  Making a plan

As indicated above, supervision meetings are prone to misunderstandings. That is why it is a good idea during the meeting to regularly check if you understand each other correctly. One way of checking is by writing a report about the meeting. This may be a short document or a to-do list, as long as it contains the arrangements you have made. Those arrangements may be about all kinds of things, including the supervision process, the planning, the research plan, the results, and/or the texts. Email the report to your supervisor as soon as possible and ask if he or she will check it for shared understanding.

Feedback from peers or peer tutors: when and how

III Interlude

Feedback from peers or peer tutors may be useful in various phases of the process. Actually, you can invite people to think along from the very first moment; you don’t need to wait until you have a draft of your final text. You can also present your preliminary topic to a fellow student and ask if he or she thinks this would make an interesting, researchable topic and if it fits within your discipline.

8.3.1 Feedback on the overall picture of your research

157

IV  Writing the text

Feel free to ask for feedback on the general aspect of your research from anyone. The beauty is that people who are strangers to your discipline may give the most useful feedback. They will ask many questions about the logical connections between the elements and invite you to word them very precisely. It is not exceptional for researchers to find in that way that the elements have not been logically arranged in connection with each other; they may for example discover that the answer does not closely follow the question. ‘Laypersons’ may also be very good at determining whether the question itself is formulated clearly and precisely enough.

8  Getting feedback: how, who, and when

This form of feedback works best when the co-reader formulates the feedback as questions. These questions are included in this book as checklists accompanying the different steps. See for example 10.2.2, 10.4.5 and 10.5. Questions are meant to stimulate you, the writer, to think critically and use precise wording. The result will be that you will be doing most of the talking. That is how it should be, since you are the one who needs to do the thinking.

8.3.2 Feedback on the execution of the research When you want to discuss the results with someone, you will find yourself talking to peers from your discipline. They are in a position to think with you about the reliability and validity of the results and how to interpret them in the light of the research questions. Sometimes groups are organized for this purpose. Monthly meetings will study and interpret the preliminary results. For qualitative research, such a meeting may even be part of the methodology, and the group will act as a sort of focus group, delphi group, or audit process for the interpretation of the data.

8.3.3 Feedback on writing Feedback in earlier phases is probably also provided based on what you have written, but in this phase we are mostly dealing with feedback on draft versions. The feedback giver is a sort of co-reader. When people read someone else’s text, they are often quick to assume the role of ‘corrector’, and they cross out all the mistakes they find and add alternative phrasing. That may be useful if the feedback giver is a better writer than you are and also knows exactly what kind of text you are meant to write. Especially in the final phase of finishing the text, it may be useful to have someone to help you come to grips with the finesses of language and style. But a text is more than just language and style. A text is also content and structure, and that takes a different kind of feedback. You don’t want to know if you have done well; you want to know if your reader understands the story, if it’s easy to follow, and if the reader is convinced by your message. In places where this is not the case, you can try to find out together what the problem is and how it can be solved. The feedback you need for this may not always come in the form of suggestions, but more often in the form of questions and identifications of problem areas. In that way, you will get a much better idea of what works well in your text and what doesn’t, which in turn helps you to become a better writer. The website contains the document Questions for co-readers, a handout with questions for co-readers of your second version, under ‘Theory’.

158

8.4  Writing support groups

8.4

Writing support groups

Writing can be a very solitary activity. That is why writing support groups are being formed all over the world. These groups can foster your writing process in several ways. The KU Writing Center of the University of Kansas describes writing groups as follows:

(…) Group members provide each other with interdisciplinary writing feedback and peer support for setting goals, solving problems, and working efficiently and effectively as writer-researchers.

II  Making a plan

Writing groups provide writers with a community of writers and several complementary types of support, including: • Feedback on your writing. • Encouragement to set and accomplish goals. • Resources for resolving conflict and solving problems. • Aid in overcoming ‘writer’s block’ and other writing challenges. • Contacts for writing partner.

I  Setting the scene

8.4.1 Goals of a writing support group

8.4.2 Effects of a writing support group When writing support groups were introduced at a graduate school in the Netherlands, the first members gave comments like the following: III Interlude

• The writing support groups were a real eye-opener to me. It stimulated me to actually start writing.

• In this group I am not afraid to show my early drafts, and I have experienced how useful this is.

• The writing speed increases just by explaining to someone else what your message is.

• The feedback I’ve been getting from my group members has been useful.

IV  Writing the text

They provide a peer audience that are not experts in my particular area, and as such they’ve helped make my writing clearer and more accessible. • In addition to this I think I’ve also benefitted from reading other people’s work and from my own comments on their material. We have also discussed more general things like information on a poster and how to determine your target audience. • We meet regularly which helps with planning and structuring.

159

8  Getting feedback: how, who, and when

So, forming a writing support group can be an valuable idea. However, you should pay careful attention to the way you organize yourselves as a group. Otherwise you might end up feeling frustrated about the amount of time you spend reading other people’s work, getting feedback which does not fit your needs, or about the long and boring meetings. That is why we have provided you with a few rules for an efficient writing support group.

8.4.3 Some practical rules and suggestions for making writing groups work Goals of feedback are: • learning from each other about the positive and negative features of your text; • learning from each other about the less or more effective aspects of the writing process; • getting motivated to move on with your writing process! The following rules will make your writing group efficient: • Limit the time. For example, thirty minutes preparation time and a maximum of thirty minutes discussion time for each writer. • Limit the text. Five pages will be more than enough for one session. • Report on how your writing is progressing, discuss distractions and other control-related problems. • Problem solve with each other. • Don’t try to solve all the problems you encounter; that will be impossible in just half an hour. Make sure you know what the problems are and the possible causes and solutions. Solving them is what you can do after the sessions. As a feedback giver: • Be a mirror to your fellow writer, not an assessor. • Make sure that you find things to praise. • Ask questions and suggest ways to improve/change aspects of the writing. • Writers may use your feedback as they see fit. They might make different choices than you would. • Don’t forget that text conventions differ greatly within the academic discourse community. As a feedback receiver: • Be specific about your intended audience and the kind of feedback you need. • Be specific about the status of your work; is it just an outline, a first draft, an almost finished paper?

160

8.4  Writing support groups

And, last but not least, enjoy the sessions. Make them fun.

I  Setting the scene

• Don’t get into a defensive stance when the feedback contains some criticism. Just listen carefully and try to understand why this feedback is given to you. If the feedback surprises you, just ask why the reader has this opinion about your text or try to discover together what the problem might be. • Reflect on what you have learned about your writing.

II  Making a plan III Interlude IV  Writing the text

161

IV

Writing the text



The what, why, and how of writing the text

What is writing? The writing phase is basically the final phase. In setting the scene you mapped the type of task that was before you: which procedures, what process, and what product are required. Picturing your research resulted in a defined topic for smaller assignments as well as a main question with sub-questions. In the thesis plan, the research has a central position: the what (topic, question), the how (sub-questions and methods), and the why (relevance). Perhaps you have also made a time schedule, chapter division, and a fully written thesis proposal. The research phase gave you the answers to questions from the plan, which you subsequently processed and analysed. That concludes the most important preliminary work to start writing the text, the text in which you tell others (the readers) what you have to say. The biggest difference with the previous phases is that the reader now comes into the picture for real; you are stepping outside to present to the world what you came up with and what you have found. You are communicating with the outside world. But before the text for the outside world is finished, you will go through a complex and often chaotic process in which you not only communicate with the reader but also with yourself, with the data, and with the critical reader in your head. Writing is also making outlines, writing drafts, trying out sentences, organizing co-readers, rewriting, talking to people, evaluating, restructuring, reading up, writing and rewriting and writing and rewriting. Writing is called an iterative or recursive process, or as some say, ‘writing in rounds’.

Why write? There are two important reasons to report on your research in writing. First of all, there is a scientific reason. The introduction to this book describes the purpose of academic texts, which is to convincingly inform other scientists about your research. That is necessary because scientists cannot operate in isolation; we need each other to develop, test, and improve our theories. Every study that is relevant (section 3.9) contributes a little to that process and is therefore worth sharing with other people in the field. The reasons for doing this in writing are because this form is less volatile than the oral form and because it enables the story to reach readers at different moments and places. The second reason to do this in writing is more of a pro-

163

saic one. You also write because someone, a professor or supervisor, requires this of you and you need the credits and diplomas.

How to write? Despite having already disconnected the planning and research phases from the writing phase, the writing itself can still prove to be quite tough. The challenge is to execute all the various activities in an efficient manner. Roughly speaking, we are dealing with five different activities: 1 Setting the scene: checking what you need to do and how far you have progressed. 2 Planning: putting the content and structure of the text you want to write into an outline. 3 Writing: producing a first draft. 4 Revising: editing and improving the text. 5 Finishing: dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s of layout, headings, grammar, spelling, references, and such. Two rules are important for an efficient writing process: 1 Do not try to make a perfect text on your first attempt. 2 Do not try to do too many things at once: divide the task and always concentrate on the activity at hand. Why can’t we write everything at once? The reason is that writing proves to be too complicated a process for that. A writer has to think about the content of the text, the structure, the style, grammar, and spelling. In addition, he has to consider the things ‘surrounding the text’: am I handling this the right way? Hadn’t I better start on another section? Will my supervisor allow me to use this word? What was the deal again with those footnotes? I want this to be interesting to other readers besides my supervisor; how do I do that? How did they put it again in that article? And all the while the clock is ticking, and your deadline is coming closer and closer. If you are not careful, you won’t be able to put a single letter on paper because you are too busy thinking. That is why it makes sense to organize your work in such a way that you have separate thinking and producing moments. Thinking (analysing) and writing (producing) are equally important but essentially different from each other. When you think, you are being reflective and rational. Writing is a creative and intuitive activity. The thinker is stationary and looks back critically. The writer is in a flow and proceeds without looking back. To end up with a good text, you need to be both thinker and writer, just not at the same time as the two activities tend to clash.

164

In the following chapters, you will find explanations, procedures, examples, and tips for each of the five activities mentioned above. We will deal with writing the first draft (chapter 9), the first revision (chapter 10), and the second revision (chapter 11). For a larger writing task, it generally makes sense to deal with the revision activities per chapter or, for longer chapters, per section. Final editing (5) is best delayed until the very last moment, both for small assignments and bigger tasks, since that is when you will have discussed your text with your supervisor and the entire text will be finished. It is important that you have a clear idea of when you want to do what with a certain section. One way of keeping an overview of your activities is to make a schedule. In the schedule, you write down when you plan to do certain activities (P for Plan in the example below) and when you expect to finish them (F). For smaller writing assignments, it may be sufficient to divide the work into three parts: introduction, body, and conclusion. Theses often work best if you organize the work per chapter. In the example schedule below, the starting point is a three-round revision: revision of content, structure, and finally style. Section 10.1.1 explains why this order is important. It is also sensible to have someone read the draft versions, and that ‘action’ has been added under item 7. This Planning schedule is on the website, under ‘Forms’. Table 1 • Planning schedule of the writing phase

Step

Chapter 1 P

F

Chapter 2 P

F

Chapter 3 P

F

Chapter x P

F

1 Orientation 2 Making a text plan 3 Writing the first draft 4 Revising the content 5 Revising the structure 6 Revising the style of the text 7 Co-reading 8 Final editing

165

9

Preparing and writing the first draft

9.1 Setting the scene for writing 9.1.1 Introduction 9.1.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Collect everything you have ՔՔ Step 2 Make or reconsider the table of contents ՔՔ Step 3 Determine which section to start with ՔՔ Step 4 Decide whether you are going to plan or warm up ՔՔ Step 5 Formulate the conclusion of the text ՔՔ Step 6 Write a bin version ՔՔ Step 7 If necessary, go back to earlier phases 9.2 Making an outline 9.2.1 Introduction 9.2.2 The steps ՔՔ Step 1 Decide on the main theme of the piece you are going to write ՔՔ Step 2 Write down the most important questions ՔՔ Step 3 Briefly describe the answers ՔՔ Step 4 Work out the answers in more detail ՔՔ Step 5 Check the connections 9.3 The first draft: uninterrupted (speed) writing 9.3.1 Introduction 9.3.2 The steps

166



Preparing and writing the first draft

9.1

Setting the scene for writing

I  Setting the scene

9

Setting the scene for writing can be considered ‘pre-work’: you travel from the research phase to the writing phase. This means that you answer a number of questions that are important in writing: • What lies ahead of you? • How far are you? • What will be your approach?

III Interlude

Why this ‘pre-work’? You can infer from the description above what the reason is to reflect on your situation. Mapping what you have and what lies ahead allows you to plan an ideal process and to ensure that you start writing neither too soon nor too late. You can arrange to have all the necessary information at hand so you avoid having to look up all kinds of things while writing. Plus it allows you to choose a strategy that best fits your strengths and weaknesses.

II  Making a plan

9.1.1 Introduction

9.1.2 The steps To find out how far you have already come, and to prepare yourself for making an outline for your text, you can do the following: Collect everything you have. Make or reconsider the table of contents. Determine which section to start with. Decide whether you are going to plan or warm up. Formulate the conclusion of the text. Write a bin version. If necessary, go back to earlier phases.

IV  Writing the text

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

167

9  Preparing and writing the first draft

STEP 1 Collect everything you have Start by making an inventory of everything you have collected so far: • the requirements and prerequisites that emerged during setting the scene of the task (see chapter 2); check especially the required length and the type of text you are expected to write; • for short assignments, the schedule with the main question and the subquestions (see chapter 6); • for theses, the entire template (see chapter 3, 4, and 5); • the results of the research, the answers to the questions (see section 6.5 and chapter 7); • the analyses of that material and/or your ideas or your notes on this (see section 6.5 and chapter 7). This is your luggage for a logical and convincing story.

STEP 2 Make or reconsider the table of contents This step is probably not necessary for a small writing assignment. The table of contents can be planned in one go, using the steps in the text plan in the next section. Just to be sure, though, continue reading. It may be interesting to ‘flip’ your structure. If you are working on a thesis, you probably drew up a table of contents in the planning phase (chapter 5) that was based on the research structure. You chose a particular order that was useful for collecting the answers. In section 5.1.2 we indicated that it sometimes makes sense to ‘flip’ this structure because the research order is not always the most logical or agreeable order in which to present the information to a reader. Before you start planning your text, we recommend re-examining that table of contents. Perhaps a different text structure will improve the readability of your thesis. An example. You are researching the development of the structure of Beethoven’s piano sonatas. You have selected three early sonatas, three from the middle period, and three late sonatas. You expect the structure of the sonatas to increasingly diverge from the classic sonata form. You have analysed the nine sonatas piece by piece according to the following research schedule:

168

9.1  Setting the scene for writing

I  Setting the scene

1 What are the form features of the early sonatas? 1.1 What are the form features of sonata 1? 1.1.1 What parts does sonata 1 consist of? 1.1.2 What is the thematic structure of sonata 1? 1.1.3 What is the tonal structure of sonata 1? 1.2 What are the form features of sonata 2? 1.2.1 What parts does sonata 2 consist of? 1.2.2 What is the thematic structure of sonata 2? 1.2.3 What is the tonal structure of sonata 2? 1.3 What are the form features of sonata 3? 1.3.1 What parts does sonata 3 consist of? 1.3.2 What is the thematic structure of sonata 3? 1.3.3 What is the tonal structure of sonata 3?

Working out question 1 can also be done as illustrated below (the questions are rendered in telegram style): 1.2 Sonata 2?

1.3 Sonata 3?

1.1.1 Parts?

1.2.1 Parts?

1.3.1 Parts?

1.1.2 Thematic ­structure?

1.2.2 Thematic ­structure?

1.3.2 Thematic ­structure?

1.1.3 Tonal structure?

1.2.3 Tonal structure?

1.3.3 Tonal structure?

A disadvantage of this structure is that it can lead to a very list-y text; you will be able to say something comparative only after a couple of sections. In such a case, it can be a useful exercise to see if the table can be flipped such that the horizontal division becomes the vertical one: 1.2 Thematic ­structure?

1.3 Tonal structure?

1.1.1 Sonata 1?

1.2.1 Sonata 1?

1.3.1 Sonata 1?

1.1.2 Sonata 2?

1.2.2 Sonata 2?

1.3.2 Sonata 2?

1.1.3 Sonata 3?

1.2.3 Sonata 3?

1.3.3 Sonata 3?

IV  Writing the text

1.1 Parts?

III Interlude

1.1 Sonata 1?

II  Making a plan

2 What are the form features of the sonatas from the middle period? 2.1 What are the form features of sonata 4? et cetera

169

9  Preparing and writing the first draft

Translated into a table of contents, it looks like this: 1 What are the form features of the early sonatas? 1.1 How are they divided in parts? 1.1.1 What parts does sonata 1 consist of? 1.1.2 What parts does sonata 2 consist of? 1.1.3 What parts does sonata 3 consist of? 1.1.4 What are the similarities and differences? 1.2 What is the thematic structure? 1.2.1 What is the thematic structure of sonata 1? 1.2.2 What is the thematic structure of sonata 2? 1.2.3 What is the thematic structure of sonata 3? 1.2.4 What are the similarities and differences? 1.3 What is the tonal structure? 1.2.1 What is the tonal structure of sonata 1? 1.2.2 What is the tonal structure of sonata 2? 1.2.3 What is the tonal structure of sonata 3? 1.2.4 What are the similarities and differences? 2 What are the form features of the sonatas from the middle period? 2.1 How are they divided into parts? 2.1.1 What parts does sonata 4 consist of? et cetera

The research elements (the sonatas) do not take the central position in the structure above, but rather the features you use to compare them do. That usually makes for a more captivating story – more fun to write, more interesting to read. You could take that principle one step further by also incorporating all periods in the same form feature. Then you would present the comparison per form feature: 1 How does the division into parts develop? 1.1 What is the division into parts in the early period? 1.1.1 Sonata 1? 1.1.2 Sonata 2? 1.1.3 Sonata 3? 1.1.4 Similarities and differences? 1.2 What is the division into parts in the middle period? 1.1.1 Sonata 1? 1.1.2 Sonata 2? 1.1.3 Sonata 3? 1.1.4 Similarities and differences?

170

9.1  Setting the scene for writing

Late period? et cetera What are the similarities and differences between the division into parts in the early period and that in the middle period? et cetera What are the similarities and differences between the division into parts in the middle period and that in the late period? et cetera

I  Setting the scene

1.3 1.4 1.5

2 What is the development in the thematic structure? et cetera

So don’t automatically assume that the order in which you carry out your research has to be the order in which you discuss the questions in the text. Important considerations in determining the best order include: • Which cluster inspires you the most to write? • Which cluster would result in the most interesting story for readers?

II  Making a plan

Once you have those answers, you might even reach the conclusion that it is best to turn this text upside down compared to the research structure, start with the main conclusions, and support them by means of the results of your research.

STEP 3 Determine which section to start with

IV  Writing the text

171

III Interlude

Does it matter which part of the text or which chapter you start to write? Different factors come into play here: • For a writer, it is convenient to start on a chapter that can be written easily. In that way, you warm up quickly and can achieve results fast. Doing it this way will be motivating. • A small writing assignment generally lends itself best to starting with the body. That has everything to do with the previous point in that the body is usually the easiest because that is the story itself. Most writers find the introduction toughest to start with because the story is not finished yet. • If the content of one section precedes another one, you had best start working out the first one. This may happen when you are writing a theoretical chapter and working your way towards a model that you will subsequently use to analyse the data. In that case, the sensible thing to do is to first write the chapter in which you deduce the model from the literature, before you work on the analyses themselves. That way, you will be certain that you can properly justify this model. See also the time schedule, section 5.2.2, step 3.

9  Preparing and writing the first draft

• Similarly, this applies to working with co-readers such as fellow students, lecturers, or supervisors. If they want to follow the entire process starting from reading the draft texts (chapters), you will have to deliver them in a logical order, the order which helps readers understand the story. • Certain parts of text are important for consensus with the supervisor or other co-readers. They need to be read on time. In the case of a thesis, for example, this applies to the introduction; it contains a description and a justification of the ‘what’ and ‘how’ of the research. These are things you will want to have consensus on before you start working on the other chapters. See also section 5.3.2. In short, it boils down to the following advice: start with the section that seems easiest to you, unless there are reasons of content or procedure to suggest otherwise. A second question is, How many rounds and parts are you going to do the work in? That is difficult to say without getting specific. When we deal with writing the first draft (section 9.3), we assume this will be some five pages which you will subsequently revise. That does not mean to say that the text outline (section 9.2) cannot exceed those five pages. Getting an overview of the entire text first might be required to get an idea of the first part. In other words, writing and revising may take place in smaller parts than outlining.

STEP 4 Decide whether you are going to plan or warm up Once you have collected everything, made your table of contents, and chosen which text part to start on, you can – in some cases – skip to the next phase in which planning the text is central (section 9.2). Experience teaches us that this does not always work straight away from the research questions and data. In that case, it is best to ‘warm up’ a little first. There are two factors that can make it difficult to draw up a text outline straight from the raw material: 1 the material in combination with the text part you are starting on; 2 the type of writer you are. Below, you will find some examples that could help you decide whether or not you need to warm up. Warming up is sensible … … if the story is not immediately clear from the material. This is often the case with:

172

9.1  Setting the scene for writing

I  Setting the scene

• interpretative research, for example, in humanities or in qualitative socialscience research; • introductions and discussion. These usually have a more argumentative and reflective nature than other text parts; • theoretical chapters. These parts need to become a story with a start and an end (see also sections 3.6.1 and 5.1.2, step 1). In that sense, a theoretical chapter resembles an introduction or conclusion. Warming up can also be helpful if you are not that good at making schedules. In that case, you might benefit from first getting an idea of the text. You can do that by following steps 5 and 6, described below.

II  Making a plan

Warming up is probably not necessary … … if the story is immediately clear from the material. This is often the case in: • quantitative empirical (hypothesis testing) research. The methods and results often lend themselves easily to being put on paper without too many intermediate steps; • (related to the previous item) a results chapter in empirical research. This often closely follows the schedule of the research questions or hypotheses. Describing the results does not require much extra thinking. If you are analytically strong and are able to outline your story based on the data, you can skip the warm-up phase and turn straight to making a text outline (see section 9.2). If you cannot manage that well enough, you can always go back to steps 5 and 6 described below.

173

IV  Writing the text

For your warm-up, it makes sense to start by formulating the conclusion of the section you are going to write. A conclusion or partial conclusion is a statement that incorporates everything. It is the final part or the result of an argument. Formulating your conclusion is basically like formulating an end point for your text. That is useful because when you know where you want to end up – what the conclusion is – you have a clear benchmark in planning, writing, and rewriting. For example, if you are unsure about the relevance of certain information, you can draw on that conclusion and ask yourself, Does the information help to substantiate the conclusion? If so, then it is relevant. If not, that part can be left out. For this step, and also in the rest of this chapter, we assume that you are working on a fragment of a few pages (see step 3). Is the text short enough to plan and write it at a single sitting? Then the conclusion will in any case concern the answer to the main question.

III Interlude

STEP 5 Formulate the conclusion of the text

9  Preparing and writing the first draft

There are different ways of finding out what the conclusion to your text is: • Ask yourself the question, What is it I want to say? • Formulate that question in reader’s terminology: what is my message to the reader? • What also helps is to complete a formula: after reading this text my readers will know/understand/think that … • Come up with a headline, like in a newspaper article: the heading of a newspaper article on my text would read: … Perhaps you are thinking, ‘I do not have a conclusion because my text is purely informative’. In that case, the question that you answer in that section of the text is a purely descriptive question. That is possible; in section 3.6 we saw that sub-questions can sometimes be purely descriptive. But we also saw that descriptions are tricky because they are difficult to define and don’t explicitly ‘lead anywhere’. Purely informative or descriptive texts are also often less interesting to write and for your readers quite often unsatisfying to read because they will constantly wonder, ‘Where is this leading and why am I reading this?’ Hence our advice to continue your search for a possibility to view your text as an argumentative text, with a conclusion as the end point. Below are some tools to discover the argumentative aspects of academic sections. The introduction is generally not only informative but it is also intended to convince the reader that the research is relevant and researchable (sections 3.9, 5.2 and chapter 4). The conclusion of the introduction should therefore read something like ‘researching … is worth the effort’, and thus, ‘Read me!’ Theoretical chapters can also be considered argumentative. A few examples: you demonstrate why parts of theories (for example, definitions) are usable for your research, you convince the reader that you have deducted sound hypotheses, you prove that a certain question has not been answered yet, or you argue why you have opted for particular elements in your model of analysis. Method chapters are not strictly informative by nature; the reader needs to be convinced that the selected methods are adequate. Results chapters cannot always pass as an argumentative piece. If the researcher only presents the findings and leaves no room for discussion, this section is purely informative.

STEP 6 Write a bin version A second way to warm up is to write a bin version. That means write down what you know. This type of writing is like brainstorming or free writing,

174

9.1  Setting the scene for writing

IV  Writing the text

175

III Interlude

How do you do that? • Think about the time you want to spend on it. An hour is a pretty good indication for a text of about four pages. Check the clock or set the stopwatch if you have to. • Suppose someone at work or in the pub says to you, ‘Tell me a little bit about your research’. Use that image to start writing: write whatever you want to put in your story, no holds barred. • It is important that you maintain a steady pace or it may be difficult to throw the text away later. So keep writing. • You could start by putting some main themes on paper with the sub-stories beneath them. Alternatively, you can start by writing the first sentence. • The idea is that you only write down what you have in your head; don’t consult any books or articles at this stage. You will find at the end what you need, in the next step. • Assume that this text will be deleted later. That means you don’t pay any attention to crooked sentences, grammar, spelling, or any other external insufficiencies. The most important thing is to make sure that everything that is in your head comes out. The way this is done is less important.

II  Making a plan

Why write a bin version? Writing a zero version is a quick way to find out what the status is. It only takes you a short time to discover what work still lies ahead of you before you can make a text outline, for example: • Do you have sufficient knowledge to make a text outline, or do you need to read some more? • Can this become a coherent story, or should you improve the wording of the research question? • Which elements are clear in your mind and which are still fuzzy? Do certain elements require some more thought? • How long will the story be, approximately? Do you need to delete or add anything?

I  Setting the scene

except it is more than ‘simply writing down what comes to your mind’. Rather, you ‘simply’ write down the findings of your study. For example: you have formulated the main questions and the sub-questions for a literature study; you have found books and articles for each sub-question; and you have studied them and made a summary of the main findings. Along the way, you have spotted parallels and/or considered the value of those articles for your research, but those things are still roaming around in your head and you are not sure what will come of them. Then you simply start to write: writing to think. Not a text that someone else should read (least of all a professor or supervisor), but a text for yourself. And to emphasize that this text does not really count as a text, we also refer to it as the ‘zero’ or ‘bin’ version.

9  Preparing and writing the first draft

• Some writers find that the best way to do this is by using old-fashioned pen and paper because that eliminates the suggestion that you are already producing a real text. When you are writing at your computer, it is tempting to do all kinds of layout things. What is more, on paper it is much easier to add arrows, circle excerpts, make half outlines, et cetera. Try it sometime. When you are finished, check the status (cf. the reasons for a bin version). Examples of reflections after writing a bin version include: •• I have to choose a different main structure after all. •• It is actually going quite well. •• The bit about … I will have to look into because I don’t have a clear picture of it in my head yet. •• The content is OK, but there are too many loose ends. •• How can I connect those elements? •• I am still missing a clear example of … •• Can I delete that second part? •• Should I explain this too …? •• How can I cram this into … pages? Don’t I need a lot more? •• That one paragraph is way too long. •• et cetera

STEP 7 If necessary, go back to earlier phases It is not unusual for writers to find after the bin version that they have not sufficiently gone through the previous phase; the information from the research has not been processed specifically enough to make a text outline, let alone the text itself. The thing to do then is to go back to that phase. Answer the questions described in sections 6.6 and 7.5.2. The bin version may also reveal problems with the entire plan. In that case you need to go back to picturing your research. Finally, the zero version could even take you back to setting the scene, for example, if you discover that you are unsure about the type of text you have to write or how long it should be.

9.2

Making an outline 9.2.1 Introduction Writing requires some preparation. The better this preparation, the better your writing will be. There are several strategies you could use to prepare yourself for writing. For example:

176

9.2  Making an outline

free writing; talking; mind mapping (e.g. the model of the research problem); graphs; bullet list containing topics; outline containing headings/titles; outline containing statements; outline containing topic sentences; outline containing topics and questions.

I  Setting the scene

• • • • • • • • •

II  Making a plan

The best preparation for writing is a strategy that motivates you to think about: 1 Content; what information will be in your text and what will not? 2 Relationships (connections) between all elements (information) in the text; how are pieces of information linked with other pieces and with the overall claim or question? 3 Hierarchy of elements; what are main topics and what are sub-topics? This will help you with your paragraph structure. 4 Sequence of elements; in what order will you present the information? Some of the aforementioned strategies offer more than others. For example, mind maps and graphs may lack information about (4) the sequence or order in which the information will be presented. Even many outlines are not optimal because they lack (2) indications of how elements are connected.

III Interlude

That is a shortcoming because the most common problem with academic texts is that they lack sufficient cohesion. An often-heard complaint from readers (professors or co-readers) is that a text contains loose ends or that the structure of the story is unclear. At the Nijmegen Center for Academic Writing, approximately eighty per cent of the tutorial sessions are about structure, the structure of the research and the structure of the text. It helps if you decide on that structure in advance. That takes a little more than themes or headings. The most complete way of outlining is an outline with topics and questions. Questions give structure, answers give content. That’s why the best preparation is making an outline with questions and answers.

177

IV  Writing the text

The cohesion between themes in the text can be demonstrated using questions. A theme is an answer to a question on another theme. Since those questions indicate what the connection (the relationship) is between the themes, they are referred to as ‘relational questions’. This system (developed by Van Steen, 1987) is based on Aristotle’s idea of ‘topic questions’ by which you prepare a story or argument, and then you check out the important points/ques-

9  Preparing and writing the first draft

tions (the ‘topoi’) of the subject and discuss them in the text. More about this system in the next section. The system is an excellent instrument to plan the content coherence, and it can also be used to evaluate the text structure. That means it will allow you, once you have written the first draft, to evaluate and improve the text later, using the same system. You will be killing two birds with one stone. Why make a text outline? The goal of making a text outline is to prepare you in the best possible way for writing a first draft. An outline can do that because it forces you to disconnect text production from thinking about the content and structure. As indicated earlier, writing a text is a complicated matter, and it is sensible to split such a task into manageable sub-tasks. In that way, you can concentrate on a certain part of the writing process without being distracted by matters that are not relevant yet. Planning your text before you begin writing it is such a sub-task. In the introduction to part 4, we spoke about the various types of activities. Making a text plan is a truly analytical activity. If you devote proper thinking time to the content and structure of your text prior to writing, you won’t have to do it during the writing of your first draft. You will be free to focus fully on text production in the writing phase, free to tell your story.

9.2.2 The steps A text is a collection of answers to questions on a topic. In a text, you tell the reader all kinds of things about a subject (theme), ‘all kinds of things’ being the answers to the questions on that theme. The principle of text structure as a collection of themes and questions is illustrated below, using an existing text from a student who researched television programmes. There is another example at the end of this section. Programmes that have children as a target audience use different formal features than programmes that are meant for adults. For children, a cluster of features is often used, characterized by salience. This means that often features are used that draw the little ones’ attention, such as a rapid change of images, intensity, contrast, change, novelty, or surprise (Huston, p. 836). Research by Campbell (Huston, p. 338) proved that programmes for adults use different features than programmes for children. Adult’s programmes more often use, for example, live footage, an adult male presenter, and quiet background music (…)

178

9.2  Making an outline

IV  Writing the text

179

III Interlude

So questions are used to link all the pieces of information to a theme that has been dealt with previously. Both the writer and the reader need to find out which of the topics this new information is linked to and which question this information answers. Don’t worry, in this little example we analyse very small units (half sentences), but a text plan does not require analysing down to this level. It may be useful, though, to copy the way the example is indented (tabs); that will provide you with a good overview of the main theme and the subthemes (as well as the sub-sub-themes) and therefore the hierarchy.

II  Making a plan

Differences between formal features in television programmes for children and for adults What are those formal features in television programmes for children? (= question) Salience (= sub-theme) What does that mean? (= sub-question) Drawing the attention of the little ones What are examples of that? rapid change of images, intensity, contrast, change, novelty, ­surprise How can we infer this? Huston, p. 836 What are the formal features in television programmes for adults? (= question) Different What are examples of that? Live footage, an adult male presenter, and quiet background music How can we infer this? Research by Campbell (Huston, p. 338)

I  Setting the scene

This fragment is about the formal features of programmes for children and for adults (sentence 1); these differ (different). That means we can describe the theme as differences between … What is said about that? What question is answered about it? Sentence 2 is about the features used for children’s programmes. The question that is answered is therefore, What are those features in children’s programmes? A feature is mentioned – salience. Salience means (this means) that they draw attention. Finally, an example is given (such as) and a source. The next paragraph is about the features of programmes for adults. The structure of this excerpt can be illustrated in the following outline.

9  Preparing and writing the first draft

The steps toward making a text outline 1 2 3 4 5

Decide on the main theme of the piece you are going to write. Write down the most important questions. Briefly describe the answers. Work out the answers in more detail. Check the connections.

Don’t worry if this is difficult; coming up with a good structure is no mean feat. If writers had that structure all ready in their minds, we wouldn’t be making such a fuss about this planning phase. The reward for all this brainwork will come later when you write your first draft: that will go a lot quicker if you have set up a clear structure.

STEP 1  Decide on the main theme of the piece you are going to write So what is this fragment about? In any case, there are two ways of wording that, either as a subject or as a statement. Be aware that a theme is not a full sentence but a topic. If you have done warm-up step 5 before, you will already have formulated a statement (conclusion). Write that principal theme or statement at the top of a piece of paper. (Yes – making an outline is generally easier with pen and paper than with a computer.)

STEP 2  Write down the most important questions Choose the most important questions or sub-questions that you want to answer about the main topic, theme or statement in your text and write those down underneath. Keep some space between the sub-questions. For example: Study into the bicycle airbag •• What is so special about it?

•• What are the results? For the questions, you can allow yourself to be inspired by: • the content of the bin version (section 9.1.2, step 6); • the main questions and sub-questions of your research; • all possible kinds of connections (relations) between bits of information; • the questions you can assume readers will ask. Imagine a reader and think about the questions he or she might have about the main theme or statement of your text.

180

9.2  Making an outline

Table 9.1 • Overview of relation types and relation questions

Relation questions

Cause-effect (causal)

How come? What is the cause? What is the effect?

Means-goal (final)

How? With what means? Wherefore? With what goal?

Reason

Why? With what reason? What is the consequence?

Conditional

When? On what condition? What applies to that condition?

Time

When? At what moment? In which period? Since when?

Space

Where? Where to?

Circumstance

How? Under what circumstance?

Concession

Despite what? What if not?

Mode

How? In what way?

Qualification

How good/bad is it? How to evaluate?

Specification

What is an example of this? What is this an example of?

Comparison

What is the similarity? What is the difference? To what extent are they alike/different?

Classification

What/which class does it belong to? What elements can be distinguished?

Identity

What are the characteristics? What is it?

Problem – solution

What is the problem? How can the problem be solved?

Listing

How many aspects/elements does it have?

Argumentation

What conclusion does this lead to? Which arguments are pro/con?

Summary

How can this be summarized?

II  Making a plan

Relation type

I  Setting the scene

In order to inspire you, we have included below an overview of the most common relations with examples of how these relations can be translated into questions. Note that these are all open questions. The reason for this is simple: a closed question does not lead to a text but merely to a word, ‘yes’ or ‘no’. The seven question types for the main question (section 3.6 and 6.3) also reappear in the schedule.

III Interlude IV  Writing the text

181

9  Preparing and writing the first draft

STEP 3  Briefly describe the answers You write down short answers to the questions in a text plan, in key words. These now make up the sub-themes in the schedule and later in your text. For example: Study into the bicycle airbag What is so special about it? •• Many different participants What are the results? •• Promising

Take good care that those themes are actually the answers to the question you formulated and that they do not end up being complete sentences. If the schedule consisted of complete sentences, you would almost have a complete text and that is not the purpose of this step because then you would be doing two things at once (thinking and writing).

STEP 4  Work out the answers in more detail To explain this, we need to go back to the purpose of the text plan: to prepare as best you can for writing the first draft. You have to be able to write that text quickly later on. All the tools you need to do that have to be in the schedule. That means we are always dealing with two questions: (1) Do I want to/Should I say more about this theme/sub-theme? If so, (2) will it flow effortlessly from my keyboard or do I need to plan a structure for it? In this way, you can ensure that a single outline allows you to write a first draft that also contains substantial content. If you work out the outline in greater detail, it makes sense to make the hierarchy clearly visible, for example, by consistently indenting all sub-questions. Here, we refer to the example of the formal features. This is useful later because it offers leads for the division into sections, text blocks, and paragraphs. Many writers find it difficult to decide where paragraphs begin and end. If you give some thought in advance to the organization of the text by including the hierarchy in your outline, this will help you when writing out the complete text and during revision.

182

9.2  Making an outline

STEP 5  Check the connections

•• •• •• ••

I  Setting the scene

The most important thing about the outline is that all the parts must be connected. Poor connections are a common problem in texts. You can check this in the outline because the questions form the connections between the themes. Make them clearly visible in your outline by repeating terms from the theme in your question or by referring to the theme in the question. The example on formal features demonstrates how this is done: What are those formal features in television programmes for children? What does that mean? What are examples of that? How can we infer this?

Finally, two more examples of what part of such a text schedule can look like. The first example is a more detailed version of the beginning of the bicycle airbag study.

III Interlude

Study of the bicycle airbag What is so special about it? Many different participants Who are they? 1 TNO What is their interest? Technical 2 Autoliv What is their interest? Sales and profit 3 Cyclists’ Union What is their interest? Safety for cyclists 4 Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sport What is their interest? Rules and regulations 5 Insurance company What is their interest? Fewer injuries, less compensation

II  Making a plan

The words in bold all refer to the theme it is connected to. Always check whether the questions in your schedule contain such a reference and if this actually can be replaced by the topic it is referring to.

IV  Writing the text

183

9  Preparing and writing the first draft

What are the results of this study? Promising Why is that the case? 1 Fewer casualties among cyclists and pedestrians In comparison with what is that the case? 1 Pedestrian airbag What is wrong with that? Airbag is too short for cyclists 2 Automatic braking system What is wrong with that? Leads to head-on collisions 2 Appears technically feasible How far has the feasibility study progressed? 1 Testing sensors 2 Testing cameras in cars

Do you recognize the four aspects of structure? • the content is embedded in the themes (italics); • the relation is in the question type and the references (it, their, this, that, et cetera); • the hierarchy is in the indentations and the numbers; • the order is in the outline itself. One final remark about that last aspect. In this phase, try to choose the order in which you want to present the information. After all, it is easier to rearrange bits of your schedule than sections of text. Perhaps when you are writing the piece on the bicycle airbag, you may think it is actually much better to start with those results. Then you take that entire part of the schedule and move it to the top. Here is a second example of a nice text schedule drawn up by a PhD student: Example of a good outline (excerpt, anonymized) How do we measure x at present? 1 Technique #1 How does it work? … (how it works)

184

What are its advantages? 1 Gold standard: very accurate and precise 2 Environment can be controlled 3 Reliability and stability of equipment can be measured

9.2  Making an outline

I  Setting the scene

What are its disadvantages? 1 Costs are high 2 Limited capacity 2 Technique #2 How does it work? … (how it works) What are its advantages? Can be applied everywhere

et cetera

To finish this section we have included some examples of where the text schedule went wrong.

II  Making a plan

What are its disadvantages? 1 Large standard deviation 2 Variation and more samples needed

Examples of incomplete outlines Questions missing

What is the writer going to write about oil palm plantations and palm oil mills? In other words, what questions will be answered about these topics? Planning this will make the writing easier and will prevent the writer from ‘knowledge telling’ (see section 1.3 and 6.1).

Here similar questions arise. First of all, how are the things in 2.1.1, 2.1.2 and 2.1.3 related to Spatial Interpolation? Are they ways? Instruments? Types? There is no question in between indicating the relationship. Second, what is

185

IV  Writing the text

Methodology 2.1 Spatial interpolation 2.1.1 Zonal Averaging 2.1.2 Ordinary Kriging 2.1.3 Regression Kriging

III Interlude

Introduction Palm oil production in Thailand •• Palm oil plantation •• Palm oil mill

9  Preparing and writing the first draft

the writer going to say about those things? How will the text develop? This could be elaborated by adding more questions to the sub-topics 2.1.1, 2.1.2 and 2.1.3. Answers missing Intro: Why are we interested in the environmental effect on seed quality? What kinds of studies have been done on this topic? What knowledge is still missing from previous studies? Why do we choose those environments?

Without answers (sub-topics) it will be difficult to write the text.

9.3

The first draft: uninterrupted (speed) writing 9.3.1 Introduction We have now come to what is actually the simplest part of the writing process: writing. Planning or rewriting are much harder, and you do not need to do them during the writing itself. So what is writing? Writing is producing text that will enable you to take the next step (revision). You have thought about what to put in the text (selection of the content), about the coherence, the order, and the hierarchy of the elements, and now is the first time you are going to tell that story. The most important thing in this phase is producing in high tempo. That means think as little as possible while writing. Don’t think about style or content problems, and never mind problems related to finishing, such as spelling and literature references. All that will come at a later stage. You have to try to get into a kind of flow. In order to achieve that flow, it is important that you write uninterruptedly. That means that you cannot look up information or do any rereading during your writing. That would interrupt the writing and you could lose the flow, or worse, fail to get into it at all. Uninterrupted writing is therefore done without any books. Of course, writing without books is daunting, but you can relax because in the revision phase you can add anything you need. Why write uninterruptedly? Writing uninterruptedly at a steady pace, without books, has a number of advantages:

186

9.3  The first draft: uninterrupted (speed) writing

4 Writing is more fun When you write from the storyline that you have come up with yourself, writing is much more fun. Cutting and pasting secondhand knowledge may seem easy, but hardly anyone finds it interesting to do.

6 You waste little time if the text turns out not to be effective after all No matter how well you try to plan, the content and structure can prove more obstinate than expected. This generally only becomes clear once the first draft has been completed. The quicker you write the first draft, the sooner you will

187

IV  Writing the text

5 You can view your text from a distance later Many writers find it hard to view their own text from a distance. This gets easier when you maintain a fast pace during the writing; it is less likely that you will become deeply involved and tangled up in the text.

III Interlude

3 Texts end up with better structures Writing without books results in texts with better structures. If you just cut chunks of information from the literature and paste them into your text without closely reading what they actually say, you often get incoherent stories that are riddled with breaches of style. Supervisors and teachers usually disapprove of this kind of prose. They often complain about texts that contain a lot of ‘cutting and pasting’ or about texts that are nothing but a ‘sequence of quotes’ or ‘patchwork’.

II  Making a plan

2 You process the content well Uninterrupted writing without having your books and articles around also has huge advantages in terms of controlling the content of your text. If you don’t have your books beside you when you write, you are forced to actually process the material. That is an advantage because you have to be able to reproduce what is in them, for example, when you defend your thesis before a committee or if you present your story at a conference. Therefore, you need to be very much aware of what you are writing and what the content is of the literature you have read and are using for your research. If you write the first draft without any books, you force yourself to do some serious information processing (knowledge transforming versus knowledge telling, see section 1.3 and 6.1).

I  Setting the scene

1 You produce more The most important thing about uninterrupted writing is that you don’t have to think about everything at the same time, which makes writing a much easier task. Since everything does not have to be spot on after the first run, you write a lot more than you would normally do in the same amount of time. That is satisfying. For many writers, it is also a relief to reach a stage where the only thing they have to do is produce.

9  Preparing and writing the first draft

find out if the basic structure is sound, and the less of a risk you run of wasting your time embellishing a first draft that needs a complete overhaul. So for the first version, you need to have the guts to process someone else’s thoughts into your own text, in your own words. Do you recognize yourself in one or more of the descriptions below? • Writing takes so long. • I am not making much progress because I constantly need to look up and reread things. • It is so difficult to connect all these quotes to each other. • I am finding it hard to say things in my own words. • My texts are very fragmented. • I find it boring to just link one quote to the next. The solution is at hand: write a first version in a single, continuous attempt, without using books or articles.

9.3.2 The steps The procedure for speedwriting looks like this: 1 Take your text outline. 2 Take an alarm clock and set it for twenty to thirty minutes. You need to experiment with what duration works for you. 3 Put everything away that may distract you – that includes books and articles. 4 As a warm-up, write an introduction to the text you are about to write. That introduction is a preliminary summary, a couple of sentences long. You could formulate it as follows: in this chapter/section/paper I am describing … [theme]. I will indicate the following … 5 Then start to write the text itself and write uninterruptedly, without pauses, until the alarm goes off. 6 Try to ignore wording as much as possible or your train of thought will come to a standstill. You will have an entire revision phase to finish the text in all kinds of ways. Right now you need only worry about producing a text to finish later. 7 Regularly check your schedule to hold on to the common thread. Don’t hesitate to use the wording from the questions. For example, if the question is ‘What is the cause?’ you can just start that sentence with ‘This is caused by …’ Make it as easy as possible for yourself (rewriting is done later). 8 Try to delete and change as little as possible. If you are having second thoughts, write something like: rubbish, again. You cannot afford to lose any time on thinking or redoing work.

188

9.3  The first draft: uninterrupted (speed) writing

II  Making a plan

If you have followed this procedure, you will have written an hour to an hour and a half. That is not particularly long (especially considering that the writing process takes several months), but training courses have shown that students are able to write some 600 to 1,200 words in forty minutes. That is substantially more than what they normally produce, according to them. That means you will have more material for the revision later. The text is obviously still flawed, but since you write according to a carefully designed structure outline, the basic storyline is there.

I  Setting the scene

9 If you get stuck or lose inspiration, simply write that down too; at least you will still be writing. For example: I don’t know any more, have to look this up, it’s so hot in here, what a stupid assignment. It does not matter. 10 If you cannot manage to move forward in your writing (when you constantly read back and correct), switch off your computer screen, or cover your screen with a piece of paper. That way you cannot read back any more. Imagine your computer is a tape recorder, or someone is sitting opposite you while you are telling them a story. You don’t rewind or swallow your words in those situations either. 11 After the first writing session, take a short break (five to ten minutes) and set the alarm clock for another twenty or thirty minutes to write the second session. 12 If you can physically manage, repeat step 11 once more.

III Interlude IV  Writing the text

189

10

The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

10.1 About revising the first draft 10.1.1 Introduction to the procedures 10.1.2 Preparing the revision 10.2 Revising content 10.2.1 Revising information ՔՔ Step 1 Describing the information ՔՔ Step 2 Evaluating the information ՔՔ Step 3 Explaining your evaluation ՔՔ Step 4 Improving the information 10.2.2 Revising argumentation ՔՔ Step 1 Describing the argumentation ՔՔ Step 2 Evaluating the argumentation ՔՔ Step 3 Explaining your evaluation ՔՔ Step 4 Improving the argumentation 10.3 Revising the structure 10.3.1 Revising cohesion ՔՔ Step 1 Evaluating the coherence ՔՔ Step 2 Explaining your evaluation ՔՔ Step 3 Improving the cohesion 10.3.2 Revising the hierarchy 10.3.3 Revising the sequence 10.3.4 Summary 10.4 Revising external structure: between structure and style 10.4.1 Introduction 10.4.2 How can you make the structure visible? 10.4.3 Layout, headings and introductions 10.4.4 Explanation of the structure, topic sentences, best placement 10.4.5 Signposting 10.4.6 Bullet lists, typographic support, and charts, graphs and diagrams 10.4.7 Summary

10.5 Finding co-readers

190

The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

10.1

About revising the first draft 10.1.1 Introduction to the procedures Not every revision process develops the same way. That is why in this section we first look at the revision process itself in a little more detail. From section 10.2 on, all the revision rounds and steps will be dealt with in more depth.

191

IV  Writing the text

For example, if you have created (1) a very good text outline which you have stuck to when you were writing, you generally don’t need to extensively analyse your own text to find out if the structure is sound. On the other hand, you may have a lot of work to do revising the style of your text. If you (2) are very experienced in writing and revising, you will spot the problem areas sooner, know what caused them, and see how they can be solved. And, finally, the better you know (3) your own strengths and weaknesses, the sooner you can focus on the weaker aspects during the revision process, perhaps skipping other checkpoints. In order to cater for such a variety in writing processes and writing experience, the section below will focus on different revision procedures.

III Interlude

Comprehensive and short revision procedures How the revision process takes place depends on a number of things, the most important ones being: 1 the quality of the first version; 2 your writing and revision experience; 3 how familiar you are with the weak and strong sides of your own texts.

II  Making a plan



I  Setting the scene

10

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

Elements of the revision process Generally speaking, it is important to: • revise what is not good enough; • revise in such a way that the text actually improves. In order to achieve this, you must (1) see what is inadequate, (2) understand how you can improve it, (3) be capable of actually improving it. That means it requires a lot of thinking and skill. The most elaborate procedure for a revision comprises four elements: 1 describing or analysing the content, structure, and style of the text; 2 evaluating the content, structure, and style of the text; 3 explaining the problems you find during the assessment (2); 4 solving those problems by dealing with the causes you find in the explanation step (3). Perhaps you will recognize this list of sub-questions to a design question (section 4.1.2). That is not strange because text revision and design both involve searching for a well-substantiated plan for improvement. It is not always necessary to follow the entire procedure for every aspect of the text. The extensive procedure may give you more guidance, though, especially if you are still an inexperienced academic writer. Along the way, you can start experimenting with shortening certain sections. And should you find, while you are solving the problems, that your analysis was insufficiently thought through after all, you can always go back to that extensive procedure. Here are a few examples of how such a revision process could go. You discover that the final paragraph should come first. In that case you have found the solution (step 4) and you don’t have to follow the preceding steps again. It does make sense, however, to give some thought to why you believe that this paragraph needs to be placed at the beginning. One reason could be that you discover that this paragraph actually contains the core message of the story and you realize that it is convenient for the reader to have the main message right at the beginning. In hindsight, you are following steps 1, 2 and 3, although perhaps unconsciously: 1 describing: it is the core paragraph of the piece; 2 evaluating: it is in the wrong place; 3 explaining: because it is at the end, but the reader will find it clearer if the text starts with it.

192

10.1  About revising the first draft

193

IV  Writing the text

Sequence of the revision steps The revision is split up into rounds; first you revise the content, then the structure, and only then style and use of language. The idea of revising style at the end of the process has a reason. When you look at the content and structure of a text critically, you may reach the conclusion that certain sections have to be moved or don’t belong in the text at all. It would be a pity to make that discovery after you have carefully improved those excerpts stylistically. That would mean you would have to kill your darlings. Working on good style is best done on text fragments that you are certain will stay in and remain where they are. Compare this to doing up an old chair. If you were to paint it beautifully only to see it collapse the moment you sit on it, your paintwork will be destroyed as well. It is better to fix the chair properly first and paint afterwards.

III Interlude

You discover that a certain section is a mess. In that case, you have only an evaluation (2) and you need to look for the causes (3) before you can solve the problem (4). A mess is usually related to the structure, for example, sentences may not be well connected. You can discover this by analysing your text in terms of themes and questions (here is the second bird with the one stone from section 9.2.1). Later on, we provide more examples. However, the mess could also have been caused by your making different claims every other sentence. Then you have a problem with the content and need to carefully reconsider what your message really is. That means going back to step 5 of the pre-work (section 9.1.2). You could also be facing a stylistic mess, for example, because one sentence is very formal and the next is too colloquial. Perhaps your text contains style inconsistencies that leave an impression of ‘messy’ (see chapter 11 on style).

II  Making a plan

You discover that halfway through the first page you abandoned the initial theme (topic) and the story takes a different turn. In that case, you have already described the structure (recognized the themes), evaluated it (no proper cohesion), and explained it (topic shift). Now you can start looking for ways to solve the problem, for example: • choose one of the themes and use the other one in a different part; • change the first theme; • change the second theme; • link the second theme to the first; • clearly present the second theme as a new theme.

I  Setting the scene

If you are unable to argue in such a way why you want to make a certain change, be careful. Perhaps this was just a whim, and your text might not benefit from the change.

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

So revising the first versions is done in rounds. This is a cyclical process, similar to making a research plan (chapters 3, 4 and 5). You continually evaluate new versions and improve what needs improving. Especially large writing tasks need more than two versions. It may turn out that the third, fourth, or perhaps even the tenth version is the final one.

10.1.2 Preparing the revision Before you start with an extensive revision of the first version, you need to cool down, quickly review the text, and write down what strikes you. Cool down It is best not to start checking and correcting the first version immediately after writing it. First you need to cool down for a while. Take a break for a couple of hours before you reread what you have written. That way, you create a certain distance from your writing which makes it easier to get a fresh perspective. So do the grocery shopping, finish that other chore for your research, grab a cup of coffee with someone or – and this is the best one – sleep on it before you start revising. First rough assessment Once you have cooled down, you can do a rough quickscan of the text. That will give you a first impression of its strengths and weaknesses. The best way is to print the text. This has two advantages: • You will have a better overview of the text. • You can add notes or scribbles more easily. Read quickly and mark things that strike you immediately, but don’t edit anything yet (that is the next phase)! Limit yourself to making short notes such as +, -, ?, rubbish, elaborate, mess, shorten, unclear, nice, and such. The idea is that you quickly rush through the text and jot down your first impressions. Simple typos and spelling errors can be corrected straight away if you like. Will you see everything that is ‘below par’? Usually not, unfortunately. There is a big risk that this rough quickscan will yield an all too random collection of slips and errors. After all, it is hard to look at your own text from a distance. What is more, you cannot notice everything in a first round, so it is recommended you do a more systematic check afterwards, with the ‘actual’ revision. But in any case, you will have gotten a fresh picture of the text you wrote so quickly a while ago.

194

10.2  Revising content

10.2

Revising content I  Setting the scene

When you evaluate the content, you need to consider two things: (1) the informative and (2) the argumentative content. Revising the informative content means you need to ask yourself questions on the quantity of the content such as, Do I have enough and do I need everything? The argumentative content is more about the quality, Is the content correct?

10.2.1 Revising information The steps to revise the information are the following: Describing the information. Evaluating the information. Explaining your evaluation. Improving the information.

II  Making a plan

1 2 3 4

STEP 1  Describing the information

STEP 2  Evaluating the information

Obviously this is rather abstract, but it is very difficult to predict exactly what has to be in every text. Academic texts are too varied for that. You will need to deduct that yourself. There are two clues that may help you: (1) guidelines in the assignment or journal and (2) the goal of the text. 1 Perhaps when you wrote the Setting the Scene for the writing task (part 1) you found clues to what the text should contain, for example, a list with

195

IV  Writing the text

In order to evaluate something, you need a norm (compare it to a sub-question schedule for an evaluative question, sections 4.1.2 and 6.4.1). In general, the following criteria apply to the information in academic texts: • Sufficient information has to be available in order to arrive at a comprehensible story. • All information has to be functional for the story.

III Interlude

In order to assess the information, you first need to describe it. You can use the system of themes and questions that is recommended for making the text outline. Indicate in the margins what each section is about; what the theme of that piece is and/or what relational question you answer in it (compare sections 9.2.1 and 9.2.2). In this step, you are effectively making an analysis of your text. If you have made paragraphs, you can perhaps do this analysis per paragraph.

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

mandatory text elements. If all is well, you used those to prepare the text plan (section 9.1.2, step 1). Use that list now to check if everything that has to be in, is actually in your text. 2 If you have followed step 5 of that same preparation, you will have described the goal of the text too (After reading this text, my readers will know/understand/find that …). Based on that, you could now formulate control questions. Control questions for evaluating the content In order to evaluate whether or not the information is comprehensible and functional, you need to try to answer the following questions: The total picture 1 What is the informative goal of the text? Compare the ‘formula’: after reading this text, my readers will know/understand/think that … 2 What is required to achieve that goal? 3 How does this relate to what is in the text? 4 Have you given enough information to provide the insight you wanted; does it indeed become clear that …? 5 Does all the information contribute to providing that insight. Ask yourself for each excerpt, What would happen if this excerpt were not in it? For all the concepts and jargon 1 Considering your readers, do you need to explain those terms? 2 If so, have you done that clearly? If not, have you omitted to do so? To answer these questions, you need to be able to take the reader’s perspective. You might consider looking for a co-reader or someone to help you think in this evaluation phase, someone to help you gauge which information is required in the text and which isn’t. Such a person is preferably a reader who is not involved in the assessment of your work– after all, you have only got a first draft. You might think of a fellow student, someone from your writing group, a co-reader friend who can cope with the academic level, or a tutor or writing coach from a writing centre. See chapter 8 for more information on getting feedback. Once you have answered these questions, you can make a simple overview of your evaluation of the information: • What is dealt with sufficiently? • What is dealt with insufficiently? • What is explained sufficiently? • What is explained insufficiently?

196

10.2  Revising content

STEP 3  Explaining your evaluation

As far as relatively simple problems of content are concerned, the solutions are not very difficult to come up with: • what is superfluous must be deleted; • what is missing must be added.

197

IV  Writing the text

STEP 4  Improving the information

III Interlude

The product explanation does not always result in too many extras in matters of content. Evaluation and explanation almost always overlap: it is superfluous only because it is not required. Process explanations, on the other hand, are important. You might realize, for example, that you are ambivalent on the subject. Although your text may deal with airbags for cyclists, the elaborate piece about the company history is there because you find it interesting. Your question may be closer to ‘How come companies invest in an innovation such as the bicycle airbag?’ Autoliv could then be a perfect example for you to demonstrate what drives a company. In that case, you need to choose again what the perspective of your text is going to be, and based on that you can decide how to improve your text: a different setup perhaps, or taking out the story anyway despite how interesting it is (kill your darlings).

II  Making a plan

An example. Suppose in your text on airbags for cyclists you have written a completely unrelated story about the history of the company Autoliv, and you notice when you evaluate that this is superfluous. Possible explanations include: • The history of Autoliv is not required to understand what their interest is in developing an airbag for cyclists (product). • There is an elaborate piece on the topic because you found yourself happily writing uninterruptedly and all of a sudden you remembered all kinds of things that you had read about that company (process). • There is an elaborate piece on the topic because you are used to always writing about the history of an aspect, although on second thought that appears not to be all that functional in this text part (process).

I  Setting the scene

Revision also comprises explaining your evaluation. That can lead you in two different directions: why do you think the text is so bad/good (product)? And: how did the text come to be like this (process)? Both questions may help you target your improvements.

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

It is sensible, though, to keep pieces of text rather than throw them out permanently. Create a separate file or folder for excess material. Then if it should transpire that you have wrongly scrapped a piece, you can still put it back. Every time you add something, you effectively start a new little writing process. Therefore, it is sensible to plan those additions too, write them down quickly, and revise them later. Another important word of warning: when you add quotes or excerpts from literature, take special care that the additions do not cloud the storyline. By adding, writers often end up destroying what they have carefully built up in the preparation – their own concisely structured story. By pasting loosely linked elements, the text becomes an incoherent sequence of what literature has to offer on the topic. A reduced procedure In this phase, you can also limit yourself to describing, evaluating, and improving the elements that you know are your weaknesses. For example, if you tend to digress and write too much, you can restrict your evaluation to the question of whether everything is necessary for the final conclusion. It will be clear that for this, you will need to know what the strengths and weaknesses of your texts are (cf. item 3 at the beginning of section 10.1.1). Usually, you discover them by receiving negative feedback from your professors, supervisors, or fellow students.

10.2.2 Revising argumentation The steps to revise the argumentation are: 1 2 3 4

Describing the argumentation. Evaluating the argumentation. Explaining your evaluation. Improving the argumentation.

STEP 1  Describing the argumentation Mark the parts in which you are arguing; these are all the parts that are not purely factual. Within them, mark the statements that can be considered viewpoints – the statements that the reader should agree with.

198

10.2  Revising content

STEP 2  Evaluating the argumentation

199

IV  Writing the text

Control questions for all the arguments (see also section 6.6) 1 Are the arguments you present acceptable in themselves? 2 Does the claim or the conclusion logically follow from the arguments? Does it always follow: ‘If argument, then conclusion’?

III Interlude

Control questions for every refutable claim 1 Do you need to provide your readers with arguments? You cannot support every claim, if only because each argument is a claim that can be supported itself and there is a limit to this. What determines whether or not you need arguments? The least you have to do is provide arguments for your claims: • If the recipient does not accept the claim without reservation. If you are certain that the readers will accept the idea, there is no need to support it. • If it concerns an important claim. Statements that are inferior (answers to sub-sub-questions) require less argumentation. • If you make a firm statement. If your claims are very tentative, supportive argumentation might not be that necessary. • If the text genre demands it. In journalistic articles, for example, you have a lot more leeway than in a scientific piece. In the case of academic writing tasks, you will often be forced to present arguments when you make a statement. Scientists are generally not that interested to learn what your opinion is; they want to know how you came to that idea and what evidence or arguments support it. 2 If so, have you actually done it? If not, have you omitted to do so?

II  Making a plan

Control questions for the total picture 1 What is the argumentative purpose of the text? 2 What questions will the reader have about that statement? 3 Does your text provide sufficient answers to those questions; did you give enough support to convince your reader of what he or she is supposed to find? 4 Does all the information contribute to that idea? 5 Are all elements sufficiently consistent with each other; are you not making any contradicting statements?

I  Setting the scene

When you revised the information, the point was to improve the comprehensibility of the text. Revising argumentation is done for the purpose of making the text more convincing. When we evaluate the argumentation, we look at whether all claims are sufficiently substantiated. You first check this for the total picture and then for each refutable claim in your text. The control questions are worked out below and illustrated with two examples.

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

3 What can be argued against it? 4 How can you refute those objections? On the website we have worked out these questions for various types of argumentation in the document Different types of argumentation and control questions (click ‘Theory’). This will help you evaluate the argumentation even more carefully. When you ask these questions, it is again important to form a realistic picture of your readers. How do your readers think? Which statements will they agree with? Which opinions will they not share in advance? How can they be persuaded? Bear in mind that every discipline has its own set of conventions about what is acceptable and logical. A co-reader may be able to help you here. Examples A student presents the following line of argumentation: For this study we contacted four tennis clubs and ninety-six children. We opted for this number because we believed it could give us a realistic picture of the way children in general perceive the sport of tennis.

The first sentence describes a choice. The student apparently deems this choice contestable because it is supported with an argument (‘because’). The first control question is then, Is it acceptable that contacting four tennis clubs and ninety-six children gives a realistic picture of the way children in general perceive the sport of tennis? That requires some additional substantiation, Is this random sample large enough (how many children play tennis and how many tennis clubs are there)? Are four tennis clubs representative of the average child who plays tennis? Another example taken from a text written by a student: The policy on recreational drugs in the Netherlands is characterized by an ‘accommodating’ approach. There are, therefore, many drug addicts.

An argumentation of this type brings us to the area of explanations. ‘Therefore’ indicates that the large number of drug addicts is a result of the accommodating approach of the Dutch drug policy. The first question is, Are there ‘many’ drug addicts in the Netherlands? You also hear other stories, that the number is not high in comparison with countries such as France, Spain, and the United States. This could use some substantiation, as the reader may not simply accept this claim. If, however, it is proven that the Netherlands indeed has ‘many’ drug addicts, the critical reader will ask what grounds the writer has to think an

200

10.2  Revising content

STEP 3  Explaining your evaluation

II  Making a plan

What is the reason that the substantiation is insufficient? This can have different causes. Perhaps it is the logical result of the writing tempo, and you did not realize during the writing that argumentation was required. Then simply move forward and do step 4. Perhaps you will find that in the previous phases of your research, you paid insufficient attention to processing and interpreting data. In that case, you need to return to that analysis. You may have chosen not to give arguments because the text would become too long if you had. That is a different story altogether: a true dilemma. If you have no ‘space’ for argumentation, you can really only do two things: either delete other information from the text so you create ‘space’ to add argumentation, or scrap the entire phrase. You may compromise by wording your argument concisely or exceeding the maximum word count. Leaving a contestable claim without substantiating it is not an option: the structure will collapse and your text will lose credibility.

I  Setting the scene

accommodating policy would automatically lead to that result – control question 2. What is that accommodating policy and which aspects of it would lead to that result? Do countries with a stricter policy have fewer drug addicts? If not, that would be a potential counterargument (cf. control question 3).

STEP 4  Improving the argumentation

201

IV  Writing the text

If you cannot find or come up with anything, the best solution is to scrap the entire claim. After all, you cannot prove it so it has no place in an academic text.

III Interlude

If you discover that important statements are insufficiently substantiated, you need to come up with new or better arguments. You can do this by thinking, talking, or reading. You can brainstorm about the statement, which aspects are connected with it, what else can you bring into the equation? A second way of finding arguments is through a discussion partner who helps you think or who plays the devil’s advocate. The most common form in academic writing, however, is the third way; reading. In academic texts, a large part of the argumentation consists of references to reliable sources (references, literature). These may be authorities in their discipline, but the fact that an authority makes a claim is not enough for the critical reader. What you are looking for is empirical support for your claim, facts that substantiate, for example, that the school dropout rate has increased in the last ten years, that Norwegian citizens feel happier than the inhabitants of Portugal, or that the Netherlands has many drug addicts.

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

10.3

Revising the structure Have you added the necessary elements and deleted the superfluous ones? Then you can check the first version for sound structure. First, you look at the overall level, the big picture. This is often referred to as Higher Order Concerns (HOC’s). Next, you analyse the structure on paragraph level. We will deal with that in section 10.4. Revising the structure on a broad level is done following the four steps mentioned earlier (describing, evaluating, explaining, and improving), but describing the structure is something you can actually skip because you already did it when you described the content. If you did that in terms of themes and questions, that analysis also depicts the structure on paragraph level: cohesion, hierarchy, and sequence. If you did not do it this way, now is your chance.

10.3.1 Revising cohesion You start with the cohesion, the way all the parts of the text are connected, in other words, the relationship between the text elements. The better your text outline, the bigger the chance that you will find a coherent text on this higher level. That is, if you have followed the outline while you were writing. The steps to revise the coherence are: 1 Evaluating the coherence. 2 Explaining your evaluation. 3 Improving the coherence.

STEP 1 Evaluating the coherence What is the norm? Coherence is achieved when it is clear how all the text elements are related, both thematically and in terms of content. Thematic or topical coherence means that all the text elements deal with the same theme (after all, eventually, everything has to be connected to the same main theme). But we also want to be able to understand what two statements about the same theme have to do with each other: we call that coherence of content. For this type of coherence, we previously used the types of connections and relational questions (section 9.2). We do not only want the text to be structured around one single theme, but we also want to avoid random statements about that theme. In an encyclopaedia this may be acceptable, but in an academic text it is not. An example on sentence level would be, The coffee has

202

10.3  Revising the structure

Where does it usually go wrong? • The text contains sections that can no longer be linked to the main theme (problem with the thematic coherence). • There is too little connection between the paragraphs (problem with the coherence of content).

Control questions to evaluate the cohesion 1 Does each paragraph deal with the main theme, the central question, or the final conclusion of the excerpt (be it through sub-themes or sub-questions)? 2 Is it clear for each paragraph what question links it to the main theme? 3 Is it clear for each paragraph how it is connected to the other paragraphs?

If you have made a text plan and the structure is still poor in certain places, two things may be at play: 1 You did not follow the outline there. 2 In hindsight, the outline was not completely accurate on that point. What to do?

203

IV  Writing the text

What could cause structural problems? If you have chosen to write without an outline or text plan, structural problems are most likely caused by intuitive writing. A text plan is designed to carefully outline how everything in your story is connected and what the function is of it all, before you start writing. Few people are capable of writing a well-structured text from scratch. They are referred to as Mozartians, because Mozart managed to get his compositions on paper in one single attempt and did not have to make any changes afterwards. But Mozart was exceptional in this respect.

III Interlude

STEP 2  Explaining your evaluation

II  Making a plan

The latter problem is especially common for introductions to theses or journal articles. Paragraph after paragraph is written, each paragraph having a new sub-theme. Around paragraph 3 or 4 the reader starts thinking ‘So what?’ In other words, where is this going? The coherence of content is unclear. The questions below are meant to check whether or not cohesion has been achieved thematically (question 1) and in terms of content (questions 2 and 3).

I  Setting the scene

been in the thermos for hours. All this time it has been raining. Although there is a thematic overlap (hours and all this time), it is not clear what the relationship is between those two statements. You can recognize this by the reaction of ‘so what?’ that such a lack of coherence evokes.

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

STEP 3  Improving the cohesion How you can improve cohesion depends on what caused the defects. If you have not adhered to the outline (explanation 1), you should check to see if that outline has a better cohesion than the text you wrote. If so, you can improve the structure based on your text outline by trying to reconnect the ‘loose elements’ to the theme. If explanation 2 applies, then the outline is faulty. Again, that can be the result of two things. The outline may exhibit shortcomings because during its creation you were forced to ignore isolated, more scenic details. That helps when you are making a text plan. But every now and then those details prove to be essential after all, but you will not notice until you have finished the entire text. That is why it is so important to write the first draft at a high pace. Should the story fail, the damage is limited (no more than one or two hours work). The outline may also be inadequate because it is not specific enough, perhaps because you are not experienced in making outlines yet, or because you are not particularly good at it, or you find it hard to practise the patience. This does not have to be disastrous, but it is an important thing to know about yourself. You just need the first draft to refine the schedule. In your planning, do allow for the extra time you need to improve the structure after writing the first draft. In any case, this is another reason to write the first draft quickly. In these cases, you have your work cut out for you – you have to redo part of the thinking. Reconsider the contribution each paragraph makes to the central question or the main idea of the section. That may prove to be a difficult puzzle because information can often be connected in various ways. You should actually return to the thinking phase and make new notes and outlines. Often it is helpful to talk to someone about your story; the logic behind it may become a lot clearer as you discuss it. If you completely fail to connect a paragraph to the rest, you are possibly dealing with some loose ends. You had best scrap them, even though they may be darlings.

10.3.2 Revising the hierarchy How can you check whether all the elements of your text are in the correct hierarchical relation to each other – the second aspect of structure? This question is very much related to the question of how you present the structure in the text, especially how you arrange the text. We will come back to this in greater detail in section 10.4, where we illustrate how to check the external structure. For your information, we have included the control questions here, although it would be better to perform the actual check through the analysis of the external structure.

204

10.3  Revising the structure

10.3.3 Revising the sequence

IV  Writing the text

205

III Interlude

The more argumentative excerpts in your text require choices governing the location of the claim or conclusion. Clarity is enhanced when a claim or conclusion is mentioned early in the piece; the reader then knows what direction the text is headed in. However, if that statement or conclusion is controversial, you run the risk of raising your reader’s opposition, causing him to stop and not finish reading your text. In that case you may try to take the reader through the argumentation step by step, seducing him as it were to embrace the conclusion. On the other hand, it is ill-advised to leave the reader in the dark for too long, because he may grow impatient (see also section 10.4.3 on the function of headings and titles). You could compromise by starting with a ‘soft’ version of the statement, and through the argumentation, conclude with a firmer statement. You could start with a phrase worded like this: it is worth investigating whether a different option could be considered in the debate

II  Making a plan

To finish the structure check, let us consider how you can evaluate if all the elements in the text are presented in the right sequence. This is another one of those questions that requires you to take the reader’s perspective. As far as the informative aspect is concerned, check if the reader always has all the information needed to follow the text. Check if you defined or explained all the terminology right away, for example. Also note if you supplied the necessary prior information at the right time and if you accidentally given the same information at different places in the text. This strategy is often referred to as ‘reverse outlining’: you reconstruct the outline of your text. The latter can be recognized by repetition of themes or questions. It can also be difficult for the reader if you give a large piece of information first and only later provide the assumptions this information is based on or which make that information relevant. For example, in a piece on problematic behaviour by elderly people suffering from dementia, you write two paragraphs on housing first and only later explain that you assume housing is a large influential factor on the degree of problematic behaviour. If you want to assess the sequence in informative text parts, you should pay special attention to: • the explanation or definition following the mentioning of the term or phenomenon that you are explaining or defining; • the topics not being scattered throughout the text; • the assumptions preceding the statements.

I  Setting the scene

Control questions for the hierarchy 1 Have you clearly distinguished between the more important and less important information? 2 Is it always clearly visible whether elements are independent (they can be joined) or if they are at different levels?

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

on nuclear energy. And end with: the Netherlands will benefit from three new nuclear power plants being built in the nearest possible term. Perhaps you are now thinking, But this is exactly the type of sentence that would make my readers curious and give them an incentive to continue reading. That may very well be possible. In that case you could decide to start your piece or paragraph with this contestable statement after all. You see that a sequential question is a matter of knowing your audience and making a well-informed decision based on that knowledge.

10.3.4 Summary Revising the structure on a global level is done using the analysis into themes and questions. You may find that the text contains loose elements, or that there is too little content cohesion between the paragraphs. It may also be the case that the sequence is not optimal. Possible repairs in this phase may therefore include: • Link everything to the main theme or the main idea. • Ensure that there is a connection between the individual paragraphs. • If you cannot manage easily, reconsider the structure and try to build a new outline to see if that helps link the parts with each other. • Sometimes it is better to plan and write sections anew. • Sometimes it is necessary to scrap text elements because they do not fit anywhere. • Put everything together that belongs together. Everything related to a single theme belongs together as do all the answers to a single question. • Give all the required information in advance. • Do not place contestable conclusions at the beginning unless you want to spark your readers’ curiosity. Soften or move them instead.

10.4

Revising external structure: between structure and style 10.4.1 Introduction In the previous sections we were mostly concerned with the question of whether the text had structure. In order to get a more accurate picture of whether the structure is clear, we need to focus on how the text is phrased; the wording. By doing that, we are slowly entering the domain of style. A useful tool to work on your style is the table containing the so-called style dimensions (Steehouder et al., 1992, pp. 170-200). That table mentions six aspects (dimensions) of style. One of the dimensions of writing style is the degree to which the structure of the text is made visible or explicit. We call that the external structure. The other five style dimensions will be dealt with in chapter 11.

206

10.4  Revising external structure: between structure and style

III Interlude

Is that always the case? No, it is not, and general rules for academic texts always have to be applied with caution and wisdom. So be careful of the various tools you can use to make the structure visible. Not all writing tasks are the same and that also goes for supervisors. Some essays do not benefit from the use of headings, but some do. Some supervisors don’t like to see bullet points, whereas others have no problem with them. Some readers hate explanations of the structure; others appreciate them. In other words, opinions on the use of these tools are divided. Always check what the criteria are in terms of the task, your supervisor’s preferences, and the journal guidelines (cf. also Identifying the Product, section 2.4).

II  Making a plan

External structure in academic texts The academic world has a distinct preference for text structures that are easy to follow. Academics are busy people who spend much of their time reading, so they have no time or patience to figure out what the storyline is. The story has to be easy to follow. What is more, academics simply want to be able to make a quick selection of what is worth reading and what is not. Therefore, it has to be clear from the start what parts the text consists of and where they can be found. This means that the structure has to be apparent.

I  Setting the scene

What is external structure? External structure comprises the same aspects as structure (cf. sections 9.2.1 and 10.2): the cohesion, hierarchy, and sequence of the elements in the text. These aspects can be clearly visible in a text (= expressed external structure) or hardly visible (= obscure external structure). If a text starts at the top left corner of the page and continues uninterruptedly to the bottom right, no structure will be visible; the structure looks like one giant block of text. You cannot make out if the story consists of elements (no hierarchy). This does not mean to say that there is not structure in it; we just cannot perceive it.

10.4.2 How can you make the structure visible?

Below you will find an overview of the tools that are at your disposal to make that structure more visible or less visible, according to your preference. Like the overviews in chapter 11, it is based on Leren Communiceren (Steehouder et al.,

207

IV  Writing the text

In order to make the structure visible to everyone, you need to start by getting a clear picture of the internal structure of your text. What elements does your text consist of? Where does one element start and where does the other end? How do the elements relate to each other in terms of hierarchy and content? If all is well, you checked this when you revised the structure.

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

1999). In the following sections you can read more about the what, how, and wherefore of these text characteristics. These are some ways to make the external structure more or less visible: More visible

Less visible

1 Layout

1 Mostly body text

2 Headings and sub-headings

2 No headings or sub-headings

3 One or more introductions

3 No introductions or summaries

4 Many explanations of the ­structure 4 No explanation of the structure 5 Topic sentences and key words

5 No topic sentences or key words

6 Optimum position

6 Central themes are hard to find

7 Many signal words and references

7 No signal words or references

8 Bullet points

8 Hidden lists

9 Structure is supported typographi- 9 Typography is dull or very messy cally 10 Use of charts, graphs and ­diagrams 10 Only text

10.4.3 Layout, headings and introductions By layout (1) is meant the way blank lines and tabs are used to illustrate how the text is organized. The meaning of headings (2) and introductions (3) is assumed. These three tools are used to make it clear to the reader as early as possible what the key message of the text is. The layout of the text (blank lines, tabs) illustrates what the individual elements are, headings often indicate the subject or theme, and introductions deal with the overall content of the text (theme and the most important questions or sub-themes). How does that work? The effect of these style devices can be explained using theories on the way people read, theories about how we process text. We can only understand texts (and other information) if we can link new information to existing knowledge, knowledge about semantics (knowing the language) but also knowledge about the world around us. A sentence like ‘Kandinsky hangs on the right’ only acquires meaning once you know that Kandinsky was a painter, that paintings are sometimes referred to by the name of the artist, paintings are often hung, and ‘on the right’ refers to the right hand side of a surface. All that knowledge of the world is stored in our brains, but those brains contain infinitely more knowledge. The knowledge that is required to understand this sentence, the so-called ‘prior knowledge’, needs to be activated. Words initiate this activation.

208

10.4  Revising external structure: between structure and style

II  Making a plan

Control questions The organization: 1 Do you distinguish between sections, text blocks, and paragraphs? 2 Are you using a consistent layout that clearly illustrates the organization? (Find a sample text if you have to, and check what combinations of blank lines, hard returns, and tabs are used there.) 3 Is the organization a logical one (compare: the hierarchy): • Have you put everything together that belongs together? • Does each paragraph deal with only one theme? • Does everything in that paragraph pertain to that theme?

I  Setting the scene

The first time we set eyes on a text, we don’t know what it is about. Our brains have to take all possibilities into consideration, and all lines to prior knowledge are open. That takes cognitive energy and gives us as reader a ‘wiggly’ feeling because we don’t know what to focus on or what the right framework for understanding the information is. That is why it is convenient for the reader (the ‘text processor’) to close a couple of windows in the brain early on and only keep open the lines that are relevant to the message at hand. Good headers in a text immediately give signals about which ‘frames of reference’ to activate and which to keep dormant.

The headings and the numbers: 4 Do the headings clearly indicate what the text is about? 5 Do the numbers represent the hierarchy? III Interlude

The introduction: 6 Does it indicate what the main theme of the text is? 7 Does it indicate in what sequence the various elements are discussed? 8 Does that match the actual organization of the text? The final control question may seem trivial, but in practice it proves very necessary. As simple as these little rules are, they are frequently violated. For example, a student wrote in her first draft:

209

IV  Writing the text

In this section, I would like to discuss the differences and similarities between separating children and adolescents and separating adults. I would like to examine the terms: where does the separation take place? under what circumstances? the length of the separation and the different occasions that are used to isolate or separate children, adolescents, and adults. As described above, there are no guidelines to be found that apply specifically to children in the Dutch context.

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

We did find that there are guidelines for separating in general, but these apply to adults (…)

The introduction (In this section … I would like to examine …) does not match the direct follow-up of the story. That concerns guidelines, after all. If you checked the introduction thoroughly, you would notice such an inconsistency and could come up with a solution. You either change the introduction to match the content or you change the content to match the introduction.

10.4.4 Explanation of the structure, topic sentences, best ­placement Explanation of the structure This is a passage (often the introduction), like this one: In this chapter we will discuss the three most important causes of the current crisis. For each of these causes, I will address the question how it contributed to the crisis and to what extent it is possible to reduce the negative effect of this factor.

In an explanation of the structure, the author explains how the text is organized. An important question is, Where should you give such an explanation? If you shower the reader with such sentences, he will probably grow impatient (‘just tell me what you have to say’). There are no specific guidelines for this, but a good rule of thumb is to give an explanation of the structure at least at the start of each chapter and each article, then after three or four pages and/ or at the start of a new section. Let yourself be inspired by texts that can serve as an example. Topic sentence The topic sentence is the sentence that the rest of the text is connected to, the sentence that links all the information in a piece of text to itself (the umbrella sentence). There are two types of topic sentences: 1 The sentence that summarizes the entire text (or excerpt or paragraph). 2 The sentence that is worked out in greater detail in the rest of the text (or paragraph), for example through illustration, explanation, description, or substantiation (cf. the overview of relational questions in section 9.2.2 and below in section 10.4.5). By clever use of such topic sentences, you can make it easier for the reader. That is because they work the same way as headings and introductions – they put the reader on the right track straight away, opening the door to the correct prior knowledge.

210

10.4  Revising external structure: between structure and style

II  Making a plan

His portrait, as depicted in the locket at Van Loon’s, shows a man whose face was characterized by a big, striking nose. The portrait was also described by Hans Nieuwenhuis, who gave five more descriptions, which were lost. The existence of that portrait is evidence of the fame that ­Schijnvoet attained in his lifetime.

I  Setting the scene

Given what the topic sentence does – it is similar to a heading – the beginning is the preferred place for a topic sentence. A text has many different beginnings, depending on the length and the division of the parts. The first page is a beginning, but each new chapter, each new section, and even each paragraph can be considered a new beginning that allows you to steer the reader’s attention by opening with your topic sentence. You should also remember that readers expect a topic sentence in those preferred places as well. You can observe this yourself. Imagine you are reading a text, and the paragraph starts with the following sentence: ‘Simon Schijnvoet (1652-1727) was a multitalented man’. What would you expect from the rest of the paragraph? The following was also said of Simon Schijnvoet:

Motivational problems at school are caused by poor fulfilment of basic needs. Stevens (…) mentions the following three psychological needs as the basis for motivational development: the need for competence, the need for a relation, and the need for autonomy. The need for competence is fulfilled when a pupil is allowed to demonstrate his abilities. Experiencing one’s own abilities brings satisfaction and is a basic ingredient for the

211

IV  Writing the text

If you want the reader to be able to follow your storyline easily, it is sensible to formulate a topic sentence in each paragraph and preferably lead the paragraph with it. In that way, the complete storyline is clearly visible from the first sentences of all the paragraphs. An example of a paragraph that starts with a strong topic sentence is:

III Interlude

Were you misled as a reader? Probably. Most readers, after the first sentence, expect the text to proceed with examples on Simon Schijnvoet’s talents. However, Simon Schijnvoet’s talents do not appear to be the topic of this paragraph; the first sentence of the paragraph is therefore not the topic sentence. What would make a good topic sentence then? All three sentences contain the word ‘portrait’, and Schijnvoet also plays a part in them. Those two themes can be combined, for example: A portrait of Simon Schijnvoet (1652-1727) exists. Or, depending on the context, a sentence like: A portrait of Simon Schijnvoet (1652-1727) was found in … Or: one of the portraits contains an image of Simon Schijnvoet (1652-1727). The other three sentences in this paragraph all connect well with that.

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

development of self-confidence. The need for relation is fulfilled when a pupil can be sure of the availability of adults who trust them. The need for autonomy is fulfilled when a pupil is involved in decisions and is invited to help think: the experience that they themselves carry the responsibility for the learning process.

When you read this text, it is almost impossible to lose track. The first two sentences indicate exactly what the rest is about; the three psychological needs are dealt with in the same sequence they were announced in. Completely clear. Perhaps you find this excerpt a little boring? Well, that can be the disadvantage of a very clearly expressed external structure. The section on the other style dimensions will come back to this aspect. Now an example of where it went wrong: The evaluation must contain four components: the process, the effect, the costs and profits, and the generalizability. 1 Product evaluation … 2 Process evaluation … 3 Cost-profit analysis … 4 Societal coverage …

The line is difficult to follow here because three out of four terms from the first sentence (which we expect acts more or less as a topic sentence) do not reappear when the details are worked out. Now we are left guessing. Will the four components be dealt with in the indicated sequence? You would expect that, but the first component (‘the process’) seems to fit the second item better (‘process evaluation’). In short, the reader still has some questions. The solution? In the topic sentence, use the same terminology in the same order as later on. Or the other way around. Control questions 1 Does your text/section start with an explanation of the structure? 2 Mark the topic sentence of each paragraph. Does each paragraph contain one (and only one) topic sentence? 3 Does the first sentence of each paragraph put the reader on the right track? Do you deliver on the expectations you raise in that first sentence? Do you indeed deal with that statement in more detail later?

212

10.4  Revising external structure: between structure and style

10.4.5 Signposting Signal words and phrases are tools to illustrate both the content structure and thematic structure within a text (see section 10.3.1, step 1). These signposts make explicit how elements in the text are connected in terms of the content. They can be directly linked to relational questions (section 9.2.2) and therefore also express those questions. In the table below you will find examples of these transitional phrases linked to the connections and relational questions.

I  Setting the scene

4 Do you cover the items in the same sequence as you announce them? Do you use the same terminology too?

Table 10.1 • Connections, relational questions and signposts

Cause – effect (causal)

What is the cause? What is the effect?

as a result (of this), consequently, as a consequence, therefore, thus, hence, accordingly, for this reason, so much (so) that

Means – end (final)

How? With which means? Wherefore? With what purpose?

In order to, so, in order to achieve that, to make an end to, to contribute to, which helps to, which will lead to, so … will be created, to end

Reason

Why? For what reason? What is the consequence?

therefore, it follows that, which leads to, we can infer from this that, because, after all, since, given that, based on, as a consequence of, following this …

Conditional

If/When? On what condition?

under those conditions, in those cases, if, when, then

Time

When? At what moment? In which period? Since when?

immediately, thereafter, soon, after a few hours, finally, then, later, previously, formerly, first (second, et cetera), next, and then

Space

Where? Where to?

Next to, over, alongside, above, further away, in the vicinity, there, exactly where, in that same place

Circumstance

How? In what circumstance?

under those circumstances, in that situation, thus, in that way

Concession

In spite of what?

however, nevertheless, but, notwithstanding, yet, although, despite, on the other hand, be that as it may

213

IV  Writing the text

Possible signposts

III Interlude

Relational questions

II  Making a plan

Type of connection

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

Manner

How? In what way?

In that way, thus

Qualification

How good/bad is it? The value of it is, this can be considered/ How can this be evaluated? evaluated/assessed as

Specification

What is an example of this? For example, so, such as, alike, take, in What is this an example of? other words, to illustrate, to give an example, to be more precise

Comparison

What is the similarity? What is the difference? In what ways are they (dis) similar?

also, as well, not unlike, the same as, compare, in the same way, this corresponds with, this resembles/looks like

Classification

Which class does it belong to? What components does it comprise?

This belongs to, this is part of, a subset of this, this consists of/comprises, this can be classified as, an aspect is

Identity

What are the features? What is it?

Characteristic is, has the following features/ characteristics, looks like, can be described as

Solution

What is the problem? How can the problem be solved?

The problem of that is, a disadvantage would be, this can be solved by, we could therefore

List

How many aspects/elements does it have?

and, first (of all), firstly, next, in addition, what is more, also, respectively, finally, in the first place, last but not least

Argumentation

To what conclusion does this lead? Which arguments can be presented in favour/ against?

therefore, so, in short, it follows that, this leads to the following conclusion, we can infer from this, in conclusion, after all, given, since, based on, that implies, the following arguments support this, my argumentation is as follows

Summary

How can this be summarized?

in brief, on the whole, summing up, to conclude, in conclusion, as I have shown, as I have said, hence

If a text contains few signal words, it is hard for the reader to see what the connection is, making it difficult to follow the story. An example. A psychology student describes the symptoms of a borderline disorder (the numbers have been added to the example to facilitate referencing):

214

10.4  Revising external structure: between structure and style

Reference words Reference words also clarify something about the connection, but only in the thematic sense. Whereas signal words indicate the connection between two or more assertions, references merely indicate that assertions deal with the same theme. A reference always refers to something else, reassuring the reader that the same theme is still at hand. In other words, references serve to illustrate thematic overlap between sentences.

II  Making a plan

This piece raises some questions about content connection. How, for example, is sentence 3 connected to sentences 1 and/or 2? Is it a new example of ‘difficulties with social interaction’? Is it a result of sentence 1 or 2? The same applies to the other sentences; although they probably all deal with people who suffer from borderline disorder, they are really all just loose sentences. Readers are left guessing what the connection is. In doing it like this, the author is running the risk of having his text misunderstood.

I  Setting the scene

Difficulties with social interaction (1) Borderliners find it difficult to initiate social contact. (2) This is partly caused by anxiety about abandonment. (3) Interpersonal relationships are troubled. (4) They don’t have any acquaintances either. (5) They are either friends or nothing at all. (6) They demonstrate little interest in others except when they benefit from this themselves, egotistical thinking. (7) They do not feel responsible for their actions.

Two examples of instances in which the author failed to check the references:

2 There are audiences who go to shows frequently and audiences who go only every now and then, people who spend little on an evening and people who spend a lot. It is the marketing department’s job to persuade those people to go to a show more often or to see a different show for once.

215

IV  Writing the text

In this excerpt, ‘that’ is an unclear reference word. Normally, it refers to the final part of the previous sentence or to the entire previous sentence. In this case, both options are questionable; the underrepresentation of girls does not appear to be an example of prejudices that are related to social class, nor to the entire group of gender, race, and social class combined.

III Interlude

1 Prejudices about intellectual giftedness do not exclusively relate to the phenomenon itself; they may also relate to gender (Rogers, 1993; Freeman, 1995), race (German, 1993), or social class (Wallace & Adams, 1993). The underrepresentation of girls in studies and programmes for the intellectually gifted is an example of that.

10  The first revision: content, structure, and external structure

Which people? The first group or the second? Control questions 1 Have you made the connections between all the sentences and paragraphs explicit using signposts? 2 Is there thematic overlap between all the consecutive sentences? 3 In all the references, does the previous sentence mention the term that is referred to? Is the reference unambiguous to avoid misunderstanding?

10.4.6 Bullet lists, typographic support, and charts, graphs and ­diagrams There is little consensus in the academic world about the use of those three tools for clearly advertising the external structure. Differences of opinion exist not only across the disciplines but often also within the same field. Sometimes it depends on the type of text you are writing. A few examples. Itemized lists (using numbers or bullets) are few and far between in legal studies. Typographic support of the structure – for example, underlining or italicizing – is not appreciated by the entire readership. Charts, graphs and diagrams are very common in the natural and social sciences but may be seen as unconventional in the humanities. To make a choice in this respect, you should check texts from your field and/or ask your professor or supervisor what the conventions are. Control questions 1 What are the conventions on typography and layout for your writing task? 2 Does your text comply with those requirements?

10.4.7 Summary If you want to make the external structure explicit so the storyline is easy to follow, do the following: • Find out what the requirements are for the task and what your professor’s preferences are. • Distinguish between sections, paragraphs, and text blocks by using blank lines or tabs. • Use consistent layout for that organization. • Check if everything in one paragraph deals with a single theme. • Put everything together that belongs to a theme. • Ensure that the promise in the title is delivered on in the content. • Ensure that the numbers you use match the hierarchy of the text parts. • Ensure that the introduction exactly announces what is actually in the text.

216

10.5  Finding co-readers

10.5

I  Setting the scene

• In your introduction, ensure that you present the topics in the same order as you deal with them in the text. • Bear in mind that readers expect the first sentence to be a topic sentence and check that you are not confusing your readers. • Add a signal word to every sentence (unless the connection is evident and unambiguous for all readers). • To every sentence, add a repetition of the theme from the previous sentence or a reference to it.

Finding co-readers

III Interlude

One more tip: check for typos. They distract and often cause irritation in your readers. That does not improve the feedback.

II  Making a plan

Once you have edited the content and structure of the text and fixed the external structure, it would be a good time to have someone else read your text even though you have not completely revised the style yet. An involved reader should be able to tell you if your story is easy to follow and is convincing. Next, you could do a second revision of the external structure if required. That would ensure the other style revisions are done on a text that is well constructed and does not have to be rebuilt. The co-reader may be a peer, a friend, an acquaintance, a writing coach (tutor), or your own professor/supervisor. Do instruct them that the style still needs to be revised and that their main concern should be that the story is clear and convincing. You could, for example, have the critical co-reader answer your own control questions. Click ‘Examples’ on the website for an example of a request to a co-reader, with questions you could have them look at (the document Question for co-readers). Also see chapter 8 on Getting Feedback.

IV  Writing the text

217

11

The second revision: style and finishing

11.1 What is style? 11.1.1 Introduction 11.1.2 Precision 11.1.3 Complexity 11.1.4 Information density 11.1.5 Attractiveness/liveliness 11.1.6 Distance

11.2 Setting the norm for your own text

11.3 Evaluating and improving the style 11.3.1 Introduction 11.3.2 Precision 11.3.3 Complexity 11.3.4 Information density 11.3.5 Attractiveness/liveliness 11.3.6 Distance 11.3.7 And, sometimes, everything comes together

11.4 General rewriting tips

11.5 The finishing touches 11.5.1 Language use 11.5.2 Useful websites for academic writing in English 11.5.3 Layout 11.5.4 Literature references and titles 11.5.5 Final elements

218



The second revision: style and finishing

11.1

What is style?

I  Setting the scene

11

Style dimensions A clever instrument to work on your style is the so-called style dimensions table (Steehouder et al., 1992, pp. 170-206). The table contains six aspects (dimensions) of style. The first, external structure, has been extensively dealt with in section 10.4. You can determine the value of each dimension and make a priority list. Below, you will find the table, a copy of which is also on the website (Style dimentsion table under ‘Forms’), so you can complete it for yourself.

III Interlude

Style can be described as the way in which a message is worded in a text. Most people have, over the course of time, adopted a certain writing style, but each genre, each type of reader, and each text purpose may require adaptations of your personal style. That is why it is sensible to contemplate the question of what style your text should have. In doing so, you define the norm to assess on what points the style of your text matches the requirements set by your professor or supervisor, and on what points the style differs. That helps to modify the style in the desired direction. For all these activities, it is useful to know more about the elements of writing style in general and academic style in particular.

II  Making a plan

11.1.1 Introduction

IV  Writing the text

219

11  The second revision: style and finishing

Table 11.1 • Style dimension table

Style dimension

Score

Priority (Top-6)

External structure

¨ ¨ clearly visible

¨ ¨ ¨ ↔ obscure

Precision

¨ ¨ vague

¨ ¨ ¨ ↔ exact

Complexity

¨ ¨ simple

¨ ¨ ¨ ↔ complex

Information density

¨ ¨ elaborate

¨ ¨ ¨ ↔ concise

Attractiveness/liveliness

¨ ¨ lively

¨ ¨ ¨ ↔ dry

Distance

¨ ¨ formal

¨ ¨ ¨ ↔ informal

In the score column, there is a scale for each style dimension. Indicate the score you believe your text should have. In the column on the right, indicate how important each style dimension is compared to the other dimensions. This is important because the dimensions sometimes clash and you want to establish which of those dimensions is the most important. For example, if you are writing a very concise text (few words, much information), you probably won’t have the space to add examples that could enliven your story (make it more attractive). You would have to choose what receives the higher priority, information density or liveliness. The style table can be used in different ways in a writing process. It can be used to describe: • Which style features your text should have in your opinion (style plan). • Which style features your text actually has (style description). You can ask a co-reader to do this, for example a fellow student, a writing tutor, or a professor. In the priority column you can note the style dimension that is predominant. • What style your supervisor expects you to use (supervisor’s style requirements). Academia: differences in taste and consensus Over time, this table has been completed by countless writers and supervisors who participated in courses and workshops on academic writing or its

220

11.1  What is style?

II  Making a plan

Later on in this section, the style dimensions are explained. What does each style dimension comprise, and what style preferences are there in the academic world? As mentioned before, the style dimensions are not completely isolated. Some clash, where others reinforce one another. How that works is covered in the sub-sections containing the term ‘overlap’.

I  Setting the scene

supervision. The question always was, What should the style of the academic text be? The findings were much alike, whether the table was completed by BA/MA students, PhD students, or supervisors. As a teaser to the more elaborate explanation that will follow, we have included the main findings in brief: • In general, it is expected that the texts be precise and that their external structure be easily recognizable. All respondents find those dimensions should have the highest priority. • The texts should not be too complex or too elaborate. • The group does not agree on how attractive and formal the text should be. These dimensions display the biggest differences, both in score and in priority.

All this information is meant to prepare you for the style revision. More technical details on how to change that style are dealt with in section 11.3 on the actual evaluation, explanation, and improvement of your text.

11.1.2 Precision

Precision in academic texts Precision is the second dimension that has achieved strong consensus within the academic community. People agree that it is very important that a text is very carefully formulated; vagueness has no place in an academic text (which unfortunately does not mean that it does not occur).

221

IV  Writing the text

Precision is the extent to which the writer specifically words the content. Specifically means that the reader is able to imagine in detail what the writer intended and that there is no room for different interpretations. Take for example the following sentence: certain forms of hooliganism may cause serious problems. A critical reader will wonder: which forms of hooliganism? What type of hooligans? How big is the risk that this is possible? How serious? Which problems? In the sample sentence, the following words are too vague or too general: certain, hooliganism, may, serious, and problems.

III Interlude

We have already explained the external structure in section 10.4, so this chapter will continue with the second style dimension: precision.

11  The second revision: style and finishing

Why do academics want the wording to be very precise? We need to go back to a previous question for that, Why do scientists write? The most important reason is that we need each other (cf. section 2.1.2). A single scientist is only able to cover a very small part of his or her academic field. In order to arrive at useful knowledge, we build on the research of others. That means scientists must be able to evaluate how strong that basis, that foundation, is before they can build on it. That is the reason why specificity is so important in academic texts. A second reason is that research must be reproducible. A researcher must be able to do your research again to check if the results are the same. That is why we need an exact description of what the research entailed and how it is carried out. Overlap with other style dimensions Precision is much like external structure in the sense of specific linkage. If the cohesion is not visible (obscure external structure), it can be vague to readers. This can be illustrated by the following excerpt. (1) In the 1970s, sports sponsorship starts developing rapidly. (2) This has several causes. (3) The number of sportsmen grows explosively. (4) Organized sport requires external financial support.

Sentences 1 and 2 clarify that this excerpt is about the causes of the rapid development of sports sponsorship in the 1970s. Sentence 3 will then be one of those causes, but there is not explicit reference to the theme, and the reader may wonder in what way explosive growth in the number of sportsmen leads to growth of sponsorship. You could just as well argue that more sportsmen should lead to more membership fees and therefore less need for extra financing. You could then wonder if sentence 4 contains another cause, or if we are dealing with a result of sentence 3. In short, the moment the writer fails to clarify this aspect of the internal structure (cohesion), we are confronted with vague linkage and limited precision.

11.1.3 Complexity The term complexity speaks for itself; this dimension refers to the question of whether the style is complex or simple. We differentiate between complexity at word level and at sentence level – complex words and complex sentences. Complexity in academic texts The complexity dimension contains an academic paradox. On the one hand, the same preferences apply as for external structure: academics have little time

222

11.1  What is style?

II  Making a plan

Overlap with other style dimensions We have illustrated the connection between complexity and external structure. The more explicit the latter, the simpler the text becomes. The similarities with precision are a little more complicated, though. Jargon is often considered difficult, but those terms often have a precisely defined meaning for peers. Using terminology makes a text more difficult but at the same time more specific. On the other hand, abstract difficult words tend to be vague. Think of words like competence, dimension, indication, adequate, or constellation that don’t always convey what they exactly mean or contribute.

I  Setting the scene

and are eager to get to the root of the story as quickly as possible. In that sense, a text that is written in simple language is preferred. On the other hand, we have the image of the author or researcher. In practice, many academic readers prove sensitive to the thought, ‘If your writing is simple, you must be simple yourself’. At the same time, there is agreement on the idea that nothing is more difficult than describing complex content in simple words – ‘Easy reading is damn hard writing’. In short, this dimension calls for seeking a happy medium. The style should be simple enough that readers do not trip over sentences and words – nothing is more irritating than having to reread each sentence over and over again – but some degree of erudition (academic literacy) can leave a good impression.

11.1.4 Information density

Overlap with other style dimensions There is a strong connection between information density and external structure. All the information on the structure of a text (meta-communication) is

223

IV  Writing the text

Information density in academic texts Given that time must be spent economically, most academics prefer concise texts. Do bear in mind the following remarks.

III Interlude

Information density refers to the ratio between the number of words and the amount of information. When a text contains a lot of information in relatively few words, the information density is high. Other words to describe this characteristic are compendious, concise, and to the point. When a text consists of many words but doesn’t contain a lot of information, we call it over-long. Other terms include lengthy, long-winded, wordy, or verbose. Here is an example of a somewhat over-long sentence: ‘De Leeuw’s theory offers the possibility to describe a management situation because he provides terms that allow the description of the operation of an organization.’ A more concise alternative is for example: ‘De Leeuw’s theory contains terms that can be used to describe a management situation in an organization.’

11  The second revision: style and finishing

superfluous, strictly speaking. Sentences such as ‘I will deal with … respectively’ do not add any information to the rest of the text – after all, readers can see for themselves that you are dealing with those points. Such sentences therefore make the text less concise but easier to follow! Summaries and many topic sentences for example do not add to the content but only serve to facilitate reading. Too high a degree of conciseness can therefore jeopardize the readability if the structure is insufficiently clear as a result of it. Concise texts may also be more difficult because of their lack of repetition – you are forced to comprehend everything in a single attempt. Finally, the use of abstract terminology instead of concrete descriptions makes a text more concise but a lot less specific. This is where information density and precision affect each other.

11.1.5 Attractiveness/liveliness The dimension attractiveness concerns mainly the extent to which the text style draws the reader to the text. The author can do this by bringing the story to life for the reader; hence the equivalent of liveliness for attractiveness. The spectrum reaches from lively at one end to boring and dry at the other. Attractiveness in academic texts This style dimension is probably the one that stimulates the most debate. There is much dispute within the academic world about the question how attractive an academic text can or should be. In section 2.4 we illustrated this by referring to the discussion between professors Mathijsen and Lagendijk. In general, a high degree of liveliness is applauded in texts concerning the humanities (literature, philosophy) and in other narrative papers describing qualitative research (e.g. cultural anthropology). Some more words of warning. Always be prepared for huge differences between one supervisor and the next. Be aware that liveliness is usually considered an extra and will not be your professor’s top priority. You should therefore spend more time on content, structure, and dimensions such as exactness. And finally, attractive writing is something of an art. If you don’t have extensive writing experience and/or writing does not come easily to you, you are perhaps better off keeping your texts plain. They will still be effective. Overlap with other style dimensions All style dimensions may affect the attractiveness of the text. What it boils down to is, that by making an extreme choice in one of the other dimensions, you risk creating a text that is too dry.

224

11.1  What is style?

What is meant is distance that the writer creates between himself and the reader. The range in this spectrum is from formal to informal, from impersonal to personal, from writing language to colloquial (speaking) language. The distance increases when writer and reader are less involved with each other as people. When the author reveals something of himself, the reader is allowed to come closer. When you address the reader, you are closing the gap. When both reader and writer are invisible as people, the distance is vast.

225

IV  Writing the text

Overlap with other style dimensions A distant, formal style is readily associated with policy documents (gobbledygook) and precision is usually the first victim. Phrases such as ‘In this respect, the possibilities should be examined more closely’ are impersonal but – partly as a consequence – also vague. Who is to examine which possibilities more closely in what respect? The message is, handle this technique with care in academic texts where precision is on the line.

III Interlude

Distance in academic texts What is interesting about distance is that this dimension generally scores very low on the priority scale, yet it often incites fierce debate in the academic world. Some people abhor the use of ‘I’ and ‘we’ in written text, whereas others are completely comfortable with it because it was after all ‘I’ and ‘we’ who carried out the research and are reporting on it. Many academics get worked up about words and phrases that veer towards colloquialism. However, opinions vary on this matter, because the use of ‘fancy’ words is not always well received either; it can be perceived as posh. Some disciplinary variation surrounds this dimension, though. Legal scholars, for example, tend to write more formally than others.

II  Making a plan

11.1.6 Distance

I  Setting the scene

A very explicit external structure may make your text boring; ‘all this firstly, secondly, thirdly …’. We saw this in the text on motivational problems in section 10.4.4. But texts without external structure may lull your reader to sleep as well. Vague texts (precision) soon dry up because readers are finding it hard to form a picture of the story; they cannot relate. Texts with many specific details can also be boring. Very simple texts (complexity) can become boring if, for example, the sentences are simple, short, and always constructed in the same way. Very complex texts on the other hand are tough. The same applies to information density: a text with many superfluous words is easily perceived as tedious and formal, but concise texts can also become stiff. Examples may not add any new information, but they do liven up the text. If, in the course of your writing assignment, a certain dimension requires an extreme choice, it may prove hard to write a lively text. You will then have to pay special attention to attractiveness.

11  The second revision: style and finishing

Distant language may often be boring, but it does not have to be. Consider the work of Oscar Wilde and, among academics, Steven Pinker or Simon Schama. Formal style does tend to be more difficult to produce than informal style.

11.2

Setting the norm for your own text In order to evaluate the style of your own text, you have to think about what that style should be like in the first place. How would you like to score on each style dimension and where do your priorities lie? It may be sensible to choose an expressly external structure and a very precise style. These two dimensions often receive the highest priority. Generally, a neither too difficult nor too simple style is required, and the text may lean towards the concise. The preferred distance and attractiveness are hard to predict. This can be illustrated as follows (where √ indicates the desired score): Table 11.2 • Completed style dimension table

Style dimension

Score

Priority (Top-6)

External structure

¨ þ ¨ ¨ ¨ clearly visible obscure

2

Precision

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ þ vague exact

1

Complexity

¨ ¨ þ ¨ ¨ simple complex

Information density

¨ ¨ ¨ þ ¨ elaborate concise

Attractiveness/liveliness

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ lively

Distance

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ formal informal

¨ dry

Note: this is the preferred table for the average academic text. A journalist, author of manuals, or someone who writes a marketing brochure will come to a completely different score. That is what is so great about such a table: you can complete it for all the future texts you write and consider what the appropriate style is for each of them. However, remember that the style may deviate from this table, even for academic texts. What is more, we have left some cells open because their content may vary considerably.

226

11.3  Evaluating and improving the style

III Interlude

11.3

II  Making a plan

If you find it hard to make a choice given all the variables, you could look for sample texts to check which style is used there. Also, try to find out what your professor’s or supervisor’s preference is. Perhaps you could submit your style plan to your professor; it could prove a useful tool to create a more meaningful discussion with your supervisor or co-author.

I  Setting the scene

How exactly you complete the table depends on the text genre, the text part, your professor/supervisor/co-author’s preference, and your own preference. To give you an idea, we have included some examples of variations on the theme ‘academic style’: • An essay is an obscure text genre, as you will have gathered from section 2.1.1, but your writing may require the use of a lively style and a toning down of the external structure (e.g. no headings). This deviates from the general description. • In your introduction it may be important to grasp the reader’s attention straight away. That would warrant a lively style. • In some theoretical chapters, the connection between the excerpts of literature is sometimes scarcely discernible. In those cases, the external structure needs some extra attention. • A methods or results section should be very exact, if nothing else. Attractiveness is not your top priority here. • Some professors like extremely concise texts (‘rather a fifteen-page thesis than a fifty-page one’). You can achieve that in part by meticulously pruning your content, but beware of being too long-winded stylistically as well. • And then there is you. What do you consider an agreeable style? Have you ever paid attention to that question? When you come across a text that you find to be an agreeable read or one that you detest, it may be interesting to find out if the style is a factor there. Would you be able to describe it in terms of the style dimensions? Perhaps you like belles-lettres or maybe you can’t stand it. You may detest informal style or you may love it. Good to give it some thought once you start writing yourself.

Evaluating and improving the style

Time to return to your own text. At this point, that will probably be the second version (or the third, or the umpteenth) in which you have improved the content, the structure, and the external structure. How can you improve the style of the text with regard to the other dimensions? This section mainly concerns precision because it is so important in academic texts. On top of that, many writers struggle with precision, not just Bachelor

227

IV  Writing the text

11.3.1 Introduction

11  The second revision: style and finishing

and Master students but also PhD students and other academic writers. In order to write very precisely, you need to be able to view your own texts very critically, as you will see later on. In the academic world, the other dimensions are considered much less important than external structure and precision. They allow for more variation too. A student will seldom receive the feedback that he should write more vaguely, but some students are told to be more concise whereas others are told the opposite; some should make their text more complex and others simpler; some more formal or dry; others more informal or lively. These style dimensions are discussed briefly below. More information and rewriting samples can be found on the website (Examples information density, under ‘Examples’). A short word of caution: we have included examples of texts that exhibit flaws and which therefore illustrate what for example is too vague, too long-winded. That may seem like criticizing those authors, but that is not how it should be perceived – all first versions contain large style deficiencies. That is a direct result of the entire procedure of extensive planning (see section 9.2) and writing uninterruptedly at a steady pace (see section 9.3). The whole point of that strategy is to reach a first version quickly and elaborately revise the style later. The challenge may not lie in becoming a great writer but in becoming a good editor of your own work. The advantage to producing the first version quickly is that you will hopefully have lots of time left for revision.

11.3.2 Precision Academic texts have to be very precise because scientists must be able to reproduce the research and assess if the findings are sufficiently well-founded to be built on. How can you meet that requirement? With every word you write, you should think to yourself, What does it mean exactly? Readers will do that too, you see; reading is trying to grasp what the writer is telling you. As soon as there is a risk that the reader will fail to understand what a sentence means or will come up with a different interpretation than the one you had in mind, you need to look for more specific words and phrases. Specific wording requires alertness which you can develop by running through all the words in your text very consciously a couple of times. This exercise is especially worth the effort in fragments where you discuss work by others; summaries of literature easily become abstract and general. The examples below, taken from students’ texts, illustrate this.

228

11.3  Evaluating and improving the style

Closely related to this is the existence of prejudices, stereotypes, and myths regarding intellectual giftedness (Freeman, 1985; George, 1992) that may stand in the way of a good relationship. De Hoop and Janson (1993) indicated that cultural aspects in both society in general and in school in particular, behavioural aspects of parents, and developmental aspects in children may inhibit proper support of gifted pupils.

These groups of gathering youngsters mostly seek out certain locations in the neighbourhood, depending on the season, among other things. Groups of youngsters regularly move to other places.

229

IV  Writing the text

The following two sentences contain many ‘alarm words’ for vagueness. If you use these words, bells should start to go off when you reread your text.

III Interlude

In short, this fragment uses so many abstract (vague) terms that we are unable to form a picture of what is happening with those relationships and support. Moreover, so many big words were used that the claims are virtually irrefutable. That is not uncommon in academic texts; you will find sentences like ‘the world is changing fast and therefore communication has become increasingly important’. Or ‘the environment has a pronounced effect on our lives’. These sentences are home to an entire universe of interpretation options, and as a result they have in effect become meaningless. Beware of overgeneralization.

II  Making a plan

It is not easy to figure out what this piece of text means. The fragment mainly raises questions instead: • Prejudices, stereotypes, and myths: are these different things? What do they mean? • May: does that mean they may not? • Stand in the way of a good relationship: a good relationship with whom? In what way do those prejudices stand in the way, and do all three prejudices do that in the same way? • Cultural aspects: what are they? Very broad term. • Society in general: another very broad term. • Behavioural aspects: what are these? What aspects from what behaviour? • Developmental aspects: what are these? What aspects from what development? • Inhibit proper support: how does that work?

I  Setting the scene

First, let’s look at an example of vagueness in a summary of another person’s work. In this case, the explanation was that the student had randomly cut and pasted fragments from the literature without giving it too much thought – without actually transforming knowledge.

11  The second revision: style and finishing

The alarm words are: • Mostly: not always? • Certain: which? • Among other things: what other things? • Depending on the season: in what way does the specific location depend on any particular season? • Regularly: how often is that? • Other places: where? In addition, we might wonder what exactly the connection is between sentence 1 and sentence 2. It is unclear what the writer means. Does he only want to say that ‘youngsters are roaming about the neighbourhood’? In that case, the information density dimension is at play too. It is not unusual to see texts becoming more elaborate when the writer does not yet have a clear image of what he wants to say. A third example to expand a little on the lexicon of vague terms: In the telematic learning environment, oral and non-verbal communication are generally not possible. You initially lose all kinds of things that the teacher tends to do using these channels. Some messages are probably possible in a written format, but you will lose a number of messages, especially the supporting ones.

The questions that arise here include: • Generally: when is that the case (and when isn’t it)? • All kinds of things: what are they? • Initially: do you not lose them at a later stage? • Some: which? • Probably: how big is that chance, and why do you think that is probable? • A number: how many? And which ones? • Especially: to what extent? Apart from being a collection of vague words, inconsistent terminology is also a factor in the precision dimension. If you use many different terms to refer to the same thing, the reader cannot be certain that you mean the same thing every time. You might just be using terms with different meanings. In the example below, the words in bold appear to refer to the same concept, but we cannot be sure: Directly connected to the existing curriculum in the classroom are the education strategies and education methods of the teacher. Butler-Por indicated in her work on underperformance (1987, 1993 a & b), that edu-

230

11.3  Evaluating and improving the style

If you find those words in a text, you should take action; revise the text for this dimension. The solution closest at hand is to make the abstract terms more concrete: fill in the who, what, where, how, how much, how big a chance, in which cases, et cetera. If you cannot manage, then the same rule applies as with the claims you are unable to support: get rid of them. Science has no room for vague language.

III Interlude

Summarizing The following text features lead to vague style and are therefore points worth checking for precision: • abstract terms such as aspects, dimensions; • vague words like possibly, may, perhaps; • unclear expressions like play a part; • big words like society, culture; • unspecified quantities like some, certain, often; • empty words and phrases like initially; • unclear references: always check words like these, those, in that sense (see also section 10.4.5).

II  Making a plan

In this case there will probably be different words because there are several authors referred to and they use different words. Especially text fragments containing literature references are prone to the use of inconsistent terminology. Carefully check how those terms relate to each other (see section 6.5 and 7.5.2), and explain to the reader what the similarities and differences are.

I  Setting the scene

cation styles may bring on boredom and frustration, and can turn out to have a demotivating effect. Children who are creative and have a divergent learning and thinking style find it hard to deal with teachers who emphasize convergent thinking and learning processes. Freeman (1993) indicated that a flexible educational approach is essential to pupils’ competence. (…) Besides disappointment, an underchallenging curriculum and poorly differentiated education and learning strategies lead to a …

IV  Writing the text

231

11  The second revision: style and finishing

11.3.3 Complexity Making the style more complex

Making the style simpler

•• Joining short sentences to make ­longer ones.

•• Cutting up long sentences into two or more sentences.

•• Making complicated sentences: frontloading and discontinuous constructions.

•• Simplifying complex sentences.

•• Replacing simple words with ­difficult words.

•• Replacing difficult words with ­simple words.

•• Extensive use of jargon.

•• Replacing jargon with common words.

•• Using many old-fashioned words (formal).

•• Replacing old-fashioned terms with modern or everyday words.

•• Ensuring the structure is difficult to discern.

•• Making the structure clearly visible.

•• Writing vaguely.

•• Writing clearly.

We need to make a comment about the first item though. Short sentences do not always simplify a text. Research into the comprehensibility of schoolbooks revealed that pupils find these books hard, although the sentence length in those books is extremely restricted and difficult words are used sparingly. What made the texts hard to read was the fact that little or no linkage was expressed between the sentences. They are, in fact, texts consisting of short, unconnected sentences. Readers are unable to interpret information that way. It appears that simple language is not that simple after all. Did you find the third sentence in the above paragraph a little long? Then you can split it. The original sentence: Research into the comprehensibility of schoolbooks revealed that pupils find these books hard, although the sentence length in those books is extremely restricted and difficult words are used sparingly.

would then become something like this: Research has been done into the comprehensibility of schoolbooks. It revealed that pupils find these books hard. That is remarkable given that the sentence length in those books is extremely restricted and difficult words are used sparingly.

232

11.3  Evaluating and improving the style

That is surprising, because the sentences in those books are short, and the words are simple.

Or:

I  Setting the scene

Would you like to make that last sentence even simpler (without the uncommon words remarkable, extremely restricted, and sparingly)?

That is unexpected because the sentences are short. There aren’t any difficult words in them either.

Research has been done into the comprehensibility of schoolbooks, and it revealed that pupils find these books hard, which is remarkable given that the sentence length in those books is extremely restricted and difficult words are used sparingly.

Problems of social isolation, rejection by peers, loneliness and estrangement, which may torment highly gifted children does not stem from their talent, but is a result of society’s reaction to them.

III Interlude

Sentences get harder when writers break up their clauses by inserting information before the clause has come to an end. Below are two examples of what we mean. You should be careful with such difficult sentences. After all, they are not only difficult for the reader, but also for the writer, as becomes apparent from the examples below, taken from students’ texts. The mistakes in sentence construction are given in bold.

II  Making a plan

Long sentences are not by definition complex. If a long sentence consists of a sequence of short clauses that can simply be read one after the other, there is no problem. We could, for example, paste the short sentences above together again without creating a particularly complicated sentence:

Having been in a twenty-three-year childless marriage, Anna of Austria, wife of Louis XIII, promised to God that, should she become pregnant, to have a church built in His honour.

233

IV  Writing the text

How do you solve that? In these cases, what went wrong is that two sentence parts that actually belong together have been separated by putting all kinds of words between them (this is a so-called discontinuous construction). The consequence is that you lose the overview of the sentence. The solution is to put the words back together that belong together. Usually, this will mean that you can cut the sentence up in two (or even three) parts, for example:

11  The second revision: style and finishing

Highly gifted children may be tormented by (problems of) social isolation, rejection by peers, loneliness, and estrangement. These problems do not stem from their talent, but are the result of society’s reaction to them. Having been in a twenty-three-year childless marriage, Anna of Austria, wife of Louis XIII, made a promise to God. Should she become pregnant, she would have a church built in His honour.

You can make style easier or more difficult at word level too. Hastily written first versions are usually rather simple in that respect. That means you need to check if you can make some overly simple wordings a little more difficult. For example, you wrote: pretend the victim does not exist at all. You could make that slightly more complex: completely ignore the victim. At word level, complexity is strongly linked to distance, or in other words the difference between colloquial language (simple words) and written language (more difficult words). Some writers may find it useful to simplify their style at word level. An example: However, since the 1970s, an increasing dominance of the grass species Brachypodium pinnatum has been observed.

This can be simplified, for example: Since the 1970s, grass species Brachypodium pinnatum has become more dominant.

On the Internet you can find synonym dictionaries and word lists to help you get inspired when you want to simplify or complicate your writing. More examples can be found on the website (Examples complexity, under ‘Examples’).

11.3.4 Information density

234

Making the style more elaborate

Making the style more concise

•• Adding paraphrases, examples, and comparisons.

•• Scrapping paraphrases, examples, and comparisons.

•• Starting sentence with front­loading.

•• Avoiding frontloading.

•• Repeating parts.

•• Deleting repetition.

•• Adding platitudes.

•• Deleting platitudes.

•• Turning verbs into nouns.

•• Turning nouns back into verbs.

•• Using prepositional phrases.

•• Using prepositions.

11.3  Evaluating and improving the style

•• Making mental leaps.

•• Making structure visible in words.

•• Deleting structural markers and summarizing sentences.

•• Adding archaic words and phrases.

•• Replacing archaic words and phrases with contemporary or common alternatives.

Wordy use of language is very common in students’ texts. That does not need to be a problem, but you should think about whether you want to bother your readers with superfluous words.

III Interlude

Authors themselves often have difficulty discovering their own mental leaps. The steps you take in your line of argument are often automatic and subconscious. Usually you need your readers to help you become aware of a writing style that is too concise; they will presumably have trouble following your text. What you can do is check continuously that one sentence automatically follows from the other. As you can see from the choice of words, mental leaps also involve content (selection) and structure (connection between sentences). Another piece of advice to prevent mental leaps was already given in earlier chapters: keep logs and don’t wait too long with writing draft versions. That way you will still be able to retrace the line of reasoning at the end of your research.

II  Making a plan

Information density is a style dimension that often reflects a natural urge in writing; some people write concisely, others are more wordy. Both styles have their own risks. Writing concisely is in itself positive because no reading time is lost, but it can also render the text incomprehensible. There may be mental leaps, or a lack of repetition, or the reader may have expected some explanation on the structure because he fails to realize how the text is organized. The latter has been dealt with as an important dilemma with external structure and information density.

I  Setting the scene

•• Making connections explicit.

An example of repetition:

This can be shortened, like this: In contrast, rural areas in Africa are characterized by communal land­ ownership.

235

IV  Writing the text

In contrast, a general feature of rural areas in Africa is that they are characterized by communal landownership.

11  The second revision: style and finishing

Or: In contrast, communal landownership is a feature (or is a characteristic) of rural areas in Africa.

Here is an example of superfluous words with frontloading (in the second sentence): One grandmother, for example, believes that her granddaughter should not date migrants. The idea behind this has to do with the fact that grandmother thinks that …

This can be shortened, like this: One grandmother, for example, believes that her granddaughter should not date migrants, because she thinks that …

An easy way to make the text more concise is to replace prepositional phrases (e.g. with regard to, in connection with) with prepositions such as for or about. Prepositional chains also often lead to superfluous words. This is usually because nominalization is at work – a noun has been formed from a verb. For example, to execute – the execution; to study – the study; to explain – the explanation. These nominalizations are almost always followed by a preposition: perform the task – the performance of the task; investigate the phenomenon – the investigation of the phenomenon; to explain the crisis – the explanation of the crisis. … in which the court should be given the necessary freedom in the assessment if the costs of an alternative destination for the area in question within reason are eligible for compensation.

This can be done with fewer prepositions: … where the court should be given the necessary freedom to assess if there are reasonable grounds to compensate the costs of an alternative destination for the area in question.

More examples can be found on the website (Examples information density, under ‘Examples’).

236

11.3  Evaluating and improving the style

11.3.5 Attractiveness/liveliness Making the style drier

•• Using different sentence types.

•• Using only completely assertive ­sentences.

•• Splitting and joining sentences to vary sentence length.

•• Making consistently long or short sentences.

•• Varying sentence structure.

•• Using standard structure for all ­sentences.

•• Varying choice of words.

•• Using the same words consistently.

•• Adding comparisons, metaphors, and examples.

•• Deleting comparisons, metaphors, and examples.

II  Making a plan

In short, lively writing means: • write with variation. Vary the words, sentence length, and sentence structure; • bring your story to life. Write concretely, give examples, and write about people.

I  Setting the scene

Making the style more lively

A text becomes dry when all the sentences are equally long, the same words are repeated over and over, all sentences are structured the same way, and there is no soul in it.

237

IV  Writing the text

The miscommunication arises because an incorrect interpretation is assigned to the behaviour of the other. Because the behaviour is interpreted from your own norms, values, and custom. In addition, people from a different culture than the Dutch sometimes speak poor Dutch, if any at all. The language problem that is thus created, may also lead to miscommunication. Another problem surrounding different cultures within social care is the goal of this care. This goal is defined such in the Netherlands that a person should be emancipated and have individual freedom of decisionmaking. This goal fits within our liberal society and this makes the goal culturally defined. By this I mean that a probation officer should be aware of his own culture when faced with intercultural contact. A probation officer must also be aware of the diversity within other cultures.

III Interlude

It is simple to determine how you score in terms of sentence length. Mark all full stops or starting words of the sentences in the text. Then you should be able to discern the rhythm of the text. See if the pulse can be interrupted by occasionally cutting up a sentence or joining two or more sentences together. Here is an example where we have shown the start of the sentence in bold:

11  The second revision: style and finishing

Consider the length of the sentences: each is a little over a line. You could add some variation there. In the fragment below, there is very little variation in sentence construction and word choice, which makes the text rather dry. The sentences are almost all organized in more or less the same way (This chapter will …, Next, … will …, Subsequently, … will …, Finally, … will …). There is also frequent repetition of words (in bold): This thesis deals with the personal directors’ and officers’ liability. In this chapter, the rules regarding directors’ and officers’ liability are described. In this chapter, we will first explain why we have come to choose the phenomenon of directors’ and officers’ liability. Next, we will discuss what directors’ and officers’ liability is based on. Subsequently, the different forms of directors’ and officers’ liability will be covered. Finally, the question will be answered what personal directors’ and officers’ liability exactly entails.

If you are afraid you are using a certain word too often, you can search for it in Word (Ctrl F) and see what the spread is. What can you do to fix word repetition? Vary your word choice? That is an excellent option for common words, but when the topic of your text (like in the example above) is a central term of some kind, you need to be careful. In the precision section we saw how confusing it can be when different words are used throughout and the reader does not know if the same concept is meant. Some tricks to avoid this are: • If there is a suitable synonym, you can introduce that the first time in combination with the other words: your reader will know that they mean the same thing. That may not be possible in the example above, but it could work in something like education strategies and methods, or in other words the teacher’s teaching style. • You could replace the word with a reference to it. For example, why people have come to that phenomenon. A preview of structure is a good exercise in language variation. What you are really doing is saying the same thing in every sentence. Check out what the variation is on the theme In chapter X, I will … in the fragment below. Chapter 2 sketches the communicative situation, especially the channels that cover public relations (PR). In chapter 3, the features of the receivers and the message will be analysed, insofar as they are relevant in this problem situation. Using these data and a communication model, chapter 4 will come to a sort of normative description of the situation. It will describe what a PR officer should consider when he draws up a release

238

11.3  Evaluating and improving the style

The question (How do the newspapers deal with municipal press releases?) in this fragment is an example of sentence type variation. The so-called ellipse, an incomplete sentence, is also a variation on the standard sentence, but there are readers who believe an incomplete sentence is per definition wrong. And therefore reprehensible. Like this sentence. And the previous one.

II  Making a plan

Apart from variation, you can liven up the style by bringing your story to life. That can be done by telling stories about people so readers are able to relate to a phenomenon or problem you are describing. For example, in the thesis about personal directors’ and officers’ liability, you could tell the story of the benevolent chairman of the drawing club who, after one of his members stole their cash, was forced to step down because it turned out he was personally responsible for the club’s finances. This option is a little risky in academic texts, though; it is not always warmly received in all disciplines (cf. section 11.1.5).

I  Setting the scene

on minorities. An important consideration is that the information stream runs through the press. How do the newspapers deal with municipal press releases? The answer to that question can be found in chapter 5. In chapter 6, we look at how the municipal press releases meet the norms described in chapter 4. The recommendations that this yields will be the subject of the final chapter, along with a comprehensive summary.

11.3.6 Distance Making the tone more informal

•• Using old-fashioned words and ­sentence constructions.

•• Using contemporary language.

•• Revealing little personal information.

•• Introducing or addressing people.

•• Using many passive sentences.

•• Using many active sentences.

•• Writing difficult.

•• Writing easy.

239

IV  Writing the text

When people write, they generally use more formal language than when they talk. This difference has become less strict over time. Nowadays, writing is increasingly used in informal settings, e.g. email, SMS, chat, or Twitter. In academic texts, however, a different, more distant tone is expected than that of a message on a blog. And what is that writing language like? It is a little more old-fashioned, often a little more difficult than the language we use when we speak to each other. For example:

III Interlude

Making the tone more formal

11  The second revision: style and finishing

Institutionalization refers to a process in which values, norms, and social actions are embedded in institutions. Institutions form a fixed, collective pattern of rules and resources according to which actors demonstrate certain behaviour and perform certain tasks because that is appropriate. These collective patterns exercise a certain amount of coercion on the actors in the institute.

In academic writing assignments, the challenge is often to hit the right tone, to use the correct register. There are readers who would argue that the paragraph with the example above is too formal. We could make it less formal (and almost automatically shorten it in the process): Institutionalization is a process in which values, norms, and social actions are embedded in institutions. Institutions have a fixed pattern of rules and resources, and everyone in that institution feels compelled to act in accordance with them.

This version will not please everyone either, though. Some readers will find it too informal. As discussed, this dimension generally incites the most fierce criticism. It is safe to assume that most teachers frown upon the use of popular language in essays and theses. Always make sure you check your text for: • Very outspoken judgments or so-called coloured use of language, for example: Does that mean we can continue to pollute and dump toxic waste without being fined or having to pay damages? There must be a way to prevent anyone from simply dumping oil into the sea, because … • Personal (subjective) statements, for example: I don’t like that court one bit. • Colloquialisms, for example: Anyway, that doesn’t really fly, does it?

11.3.7 And, sometimes, everything comes together In the fragment below, we see how the style dimensions reinforce each other. The language is distant, abstract (vague), and as a result wordy: it seems mostly words instead of content. Can you recognize these text features now? Changes in land use in dry areas range in pattern from traditional to partly modernized. Two angles can be distinguished here. First of all, attention should be drawn to the large biodiversity in rural economies which house certain forms of land use. Second, change processes in land use can be described from different perspectives.

240

11.4  General rewriting tips

11.4

General rewriting tips

II  Making a plan

Finally, here are some tips and tricks to improve your style: • What you want to say can always be phrased in countless ways. If you are not happy with a sentence or paragraph, simply rewrite it! • ‘Simply rewriting’ means putting the text aside and telling yourself (out loud if you have to) what you really want to say. This is also referred to as the wiami strategy: what I actually mean is … • Simply rewriting can also mean taking a random phrase from the sentence and starting your sentence with that. That will guarantee some new wordings. On the website of the Purdue Online Writing Lab we find the following example:

I  Setting the scene

Rewriting really becomes fun when you can concentrate on specific fragments or dimensions. Rewriting style can be tackled in different rounds too. You could start with a round of deleting superfluous words, then a round of varying sentence length (split up or join), or a round of upgrading, using difficult words. The advantage of this method is that it is very easy to use and allows you to concentrate on one single aspect at a time; that always works particularly efficiently!

The biggest coincidence that day happened when David and I ended up sitting next to each other at the Super Bowl.



Possible Revisions:

IV  Writing the text

241

III Interlude

1 Coincidentally, David and I ended up sitting right next to each other at the Super Bowl. 2 In an amazing coincidence, David and I ended up sitting next to each other at the Super Bowl. 3 Sitting next to David at the Super Bowl was a tremendous coincidence. 4 But the biggest coincidence that day happened when David and I ended up sitting next to each other at the Super Bowl. 5 When I sat down at the Super Bowl, I realized that, by sheer coincidence, I was directly next to David. 6 By sheer coincidence, I ended up sitting directly next to David at the Super Bowl. 7 With over 50,000 fans at the Super Bowl, it took an incredible coincidence for me to end up sitting right next to David. 8 What are the odds that I would have ended up sitting right next to David at the Super Bowl?

11  The second revision: style and finishing

9 David and I, without any prior planning, ended up sitting right next to each other at the Super Bowl. 10 Without any prior planning, David and I ended up sitting right next to each other at the Super Bowl. 11 At the crowded Super Bowl, packed with 50,000 screaming fans, David and I ended up sitting right next to each other by sheer coincidence. 12 Though I hadn’t made any advance arrangements with David, we ended up sitting right next to each other at the Super Bowl. 13 Many amazing coincidences occurred that day, but nothing topped sitting right next to David at the Super Bowl. 14 Unbelievable, I know, but David and I ended up sitting right next to each other at the Super Bowl. 15 Guided by some bizarre coincidence, David and I ended up sitting right next to each other at the Super Bowl.

• Practice makes perfect; the more you rewrite, the easier it will become. • Ask for feedback on your writing style! Sometimes the text comes across in a much different way than you had anticipated. Co-readers may also help to set your limits. • Examples of help to define your boundaries are remarks like: That is a little too close to slang for my taste. Sounds like you are just being posh. I feel like I have to struggle to find my way through this welter of words all the time. I have to read almost all your sentences twice before I understand them. I think your texts are a little choppy because all the sentences are equally long. All that repetition makes your text a little tedious. It could do with a bit more ‘air’. You have become extremely concise here.

• Positive feedback could also help you tremendously, of course, for example, when someone says or writes ‘completely clear, this reads like a charm, pleasing style’, et cetera. • Don’t turn receiving feedback into a fight. Be happy with the mirror readers are holding up to you, and take their opinion seriously. You can still decide to stick with your own style, but that would be a statement since you would be going against the wishes of that reader. See also section 8.11 on receiving feedback.

242

11.5  The finishing touches

11.5

The finishing touches I  Setting the scene

When you have gone through all of the previous steps, content, structure, and style hopefully have turned out just the way you had envisaged them. The last thing left to do is to add the finishing touches to the text. We distinguish four aspects: language use, layout, literature references and titles, and final elements.

11.5.1 Language use

243

IV  Writing the text

There are many websites with useful information on academic writing and use of English. We are listing four of them that have proven their value. 1 Purdue Online Writing Lab (https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/ or search for ‘Purdue OWL’). On their site map you will find the following headings: the Writing Process, Academic Writing, Common Writing Assignments, Mechanics, Grammar, and Punctuation. Each heading contains a discussion of a large collection of topics in clear handouts.

III Interlude

11.5.2 Useful websites for academic writing in English

II  Making a plan

The entire style revision is about language use, but we have not discussed correct use of language yet – a text without errors. That may not be a specific aspect of academic writing (which is why we are only dealing with it now), but a text full of mistakes is distracting to your reader. What is more, it is bad for your image as a writer. Do not underestimate the importance of groomed language and layout for the impression that readers get. Whether your professor wants to or not, he will unconsciously evaluate the content of your work unfavourably if it is riddled with mistakes and looks sloppy. So, before you submit your text: • Always read it through carefully, preferably a printed version and off the computer screen. • If you regularly make mistakes in your sentences, read the text aloud. Over and over, writers observe that they infallibly see and hear where sentences go awry or where they are formulated ‘oddly’. • If you doubt the correct form, look it up in a grammar handbook. There are also many good websites that will provide answers to your questions (see below, section 11.5.2 ). • If you cannot find a solution anywhere, reformulate the text. Try different words or sentence constructions. • If you are really struggling with grammar and spelling, have your text read by someone who is not. In every university town, you can find people who get paid for this kind of work. You could also scour your circle of friends or relatives for help.

11  The second revision: style and finishing

2 Using English for Academic Purposes (www.uefap.com/). This site is based on the book Successful Academic Writing by Andy Gillett. The site also provides examples and exercises. 3 The Writing Center at UNC-Chapel Hill site (http://writingcenter.unc.edu/ handouts/ or search for ‘UNC handouts’). This site contains a treasure of information on academic writing and a couple of entertaining videos to boot, for example, on reverse outlining and conciseness. 4 The Academic Phrasebank of the University of Manchester (see www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/). This site aims to provide you with examples of some of the phraseological ‘nuts and bolts’ of writing. It is basically a vast collection of phrases you can use when you need synonyms or alternatives during your revision process. They have phrases for certain sections of a text (e.g. describing methods, reporting results) but also for describing connections in a paragraph (e.g. explaining causality or compare and contrast). Use this website only for style revision and not for writing your first draft. The first draft should be written in your own voice (see section 9.3).

11.5.3 Layout The most important thing about layout is that you follow the conventions that apply to your discipline and your type of writing task. Check the layout of a sample text if you can. Bear in mind that the layout should be applied consistently. In order to check this, you often need to print your work. Note especially: • consistent use of italics, bold, quotation marks (single/double, straight/ curved), and such; • the layout of the headings; • the layout of figures and tables. Do you need to stick to a certain system, e.g. APA? • the numbering of chapters and sections; • the use of white lines and tabs; • any lists. Watch out because Word does a lot automatically.

11.5.4 Literature references and titles In academic texts, it is essential that titles and literature references be given strictly according to the rules. That is mainly a matter of: • knowing which system to use: APA, MLA, Chicago, Vancouver, the department’s house rules, or the journal’s house style; • carefully studying the rules. Note for example that a reference to a source may look different in a footnote than in a literature list; • doing precisely what the guidelines say;

244

11.5  The finishing touches

11.5.5 Final elements

II  Making a plan

Have a good look at what else is required (see the guidelines provided by your department and sample texts). Think: • table of contents; • title page (What should it say? Do you need a visual?); • preface; • page numbers; • index; • literature list/bibliography/references; • appendices.

I  Setting the scene

• comparing your work to that of a fellow student; • using reference management tools such as Endnote, Refworks, Word, or Mendeley; • getting advice from university library personnel or a professor if you cannot manage.

III Interlude IV  Writing the text

245

Final thoughts Introduction The most important steps towards an essay, journal article, or thesis have been described, explained, and illustrated in the previous chapters. When you follow those steps, your chances of writing a good piece are considerable. However, as the introduction of this book pointed out, academic reality is sometimes unpredictable and obstinate, and academic writing processes do not always meticulously follow the steps we have described. This book is intended to offer guidelines and insights. You can also use these when the writing process takes a course different from the one you expect. In this final section, we have included some examples of what you can do when the chips are down or when you receive negative feedback.

Look back If something goes or has gone wrong when you are working on an academic writing task, you should try to explain why. In order to do this, look back at the things you have done. You can do this in small steps or big steps. Some examples. 1 If you cannot manage to split the main question into sub-questions (cf. chapter 4 and section 6.4), the first question to ask yourself is, Have you carefully studied and followed the instructions in the relevant sections of this book? If you have, look right back at the topic and the main question. For example: • Have you sufficiently narrowed down the topic? • Have you clearly formulated the topic? • Do you have one (and only one) single central question? • Is it clear what type of question the central question is?

These are relatively small steps.

2 If you cannot decide how big or small the topic should be, look back a little further, to the orientation phase. Is it clear how much time you can spend on the task? Next, you can look forward again. What do you have to do to answer this question about that topic and how much time will it take you? Compare this to the time that is assigned for the task.

246

Final thoughts

3 If you get stuck on the structure of the text while you are writing (section 10.3), you may find yourself going back to the beginning of the process as well. Looking back may lead you through the entire book again: • Did you make a text plan (chapter 9)? • Did you sufficiently analyse all the data (section 7.5)? • Do you have a correct table of contents (section 5.1)? • Do you have a clear central question and logical sub-questions (chapters 3, 4 and 6)? • Have you got a good picture of the type of text you are required to write (chapter 2)? In short, if you get stuck, look back, check if all the preceding steps have been properly followed, and then try to repair the defect. You can use and reuse the information in this book and from the website that comes with it.

Processing feedback Feedback can also give you headaches; what do the co-readers, teachers, or supervisors mean, and how do you solve the problems they discover? You could always try to look for the explanations here first. Some examples would be: 1 ‘Your text contains loose ends.’ a If there is a dangling element that appears to be out of place, you have a content problem. Solutions for content-related problems include change, add, or delete content (cf. section 10.2). If the information does not belong with the rest of the content in your story, get rid of the loose ends (kill your darlings). b If there is a loose end because the connection with the rest of the text is not indicated, you have a problem with the external structure. Solutions can be found in the tools to make the external structure visible (section 10.4). In this case, that would mean explaining the structure or adding a summarizing sentence. 2 ‘You are contradicting yourself.’ a If you are contradicting yourself because you do not know what your position is, you have a problem with the content. The solution is to ponder on the issue or look for extra information. What is your take on it (section 10.2.2, step 4)? b If you are contradicting yourself because you are not describing exactly what you mean, you have a problem with the wording. Formulate more precisely. This is probably a matter of the style dimension precision (section 11.1.2).

247

Effective Strategies for Academic Writing

3 ‘You do not sufficiently substantiate your claims.’ (section 10.2.2) a Are your claims insufficiently substantiated because you fail to provide arguments? Then add arguments. b Are your claims insufficiently substantiated because the arguments do not match the conclusion exactly? Come up with better arguments. c Are your claims insufficiently substantiated because the arguments themselves need support? Give an additional argument or example of the arguments. 4 ‘I lost track halfway through the second page.’ a Perhaps the topic or theme suddenly changes? Read the text again. What is the theme of the first page and a half, and what is the theme of the bit the reader tripped over? If they are not the same, it would be a good idea to announce the new theme to your reader (section 10.3.1). b The confusion may also be because you added a piece of text without fitting it properly into your story. In that case, you need to introduce it or scrap it if you find that it does not really belong there (section 10.2.1, step 4). c Something else may be at work here, for example, a sentence is too long. You can solve the reader’s problem by cutting the sentence in two (section 11.3.3). Finally, let’s include two types of negative feedback from professors that may not always be easy to comprehend: insufficient academic level and too descriptive or too superficial. 5 ‘The text is not academic enough/lacks academic level.’ Feedback of this type may refer to different aspects of your work: content, structure, style and/or text finishing. Such criticism can therefore refer to anything that is covered in this book. Examples include: a Content: • insufficiently related to the theories in your discipline (sections 3.5 and 6.2.2); • insufficiently based on scientific articles (sources are of ‘insufficient level’) (2.3.4, 6.5 and 7.5); • too little critical processing of sources (insufficiently discussed, copied unquestioningly ) (sections 6.6 and 7.5); • contestable claims (statements are insufficiently substantiated with arguments) (section 10.2.2); • too little attention paid to different perspectives (biased treatment of the topics) (sections 3.4.2, 3.9 and 10.2.2).

248

Final thoughts

b Structure: • not in accordance with the conventions in the discipline (sections 2.4.3, 2.6 and 5.1); • cluttered (multiple themes per paragraph, discussions of themes are spread throughout the text) (section 10.3.1); • unclear structure (too many irrelevant elaborations, too few structural markers, topic sentences, et cetera) (section 10.4). c Style: • too many colloquialisms (section 11.1.6); • too many vague phrases (section 11.1.2). d Finishing: reference to sources and such is not in accordance with the conventions set in the discipline (section 11.5.4). If you receive a comment on the academic level, you can use this little overview to find out what aspect could be meant. You can ask the professor or supervisor what the criticism entails exactly. If that is a sensitive area, you may join forces with a fellow student or a tutor from a writing centre to find out what is wrong with your text. And finally, if you follow the clues in this book, you will increase the chances of your work reaching a sufficient standard. 6 Other negative qualifications you may get as feedback are: too descriptive, too little analysis, too superficial, or too little depth. This is often said about texts that are a chain of quotes (patch writing) or texts that don’t do much besides summarize texts from other people. The most important tip to prevent this from happening is think of a good question (problem) that the information from the texts should answer and describe to what extent the information contributes to answering that question. See the clues in sections 3.6, 4.1, 6.1, 6.5 and 7.5.

Joint effort This book is meant to help you avoid mistakes, but something can always go wrong. You can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs. Hopefully, this book has helped you gain insight into the processes involved in academic writing so you can retrace where it went wrong and how you can solve it. If you need more than the book to identify the problem and a solution, remember that writing is a joint effort. Virtually no one thinks academic writing is simple, and everyone needs help or co-readers every now and then. Don’t be embarrassed and put your questions to professors, supervisors, co-readers, or supportive peers. They will be happy to support you on your journey to a good academic paper.

249

References Draaisma, D. (2006). Ontregelde geesten. Ziektegeschiedenissen. Groningen: Historische Uitgeverij. Eik-Nes, N.L. (2008). Front Stage and Back Stage Writing: using Logs to Rehearse and Develop a Disciplinary Role. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 7(3), 181-198. Flower, J. & Hayes, J.R. (1981). A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365-387. Jansen, H.P.H. (1978). Geschiedenis van de Middeleeuwen. Utrecht/Antwerpen: Uitgeverij Het Spectrum. Jong, J. de (2006). Uitgesproken complex. Interactie tussen scriptieschrijvers en begeleiders (PhD thesis). Utrecht: Utrecht University. Jong, J. de (2011). Handboek Academisch Schrijven. In stappen naar een essay, paper of scriptie. Bussum: Uitgeverij Coutinho. KU Writing Center of the University of Kansas (z.j.). Graduate Student Writing Groups. Opgevraagd op 12 april 2010 van https://writing.drupal.ku.edu/graduate-studentwriting-groups. Langendijk, A. (2009, 17 oktober). z.t. NRC Handelsblad [bijlage Wetenschap]. Macmillen (2007). Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners). London: Macmillan. Mathijsen, M. (2009, 18 september). z.t. NRC Handelsblad. Nederhoed, P. (1985). Helder rapporteren. Een handleiding voor het schrijven van rapporten, scripties, nota’s en artikelen in wetenschap en techniek (2e druk). Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus. Oost, H. (1999). De kwaliteit van probleemstellingen in dissertaties. Een evaluatie van de wijze waarop de vormtechnische aspecten van probleemstellingen worden uitgewerkt (PhD thesis). Utrecht: Utrecht University. Oost, H. & Jong, J. de (1997). Scripties en verslagen ontwerpen. Syllabus tweede versie. Utrecht: Universiteit Utrecht (IVLOS). Oost, H. & Markenhof, A. (2002). Een onderzoek voorbereiden. Baarn: HBUitgevers. Renkema, J. (1997). Schrijfwijzer. Den Haag: Sdu Uitgevers. Steehouder, M. e.a. (1992). Leren Communiceren. Handboek voor mondelinge en schrif­ telijke communicatie (3e geheel herziene druk) Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff. Steen, P. van (1987). Rapporteren in organisaties. Leer- en oefenboek voor het schrijven en begrijpen van rapporten. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.

251

Effective Strategies for Academic Writing

Websites • • • • • • • •

252

www.scribbr.nl/category/essay/, retrieved March 2016 https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essay, retrieved March 2016 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essay, retrieved March 2016 www.rug.nl/noordster, retrieved October 2009 https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/, retrieved May 2016 www.uefap.com/, retrieved March 2016 http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/, retrieved March 2016 www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/, retrieved March 2016

Index academic style 37 academic writing 29-31, 119-120 activate prior knowledge 208 active sentences 239 actual practice 42 advice (question type) 68, 92-94 analysing 23, 96, 140-142 analysis 94 annotated literature list 146 answer (to the research question) 57, 71-77, 80, 137-142 • short writing assignment 137-143 archaic words 235 argumentation 39, 181, 198-201, 214 argumentative essay 70, 128, 135-137 arranging information 137-140 article, journal 45 assertive sentences 237 assessor 155 assumption 62 attractiveness 224-225, 237-239 audience 30 author perspective 84 BA/MA writers 27-43 bin version 23, 174-176 brainstorming 174 bullet list 216 carrying out the research 23, 116 causality 90 cause – effect 181, 213 central question see question changing science 46 chapters 53 characteristics of academic writing 29-31 chart 216 circumstance relation 181, 213 claim 135, 141, 142

classification 181, 214 closed question 76-77, 181 coach 155 cognitive overload 20 cohesion 49, 177, 202-204 collecting 23, 137-140, 148-150, 168 colloquialism 225, 240, 249 comparison (question type) 67, 86, 95, 127, 128, 131, 134, 149, 181, 214 • double comparison 134 • pure comparison 86 • short writing assignment 127, 128, 131 competence 33 complex question 96, 133-134 complexity 222-223, 232-234 concept 196 concession 181, 213 conclusion 23, 73, 173-174 condition 102 conditional relation 181, 213 connection 73-77, 94, 95, 177, 183-186 contemporary language 235, 239 content 22, 30, 74-75, 177, 195 content space 22 contradiction 79 co-reader 158, 172, 217 corrector 155, 158 correlation 90, 95 cost of the method 103 credibility 133, 136 critical analysis 135 critical essay 128 critical opinion piece 70 critical thinking 141, 142 cyclic process 53 data 23, 148-150 deep level 22

253

Effective Strategies for Academic Writing

definition (question type) 68, 86-87, 127, 128, 131-132, 149 • short writing assignment 127, 128, 131-132 density 223-224, 234-236 description (question type) 67, 69-70, 85, 126-127, 128, 130, 149 • short writing assignment 126-127, 128, 130 design (question type) 68, 92-94 desirability 135 development 94, 95 diagram 216 direct research 102 disciplinary embedding 23, 63-65 discipline 56, 63-65 discontinuous construction 233 discrepancy 79 discussing 25, 111 distance 225-226, 239-240 divisions in the literature 100 doctoral thesis 43-45 domain 74 double comparison 134 draft 24, 36, 164, 167-189 drawing conclusions 23 editing 165 editor 155 educator 155 effective writing strategy 22 ellipse 239 empirical explanations 89-91 empirical predictions 92 empirical research 14, 36, 101, 102 essay 27-29, 70, 119-143, 128, 135-137 • argumentative 70, 128, 135-137 evaluation 24 evaluation (question type) 68, 87-88, 127, 128-129, 132, 149 • short writing assignment 127, 132 examiner 155 execution phase 36

254

explanation (question type) 68, 88-91, 128, 149 • empirical 89-91 • from the literature 88 • short writing assignment 128 • theoretical 88-89 exploring the topic 147 expressed external structure 207 external structure 206-217 factor 94, 95 feedback 25, 36, 37, 115, 153-161, 247-249 • peers 157-158 • procedure 155-156 • processing 247-249 • receiving 153 • report 157 • supervision 154-157 • understanding 154 • writing support group 159-161 final editing 24, 165 finishing 164, 219, 243-245 first draft 24, 164, 167-189 first revision 165, 191-217 flow 186 formal tone 239 formulating 66-71, 71-77, 126-129, 173-174 • the answer 71-77 • the conclusion 173-174 • the question 66-71, 126-129 free writing 174, 177 frontloading 234, 236 function of academic texts 30 gap 79 global planning 22 graph 177, 216 half sentence 179 heading 108, 208-210 hierarchy 177, 204-205 Higher Order Concerns 202 hypotheses 36

Index

identity relation 181, 214 impact factor of a journal 45 IMRD-model 108 independent variable 90 indirect research 102 influence 94, 95 informal tone 239 informal writing 25 information density 223-224, 234-236 interpreting 140-142, 148-150 introduction 55, 114, 174, 208-210 inventory 102-103, 138 itemized list 216 jargon 196, 232 journal article 45 knowledge gap 79 knowledge telling 22, 119, 127 knowledge transforming 120, 127 language use 243 layout 208-210, 244 level 22 list 181, 214, 216 literature 36, 100, 122-123, 139, 140, 145151, 244-245 • divisions 100 • list 146 • matrix 140 • reference 244-245 • study 36 liveliness 224-225, 237-239 local planning 22 logical connection 73-74 logical sub-questions 83-96, 129-137 • short writing assignment 129-137 long sentences 232-233 look back 246 loose ends 247 main research question see question manner 214

matrix for literature 140 means – end 213 means – goal 181 mental leaps 234, 235 mentor 155 method of research 50, 53, 57, 101-104 mind mapping 177 misconceptions 24-25 mode 181 narrowing down the topic 60-62, 120-125 • short writing assignment 120-125 nominalization 236 non-parallel sub-questions 99 non-statistical qualitative research 91 objective 78-81 obscure external structure 207 old-fashioned words 232, 239 open question 76-77, 181 operational sub-questions 97-101 operational term 97-98 operationalization 98 opinion piece 70 order of the steps 59 orientation questions 32-33, 35-37, 39-40 • product 39-40 • writing procedure 32-33 • writing process 35-37 outline 23, 110, 164, 176-186 overview 23 paper 27, 119-143 parallel sub-questions 98-100 passive sentences 239 patch writing 249 peers 157-158 personal information 239 phase • execution 36 • planning 35-36 • writing 36-37, 163 PhD writer 43-45

255

Effective Strategies for Academic Writing

picturing the research 23, 53-81, 83-104, 147-148 pilot study 100-101, 148 pitfalls 20-21, 23 plagiarism 39 plan • research 53-104 • working without a 21 • writing out the 113-115 • see also planning planning (an academic writing task) 22, 35-36, 48-143, 147-148, 165 • ‘how’ of the research 83-104 • in the writing phase 165 • local versus global 22 • reading 147-148 • short writing assignment 119-143 • table of contents 107-110 • time schedule 110-113 • ‘what’ of the research 53-78 • ‘why’ of the research 78-81 plausibility 135 precision 23, 57, 221-222, 228-231 prediction (question type) 68, 91-92, 149 prepositional phrases 234, 236 pre-work 167 prewriting 22 prior knowledge 208 problem see question problem – solution 181 problem statement 135 procedure • doctoral thesis 43 • execution phase 36 • feedback 155-156 • finding information 31 • first revision 191-194 • journal article 45 • orientation questions 32-33 • planning phase 35-36, 53-143 • writing phase 36-37, 163-245 process 17, 19-25, 33-37, 43-45, 163-245 • finding information 35

256

• orientation questions 35-37 • doctoral thesis 43-45 • journal article 45 processing feedback 247-249 product 17, 23, 37-40, 43-45 • doctoral thesis 43-45 • finding information 38-39 • journal article 45 • orientation questions 39-40 pure comparison 86 qualification 181, 214 qualitative research 91, 102 quantitative research 102 query 146 question 23, 50, 53, 54-59, 66-71, 73-77, 78-81, 83-101, 120, 126-137, 177, 181 • beginning of the 71, 128-129 • closed 181 • complex 96, 133-134 • connection between answer and ­question 73-77 • formulating the 66-71 • one or multiple questions? 66 • open 181 • relational 177, 181 • relevance 50, 53, 78-81 • short writing assignment 126-137 • sub-questions 23, 36, 50, 53, 57, 66, 83-102, 129-137 • sub-sub-questions 97, 98, 100 • topic 177 • translate the terms 94-96, 134-137 • type 67-70, 84-94, 126-128 questionnaire 103 quickscan 194 reader-based 22 reading 145-151 reason 78-81, 181, 213 receiving feedback 153 reconstruction of the research structure 50 recording 21, 23, 137-140

Index

reference word 215 reflection 156 reflective strategy 22 relation question 177, 181 relation types 181 relationships 95, 177 relevance 23, 50, 53, 54, 56, 78-81 reliability 133 report 27, 119, 157 research method 50, 53, 57, 101-104 research phase 148-150 research plan 53-104 research question see question research structure 109 researchability 23, 40-41, 42, 54, 57, 61 researcher perspective 84 results 103 retrievable 21 reverse outlining 205 review 119 revision 24, 165, 191-217, 219-245 • content 195-201 • first 165, 191-217 • second 165, 219-245 • structure 202-217 • style 219-242 rewriting 22, 23-24, 241-242 rhetorical space 22 role 95 sample text 17, 38, 43, 47 schedule see time schedule science, changing 46 searching for literature 139, 146-147 second revision 165, 219-245 segmenting 20, 25 selecting literature 139 self-evaluation 37, 156 self-reflection 37 sequence 177, 205-206 short writing assignment 34, 119-143 signal word 215 signposting 213-216

similarity 95 skills, writing 24 skipping tasks 24 small writing assignment see short writing assignment solution 181, 214 space 22 space relation 181, 213 specification 181, 214 speed writing 186-189 statement 135 statistics 91 strategy, writing 22 Structure Model of the Research Problem 54 structure of the research 109 structure of the text 107, 168, 202-217 • cohesion 202-204 • external structure 206-217 • hierarchy 204-205 • sequence 205-206 style 37, 206, 219-240, 232-234, 237-240 • attractiveness/liveliness 224-225, 237239 • complexity 222-223, 232-234 • dimensions 206, 219-226 • distance 225-226, 239-240 • improving 227-240 • information density 223-224, 234-236 • precision 221-222, 228-231 subject see topic sub-questions 23, 36, 50, 53, 57, 66, 83-102, 129-137 • logical 83-96 • non-parallel 99 • operational 97-101 • parallel 98-100 • short writing assignment 129-137 subset 63-65, 122 sub-sub-questions 97, 98, 100 sub-topics 61 summary 181, 214 supervisor 35, 36, 154-157, 172, 217

257

Effective Strategies for Academic Writing

258

support group 25, 111 supporting a claim 141 surface level 22

type of question 67-70, 84-94, 126-128 typo 217 typographic support 216

table of contents 35, 107-110, 168-171 teacher 155 term, operational 97-98 text structure see structure of the text thematic coherence 202 theoretical explanations 88-89 theoretical predictions 91-92 theoretical research 102 theory 108-109 thesis 27, 34, 43, 107-115 thesis statement 135 thinking aloud protocol 20 time relation 181, 213 time schedule 36, 50, 53, 110-113 tips 23-25, 241-242 • rewriting 241-242 tone 239 topic 40-43, 50, 53-55, 60-65, 85, 120-125, 133, 147 • complete the question with your 133 • disciplinary embedding 63-65 • narrowing down the 60-62, 120-125 • reading to explore the 147 topic question 177 topic sentence 210-213 topical coherence 202 transforming knowledge 120, 127 translate the terms in the question 94-96, 134-137 • short writing assignment 134-137 transparent 75

understanding feedback 154 useful 80 variables 73, 74, 90, 97 variation 237-239 wiami strategy 241 writer-based 22 writing • centre 25 • first draft 167-189 • informally 25 • phase 36-37, 163-245 • skills 24 • speed 186-189 • strategy 22 • support group 25, 159-161 • tips 23-25, 241-242 • to think 175 writing procedure • finding information 31 • in the execution phase 36 • in the planning phase 35-36, 53-143 • in the writing phase 36-37, 163-245 • orientation questions 32-33 writing process 19-25, 33-37, 163-245 • finding information 35 • orientation questions 35-37 zero version see bin version

About the Author Joy de Jong (1960) studied at Utrecht University where she was awarded a Master’s Degree in Dutch language and literature. She taught Rhetoric at ­Utrecht University and at a professional drama school, and tutored students writing their theses. In 1993, she returned to Utrecht University to teach academic skills. In that role, she developed and taught courses for Bachelor, Master, and PhD students, and for teachers and supervisors. Topics included developing a research plan, reporting on the research, and supervising thesis writers. In addition, she advised numerous educational institutions on their writing education programmes. Joy obtained her doctorate in 2006. Her thesis is entitled Outspoken Complexity: Interaction Between Thesis Writers and Supervisors. In 2007, she was named coordinator of the Nijmegen Centre for Academic Writing. There she trained and coached the writing tutors who work with the Bachelor and Master students. After nine years, in 2016, she returned once more to Utrecht University, this time to set up a skills lab cum writing centre. Apart from her work for the writing centres, Joy developed new courses for PhD students (in both English and Dutch) on effective and efficient writing strategies. She gave these courses in Nijmegen and Wageningen, but also in Tanzania, Ghana and South Africa. Currently, Joy supervises writing support groups for both PhD students and post-docs working on grant proposals and provides workshops and training courses for supervisors. Joy regularly contributes to conferences and gatherings, where she speaks about academic writing, supervision and giving feedback. She presented at conferences of the European Association of the Teaching and Tutoring of Academic Writing (EATAW) and of the European Writing Centers’ Association (EWCA). She co-founded and is a member of the Dutch Network for Academic Communicative Skills (NACV).

259