Conor Hilton: Blog #8

 

I generally prefer to read non-fiction case studies than academic case studies, since I find them more engaging to read. I think that this also makes the non-fiction ones more accessible to a wider audience than most of the academic ones (which I suppose puts me in the same camp as Brian Goedde and his advocacy for a more creative writing approach over an academic one). This approach I think allows readers to experience the lived reality of the tutoring more than academic case studies. A more academic approach does tend to provide a sense of formality and can lend authority (as Lorraine points out in Goedde’s piece), as well as working within a form that potentially gives readers more information that would allow them to replicate the experience. 

It seems to me that both have a purpose and that both approaches could learn something from the other. I have never written a non-fiction case study (or an academic case study to be fair), but I would like to incorporate more creative writing practices and techniques into my own scholarship because I think that readable, accessible scholarship is important, and it seems that those elements can work to make scholarship more public facing, which is a goal that I have for my own work. 

Comments

  1. TatianaOctober 27, 2020 at 10:54 PM

    I also prefer to read creative, nonfiction case studies over academic ones. Goedde's personal experiences made me more interested in finding out what happened with Lorraine, whether she learned or not and finished the paper. It's much easier to get invested in the case study when it feels like I'm reading about a real person and not just statistics. I also think the accessibility angle is important and a valid reason to write creatively, and something Goedde could've addressed even more in his work with Lorraine when convincing her to write creatively.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Andrew post 9

I think it's vitally important for writing center staff to keep abreast of writing center scholarship. Because students who visit writing centers vary widely in their proficiency, their motivations for seeking help, and economic/identity categories, and bring in work from disparate disciplines, staff need to be adaptable to multitudinous tutoring relationships and scenarios. Requiring staff to go through practicum courses (held on maybe a biennial basis) and holding regular department forums where tutors can present research or seek counsel would help keep everyone on the same page with regard to the latest findings and debates in writing center theory and practice. However, I don't think that it's reasonable expect that each member regularly conduct their own research, since many tutors are graduate students or full time instructors whose resources are often already stretched thin on account of pressures to produce writing/research in their own field of study. Asking too m...
Read more

Andrew blog post #10

 I'm usually fairly confident working with writers outside my discipline. I think part of that has to do with my own experience as an undergraduate, where I switched majors from political science to literature to philosophy then, finally, to psychology. To my mind, basic critical thinking skills--the kind that I teach my students in my rhetoric classes--apply just as much to qualitative analyses as they do to quantitative/empirical analyses. Questions of audience and purpose factor into effective writing and communication--approaching any paper, regardless of the class that it's for, I always push writers to ask themselves how much information is necessary for them to provide to contextualize an argument, and remind them that each item of evidence they introduce has to be accompanied by an explanation of its relevance to their overarching thesis. One of my writing center students' first assignment for his rhetoric class was to write a paper about his major (bio-medical engi...
Read more

Andrew blog post 4

Perhaps one way to promote appreciation of other "Englishes," as the CCCC statement (as much as they would disapprove of the use of the term) is to recalibrate considerations of style in writing pedagogy, one that demonstrates that what we call "standard English" is but one among many modes of expression that can be modulated according to varying purposes/audiences. Many people, I think, don't particularly enjoy reading academic English, which, besides imposing oppressive standards on marginalized people, is often a clumsy, bland, and inefficient means of expression; writing is most effective when it comes off as the work of a singular voice and intellect.  Students' general education in universities should also include critical studies of how languages are products of conquest. This, of course, has been a constant throughout history--consider how Spanish and Portuguese integrated Arabic vocabulary by virtue of Muslim rule over the Iberian Peninsula. However...
Read more