David Kime [#10], "Across the Curriculum"

 Since starting at the Writing Center, I have had a plethora of topics outside my discipline. To be fair, though, I expect that -- not because I think Cinema majors wouldn't utilize the Writing Center (though something tells me they'd be less likely to), but rather because they're rather few and far between, and even fewer that would have writing to submit. Actually, come to think of it, I might be more intimidated by reading work and offering suggestions within my discipline. 

So far, I have worked with students on music (through a scientific angle), Chinese literature, archaeology, rhetoric, bioethics, economics, and 19th century literature. All of these induce some level of panic due to my lack of familiarity (STEM fields, looking at you), especially when the science/music paper is a dissertation. Honestly, I felt a bit thrown into the fire. But my tutees have largely seemed grateful for the assistance I've given them, especially the two which I've worked with since the beginning of the semester. They seem more confident in their writing and direction (Or maybe they're just being nice.). 

The authors of The Bedford Guide write, "Regardless of a paper's topic, you can determine whether the ideas are presented in a cohesive and persuasive manner" (72). That feels true from my experience... to an extent. Sometimes terminology will trip me up because I don't understand the usage of a word. But, perhaps, my lack of familiarity is beneficial. My students have largely been able to re-explain what they mean, which not only clarifies the word but reveals areas that need improvement. By not knowing terminology, having this outside perspective, I inadvertently make them question it. They have to re-evaluate their meaning for clarity, and that has (occasionally) aided them in getting past that fog of having read it too many times. Plus, it allows me to provide an example, if needed, that they will have to rephrase because I don't know the right words. 

Last thing, a moment in The Bedford Guide that confused me: for scientific papers, it reads, "Does the writer use passive voice, which is the generally accepted convention?" I just had a conversation with a tutee about this today, as he received feedback on his scientific paper that mandated an active voice. 

Comments

  1. Jose Di PaolaNovember 11, 2020 at 9:27 AM

    That's a good point about making them question their terminology. A common problem in academia is that people will use a word over and over without thinking very carefully about what that word actually means. They have a general grasp of it, but a general grasp isn't enough.

    Passive voice is very common in scientific papers. The general advice I've seen is to use active voice when the subject is more important and passive voice when the object is more important.

    ReplyDelete
  2. C ONovember 11, 2020 at 1:26 PM

    I wanted to echo Jose’s sentiment that passive voice is the generally accepted convention in scientific writing. However, I’ve also been looking for examples of quote-unquote “good” scientific writing, and many of the strongest examples, as judged by people (and not necessarily academics) online, eschew the passive voice for something more personal. There’s even been people that have written from the first person in their scientific papers, which I felt made the papers more compelling as both communicators of science and as pieces of writing. I wonder if the passive voice convention in scientific writing will live on, or if slowly other styles will start to take over.

    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