Pat Thomson

Patter blog http://patthomson.wordpress.com

In the workshop we will:

Think about what is involved in writing a thesis Consider the thesis as genre Discuss metaphors that orient the writing

Examine some common writing sticking points

Writing Up

Writing up obscures the thinking that goes on during the writing Writing up makes invisible the hard work of writing the thesis Writing up makes the writing process seem transparent

Some underpinning principles

Research is writing Writing is a discursive activity Writing is a representation Then written representation is a text Research writings are particular genres Writing has a reader in mind We are writers Our writing is always in conversation with other writers

Key concept

Text work/identity work

Text work/identity work

Writing clarifies what we think and want to say Writing is becoming and being - we imagine ourselves as particular kind of scholar - we write our-selves, what we stand for and what we know We are known by others by our writing We are judged on our writing

Key concept

Writing as a social practice Our writing is shaped and framed not simply by immediate interactions, but by broader contexts

three layer model of discourse: thesis

National higher education policy; national scholarship conventions, institutional policy, scholarly/disciplinary conventions, audit regimes Supervision The field, the literature disciplinary conventions Research conventions/standards University requirements

Layer 1

Text

Discourse practice
Layer 2

Sociocultural practice
Layer 3

One way to understand the problem of writing is to see it in context. We write what we write--in the case at hand, a dissertation--in the context of academic institutions. The problem's solution, in this context, requires not only putting together ideas and evidence clearly and convincingly. It also requires that we satisfy the requirements those institutions insist on for such a document. The author, the dissertation writer, has first to satisfy the immediate readers, the people who will say yes or no, pass or don't pass, go back and do it again and we'll have another look or, for the lucky ones, "Well done! Get it published and get on with your life and work." People who serve as this kind of reader--for the most part reasonable, sane people--still have to consider more than the quality of the work before them. They think about the politics of their departments ("Old George will have an apoplectic fit if you attack his favorite theory") or, more commonly, of the discipline ("I agree with what you have written, but if you take that unpopular position or write in that unconventional style you will have trouble getting your work published") and as a result suggest changes in substance and style that have no reason in logic or taste, but which result purely from academic convention.
(Howard Becker, undated)

3 dimensional model of discourse: journals

Commercial publication requirements Scholarly/disciplinary conventions, Open access?

Editing and Refereeing

Layer 1

Text

Discourse practice
Layer 2

Sociocultural practice
Layer 3

Thesis as genre

Three different types of thesis: The Big Book Publications plus exegesis Artefact plus exegesis

Thesis structures

IMRaD Narrative Chronological Guidebook

METAPHOR

Metaphors shape the way we think and act

Whats your metaphor for the PhD?

And your metaphor for working with the literatures?

Common metaphors
Water images
A puzzle/maze An unprepared researcher Bodily pain The answer is out there

Less frequently, the literatures are benign, incomplete, and the researcher is in control

Beginning literatures work: scoping

sketch out the nature of the field or fields relevant to the inquiry, possibly indicating something of their historical development and identify major debates and define contentious terms, in order to establish which studies, ideas and/or methods are most pertinent to the study and locate gaps in the field, in order to create the warrant for the study in question, and identify the contribution the study will make.

The dinner party

Who has to be

invited? Who is left out? Who is at the top table? What are the main topics of conversation?
Avoiding bad dinner party behaviour.

The table
Imagine that you are ... making a table. You have designed it and cut out some of the parts. Fortunately, you dont need to make all the parts yourself. Some are standard sizes and shapes lengths of two by four, for instance available at any lumber yard. Some have already been designed and made by other people drawer pulls and turned legs. All you have to do is fit them into the places you left for them, knowing that they were available. That is the best way to use the literature. You want to make an argument, instead of a table. You have created some of the argument yourself, perhaps on the basis of new data or information you have collected. But you neednt invent the whole thing. Other people have worked on your problem or problems related to it and have made some of the pieces you need. You just have to fit them in where they belong. Like the woodworker, you leave space, when you make your portion of the argument, for the other parts you know you can get. You do that, that is, if you know that they are there to use. And thats one good reason to know the literature: so that you will know what pieces are available and not waste time doing what has already been done. (Becker, 1986: 142)

The library
Pierre Bayard argues it is never possible to read everything and foolish to try or pretend. Rather it is important, he suggests, to try to grasp the shape of the collective library as well as the relationships that elements of the whole have with each other. He argues that people interested in books are those who not only take account of the content of any text that they read, but also its location in relation to those that they have not. It is the capacity to understand the place of a book within the collective library that makes it possible for a reader to merely skim the contents in order to grasp its most essential points. Bayard also proposes an inner library, a subset of the collective library. These are those particular books which orient individual readers to books in general and to other people. An inner library includes those books which have made a deep impression on the reader and those which are most useful and used.

DIY metaphor what does it mean for the writing?

Thesis literatures work

The purpose is to position a piece of research that has already been undertaken. The reader/examiner gets whats-already-known, plus the newly conducted piece of research this research as the contribution. The literature is used to locate the contribution, the what-we-now-know-that-we-didnt-before-and-whythis-is-important. Some texts and themes that were in the initial scoping review are omitted, and other things are now emphasized in order to make clear the connections and continuities, similarities and differences of the new research to whats gone before.

The stance to literatures

Be appreciative Ask what you know more of now youve read this Look for blank and blind spots

Vera drowns in detail

According to Belsey (2002: 57), Jacques Lacan reinterpreted Freud in the light of Lvi-Strauss and Saussure to delineate a subject was itself the location of a difference. Belsey goes on to explain that, for Lacan, the human being is an organism in culture. According to Lacan, speech was central to psycho-analytic practice. He argued that during the first two months of life a childs emergent sense of self was formed in relation to subjects, capable of signifying. Lacan calls this the Otherness of language. The big other, states Belsey, is there before we are, exists outside us and does not belong to us. The early writing of Barthes, says Norris (1982: 8), was aimed at a full-scale science of the text, modelled on the linguistics of Saussure and the structural anthropology of Lvi-Strauss. In Elements of Semiology (1967), Barthes takes the view of structuralism as a kind of mastercode capable of providing higher-level understanding. Culler (1976: 58) states that Barthes, in Elements of Semiology, speculated upon the ways in which langue and parole, signifier and signified, syntagmatic and paradigmatic might apply to various non-linguistic phenomena. Culler goes on to say that, for a semiologist studying the food system of a culture, parole is all the events of eating, whereas langue is the system of rules that underlies all these events. These would define, for example, what is edible, which dishes would be combined to create a meal and the conventions governing the syntactic ordering of items.

Geraldine does he said he said

Mortimore (1998) also contributes to the school effectiveness research agenda. He explains that school effectiveness researchers aim to ascertain whether differential resources, processes and organizational differences affect student performance and if so, how. He is also of the view that school effectiveness researchers seek reliable and appropriate ways to measure school quality. Hopkins (2001) suggests that one of the earliest studies that was done compared the effectiveness of some secondary schools on a range of student outcome measures. Reynolds and Cuttance (1992) also point out that the effective schools research entitled Fifteen Thousand Hours characterised school efficiency factors as varied in the degree of academic emphasis, teachers action in lessons, the availability of resources, rewards, good conditions for pupils and the extent to which children were able to take responsibility. It was emphasized that effective school researchers claim that there are significant differences between schools on a number of different student outcomes after full account has been taken of students previous learning history and family background. Hargreaves and Hopkins (1991) also endorse the view by stating that there is evidence to support the argument that the characteristics of individual schools can make a difference to pupils progress since certain internal conditions are common in schools that achieve higher levels of outcomes for their students.

Chris manages the reader and the literatures

This chapter traces the development of key concepts in film and education from the Report of the Commission on Educational and Cultural Films that led to the establishment of the British Film Institute in 1933 through to the early 1950s. In particular it explores the context of the Ministry of Educations 1944 experiment into the sponsored production of classroom films. While issues of organisational responsibility are discussed alongside developments in production, distribution and access to the medium, this is not intended as a history of the organisations involved. The aim is to track the evolution of a range of different and in some instances conflicting views on film and education asserted by the main organisations and individuals involved in its development. The title film and education is applied, as this period of development culminated in the parallel concepts of teaching about film and teaching through film. These two lines of thought regarding film and education remain at the centre of debates surrounding its pedagogical application and implications, and the form and style of the medium itself.

Talk to your neighbour

WHAT QUESTIONS DO YOU HAVE ?

http://patthomson.wor

dpress.com

patricia.thomson@ nottingham.ac.uk