In any case, when you are deciding on a rhetorical stance latex phdthesis, choose one that allows you to be sincere. You don't want to take an authoritative stance on a subject if you aren't confident about what you are saying. On the other hand, you can't avoid taking a position on a subject: nothing is worse than reading a paper in which the writer has refused to take a stance. What if you are of two minds on a subject? Declare that to the reader. Make ambivalence your clear rhetorical stance. When you analyze, you break down a text into its parts. When you synthesize, you look for connections between ideas. Consider once again the Hitchcock film. In analyzing this film, you might come up with elements that seem initially disparate. You may have some observations that at first don't seem to gel. Or you may have read various critical perspectives on the film, all of them in disagreement with one another. Now would be the time to consider whether these disparate elements or observations might be reconciled, or synthesized. This intellectual exercise requires that you create an umbrella argument - some larger argument under which several observations and perspectives might stand. Remember: professors are human beings, capable of boredom, laughter, irritation, and awe. Understand that you are writing to a person who is delighted when you make your point clearly, concisely, and persuasively. Understand, too, that she is less delighted when you have inflated your prose, pumped up your page count, or tried to impress her by using terms that you didn't take the time to understand. How does one move from personal response to analytical writing? The tone and style of academic writing might at first seem intimidating. But they needn't be. Professors want students to write clearly and intelligently on matters that they, the students, care about. What professors DON'T want is imitation scholarship - that is, exalted gibberish that no one cares about. If the student didn't care to write the paper do you write essays in first person, the professor probably won't care to read it. The tone of an academic paper, then, must be inviting to the reader, even while it maintains an appropriate academic style. Your position on a topic does not by itself determine your rhetorical stance. You must also consider your reader. In the college classroom, the audience is usually the professor or your classmates - although occasionally your professor will instruct you to write for a more particular or more general audience. No matter who your reader is, you will want to consider him carefully before you start to write. Many students writing in college have trouble figuring out what constitutes an appropriate topic. Sometimes the professor will provide you with a prompt. She will give you a question to explore rule of law essays, or a problem to resolve. When you are given a prompt by your professor, be sure to read it carefully. Your professor is setting the parameters of the assignment for you. She is telling you what sort of paper will be appropriate. When you begin to answer all of these questions, you have started to reckon with what has been called "the rhetorical stance." "Rhetorical stance" refers to the position you take as a writer in terms of the subject and the reader of your paper. One of the first things you'll discover as a college student is that writing in college is different from writing in high school. Certainly a lot of what your high school writing teachers taught you will be useful to you as you approach writing in college: you will want to write clearly, to have an interesting and arguable thesis, to construct paragraphs that are coherent and focused example of creative writing, and so on. When writing an academic paper, you must not only consider what you want to say essay student life in school, you must also consider to whom you are saying it. In other words, it's important to determine not only what you think about a topic, but also what your audience is likely to think. What are your audience's biases? Values? Expectations? Knowledge? To whom are you writing, and for what purpose? The process of evaluation is an ongoing one. You evaluate a text the moment you encounter it essay about christmas, and you continue to evaluate and to re-evaluate as you go along. Evaluating a text is different from simply reacting to a text. When you evaluate for an academic purpose, it is important to be able to clearly articulate and to support your own personal response. What in the text is leading you to respond a certain way? What's not in the text that might be contributing to your response? Watching Hitchcock's film, you are likely to have found yourself feeling anxious, caught up in the film's suspense. What in the film is making you feel this way? The editing? The acting? Can you point to a moment in the film that is particularly successful in creating suspense? In asking these questions, you are straddling two intellectual processes: experiencing your own personal response, and analyzing the text. So how does a student make a successful transition from high school to college? First, summarize what the primary text is saying. You'll notice that you can construct several different summaries, depending on your agenda. Returning to the example of Hitchcock's film, you might make a plot summary, a summary of its themes, a summary of its editing do my homework history, and so on. You can also summarize what you know about the film in context. In other words, you might write a summary of the difficulties Hitchcock experienced in the film's production, or you might write a summary of how this particular movie complements or challenges other films in the Hitchcock canon. You can also summarize what others have said about the film. Film critics have written much about Hitchcock, his films, and their genre. Try to summarize all that you know. The first thing that you'll need to understand is that writing in college is for the most part a particular kind of writing, called "academic writing." While academic writing might be defined in many ways word format for essays, there are three concepts that you need to understand before you write your first academic paper. The article, “United States health care reform: progress to date and next steps”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in July, took pole position in a top 100 list compiled by Altmetric, a London start-up that tracks and analyses the online activity around scholarly literature. The paper from the outgoing US president resulted in the highest Altmetric “attention score” ever tracked terms papers, 8,063, compared with a score of 4,912 for the second-most popular article. Barack Obama’s research on US healthcare reform – the first academic article to be published by a sitting US president – has topped a list of the most popular online papers of the year. - Say it once, say it right. Do not say argument in drips and drabs. Group similar points in one place - In writing a first draft text essay on hard work, aim for at most 80% of target. So 0.8*8K = 6,500 words - argumentative plus analytic Designed sequences are in stark contrast to “given structures” such as the meachanistic or conventional approaches discussed above. It is especially helpful to try to avoid structures that are just a ‘record of work done’ or the pure conventional structure still used in technical disciplines. Three basic designs are feasible: - Apply the BBC test — does every element “build, blur, or corrode” the paper? Every piece in your writing does one of these three. Writing that builds moves things forward. Waffle or unclear or un-necessary writing needs to be corrected or deleted. Corrosive writing needs to be deleted. Pre-core materials are: Lead-in, throat clearing — minimum 5 paragraphs Writing for research. Twitter: @Write4Research All the bits of your paper need to fit together — in an ‘industrial strength’ mode where every bit supports the whole. To check this examples of topics and thesis statements, isolate out the parts below and see how they complement and reinforce (but don’t repeat or contradict) each other. · Overall conclusion — at the start of this section mirror the last paragraph of your introduction but now substantively answering the questions posed, not asking them. Later on in the conclusion, open out to next stage research questions. Source: arXiv:1410.2217v1 [cs.DL] 8 Oct 2014 Aim to divide the text relatively evenly into same-size main sections. - Flatten the structure. If you have too many headings without text in between, your structure is probably to complex. You need to flatten it, have fewer sections/building blocs (8 in conventional structure, maybe 4 in designed sequences) 1. The focus-down model. Perhaps 90% of work done still uses the focus down model. There two major models for structuring an academic paper: 1. the conventional model; and 2. the design model. Whatever method you use, it is important to set it up right, and plan your paper beforehand. You may find it useful to also c heck tips in my post on storyboarding research . · selects more, structures more - Do one thing well — cut out digressions, and secondary materials - Don’t write much less than the required length either. e.g. if norm is 6k, then anything under 6K looks too short The structure is set outside you. Examples include: · It doesn’t personalize or distinctively organize the information being covered. You need to realistically identify what the core is, in other words what the value added is · your supervisor/department takes a strong, closed view (‘there is no alternative’) · Even wrong-headed comments have value — they show you where misunderstandings arise This model uses a very quick set-up to move straight into the core. It can be hard to do this well. Some traditionalists in humanities and social sciences disciplines do not like it — because there is insufficient literature/ ancestor worship. - Don’t despise short article forms, notes etc. These models differ a lot in how long readers have to wait before reaching ‘core’ material — the most original or value-added evidence or components. You have to decide what the core is from a reader’s point of view. The core is where you talk about new findings or show independent critical power.
0 Comentarios
Deja una respuesta. |
ArchivosCategorías |