Writing Techniques
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Writing Techniques as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 1,471
- Pages: 25
WRITING TECHNIQUES
Writing techniques Writing about the work of other authors Writing about your own thoughts ******************************
Writing about the work of other authors
o
Summarising Critiquing Voice
o o
Summarising
o o
A vital skill in research and all academic endeavours is the ability to summarise - that is, to reduce information to its essence without losing accuracy, by subsuming elaboration and detail into broad main points. It is useful for note-taking (from written and spoken delivery), for critical reference to previous research or theoretical frameworks as in a review of literature,
o for writing abstracts o for summarising your own findings. o for brief proposals or progress reports,
Summarising in an academic context nearly always means reducing someone else’s text or idea to a brief account, without losing the intention or the structure of the original.
Let’s try part of a step-by-step technique and you should find that your notes and other summaries are more useful to you in the end, with less time wasted and greater accuracy and internal logic.
The short summary
Read the journal article (part of) called ‘Interactive whole class teaching in the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies’ and carry out the task on the task sheet entitled The Short Summary.
Your answers should look something like this:
Critiquing
The word 'critique' is related to other words, such as critical, and critic, which are to do with having and stating an opinion about someone else's claim, statement or performance.
You critique (verb) the literature when you write about ideas in your field that are not your own, both to show you know the field, and as a context for your own research or ideas.
Usually, your critique (noun) follows your summary of the original. The reader can then appreciate your views about the validity of other writers' ideas. This summary/critique partnership gives you the basic building blocks for a literature review. Like some forms of summarising, critiquing is a form of indirect reporting - that is, you observe something and you relate or explain it to someone else as if they are hearing about it for the first time through you.
In the case of critiquing, your readers are given the added dimension of your interpretation and opinion, so they do not get a 'neutral' report as they would with a summary.
Depending on the 'voice' you use (paraphrasing, reporting or quoting), and the degree of 'author orientation', you can imply a great deal about your own position by selecting from a wide range of verbs to write about other authors.
Voice When you report on your own findings, you are likely to present them something like this: 'Table 2 shows that sixteen of the twenty respondents preferred the Communicative method.' You could also say: o 'The Communicative method was preferred by 80% of the respondents (see Table 2).' Or: o 'From the results shown in Table 2, it appears that the majority of respondents were in favour of the Communicative method.' o
In this case, your source of information is Table 2. Had you found the same results in Smith (1988, p 17), you would naturally substitute the name, date, and page number for Table 2. In each case, this is your voice introducing a fact that can be verified somewhere else.
Note that the tense used here is past for the fact itself ('preferred'; 'were in favour of'), and present for your part (or the source's part) in the reporting ('Table 2 shows that'; ' it appears that').
This is because the reported fact occurred specifically in the past, whereas both you and your sources are presenting it 'now' - that is, at the time that the reader is reading your document.
You use the two time frames to indicate the difference between what actually happened and how it is being presented right now.
Paraphrasing, reporting, quoting
Every time you repeat someone else's idea, you are providing a kind of summary - that is, your version is a very small part of a larger body of writing. You can choose to summarise in different ways for different purposes.
There are three basic ways in which you can combine an idea and its source with your own voice:
o direct quote o paraphrase o report
Each of these can be varied in many ways, but the distinction between them is important; the quality, depth and subtlety of your presentation may depend on the use you choose to make of each method.
Start with an idea expressed in one or more sentences as originally stated by the source. For example, Jones who wrote these words in 1997: ‘Teachers work with a multitude of problem situations, many of which can be characterised by complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity.' (Jones, M (2009). ‘Understanding students’ actions: the challenges'. Part 1. Kemuna Journal of Education, 43:167.)
Below are some examples of how this idea may be expressed by direct quote, paraphrase and report, combining your voice with that of Jones in ways which are endlessly variable for your purposes.
Direct quote: what were Jones' exact words? You can choose a single sentence or phrase from the original text which, in itself, sums up the main point being made by the author.
If you quote directly in this way, you must surround the exact original wording with single inverted commas, or choose to indent longer passages in smaller font, with no inverted commas. In each case, include in your reference the page number from which the extract is derived. Examples: Jones (1996: 167) wrote, 'teachers work with a multitude of problem situations, many of which can be characterised by complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity'.
As Jones observed in 1996, 'Teachers work with a multitude of problem situations, many of which can be characterised by complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity' (page 167).
'Teachers work with a multitude of problem situations' points out Jones (1996: 167), returning to the issue of social background. Many of these, he adds 'can be characterised by complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity'.
Paraphrase: what was Jones' idea?
This process basically means repeating or rewriting a statement in your own words from an 'inside' stance. You can restate the content in reduced form without mentioning the author by name, but writing as if you were using the author's 'voice'. This gives prominence to the information itself, while the author is (must be) added simply as a reference, either by name/date or by number.
Many complex, unique, even ambiguous problem situations are familiar to teachers (Jones 1997).
That many of the problem situations encountered by teachers can be imbued with complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity, is a phenomenon pointed out by Jones (1997).
Report: what did Jones do? You can report the content by describing indirectly what the author wrote, as if you were an observer reporting the author's action or intention. Use your own 'voice' as if speaking about this author to someone else and restate the main points from an 'outside' stance. This gives greater prominence to the presence and authority of the original writer. It also allows you to imply your own level of acceptance of the author's point.
Although Jones (1997) claimed that many of the problem situations faced by teachers can be characterised by complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity, he did not pursue this line of argument.
Jones (1997) characterises the multitude of problem situations faced by teachers, describing them as complex, unique and ambiguous.
Referring to the complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity of problem situations that arise in teaching, Jones (1997) provides a professional context for the significance of social background.
Jones' claim (1997) that the characteristics of problem situations for teachers demand sensitivity to social background, is supported by several recent research studies (refs).
Use each of these methods to suit your own purposes, especially in a review of literature, where you should be displaying control over the way in which ideas and counter ideas are understood in relation to each other.
(Go to task sheet on identifying three types)
Emphasis
o
o
You can develop your own argument in the choice of language used to report on findings or viewpoints of various authors. Verbs used to report an author's idea may: indicate if the writer agrees/ disagrees with the author: 'Johnson (1996) claims that ... ' indicate if the author agrees/ disagrees with other authors in the field: 'Brown (1985) agrees that ... '
indicate strong opinion/no opinion held by the author: Strong opinion: 'Cook (1979) asserts that ... ' No opinion: 'Adams (1993) reports that ... '
(Go to task sheet)
Writing techniques Writing about the work of other authors Writing about your own thoughts ******************************
Writing about the work of other authors
o
Summarising Critiquing Voice
o o
Summarising
o o
A vital skill in research and all academic endeavours is the ability to summarise - that is, to reduce information to its essence without losing accuracy, by subsuming elaboration and detail into broad main points. It is useful for note-taking (from written and spoken delivery), for critical reference to previous research or theoretical frameworks as in a review of literature,
o for writing abstracts o for summarising your own findings. o for brief proposals or progress reports,
Summarising in an academic context nearly always means reducing someone else’s text or idea to a brief account, without losing the intention or the structure of the original.
Let’s try part of a step-by-step technique and you should find that your notes and other summaries are more useful to you in the end, with less time wasted and greater accuracy and internal logic.
The short summary
Read the journal article (part of) called ‘Interactive whole class teaching in the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies’ and carry out the task on the task sheet entitled The Short Summary.
Your answers should look something like this:
Critiquing
The word 'critique' is related to other words, such as critical, and critic, which are to do with having and stating an opinion about someone else's claim, statement or performance.
You critique (verb) the literature when you write about ideas in your field that are not your own, both to show you know the field, and as a context for your own research or ideas.
Usually, your critique (noun) follows your summary of the original. The reader can then appreciate your views about the validity of other writers' ideas. This summary/critique partnership gives you the basic building blocks for a literature review. Like some forms of summarising, critiquing is a form of indirect reporting - that is, you observe something and you relate or explain it to someone else as if they are hearing about it for the first time through you.
In the case of critiquing, your readers are given the added dimension of your interpretation and opinion, so they do not get a 'neutral' report as they would with a summary.
Depending on the 'voice' you use (paraphrasing, reporting or quoting), and the degree of 'author orientation', you can imply a great deal about your own position by selecting from a wide range of verbs to write about other authors.
Voice When you report on your own findings, you are likely to present them something like this: 'Table 2 shows that sixteen of the twenty respondents preferred the Communicative method.' You could also say: o 'The Communicative method was preferred by 80% of the respondents (see Table 2).' Or: o 'From the results shown in Table 2, it appears that the majority of respondents were in favour of the Communicative method.' o
In this case, your source of information is Table 2. Had you found the same results in Smith (1988, p 17), you would naturally substitute the name, date, and page number for Table 2. In each case, this is your voice introducing a fact that can be verified somewhere else.
Note that the tense used here is past for the fact itself ('preferred'; 'were in favour of'), and present for your part (or the source's part) in the reporting ('Table 2 shows that'; ' it appears that').
This is because the reported fact occurred specifically in the past, whereas both you and your sources are presenting it 'now' - that is, at the time that the reader is reading your document.
You use the two time frames to indicate the difference between what actually happened and how it is being presented right now.
Paraphrasing, reporting, quoting
Every time you repeat someone else's idea, you are providing a kind of summary - that is, your version is a very small part of a larger body of writing. You can choose to summarise in different ways for different purposes.
There are three basic ways in which you can combine an idea and its source with your own voice:
o direct quote o paraphrase o report
Each of these can be varied in many ways, but the distinction between them is important; the quality, depth and subtlety of your presentation may depend on the use you choose to make of each method.
Start with an idea expressed in one or more sentences as originally stated by the source. For example, Jones who wrote these words in 1997: ‘Teachers work with a multitude of problem situations, many of which can be characterised by complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity.' (Jones, M (2009). ‘Understanding students’ actions: the challenges'. Part 1. Kemuna Journal of Education, 43:167.)
Below are some examples of how this idea may be expressed by direct quote, paraphrase and report, combining your voice with that of Jones in ways which are endlessly variable for your purposes.
Direct quote: what were Jones' exact words? You can choose a single sentence or phrase from the original text which, in itself, sums up the main point being made by the author.
If you quote directly in this way, you must surround the exact original wording with single inverted commas, or choose to indent longer passages in smaller font, with no inverted commas. In each case, include in your reference the page number from which the extract is derived. Examples: Jones (1996: 167) wrote, 'teachers work with a multitude of problem situations, many of which can be characterised by complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity'.
As Jones observed in 1996, 'Teachers work with a multitude of problem situations, many of which can be characterised by complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity' (page 167).
'Teachers work with a multitude of problem situations' points out Jones (1996: 167), returning to the issue of social background. Many of these, he adds 'can be characterised by complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity'.
Paraphrase: what was Jones' idea?
This process basically means repeating or rewriting a statement in your own words from an 'inside' stance. You can restate the content in reduced form without mentioning the author by name, but writing as if you were using the author's 'voice'. This gives prominence to the information itself, while the author is (must be) added simply as a reference, either by name/date or by number.
Many complex, unique, even ambiguous problem situations are familiar to teachers (Jones 1997).
That many of the problem situations encountered by teachers can be imbued with complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity, is a phenomenon pointed out by Jones (1997).
Report: what did Jones do? You can report the content by describing indirectly what the author wrote, as if you were an observer reporting the author's action or intention. Use your own 'voice' as if speaking about this author to someone else and restate the main points from an 'outside' stance. This gives greater prominence to the presence and authority of the original writer. It also allows you to imply your own level of acceptance of the author's point.
Although Jones (1997) claimed that many of the problem situations faced by teachers can be characterised by complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity, he did not pursue this line of argument.
Jones (1997) characterises the multitude of problem situations faced by teachers, describing them as complex, unique and ambiguous.
Referring to the complexity, uniqueness and ambiguity of problem situations that arise in teaching, Jones (1997) provides a professional context for the significance of social background.
Jones' claim (1997) that the characteristics of problem situations for teachers demand sensitivity to social background, is supported by several recent research studies (refs).
Use each of these methods to suit your own purposes, especially in a review of literature, where you should be displaying control over the way in which ideas and counter ideas are understood in relation to each other.
(Go to task sheet on identifying three types)
Emphasis
o
o
You can develop your own argument in the choice of language used to report on findings or viewpoints of various authors. Verbs used to report an author's idea may: indicate if the writer agrees/ disagrees with the author: 'Johnson (1996) claims that ... ' indicate if the author agrees/ disagrees with other authors in the field: 'Brown (1985) agrees that ... '
indicate strong opinion/no opinion held by the author: Strong opinion: 'Cook (1979) asserts that ... ' No opinion: 'Adams (1993) reports that ... '
(Go to task sheet)
Related Documents
Writing Techniques
November 2019 11
Beyrouth Writing Techniques
June 2020 1
Principles In Designing Writing Techniques
November 2019 21
Techniques
April 2020 35
Task Sheet For Session On Writing Techniques
November 2019 5