1. In the essay "Building a Mystery," Davis and Shadle are simply arguing the academic world's idea of what a research paper should look like. They feel that research papers should not be all grouped into large category, but broken down into four smaller categories based on the content and goal of the essay.
2. Davis and Shadle had two main purposes for arguing the widely accepted and historical research paper. First, they wanted to provide teachers and students (especially college-level) with a new, more sophisticated way of writing research papers. Second, they wanted to see how the students' way of thinking changed after using their system.
3. The belief throughout the essay was that the current research paper was something that students put as little effort into as possible and was completed solely to be completed. They believed that instead of increasing their knowledge and gaining expertise on a certain topic, students were mindlessly taking information from sources and rewriting it in an essay. Their essay is basically an attempt to prove that the current research paper is obsolete when compared to their model and that it could solve the problems of current student research writing.
4. Davis and Shadle thought that students would have a much easier time writing a research essay if given the opportunity to choose from a number of formats. By creating the four different types, students could choose the one that would best fit their information/ assignment and have an easier time writing the paper. For example, the personal research paper would be helpful when writing a research paper that required both factual/ studied information, along with personal experience.
Personally, I feel that Davis and Shadle were correct in thinking that research essay writing is rather boring for students and is in most cases done as quickly as possible just to get it done. I've never been concerned about increasing my intellectual curiosity and exploring data further than just brushing its surface, unless I was really interested in the topic (which in many cases isn't the students choice anyway). Now, am I totally convinced that their system would work? Not really. I can't really see students becoming more interested in doing research just because they have a better model to work with. It may be a good idea, however, the fact that an old model has already been put into students' heads, makes it hard to believe this idea will work.
Saying all this, there were good points throughout the essay that helped me understand research writing a little more. It seemed to be more lenient than i thought, due to the dependence on the information used and point of the paper. The section that helped me the most was the "personal research paper," because I now understand better how to incorporate personal thoughts into a research paper. One comment I found interesting was "The authors recommend that research writers imagine themselves in conversation with the readers" (Davis and Shadle 427). It made it easier to picture a way to put personal thought into the paper.
A project that would work well with Davis and Shadle's model would be group research papers that require good communication from members of the group. A more detailed format would allow the final product to be more clean and organized.
Tyler, I think that your reading of Davis and Shadle is a bit off-- they are, in fact, arguing for a new model of the research paper that focuses instead on what they call "mystery" and seeking, one that is driven by genuine interest.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I do like how you aren't just taking what they say wholeheartedly. I agree that many students find it frustrating to have to learn a new model, and don't automatically enjoy it. Also, the "old model" often works in various ways, especially given that businesses and other disciplines want that model.
I don't know what you mean by your last two sentences; I expect I will hear more about it in class.