1.30: Literature Review _ Berlin, Bizell & Kirsch&Ritchie

Characterizing yourself as a researcher:

You started class with some writing about your preferences/feelings associated with the four features Mertens uses to characterize the research paradigms: ontology, epistemology, methodology, and axiology.  This was meant to provide a collaborative chance to explore your assumptions about the way the world is, how knowledge is made + how to document it accurately and ethically AS PART OF your process for developing a research project.  

You also did some writing to think about your research project.  You have some time to think about this - but thinking about your thesis project at the same time you are studying research methodologies (and their underlying assumptions) can help you choose a project that is suited to your habits of thinking and relating to others.

Literature review

Choosing your focus: We did some talking about what kind of relationship you want to have with your research topic, and, in response to Mertens' prompt, we developed a list of factors that might influence your choice.

personal interest

intellectual curiosity

"distance"/objectivity v closeness/insider status to your research community 

 commitment to or investment in the study's purpose

the time-frame/resources necessary for the project

relationships to stakeholders/participants

how you want to "use" your research (to get a job, to fullfill personal goal, to pursue and educational goal...)

We glossed over differences between preliminary, primary + secondary resources, and focused on developing a research strategy.  Because Mertens is very clear and well organized, I emphasized non-mainstream methods (such as using the internet, forums, and Amazon) and left the more respectable discussions about using databases to her.  We briefly discussed how to narrow down your sources to the "most important" for your purposes; basically you need to walk the line between including the most important (most often cited) scholars relevant to your particular project, and dealing with researchers who are working on projects that are very close/relevant to your (but not necessarily cited so frequently).  I didn't mention this in class, but you should have sources not only to establishe  your focus = but also your methods - and any "challenges' to your ideas that you might want to address.

Reaction papers

I presented a poorly proofread reaction paper and offered a teacherly version of a presentation.  There is lots of room for you to improve on my performance.  The idea is that your presentation will help classmates collect their thoughts and consolidate their understanding of the ideas in the essay you are presenting.  You are the expert (I will help out if you ask), and you will be expected to lead the discussion.   As it turned out we spent most of our time on the content & my reaction = with not much attention to the question.  If your discussion works out that way - that's OK - just remember the idea is for the reaction papers to direct classmates' understanding and critique of the essays.  

Other readings
If you have questions about Bizzell an Kirsch & Ritchie - we can pick up on them next week.  Kirsch and Ritchie are particularly important in terms of thinking about how to do research that goes against dominant discourse (so that in some cases it is not possible to state your position without invoking a form or subject position that goes against your work's belief system).  Bizzell's piece is important in that it shows where composition was in terms of thinking about identity back in the 1980s.  Bizzell mentions the students right to their own language policy adopted by CCC, and indicates that compositionists' commitment to respecting the students' individual identities in some ways runs counter to the idea of  developmental stages.  She also points out the narrow focus of the study as compared to the broad claims (as a developmental theory -rather than particular observations about males of a particular age at a particular elite school).

For next week
Read:  Mertens,  Ch 5: Causal Comparative and Correlational Research;  Mertens;  Appendix: Research Proposals;  Brodkey  (1989) p 621;  Sommers  (1980), 43. 

Due: NIH training certificate (see assignment sheet- with link to training site -posted to the right)

I will work on posting the pdfs for the other readings - hopefully they will be up by next week. 

Useful links

A list of Writing Studies resources


List of preliminary (with links to secondary sources)
Association of Writers and Writing Programs
The Kean University English Department is a member, so you should be entitled to access - either through the Department, or through the Kean data bases.


The Art of Creative Research  (link from the Writer's Chronicle)


Becky Moore Howard's biliographies


Composition journals (grouped by topic)


Poets and Writers (full access available through Kean databases)


Research bibliographies (for composition, listed  by topic)


The Writer's Chronicle (creative writing resources = scroll down)




Networked communities/forums
CBW_Listserv


The Speakeasy


The WPA_Listserv


The Writer's Circle


WCenter




Professional organizations
American Educational Research Association


Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)


Association of Teachers of Technical Writing (ATTW)


Association of Writers and Writing Programs

Computers & Writing


Conference on Basic Writing


Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC)


Council of Writing Program Administrators


Modern Language Association


The National Council of Teachers of English


New Jersey Writing Alliance


Rhetoric Society of America


WAC Clearinghouse

Overview of course + research paradigms

NOTE:  Cross-talk in Comp Theory is sold out at the bookstore.  If you are waiting for a book you ordered online and would like to read the assigned essays, they were all published in journals available on the Kean database.  The references are:


James A Berlin's "Contemporary Compostion: The Major Pedagogical Theories" was published  in College English 44.8 (December 1982): 765-77.


Gesa Kirsch and Joy Ritchie's "Beyond the Personal: Theorizing a Politics of Location in Composition Research" was published in College Composition and Communication 46.1 (february 1995): 7-29.


and Patricia Bizzell's "William Perry and Liberal Education" was published in College English 46.5 (September 1984): 447-54.




Class January 23 set up the course.  We talked through the syllabus, calendar & major assignments and got started on a discussion of terminology for talking about research in writing studies.  


You also did some writing meant to help you think about your identity as a researcher.  Careful attention to the values, assumptions, and interests implied in the answers to the research interests survey, and  in the fast-writing where you designed a study, can help you identify gaps or tensions between your research goals - and the tools/ideas/and experiences you have to "draw from" to do that research. 


This course will be a "research resource": a place where you can explore (with me, classmates = and the writers in our textbooks) models and concepts for research.  Our discussions will be places for you to imagine, re-think, and plan both your thesis - and your identity within the community of researchers who both participate in and study discourse, writing, and the teaching of writing.  


Reaction papers:
We spent some time discussing the reaction paper assignment.  This discussion was to "set you up." No reaction paper assignments are actually due until February 6 (see Reaction Paper sign-up sheet in your google.docs).  


You will have various models, both for the reaction paper, and for the "presentation," in the reading assignments and in class next week.  For now, read the assignments (listed at the end of this post), and look through the essays listed on the Sign-up sheet.  Think about which essays make the best connection to your research interests.  Pay attention to which essays are associated with which methods - or skim some of the essays - to get a feel for which essays use methods that you might want to use.  

We agreed in class that you would not actually choose essays until we got together as a class and talked through the line up.  So look through and pick 4 or 5 that might interest you.  


Research paradigms and research language
We talked through the 4 x 4 matrix posed by Mertens: postpositivist, constructivist, transformative and pragmatic research paradigm characterized in terms of their ontology, epistemology, axiology, and methods.  A chart summarizing our discussion is posted to the right.  It is important for you to get comfortable with the language used for this discussion, and language to name important features of research (the list that includes the terms subjects/participants/stakeholders; independent/dependent variables, etc).  As we consider each method - we will think about how it plays out within the different paradigms, and we will use the language used to describe features of research.  


For next class: 
Read:  Mertens, Ch 3: Literature Review; Berlin (1982), 235; Bizzell (1984), 299 (this is a sample reaction paper); Kirsch & Ritchie (1995), 485. student reaction paper (and the essay he "reacted" to) = posted to the right
Write:  NIH training (due February 6)


What we will do January 30
In class we will begin with a discussion/some interactive writing to answer any questions you might have about literature reviews.  Of the research methods we will study, this may be the approach you are most familiar with, as it can be similar to the kind of writing produced for English classes. 


We will then spend some time looking at the "model" literature review essays = particularly Berlin (1982) + Kirsch & Ritchie (1995).  We will use these essays both to think about what kind of "research" unfolds within  literature reviews = and to begin to map the history of composition as a discipline as it unfolded within larger cultural trends in the United States.


We will also have an "overview" discussion of the essays for the course that will set you up to choose the essays you want to take the lead on (write reaction papers for) during class discussion.

Thanks for a great first class, and see you next week!