Tuesday, February 28, 2017
new, authoritative model for the results section
Click here for the model to follow. I'll discuss this one briefly in class on 3/1. While both in APA, I think this version is a little more intuitive to follow as a model because of the numbering. I'm not saying the one discussed on 2/27 is better or worse. It's just that the other one, this one, follows a consistent numbering patterning--in other words, the introduction = 1, the methods will then be 1.1, while the results section will start on 2. And then you can do each of your theme groups 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and so on. The discussion section will be 3, the conclusion 4, and then "references." Remember, "work cited" is MLA. In APA, it's "references."
Like I said, I chose this version to obviate the quandary as to whether to number the whole thing. Now you know. You have to number the whole thing. And the results section will be converted into a series of thematically grouped numbers:
Like I said, I chose this version to obviate the quandary as to whether to number the whole thing. Now you know. You have to number the whole thing. And the results section will be converted into a series of thematically grouped numbers:
Monday, February 27, 2017
Writing Center instructions
Hello fellow Writing Center consultant,
If you're reading this, you're sitting with one of my students, wondering what to do next. Due on 3/17 is a 6-7 page, Times New Roman font, 1-inch margins, 12-point font results section of a literature review paper. There is an example of a published literature review from AJPH in the "files" section on Canvas, if either of you is curious what one looks like. This paper is also in APA.
The plan for the paper is not to do it all at once. So, the paper doesn't need an introduction, a conclusion, discussion section, method section, etc. The paper will need all of those things eventually. But we're doing all that after spring break. The results section is the most difficult and substantive part of the paper, and, as such, needed to be done first.
But, in term of the results section of the paper itself, I don't expect a masterpiece. After all, this is just the paper's first major draft. And it'll be compressed down to a smaller length later on. What I'm really looking for is organization. When I say "organization," I mean the rationale by which they decide what studies go in which paragraph, and how the paragraphs are arranged and sequenced together for the purpose of arriving at their own conclusion.
Every paper ought to have subsections, that is, because published literature reviews in the field of public health have subsections, so one really great thing you two could do together is brainstorm how to break up the results section into, say, three smaller subsections, and make an outline for one of these sections. (The number of subsections could also be two. But, if they want to do any more than four or less than two [i.e., none at all], they'll have to come talk to me first.) The number one thing I'm concerned about is that they simply develop a good rationale for what goes with what and why.
They have an assignment coming up in which they have to do just this (the synthesis proposal), and I'm not opposed to you two working on that assignment, either, especially since it basically asks for the same thing: namely, to re-contextualize the results of different studies in the form of a story, while also breaking the task into subsections for increased readability. (I'm also a fan of good, very informative titles for the subsections.)
So, brainstorming is good; outlines are good; figuring out how to tell a story with data is good; collectively figuring out what studies go together and why is good, etc. But that's where they're going: i.e., the synthesis proposal, and then the result section of the literature review.
Also, email me at drakestechnicalwritingclass@gmail.com
Drake
Friday, February 24, 2017
Wednesday, February 22, 2017
cont.
division = divides a concept into areas
In the research literature on EPB, there are at least two different ways to think about the term "complexity." There is the sense in which the decision-making process of the practitioner is considered too complex to reduce to the EPB's stringent, deductive criteria (Kemm, 2006). But it is also used in the pejorative sense to show how the strategies to discredit sound scientific judgement are becoming ever more sophisticated (Rosenstock & Lee, 2002).
more and less = presenting information in terms of size
Overwhelmingly, the rejoinder from the qualitative camp is that EBP research is too reductive, that is, because its criteria are too narrow to include many individuals that the research de facto applies to (Lenne & Waldby, 2011). On of the things that more qualitative, or at least mixed methods research does is increase a research program's scope: in other words, these researchers argue for a broad and generousness sense of complexity that refers to the richness of life, plus the attitude of being unwilling or unable to reduce it to deductive terms (Martin & Sturmberg, 2009).
space = sets for the parameters of work; tries to see things "next to" or 'beside" other things (in any way it can)
Interestingly, as soon as one extends the reach of EBP into the realm of public health, we immediately begin to see the limits of its usefulness. In other words, it can be argued that EBP is better at home in the context of medical research, that is, used by and for other medical researchers. But, as soon as practitioners in public health try to re-purpose this knowledge for lay consumption, it begins to break down. Surely, there is a scientific way to determine what the best method for breast feeding is, but, as what happens when we try to apply that knowledge at an inner city women's center (in Aveyard 2014)? It's not that it does't apply. But additional research is needed to determine what epistemic supplements EBP needs to be effective in context.
In the research literature on EPB, there are at least two different ways to think about the term "complexity." There is the sense in which the decision-making process of the practitioner is considered too complex to reduce to the EPB's stringent, deductive criteria (Kemm, 2006). But it is also used in the pejorative sense to show how the strategies to discredit sound scientific judgement are becoming ever more sophisticated (Rosenstock & Lee, 2002).
more and less = presenting information in terms of size
Overwhelmingly, the rejoinder from the qualitative camp is that EBP research is too reductive, that is, because its criteria are too narrow to include many individuals that the research de facto applies to (Lenne & Waldby, 2011). On of the things that more qualitative, or at least mixed methods research does is increase a research program's scope: in other words, these researchers argue for a broad and generousness sense of complexity that refers to the richness of life, plus the attitude of being unwilling or unable to reduce it to deductive terms (Martin & Sturmberg, 2009).
space = sets for the parameters of work; tries to see things "next to" or 'beside" other things (in any way it can)
Interestingly, as soon as one extends the reach of EBP into the realm of public health, we immediately begin to see the limits of its usefulness. In other words, it can be argued that EBP is better at home in the context of medical research, that is, used by and for other medical researchers. But, as soon as practitioners in public health try to re-purpose this knowledge for lay consumption, it begins to break down. Surely, there is a scientific way to determine what the best method for breast feeding is, but, as what happens when we try to apply that knowledge at an inner city women's center (in Aveyard 2014)? It's not that it does't apply. But additional research is needed to determine what epistemic supplements EBP needs to be effective in context.
Tuesday, February 21, 2017
topoi, 2/22
Click here for the topoi. This is the expanded one from the internet.
And here is one more. This is the smaller word document that's not from the internet.
Rosenstock, L. & Lee, L. J. (2002). Attacks on Science: the risks to evidence-based policy. American Journal of Public Health, 92(1), 14-18.
Kemm, J. (2006). The limitations of 'evidence-based' practice. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 12(3). 319-324.
Martin, C. M. & Sturmberg J. P. (2009). Perturbing ongoing conversations about systems and complexity in health services and systems. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 15(3), 549-552.
Lenne, B. S. & Waldby C. (2011). Sorting out autism spectrum disorders: evidence-based medicine and the complexities of the clinical encounter. Health Sociology Review, 20(1), 70-83. Print.
Victora, C. G., Habicht, J., & Brice, J. (2004) Evidence-based public health: moving beyond randomized trials. American Journal of Public Health, 94(3), 400-405.
(6) Social Justice
(7) Mistaken Critic
And here is one more. This is the smaller word document that's not from the internet.
(1) Appearance versus reality + dissoi logoi =
One organizational strategy I could try is to say that, while it seems as if EBP is the "gold standard" and that qualitative research is derivative and subjective (Rosenstock & Lee, 2002), this form of knowledge-making actually de-privileges the decision-making and negotiation process of parents and practitioners, both the experiential knowledge of parents and expertise of the practitioners (Kemm, 2006). But, to be fair, this latter type of research is open to bias and manipulation because of the way research funding works. Perhaps this is one of the reasons to support mixed methods research.
Rosenstock, L. & Lee, L. J. (2002). Attacks on Science: the risks to evidence-based policy. American Journal of Public Health, 92(1), 14-18.
Kemm, J. (2006). The limitations of 'evidence-based' practice. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 12(3). 319-324.
(2) Paradox
What's weird about the reaction to EPB is the implication that complexity can be garnered through an application of less energy to the research site, by ceasing to busy the subjects to whom the research is aimed with data they simply don't have a use for (Martin & Sturmberg, 2009).
Martin, C. M. & Sturmberg J. P. (2009). Perturbing ongoing conversations about systems and complexity in health services and systems. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 15(3), 549-552.
(3) Paradigm
A popular argument against EBP maintains that this type of research is counterintuitively so scientific as to preclude a use-value among those who would most benefit from it (Lenne & Waldby, 2011). Yet, if we see this claim in terms of those who support EBP, we might say, the point isn't to make an unusable product, and the product isn't unusable: the point is to eliminate potential bias to encourage as many re-purposing down the road as possible. In other words, if research is contextually situated and inapplicable to other situations from the get go, that actually has no use-use. EBP research has actually maximum use value precisely because it can potentially be re-purposed an indefinite amount of times (Rosenstock & Lee, 2002).
Lenne, B. S. & Waldby C. (2011). Sorting out autism spectrum disorders: evidence-based medicine and the complexities of the clinical encounter. Health Sociology Review, 20(1), 70-83. Print.
(4) Ubiquity
What makes "complexity" such a tricky term to pin down in the context of EBP is how it gets used in so many different ways. Across different articles, each researcher or team of researchers has their own definition, which is exacerbated across the quantitive and qualitative studies (Rosenstock & Lee, 2002; Martin & Sturmberg, 2009; Kemm, 2006).
Victora, C. G., Habicht, J., & Brice, J. (2004) Evidence-based public health: moving beyond randomized trials. American Journal of Public Health, 94(3), 400-405.
(5) Context / Intention
While some do claim that EBP and its relation to the pubic is hampered in terms of causality (Victora, Habicht, & Brice, 2004), we have to remember that these claims have taken place only in the policy literature and therefore at the level of general discussion. No studies have actually tried to map the re-purposing of EBP studies that do in fact take place down on the ground in practice.
(6) Social Justice
(7) Mistaken Critic
Sunday, February 19, 2017
Saturday, February 18, 2017
Friday, February 17, 2017
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
Monday, February 13, 2017
Sunday, February 12, 2017
in class work 2-13 -> 2-15
Here's an example of another student from a different semester doing a synthesis matrix.
Our's is close to this, but not quite, because, to obviate redundancy, I'm collapsing two assignments into one: that's why this assignment is called the "critical appraisal/synthesis matrix."
These questions might help you critically evaluate.
By "critical appraisal," part of what I mean is in Aveyard (p. 144):
Pay particular attention to the strengths and limitations on the far right. A full critical appraisal would also seek to answer questions such as these (p. 109):
These questions are similar to these, which I also linked above. Use these above questions not only to trigger critical thinking but also to input the strengths and limitations you need for the critical appraisal/synthesis matrix. You'll also have to consider the context:
Notice how the setting in which the research was conducted directly bear on how strong the evidence is for this research question (i.e., your research question).
Ok. I just made a rudimentary critical appraisal/synthesis matrix grid. Don't feel obligated to use this exact grid. In fact I really dislike it. But it'll work. But you have to make one with all of these categories. And you have to do it for all ten of your required sources. That is, you will need to find and tentatively work with ten sources via both research journals, but you will have to re-work with the same ten sources through the synthesis matrix/critical appraisal grid. The first five are due not this Friday but next (2/24). All ten are due by 3/3.
What you have to do isn't simple, but you simply have to fill in the boxes. Here is the example of me filling it out.
Our's is close to this, but not quite, because, to obviate redundancy, I'm collapsing two assignments into one: that's why this assignment is called the "critical appraisal/synthesis matrix."
These questions might help you critically evaluate.
By "critical appraisal," part of what I mean is in Aveyard (p. 144):
Pay particular attention to the strengths and limitations on the far right. A full critical appraisal would also seek to answer questions such as these (p. 109):
These questions are similar to these, which I also linked above. Use these above questions not only to trigger critical thinking but also to input the strengths and limitations you need for the critical appraisal/synthesis matrix. You'll also have to consider the context:
Notice how the setting in which the research was conducted directly bear on how strong the evidence is for this research question (i.e., your research question).
Ok. I just made a rudimentary critical appraisal/synthesis matrix grid. Don't feel obligated to use this exact grid. In fact I really dislike it. But it'll work. But you have to make one with all of these categories. And you have to do it for all ten of your required sources. That is, you will need to find and tentatively work with ten sources via both research journals, but you will have to re-work with the same ten sources through the synthesis matrix/critical appraisal grid. The first five are due not this Friday but next (2/24). All ten are due by 3/3.
What you have to do isn't simple, but you simply have to fill in the boxes. Here is the example of me filling it out.
2/13 -> 2/19
Here's the weekly schedule.
Important for this week is that you pay attention to the in class work (critical appraisal/synthesis matrix). That'll be the next post.
Important for this week is that you pay attention to the in class work (critical appraisal/synthesis matrix). That'll be the next post.
Friday, February 10, 2017
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Research vs. Policy/practice
For this question, as you can see, you might get hung up on whether to look primarily to research literature, or whether to look to policy or practice literature. If you are primary interested in whether something is true or grounded in a methodological reading of data, then you want research. If you are interested in whether something is right, ethical, or applicable in this context, then you want policy or practice.
writing center consultants who specialize in CHS
Drake
Pleased to make your acquaintance. My name is Drake, and I am a graduate student in English and education. I would be particularly helpful at brainstorming ideas and working through argumentative prose. I also have a knack for revision, organization, and coherence. I am teaching CHS 211 for the first time, so I welcome literature reviews as well! As for me, academics is my life. When I’m not teaching, writing, or helping others through the writing process, I enjoy cooking.
Logan
Hey friends and neighbors, my name is Logan, and I'm a graduate special student starting my third year here at the Writing Center. I received my BA at UNR, and I'm currently researching MFA programs to take that next, terrifying step in my education. While my own writing endeavors are mainly in fiction and creative nonfiction, I am excited to help my fellow colleagues get the most out of their work. I have experience working with many diverse types of writing, and I can offer advice throughout the writing process, from close-reading and research strategies to argument and structure to the sentence-level nuances of cohesion, syntax, and grammar. Bring your creative work, your persuasive work, your work in both science and the humanities; I'm sure we'll have a good time. And, yes, we can still talk about AP Style.
Maddie
Hi, my name is Maddie! I’m graduating May of 2017 with a bachelor’s degree in community health science, with an emphasis in public health. I also will be getting my minor in human development and family studies. My strengths in writing include organization, as well as CHS, Biology, and HDFS classes. When I have free time, I like to practice my cooking skills, watch reality TV shows, travel, and play with my Lionhead bunny, Mr. Jack.
Hailey
Hey guys! My name is Hailey. I am majoring in community health science with a focus on public health. I love learning about the different diseases and how our bodies fight them. I plan on applying to graduate school and becoming a physician’s assistant. Music is a huge part of my life, everything from Led Zeppelin to the Beatles, anything oldies and I am there. I am also very enthusiastic superwholock. I love the outdoors and being athletic. I am always happy to help with anything you throw at me. English and health sciences are my strong suits. I look forward to meeting you!
Samantha
Hello! My name is Samantha, but you can call me Sam or Sammy. I am an adaptable writer who appreciates all aspects of the learning process and can confidently address a wide range of rhetorical situations. I am a psychology major who loves research. My favorite part about working at the Writing Center is helping students engage with the material they are writing about. I enjoy helping students synthesize information for argumentative essays, research papers, reviews, and a variety of fiction and non-fiction styles. I am confident to support writing for any course that falls under the liberal arts and humanities spectrum, community health science, as well as business communication.
Aly
Hi, I’m Aly, and I’m studying pre-nursing and addiction treatment services! I excel in synthesis and argumentation, but I can help you with any variety of topics, including Core Humanities, Core Writing, scientific disciplines, and more. I also can speak and understand Tagalog. I like watching Food Network and eating sushi as many times a week as I can afford. Come on this writing adventure with me!
Pleased to make your acquaintance. My name is Drake, and I am a graduate student in English and education. I would be particularly helpful at brainstorming ideas and working through argumentative prose. I also have a knack for revision, organization, and coherence. I am teaching CHS 211 for the first time, so I welcome literature reviews as well! As for me, academics is my life. When I’m not teaching, writing, or helping others through the writing process, I enjoy cooking.
Logan
Hey friends and neighbors, my name is Logan, and I'm a graduate special student starting my third year here at the Writing Center. I received my BA at UNR, and I'm currently researching MFA programs to take that next, terrifying step in my education. While my own writing endeavors are mainly in fiction and creative nonfiction, I am excited to help my fellow colleagues get the most out of their work. I have experience working with many diverse types of writing, and I can offer advice throughout the writing process, from close-reading and research strategies to argument and structure to the sentence-level nuances of cohesion, syntax, and grammar. Bring your creative work, your persuasive work, your work in both science and the humanities; I'm sure we'll have a good time. And, yes, we can still talk about AP Style.
Maddie
Hi, my name is Maddie! I’m graduating May of 2017 with a bachelor’s degree in community health science, with an emphasis in public health. I also will be getting my minor in human development and family studies. My strengths in writing include organization, as well as CHS, Biology, and HDFS classes. When I have free time, I like to practice my cooking skills, watch reality TV shows, travel, and play with my Lionhead bunny, Mr. Jack.
Hailey
Hey guys! My name is Hailey. I am majoring in community health science with a focus on public health. I love learning about the different diseases and how our bodies fight them. I plan on applying to graduate school and becoming a physician’s assistant. Music is a huge part of my life, everything from Led Zeppelin to the Beatles, anything oldies and I am there. I am also very enthusiastic superwholock. I love the outdoors and being athletic. I am always happy to help with anything you throw at me. English and health sciences are my strong suits. I look forward to meeting you!
Hello! My name is Samantha, but you can call me Sam or Sammy. I am an adaptable writer who appreciates all aspects of the learning process and can confidently address a wide range of rhetorical situations. I am a psychology major who loves research. My favorite part about working at the Writing Center is helping students engage with the material they are writing about. I enjoy helping students synthesize information for argumentative essays, research papers, reviews, and a variety of fiction and non-fiction styles. I am confident to support writing for any course that falls under the liberal arts and humanities spectrum, community health science, as well as business communication.
Aly
Hi, I’m Aly, and I’m studying pre-nursing and addiction treatment services! I excel in synthesis and argumentation, but I can help you with any variety of topics, including Core Humanities, Core Writing, scientific disciplines, and more. I also can speak and understand Tagalog. I like watching Food Network and eating sushi as many times a week as I can afford. Come on this writing adventure with me!
Monday, February 6, 2017
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)