Best Writing Practices for Graduate Students: Reducing the Discomfort of the Blank Screen
Module by: Carol Mullen. E-mail the author
Summary:
With support and guidance, graduate students can successfully pursue academic writing for publication. In graduate circles, academic writing is presumed to be a solitary activity for which students already are prepared. Yet, the reality is that students tend to find academic writing difficult and stressful, and they often look to university faculty members for guidance. Faculty members, in turn, may provide hands-on practice and other classroom support in an effort to teach writing, even though they have had little or no instruction on how to do so. In this article discussion is provided of what researchers say about writing, challenges of teaching writing, and writing ideas and strategies.
Previously published:
In graduate circles, academic writing is
presumed to be a solitary activity for which students already are
prepared. Yet, the reality is that students tend to find academic
writing difficult and stressful, and they often look to university
faculty members for guidance. Faculty members, in turn, may provide
hands-on practice and other classroom support in an effort to teach
writing, even though they have had little or no instruction on how
to do so (Thomas 2005).
Helping students become competent writers is
always a challenge, and educators continually should seek out new
ideas and approaches. I concur with Stevenson’s (2006, 1080)
position in her essay on the teaching of writing: “With regard to
current curriculum design, it is doubtful that one ‘best’ method
exists.” Recent research provides insights into university
classroom applications and suggests some fundamental best practices
of teaching writing to graduate students across educational
disciplines. Both university faculty members who teach
graduate-level writing and graduate students can benefit from a
review of these techniques.
What Researchers Say about Writing
Graduate students are novice researchers and
writers who must be initiated into the culture of academic writing.
The importance of graduate students learning academic writing is a
given; in fact, Stevenson (2006, 1080) argued, the “need for
writing has never been questioned.” Nonetheless, researchersof
graduate writing have been building a rationale for why students
should develop a facility with writing and have highlighted the
benefits of doing so (e.g., Mullen 2005; Richardson 1994;
Scardamalia and Bereiter 1986; Stevenson 2006; Thomas 2005).
Like their younger counterparts, graduate
students need to demonstrate high-level skills in reading
comprehension, thinking and reading critically (as in knowing how
to identify various rhetorical structures and to distinguish
between what should be said explicitly and implicitly), and
communicating with particular audiences for specific purposes. They
also should know how to collaborate on writing, how to use
technology, and how to write for specific genres, both professional
and academic. Educational studies of the young student (e.g.,
McCallister 2004), college student (e.g., Stevenson 2006), and
graduate student (e.g., Mullen 2003) all agree that writing
activities are the key to developing these wide-ranging
skills.
Two decades ago, Scardamalia and Bereiter
(1986) claimed that adult students would be able to keep pace with
the rising expectations for scholars and practitioners only if they
gained the necessary competence in writing. Facility not only with
the written language but also with research-based writing skills
has become the norm, even for doctoral students who are teachers
and leaders (Mullen 2005). Doctoral students must know how to write
well; moreover, those applying for academic positions in research
universities should be equipped with publication records (Cassuto
1998). Arguably, publication should not be thought of as an
esoteric activity reserved for “the elite”; rather, as Thomas
(2005) described, writing and publication are expected performances
for academics, much like playing a musical instrument and
performing at a concert are for musicians.
Unfortunately, the topics of graduate writing
and its instruction have been relegated to the periphery of the
literature, including the most current educational texts on
critical thinking and learning. Further, much of the research on
graduate-level writing focuses on how to produce an exemplary
dissertation or how to achieve publication (e.g., Henson1999).
Virtually overlooked are the steps involved in developing as a
writer or as a teacher of writing. In addition, research is only
gradually emerging that treats the graduate classroom as an arena
for academic writing (e.g., Bolton 1994; Mullen 2005;
1994; Thomas 2005).
The Challenge of Teaching Writing
University faculty members in schools of
education are central to helping students develop critical writing
skills. Faculty members can begin by designing writing programs—not
just assignments—that McCallister (2004, 144–45) would classify as
“reconceptualized.” These offer democratic models of learning that
emphasize “novel and creative thinking” and encourage “questioning,
connecting, and reflecting” over “obedience, efficiency, speed,
attentiveness, and memory.” A curriculum that approaches writing as
a social and cognitive process “positions the student squarely in
the midst of the world of things, ideas, history, and people and
invites him or her to use writing as a means to participate in that
world” (McCallister 2004, 145).
Up-to-date writing programs are necessary for
exposing students to the applicable knowledge base, current public
discourses, and relevant technologies—all of which are changing
rapidly across educational disciplines (Stevenson 2006). Though the
opportunity to write and share writing is emphasized in the K–12
context (e.g., McCallister 2004), the importance of creating
interactive learning environments for adult writers is gaining
recognition (e.g., Mullen 2003; Mullen with Tuten, in press; Thomas
2005).
University faculty members need to determine
how the goal of teaching writing fits with broader instructional
goals and where it best falls in the sequence of a program’s
courses, as this will affect the remaining curriculum. This means
that a syllabus probably will not be the only curriculum template
needing serious consideration. Importantly, as Thomas (2005)
explained and I demonstrate later, the faculty member might find
that a most compelling democratic method of teaching writing is the
workshop model, wherein the reconceptualized curriculum can be
enacted. Students write with purpose and by making choices, and the
professor focuses not on lecturing and providing packaged lessons,
but rather on sharing—as part of the group—ideas and feedback
directed at the learners’ needs.
A major aim of faculty members who teach
graduate-level writing involves seeking productive ways to engage
professionals in writing academic papers on contemporary topics.
Kuh (1999) suggested that when high-level performance is modeled,
positive learning is more apt to occur. Accordingly, writing
programs rooted in a workshop context have been known to foster
high-level performance, growth, and success (Thomas 2005). The
workshop environment is a place where the craft of writing is
modeled through doing, including hands-on activities and
in(ter)dependent projects in various stages of the writing process
(Mullen 2005; Ray and Laminack 2001; Thomas 2005). Writing teachers
such as Mullen, Thomas, and Stevenson, who have investigated their
own teaching, have concluded that structure, combined with
flexibility, promotes student success. In master’s and doctoral
courses approached as workshops, students have been known to
produce action studies of considerable complexity, some of which
appear in the literature (e.g., see the special issue of
International Journal of Educational Reform, Mullen 2004).
In the workshop environment, after the faculty
member covers the guidelines for assignments, students are invited
to share how they tackle academic writing. In these early
conversations, students often do not readily identify explicit,
well-honed writing and research strategies; instead, they may
flounder. Despite the years of writing experience students bring to
advanced study, they frequently express uncertainty about inquiry
as a learning process. While they can talk about reflective and
explanatory writing, when it comes to social science inquiry—the
educational paradigm that blends science and art and combines
reflection with analysis and evidence (e.g., Miles and Huberman
1994)—they struggle, seemingly as fledglings, to grasp new
territory.
Once the areas that need to be addressed are
identified, the hard work begins—and not just for the students.
Thomas (2005, 1) confirmed that as difficult as it may be to learn
how to write, “learning to teach writing may be even more
daunting.” Such an undertaking requires significant time and
effort, even for experienced teachers of writing and with the
application of best practices. However, the creation of a
successful student-centered curriculum is likely to emerge from
particular instructional characteristics (notably patience,
imagination, and flexibility), as well as a nonauthoritarian style
and a working knowledge of effective writing practices.
Writing Ideas and Strategies
Faculty members generally can empathize with
the graduate student’s struggle to pen ideas. Academic writing is
challenging, sometimes frustrating work. Instructors can help by
modeling authentic discourse in class—for instance, by revealing
personal vulnerabilities with respect to writing. However, this is
not enough. Sharing of fruitful ideas and strategies for enabling
novice writers to open up and take risks within a group context is
also vital.
I share with my new student groups, for
example, that I often feel overwhelmed when faced with a new
writing project, especially when grants and contracts intensify the
responsibility. I then go on to describe the strategies I use for
reducing the discomfort of the blank screen and the anonymous
critic. In turn, I invite students to share first with a “neighbor”
and then with the whole group their vulnerabilities and strategies
as developing writers. This conversation sets the tone for a
personal learning experience that promises to be highly productive,
even exciting.
Here, I open up the pedagogical toolkit that
supports university teachers of writing, regardless of a course’s
title and content. All the strategies that follow appear in the
literature and are among the best practices used in my graduate
courses. Though they have been classified in this section, each
fits more than one theme.
Developing Identity as Writer
For students to realize that they are already
writers, albeit developing, can be empowering. Writing instructor
McCourt (2005, 244–45) shared this liberating perspective with his
high school students:
Every moment of your life, you’re writing.
Even in your dreams, you’re writing. When you walk the halls in
this school, you meet various people and you write furiously in
your head. There’s the principal. You make a decision—a greeting
decision. A simple stroll in the hallway calls for paragraphs,
sentences in your head, decisions galore.
The identity of students as writers is not
esoteric or far-fetched; rather, this standpoint is relevant to who
they are now and who they are becoming. One technique that can be
used for encouraging this self-image involves the spontaneous
recording of thoughts or feelings about the course itself or a
particular exchange; after writing for a few minutes, volunteers
share. As an outgrowth of this practice—and on a more sophisticated
level—action researchers could keep a learning journal, recording
their observations of places or people, reflections on interviews
or interactions, and interpretations of data.
Closely related to this notion of the
developing identity of the writer is finding a voice. Voice in the
academic graduate-level context is not so much associated with an
unraveling of self or a process of self-therapy as with a
connection to what Stevenson (2006, 1081) described as an
“understanding of the social milieu in which [students] write,”
which “parallels the ways writing is done in the professional
world.”
Creating a Studio Environment
Many students are plagued by procrastination
along with concerns and questions about their writing. In a studio
context devoted to writing and sharing writing, students can
experience a healthy and productive writing process. Writing
instructors can help students new to the social sciences and
educational inquiry by providing samples of exemplary writing
forms, creating a guide that can be used to satisfy the
expectations for rigorous work, and allowing students the time to
write in the desired format (Stevenson 2006). Students can easily
relate to the work of their peers and find the accomplished writing
products of classmates to be especially good samples; the samples
also make the task seem less intimidating and more achievable
(Mullen 2005).
In an environment fondly referred to as the
“writing studio,” my students excel. During a writing studio
session, novice writers complete exercises in developing outlines,
writing proposals, revising writing, accessing materials online,
and learning academic formatting. They also have opportunities to
consult with peers and the instructor, and to brainstorm about
various conceptual and technical matters.
For my doctoral courses, the writing studio is
simply a regular classroom, wired for Internet access; for my
master’s classes, the writing studio is in a computer laboratory
with word processing and other software. No doubt, today’s college
writing studio needs to incorporate the computer and the Internet
to foster active learning. The blank computer screen should
transform into a productive writing tablet as students access
information via relevant Web sites and databases, incorporate that
research into their text, and develop a well-supported
thesis.
Students should be encouraged to ask their
instructor questions about their projects and to request that the
instructor read and critique drafts, as well as recommend or even
help them obtain relevant materials (e.g., sources, references,
databases). The instructor’s feedback also might be sought
regarding strategies for including quotes, developing interview or
survey protocols, presenting data results and evidence, and
creating informative charts.
Using Small Assignments
Small assignment has at least two meanings.
First, I see it as a short piece of writing that can stand on its
own and supply the “seed” for the “plant,” the larger paper. A good
writing assignment for the studio is a review—essentially a
thoughtful critique of an article, book, or dissertation on the
same topic as the major paper. I encouraged one doctoral student,
who decided to write her long paper on low-performing schools and
cultures of resilience, to first review someone else’s work on the
subject. That same evening, we located a relevant dissertation,
starting her on the journey of preparing a small assignment in the
area of her scholarly interest. Students respond well to this
opportunity to write developmentally on a selected topic while
advancing their skills as writer and reviewer.
Second, the small assignment is a tool for
managing a larger work by identifying its distinct parts. Lamott
(1994) admitted to sometimes feeling emotionally besieged at the
prospect of writing a new book. For inspiration, she peers through
a one-inch picture frame that she keeps on her desk. Writing
becomes possible when she can motivate herself “to figure out a
one-inch piece of [her] story to tell, one small scene, one memory,
one exchange” (Lamott 1994, 18). Instead of trying to write a novel
from start to finish, she constructs a story (e.g., a character’s
experience of the sunrise) that is somehow integral to the larger
work. She even sets a goal for the number of words she will produce
each day on a given subject. Eventually, she weaves together the
parts into an evolving whole. Students similarly can find
motivation and tame the rigorous demands of a larger work by
crafting small segments, such as a description of a setting or
group, or a summary of responses to a survey study.
Encouraging Draft Writing
First drafts, according to Lamott (1994,
21–22), are equated with “the child’s draft, where you let it all
pour out and then let it romp all over the place, knowing that no
one is going to see it and that you can shape it later.” The first
draft is the writer’s “channel” for “whatever voices and visions
come through and onto the page” (Lamott 1994, 23). Though Lamott’s
context is not social science, students are reassured to know that
many accomplished writers lack excitement and confidence when
approaching the task and that few produce eloquent first drafts.
Stevenson (2006, 1080) explained, “Writing is a complex, recursive
process that is subject to false starts, trial and error, and
constant revision.” Drafting, revising, editing, and review are all
techniques used for improving texts; ideally, peer listeners and
readers should be incorporated from start to finish.
Young students who have the freedom to
exercise choices in content and form are on their way to authentic
writing (Thomas 2005). Adult students, however, often function best
when they have a sense of direction; so they prepare flexible
blueprints in the form of outlines and proposals. In class,
students can generate, alone or with coauthors, a brief proposal
(one to two pages) serving as a preliminary synopsis of their
topic, focus, research question(s), setting, methods, key
participants, and references. Depending on the circumstances they
encounter as action researchers, proposals may change as they
investigate further. Students usually end up with a more focused
and coherent study when they plan, brainstorm, and problem-solve
with their peers and experts, and use techniques consistent with
social science inquiry.
Designing Interconnected Writing
Writing assignments, like Russian nesting
dolls, can be designed for interconnection—that is, stacking one
inside another. Students who prepare a small assignment then can
develop it into a larger work (e.g., action study, literature
review), by incorporating additional elements, such as an
introduction, research, survey results, and conclusions. A great
deal of productivity can be realized within a short period when the
“stacking” approach is used.
Instructors enable writing as a process of
inquiry when a selected issue is tackled over time and in the form
of intrinsically connected assignments. With intermittent feedback
from instructors, students synthesize scholarly arguments and
references they have been formulating or gathering in the
construction of their work. When writing the major paper, students
are more comfortable if they have produced small works that, once
creatively assembled, are reconstructed into a larger work.
Scaffolding Assisted Learning
Assisted learning, another best practice of
graduate teaching and learning, is grounded in constructivist
psychological theory. This strategy entails mastery learning,
faculty mentoring, and scaffolding. In assisted learning, the
professor provides all the support that students need to learn how
to perform a task effectively (Mullen 2006). As students acquire
the knowledge, skills, and disposition needed to carry out action
research, for example, their independence and interdependence
overshadow the constant need for teacher assistance.
Through assisted learning, combined with other
components of the writing curriculum, instructors shape students’
behavior from a generalized understanding to the specific ability
to write professionally. Students become better prepared academics,
even empowered, when they learn about professional writing and the
publication process itself. During online studio time, students can
search for appropriate publishing venues. Their final, revised
works are reviewed not only by faculty committees but also by
academic publishers, who may provide additional feedback.
Dissemination of students’ work is a concrete goal worthy of
attention in the formal curriculum.
Parting Reflection
All the best practices described here support
the preparation of students for the world of scholarly inquiry and
the demands of high-quality scholarship. Their application can
enhance the development of students, as well as their instructors,
as both scholars and practitioners. Both instructors and graduate
students are encouraged to experiment with these ideas and
strategies.
Graduate students certainly are able to learn
how to write and disseminate their original works, and they can
benefit greatly from the opportunity to learn from a formal
curriculum that moves them through the phases of developing an
educational study. Institutions of higher education are wise to
support university faculty in developing program and policy
initiatives that meet these academic goals.
References
Fictional-critical writing as a means of professional development.
British Educational Research Journal 20(1): 55–68.
Cassuto, L. 1998. Pressures to publish fuel
the professionalization of today’s graduate students. The Chronicle
of Higher Education, November 27.
Henson, K. T. 1999. Writing for professional
publication: Keys to academic and business success.
Heights: Allyn & Bacon.
Kuh, G. D. 1999. Setting the bar high to
promote student learning. In Good practice in student affairs:
Principles to foster student learning, ed. G. S. Blimling, E. J.
Whitt and Associates, 67–89.
Lamott, A. 1994. Bird by bird: Some
instructions on writing and life.
McCallister, C. 2004. Writing education
practices within the reconceptualized curriculum. In Critical
thinking and learning: An encyclopedia for parents and teachers,
ed. J. L. Kincheloe and D. Weil, 144–48.
Press.
McCourt, F. 2005. Teacher man: A memoir. New
Miles, M. B., and A. M. Huberman. 1994.
Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook, 2nd ed.
Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mullen, C. A. 2003. The WIT cohort: A case
study of informal doctoral mentoring. Journal of Further and Higher
Education 27(4): 411–26.
Mullen, C. A., guest ed. 2004. Special issue:
Mapping a landscape of leadership: Cultivating scholarly, practical
inquiry. International Journal of Educational Reform 13(2).
Mullen, C. A. 2005. Fire and ice: Igniting
and channeling passion in new qualitative researchers.
Peter Lang.
Mullen, C. A. 2006. A graduate student guide:
Making the most of mentoring.
Education.
Mullen, C. A., with E. Tuten. in press.
Doctoral cohort mentoring: Interdependence, collaborative learning,
and cultural change. Scholar-Practitioner Quarterly 3(2).
Ray, K. W., and L. L. Laminack. 2001. The
writing workshop: Working through the hard parts (and they’re all
hard parts).
English.
Richardson, L. 1994. Writing: A method of
inquiry. In Handbook of qualitative research, ed. N. K. Denzin and
Y. S. Lincoln, 516–29.
Scardamalia, M., and C. Bereiter. 1986.
Research on written composition. In Handbook of research on
teaching, 3rd ed., ed. M. C. Wittrock, 778–803.
Macmillan.
Stevenson, C. N. 2006. Writing, teaching of.
In Encyclopedia of educational leadership and administration, vol.
2, ed. F. W. English, 1080–81.
Thomas, P. L. 2005. Teaching writing primer.
good article.
BalasHapusblogwalking :)