Showing posts with label thesis. Show all posts
May Webinar Update
APA
,
Avoiding Plagiarism
,
Citations
,
Grammar and Mechanics
,
Literature Review
,
Organization
,
Reading & Writing
,
Revising
,
Scholarly Writing
,
thesis
,
Writing Center Services
No comments
Happy nearly May, Walden students! We hope the flowers are blooming where you live! This month we have a range of webinars, including a brand new offering on plagiarism prevention.
The
Walden Writing Center provides information and assistance to students
with services like live chat, webinars, course visits, paper reviews,
podcasts, modules, and the writing center webpages. Through these
services they provide students assistance with APA, scholarly writing,
and help students gain skills and confidence to enhance their scholarly
work.
.png)
Never miss a new post; Opt-out at any time
Every webinar presents
students with a live, interactive setting where you can ask questions of
writing center staff, work on practice exercises and questions, and develop a
better understanding of the topic being presented. This month, our topics range
from literature reviews and reference lists to grammar and thesis statements. We also have a brand new webinar on Plagiarism Prevention that will help you avoid plagiarism in your work! Check out our schedule below. All times listed in EST.
You can click these links to register for the
webinar ahead of time! If you can’t attend live, don’t worry—you can check out our entire Webinar Recording Library here.
|
If you have any questions
about our webinar schedule or appointment scheduling system, e-mail us at writingsupport@waldenu.edu. We hope
to see you there!
Never miss a new post; Opt-out at any time
Lead Your Readers With Flow: A Thursday Thoughts Reflection
Expert Advice
,
Flow
,
Reading & Writing
,
Revising
,
thesis
,
Using Evidence
,
Writing Process
No comments
Last week, we concluded our five-part blog series on flow on the Walden Writing Center Blog. The aim of this series was to provide writers with the means and resources not only to understand the importance of flow in writing, but also to provide the tools to effectively create flow. We were thrilled with reader engagement with the series, and now, we reflect on the contributions to this series that inspired such engagement.
In part one of the series, Lydia focused on creating logical connections to build flow. This means supporting your thesis statement with strong evidence, using transitional phrases, and avoiding logical fallacies.
In part two of the series, Basil presented the idea of using strong topic sentences. A strong topic sentence will scaffold the structure and develop flow throughout an entire paragraph. This means that writing strong topic sentences should be of high priority.
In part three of the series, Max introduced building in transitional phrases as a means to create flow. Max compared a transition to a bridge, which brings your readers from one point to the next, creating ease of passage with words, sentences, or full paragraphs.
In part four of the series, Tara presented the importance of practicing concision to build flow. Like the topic of this part in the series, Tara's message was clear and direct. The efficacy of concision in academic writing rests on your ability to omit needless words and develop an effective revision process.
In part five of the series, Tim helped us reach our conclusion, noting that writers should focus on varying their sentence structure to build flow. In this way, writers can engage their readers with sentence structure that intrigues and engages.
In short, you can create flow in your writing by:
1. Creating logical connections
2. Using strong topic sentences
3. Building in transitional phrases
4. Practicing concision
5. Varying sentence structure
The Walden Writing Center offers to Walden students 1:1 writing support and offers to students and non-students alike all the writing expertise, tips, and information a writer could want.
Never miss a new post; Opt-out at any time
WriteCast Episode 2: Thesis Statements
Why is a thesis statement so important? Where does it go? How is it different than a purpose statement? How can you make yours stronger?
These are some of the questions Brittany and Nik talk about in this
week’s podcast episode.
To download the episode to your computer, press the share button on the player above, then press the download button. Visit the Writing Center's WriteCast page for our episode archive and transcripts. Happy listening!
The podcast pilot is made possible by a Social Media Research Grant from Global Products and Services, Laureate Education, Inc.
Putting It All Together: Thesis + Synthesis
By Matt Smith, Writing Instructor and Coordinator of Graduate Writing Initiatives
You’ve probably heard the term thesis before from a writing teacher, and we comment on this often in the Writing Center as well because almost any scholarly document—from a discussion post to a dissertation—must have some kind of central, guiding purpose. You may not, however, have heard much about synthesis, or you may have only heard it mentioned vaguely. Synthesis doesn’t get quite as much attention as a thesis does, which is a shame: it’s really just as important. Without it, your document would lack cohesion, and your reader would have to work much harder to understand the overall meaning of your work.
If you look at the etymological roots of the word synthesis, you’ll find that it basically means “to put together.” Pair it with analysis, which means “to take apart,” and you’ve got two of the most fundamental functions of academic work—taking information apart and putting it back together to make something new. In your time at Walden, you’ve probably developed strong analytical skills, and you’ve practiced demonstrating this analysis in your discussion posts and course papers. You’ve probably been synthesizing too, but synthesis is often less explicit than analysis because it mainly involves the connections between ideas rather than the ideas themselves. This can make it difficult to identify and even more difficult to add more of when your peers, Writing Center instructors, or faculty members suggest that a spot in your text doesn’t have enough of it.
You’ve probably heard the term thesis before from a writing teacher, and we comment on this often in the Writing Center as well because almost any scholarly document—from a discussion post to a dissertation—must have some kind of central, guiding purpose. You may not, however, have heard much about synthesis, or you may have only heard it mentioned vaguely. Synthesis doesn’t get quite as much attention as a thesis does, which is a shame: it’s really just as important. Without it, your document would lack cohesion, and your reader would have to work much harder to understand the overall meaning of your work.
If you look at the etymological roots of the word synthesis, you’ll find that it basically means “to put together.” Pair it with analysis, which means “to take apart,” and you’ve got two of the most fundamental functions of academic work—taking information apart and putting it back together to make something new. In your time at Walden, you’ve probably developed strong analytical skills, and you’ve practiced demonstrating this analysis in your discussion posts and course papers. You’ve probably been synthesizing too, but synthesis is often less explicit than analysis because it mainly involves the connections between ideas rather than the ideas themselves. This can make it difficult to identify and even more difficult to add more of when your peers, Writing Center instructors, or faculty members suggest that a spot in your text doesn’t have enough of it.
Put another way, text without synthesis is like bricks without mortar: you have the essential substance, but there’s nothing to hold it together, rendering the whole thing formless and unable to support the argumentative weight of your thesis.
 |
Text without synthesis (above) and with synthesis (below).
|
If you think
you need to add synthesis in your writing, or if someone else has suggested
this, you may be wondering how, exactly, to do so. This can be tricky, because
synthesis can look different from one situation to another. To effectively
detect synthesis (or a lack thereof), you’ll need to think about the function
of a sentence or paragraph rather than its structure or content—or, in other
words, you’ll need to determine what the
sentence accomplishes rather than how
it looks.
If you’re looking at a portion of text that doesn’t quite fit with the rest, ask yourself these questions as you read:
If you’re looking at a portion of text that doesn’t quite fit with the rest, ask yourself these questions as you read:
- Does this text logically follow from the sentence or paragraph that comes before it?
- Does it contribute to and support my overall argument?
- Are its connections to the other ideas in my text clear?
Arter (2008) pointed out that, since the
early twentieth century, strain theories have been used to describe crime and
delinquency. In his study, Arter used general strain theory as a theoretical
framework to test the application of the theory on a highly stressed adult
population and to determine how officers in different policing assignments cope
with stress and deviance. Arter also utilized phenomenological methodology to
mitigate one of the criticisms of the general strain theory, the argument that
individuals experiencing the same or similar circumstances often react
differently to deviance or delinquency.
Notice that
this paragraph contains useful evidence and analysis, and, if I asked myself
the above questions with regards to this text, my answer to the first one would
have to be “yes.” However, I’d answer “no” to the second and third questions,
because there’s nothing here that explicitly shows the reader how Arter’s work
relates to the overall thesis or to the other ideas in the paper. This is a
pretty strong indication, then, that this paragraph would benefit from some
additional synthesis. I might add a sentence like this to clarify these
connections:
Arter (2008) pointed out that, since the
early twentieth century, strain theories have been used to describe crime and
delinquency. In his study, Arter used
general strain theory as a theoretical framework to test the application of the
theory on a highly stressed adult population and to determine how officers in
different policing assignments cope with stress and deviance. Arter also utilized phenomenological methodology
to mitigate one of the criticisms of the general strain theory, the argument
that individuals experiencing the same or similar circumstances often react
differently to deviance or delinquency. The
benefits of this phenomenological approach make Arter’s study a more effective
model for my own research than Adams’s (2008) or Ilford’s (2010).
Note that this is just one way to synthesize this material; another writer would handle it differently, and in other situations this approach—adding a concluding sentence—may not be appropriate. Sometimes, for instance, it may make more sense to devote an entire paragraph to a piece of synthesis, showing how a major component of your text relates to other major components (this usually occurs in longer documents like dissertations or doctoral studies); at other times, you might synthesize within another sentence that focuses on your topic, your evidence, or your analysis. Whatever the situation, you’ll want to focus on the function of a given sentence or paragraph and its connections to the rest of your text to identify synthesis or places in need of it.
Matt Smith, who earned a BA in English from Saint John's University and an MFA in writing from Hamline University, says, "It's at once paradoxical and commonsensical, but it's true: you get better at writing by writing."
Argue Is Not a Dirty Word: Taking a Stand in Your Thesis Statement
By Kayla Skarbakka, Writing Consultant
Like many high schoolers across the country, I was assigned
in my junior year to write a paper for the National Peace Essay Contest, a fantastic program that promotes education and
conversation about peace and conflict resolution. My year, the contest’s theme
was reconstruction. I chose my topic (the Croatian War of Independence),
conducted my research (involving a bit too much Wikipedia—hey, I was 16!),
drafted my essay, and submitted to my teacher, feeling pretty darn confident.
I got the essay back the next week with a middling grade and
a big red X in my introduction, next to my thesis statement, which was
something like “Reconstruction is a complicated process that can take years to
complete.”
“But it’s true,” I complained after class.
“It also doesn’t say anything,” my teacher told me. “Where
do you stand? What do you have to
say?”
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
