Faculty Spotlight: Dr. Kate Swetnam, Riley College of Education and Leadership
 |
| Dr. Kate Swetnam is a Walden graduate. |
Writing Instructors as Coaches
One particular volleyball coach—I’ll call him Ed—got so
riled up at games that he often was thrown out. We were left to fend for
ourselves the rest of the match. He yelled at his players, the referees, and sometimes
even the opposing team. Afterward, with a sheepish shrug, he returned to the
mellow guy he was in real life. But when we were playing, it was hard to move past
the negativity that Ed brought to the gym. We ended up losing most of our
games.
My gymnastics coach—I’ll call her Sheila—was tough in the
demands she placed on her gymnasts but also kind. She watched my movements
patiently and then told me what to work on: faster rotation, pointed toes, or
sticking the landing. Most importantly, she was engaged in making me a better,
well-rounded athlete. She was someone I actively consulted for support and guidance,
rather than someone I retreated from. What Sheila brought was positivity.
The Writing Center instructors aim to be the Sheila type of
coach—those who do not negatively judge, but buoy. Those who are less interested
in perfection (it is not always about
winning, after all) and more interested in personal development. Ultimately,
the coach-athlete relationship is about teaching and training. The teaching
part is the calm, constructive voice we bring to paper reviews, webinars, and
emails. The training part is how you listen, engage, and respond to that voice.
Like athletes, you need to be invested in yourself and you need to practice.
And pretty soon, you will see change.
Like athletes, you need to be invested in yourself and you need to practice. And pretty soon, you will see change.
Like athletes, you need to be invested in yourself and you need to practice. And pretty soon, you will see change. The most joyful part of being a coach is celebrating the athletes’ success. Even though you don’t actually see this celebration, trust me: it is happening behind the scenes in the Writing Center’s cubicles and offices when we read your improved writing. Sometimes, when it’s really quiet, we even say, “Go team!”
Other posts you might like:
The Best Writing Teacher I Ever Had
Writing Through Fear
.png)
Hillary Wentworth, writing instructor and coordinator of undergraduate writing initiatives, has worked in the Walden Writing Center since 2010. She enjoys roller-skating, solving crossword puzzles, and basking in the summer sun. She recently moved to Minneapolis.
Get new posts in your email inbox!
|
How Zombies Can Help You Avoid Passive Voice: A 20-Minute Writing Exercise
While writing a paper or dissertation, you may have heard
from your instructor, “Don’t use passive voice!”
What is passive voice? I’ll give the technical and then
layperson’s definition, and I’ll show you an easy and memorable trick to help
you identify passive voice in your own writing.
Patchwork Paraphrasing
I’m sure you’ve heard about paraphrasing. It’s fundamental
to academic writing; it’s better than quoting, because a paraphrase, created
with your own perceptions and language, is more closely connected to your ideas
than someone else’s writing could ever be. Some (including me) would argue that
paraphrasing is the bedrock of scholarly discourse. You’ve probably heard all
of this. However, even when students know the importance of paraphrasing, and
they try to paraphrase their sources rather than quoting them, they will sometimes
unintentionally create something between a quote and a paraphrase, a
half-measure that can weaken their writing: a patchwork paraphrase.
What is Patchwork Paraphrasing?
Writing instructors use the term patchwork for this kind of text because it has a pieced-together,
hodge-podge quality rather than the seamless integration of strong academic
writing. A patchwork paraphrase contains much of the same language or structure
as the source it refers to, so much so that it isn’t a unique product of its
author. You don’t want patchwork paraphrasing in your writing for a few reasons, the most important ones being (a)
it functions like a quote in your argument (which, as we know, isn’t as good as
a paraphrase) and (b) it could be interpreted as plagiarism.
Patchwork paraphrasing can be tricky to detect, because there’s no easy rule or telltale sign to help you determine whether your writing is patchwork. Instead, you’ll need to ask yourself this question as you write: is this phrasing truly my own creation?
Patchwork paraphrasing can be tricky to detect, because there’s no easy rule or telltale sign to help you determine whether your writing is patchwork. Instead, you’ll need to ask yourself this question as you write: is this phrasing truly my own creation?
 |
| Patchwork paraphrasing is sometimes referred to as "quilted text"-- writing that does not use the author's voice but is instead primarily made up of words and phrases from the original source or sources. |
Patchwork Examples
Let’s look at an example to get a better sense of how you
can answer this question. I pulled this passage from an article I found on
systems thinking in healthcare:
Health professionals will need to be able to set common goals and targets with patients, service users and relevant stakeholders, and ensure that each group or individual is properly informed and engaged. From a systems thinking perspective, increased participation provides the opportunity to break down barriers between patients and providers, and citizens and policy makers. Evidence and explicit knowledge need to be integrated with tacit knowledge of stakeholders within the working dynamic of the health team. (Swanson et al., 2012)
Here’s a patchwork paraphrase of the same passage:
Healthcare providers need to set
common goals for patients, service users, and stakeholders (Swanson et al.,
2012). Swanson et al. (2012) argued that more participation from all
stakeholders can break down barriers between patients and providers. Evidence
can be combined with tacit knowledge of all of the stakeholders on the team
(Swanson et al., 2012).
Notice that, technically, I’m not plagiarizing: I didn’t
reuse large chunks of the passage word-for-word, and I included citations
whenever I mentioned an idea from my source. However, in these sentences I used
virtually the same structure as the original passage and didn’t provide my
unique understanding of the topic. Compare this sentence from the original
From a systems thinking perspective,
increased participation
provides the opportunity to break down barriers between patients and providers,
and citizens and policy makers.
with this one from my patchwork paraphrase (I’ve highlighted
the major similarity)
Swanson et al. (2012) argue that more participation from all
stakeholders can break down barriers between patients and providers.
In another sentence, I avoided using the original’s exact
wording. However, rather than rephrasing the idea in my own voice—as I should
do—I used synonyms of the original’s words. Compare this sentence from the
original
Health professionals will need to be able to set common goals and
targets with patients,
service users and relevant stakeholders, and ensure that each group or individual is
properly informed and engaged.
with this from my patchwork (I’ve also highlighted the
similarities here)
Healthcare providers need to set common goals for
patients, service users, and stakeholders (Swanson et al., 2012).
Instead of a paraphrase, I’ve only produced a knockoff of
the original, much like Mr. Pibb was made as a knockoff of Dr. Pepper. (You can
surmise which one is more scholarly based on the fact that Dr. Pibb
had his degree revoked.)
A Better Paraphrase
Let’s look instead at a true paraphrase of the original:
Original:
Health professionals will need to be able to set common goals and targets with patients, service users and relevant stakeholders, and ensure that each group or individual is properly informed and engaged. From a systems thinking perspective, increased participation provides the opportunity to break down barriers between patients and providers, and citizens and policy makers. Evidence and explicit knowledge need to be integrated with tacit knowledge of stakeholders within the working dynamic of the health team. (Swanson et al., 2012)
Health professionals will need to be able to set common goals and targets with patients, service users and relevant stakeholders, and ensure that each group or individual is properly informed and engaged. From a systems thinking perspective, increased participation provides the opportunity to break down barriers between patients and providers, and citizens and policy makers. Evidence and explicit knowledge need to be integrated with tacit knowledge of stakeholders within the working dynamic of the health team. (Swanson et al., 2012)
Paraphrase:
Swanson et al. (2012), in their application of systems thinking to health care, argued that providers, patients, and other stakeholders can use goal setting, increased participation, and the integration of tacit and explicit knowledge to create positive change in their healthcare settings.
Swanson et al. (2012), in their application of systems thinking to health care, argued that providers, patients, and other stakeholders can use goal setting, increased participation, and the integration of tacit and explicit knowledge to create positive change in their healthcare settings.
You’ll notice that, while I’ve used a few of the same words
as the original (which I’ve highlighted), I’ve used a different sentence
structure here. This paraphrase is also shorter than the patchwork, because
I’ve focused on the aspects of Swanson et al.’s ideas that matter for my
argument.
Your paraphrase of this passage would look different from
mine, which is good; it would represent your understanding, not mine. You
should strive for this individuality in your own paraphrasing, because this is why
people will want to read your writing rather than the sources you’re using: to
see your unique ideas.
Reference
Swanson, R. C.,
Cattaneo, A., Bradley, E., Chunharas, S., Atun, R., Abbas, K. M., … Best, A.
(2012). Rethinking health systems strengthening: Key systems thinking tools and
strategies for transformational change. Health
Policy and Planning, 27(Suppl. 4), 54–61. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czs090
.png "Photograph of Matt Sharkey-Smith")
Matt Sharkey-Smith is a writing instructor and the coordinator of the graduate writing initiatives in the Walden Writing Center.
Matt Sharkey-Smith is a writing instructor and the coordinator of the graduate writing initiatives in the Walden Writing Center.
Get new posts in your email inbox!
|
WriteCast Episode 9: The Residency Experience: Reflections from Current Walden Students
This month on WriteCast, Nik interviews doctoral students at the Walden residency in Atlanta. Lam Cosmas (PhD in Management candidate), Gladys John (PhD in Human Services candidate), and Karim McDaniels (PhD in Management candidate) talk about their residency experiences, writing journeys, and writing advice for fellow students.
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!
You might also like:
WriteCast Episode 7: Interview with Amy Kubista, EdD Student and Writing Center Staff Member
Student Spotlight: Jennifer Sulkowski
Student Spotlight: Mary Eldredge-Sandbo
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!
You might also like:
WriteCast Episode 7: Interview with Amy Kubista, EdD Student and Writing Center Staff Member
Student Spotlight: Jennifer Sulkowski
Student Spotlight: Mary Eldredge-Sandbo
Writing Instructors Nik Nadeau, Anne Shiell, and Brittany Kallman Arneson produce the WriteCast podcast.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
