Alternative Research Writing by Davis and Shadle
In an article titled ““Building a mystery”: Alternative research writing and the Academic Act of Seeking” by Robert Davis and Mark Shadle, research writing is explained how it is important and why it can be disrespected. Davis and Shadle use ways of reaching out to the reader and also use different points of view. To explain each point of view they include passages from different researchers and writers.
Davis and Shadle state, “In this essay, we will present a series of alternatives to the modernist research paper: the argumentative research paper, the personal research paper, the research essay, and the multi-genre/media/disciplinary/ cultural research paper” (418). Davis and Shadle also have techniques by using rhetorical situations. The described situations help the reader understand how to create a successful research paper and useful tips on what and what not to do. Davis and Shadle include many different examples from other researchers in their article. This helps back up the information that they are trying to reach out to the readers. They also help by including ways of writing that I can make connections with as well as other readers like me. For example Posusta, a tutor at UCLA, comes up with ways for a researcher to make the process work well in a short period of time for procrastinators rather than insisting on using a longer process. Davis and Shadle further his purpose by explaining, “To better invent, Posusta had to learn the academy’s customs, rules, and practices” (419).
Overall, the insight given from Davis and Shadle is much easier to understand because of the perspective they see to help us readers relate. This article was much easier for me to understand than Pat Belanoff’s article because of the way Davis and Shadle use easier vocabulary and more explanations that I, myself, can relate
Davis and Shadle state, “In this essay, we will present a series of alternatives to the modernist research paper: the argumentative research paper, the personal research paper, the research essay, and the multi-genre/media/disciplinary/ cultural research paper” (418). Davis and Shadle also have techniques by using rhetorical situations. The described situations help the reader understand how to create a successful research paper and useful tips on what and what not to do. Davis and Shadle include many different examples from other researchers in their article. This helps back up the information that they are trying to reach out to the readers. They also help by including ways of writing that I can make connections with as well as other readers like me. For example Posusta, a tutor at UCLA, comes up with ways for a researcher to make the process work well in a short period of time for procrastinators rather than insisting on using a longer process. Davis and Shadle further his purpose by explaining, “To better invent, Posusta had to learn the academy’s customs, rules, and practices” (419).
Overall, the insight given from Davis and Shadle is much easier to understand because of the perspective they see to help us readers relate. This article was much easier for me to understand than Pat Belanoff’s article because of the way Davis and Shadle use easier vocabulary and more explanations that I, myself, can relate