By Becca Cassady, Coordinator/Consultant
I heard a proverb recently that struck me as quite relevant to my work as a writing scholar: “There is no tale so great that it can’t be spoiled in the telling.” I thought about the dissertation writing and article collaborations that we, as researchers, are engaged in daily. We can conduct the best research, collect the best data, and make the most interesting connections, but at the end of the day, if we can’t effectively communicate our ideas, the impact of our work is greatly diminished—even misunderstood.
That’s why from chemists to historians, from psychologists to sociologists, all researchers are writers. When you reach a certain point in academia, writing is practically your job. Publications, conference papers, grant writing, and even syllabi all help establish you within your discipline and convey the important work that you’re doing. A great deal of your scholarly identity and career progress is connected to your writing.
Moreover, all researchers are storytellers. You may not think of storytelling as something that goes down in the lab or in the field or even in the university library, but your data and research are telling a story, forming a narrative. You, as a writer-research, must shape that narrative so that your readers leave blown away by—or at least thinking about—your discovery/intervention/argument.
Investing in your writing practices and rhetorical knowledge as you progress through graduate school will position you well not only for the dissertation stage but also for other publications and presentations in and beyond grad school. You’ll be prepared to effectively engage other scholars, potential collaborators, and even lay readers and build your scholarly identity in the process.
Sounds like a good plan. But how?
Shaping your Narrative
As you think about translating your research into a written document, keep in mind the following rhetorical considerations that can help you engage your readers effectively.
1. What story is the study/data/research telling?
Once you know what you want to say, all of your writing choices should serve to highlight and support that goal and point readers back to your argument. Don’t let yourself get distracted by other findings or “plot lines.” Save those for another piece and tell one story well. Your reader should leave able to clearly re-state your argument.
A related consideration is the scope of your document. Don’t try to save the world in one article, one chapter, even one book. Be realistic about the content and findings that you can cover and don’t be afraid to go deep and not wide. (Although sometimes broad is more appropriate—e.g. this blogpost!)
2. Who is your audience?
Consider who your audience is. Does your work have implications for multiple fields? If so, which field are you targeting with this piece? Different scholars will have different levels of knowledge and background—even different vocabularies—so identifying this beforehand will help you keep in mind what your audience already knows and what they need to know (and therefore what you’re responsible for explaining to them.)
On a broader scale, if this is a publication, what is your venue? Different journals, for example, have different expectations for both content and style. If you’re new to publishing, I would suggest identifying the top-tier journals in your field (through your own research or by asking a mentor) and reading the articles in those journals. You’ll get a sense of what they’re looking for, what kinds of critical approaches or methodologies their pieces often use, and what content they’ve published recently. In some fields, reaching out to journal editors can also help you (or them) decide if your work is a good fit for the journal.
3. How are you intervening in the scholarly conversation?
Your work should be engaging relevant scholarship. That doesn’t mean you have to read every piece on your topic since 1900. But it does mean you need to be aware of what scholars are saying. You also need to be aware of what they’re not saying, thus identifying gaps in scholarship. This is how you justify the need for this amazing new research you’re doing. Build on other people’s work; don’t be afraid to show connections or, when necessary, contradictions. If you’re not engaging the scholarship within your field, you’re essentially screaming into an empty echo chamber. And that’s just not a productive (or publishable) place to be.
While there are many rhetorical considerations that should guide your writing, these are just a few that I find helpful as I try to shape my own data into a narrative. I hope you find them helpful, too. And if you ever need someone to read your story, the Graduate Writing Center is happy to help.
Becca Cassady is a PhD Candidate in English whose research focuses on writing center studies and learning transfer. She serves as the Graduate Writing Center Coordinator as well as a Doctoral Administrative Fellow for the Baylor Graduate School.