Gina L. Vallis-Reason to Write_ Applying Critical Thinking to Academic Writing -Kona Publishing and Media Group (2011)

GRAMMAR REVIEW

The words affect and effect are often confused. Affect is the verb, as in “He affected
her.” Effect is the noun, as in: “The effect was that she blushed.”

VOCABULARY REVIEW

argumentation
In formal logic/rhetoric, the elucidation of the process whereby one draws
reasonable inferences from true premises, as in formal argumentation

appeals
In rhetoric, three basic ways in which a speaker may seek to produce belief or
action in an audience through suasion, including dissuasion or persuasion

audience
In rhetoric, the receiver of a message, one of five elements necessary for
communication to occur

communication
In rhetoric, defined as an act that, to qualify as communication, must involve a
speaker, audience, vehicle, message, and intention. If the communication is designed
to persuade, it can also involve what are called appeals

ethos
In rhetoric, one of three types of appeals. In this case, the appeal to personal
credibility or authority of the speaker

fallacy
In rhetoric, the unsound or unethical use, either through error or deliberate
deception, of an appeal

intention
In rhetoric, the element of communication that indicates the purpose of the
speaker in conveying a message, one of five elements necessary for communication
to occur

logos
In rhetoric, one of three types of appeals. In this case, the appeal to logic or sound
reasoning

182 REASON TO WRITE

message
In rhetoric, the element of communication that indicates the content that
is relayed from speaker to audience, and one of five elements necessary for
communication to occur
pathos
In rhetoric, one of three types of appeals. In this case, the appeal to emotion
rhetoric
The study of logic and communication. From Aristotle, the study of such
communication especially in regard to awareness of the most effective means of
suasion in a given communication situation
speaker
In rhetoric, the element of communication that indicates the source of the
message, whether that source is immediately present, or not, and one of five
elements necessary for communication to occur
suasion
The attempted result, in a communicative act, of compelling belief or action in an
audience, whether that result is one of persuasion or dissuasion
vehicle
In rhetoric, the element of communication that indicates the means by which
the message is transmitted, whether that means is writing, speech, visual imagery,
gesture, etc. and one of five elements necessary for communication to occur

SECTION III • CHAPTER 8 Communication and Rhetoric 183



Chapter 9

Feedback and revision
1 186EVERYONE’S A CRITIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2 ON BEYOND SPELLCHECK: EDITING VS. REVISION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
3 189MIRRORING DOCUMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4 190THE SECRET OF THE HARD-COPY EDIT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5 190REVISION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

191STEP 7 SELFDIAGNOSTIC GUIDE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

185

1 everyone’s a critic

T he more that one writes, the more that one comes to appreciate the feedback of
others. In fact, if one pursues advancement in academics, one gets to the point of
soliciting criticism, because unless one can put a piece of writing away for a year, and
then come back to it, there is no way to encounter one’s own writing in a fresh way;
one is just too close to it.

This proximity to your own writing will cause all sorts of mischief. It will allow you
to fill in missing words that are not there, make leaps in logic that a typical reader
cannot follow, and otherwise read the writing that is in your head, instead of the writ-
ing on the page. You understand what you mean. It’s very difficult to get past that, in
order to imagine what it would be like to be someone else trying to figure out what
you mean.

The role of feedback in a writing draft is supposed to be helpful. However, its useful-
ness is dependent upon the way in which the feedback is presented, and also a degree
of maturity on your part, in accepting and making use of that criticism. Criticism is
quite simply a bit of a blow, no matter how well-phrased. It’s a lot easier to understand
why you bubbled in the wrong answer on a test. In writing feedback, things get a bit
more complicated.

Feedback for an essay draft comes in levels: word level (spelling, word-choice), sentence
level (syntax, grammar, word choice); organization level (the order of the presentation
of the ideas); formalist level (formatting); content level (your analysis and conclusions).
In a given course at university, one might just receive a grade, with no explanation. In a
writing course, one would hope you would receive a more detailed response.

There are several ways in which writing instructors tend to respond to drafts. These
include marginal comments, end-comments, rubrics, and 1:1 conferences. A rubric
is simply a sheet that lists common areas for improvements, and gives you an idea
which area you should work on for the final draft. Skip over none of it; respond to
anything your instructor offers—they notice.

Instructors are, one assumes, invested in being helpful, but they are also justifying a
grade. The idea would be that if one addresses all of the comments, (and understands
them), the final product would receive a higher grade. The purpose of a writing course
is to teach writing, and the final product is the measure the learning that has occurred.
Remember that instructors must choose between the quality of the final product, in
relationship to class standing, learning outcomes, and a student’s improvement, over
the course of the quarter, in determining that grade. In university courses, especially

186 REASON TO WRITE

if students are used to receiving high grades for their writing in high school, it can be
quite surprising (and a bit unsettling) to receive a lower grade for the same work, in
university. That is because one has moved to a new level of expectations.

There is no getting around the fact that instructors vary in those expectations. Almost
all instructors tend to agree upon the quality of a given piece of academic writing,
when they encounter it. This book aims toward identifying, and breaking down, for
students, the elements that tend to generate that consensus, based upon published
works. Yet just because instructors agree that a given published article displays a high
degree of writing competence, this does not guarantee that they agree as to how to
provide instruction in duplicating that quality. It’s not particularly fair to have to shift
your style of writing, or the rules that you are given, from course to course, but that
is the reality of writing within the university.

As such, your job, as a student, is twofold: first, your job is to learn. Take what you can
from instruction, and use your own judgment if it conflicts with other instruction you
receive. It has to make sense to you. Your other job is to pay attention to the expec-
tations of the instructor you are currently working with, and to follow them, even if
you don’t agree, or if it conflicts with other writing instruction you have received. Nor
does it help to point out any discrepancy to your current instructor. Hopefully, you
will get an instructor who is willing to explain his or her reasoning to you. It’s even
better if what she or he tells you actually makes sense.

Your best strategy for improving both your writing, and improving your grade, is to
go to the instructor (or whoever issues the grade) and ask her or him, directly, and as
politely as possible, what you can do to improve. Don’t be confrontational or emo-
tional. Push, if you have to, to get specifics. This is the job of an instructor; it’s the rea-
son office hours exist. The best time to do this is after your instructor has reviewed a
sample of your writing, as in a draft. Most instructors will respond positively to this
question, and will do their utmost to clarify their expectations.

Most of all, don’t take criticism personally, and remember that, no matter what you
have to do for a given course, this is your writing. It doesn’t matter what you pro-
duce; it matters what you learn. If you encounter a course in which you don’t feel
you are learning, do what you have to do to provide a product that fulfills the criteria
laid down by the instructor, and move on. Following instruction that doesn’t make
sense can only be for the purposes of receiving a desired grade; learning occurs when
understanding attends that instruction.

At the same time, remain open to different views, because sometimes an approach to
writing that you haven’t encountered before can actually make a lot of sense. At one

SECTION III • CHAPTER 9 Feedback and Revision 187

point or another, the whole business of academic writing should fall into place, and
at that point what you write is your own business.

To give an example of how writing instruction really works, the best single piece
of writing instruction that I ever received was from a teaching assistant. It was a
course in American Literature, and involved reading not only literary works from
that period, but also critical essays that responded to that literature.

In speaking to the teaching assistant in charge of grading, I learned something that
radically changed how I perceived the writing that I would perform for the rest of my
student career. In that conversation, after she confirmed that I had read the essays on
the readings, she simply said: “Write like that.”

Up to that point, it had never occurred to me that this was what was expected.
Sometimes things just click. This one went straight to what I had been struggling to
understand: the purpose of my writing efforts within the context of the university.

Over the years, as an instructor, I have witnessed many such pivotal moments, in
interacting with students. I have also known a few students who have walked away
from my office with little more than a vague plan of how to approximate what I was
asking of them, in their writing. Because thinking and writing are so closely linked,
a student’s response to instruction is as individualized as an instructor’s approach to
teaching. The best thing to do is to try to find a good fit between your learning style
and an instructor’s teaching style.

2 on beyond spellcheck: editing vs. revision

Editing a document, which involves identifying errors—checking for spelling
mistakes, making sure formatting is correct, making sure words are not missing,
etc.—is a student’s job, and should be completed within the draft stage, not in revision.

Instructors in university do not edit papers; they comment primarily on organi-
zation and content, for the purpose of global revision. In other words, nobody in
university expects you to revise your draft by correcting spelling errors; the paper
should not have been turned in this way, in the first place. An instructor may indicate
editing problems in feedback, but a rewrite that involves merely editing your paper
will probably not result in a higher grade. The only thing it might do is to prevent a
failing grade.

188 REASON TO WRITE

Before you turn in a draft, run both spell-check and grammar-check. Don’t rely on
them—keep a dictionary and college handbook at hand, and, if you’re not sure about
something that has been flagged, look it up. Software checks are useful tools, but they
are not foolproof. Never rely on a software program for formatting.

A rewrite is not about editing. Most of the time, it’s about a global revision, and often
an extension, of your original draft. A draft is not a finished product, and a final paper
should be considerably different from what you originally submitted.

3 mirroring documents

I n practical terms, there are two strategies that will help you to produce the most
effective rewrite for a given draft that you produce. The first is what could be called
mirroring documents.

If you perform a revision within your original document, you will miss two things:
first, you will lose the opportunity to encounter your writing fresh, because you will
be re-reading what you have already written. Second, you will lose the opportu-
nity for eloquence: the way in which a point you make not only makes sense, but it
particularly well-said.

Mirroring documents is a simple process. It involves calling up your original draft on
your desktop, and moving it over to one side, while leaving it open. Then, call up a
new blank document. Put them side-by-side. With your hard-copy feedback next to
you, your original open in a document, and your blank document pre-formatted, the
very best thing to do is to start from scratch. Anyone who has ever built a house will
tell you that it is easier to start fresh construction than engage in a remodel, where
you have to deal with existing material you are trying to replace, or change. For exam-
ple, global revision may require a completely new opening. Mirroring documents
allows you to construct that opening, while having your original readily available if
you would like to refer to it.

For parts of the original draft with which you are pleased, and that work, there is the
wonderful tool of cut and paste. This is especially helpful if you are moving around ele-
ments for a new organization, where elements that were once combined, but should
not have been, can be selectively extracted to fit a new organization. Remember that
input of new text creates the need for a new edit for small errors.

SECTION III • CHAPTER 9 Feedback and Revision 189

4 the secret of the hard-copy edit

This may seem like a simple strategy, but it is actually quite important. A student
once  came to me because he was extremely frustrated with the grades he was
receiving for writing in his courses. He had just turned in a draft for my course, and
it was easy to understand why he was receiving these grades. It was not his ideas,
which were very sound, nor his ability to think critically. It was not the way in which
he organized his writing. It was, quite simply, that his paper was full of egregious
editing errors.

In going over his draft, together, I asked him to read three sentences aloud. By the sec-
ond sentence he expressed profound surprise: he had edited the paper. He had read
it over several times. How could he have missed a sentence like: “It was for made the
purpose of in constructing identity”? It was just so wrong—why hadn’t he caught it?

The answer is quite simple: he had edited the document onscreen. There is no answer,
of which I am aware, as to why editing this way doesn’t work. Students who receive
the highest grades in writing courses always know this secret: no matter how many
times you have gone over a document, onscreen, it is always absolutely necessary to
perform a hard-copy edit.

That means printing the document, sitting down with a pen in hand, and reading
your prose off the page. If editing is an area in which you have had real difficulty, in
the past, you can take it a step further: find somewhere private, and read it aloud.

Mark places in your copy where you find errors (and you will), and return to the
screen to make the changes. Then you can print out a final copy. This particular stu-
dent’s final essay was not only a fine critical essay, but was entirely free of editing
errors, and his grades improved in all of his courses.

5 revision

B esides responding to instructor comments, performing adequate editing, mirror-
ing documents, and doing a hard-copy edit, it can be helpful to review important
issues covered within this text in order to self-diagnose any areas where one could
improve, or to return to a given step and review it. On the following page, you will
find a self-diagnostic. It is intended as a tool for self-evaluation, and not to force you
to give yourself some kind of grade. The self-diagnostic helps a student to recognize
that concentration on one or two areas, instead of “writing,” in general, can make a
substantial difference in the quality of his or her writing.

190 REASON TO WRITE

STEP 7: SELFDIAGNOSTIC GUIDE

# Issue Very Good Need to Issue for
Improve Revision
Critical Question _____
Based on a Critical Question _____ _____
_____
Contextualization _____ _____
Finds General/Specifics of question _____
_____ _____
Definition _____
Defines terms _____ _____ _____
_____ _____ _____
Analysis _____ _____
Gathers details _____
Finds patterns _____ _____
Draws conclusions _____
_____ _____ _____
Organization _____ _____
Strong organizational principle _____
_____ _____ _____
Sources _____ _____ _____
Emphasis on primary sources _____ _____ _____
Secondary sources when needed _____ _____ _____
_____ _____ _____
Tone _____ _____ _____
Tone works for publication _____ _____
Objective/Reasonable/Fair _____
No emotional language _____ _____ _____
No value judgments _____ _____ _____
Complicates any binaries _____ _____
Is not opinion-based _____
Deals with counterpoints _____ _____ _____
_____ _____
Language Usage _____
No “Wine-Bottle” Language _____ _____
No Adjectives
No Generalizations _____ _____ _____
__________
Structure __________________ __________
Title __________
Paragraphs

Mechanics
1. Formatting

Editing
1. Editing (General)
2. Specific Issue/s

__________________

__________________

SECTION III • CHAPTER 9 Feedback and Revision 191



Chapter 10

Joining the conversation

1 194KINDS OF WRITING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2 WRITING IN PROFESSIONAL 195CONTEXTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3 CONFERENCE PRESENTATION/PUBLICATION FOR

196UNDERGRADUATES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4 199JOINING THE CONVERSATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

STEP 8 CONFERENCE/JOURNAL PUBLICATION GUIDE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
Sample Undergraduate Conference CFP. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
Sample Undergraduate Journal CFP. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202

193

1 kinds of writing

“Writing is not a profession, occupation, or job; it is not a way of life.
It is a comprehensive response to life.”
—Gregory McDonald

P eople write in all sorts of different ways, for all sorts of different purposes. For
example, personal writing is quite simply writing that one does without the
intention of sharing it in a professional or academic or career-related context, because
that is not its purpose. Writing that would fall under this might include a personal
journal, a shopping list, a letter to a friend, etc. You get it.

Academic writing is merely one kind of writing. One of the things that distinguishes
academic writing is that it uses a style that tends to offer a question, and then to move
step by step, to a conclusion, through careful analysis and objective reasoning, in the
process leading the reader through that thought process in an organized manner.

As a specific kind of writing, the academic essay is not an editorial, a review, or an
autobiography. It is not a business proposal or a cover letter.

In contrast, non-academic writing serves a variety of purposes, in the world, but can
also be broken down into types and sub-types. A part of learning about academic
writing is the recognition of its unique quality, and it can help if one is able to differ-
entiate it from other kinds of writing that function in the world .

Professional Writing

Professional writing is writing performed by a person who will receive payment spe-
cifically for the writing product that he or she produces. For example, editing is a type
of professional writing. Professional writing can also include, among others:

technical writing: Writing that serves the function of breaking down
a process, for a reader, for the practical purpose of having the reader
perform that same process. This is done with the understanding that
the result would, ideally, result in a duplication of that initial process.
Technical writing is published, for example, in manuals. Its purpose is
primarily to educate.

194 REASON TO WRITE

journalism: In the form of, for example, reporting, journalism is
composed of writing that organizes, and synthesizes, for the reader, in
a coherent and objective manner, the results of skilled research. This
research often includes both primary sources, which can include cur-
rent events, historical research, as well as investigation into secondary
sources. Ideally, such writing is free of interpretation on the part of the
writer, and concentrates only upon the reliable transmission of accurate
data concerning those events or issues.

Journalism has many subgenres that would challenge this definition: it
can also include opinion-based writing, in the form of the editorial. It
can include reviews, or interviews, or satire. Journalism is published
in magazines, newspapers, and non-academic journals. Its purpose is
primarily to educate or to entertain.

creative writing: The writing of fiction or creative non-fiction for the
purpose of publication in a variety of forms: magazines, anthologies,
books, etc. Its purpose is more than just to entertain, but is a part of the
verbal arts, which function outside of the range of utility.

2 writing in professional contexts

O f course, while professional writers are paid specifically for their writing, there
are many professional contexts in which people engage in very specific kinds
of writing tasks. Writing in professional contexts is often specific to certain career
categories, whether in the public or private sector. There are many professions that
require a person to write. An entrepreneur may write a business plan; a consultant
may write a proposal; a teacher may write a lesson plan.

These context-specific kinds of writing can be important for people to master within
a  given professional field. Such writing is done under rules that often involve a
complex understanding of heavily coded conventions that have built up over time.
For example, we expect that a business letter will have a closing line (“Sincerely”;
“Regards,” etc.). We expect that a lawyer will state his or her case, in a written brief, in
language that follows a predictable formula, and that might be difficult to understand
unless one has been to law school.

SECTION III • CHAPTER 10 Joining the Conversation 195

3 conference presentation/publication for
undergraduates

S ometimes students who enter into university have the idea that writing will not
be required within their given field. This is not the case. There is no discipline in
which writing does not occur, and copiously, within academics. There are publica-
tions in every field. Students also often see the “academic essay” as a school-based
writing assignment, written to take entrance exams and to pass classes. Again, that is
not, actually, its purpose.

The “academic essay” is, in fact, writing in any of the disciplines—Biology, History,
Sociology, Anthropology, English, Chemistry, etc.—that is written in order to be
presented to a review board for two potential purposes: for consideration for pre-
sentation at a conference, or for the purpose of consideration for publication in an
academic journal.

The university is really a self-renewing writing situation. People in universities teach,
do experiments, speak, and publish academic writing. Because undergraduates often
see their role within the academy as a classroom-learner, few take advantage of the
opportunities provided by participation in undergraduate conference presentation,
undergraduate research assistantship, and undergraduate publication. Beyond the
satisfaction that one can gain from such activities, they speak in a powerful way to
potential committees or interviewers if one wishes to continue on to graduate school,
or to put together a strong professional package for job application.

Academic Conferences for Undergraduates

Conferences are gatherings that are hosted by academic associations. They occur at
universities, at hotels, and at conference centers, all over the world. Scholars attend
these symposiums, or conferences, in order to learn what others present, and to get
the opportunity to present what they have learned. There are conferences that are
specifically aimed at undergraduates, and there are conferences at which persons at
any level of scholarship can participate.

Usually, one must be a member of an association to attend, which usually involves
either simply officially indicating willingness to join, as well as a desire to attend a
given conference, and sometimes involves a fee for both membership and registration
to a conference. Some associations are linked to academic journals, and some put out
newsletters that keep their members up-to-date on various goings-on pertaining to
the association.

196 REASON TO WRITE

These associations range widely: some are discipline-specific (e.g.: The Association
of Academic Psychiatrists), some are theme-specific (e.g.: The Association for Infor-
mal Logic and Critical Thinking), and some are area-specific (e.g.: The Mid-Western
College Art Association). Some are small. Some are very big. The Modern Language
Association (which is the association that puts out the MLA guidelines for format-
ting) hosts a conference, each year, attended by thousands of participants.

When a given association is planning to host a conference, it notifies its members,
and it also sends out a general notification called a CFP: a Call For Papers. The call
goes out to anyone who would like to present, who fulfills the qualifications. Response
to this call may require an abstract, or a paper, depending on the specifics of the call.
A review board then evaluates this material, and presenters are chosen based upon
that review.

Some associations will only accept submissions from specific presenters, but many
will consider a strong abstract from anyone currently engaged in academic inquiry,
and even those who are not. It is much easier to get accepted to an academic confer-
ence than to be accepted for academic publication. Presenting at a conference, or
even attending one, gives students exposure to a given field, provides a chance to
make contacts, and is a significant part of professional development reflected on a
C.V. or résumé.

The Academic Journal

An “academic journal” is not a magazine. A legitimate academic journal publishes
articles that are:

Scholarly: The purpose of the articles contained within the journal is
to distribute knowledge, not to make money.

Peer-reviewed: Articles are reviewed and selected by experts within a field,
depending on the nature of the journal

Specialized: Articles are usually written by people within a given field,
for an audience of readers within that same field.

When a journal is created, the editorial board gets together and makes a series of
decisions. They will decide whether the journal will be disciplinary or interdisci-
plinary, on what the journal is going to concentrate, and what its general philoso-
phy will be. Editorial boards get to decide which essays they publish, the journal’s
intended audience, the look of the journal, and how it is distributed. Once a journal

SECTION III • CHAPTER 10 Joining the Conversation 197

is established, the editorial board will also put out a CFP. This invites those within
academics to submit abstracts, or essays, for consideration for publication in the
journal.

Some journals will publish essays from any source, as long as the essay meets their
standards. Others are very specific about whom they will publish. Some will only
publish articles or essays from established experts in a field. Others specify works
from a specific university.

Here is an example of the description of an interdisciplinary journal from the edito-
rial board for “NeoAmericanist.” This journal routinely publishes work from profes-
sors, graduate students, and undergraduates:

NeoAmericanist is an inter-disciplinary online journal for the study of
America. We are focused on reaching out to universities and the gen-
eral public to create an e-journal that pushes the boundaries of scholar-
ship and theory, and blurs the lines between academic disciplines and
popular culture. NeoAmericanist is a journal available for anyone who
aspires to participate in the study of the United States of America.

Like most academic journals, this journal indicates the forum for the journal, its
focus, its intended readership, and the people from whom it will accept submissions
for potential publication.

There are literally hundreds of journals that publish work by undergraduates. There
are interdisciplinary undergraduate academic journals, and journals that special-
ize in publishing undergraduate research. There are also many journals that are
discipline-specific, including but not limited to:

Art Creative Writing Business
Communication Economics English
Cognitive Science Rhetoric History
Law Computer Science Psychology
International Affairs Medicine Political Science
Mathematics Physics Philosophy
Biology Engineering Anthropology
Neuroscience Chemistry Public Writing
Film Studies Linguistics Sociology

198 REASON TO WRITE

4 joining the conversation

I t is an excellent exercise to at least find a conference or journal to which one could
contribute. Academic submission is always free. All one has to do is follow the
guidelines. At the worst, one could get rejected—but the benefits, should one get
accepted, far outweigh a bit of ego-deflation, should one not be accepted.
Knowing how to respond to a CFP does not mean that one has to actually submit the
essay—but one should know how to go about doing so.

SECTION III • CHAPTER 10 Joining the Conversation 199

STEP 8: CONFERENCE/JOURNAL PUBLICATION GUIDE
STEP 1

Open your web browser and type in “undergraduate journal.” Other key words could
include “undergraduate conference” or “CFP undergraduates.”
You will find multiple websites, often themselves lists to other resource links.
Find a Conference or Journal to which you could legitimately submit your essay for
potential consideration.
Go to that website.

STEP 2
On that webpage, if you look around, there will be a link that says something to the
effect of “Submission guidelines,” or “For Contributors.”
Click on the link.

STEP 3
This link will take you to a set of guidelines for how to prepare your essay for consid-
eration for a conference presentation or journal publication.
Print out the “submissions guidelines” page
You don’t have to submit your essay—but, at this point, you could.

200 REASON TO WRITE

SAMPLE UNDERGRADUATE CONFERENCE CFP

Conference for Undergraduate Research
in Communication

Call for papers

We invite theoretical, critical and/or empirical papers on a broad range of communi-
cation topics for presentation in traditional panel format.
Undergraduate research projects suitable for poster session presentation in an inter-
esting, engaging visual format are also encouraged.
Papers must be authored by one or more undergraduate students attending one of the
participating institutions. Maximum length is 15 pages (not including references and
appendixes). Please submit your paper, using the citation method of the American
Psychological Association and following the directions laid out in the Paper Format
Guide, with 100-word abstract, electronically to [email protected] for review.
Poster session presentations should represent research projects and results in an
interesting visual form. At least one author of the project must be present at the
poster session to discuss the poster with attendees. Please submit your proposal, of
no more than 500 words, electronically to [email protected].
Deadline for all submissions Monday, February 15. Acceptance is by e-mail.

SECTION III • CHAPTER 10 Joining the Conversation 201

SAMPLE UNDERGRADUATE JOURNAL CFP

HISTORY MATTERS

AN UNDERGRADUATE JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH

Submissions Info 
HISTORY MATTERS welcomes submissions from all undergraduates. Please follow
these guidelines when submitting papers:

– The deadline for submissions is the last Friday of January.
– Authors may submit papers via e-mail attachment, in Microsoft Word

formats, to [email protected].
– Please put your name, university, e-mail address, current mailing address,

and phone number on a cover page.
– We are especially seeking papers that utilize primary sources.
– We strongly prefer papers between 10 and 20 pages in length.
– Please do not include your name in the header or footer.
– Please use 1” margins.
– The body text of all papers should be double-spaced, but footnotes should be

single-spaced.
– All papers must include a bibliography of sources used.
– We ask that you use footnotes and conform manuscripts to the Chicago

Manual of Style (latest edition), especially for footnote form.
– Only one submission per student will be reviewed.
– We do not accept papers already published or previously submitted to this

journal or other academic journals.
Revisions and additional research may be requested after editorial review, but a
request for revision does not guarantee publication.

202 REASON TO WRITE

recommended readings

Roland Barthes: “The World of Wrestling.”
Mythologies. New York: Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux, 1972. Print.

Jean Baudrillard: America. New York: Verso New Edition, 2010. Print.

Walter Benjamin: “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” Illumi-
nations: Essays and Reflections. New York: Schoken, 1969. Print.

John Berger: “Hiroshima”
A Sense of Sight. New York: Vintage. 1993. Print.

John Berger: “Ways of Seeing”
Ways of Seeing. New York: Penguin, 1990. Print.

Stephen Bernhardt: “Seeing the Text”
College Composition and Communication 37.1 (1996): 66–78.
Print.

J. Anthony Blair: “The Possibility and Actuality of Visual Arguments”
Argumentation and Advocacy 33.1 (1996): 23–39. Print.

Susan Bordo: “Hunger as Ideology”
Unbearable Weight: Feminism, Western Culture, and the Body.
2nd Ed. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004. Print.

Paul Cantor: “The Simpsons: Atomistic Politics and the Nuclear Family”
Political Theory 27.6 (1999): 734–749. Print.

Carol Clover: “Her Body, Himself ”
Men, Women, and Chainsaws: Gender in the Modern Horror
Film. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1993. Print.

Annie Dillard: “The Wreck of Time”
For the Time Being. New York: Vintage, 2000. Print.

Lars Eigner: “On Dumpster Diving”
Travels with Lizbeth. New York: Ballentine Books, 1994. Print.

Ralph Ellison: “An Extravagance of Laughter”
Going to the Territory. New York: Vintage, 1999. Print.

203

Stanley Fish: “How to Recognize a Poem When You See One”
Is There a Text in This Class?: The Authority of Interpretive
Communities. Boston: Harvard University Press, 1982. Print.

Paulo Friere: “The Banking Concept of Education”
Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum, 2000 (1970).
Print.

Erich Fromm: “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem”
On Disobedience and Other Essays. New York: Harper Perennial
Modern Classics, 2010. Print.

Clifford Geertz: “Deep Play: Notes on a Balinese Cockfight”
The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books, 1977.

Elliot Gorn: “Professing History: Distinguishing Between Memory and the Past”
The Chronicles of Higher Education 46.34 (2000): B4–B5. Web.
14 Sept. 2004.

Susan Griffith: “Our Secret”
A Chorus of Stones: The Private Life of War. New York: Anchor,
1993. Print.

Daniel Harris: “Cuteness” and “Coolness”
Cute, Quaint, Hungry, and Romantic: The Aesthetics of Consum-
erism. Cambridge: Da Capo Press, 2001. Print.

Michael Holzmann: “Rhetoric/Composition//Academic Institutions/Cultural Studies.”
Enculturation 5.1 (2003): n. pag. Web. 23 Jan. 2010.

Rosina “Teaching Children How to Discriminate: What We Learn from
Lippi-Greene: the Big Bad Wolf.” English with an Accent: Language, Ideology,
and Discrimination in the United States. 2nd Ed. New York:
Routledge, 2010.

Elizabeth Mangini: “Real Lies, True Fakes, and Supermodels”
Invisible Culture: An Electronic Journal for Visual Culture 7.1
(2006): 8–17. Web. 17 Mar. 2007.

The Hays Code: David P. Hayes, ed. “The Motion Picture Code of 1930.” n. pag.
2000 (1934). Web. 15 Oct. 2009.

204 REASON TO WRITE

Scott McCloud: “The Vocabulary of Comics”
Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art. New York: Harper
Collins, 1994. Print.

Richard E. Miller “Preface”
and The New Humanities Reader. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company,
Kurt Spellmeyer: 2006. xvii. Print.

William Ian Miller: “Thick, Greasy Life”
The Anatomy of Disgust. Boston: Harvard University Press,
1998. Print.

George Orwell: “Politics and the English Language”
A Collection of Essays. New York: Mariner Books, 1970. Print.

Walker Percy: “The Loss of the Creature”
The Message in the Bottle New York: Macmillan, 2000. Print.

Christine Rosen: Cohen, Eric, ed. “Our Cell Phones, Ourselves”
The New Atlantis: A Journal of Technology and Society 6 (2004):
n. pag. Web. 18 Nov. 2007.

Carl Sagan: “Can We Know the Universe?: Reflections on a Grain of Salt”
Broca’s Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science. New York:
Ballantine Publishing Group, 1979. Print.

Theodore Sizer: “What High School Is”
Horace’s Compromise: The Dilemma of the American High
School. New York: Mariner Books, 2004. Print.

Mark Slouka: “Dehumanized: When Math and Science Rule the School”
Harper’s Magazine. 319.1912: 32–40. Article.

James P. Spradley/ “The Cocktail Waitress: Women’s Work in a Man’s World.”
Brenda Mann: Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 2.10 (1976): 255–256.
Article.

Brent Staples: “Black Men and Public Space”
Harpers Magazine. 273.1639 (1986): 19–20. Article.

Recommended Readings 205



WORKS CITED

CHAPTER 1

Birkerts, Sven. “The Owl Has Flown.” Making Sense: Essays on Art, Science, and
Culture. 2nd ed. Ed. Bob Coleman. Kentucky: Wadsworth Publishing
Company, 2004. 70–77. Print.

Charlip, Julie. “A Real Class Act.” Making Sense: Essays on Art, Science, and Culture.
2nd ed. Ed. Bob Coleman. Kentucky: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 2004.
79–94. Print.

Coleman, Bob, ed. Making Sense: Essays on Art, Science, and Culture. 2nd ed. Kentucky:
Wadsworth Publishing Company, 2004. Print.

Florida, Richard. “The Transformation of Everday Life.” Making Sense: Essays on
Art, Science, and Culture. 2nd ed. Ed. Bob Coleman. Kentucky: Wadsworth
Publishing Company, 2004. 195–211. Print.

Rossenwasser, David and Jill Stephen. Writing Analytically. 5th Ed. Kentucky:
Wadsworth Publishing, 2009. Print.

CHAPTER 2

Guth, Hans P. Words and Ideas: A Handbook for College Writing. Kentucky:
Wadsworth Publishing, 1969. Print.

Miller, Richard E. and Kurt Spellmeyer. “Preface.” The New Humanities Reader.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2006. xvii. Print.

Paul, Richard and Linda Elder. The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts
and Tools. California: The Foundation for Critical Thinking, 2001. Print.

Sagan, Carl. Broca’s Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science. New York: Ballantine
Publishing Group, 1979. Print.

CHAPTER 3
_____

CHAPTER 4

Carroll, Lewis. “The Jabberwocky.” Through the Looking Glass, and What Alice Found
There. Boston: Adamant Media Corporation, 2001 (1871): 22–24. Print.

207

Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. University of Minnesota Press,
2008. Print.

Goffman, Erving. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor, 1959.
Print.

McCloud, Scott. Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art. New York: Harper Collins,
1994. Print.

Orwell, George. A Collection of Essays. New York: Mariner Books, 1970. Print.

Shakespeare, William. “Richard the III.” The Riverside Shakespeare. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1997. Print.

CHAPTER 5

Blair, J. Anthony. “The Possibility and Actuality of Visual Arguments.” Argumentation
and Advocacy 33.1 (1996): 23–39. Print.

Derrida, Jacques. Given Time: Counterfeit Money. Trans. Peggy Kamuf. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1994. Print.

Twilight. Dir. Catherine Hardwicke. Perf. Kristin Stewart, Robert Pattison, and Taylor
Lautner. Summit Entertainment, LLC, 2008. Film.

CHAPTER 6

Cantor, Paul A. “The Simpsons: Atomistic Politics and the Nuclear Family.” Political
Theory 27.6 (1999): 734–749. Print.

Clover, Carol. Men, Women, and Chainsaws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film.
New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1993. Print.

Friere, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum, 2000 (1970). Print.

Gorn, Elliot J. “Professing History: Distinguishing Between Memory and the Past.” The
Chronicles of Higher Education 46.34 (2000): B4–B5. Web. 14 September 2004.

Griffin, Susan. A Chorus of Stones: The Private Life of War. New York: Anchor, 1993.
Print.

Martin, Emily. “The Egg and the Sperm: How Science has Constructed a Romance
Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles.” Signs 16.3 (1991): 485–501. Print.

208 REASON TO WRITE

Sagan, Carl. Broca’s Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science. New York: Ballantine
Publishing Group, 1979. Print.

Spradley, James P. and Brenda J. Mann. “The Cocktail Waitress: Women’s Work in a
Man’s World.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 2.10 (1976): 255–256.

Zimbardo, Phillip, C. Haney, W.C. Banks, and D. Jaffe. “The Mind is a Formidable
Jailer: A Pirandellian Prison.” New York Times Magazine [New York] 8 April
1973, sec. 6: 38–45. Web. 23 July 2008.

CHAPTER 7

Clover, Carol. Men, Women, and Chainsaws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film.
New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1993. Print.

Ohio Humanities Council. Ohio Humanities Council. Web. 12 April 2009.

CHAPTER 8

Barrere, Albert and Charles Godfrey Leland, eds. A Dictionary of Slang, Jargon, and
Cant v.2: L-Z. Montana: Kessinger Publishing, LLC, 2010 (1890). Print.

Holzmann, Michael. Holzman, Michael. “Rhetoric/Composition//Academic
Institutions/Cultural Studies.” Enculturation 5.1 (2003): n. pag. Web. 23
Jan 2010.

Safire, William. Safire’s New Political Dictionary. New York: Random House, 1993. Print.

CHAPTER 9
_____

CHAPTER 10

Conference for Undergraduate Research in Communication. Conference for
Undergraduate Research in Communication. Department of Communica-
tion, R.I.T. 2010. Web. 23 April 2010.

NeoAmericanist: The Interdisciplinary Online Journal for the Study of America.
University of Western Ontario. 2010. Web. 23 April 2010.

Shea, Alison, ed. History Matters: An Undergraduate Journal of Historical Research.
Appalachian State University, 2010. Web. 23 April 2010.

Works Cited 209



This handbook is a practical guide designed to offer students the means to
apply critical thinking to academic writing.

Critical thinking is a challenging term. Sometimes it is presented in
relationship to formal logic, which is too rigid to use as a strategy for writing
instruction. Sometimes critical thinking is made synonymous with analysis,
although they can be clearly differentiated as separate cognitive activities.
Sometimes critical thinking is reduced to writing prompts on selected readings,
or exemplar asides.

Reason to Write introduces the critical question, a pre-writing strategy that
both stipulates a working definition for critical thinking, and, in doing so,
reorients the approach to academic writing as fundamentally inquiry-based.

Critical thinking provides specific strategies designed to help student writers
to work through the relationship between thinking and writing. When given the
opportunity to develop a line of inquiry based upon a question, students
acquire not only critical thinking skills, but also the means to be
self-corrective in their writing, and to transfer those skills into new contexts.

In three major sections, students are guided through steps that build upon
foundational critical thinking skills, and that reinforce academic writing as a
practice designed to answer a question, solve a problem, or resolve an issue.

Gina L. Vallis received her Ph.D. in Literature with an emphasis in critical
theory, and teaches Writing at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
She writes and presents on topics concerning rhetoric, communication,
critical and literary theory, and film and visual studies. She is certified in
graphic design, has published poetry, and vendors an intervention program
for children with ASD, in relationship to which she contributed a chapter for a
book on autism intervention. She is currently completing a pending
publication of a collaborative web-text for the praxis category of Kairos, as
well as preparing a manuscript concerning writing about film, titled Screening
Arguments.