,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
At around 18 minutes on this podcast with @holden, @derekbruff makes an excellent point about the disconnect between how students are asked to write in academic modes (start with a thesis and prove it) v. how academics really work. soundcloud.com/leadinglines/e…
It's "tempting" (@derekbruff's) for students to pick a thesis and try to prove it because a thesis is a sign that the stdnt must be on the right track, but by privileging the appearance of the thesis, rather than the thinking that precedes a thesis, we're steering students wrong.
When we tell students, "you must have a thesis," we're denying them the experience of doing the thinking that leads to a genuine discovery. This is why I'm fanatic about process in The Writer's Practice. I want them doing the thinking, not skipping to the "end."
We've all read those student essays where they've shoehorned in sources in order to "prove" a thesis. That shoehorning isn't a sign of not knowing how to work with sources. It's a sign that they haven't done an inductive process of observation and inference to develop a thesis.
I'll go further. That shoehorning is actually a sign that students DO know how to use sources but because they started with a thesis without doing the thinking, they believe they have to (in the words of Tim Gunn) make it work. It's a problem earlier in the process.
Now wishing I had a section in Why They Can't Write titled, "Don't Start with the Thesis."
