What I have found interesting this week is that the subject readings appear to be based on Academic Writing: Process and Product Johnson, A. (2016), quiet closely?

  In preparation research to the assignment rather than the academic writing doctrine I have found it a far more interesting topic of thought the philosophy of teaching Academic Writing and the method in which we are learning Academic Writing. Researching for the upcoming assignment has somewhat served to only intimidate further. Realising that these journal entries themselves are being marked and calculated against my final mark for this subject has now made me a little self-conscious about the style and grammatical correctness.    

With the past assignment (as previously mentioned) I made the fatal mistake of not getting my references together as I worked; this is not a mistake I will be making again. I have also noticed when downloading a section or a chapter of a particular book/journal from the Library it does not contain the reference material required in order to reference correctly, another mistake I will not make again.

I have learnt a few lessons from the previous assignment I wish not to make again and the reason I am mentioning it in this blog post is I feel it an appropriate forum. The last mistake I made with this assignment was over researching and then getting writer’s block and suffering from an unclear thought process when trying to write the speech. I will be implementing some of the critical thinking processes I have researched in preparation of the assignment for this subject such as making notes, highlighting anomalies in writing, making questions and connections between other writings read, making thought maps and assignment plans.

I have saved a copy of the APA referencing guide and going forward I will ensure it is constantly and consistently on hand. 

Analytical Essay- discuss, analyse, investigate, explore or review- breaking into structure and being balanced where possible

Argumentative Essay- take a position; present opposing views of an argument, present the position taken second with stronger evidence

Interpretative Essay- given data (ie. Statistics, scenario, case study) asked to given an explanation, recommendations or possible solution etc. 

Comparative Essay- include compare, compare and contrast or differentiate questions maybe then asked to give recommendations about the suitability of what you’re comparing

Problem and solution Essay- questions often require you to structure your answer in several parts. An example may be to ask you to investigate a problem and explore a range of solutions. You may also be asked to choose the best solution and justify your selection, allow space for this in your essay

Cause and effect Essay- which ask you to state or investigate the effects or outline the causes of the topic. Can be structured with the effects working back to causes or the causes leading to their effects- sometimes asking for an overall picture of the effects on the community. 

Researching for upcoming assignment I have come across How to Write Better Essays Bryan Greetham in it he describes the 5 stages 

1.       Interpretation of the question

2.       Research

3.       Planning 

4.       Writing 

5.       Revision 

These differ slightly from those mentioned in our study material being 
analysing the essay question,

The Monash Credibility Checklist goes through in depth the types of information we are needing to establish whilst looking for credible sources. Establishing who an author is and there previous work, opinions and credibility in a chosen field is a new concept as to researching an assignment topic. Although researching the author does make complete sense if using those opinions and conclusions to base an argument on.  

Where I have struggled in the past is point 5 of the Learning material

In academic writing you do not simply list what you have read - your bibliography or reference list does that. Your writing needs to show how you have grouped and categorised information from a wide range of sources and organised this information around central points, arguments or sections.
 
However working on this with some of the strategies around critical thinking and researching I anticipate this will get better with time. 

What I have learnt this week is the need to be more aware of the persuasiveness and manipulative intent behind the resources that I am using. I can see how it would become easy to use a few resources and let that persuade your theory. It has become clear the need for intentionally looking to sabotage your own theory or thesis. 

It has also become clear as to some of the criticism I received in my report for Working in Community Services. I will struggle, I feel to find a balance between over persuading or manipulating the audience and not making my arguments clear enough. I have always aired on the side of the assumption that the audience of these reports are intelligent, critical thinkers and thus have fallen in to the trap of not explaining my thought process clearly and somewhat blindly assumed that my audience would somehow just know what point I am trying to make. It has been made clear to me through looking at critical thinking and other academic processes behind academic writing it is more complex a process than I had ever imagined and this is a skill I will need to master. 

Deakin University. (n.d). Critical thinking. Viewed September 15, 2016, from http://www.deakin.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/51222/critical-thinking.pdf

I am sure as students we have all been guilty of one or more of the misconceptions of argument. 

Evaluating information. (2017). John Hopkins Sheridan Libraries & University Museums. Retrieved August 10, 2017, from http://guides.library.jhu.edu/evaluate

Authority

·         Is it in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal?

o    ‘Peer-reviewed’ means that a source has undergone the review and scrutiny of a review board of colleagues in the author's field. They evaluate this source as part of the body of research for a particular discipline and make recommendations regarding its publication in a journal, revisions prior to publication, or, in some cases, reject its publication.

·         Who published the source? 

o    Is it a university press, professional society or large reputable publisher? 

o    Is it from a government agency?

o    Is the source self-published? 

o    What is the purpose of the publication?

·         Where does the information in the source come from? 

o    Does the information appear to be valid and well-researched, or is it questionable and unsupported by evidence? 

o    Is there a list of references or works cited? 

o    What is the quality of these references (Have these criteria been applied to its sources)?

·         Who is the author? 

o    What are the author's credentials (educational background, past writing, experience) in this area? 

o    Have you seen the author's name cited in other sources or bibliographies?

·         Is the content a first-hand account or is it being retold? 

o    Primary sources are the raw material of the research process; secondary sources are based on primary sources.

·         When was the source published? 

·         Is the source current or out of date for your topic? 

o    In some disciplines, material can become outdated very swiftly. In others, texts can continue to be considered valuable for longer. You should search for additional texts on the topic to find related sources, sources in which this source is cited, and sources that cite this source in order to get a stronger picture of its intellectual relevance and value.

·         What is the author’s intention? 

o    Is the information fact, opinion, or propaganda? 

o    Is the author's point of view objective and impartial? 

o    Is the language free of emotion-rousing words or bias?

·         Is the publication organized logically? 

o    Are the main points clearly presented? 

o    Do you find the text easy to read? 

o    Is the author repetitive?