Do You Remember the 21st Night of September?

     

      Sorry, I had to. However, I do think that this 21st night of September will indeed be memorable, thanks to Teresa Thonney's article, "Teaching the Conventions of Academic Discourse". After reading Thonney's "six standard 'moves' in academic writing", I found numerous ideas that I liked and some that I found different than what I had always been taught.

     Primarily, I enjoyed the manner in which Teresa Thonney expressed her credibility and dedication to speak on such a topic. I mean just look at that works cited page! Thonney elucidates her immense research done, not only by including a works cited page, but also by embedding the sources throughout her paragraphs. Thonney uses sources to both assist her ideas, and offer opposing ideas which also strengthens her insight. She stresses each of her points equally, with adequate evidence to support all six, suggesting that successful academic discourse is certainly a multifactorial process.

     Furthermore, I really liked how she provides specific examples, from numerous different fields (psychology, biology, engineering, etc.), which make clear the different writing styles that are suitable at different times. For example, when discussing the use of first or third person, Thonney includes a paragraph from engineering, which includes "no mention of who completed the research" (49), later comparing it with a paragraph from psychology that uses first person. Through Thonney's incorporation of vivid examples, I found it much easier to understand her main point, as I could see it for myself on paper instead of having to picture it in my head. 

     Despite enjoying her study for the most part, there was one specific section of it that I found challenging to agree with. More specifically, in her second principle, Teresa Thonney discusses students' announcement of their plans in their papers. She notes that "some instructors want students to avoid statements like 'in this paper..' or 'blueprint' statements...but these statements are commonplace in academic journals and are often rewarded by professors for making reading easy" (47). She then follows with an example of a marketing article that says "in the next section, we discuss..."(47). The fact that such statement are actually acceptable in some cases kind of makes me cringe. To me, it sounds so elementary and I would be disappointed in myself if I ever used such statements. This may be due to the teachers I've had in the past who embedded such ideas into my mind; however, I certainly appreciate the "rules" they taught me. 

     I personally related to Thonney's ideas in her third section that examines why writers should acknowledge that others may disagree with their position. In my AP English Lang & Comp class junior year, we wrote numerous argumentative essays, which all required a counterargument and rebuttal. If we failed to include these essential factors, it would be reflected in our overall essay score. By examining the opposing positon and qualifying assertions, we were able to strengthen our own argument, thus composing a better essay.

     Ultimately, I believe that Thonney's journal is beneficial for both professors and students. Although not primarily intended for students, I felt that I was able to obtain some useful information on academic discourse and what to possibly expect in future writing classes.