Some Dos, Don’ts and Dancing

Posted on by

This is a reading response for week three in the Research Colloquium course. I’ve read three dissertations for this week’s response and will focus on one of these as I try to make sense of Gerald Graff’s suggested do’s and don’ts for academic writers. In this way, I can clearly visualize and try to apply a wabi sabi aesthetic [Wabi Sabi in a PhD Dissertation] to my writing.

  1. Be dialogic – explicitly share the context and conversation into which you are entering. Start by identifying some of the back story to where you are now, in order to bring readers into the current point in the narrative. Brant (2017) brings us into her research story by identifying her position and connection to the culture and context in which she researches. The first paragraphs and pages of the dissertation explicitly shares her positionality and locality within the research tradition and community where the inquiry will occur.
  2. Make a claim early in the dissertation so your purpose is identified. This may be true for some dissertation writing, but not true for some genres. One example where this is true is Potvin’s (2017) dissertation where the claim and purpose are presented within the first few paragraphs and pages of the paper. Brant (2017) on the other hand shares extensive back story and context before presenting the purpose and claim for her research, as representative of an indigenous approach to research writing, where honouring the ancestors (previous ideas, people, theorists) comes before personal story.
  3. Remind readers what your are saying and also what you are not saying. Brant (2017) explicitly states and reminds readers what she is saying. This is frequently done in a form of meta-text, which is another DO outlined by Graff (2001). Brant (2017) writes:
    • “Through Indigenous Maternal Methodology, which I outline in greater detail in Chapter 3, I draw from sharing circles, conversations with an Elder (Grandmother Shirley), and my ongoing research reflections.” (p. 18)
  4. Summarize objections to your claims. While this can take a variety of formats, it is a means of recognizing where and when others have presented counter-narratives or cautionary tales. This is not explicitly evident in Brant’s work, but is found in Potvin’s (2017) dissertation:
    • “I argue that systemic straight privilege in the forms of heterosexism, heteronormativity, and homophobia act in similar ways in schools and society. Nevertheless, I heed Tuck and Yang’s (2012) warning that queer theorists (and others) should not seek to superficially adopt the language of decolonization for the purposes of queer goals.” (p. 3o).
  5. Explain why your ideas are important. Be able to clearly answer the ‘so what’ questions from others. Brand (2017) brings this forward in many places throughout her dissertation, but this one statement resonates for me: “I considered the value of Indigenous Maternal Pedagogy as a transformative learning engagement for Indigenous women by drawing on the courses that I teach as sites where Indigenous Maternal Pedagogy is enacted” (p. 17).
  6. Write a meta-text or meta-commentary within the work to allow readers to step outside the writing to see where you are going and where you have been. Brandt does this throughout the dissertation, but here a few examples:
    • “In this chapter, to clear the path, I have documented the literature that shaped my theoretical approaches…” and “The next chapter outlines my methodological approach to exploring the praxis of Indigenous Maternal Pedagogy…” (p. 71).
  7. Be bilingual. Write in both academic language and in the vernacular of everyday life. This helps your work extend beyond the boundaries of academia and engages a variety of potential audiences. This is a challenging task for novice academic writers, but Brandt (2017), who is potentially writing for Indigenous elders and community members, appears to do this with ease. This is most evident in her section where terms are defined, specifically cultural identity development. This definition is connected to personal experience and culturally recognizable references.
  8. Tied to number seven above is the challenge to make your writing understandable to others. Explaining it to your parents or grandparents. This may be where the 3 minute thesis and the ‘dance your dissertation‘ experiences emerged.

One 3 minute thesis award winner from a national competition in Canada where this challenge is modelled:

And one example of a ‘dance your dissertation’ that demystifies a complex research topic:

References

Brant, J. (2017). Journeying toward praxis of Indigenous maternal pedagogy: Lessons from our sweetgrass baskets (PhD). Brock University, St. Catherine’s, Ontario.

Bohannon, J. (2011, Nov 23). Dance your PhD: John Bohannon & Black Label Movement. TEDxTalks: TEDxBrussels. . Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlDWRZ7IYqw

Graff, G. (2001). Scholars and Sound Bites: The Myth of Academic Difficulty – Do’s and don’ts for academic writers. PMLA 115: 5 Retrieved from https://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~lmbishop/research/graff.htm

Potvin, L. (2017). More than pink shirts and posters: Beyond the limits of anti-homophobia education. (PhD). Lakehead, Thunder Bay, Ontario.

Image attribution: Photo by Georgia de Lotz on Unsplash