Writing for Publication: Transitions and Tools that Support Scholars’ Success - Mary Renck Jalongo, Olivia N. Saracho 2016

Argument in Academic Writing
From Unpublishable to Publishable
Professional Roles and Publishable Writing

Over the years, some of our undergraduates enrolled in writing courses have been confused by the word “argument” because they define the word as a contentious disagreement. Gradually, they come to realize that “argument,” as it is used in scholarly writing, refers to a logical progression of ideas supported by evidence. In general, scholarly writing relies on a logical argument that depends on an “assert, then support” style (Rhodes, 1995). Wallace and Wray (2011, p. 47) use the following equation to explain argument in scholarly writing:

They go on to say that readers will want to know such things as:

· Why do you think that? How do you know?

· So what? What do these different pieces of evidence together imply?

· Does this reasoning add up? Aren’t there other, more plausible conclusions?

· What causal relationship between the factors are you suggesting?

· Is the evidence adequate to justify the extent of the claim? Is the evidence appropriately interpreted? (Wallace & Wray, 2011, p. 52)

The argument is what distinguishes scholarly writing from other forms of written composition. Fulwiler (2002) identifies these key attributes of scholarly writing:

Beliefs and persuasion

Writers must believe in what they write and persuade readers that it is true through a series of assertions that form a logical argument. The argument is supported by such things as professional experience, observation, experimentation, statistics, or interviews as well as a careful account of where the information was found.

The research imperative

The expectation of the academic community is that even practical advice is based on research. For example, when doctoral candidates in education are first interviewed, most of them are classroom teachers seeking to become university faculty members. They tend to support their assertions with “In my school district, we …”. As they pursue doctoral study, they grow in the ability to identify authoritative support for their ideas in the literature and, by the time that they defend a dissertation, they are conversant with specific studies and their findings.

Objectivity

Academic authors need to be impartial, particularly when conducting research. This is one reason that the personal pronoun “I” is seldom used in academic writing. Even though there is extensive “between-the-lines information” about the author in a manuscript (Fulwiler, 2002, p. 6), the tradition of academic authorship is to distance oneself from the material to some extent. Instead of invoking personal opinion as their claim to authority, academic authors rely on evidence from the discipline to support their claims.

Balance

Even though authors believe something, this does not mean that they limit their literature review to sources that validate their position only. Rather, in the interest of achieving a balanced argument, they briefly acknowledge these opposing opinions and explain why they respectfully disagree. By offering the reader an examination of alternative points of view or opposing interpretations, writers demonstrate that they have examined a topic from different perspectives.

Relativity

Academic authors avoid absolute statements (e.g., “As everyone knows …”), partly because generalizations lead to challenges to the argument and partly because scholars acknowledge that they could be wrong. The habit of qualifying assertions makes statements more supportable, for example, stating “The results suggest…” rather than “This study proves that…”

Activity 2.2: Basic Composition vs. Academic Writing

To illustrate the difference between ordinary writing and writing with a more academic tone, consider the following two paragraphs. The first is an ordinary type of writing that you might find in a student paper and the second, the same basic assertions in a more academic style. In both examples, the purpose is to persuade the reader that women who commit crimes should be viewed in a different way. The ordinary writing example attempts to achieve this by appealing to emotions. The second example is an illustration of how that same message could be communicated in a more authoritative voice and identifies places where evidence is needed.

In their book about the basic structure of academic writing, Graff and Bernstein (2010) suggest that academic argumentation follows a “they say/I say” strategy. For example, when discussing a perennial controversy, a “script” in academic writing might go something such as the following:

A persistent debate in _____ has been _____. Some contend that_____ . From this stance, ______. In the words of a leading advocate of this approach, _____. Others argue that_____. According to this perspective _______. is the major influence. X supports this position when he writes, “ _______. To summarize, the issue is whether ______ or _______.

For more examples of scholarly writing see Clark & Murray (2012). Table 2.2 identifies some of the common phrases that are used when presenting a logical argument.

Table 2.2

Phrases commonly used in scholarly writing