Writing Analytically, 6th Edition - Rosenwasser, David & Stephen, Jill [13]
Chapter 2 offers the first set of methods, along with discussion of the counterproductive habits of mind they are designed to deflect. Chapter 3 defines analysis in detail (in what we call the five analytical moves) and shows you how it operates differently from other forms of thinking and writing. For now, we offer the following list on the goals of analysis and its identifying traits:
Analysis Defined
Analysis seeks to discover what something means. An analytical argument makes claims for how something might be best understood and in what context.
Analysis deliberately delays evaluation and judgment.
Analysis begins in and values uncertainty rather than starting from settled convictions.
Analytical arguments are usually pluralistic; they tend to try on more than one way of thinking about how something might be best understood.
WHAT DO FACULTY WANT FROM STUDENT WRITING?
Here is a list of faculty expectations based on what faculty across the curriculum say at our seminars on writing:
Analysis rather than passive summary, personal reaction and opinions
Analysis before argument, understanding in depth before taking a stand
Alternatives to agree-disagree & like-dislike responses
Tolerance of uncertainty
Respect for complexity
Ability to apply theories from reading, using them as lenses
Acquiring and understanding the purpose of disciplinary conventions
Ability to use secondary sources in ways other than plugging them in as “answers”
Overall, what faculty across the curriculum want is for students to learn to do things with course material beyond merely reporting it on the one hand, and just reacting to it with personal response on the other. This is the crux of the issue that Writing Analytically addresses: how to locate a middle ground between passive summary and personal response. We call that middle ground analysis.
To these expectations, we would add that the ability to cultivate interest and curiosity is a great desideratum of faculty across the curriculum. They want students to understand that interest need not precede writing; interest is more often a product of writing.
BREAKING OUT OF 5-PARAGRAPH FORM
The shift from high school to college writing is not just a difference in degree but a difference in kind. The changes it requires in matters of form and style are inevitably also changes in thinking. In order to make these changes in thinking, you may need to “unlearn” some practices you’ve previously been taught. At the top of the unlearning list for many entering college students is 5-paragraph form—the rigid, one-size-fits-all organizational scheme that is still taught in many high schools.
If you have come to rely on this form, giving it up can be anxiety-producing. This is especially so when you are asked to abandon an all-purpose form and replace it with a set of different forms for different situations. But it’s essential to let go of this particular security blanket.
So, what’s wrong with 5-paragraph form? Its rigid, arbitrary and mechanical organizational scheme values structure over just about everything else, especially in-depth thinking.
The formula’s defenders say that essays need to be organized and that the simple three-part thesis and three-body paragraphs (one reason and/or example for each) and repetitive conclusion meets that need. They also say that 5-paragraph form is useful for helping writers to get started. The problem with treating 5-paragraph form as a relatively benign aid to clarity is that like any habit it is very hard to break.
Students who can’t break the habit remain handicapped because 5-paragraph form runs counter to virtually all of the values and attitudes that they need in order to grow as writers and thinkers