Writing adventures

I've had this experience, and I just want to share it with you.

"Parentheses, digression, subset. Some little detail in what I was writing, perhaps just an image or phrase or parenthesis, seems to have a spark in it. I let it go and it ends up being the main point, the center of gravity. And what I had thought was the center of gravity turns out to be only a subsidiary part. The whole thing drastically changes its orientation. Even though most of the same elements are still there, it feels very different." (Elbow, 1973, p. 37)

Remember that paper I wrote that was rejected? I was obsessed with something called "social patriotism". I kept seeing in my data that unique to my participants was the idea that patriotism has got to do with kinship, with people, with community. But then... after rejection, I had a look at the thesis again, and realized that what was more fascinating was not the social stuff, but how the teachers' understandings were postmodern. They talked about world citizenship, about caring for people rather than abstract notions. They way they think about patriotism was quite unlike how people typically think about it - it was postmodern.

So there you have it, don't be afraid to write, and to change your mind about matters. Sometimes to get to one point, you have to go through another. Don't see that "another" as a waste of time, but a necessary step to take to get to your destination! :)

Elbow, P. (1973) Writing without teachers. London: Oxford University Press

Writing the Discussion

My friend, Nicholas, introduced this book called "How to write and publish a scientific paper" by Barbara Gastel and Robert A. Day to me. It's been one of my favourite writing books, even though it's science, rather than social science, focused. I had always found scientist to be more direct and clearer than social scientists. (Ops! Sorry about that!)

Okay, now, so these are the essential features and components of a good discussion, quoted directly from the 8th edition of the book (p. 76).

1. Try to present the principles, relationships, and generalizations shown by the results. And bear in mind, in a good discussion, you discuss - you do not recapitulate - the results.
2. Point out any exceptions or any lack of correlation and define unsettled points. Never take the high-risk alternative of trying to cover up or fudge data that do not quite fit in.
3. Show how your results and interpretations agree (or contrast) with previously published work.
4. Don't be shy; discuss the theoretical implications of your work, as well as any possible practical applications. 
5. State your conclusions as clearly as possible.
6. Summarize your evidence for each conclusion. Or, as the wise old scientist will tell you, "Never assume anything except a 4-percent mortgage." 

Gastel, B. and Day, R. A. (2016) How to write and publish a scientific paper. 8th edition. Santa Barbara: Greenwood

Q Methodology

This is the new methodology that I want to pick up and use for my Ph.D studies...

“Simply stated, Q technique is a set of procedures whereby a sample of objects is placed in a significant order with respect to a single person. In its most typical form, the sample involves statements of opinion (Q sample) that an individual rank-orders in terms of some condition of instruction – e.g., from “most agree” (+5) to “most disagree” (-5). The items so arrayed comprise what is called a Q sort. Q sorts obtained from several persons are normally correlated and factor-analyzed by any of the available statistical methods. Factors indicate clusters of persons who have ranked the statements in essentially the same fashion. Explanations of factors is advanced in terms of commonly shared attitudes or perspectives. Q methodology is the body of theory and principles that guides the application of technique, method, and explanation.
… The resultant factors point to categories of operant subjectivity, i.e., to persons bearing family resemblances in terms of subjectively shared viewpoints. All is subjective, yet the factors are grounded in concrete behavior, are usually reliable and easily replicated, and, happily, are subject to statistical summary which facilitates more careful description and comparison.” (Brown, 1980, pp. 5-6) 

Brown, S. R. (1980) Political subjectivity: Applications of Q Methodology in political science. Yale: Yale University.

What is an argument?

"Succinctly, an argument is a discourse intended to persuade. You persuade someone by engaging their doubts and providing evidence to overcome those doubts. A journal article, then, is a piece of writing that attempts to persuade a reader to believe in something. It expresses a point of view intended to influence.
...
More technically, an argument is a coherent series of statements in which the author leads the reader from certain premises to a particular conclusion. Thus, an argument always has at least two parts: a claim and evidence for that claim. A statement that is being supported is called the conclusion, hypothesis, or claim. A statement being offered as a support to another is called a premise, proof, or evidence. Whatever your argument (or thesis or conclusion) you must provide proof (or premises).
...
I use the term "argument" as shorthand for your article's significant idea, an idea you must support with proofs to persuade the reader that your point of view has validity.
...
An argument is a dialectic between opposing positions that results in a decision. It is about the search for answers through exchange. This means that you do not need to have an unassailable argument, just an interesting one. A difficult truth is that those issues most worth arguing over almost never have all the evidence on one side or the other: Both sides have compelling proofs... To persuade readers, they must first have doubts, or believe that others have doubts that your argument is right. So, to construct a sound argument, build in a consideration of opposing voices. This is a mark of the best academic writers.
...
It's a good writer's job to show that opposing arguments are understood and credited, but need not vitiate the claim. Good reasons exist on both sides of any important argument; your purpose is to present them and reach the best conclusion possible.
...
In the social sciences, such openness often shows in the authors' description of the limitations of the study. The authors analyze their data as supporting their hypotheses, but admit that variations in sample or variables might have delivered a different conclusion.
...
an argument is about establishing a position through rational support." (Belcher, 2009, pp. 82-90)

Belcher, W. L. (2009) Writing your journal article in 12 weeks: A guide to academic publishing success. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Becoming Better

I realized I remember things I read and what people tell me, though I am not conscious of it. Somehow whatever goes through my mind remains in me in one way or another. I am that mentally flexible. I realized as I am reading some columns I had read more than 5 years ago, that I still live by many of its principles. For example, I have deliberately chose to specialize in "patriotism" because I wanted to invest sufficient effort and time to become an expert. I had once read somewhere that to advance knowledge in an area, you need to go deep into it. Though somewhere else it says, you need to find that area of special interest to you, I still remember this metaphor of "digging deep" better than shallowly scooping top layers, and it has been something I live by.

So it is fascinating. My boss told me when I asked for feedback during my appraisal that the improvements one makes further down the line, the more familiar one becomes with one's work, the more one is like an expert, are less and less obvious. A beginner learns many things afresh, and it gives the impression of constant advancement. However, a more experienced researcher, would be polishing his skill. Improvement comes in smaller doses, like perhaps writing faster. I used to take 1 week to do something, and now I only take 1 day. And things like this. You may not pick up new skills, but you become better at old skills. So there, I have entered the next phase of my researcher life!

Growing

"Growing is certainly a proper word for what people and other living organisms do to arrive at a "grown" or "mature" state. They go through a series of changes and end up more complex and organized than when they started. It is no metaphor to speak of a person in the following way: "He really grew. Of course he's the same person he was, but he's also very different. Now he thinks, behaves, and sees things differently from the way he used to. I never would have expected him to end up this way." - Peter Elbow (1973), p. 22

"In any event, I advise you to treat words as though they are potentially able to grow. Learn to stand out of the way and provide the energy or force the words need to find their growth process. The words cannot go against entropy and end up more highly organized than when they started unless fueled by energy you provide. You must send that energy or electricity through the words in order, as it were, to charge them or ionize them or give them juice or whatever so that they have the life to go through the growing process." - Peter Elbow (1973) p. 24

This. He is talking about writing. But I am thinking about life, my life. And how it's really in a mess now. In some ways. I feel tired. I have an headache, likely caused by anxiety. It's like I feel stuck, I don't know what to do to grow. I feel limited and small, and I can't see the path ahead of me. I had booked a short holiday to Ho Chi Minh City at the end of the month, mainly to visit museums. But I am thinking that this may be good for me as a person in general, to let traveling and another environment open my eyes again. I have been jaded and tired by life and people, myself including. I want to feel that sense of growing again. It's been so long since I felt like I was growing.

I try to tidy my room. No, I did tidy my room and still am doing it. It's one of the ways I feel in control of my life. Like I really have a lot of control like that (sorry, Singlish here). It's a way I deal with anxiety, by doing something productive, yes tidying is something tangibly productive with an outcome. Things look in order and organized. :) It's the way I wish my life were.

Reference
Elbow, P. (1973) Writing without teachers. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.