The BEAM style of labeling different types of research argues the traditional way of naming them (primary, secondary, tertiary) actually hinders the rhetorical writing process. The traditional terms are too vague to actually aid us in understanding what sort of research products we come out with. The BEAM method aims to organize our research outcomes by their use in our writings. This is important in our own writings but also in analyzing the work of others because we can more clearly state exactly why and how the writer used a certain piece of evidence or information in their work.
Looking back at my archival research writing I see a lot of ways to classify my research products by how they were used in my writing, and I could not have done this using the traditional methods. For instance, in my writing I mentioned an article in an old newspaper regarding wine. Going off the BEAM method I would say this was Background material. It’s main purpose was just to provide some more evidence to my claims and add even more understanding to my topic. Without using this new method I would have had to label this finding as a primary source which would then give no indication for how I used it in my rhetorical writing. In other words, we all understand it’s a primary source but what does that have to do with your work? What did you do with that article?
Perhaps the main archival finding I used in my writing was an old article in a Santa Clara from 1978. Again with the traditional methods of naming sources I would have said this was a prim
ary source, but with the BEAM method you would get more of a sense of how I used this article. I would have labeled it as an Exhibit source.
This explains that I “analyzed or interpreted” this source which would give you way more detail about its value to my writing.
Overall, the BEAM style of organizing research findings is way more practical than the traditional way. Now when I am looking through my findings I can think to myself
hmmm… How am I going to use this? Will it just add general information to my topic? Am I going to use it as evidence for one of my claims? Will I use it to show others’ support for the same claim I am making? Or will I use it as a “governing concept” in my paper?
This could potentially help me in my writing process because maybe I have a good finding that will be valuable to my writing, but I am unsure of how to use it effectively in my paper. I would then go over the BEAM method and see which category would best suit my finding. That alone would keep my writing more focused and coherent.