As part of our research process in my writing class, we are to conduct a survey among our peers that will give us some insight about our topic. Sounds pretty easy right?
Source: Giphy
It’s actually kinda hard. I’m really struggling with which questions to ask so that the survey results are actually helpful in my research about the history of women’s athletics at SCU.
So What Does the Survey Say?
In addition to the usual demographic information, this is what I’ve got so far.
Source: Natalie Kennedy
Source: Natalie Kennedy
These types of questions will give me a feel for people’s thoughts about women’s athletics, and just athletics in general, in the current age. But the problem is, I don’t really have anything to compare it to. I haven’t found any data (YET) that discusses the feelings of past SCU students about athletics.
Where Do I Go From Here?
To deal with the problem about not having comparable data from the 1970s, I could continue to sift through files in the archives and see if there are any newspaper articles, interviews, etc. But, if I don’t find anything there, isn’t that saying something too?
If no one was talking about the start of women’s sports and Title IX and gender equality, isn’t that significant too?
Typically, when we hear the terms hunting and gathering, we think of our distant ancestors foraging through forests. But this is not the hunter-gatherer I am referring to. I am talking about archival research hunter-gatherers who instead scour libraries and databases.
Source: Giphy
This idea of archival research hunter-gatherers comes from an article we read in my Critical Thinking and Writing class. In this article, “What Is It We Do When We Write Articles Like This One – And How Can We Get Students to Join Us?” Michael Kleine proposes a heuristic to help students who are writing research papers.
Let Me Break It Down For You
Source: Giphy
Kleine claims that writing is
Strategic – “researchers/writers need to collect data and write with an established and focused sense of their goal” (24)
Heuristic – researchers/writers “need to accommodate and consider unexpected data and insights that are discovered during the process”
To simplify this concept, he constructs the metaphor of primitive hunters and gatherers. “A hunter finds what he is looking for; a gatherer discovers what might be of use” (Kleine 25).
He then breaks down the research and writing process even further into four steps:
Collecting data
Sifting through data rhetorically (determining what is relevant/irrelevant)
Seeking patterns
Translating (writing)
How This Applies to Me
When I first started my research in the archives, my goal was to find information about SCU in the 1980s; this was my hunt. However, I didn’t exactly succeed in finding this. Instead, I found the Pocket Profile which lead me down a completely different route and into new information; this was my gathering.
But then, I began a new hunt as I formulated a new research question with the goal of finding information about the impact of Title IX on women’s sports. This time, I succeeded in finding information as well as finding new pathways to alternate subjects for more gathering. I found this hunter-gatherer relationship to be cyclical and complementary.
No Theory is Perfect
Even though I found Kleine’s metaphor of hunting and gathering extremely helpful, I did notice some limitations to his segmentation of the writing/research process. I found it to be a little restrictive as “the coding was not capable of capturing the complexity of what” I had done.
For example, I found that my research process did not proceed in the linear fashion that Kleine proposed. Instead, it was more cyclical and recursive, with me going back and forth between his 4 different stages. Also, I found that some of my actions double-dipped and couldn’t be classified as just collecting or just sifting, they were both at the same time.
Maybe this is because “history is not, and never has been, systematic or scientific” or because “issues are dynamic and arguments are always evolving” (Gaillet 31, Greene 12). Either way, no matter how hard I tried, I couldn’t fit this proposed mold. And maybe that’s not exactly a bad thing.
I was browsing through our classmates’ blogs to try to get ideas about topics to write about and stumbled across yours about Santa Clara Extension Course Scandal. Although this was the first time I had ever heard of this scandal, I thought I might be of assistance in trying to answer some of the questions you posed.
Why do coaches do this?
College coaches care about winning. It’s as simple as that. Now I know you’re probably thinking
Source: Giphy
but it’s very eye-opening when you really think about it.
For coaches, the sport they are involved with is more than just a game; it is their CAREER. Their salary and ability to provide for their family are dependent upon their success on the field/court/pool or wherever they play. And this “success” is determined by their win-loss record.
Now although they do play a huge role in the way they coach the team, the result of the game is ultimately dependent on the performances of their players. Pretty much, their jobs and livelihood are controlled of a bunch of 18-22 year olds.
Source: Giphy
It’s a little scary right?
Per NCAA regulations, there are certain academic requirements that must be met for an athletes to be eligible. I have included the table that is inside the current student-athlete handbook and planner.
Source: Natalie Kennedy
Source: Natalie Kennedy
Now, pretend you are a coach. Let’s say one of your best players is currently ineligible because of their GPA and you have a big game coming up. Since your job depends on winning, and this player plays a significant role in your ability to do so, you are obviously invested in their academic status.
The degree to which your investment inspires you to intervene is completely up to you; you could personally meet with the athlete, make them complete a certain number of study hall hours each week or, as the coaches in the scandal did, do something illegal to ensure that your star player is ready to go come game day.
Now, I am most definitely NOT saying that this type of intervention is justified, I am merely saying that it makes sense.
Why do athletes have problems in class?
This could be happening for many reasons, but 3 popped into my head right away.
Absences – When it’s season, athletes miss a decent amount of class because of traveling for games. As we all know, college is hard. And it’s even harder when you miss lecture and have you teach yourself the material.
Time Management – For women’s soccer, and I’m sure it’s about the same for other sports, it’s typical to have 20 hours of training a week. Handling a full course load and a full training schedule is difficult to say the least, and some are unable to balance their time and energy between both.
Environment – Sometimes, the best athletes are not the best students. So even though their athletic abilities meet the high standards of the institution, they might struggle to keep up with the equally as high academic standards.
I hope my input helps you somehow in your research process!
Every once in a while when I’m reading a historical fiction novel or watching a TV show/movie that romanticizes some historic decade, I find myself wondering if I was born in the wrong era. I’m sure many of you can relate to this thought because even one of my class mates did and touched upon it in one of his blog posts.
I have always thought that I would be a perfect fit for a time when there was no social media and no cell phones; a world in which you didn’t have to be plugged in 24/7. That is why I was so fascinated with the 80s. My mom always shared her college days from “back in the day” (I know, we’ve all heard this phrase) and how things at Santa Clara now are so much different from back then.
Source: Giphy
Although some may argue that things have changed for the worse, I discovered that some things have also changed significantly for the better.
My Journey Into the Past
As I began my research in the archives, I had a framework for what I was interested in (the 80s) but didn’t exactly know what I was looking for. I sat down at a table dedicated to old campus maps and demographics from the 1850s (when the college was founded) up until now.
I opened a folder entitled “University of Santa Clara Visitors Guide” and, among dozens of brochures and pamphlets designed to handout to prospective students and their families, found a cute little book called “University of Santa Clara 1976 Pocket Profile.”
Source: Natalie Kennedy
Although this wasn’t exactly the 80s, it was close enough to be of interest to me.
I started flipping through the minuscule pages of the book, not exactly knowing what I was looking for, and stumbled upon two sections entitled “Men’s Athletics” and “Women’s Recreation and Athletics.” These immediately piqued my interest as a large part of my college experience has been influenced by my participation in collegiate athletics.
To my surprise (I honestly don’t know how I was so naive) I discovered that Santa Clara didn’t offer NCAA Division 1 women’s athletics in 1976. Instead, their sports (soccer was not listed, to my disappointment) competed in the Northern California Intercollegiate Athletic Conference, or NCIAC.
This made me wonder about when NCAA women’s athletics began at SCU and how women’s sports have evolved over the years (I am currently in the process of researching this).
What is Title IX?
Title IX was revolutionary in the movement for equality among the sexes in all aspects, including sports. I wondered, if Title IX was passed in 1972, then why were women’s sports still not NCAA Division 1-level in 1976?
I found the answer within the files kept my Marygrace Colby, the first Director of Women’s Athletics and Recreation at Santa Clara: “Even though this amendment was written in 1972, they are still not sure how they are going to instrument and regulate this amendment” and frankly, “most schools could not handle separate but equal programs for men’s and women’s [sports] from a financial point of view” (February 1974).
Maybe I’m Fine in My Own Era
Even though the idea of living in the 70s and 80s is enticing, I think I will stick right where I am. Honestly, I don’t know if I can imagine a college experience, or even school experience, without Title IX. For one, I probably wouldn’t even have the opportunity to be at such a great school, and two, I definitely wouldn’t have the opportunity to travel across the country representing my school through athletics.
So, basically, thank you to Richard Nixon and Congress who have made my life, and all other females’ lives, what it is today.
Source: Giphy
Video Citation: “Title IX at 40.” Youtube, uploaded by The Obama White House, 20 June 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Jqj40dybSQ.
Where are we going you might ask? Drumroll please…
Source: Giphy
THE ARCHIVES! That’s where!
Now I know, I’m kind of a nerd for being excited about getting to do research in my school library, but if you think about it, it’s really quite exciting. We get to venture into uncharted territory, looking for whatever resources we want about whatever topic we want. How often does that happen in school? Not nearly enough if you ask me.
So, What Exactly am I Looking For?
Although I don’t know exactly what I’m looking for, I have a general idea. I’m really interested in learning about Santa Clara University in the 1980’s and looking at how it has changed in the past 37 years. I particularly want to look at how the campus has changed physically (like the re-routing of the Alameda), how education has changed as a result of the digital revolution and how social norms and interactions have changed with a new generation.
Why the 80’s? Well, my mom was a student here from 1981-1985, so I am curious to see how her Santa Clara differs from my Santa Clara. Also, I have a few people, including my mom, that I could interview and use as secondary sources to supplement my research.
Game Plan
After reading various articles on archival research, I feel like I’m ready to tackle my first research paper. Here’s my game plan for the journey into the archives.
Get My Head in the Game
Source: Giphy
I often think of research as just collecting information to meet an assignment’s requirements. Instead, I have to think of research as “the discovery and purposeful use of information” (Greene 19).
Understand My Role as Researcher
I am more than an external observer or narrator. In the words of Gaillet, “the researcher becomes a part of the project” and acts as “a filter and a lens” (36-37). To be effective, I must become a “scholarly storyteller” (36).
Consider How Sources Fit into My Work
Source: Giphy
When I find sources, I need to be aware of it’s “rhetorical situation – the author, the intended audience and purpose of the document” (Tirabassi 173). With this information, I can cross-reference other sources, while also adding my own “assumptions and claims” to “substantiate the story I tell” (Gaillet 35).
Pay Attention to Details
Source: Giphy
Gaillet recommends documenting the smallest details, like “the paper, watermarks, binding, print or handwriting, marginalia” (35). It is also helpful to “take note of where a document is found” since its categorization might tell you more about where to find similar sources (Tirabassi 175).
Enough is Enough
Source: Giphy
At some point, all research must come to a close. Instead of endlessly searching for more sources, I need to realize the time to walk away and find closure.
I was assigned to read Stuart Greene’s article “Argument as Conversation: The Role of Inquiry in Writing a Researched Argument” for my class today, and let me tell you, it really opened my eyes. Nothing that was said was particularly profound or new knowledge to me, but Greene simplified something that I had found so complicated.
Source: Floragraphy
In short, Greene claims that in research, we need to
identify an issue that exists between two conflicting points of view
identify the situation that calls for a response
frame a questionthat specifies your perspective.
For me, the third point is the biggest takeaway from the article. Greene defines framing as “a metaphor for describing the lens, or perspective, from which writers present their arguments” (14). In other words, framing is the angle of approach you take to a certain issue; it will limit your “range of vision” and therefore, limit the information you include in your sources.
Framing meets BEAM
I know, I know, you’re probably getting tired of reading about BEAM since I’ve discussed it in my previous two blog posts (link to 1, link to 2). But it’s just so applicable!!
Framing reminded me of the method sources that Bizup talks about in BEAM. Method sources can offer a general model or perspective for analyzing an exhibit source. In other words, it is the lens through which you look at the issue.
Source: Pixabay
Framing meets the Principle of Selectivity
When you are researching and looking for sources, obviously, you are going to refine your search to articles that will apply to your desired topic. It would be foolish to just read sources that have no change of supporting your argument, and honestly, no one has time to do that.
I was also assigned to read Katherine Tirabassi’s article “Journeying into the Archives: Exploring the Pragmatics of Archival Research,” in which she offers a few principles to guide those beginning archival research. One of those is the principle of selectivity, which she defines as “developing an understanding of how archivists select and omit materials for an archival selection” (172).
Just as archivists must determine which materials to include in a given collection or archive, we as authors and researchers must select what sources to include in our compositions. In doing so, we are framing the issue further, and focussing our lens of approach.
Wrapping it Up
Framing is your perspective and view on the issue at hand. You can use sources as methods to define your approach or you can use them to present the issue through a certain view.
No, they weren’t really wrong, but some of the rules they forced upon us students don’t exactly have to be followed.
For example, did an English teacher ever tell you that you can’t use Wikipedia as a source in your papers? Or that you can’t talk in the first person in your essays? Well, what if I told you that you actually could use Wikipedia and personal pronouns like “I” in an essay and still write a great paper?
Source: Giphy
Well, it’s possible as long as you use them the right way. I know, I know, you’re probably thinking, “Why would I trust a freshman in college making crazy claims on her personal blog?” You can rest assured that I am a trustworthy source, since I am simply piggy-backing on the idea proposed by Joseph Bizup, an English professor at Boston University.
If we use Bizup’s BEAM concept that I discussed in my previous post, both Wikipedia and first person narration can be used in academic essays. For those of you who haven’t read my previous post or are too lazy to go do it now, I have made a little summary table of BEAM. You’re welcome.
Background
Materials whose claims are accepted as facts, common knowledge
Exhibit
Materials offered for explication, analysis or interpretation; examples
Argument
Materials the writer affirms, disputes or refines
Method
Materials from which a writer derives a governing concept or manner of working
Most teachers advise against using Wikipedia and first person because they don’t want students to use them as argument sources to prove their point. Wikipedia could be used as a background source instead, used to understand the big picture and gain common knowledge before writing a paper. You don’t even have to cite it, since you are just reading up on common knowledge. First person narrative could be used as an exhibit, where you use a personal anecdote as an example to analyze. Or, it could be used as a method if you are writing a narrative.
Basically, what I’m trying to say is that although the types of sources you use matter, the way in which they are used and fit into your composition is much more important.
If you are interested in reading Bizup’s article in its entirety, click here.
The only research I have ever done for academic purposes was for close readings of novels. Because of this, my experience with research is probably different than the process taken for an extensive research paper.
In high school, I was typically given a prompt, so I didn’t really have to ask my own questions, I simply had to pick a position and support it. The real work was finding quality sources that supported and embellished my argument. My first step was always to search a few key words on an online database, like EBSCO or JSTOR, and then browse through dozens of articles.If I found that I needed more information, I would reach out to our school librarian who would direct me to more literary criticisms. While reading through all these sources, I always kept my position in mind and asked myself how their argument would further my own.
Reading Bizups’s BEAM article clarified the research process and shed light on new ways of viewing research. His terminology for defining sources made me realize the importance of how you use a source in your work and their rhetorical purpose. I now understand that the novel I was analyzing, although still accurately classified as a primary source, was more importantly an exhibit (a material I analyzed and interpreted) and that the literary criticisms I was citing, although still accurately classified as secondary sources, were more importantly arguments (materials that I affirmed, disputed, refined or extended).
The article pointed out the strengths of my research and writing process. My essays accomplished something that Bizup supports: analyzing “specific exhibits in order to further conversations embodied in the specific constellations of argument sources” (81). I would “start with an exhibit [and] look for argument sources to engage” (82).
But, the article also pointed out the mistakes I made during my research and writing process. I often decided on a specific topic prematurely, which Bizup advises against. Also, I didn’t look at the research process as an “active exercise in ‘knowledge construction;'” I had tunnel vision and viewed the research as merely part of an English assignment, not the real world.
I am more than an external observer or narrator. In the words of Gaillet, “the researcher becomes a part of the project” and acts as “a filter and a lens” (36-37). To be effective, I must become a “scholarly storyteller” (36).
