1) INTRODUCTION
When you embark on a new idea or concept, you do not often realize how it will impact other people or processes, especially on a global scale. Kate L. Turabian read dissertation after dissertation. She saw the best and the worst papers. She decided to do something about it. With the University of Chicago Press’s Manual of Style as a foundation, along with her observations and expertise, she developed a writing pamphlet for students in 1937. Since then, A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations has evolved. Today, her writing manual helps millions of students around the globe develop quality research papers. Turabian died in 1987, at 94 years old, the same year I entered community college (Turabian 2013, 10). Almost thirty-two years later, her teachings and guidance have found their way into my life. What would she think of her legacy?
Although the manual is in its ninth edition, for ACA-401D period two, we are reviewing Part 1, Chapters 1–14 of the eighth edition. This portion of the manual focuses on drafting research reports, including strategizing an approach, working with a hypothesis, using and engaging sources, citing evidence, drafting and revising reports, and presenting research. In addition, the coursepack includes two videos on the use of Zotero, which is a powerful tool to ensure proper use of citations. Part 1 directly relates to my professional work and writing projects. In this response paper, I highlight those areas and provide examples of my experience.
2) SO WHAT?
In my professional career, I help manage a nationwide program. The program established a committee to maintain and enhance its performance measures, reporting processes, and analytics. The program tracks 80 performance metrics. Statistics can be useful in showing progress and revealing gaps or areas to research further. But, “so what” (Turabian 2013, 15–16)? What do the numbers really mean?
This year, the committee is conducting a comprehensive review of the program’s performance measures. To kick-off the effort, we held a meeting with the committee. One of its goals is to develop evidence-based measures that show a Return On Investment (ROI). This is harder than it sounds. For example, one statistic currently tracked pertains to the number of pieces of information distributed. At the meeting, I asked, “so what?” The response was, “we distribute millions of items every year and should get credit for that work effort.” I repeated, “so what?” and continued, “who received the information? If it was emailed, did the recipients open it, read it, and understand it? Did they apply it in their work environment? Did it solve an investigation? Save a life? Find a child?”
My popularity shrank with the team as I kept pushing them to answer, “so what?” This critical thinking is necessary to show the program’s results. Data are just numbers if they are not reliable, meaningful, trusted, and impactful. Answering “so what?” while leaving readers with more questions, stimulates discussion, innovation, and solutions (Turabian 2013, 70). Whether it is statistics or a problem we are trying to solve, asking “so what?” helps develop and refine our approach or argument. When I conduct research, I recognize the importance of identifying and studying all sides of an issue and their possible outcomes. I refer to this as the Domino Effect.
3) THE DOMINO EFFECT
The Domino Effect helps me recognize that various paths for a project or solution exist and have varying results. Those results may produce positive and negative scenarios. If I do A, then B may happen. If I do C, then D may happen. Considering these factors and their outcomes helps me make the best decisions possible when working on multi-layered complex projects.
Recently, I discussed school violence in the United States with a colleague. He claimed that the response to school shootings offered the greatest opportunity to show improvement. I disagreed. Improvements can and should be made in all areas of school violence, including prevention, mitigation, response, and recovery. He argued that school shootings were rare, and too many resources are expended on trying to prevent them. I argued that prevention is essential for reducing school violence. Using an analogy, I said, “plane crashes are rare, so let’s stop conducting aircraft safety checks and eliminate pilot rest requirements.” He paused and conceded that there was more to the story than he initially realized. When researching, it is critical to diagnose and prepare for questions that others may ask from academic and practitioner standpoints (Turabian 2013, 16).
In our conceptual conversation, I tried to help my colleague understand the problem by offering specific data and broadening the scope beyond school shootings. Talking about it and understanding the problem, however, is only part of the issue. What do we do about it? So what (Turabian 2013, 16–17)? We can develop multidisciplinary training, advance anonymous reporting systems, enhance collaboration, and launch educational campaigns. These approaches offer answers to practical questions—what we should do. It is the applied questions, however, that are most challenging (Turabian 2013, 16). To begin thinking about how to employ applied questions, I practiced using my school violence example and the format provided in the course materials (Turabian 2013, 17):
I want to find out how mental health among youth impacts violence in American schools. So what if I do?
Then, we can understand the societal and behavioral issues that lead a young person down a path of violence. So what if I do?
Then, we can understand the gaps in prevention strategies and develop effective mental health programs in schools. So what if I do?
Then perhaps teachers and school officials can use those programs proactively to prevent or deter someone’s actions before they occur. So what if I do?
Then perhaps there will be fewer students and teachers injured or killed due to school violence.
This exercise was an excellent example of my Domino Effect process. However, these are tough questions and more easily asked than acted upon. One benefit of research is the opportunity to discover something new, prove its worth, share it with others, and hopefully make a lasting impact (Turabian 2013, 18).
Although I agree with the message in Chapter 14, what about the diminishing return? In other words, will there not always be a group who will discard a claim even with evidence because of faith or another reason? Perhaps refuting the claim benefits them financially or politically. At some point, it seems we should stop trying to convince the un-convincible and focus on the broader audience (Turabian 2013, 84).
4) ADVANCING MY TOPIC
As we move from a question to a hypothesis, it is essential to keep an open mind. Even when you know the topic well, there is always something to learn. The manual provides questions to ask about a selected topic (Turabian 2013, 18). These were very helpful as I consider my dissertation. I answered the questions and felt confident with some of my answers, but in other areas, I realized I need to start researching now. Furthermore, I began dissecting and refining my topic (Turabian 2013, 19). My initial concept focused on bringing community members and law enforcement officers together using an artistic element to solve a conflict. Now, that sounds nebulous. I started to think about the topic differently. For example, third grade (or eight years old) is a turning point for youth. Early positive influence by police could make a significant difference in their relationships later and, ultimately, result in less conflict. I quickly identified several related questions: Are there examples of young people who were mistreated by police who became police officers? If so, what have they done to prevent conflict with youth in their communities? Do children have better relationships with law enforcement than teenagers? How does unconscious bias impact relationships between police and youth? Has the conflict grown over time, and if so, why? What types of conflict do other countries experience between police and youth? What solutions have they developed? Are training programs available to educate officers on working with youth? Are the vetting processes used to select officers effective? What generational gaps impact conflict between officers and youth? Are there geographical differences to consider? Questions kept entering my mind, and I increasingly grew more eager to start working on this topic. And, I did not start asking questions about using art as a resolution (Turabian 2013, 19–21). In addition to answering these and other questions, I will need to identify and be prepared to address issues from opposing views. Considering and planning for counterarguments is an essential part of any research effort and will strengthen my argument. It will also help find gaps and reduce or hopefully eliminate challenges later (Turabian 2013, 68).
a) Storyboarding
Whether it is a proposal, video, or fiction story, storyboarding helps me plan my thoughts and build a map from my starting point to my destination. With my novel, Precious little Secrets, I used index cards. The cards listed the characters mentioned in each chapter and provided a short description of the chapter’s focus. I physically saw the story unfold and could move chapters (index cards) around (Turabian 2013, 21–22). Using the storyboard helped me discover key words and common trends as well as refine the flow and structure of the piece (Turabian 2013, 45). Through various strategies, such as comparison and contrast, readers will engage in and, hopefully, embrace a story or an argument (Turabian 2013, 46). Today, I use Scrivener. Scrivener is software for writers to store, categorize, and link research, photos, Web sites, and other resources. Writers can organize their writing by chapter or section and summarize information on cards, pinned to a virtual corkboard that can be quickly moved with a computer mouse.
b) My Approach
“Most of us would rather read than write” (Turabian 2013, 36). Not me. The thought of identifying a question, building a hypothesis, developing a claim, finding evidence, arguing my position, considering diverse opinions, and articulating all of this and more into words, is a challenging and rewarding puzzle (Turabian 2013, 37–42).
I adapt my writing style based on the situation, expectations, and timeline. If a project is under a strict deadline, it requires an immediate approach. If I am working on a magazine article due within two weeks, I have time to think about how to structure the piece and collect the necessary information. If it is a longer project, I can balance other priorities while working on the project. My preference is to free-flow write and then edit and refine later. By using this approach, I discover new avenues that I may not have if I had used a regimented approach. A story, issue, or character can lead you to new and uncharted paths (Turabian 2013, 50). I also feel accomplished when I put my ideas on paper. I know that significant work will be needed to transform my ideas into a well-crafted essay. In acting, there are many methods for building a character. You must find what works for you, exploit it, refine it, and build on it (Turabian 2013, 48).
c) Letting Go
One of the hardest things for me as a writer is to delete. If I write a chapter that I feel strongly about, I hold on to it, hoping that the story will embrace it, only to discover that it has no place in my novel. In research, ensuring relevant and meaningful content is essential. If it does not, it may be time to let it go (Turabian 2013, 69). After months, or even years, of work that can be challenging, maybe even heartbreaking. But, as the coursepack suggests, “File away leftovers for future use” (Turabian 2013, 47). You never know when that chapter, or research, will be the impetus for a whole new story.
When I presented the final draft of Precious little Secrets to my husband, I was on the verge of tears when I handed him the ribbon-bound manuscript. He loved it, but he had several suggestions that ultimately enhanced my story. I am grateful for his input and his keen eye for ensuring consistency and continuity. Having someone review your writing is stressful, but it provides a different perspective that can elevate your piece to another level (Turabian 2013, 69). The coursepack mentions organizing and/or participating in writing groups (Turabian 2013, 22). I have experienced positives and negatives with this approach. What is helpful to me is having an accountability partner. A close friend and accomplished playwright has been my writing accountability partner for more than ten years. We exchange our writings and offer suggestions, ask questions, and provide encouragement. She is my fan and my critic. Her wisdom and guidance add value to my writing efforts.
d) Observations
I agree with the course materials that reading a hard copy version of a document reveals errors or flow problems that reading it on a computer does not. We use Microsoft Teams at work to collaborate on documents, but I print out at least one final version to read. Almost always, I find something that requires attention (Turabian 2013, 68). If I use graphs, charts, or other visual elements, reviewing a hard copy in a final draft form enables me to see how a reader will view and interpret those items and how they look in color and in black and white.
The coursepack stressed the need to identify and utilize “key terms” (Turabian 2013, 69). I questioned whether seeing the same terms over and over could become redundant and monotonous from a reader’s perspective. It is understood that experts in the field may expect to see certain words, but at the same time, the writing should be engaging and hold a reader’s attention (Turabian 2013, 76).
By reading documents out loud, many of the choppy or confusing sentences described in Chapter 11 could be resolved. Less is more when wanting to relay information to readers (Turabian 2013, 74–79).
Programs such as Zotero impress me. However, writers should not rely on these tools. I have young friends that have no idea how to use a map because of GPS. But, if there is no cellular service and you cannot read a map, you quickly become lost.
5) JUST THE FACTS
When writing a grant proposal, research report, or another document, it is essential to adhere to appropriate formatting and structure requirements, to ensure the piece flows, and that dependable facts and evidence are accurately cited and transformed into meaningful information (Turabian 2013, 15). Statistics can say anything if you know how to manipulate the data. That, however, is dishonest and unethical. Moreover, flagrant anomalies will be recognized by experts reading your report and ultimately hurt your reputation. Displaying data accurately and using appropriate charts or graphs strengthens an argument (Turabian 2013, 63).
PowerPoint slides or documents that are jammed with information are hard to review and interpret. Using data can be complicated. Simple graphical representations provide clear messaging to readers (Turabian 2013, 57-58). Table 8.7 in the course materials offers a summary of charts (Turabian 2013, 65–66). This section was beneficial. People use what they know. For example, if you feel comfortable using a pie chart, you use a pie chart. But a pie chart may not be the appropriate representation for what you are trying to show or prove (Turabian 2013, 54).
If data in a research report is not trustworthy, relevant, and reliable, there is no reason to produce the paper (Turabian 2013, 28). Yet, so many people do not diligently ensure sources are trustworthy, relevant, and reliable. The Internet is a fantastic tool, but anyone can publish a Web site. So what? Know, understand, and use information gathered from the Internet thoughtfully (Turabian 2013, 29).
Using my law enforcement example, I started thinking of possible primary, secondary, and tertiary sources as well as how best to engage and document information from these sources (Turabian 2013, 24–25). Many came to mind, including the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Great Resistance Education And Training (G.R.E.A.T.) Program. I plan on building my source list now and adding to it as I discover new sources. Taking notes cannot be overstated. We take notes at meetings frequently and even with our detailed approach, often return to the office days later trying to interpret what was stated. After months of research, it can be challenging to understand notes if they are not thorough. More is more, in this case (Turabian 2013, 32-33).
6) CONCLUSION
When I opened the coursepack and realized it was A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations, I thought this period’s work was going to be dry and tedious. I was wrong. These first fourteen chapters have opened my eyes to new approaches to research. It enabled me to begin thinking strategically about my dissertation topic and work through the exercise of asking “so what?” The course materials helped me identify possible sources for my dissertation and offered guidance on how to effectively use and display evidence. Period two allowed me to reflect on what I have done well in crafting research papers and what I need to improve on.
As Turabian “always insisted on the highest standards for the substantive content of dissertations” (Turabian n.d.). I am confident that just like a worn paperback that has been read dozens of times, I will be visiting Turabian’s manual for guidance throughout my doctoral career and beyond.
REFERENCES
“Kate L. Turabian, A Manual for Writers, Eighth Edition.” n.d. Kate L. Turabian, A Manual for Writers, Eighth Edition. Accessed June 25, 2019. https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian.html.
Turabian, Kate L. 2013. A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations, Eighth Edition: Chicago Style for Students and Researchers. Edited by Wayne C. Booth, Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams, and University of Chicago Press Staff. Eighth edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
