I’m still asking myself this question – “Is the academic paper the best way for students to demonstrate their learning?” – three years after publishing the original version of this post. In the interim, I’ve listened to the audiobook of Now You See It (discussed below), and I’m still not sure whether I’m onside with Davidson’s perspective. It seems to me that the academic paper has got to go, but something just as rigorous needs to take its place. Do you have thoughts on this?
When this post first appeared, it was chosen as a WordPress “Freshly Pressed” feature and received 178 very interesting comments.
Is the academic paper the best way for students to demonstrate their learning? Will learning to write papers help students develop the skills they will need later in their lives?
In Now You See It, Cathy N. Davidson asks “whether the form of learning and knowledge-making we are instilling in our children is useful to their future.” Davidson examines the roots of our contemporary education culture and suggests that we need to look back to pre-Industrial-Revolution models and forward to the murky future. As Virginia Heffernan explains, in her review of Davidson’s book (“Education Needs a Digital-Age Upgrade“) in the New York Times:
The contemporary American classroom, with its grades and deference to the clock, is an inheritance from the late 19th century. During that period of titanic change, machines suddenly needed to run on time. Individual workers needed to willingly perform discrete operations as opposed to whole jobs. The industrial-era classroom, as a training ground for future factory workers, was retooled to teach tasks, obedience, hierarchy and schedules. That curriculum represented a dramatic departure from earlier approaches to education. In “Now You See It,” Ms. Davidson cites the elite Socratic system of questions and answers, the agrarian method of problem-solving and the apprenticeship program of imitating a master. It’s possible that any of these educational approaches would be more appropriate to the digital era than the one we have now.
This is old news – education needs to be skills-based, collaborative, constructivist, blabla. However, Heffernan focuses particularly on Davidson’s discussion of the academic paper. After reading insightful, well-written student blogs and then being appalled by the quality of the same students’ research papers, Davidson began to wonder whether it was the form, not the students, that was at fault. After some research, Davidson concludes that, in Heffernan’s words,
Even academically reticent students publish work prolifically, subject it to critique and improve it on the Internet. This goes for everything from political commentary to still photography to satirical videos — all the stuff that parents and teachers habitually read as “distraction.”
I’m not, at first glance, convinced by this argument – we’ve all read the “work” published every day on the Internet, and in many cases its “prolificness” is one of its many problems. That said, I have students keep blogs in some of my courses, and I love them – you can SEE the learning happening as students wrestle with course topics and literature and relate them to their own experiences. I don’t do blogs in every course because a) I’m required to have them write a certain number of papers, and it can all get to be a bit too much for me, and b) the majority of my students have not received the time-consuming training in digital communication that Davidson says they need. However, if more space were made in the curriculum for online forms of writing, and we could limit the number of formal papers and make them an outgrowth of the online work, we might be on our way to something resembling “authentic learning tasks.”
I’ve been saying for a while that the research paper is going the way of the dinosaurs, and that we need to develop viable academic approaches to the blog and other online forms so that students can learn to write things that people actually read. (The fact that no one reads academic papers isn’t a new phenomenon, of course, but now we have an alternative that gives researchers a real potential audience.)
What is the place of the formal academic paper in the future of education? Should it continue to look the way it does now, or is it time to ask students to do something new?
Tomorrow: my all-time #1 most shared post, on succeeding through failing.
Image by kristja
5 thoughts on “What’s the Use of the Academic Paper?: Blogiversary Post #9”
To quote Egon, Ghostbusters (1984), “print is dead”. Do I actually believet that? No. Nonetheless, the landscape of literature, and academic papers for that matter, is changing. How we consume written the word is through digital forms, ebooks and online newspapers are commonplace, and that probably won’t change anytime soon.
Toby: 1. Egon is the object of my first ever crush on a fictional character. 2. Do you feel that the move toward the digital necessarily eliminates the place of an academic paper? Just as books work as digital documents, papers can as well.
Hi Siobhan. No, I don’t. I wasn’t saying that the academic paper is obsolete due to digital formats. In fact, I think the academic paper has many uses in teaching critical thinking as well as teaching how to articulate that thinking. Yet, there are many distractions when reading on a tablet since so those devices want to connect to Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram type accounts.
Writing is an important means of communicating thoughts and ideas, maybe even more in the digital age when emails and text messages have replaced phone calls and letters. I think learning to write in an academic format is relevant but it shouldn’t be the only form taught in schools.
I really am leaning toward tailoring education to a person’s talents, interests and abilities from 8th grade on. Everyone masters the basics before that time, but engineer-types go to a school that stresses that, mechanics to a hands-on school, health care to something stressing those skills and so on. What percentage of our population still move on to a job in a factory? Do the bank teller and salesclerk need to be able to write a six-page research paper correctly citing four unique sources?
I wrote a post on my blog a few months back addressing the idea that the need for a college education is over-stressed and plenty of great jobs in business, communications and customer service shouldn’t require a degree but they do because of this ideal that a college degree makes someone a better candidate.
Sorry, I think I may have gotten off topic… Interesting post. Thanks for sharing it again.
Sharon: I agree with your general point here. The only thing I’d take issue with is the suggestion of a system in which “everyone masters the basics” before 8th grade. As a college teacher, I work every day with some students who are barely literate, and who have not mastered basic essential 21st century skills like typing. A system that addresses that problem would have to extend work on the basics throughout, I think. I also think a system that streams students to career paths early needs to have a LOT of opportunities to double back. Years ago, a Swiss educator described the system in Switzerland to me, and it sounded like an arrangement that directed kids early but also allowed for changes in direction at many junctures. That would be ideal, I think.