A research paper is different from a creative writing paper, or an opinion paper. It has opinion, and it may be creatively written, but it also has substance. Whatever opinions are expressed are supported by facts. As a research writer you must state not only WHAT you think, but WHY you think it. In the scientific world, the WHY must be answered with FACTS. (Even though the Bible and the Pope may be recognized authorities, the scientific world does not consider these sufficient to demonstrate a point. That does not mean that you have to contradict or disregard religion, but it does mean that you need to support whatever opinion you put forth with secular facts.) For this class, a fact is: a study, statistics, or an anecdote - current or historical. A quote from the textbook is not necessarily a fact - it may or may not be. The fact that someone important said something does not make it a fact, either.
For example, an opinion is: "Sororities and fraternities are an important part of student life at SFA." By itself, that statement has little substance because there are too many unanswered questions. Important to whom? Why are they important? This opinion can be backed by facts in several different ways. You can answer the question of why by referring to numbers: if a large proportion of students at SFA are members of sororities and fraternities, obviously they are going to be important to campus life. "Thirty-seven percent of the 10,000 students at SFA are members of sororities or fraternities." If you don't have the exact number of members, you can count the number of sororities and fraternities on campus. "There are 25 sororities and fraternities for 10,000 students at SFA." (In this example, all the figures are fictitious.) If you happen to know the number of sororities and fraternities at another University, a comparison may strengthen your point. "This compares with a total of only 35 sororities and fraternities for 40,000 students at Texas A&M University."
Another kind of fact is anecdote, or your experience (be careful not to use this one tooooo much). For instance, "Everywhere you go on campus, you can recognize sorority and fraternity members by their distinctive dress." Of course this statement needs more qualifying to be "solid." "Even in the dining hall, where non-members and members alike eat together, there is a strong sorority and fraternity presence." Or, "The presence of sorority and fraternity members is especially strong at football games and other athletic events, where it seems to a casual spectator that half the audience, or more, belongs to one group or another."
A third kind of fact is a study. "Jones (1995) concluded that sorority and fraternity membership is vital to many campus activities." In this case, if the reader wants further facts to back up what seems to be an unsupported opinion, they can refer to the study by Jones, published in 1995.
A lot of people believe that facts PROVE something to be true. To the contrary, facts rarely PROVE anything. They are a tool to be used. They are only as powerful as the argument they modify, or support. Facts can be used well, so that each fact is like a nail attaching an image to the listeners' concept at hand. Or facts can be like little bits of dust that irritate the eyes, and keep you from seeing the overall picture. The value of facts is that they cannot be argued. Everyone can agree that there ARE sororities and fraternities. Not everyone agrees about how important they are to campus life.
Facts -------------------Variables -------------------Generalized Concepts
or Categories
(less arguable)
(more arguable)
Another misconception about facts is that they always point in one direction. Some people believe that if a certain fact is true, you are obliged to hold a certain opinion. That is not the case. The same facts can be interpreted in different ways. For instance, someone might argue that "Although 37% of the students at SFA are members of sororities or fraternities, the majority of the students ARE NOT, therefore, anytime one is talking about Greek activities, one is talking about less than half of the student body." They might further argue that "Although Greeks are visible in many of the campus activities, there are many more activities which are less visible, and are unlikely to have Greek participants - such as the student newspaper. When it comes to reforms of campus policy, the newspaper has more weight, hence, one might argue that in fact the Greeks are less important than it at first seems to be the case."
So, the first step in writing a good research paper is to include lots of facts. But, as you can see, just having a lot of facts does not necessarily mean you can write a good paper. You have to have a good argument as well. A strong argument needs an introductory statement to explain why the point you want to make is important. Consider this sentence which follows the title, "Important Elements of Campus Life at SFASU." "Sororities and fraternities are one of the first organizations that new students encounter when they come to SFASU. Much of the fall term is devoted to choosing an organization, and being chosen by it." Here you have explained why a paper entitled "important elements of campus life" is going to be devoted to sororities and fraternities. Additional reasons may make the initial statement even more compelling.
A second element of a good argument is internal consistency, and the inclusion of views that differ from the one you are presenting. "Despite their prominence in campus life, some students deny that sororities and fraternities are important to campus activities. While it is true that for the many students who are not members, Greek functions may not be on their social calendar, even these non-member students are represented by a Student Body President that is likely to be a sorority or fraternity member." Here, the writer is accounting for a dissenting opinion.
The third element of a good argument is a conclusion. "Therefore, anyone who wants to understand student life at SFASU must understand sorority and fraternity membership." MAKE SURE that your concluding statements have been demonstrated by your previous argument. Nothing is worse than to read at the end, "I have proven that XXX." when in fact, XXX was not only NOT proven, but not even adequately discussed.
The most common mistakes students make when writing research papers is to have a coherent argument, but failing to back it up with facts (only half of the assignment). Or, they include lots of facts, but do not have a coherent argument (the other half of the assignment). To adequately complete the assignment, you need to do both.
Most of you will write your papers on computers, and most computer programs have a spell check. MAKE SURE YOU USE THE SPELL CHECK. Misspelled words detract from your argument, and weaken the overall effect of your paper. Another kind of misspelling also detracts from your presentation. Many people use their, instead of there, our, instead of are, than instead of then, accept instead of except. Be careful to use the correct word.
Writing a good paper takes time, and takes practice. Hopefully you will write a better paper at the end of the semester than you did at the beginning. The first step in writing a good paper is to take it seriously. Don't sit down two hours before the paper is due, scribble out whatever comes to mind, and expect to get an A, or even a C. You CANNOT write a good research paper in a hurry. Give yourself enough time.
Second, identify your main point. What do you want to argue for, or against? What point do you want to make with your reader? Once you start writing, NEVER LOSE SIGHT OF YOUR MAIN POINT. You may have to digress to better make a point, but always keep your focus.
When you bring in secondary ideas, remember to introduce them so that your reader knows where mentally to place the material that you present. Most of the time it is also useful to summarize a new idea in a sentence once you have discussed or explained it.
Avoid extremes.
Use the term "support", not "prove".
Mark the sections. If you don't have
sections with a title, tell the reader at the beginning of the paper what
you
are going to do.
Write as if you are explaining the
material to someone you know. Imagine them in your mind.
Identify your sources: Newcomb (in
Fink 1989:page 59), or "Asch (1993) found that..."
A theory never shows anything, nor
do people do anything because of a theory. A theory explains.
Read over your paper before handing
it in. If it isn't worth your while to read it through a second time, it
is not
worth a good
grade.
Use another word for Man - i.e. human
kind, people, individuals.
Make sure you spell the sources correctly
- Lofland - not Laughlin, Loflan, or Loflond.
2. A good introduction sets the tone of the paper, and
is a significant part of the grade.
Did you write
it last so that it can summarize the paper's arguments?
Is it well
written so it can inform the reader what to expect?
Advice: Spend some extra time on your introduction
at the end.
3. Papers that are broken down into sections are easier
to read (and write), and are more likely to be assessed fairly.
Did you use
section headings, or indicate in the aim of the section in the text?
Did you state
which question you are going to write on?
Advice: It is easier to argue both sides if you do
one at a time. Otherwise you can get in a muddle very easily.
4. Did you include facts from the reading?
Did you summarize
the important facts and trends so they can be understood?
Did you point
out the importance of them, answering what the facts mean to the overall
situation?
The same facts
can sometimes support two different arguments.
Advice: Make a fact sheet to refer to when you need
facts to support the arguments.
Even better, make it as you go through the reading,
and listen to the lectures; then you will be ready when it comes time to
write the paper.
5. Did you read over your paper before handing it in?
Hastily written papers usually get a lower grade.
Did you use
a spell check?
Are there
sentences that are incomplete?
Have you confused
words such as their-there, our-are, affect-effect?
Did you spell
the authors' names correctly?
Advice: Finish the paper one or two day before it's
due. Let it sit while you do other things. Then reread it before handing
it in. You'd be surprised at the silly mistakes you will find, the arguments
that are not fully explained, and the missing material.
6. Is your argument well made?
Do you have
a straw-man argument (unrealistic situation you can easily
knock down)?
Is it a kitchen-sink
argument (everything is tossed in)?
Are ideas
that differ from the others introduced so the reader can appreciate them?
Do you have
simplistic arguments (unexplained categories of good and evil)?
Most things are
not black
and white, so you'd do well to avoid extremes unless they are strongly
supported.
Have you separated
facts from theory and logic?
Advice: Even students can notice mistakes in the logic
of published sociologists, once you get the hang of it.
7. Did you write like a sociologist?
Did you use
the word PROVE? (Sociologists use support, demonstrate, or indicates.)
Did you unintentionally
say a theory causes people to do something. (A theory can only explain
WHY
people act
they way they do. It never causes them to act. )
Did you use
Man, Mankind and He, instead of Humans, Humankind, People, One, Person,
Being, Individual?
Sociologists
are sensitive to gender issues.
Did you cite
your sources of information (Durkheim) (Sampson and Laub) etc.?
The following are not fictitious. They were taken from
actual papers handed in for an assignment at a respectable Texas University
(not SFASU).
UNREADABLE SENTENCES
It states that in the First Plymoth Church in 1703, 65%
other 103 members were woman and that twenty years later even though the
congregation had grow 65% of the 155 member were still woman.
READABLE
Another aspect of social conformity can be seen when
people make life decisions. They most often do not like being abandoned
or isolated - they want to fit in with others, and not feel like they are
outsiders. Or in other words, they become encapsulated, and see things
through another's eyes.
AWKWARD
Many times there are going to be people so persistent
to do something, that you feel like just giving into whatever it is they
want you to do, so that you no longer have to hear them; these people are
alone and do not have anyone that looks out for them.
Another form of neglect and in a way infanticide was abandonment.
(More readable)
Many times people are so persistent that you feel
like giving in to them just to keep them quiet.
Abandonment, another form of neglect, could be considered
a form of infanticide.
MIS-SPEAK
Basically anything dealing with a preset notion can pass
for ideological consistency theory.
Another reason why people have certain religious beliefs
is the social network theory.
(No one has beliefs because of a theory. A theory
might explain why people have beliefs, however.)
EXAGGERATION
This theory exists in more than nineteen million versions,
but the general idea is that one.
Social conformity is the cause of all religious beliefs.
The Methodists for example had hardly educated ministers...
LOGIC WITH NUANCES
No one person can say that they are emphatically an individual
because by the very nature of this comment society would be required to
define you as such.
LOGIC IS MISSING
It is evident that society has become more modern, therefore,
religion has declined because there is less agriculture.
BAD GRAMMAR
This is a very basic argument in that the people you
are exposed to depends on your geographic area in which you live.
SUSPECT OF BORROWED COPY
Of the Pentecostals observed, one third turned to teachers,
religious advisors, or persons they trusted. One half turned to family.
Four fifths talked with close friends. Of the friends or advisors, 40%
were Pentecostals. Positive feedback from close friends was received by
70%. Time spent with Pentecostals increased during this time to 56%. Of
the encapsulated, 92% received the Baptism. One fifth of all seekers and
less than one fourth who converted reported no encapsulation experience.
(These 8 sentences express a very sophisticated idea,
part of which is suggested but not explained here.)
If the Methodist and Baptist ministers lacked education in comparison to the other leading Protestant bodies, they were not less educated than the people they served. In 1870, only 2% of the 17 year olds graduated from high school. If the goal was to arouse faith, the carefully drafted, scholarly, and often dry, sermons of the learned clergy were no match for the impromptu, emotional pleas of the uneducated preacher.
THOUGHTLESS
It was estimated that a sixth of all infants who stayed
with their mothers was 19%.
(The following was written by a male student and has been slightly edited.)
Because such a large portion of the population expects to be married in their lifetime, ninety percent, it is logical to wonder what benefits accompany marriage that make it so desirable. Many researchers have concentrated on the personal benefits of each marriage in marriage. Generally they have found that women benefit less from marriage today than they did forty years ago and men benefit more.
Women's roles in our society have increased over the past forty years, making marriage less beneficial to them and more beneficial to men. Vanek (1974) found that the total number of hours women spend on housework has not decreased since 1920. However, according to the U.S. Census Bureau an estimated 61% of the women in U.S. will be working outside the home by the year 2,000, as compared to 43% of the women who worked outside the home in 1974. What's more, Arlie Hochschild (1989) found that only 20% of the men in a two-job family shared the housework equally with their wives. Consequently, the amount of work women do in the home has not decreased, but the amount of work they do outside the home has increased. Even more disturbing is the fact that, according to the U.S. Census Bureau (1994) "he average American man working full time earns $37,180 Perrier, whereas the average American woman working full time earns $24,748" (source, year, page). This discrepancy, then, makes it nearly impossible for the working woman to make as much as her husband; therefore, she is still viewed by society, and often by her mate, as being economically dependent upon her husband. However, it is important to point out that some women today have contributed to their present dilemma. David Buss studied 37 different groups of men and women to determine the characteristics of an ideal mate. Females in 36 of the 37 groups said that it was important for a man to have a good financial prospects. Men, on the other hand, were more concerned with good looks in a potential mate. This attitude strengthens society's view that men should financially support women and encourages men to hold the dominant position in a marriage. This brings us to the interesting subject of the women's movement and women's place in the workforce.
Feminism and today's independent woman encourage women to work as a means of decreasing their dependence on men. However, according to the study of male and female earnings reported above, it is difficult for women to earn more than their husbands. [Editors note: Some women earn as much or more than their husbands, however the average of female earnings is consistently lower than the average of male earnings.] A study by Blumstein and Schwartz (1983) found that in "more than 30% of the marriages in which the husband earned over $8,000 more than the wife, the husband was perceived to have more power." Therefore, it appears that working outside the home only increases a woman's work load and not her status in her marriage. In fact, Olson and Defrain came to the sobering conclusion, after reviewing average family expenditures recorded by the U.S. Census Bureau, that in two-income families, the second income which is likely to be the female's income, "seems to disappear when the expenses associated with earning it are paid" (O&D 331). For example, after childcare, clothing, taxes, transportation and lunches are paid, a $2,333 a month income is reduced to $521 a month real income. Again, it seems that working outside the home only increases the work of the woman and not her status in the family.
Now that it has been established that it is very difficult for women to overcome society's belief that the male role in a marriage is a dominant one, it is important to look at the effect this has on a man and woman's ability to have a successful marriage and family. Goodman (1986) found that 37% of the respondents in his study thought that money was a major problem, followed by children and childrearing issues (29%), household chores (26%), and diets and health (21%). Looking at the money problem, Mace (1982), who surveyed 400 physicians, found that 49% of them believed that the primary reason that quarrels over money occurred was that one member of the couple tried to dominate the other through the use of money. As already stated, it is almost always the man who is economically dominant, consequently it is the woman who must endure trying to be controlled by her economically superior husband. Second, turning to childrearing issues, Olson and McCubin (1989) found in their study of 545 families that those "with open communication patterns and problem-free communication" were stronger families, but that in all families, adolescents communicated more with their mothers than with their fathers. Once again, the burden of family success rests more on the woman than the man. Third, turning to household chores, John P. Robinson (1985) found that women spent an average of 19.5 hours per week on housework compared to men's 9.8 hours. Obviously, housework is, in most marriages, the woman's responsibility. Finally, in the area of diets and health, Robinson found that women spent 6.9 hours per week cooking meals compared to men's 2.0 hours. It is easy to see, then, that in all four categories concerning marital problems, it is the woman who sacrifices most in maintaining a happy family.
A 1996 Gallop Poll found that in nearly 2/3 of the countries
polled the people felt that "their society was biased toward men" (O&D
235). Hence, it is clear that the unfair treatment of women in society
is a worldwide problem. This unfortunate, unfair treatment extends into
the family where men worldwide assume a dominant role stemming primarily
from tradition and from their economic superiority over women. M. Arond
and S.L. Pauker (1987) found that 23% of newlywed arguments concern money,
while 12% center on lack of sharing household chores. Because women make
less money than men, and do most of the housework, they lose in both of
the previously mentioned situations. Consequently, it is reasonable to
assume that, in today's society, the woman must accept a greater burden
of responsibility than her husband if she is going to have a successful
marriage and family.