 |
Guiding principles
|
|
|
|
Alongside the format, there are a number of crucial factors to consider in the pro- cesses of planning and writing up. Some of these may seem obvious but, as Matthews and Ross (2010) point out, they can be easily forgotten. Important questions researchers should ask themselves as they write a research paper or essay include:
· What are the aims of the research and are they clearly outlined in the paper?
· Who will make up the audience?
· Does the paper include an appropriate introduction and conclusion?
· What is the word limit and has an appropriate amount of space been taken up by each section?
· Have relevant and clear signposts been included to break up different sections?
· Is the literature review adequately comprehensive and critical?
· What methods have been adopted and are they clearly outlined in the paper?
· Is the presentation of data appropriate and comprehensible?
· Is the argument reasoned and does it follow a logical sequence?
· Have appropriate links been made between data and theory?
· If images, tables, figures or graphs are presented in the text, are they formatted correctly?
· Have existing standards or guidelines been followed (e. g. university guidelines)?
· Have referenced source materials been cited accurately and consistently through- out, including both in-text citation and the final bibliography/reference list?
Thody (2006) offers a useful framework of principles to guide the selection of writing and presentation styles, which are summarized in the context of criminological research below and explain in more detail some of the crucial factors listed above. She begins by suggesting a dialogue with data that involves careful planning alongside writ- ing from the start of a project. It is worth bearing in mind that, although the most significant chunk of writing comes at the end of the project, the writing process will have commenced during various earlier stages of the research. Writing the proposal – which includes an overview of the methodology – conducting the literature review, and note-taking during data collection and analysis will have involved some aspect of writ- ing up. This leaves the researcher with a number of sources to draw on and incorporate into the final presentation. In other words, the researcher is not starting from scratch and will have been writing up various aspects of the research throughout the process (Chamberlain, 2013). According to Thody (2006), the main principles to consider during the writing and presenting stage include:
Whether or not to follow precedent. There are a number of conventional and alter- native writing formats available to researchers. However, the choice is usually predetermined by the type of project on which the researcher is working. For exam- ple, undergraduate dissertations and chapters for edited collections usually have a required format, whereas a PhD thesis or research monograph can provide opportu- nities to break free from convention. It is often worthwhile consulting an experienced colleague, supervisor or book editor before an innovative approach is taken. As a general rule of thumb, it is important to follow the required rules and customs asso- ciated with a chosen form and style of written work, whether conventional or alternative. Consulting existing guidelines is therefore advisable before commencing the final write-up.
|
|
|
How much of your personality as a writer/presenter to admit. Reflexivity, autobi- ography and emotion are seen as increasingly significant in criminological research. The researcher must decide how much of her voice should appear and where those reflections should appear in the presentation and analysis of findings. Too much can seem self-indulgent and lead to the researcher/writer appearing as a dominant voice rather than the researched. However, there are occasions where this is necessary. For instance, Wakeman’s (2014) autoethnography of drug use and drug dealing and Owens’ (2012) prison survival guide provide examples of criminological researchers directly drawing on their personal histories and biographies as they reflect on crime, deviance and the criminal justice system. Moreover, when adopting an in-depth qualitative approach commonly found in the ethnographic method (see Hall, Chapter 17), the views and actions of the researcher become intertwined with those of the researched in quite complex ways. On these occasions, the researchers’ voices and reflections on the process – personal commitments to the research, positionality, epistemological and ontological frameworks – can become indispensable to the text, adding richness and authenticity to its final presentation. Examples of pieces benefit- ing from an increased appearance of the researcher’s voice include Hobbs’ (1988) ethnography of criminal entrepreneurship and working-class life in the East End of London; Adler’s (1993) six-year exploration of an upper-level drug-dealing commu- nity in Southern California; Bourgois’ (1995) study of street-level dealing in East Harlem; Winlow’s (2001) covert ethnography and discussion of his insider status as a nightclub doorman researching violence and professional crime in north-east England; Fleetwood’s (2014) reflections on her time in Ecuadorian prisons inter- viewing and observing female drug traffickers; Fraser’s (2015) experience as a youth worker and researcher over a prolonged period of time examining Glasgow’s youth gangs; and Ellis’ (2015) in-depth study of male violence in an English town.
The practicalities including time spent and word limit. Everyone begins writing up
a project with the best intentions, and then things get in the way. Dealing with the practicalities of writing and being realistic about your own strengths and weaknesses can be difficult to manage. Realistically, when considering the time required for each stage of the writing process, or the word limit, it is worth knowing that more than the initial estimates will usually be required. However, when struggling to manage it
is important that researchers try not to panic, because with help and consultation most find they can adapt to any given situation. If writing up is taking much longer to complete because of other work and family commitments, ask for an extension and, if possible, renegotiate a submission date, and make a note to plan work more effectively in the future and try not to take on too much.
|
|
|
Valuing and assessing readers and audiences. Alongside the methodological approach, the choice of the style of presentation depends on the target audience. Whether the audience is the examiners reading the dissertation or thesis, practition- ers and policy makers reading a report prepared for a governmental agency, the general public reading a newspaper piece or watching a documentary film, or review- ers of the academic journal targeted for publication, considering who the target audience is and how best to present the research to suit their needs is of the utmost importance (Chamberlain, 2013). For some authors, their research aims to reach beyond academic, policymaking and practitioner communities. The methodology and subsequent presentation of research findings can therefore take on different and more accessible forms that are sensitive to the needs of general, non-specialist audi- ences. For instance, the purposeful use of everyday language in published work can benefit a broader audience outside of academia. However, for students, whose audi- ence is a dissertation/thesis examiner, following university guidelines and academic regulations and complying with the rules of vocabulary, punctuation and grammar are both of the utmost importance (see Thody, 2006: 39).
Thinking about the overt and covert purposes of the presentation. If the format has
been chosen and the researcher is ready to begin the process of writing up, it is advis- able to revisit the data, methodological approach and theoretical framework and clarify the overall purpose of the piece. The researcher might be aiming to test an idea, enhance understanding, share information, gain acceptance, or simply to achieve a good result in an assessment in order to progress to the following year. Depending on the aim, there are a number of considerations that are important to think about, which include how to weave together data and theory in the text, and whether the chosen approach better suits analytical prose or narrative text. Different schools of thought in the social sciences emphasize different aspects of the research and require varying amounts of writing dedicated to the underlying aims of the research and the approach to it. Clare and Hamilton’s (2003) collection on writing research offers chapters dedicated to linking data to text from feminist, interpretivist, poststructuralist and positivist-analytic approaches, among others. More recently in criminology, additions to the field include narrative criminology, which, drawing on symbolic interactionism, emphasizes the importance of storytelling to the lives of perpetrators and victims of crime (see Presser and Sandberg, 2015). Another is ultra- realism, which combines advanced ethnographic methods and networked data gathering with new philosophical and psychosocial conceptual frameworks (see Hall and Winlow, 2015). Adopting specific approaches such as these impacts not only on methods and theory, but also on the writing process and final presentation of the research. For example, if following a narrative approach, enough time should be
spent introducing the research participants whose stories are being told. From the ultra-realist perspective, for instance, a sufficient amount of time should be spent contextualizing the data and theorization in the broader and deeper political, eco- nomic and psychosocial forces, processes and structures that underlie the criminal/ harmful phenomena being examined.
The arts and craft of producing written work. As Thody points out, ‘there’s no magic formula and no choices about starting to write’ during the final write-up stage (2006: 60). Therefore, the researcher can get started by writing anything. In other words, make a start, no matter how insignificant it may seem. The actual schedule can vary from person to person. Some might benefit from setting daily writing tasks (including word or paragraph limits) or by writing during predetermined times each day. Some find it more productive to write at weekends, in the evenings or during holidays, during the working week, or some combination of the above. The same is true when the researcher reaches the end. At some point, the writing must finish and the researcher must let go of the whole project. This can often be just as hard as beginning the process. It is extremely important to calculate roughly how long it will take to write various sections and stick to your own deadlines, so that the project can be completed to the required standard. As you develop your writing and presenting technique, try to work out and remember what works best for you at each stage of the writing process. Alongside the formula for beginning and finishing a piece of written work, style and tone are also significant issues. There is no space here to fully explore style and tone – appropriate language, correct tense, choice of voice, and so on – but useful overviews can be found in Thody (2006), Bryman (2012) and Kara (2015). Finally, the process of constantly refining writing to a high standard is impor- tant; therefore, a sequence of drafts is essential. There is no set number but a polished piece of academic writing will most likely have been drafted at least three or four times. As the work moves through the drafting stages – from first draft through middle draft(s) to final draft – not just the writing but the argument can be developed. Drafting presents an opportunity to review, evaluate and refine the research’s themes and concepts and how they are presented. It is important to estab- lish a flow from paragraph to paragraph using transitional devices, which are summative phrases at the beginning and end of paragraphs that tie together and signpost the overall argument, and clearly introduce theory and data where necessary in order to support interpretations. A final copyedit is also essential, which allows the researcher to check the structure, flow, grammar, spelling, word count and refer- encing before the final proofread and submission.
|
|
|
It is often only during the final write-up stage that a researcher fully endorses the
argument they are trying to make. This follows constant reformulation and refine- ment throughout the numerous stages of writing and rewriting. Bearing this in mind, Ward makes the important point that the researcher should ‘think about the disserta- tion process as a series of loops rather than a straight line’ (2014: 157). This allows for additional feedback, reflection, literature and theory to be integrated into each section of the dissertation throughout the process. For example, sections of the
research can be revisited and additional literature can be read and concepts inte- grated into the analysis as the writing up progresses and the argument develops. As Ward adds, this makes room for a ‘series of iterations’: leaving space for editing and moving text, images and figures in the document (2014: 158). This is necessary because, alongside text, written work in criminology often includes the presentation of data in various forms.
|
|
|
