Assignment 12: Due Thursday, by 10:55am

Read the PDF sent to your email and the article below (which may take about 45 mins, so budget your time accordingly). In a 300-word post in response to this post, I want you to consider two things:  one piece of advice that Amanda Ripley gives to writers in “Complicating the Narratives” and one detail from the PDF about research process. State both at the top of your post. Then, taken together, how do the two items that you’ve chosen seem useful to researchers like yourselves? How do they help you rethink the way you will write about a crisis in Major Assignment 3? (You can write this without mentioning your potential research topic, but if you already have an idea feel free to reference it)

6 thoughts on “Assignment 12: Due Thursday, by 10:55am”

  1. Amanda Ripley talks about how creating a more complex story will create a more intriguing one. “When people encounter complexity, they become more curious and less closed off to new information. They listen, in other words” -Amanda Ripley. Credibility in a research paper contributes to the ethos of the person making the claim. These items are useful to researchers because when writing any paper you want the reader to be interested in what they’re reading. So making the narrative complex will want the reader to read on, and when backing up claims in a research paper, with credible sources you’re appealing to the ethos which will help strengthen your claims/facts. These items will help when writing about a crisis, because you should be backing up any claim with evidence from a credible source. Even if stating an opinion, some sort of evidence or research should be present to back up why you think the way you do, from a credible source.

  2. Hasibul Bhuiyan

    One piece of advice Amanda Ripley gives to writers is that while you’re doing research for your paper, you should always widen the lens or perspective. While it’s important to be specific when constructing your final paper, you have to be vague when conducting research and gathering information about your crisis. It’s essential to make sure that you are looking at all the perspectives. If you focus on multiple viewpoints, even going as far as considering your opponent’s arguments, you will find yourself asking more questions and finding more answers. This can help you understand the crisis better and produce a well-crafted, detailed research paper. It will also increase your credibility because you are willing to look at both sides.

  3. Ka Lye Chan

    In “Complicating the Narrative”, Ashley Ripley advises us to “Ask Questions that Get to People’s Motivations”. In “The Research Process”, the authors mention a similar detail, “The best research questions often come from everyday life, when something ordinary, however briefly, becomes extraordinary”. Both of these readings advises us to ask questions that range from everyday life to the underlying values of tribes. The beginning of making a research paper starts with questions that can stem from any inspiration that the author finds and in that research paper, we aim to answer those questions through thorough research. Graves, Corcoran, and Belmihoub tells us that research questions that come from everyday life are the best because it defamiliarizes us from the topic and leads us to a new perspective. Ripley advises that we do a similar thing where we ask deeper, more complex questions that complicates our own views and other’s views in order to gain new perspectives. The advice given to me from the two items is useful because it gives me a starting point. I knew that research had to start with questions, but I still had no idea where I can get those questions from. After being given the advice to ask everyday life questions, I was able to come up with several topics that I’d like to complicate my views on because not everything is as simple as we say it is. Instead of thinking about all the big social crises, I could write about everyday matters that need more attention, which is not to say that the other issues aren’t as important. Additionally, in order to build a more complex research paper, I would like to think of questions that truly tries to deepen my understanding of things even if it’s from a new perspective; I’m hoping to gain more outlooks on the topic besides from my own.

  4. Amanda Ripley gives the advice to writers to work “admidst interactable conflict”, which in this case means to complicate a narrative. The reasoning she gives behind this, is that a more complex story in which can develop and use in order to argue one way or the other. Another way to improve writing according to Ripley is to add quotes or details that do not fit your own bias narrative. This ties into Seth Graves idea of credibility and ethos, as leaving out details to fit your narrative or twisting the narrative is not a credible way to be a journalist, in this case. After reading both the article from Ripley and the article from Graves, what I can take away is the ideas to not have a clear biased view while researching, and to incorporate details that don’t fit my narrative in order to create an article that is not only a complex piece, but an credible piece. According to Ripley’s study, the more complex the story was, this meaning with more details, and touching upon both sides, that the people reading this articles were able to have a better conversation about the topic, which is what writers should strive to do. Everybody wants the truth out of journalists, however everyone has their own biases, which to Ripley’s point leads to a “simplistic view” on topics, leading to only arguments, whereas a complex article, which is what writers should strive for allows for more eloquent conversations. As a researcher and a writer this mess ideas presented by Ripley and Graves will help me as I will not lose credibility or my ethos, because I am bias, this means providing the point of view from both sides of the spectrum.

  5. One piece of advice that Amanda Ripley gives to writers in “Complicating the Narratives” is to refrain from taking a vague, generalized approach towards the particular topic that the written piece is about. Instead, Lipley suggests that writers “complicate the narrative”.One detail from the PDF that I found useful is this idea of “[looking] to test out different ideas and hypotheses that could provide us with fresh ways of understanding”.The two items are useful to researchers like myself because it encourages researches to take a different approach that, as Ripley suggests, adds to the depth and the appeal of the written piece.By taking the general approach of just simply evaluating a given topic that is being written about and then injecting one’s personal opinions into it, especially mainstream thought or the common notion, the paper then loses some level of credibility and ends up becoming stale. “Beating a dead horse” might be the easiest way to go on about writing pieces about a particular topic since you don’t have to go through the painstaking process of having to introduce a new perspective and reinforcing the credibility and plausibility of this new perspective. In other words, it’s easier to take the easier approach of piggy backing off of an already established approached. However, in doing so, we end up limiting and boxing in our understanding which deprives us the opportunity of being able to view the topic from a wider range of perspective which in the grander scheme of things would help us gain a better, deeper understanding about the topic at hand. The piece of advice that Ripley provides, in conjunction with the information from the PDF, really helped me think about how I am going to structure my paper for Major Assignment 3 and how I could “complicate the narrative” by evaluating the various nuances of the crisis that I will be writing about.

  6. In “Complicating the Narrative”, Amanda Ripley gives many different pieces of advice to the reader. One that had stuck out to me was to “Widen the Lens”. Research has shown that when you widen the lens, the audience’s reaction differs. I find it extremely important to include both narrow and wide lens moments when discussing a crisis. This is because a major difference between a narrow lens and a wider lens is who is to blame in conclusion, individuals or government officials? Ripley still states that great storytelling is storytelling using a narrow lens but it is important that after doing so, to zoom out and include a different perspective from a wider lens. In the PDF about researching and making claims, I related way too much with the topic of “fake news” and credibility. Often times I feel that if I see an article come up on my google search, it must be reliable and credible. The excerpt stated that only 7% of college students were able to tell when a source wasn’t credible; I’m part of the 93%. When writing Major Assignment 3 I hope to really focus on the ethos of my paper because it is a research paper. Without credibility, it can be really difficult to reach your audience.

Leave a Reply