I was brought up with the idea that when you write an essay (lets call it a TMA for the sake of argument), you read the material relevant to the question, take copious notes, and then get down to planning and writing your answer. However, when I began doing my research degree, I was advised to do the opposite. I was advised to write first and then to read/take notes - Let the writing process direct your research, my supervisor said. I didnt take his advice until I was a long way into the project - at which point I kicked myself for not having tried his idea earlier. Writing first - and then reading - has a number of advantages ... 1. You know that what youre writing is entirely provisional - you can scrap it later: its purpose is to get you to engage with the topic. It helps clarify your own starting point. 2. It also gets the pen flowing/keyboard rattling - it reduces the danger of being blocked. 3. It can help you acquire some confidence - you can externalise your doubts and uncertainties in a safe space - and youve got at least some words to your credit when you start word counting. 4. Its really good for picking up the threads after a long interruption/hiatus: you can remind yourself where you were at before you were so rudely interrupted by life. 5. If youre somebody whos not always helped by planning your answer in advance, this is a pretty indispensable technique. 6. Its a classic way of actually using the hermeneutic circle (have a general, rough hypothesis and then go looking for relevant evidence after which you refine your hypothesis in the light of the evidence and so back to look for more data, and so the circle rolls on). There are other benefits too - and I may add them when I think of them.
Posted on: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 14:00:40 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015