In “Blogs v.s. Term Papers,” Matt Richtel reports on the two sides of the argument proposed by the title: Are blogs or term papers better for the students who are writing? Richtel examines the interests of professors such as Cathy N. Davidson, an English professor at Duke, who “[want] to eradicate the term paper,” as well as other researchers like William H. Fitzhugh, founder of The Concord Review, who believe that term papers provide “a dramatic leg up [with]...critical thinking [and] argumentation.” Richtel uses the compelling sides of these arguments to provide an in depth explanation of these researchers’ views.
Matt Richtel does a good job at playing an observative role. Richtel never states his views, but instead reports evenly and fairly between the two arguments. Richtel starts off by describing Davidson’s point of view. He starts off with this opinion because most people are used to the standard of writing term papers. Richtel wants to grasp the reader’s attention from the beginning with a new idea to replace the one most known. After proposing this idea, he then explains Davidson’s argument for why term papers should be replaced. Richtel uses the term “punish[ment]” to describe term papers and calls blogs, “relatively, fun[.]” Richtel makes sure to spend time convincing the reader of this concept to make them question which side they should take. Later Richtel will try to convince readers of the other side as well. This idea is then bypassed to explain a new point of view.
 |
| Cathy N. Davidson |
This new point of view, however, is what most people are used to. Richtel brings us back to the standing of term papers and how they are helpful and more useful than blogs. To begin this stance, Richtel explains how “defenders of rigorous writing” see blog posts. This is a look into what most people have grown up with. Term papers have been the standard for so long. Richtel brings an extreme view into the conversation to make a point. The point being, many people see the blogs as silly or illogical. Richtel states that instead of a blog, students should just write a twitter post. The creativity in this extremity is prevalent. The sentence is only 140 characters, which was the maximum on twitter at the time.
 |
| Douglas B. Reeves |
Douglas B. Reeves, a columnist for the American School Board Journal, is chosen as the opener for this opposing side of the argument. Reeves does not completely trash the belief behind blogs, but he makes sure to support his own beliefs. Reeves strongly encourages writing term papers to give a “dramatic leg up in terms of critical thinking [and] argumentation,” however, he believes that blogs are meant for entertainment and not education. Reeves’s argument is interrupted by statistics of the amount of term papers that are written. His perspective is short lived because another person who shares his views is about to be introduced to back him up. Fitzhugh is introduced to explain the study used for the statistics mentioned, published by him. The study shows that term papers are requiring less from their students and slowly becoming easier. In other words, one could say that the term paper is “being murdered.” Fitzhugh pushes the idea that blogs will not help students in anything. Richtel emphasizes Fitzhugh’s beliefs with quotes containing slander against blogs. This is a major contrast to the beginning of the article. This proves that Richtel is showing no bias because he is including both sides evenly.
After showing the push from both sides, Richtel brings in a third mindset. Why not provide students with the opportunity to write both blogs and term papers. Andrea A. Lunsford, a professor of English at Stanford, is picked to represent this opinion. Lunsford pushes for the idea that students seek for ways to express themselves and blogs are an amazing way to do that. Though, term papers still provide important skills that blogs will not. Therefore, Lunsford starts a school year off with her students “writing a 15-page paper…[for] the first few weeks.” Afterwards, she lets her students use the ideas in said paper to make blogs, web sites, and presentations. Thus giving students both perspectives and the skills provided from both.
 |
| Andrea A. Lunsford |
Richtel then ends the article by returning back to Professor Davidson. Richtel does this to show that the blog posts are much more acceptable today. Blog posts were seen as “bad writing.” The creativity behind the intent of blog posts, however, has become more prevalent and noticed. Now, as Richtel pointed out, people like Lunsford, who has spent many years examining how students react to writing, are able to use both blogs and term papers. By ending the article with Davidson’s story, it shows how much writing has advanced. It gives hope for better solutions to come.
In conclusion, Richtel used this pattern of perspectives to relay his unbiased observations to the audience. By describing some of the pros and cons of each stance, he lets the reader decide which side to lean towards. Then Richtel throws in a more inclusive option for both sides. Richtel’s article is a well developed explanation of the argument for blogs and term papers.
Richtel, Matt. “Blogs vs. Term Papers,” The New York Times, 20 Jan. 2012, https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/education/edlife/muscling-in-on-the-term-paper-tradition.html.
No comments:
Post a Comment