CCR 601: Howard, Serviss, Rodrigue (2009) "Writing from Sources, Writing From Sentences"

Howard, Rebecca Moore; Serviss, Trish; and Rodrigue, Tanya. “Writing from Sources, Writing from Sentences.” In print. 2009.

Executive Summary:

Since writing with sources is a fundamental and commonly practiced composition activity assigned across disciplines in the university and since composition research has for the most part ignored research on student writing with sources, Howard, Serviss, and Rodrigue (2009) present findings from their preliminary inquiry regarding students’ practices of summary, paraphrasing, patchwriting, and copying in source-based writing. Their method consisted of collecting a sample of 18 students’ texts, each written for one source-based research writing project in a sophomore composition course. All cited sources of students’ texts were found, collected, read, and compared against the language used by the student. Following research procedures as regulated by IRB, the researchers analyzed students’ texts by qualitatively assessing and coding where and how students used sources (this coding being done by two of the researchers). Results indicated that a majority (72-100%) of students’ texts had at least one instance each of patchwriting, paraphrase, direct copying with quotations, and direct copying without quotations. Additionally, results showed not a single incidence of summary from students and showed that 94% of the papers used un-cited “non-common knowledge information” and 78% inaccurately attributed information to sources. After exemplifying some of these findings, the authors discuss how, collectively, this research suggests that “students are not writing from sources; they are writing from sentences selected from sources” (14, italics in original). Acknowledging that as a pilot study based on a small sample in a single university, results may not be representative of larger populations of student writers, and suggesting that more research is needed to investigate questions raised in this investigation of student practices in source-based writing, Howard, Serivss, and Rodrigue call for addition research to be developed on this important topic—an endeavor they reveal they have already initiated.

Quotable Quotes:

· “[O]ur primary concern throughout our analysis of these eighteen papers [was that] they cite sentences rather than sources, and one must then ask not only whether they understood the source itself but also whether they even read it” (12).

· “Our observations also raise questions about problems students may have with source-based writing, problems that are both prior to and foundational to their correct citation for sources. Citation counts for little if what is being cited is a fragmentary representation of the source, Plagiarism is difficult to avoid if one is constructing an argument from isolated sentences pulled from sources” (15).

· The authors show how paraphrasing, patchwriting, and copying “are issues with which all writers seem to struggle. However, despite the accumulating body of research on writers’ intertextual struggles with their sources, these are not widely recognized as global issues; instead, they are widely regarded as malfeasance committed by ignorant, indifferent, or unethical writers” (16).

Seemingly Important Cited Citations:

· Howard, (1993); Keck, C. (2006); Pecorari, D. (2003, 2006, 2008)

Tags:

· (2010), 601, authorship, Howard, Keck, Pecorari, pedagogy, plagiarism, Rodrigue, Serviss, source-based writing, citation, summary, research writing, paraphrase, qualitative, patchwriting, student writing,