{"id":3234,"date":"2024-10-24T09:10:41","date_gmt":"2024-10-24T13:10:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/krieger.jhu.g.sjuku.top\/writing-program\/?page_id=3234"},"modified":"2024-10-24T09:10:41","modified_gmt":"2024-10-24T13:10:41","slug":"writing-with-data","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/krieger.jhu.g.sjuku.top\/writing-program\/writing-toolkit\/concepts-and-practices\/writing-with-data\/","title":{"rendered":"Writing With Data"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
When we ask our students to collect, evaluate, and analyze data, our instructional focus often first falls on ensuring they have the tools they need to interpret<\/em> data. We teach students how to identify patterns, explore relationships, and assess comparisons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yet moving from the ability to understand data representations<\/em> to the ability to effectively incorporate data <\/em>into an argument can mark a threshold concept<\/a> in data literacy<\/a>. This means that once a student learns how to incorporate data in an argument, it can permanently and dramatically change their perception of what data is and does\u2014often leading to more precise understanding and deeper critical thinking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ensuring students can deploy data to suit their ends in multiple contexts and genres\u2014from research reports and presentations to editorials and policy briefs\u2014is thus a key task for instructors across disciplines. But communicating effectively with data is no easy task, even for the most experienced writers. Here are three common problems found in novice writing with (and about) data, and some tips for how to help students overcome them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Solution: Help students identify their purpose\u2014and make it explicit.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The prospect of writing about data can sometimes overwhelm students. The technicalities involved with statistical evidence, for example, or the variety and richness of data visualizations<\/a> available, may make inexperienced writers feel lost in the weeds when they attempt to discuss their data. Rather than putting in the effort to get back on the right course, they might reasonably decide that the path of least resistance is to \u2018let the data speak for themselves.\u2019 This is a common problem in undergraduate writing, in which students include data in the text but ultimately say little, if anything, about what they think it means. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Faced with this situation, instructors may find it useful to demonstrate to students that everything\u2019s an argument<\/a>\u2014even discussions of data and findings. Much writing in the social and natural sciences, of course, aims for a tone of impartiality with its interpretation of data. But this doesn\u2019t mean that there is no argument\u2014writers are always taking positions<\/a> as they decide what they want readers to take away from their text.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Experienced writers know that, far from speaking for themselves, nearly all data can be interpreted multiple ways. Impressing on students the importance of articulating their interpretation as an implicit argument\u2014i.e., that their interpretation is correct\u2014can go a long way in rectifying this problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A good first step may be to help students identify what their purpose<\/em> is. Getting a student to recognize that data is (or should be) included for a reason\u2014to present a pattern, for example\u2014can help them understand that an effective discussion must explicitly tell the reader what<\/em> that pattern is, and why<\/em> it matters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Solution: Help them subordinate their evidence to their purpose.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Some students will err in the other direction, choosing to say too much<\/em> about their evidence\u2014including excessive information or explaining every datum. This may lead to a discussion that is irrelevant (at best) or incoherent (at worst).<\/p>\n\n\n\n To find the happy medium between \u201csaying too little\u201d and \u201csaying too much,\u201d instructors should help students lean into their purpose<\/em>. When selecting data or figures to include and discuss, students should do so in a way that serves the broader goals of the assignment<\/a>. Including a piece of evidence for its own sake will distract readers and muddy the analysis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Giving students examples of various uses of data and figures that are purpose-driven is a useful strategy. These purposes include, for example:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Notice the verbs used: present<\/em>, demonstrate<\/em>, and show<\/em>. Instructors should help students understand that this is about communication, not exploration. Often, students have difficulty thinking about the written product as a separate step from the research itself. In the research stage, students will use data to identify<\/em> patterns, explore<\/em> relationships, and assess<\/em> comparisons. But at the presentation stage, the goals are not to \u2018show their work\u2019 but rather to \u2018show what they found.\u2019<\/p>\n\n\n\n Instructors can design assignments and exercises to reinforce the message that all writing about data should be subordinated to a purpose. For example, Deborah Nolan, author of Communicating With Data<\/em>, designs technical assignments<\/a> that ask students to take on a problem from varying perspectives. As students work to craft technical discussions of data for different purposes\u2014such as a consumer guide or a memo to a supervisor\u2014they learn to identify how these divergent purposes shape various approaches to writing about data. An infographic assignment<\/a> can also be a good way to practice these skills, as the minimalist form forces authors to be selective about what data they display. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Solution: Lean on complexity to enrich students\u2019 writing.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n As they try to strike a balance between saying too much and saying too little, students may ignore qualifying or complicating evidence<\/a> for the sake of clarity. Inexperienced academic writers might reasonably think that evidence which complicates their argument also complicates their writing. They may unintentionally succumb to cherry picking evidence<\/a>\u2014not because they are trying to be deceitful, but simply because they are trying to articulate their point clearly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Experienced writers know that it\u2019s possible to address complicating data while still subordinating it to the writer\u2019s purposes. Our job as instructors is to help students see that doing so can make arguments even stronger.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One helpful exercise may be to have students explain not why their explanation is convincing, but rather why their explanation is more convincing than the alternatives<\/em>. This slight change in phrasing forces students to grapple with complicating evidence in their assignments, rather than letting it fall by the wayside. In doing so, they may find not only that their arguments are stronger, but also that their ability to write clearly and persuasively about data has improved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Chris Carroll\u2019s course \u201cTools for Writing a Research Paper in Economics,\u201d featured in the Model Library, students compose a semester-long research paper that integrates data visualizations to support their argument.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When we ask our students to collect, evaluate, and analyze data, our instructional focus often first falls on ensuring they have the tools they need to interpret data. We teach students how to identify patterns, explore relationships, and assess comparisons. Yet moving from the ability to understand data representations to the ability to effectively incorporate […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":724,"featured_media":0,"parent":1682,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-3234","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/krieger.jhu.g.sjuku.top\/writing-program\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3234","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/krieger.jhu.g.sjuku.top\/writing-program\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/krieger.jhu.g.sjuku.top\/writing-program\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/krieger.jhu.g.sjuku.top\/writing-program\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/724"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/krieger.jhu.g.sjuku.top\/writing-program\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3234"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/krieger.jhu.g.sjuku.top\/writing-program\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3234\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3254,"href":"https:\/\/krieger.jhu.g.sjuku.top\/writing-program\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3234\/revisions\/3254"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/krieger.jhu.g.sjuku.top\/writing-program\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1682"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/krieger.jhu.g.sjuku.top\/writing-program\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3234"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Problem: Saying too little. Students think that data \u201cspeaks for themselves.\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Problem: Saying too much. Students try to explain every datum.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Problem: Overstatement and oversimplification.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Cited and Recommended Sources<\/h2>
\n