Theories
of Intelligence is like no research paper I’ve ever read. But I enjoyed it far more than a
research paper. I like the term
“research essay” for this written work more. But before reading about the origin of the word “essay” and
the approach Montaigne took I probably would have labeled this piece “memoir”,
“reflection” or “opinion”, although those descriptions don’t quite fit
either. This essay is part fact,
part story, part reflection, part research in such a way the essay as a whole
is much more winsome than the thesis papers I had to write in high school. It employs authoritative research with
reliable sources and citations like any good research paper but it also employs
personal story, which in my academic past was always met with a resounding,
“NO.” But the honesty and
openness, the willingness to discuss hurtful experiences, makes this paper
relatable. And mixing factual
research with stories that invite a “What? I’m not the only one?” response
makes it inspirational and encouraging.
I would guess the people who
determine the conventions of the college research paper genre are the
professors themselves. However,
students have a formula of research, impersonal paragraphs, and specific structure
grilled into them from grade school.
So maybe the conventions of this genre are dictated more by habit now but
I like the idea of mixing it up and this research essay seems much more
exciting.
I really like what you have to say about the role of "habit" in governing a genre like the college research paper. My own research into the history of the assignment suggests that this is one of the forces at work. Oddly, though, professors and students both admit that they don't like reading and writing conventional research papers. One would think that would be a motive for change?
ReplyDelete