assumptions: chart for, 62–63; commonly made mistakes of, 63; disabuse model, 59–60, 65; expectations, shaping of, 60; as fuel to be consumed, 60; making visible, 59–63; not identifying, 63; should not be stigmatized, 60; as vulnerable, 60–62
Before and After Game, 133–35, 137–38; worksheets, 178
boredom, 34–37, 138; as active sentiment, 33; as teacher, 171
brainstorming, 13, 24, 62, 81–82, 136, 178
Cereal Box Challenge, 70–71, 75–81, 173–74, 177
Change One Variable (COV), 125, 128–29, 132, 141–42, 164–68, 178; negotiable or fungible variables, 131, 133, 138–39; non-negotiable variables, 131, 133, 138–39
Commonly Made Mistakes, 9, 15, 196; asking advocacy questions, 49–50; asking leading questions, 49; asking only obvious or self-evident questions, 77; asking too few genres of questions, 77; asking too few questions, 40; asking vague questions, 40, 77; assumptions, not identifying or divulging, 63; Before and After Game, 138; boredom, denying of, 36; brainstorming, 81–82; Cereal Box Challenge, 77; Change One Variable (COV), 141–42, 168; choosing variables, 133; considering only professional factors affecting research project, 99; diagnostic test on questions, 49–51; dismissing instinctual feeling of interest in secondary sources, 141–42; engaging in circular logic, 36; excluding sources not related to keywords, 82; failing to include personal factors, 99; getting bogged down in individual sources too soon, 32; insider language, 149; making impossible substitutions of variables, 133; making only minor substitutions to variables, 133; multiple questions, trying to answer, 65; neglecting ethical factors, 99; neglecting to highlight obscure or field-specific adjectives, adverbs, and verbs, 149; not distinguishing types of insider language, 149; not identifying problem that connects questions, 65; not letting yourself be vulnerable, 11; not listening to yourself, 11; not making assumptions visible, 63; not using COV results in keyword search, 141; not writing things down, 11, 32, 82; particular topic, not thinking beyond, 65; procrastination, 114; revising or restructuring, not attempting, 63; skipping steps during Cereal Box Challenge, 77; sorting studies in your field by case instead of problem, 164; thinking only of sources within your field, 77; too few questions, 40; underestimating time required for envisioned research, 99; vague questions, 40; writing defensively, 114
Connect-the-Dots analogy, 83–86; as active choice, 90; connecting dots (sources) to arguments in pencil, 92–93; curved line, 88–89; ethical issues, 87; ethical responsibility, 90; as iterative process, 93; smudges (non-sources), 93; zigzag, 89–92. See also sources
databases, 27–29, 32, 42, 55–57, 65, 70, 78–79, 81, 95
Draft 0: consolidation of, 182–83; digital notes, 181; handwritten notes, 181; reading out loud, 184–85; self-evidence, 182; tidying up, 181–82; underlinings, highlights, and marginalia, 181
Draft 1: adding citations, 189; adding titles, 188; bibliographic entries, 186; combining things, 185–86; developing writerly voice, 188–89; killing acronyms, 189; rough sequence, 187–88; self-evidence, paying attention to, 186–87; writing of, 183–89
drafts, 3, 27, 93, 106–7, 114–15, 184–85, 188; first-draft questions, 45; as inward looking, 173; preliminary structure, 187; research proposal, 116, 142, 146, 170, 178, 181; research questions, 64
engagement with topics, subjects, problems, and ideas, 45, 79, 106, 118–19, 172–73
epiphanies, 30
extroversion, 13
field, 8, 13–14, 118–19, 123–24, 142, 145–46, 175, 177, 191, 193, 199; advantages of, 154; blind spots, 155; engaged readers, 171–72; engagement with, 172–73; finding, 152; “gaps” in, 22–23, 156, 197; limitations of, 154; literature review, 156–58; membership in, 174; members of, talking to, 169–73; organizing into Problem Collectives, 159–64, 169; primary sources, 173–74; Problem Collective, different from, 152–54; Problem Collectives, as assortment of, 155–56; Problem Collectives, as members of, 171–72; rewriting for, 169, 171–73, 189; rewriting of, 147, 149; Sounding Board, 173–74; and topics, 152, 155. See also Problem Collective
formal research proposal. See research proposals
getting over yourself, 117–18, 120
insider language, 142, 145–47, 149, 167, 169–71, 178, 189. See also jargon
insight, 102, 104, 110, 118–20, 140, 172–73, 192, 197; as fleeting, 11
introspection, 3–4, 10, 12, 76, 108–9, 115, 118, 131, 140, 142, 179, 184, 190; roadblocks to, 11
jargon, 48, 142–43, 146, 167–70, 178, 189, 197. See also insider language
journaling, 179. See also prewriting
Jump-to-a-Question Trap, 46
keyword searches, 53, 81–82; art and science of, 54–55; category searches, 55–56; keeping track of, 57–59; metadata, 55–56; self-reflexive sources, 56–57; tables, use of, 57–58; tagging, 55
literature review, 156–57; being fair, 158; being skeptical, 158–59; focus on author’s concerns, 158
metadata, 55–56
Narrow-Down-Your-Topic Trap, 46
non-sources, 86
notes, 2, 11, 36, 41, 129, 180, 182, 185, 187, 191; digital, 181; fragmentary, 179, 181, 186; messy notes, cleaning up of, 189; note-taking, 1, 10, 31, 82, 139, 165, 178, 181; side notes, 163; voice notes, 104–5
perfection, 189–90
Plan B: same problem, different case, 100–102; same topic, different project, 102–4; types of, 99–100
prewriting, 14, 179. See also journaling
primary sources, 1, 6, 10–11, 18, 24, 26, 29, 43, 51–52, 67, 70–71, 102, 108–9, 113, 115–16, 134, 177–78; Cereal Box Challenge, 75–80, 173–74; commonly made mistakes, 81–82; Connect-the-Dots analogy, 83–88; creating puzzles, 84; as defined, 68–69; digitization of, 78–79; Draft 0, 183; envisioning of, 78–81, 93; ethical challenges, 87, 89–90; ethical responsibility, 90; getting leads on, 65; keyword searches, 53–59, 81; methodological challenges of, 82–84; non-sources, 86; reliability of, 82; self-reflexive sources, 56–57; thesis-driven argument, 82; usefulness of, 82
Problem Bookstore, 159–60, 162
Problem Collective, 14, 119, 122–26, 132–33, 139–40, 150–52, 154–55, 157–58, 162, 174–75, 177–79, 191, 197, 199; eliminating insider language, 142, 145–47; identifying Field jargon, 142–43; rewriting for, 142–48, 171, 189; secondary sources, 138; as self-affiliation, 153; writing for, 169–70. See also field
Problems, 67, 94, 96, 102, 121, 122, 125, 141, 155, 157, 171, 173–76, 194–95, 197; Before and After Game, 135–37; capturing of vs. case of, 131–33; discovering of, 132; finding of, 64; functions of, 45; generating better questions, 45; as good things, 66; identifying of, 130; motivations, 104; as nagging presence, 44; vs. questions, 44; researching of, 44; seeing with “Field eyes,” 169; seeking of, 132; solving of, 124; temperament, 103; your Problem vs. their Problem, 117
procrastination, 114
questions: as clear, precise, and jargon-free, 48; educating of, 43; improving of, 45; jumping to, 45–46; leading, 49–51; outcome, indifferent to, 48–49; as problem-driven, 45; raw and undisciplined, 49; repairing of, 51; small, 39; specific, 37; stress-testing of, 46; subject, clear about, 49; unexpected, 39; using sources to identify, 45; verifiable and falsifiable data, rooted in, 48
research, 2, 190, 193; as collaborative process, 199; competence, 109; as craft, 104; ethic of, 4–5; finding your center, 6; goal of, as perfecting things, 190; honesty, 109; imagination, 109; as introspective process, 111, 115; as iterative process, 10, 199; as life-changing experience, 6; moving forward, 12; needs of, 105; practice of, 4; procrastination, 114; research issues, awareness of, 92; right time of day, 106–7; right tools, 105–6; state of mind, 5; tenacity, 109; tools of, 104–5; unproductive uncertainty vs. productive uncertainty, 7; wants of, 105; work environment, 104
research method, 2; brainstorming stage, 24; choosing topic, 7; conversation, as affirmative and nonjudgmental, 24; finding sources, 8; generating questions internally, 25; introspection, 3–4, 10; making yourself vulnerable, 24; remaining flexible, 8; self-centered approach to, 4–6; techniques of, 7–8; topics, as obstacles to, 20; underlying problem, identifying of, 7; writing, 14–15; writing as you go, 8; writing down ideas, 25
research methodology, 1
research problem, 5, 7, 18, 102, 117, 122, 125, 130–31, 150, 164, 172, 179
research proposals, 116, 178–79; avoiding apologetic tone in, 114; commonly made mistakes, 114; contextual framework, 112; goals and objectives, 112–13; preparing of, 108–14; project plan, 113–14; sharing significance, 113; writing defensively, 114
research questions, 46; adjectives and adverbs, 47; and boredom, 33–35; clear, 48; collective nouns, 47; diagnostic test on, 47–51; educating of, 51–59, 65; identifying and articulating problems of, 43–44; identifying problem that connects, 64–65; keywords, 53; making assumptions visible, 59–63; outcome, indifferent to, 48–49; primary sources, using of, 51–59; punctuation, 47; raw and undisciplined, 49; subject, clear about, 49; verbs, 48; verifiable and falsifiable, rooted in, 48
research resources: abilities, 95, 97; access, 95, 97; family responsibility, 95, 97; funding, 94, 97; human subjects, 95–97; material factors, 97; personality, 96–97; risk tolerance, 95, 97; time, 94, 97; writing speed, 94–95, 97
search results, 27–29, 31–33, 35, 45, 52, 54–55, 60, 79, 108, 155, 177
Search Yourself exercise, 27–32, 37, 51, 64, 139
secondary sources, 1, 26, 42, 69–70, 138–39, 142, 159–60, 163, 177–78, 186; as defined, 68; Draft 0, 183
Self-Centered Research process, 10–13, 25, 150, 155, 157, 175, 184, 190–92, 199; assumptions, approach to, 60; goal of, 196; intuitive part, 26
self-evidence, 8–9, 11, 15, 26, 28, 30, 33, 35, 40–41, 63–64, 66, 93, 111, 128, 130–31, 140, 161, 165, 182, 186–87; as form of note-taking, 10
Sounding Board, 9, 11–13, 24–25, 93, 116, 164, 178, 191, 198–99; Before and After Game, 135–36; decision matrix, 99; finding in your field, 173–74; formal research proposal, 114–15; getting leads on primary sources, 65; insider language, 149–50; research network, building of, 40–41
sources, 141; acknowledged or unacknowledged agenda, 91; biased, 91; and choice, 90; as deceptive, 90–91; ethical issues, 87; as incomplete or fragmentary, 90; inconsistent, 91; objective method, 90; question-generation process, 91–92; straight-edge method of connecting, 90; wrong by accident, 91. See also Connect-the-Dots analogy; primary sources; secondary sources
Topic Land, 122, 152, 156, 168–69
topics, 2, 4, 10, 15, 17, 22–23, 47, 52, 80, 94, 117, 121–22, 140–41, 152, 156, 159, 164–65, 171; choosing of, 7; concrete and compelling questions, transforming into, 7; as dangerous, 21; dealing with assumptions, 8; dealing with mental roadblocks, 8; as deceptive, 19; epiphanies, 30; identifying problem within, 133; masquerading as questions, 40; Narrow-Down-Your-Topic Trap, 21; as obstacles, in research process, 20; questions, 26, 33, 40–42; questions, and self-evidence, 26, 28; questions, distinguishing between, 20, 24–25, 36; search results, 27, 29–33; select database, 28–29; specific set of questions, 19, 36–40; switching of, 34
Try This Now, 9–11; Before and After, 133–38; boredom, 33–36; Cereal Box Challenge, 75–76; Change One Variable (COV), 125–32, 164–67; connect primary sources in pencil, 92–93; create Draft 0, 180–83; create Draft 1, 185–89; decision matrix, 97–99; diagnostic test on questions, 47–49; finding and replacing insider language, 146–47, 149; finding a new problem, 194–96; formal research proposal, preparing of, 108–14; go small or go home, 36–40; helping someone else, 196–99; identifying problems that connect questions, 64–65; making assumptions visible, 59–64; organizing field into Problem Collectives, 159–64; preparing formal research proposal, 108–14; primary sources, envisioning of, 78–81; primary sources, use of, 51–59; problem and case of problem, 125–32, 164, 168; Problem Collective, 126; rewriting for your field, 169–73; search yourself, 27–32; secondary source search, 138–41; using primary sources to educate, 51–54; writing, 14–15, 36–37
writing, 175; as act of estrangement, 183; blank page, fear of, 182; book reviews, 198; conference and workshop presentations, 199; digital notes, 181; Draft 0, 180–85; Draft 1, 183–85; externalizing thoughts, process of, 183–84; forms of, 178–79; handwritten notes, 181; inhibitors of, 182; it’s all, 176–80; judgment, fear of, 182; manuscript reviews, 198; as messy, 180; perfection, 190; real writing, 179; refining and consolidating, 179; and rewriting, 183; state-of-the-field essays, 198–99; underlinings, highlights, and marginalia, 181; writing and partnership workshops, 198