"The I-Search Paper" proposes two very different views regarding the way research papers are created by students. Huntington Lyman, a middle school teacher, suggests that the I-Search method of composing a research paper is worthwhile to students because it is able to spark an interest that may lack in other forms of research. The process of looking up information from encyclopedias and online databases to then just reword the information into a paper is unfulfilling and uninteresting. An interesting topic allows the student to really connect with the work they are doing, making for a more enjoyable and rewarding experience. However, Susan Smith is against this I-Search format of research because it only promotes the egotistical mindset that is already widespread among middle school students. This type of research will not properly prepare students for the rigors of academic college writing.
While both Lyman and Smith both make valid arguments, I personally would have to side with Lyman. I have done many research style papers in middle school and high school and I have dreaded all of them. Instead of connecting to the research, I instead just looked up information from sources and basically jumped through the hoops my teacher presented in front of me to get a good grade. In the end I may have gotten an A, but the actual time spent on the assignment was worthless. I think the I-Search paper will give students a chance to really enjoy their work and grasp the concepts they are exploring.
I tend to agree with you, Tim. As a long-time reader / teacher of traditional research papers, I've come to question their value. Many others (Macrorie, Lyman) agree.
ReplyDeleteBut what of Smith's argument against the form? She finds the I-Search egotistical and limited? Is there a way to counter or at least mitigate this potential problem?