They Say/I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing

Location: Home » vampire: masquerade » Writing Skills » They Say/I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing

Similar Items:

•	They Say/I Say: The Moves that Matter in Persuasive Writing
•	The Norton Field Guide to Writing
•	A Writer's Reference
•	A Pocket Style Manual
•	MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers, Sixth Edition

Editorial Reviews:

Product Description
At a time when so many lament the decline of writing skills among Americans, They Say/I Say teaches the core moves of effective argumentative writing. Suggesting that there are certain moves that experienced writers use instinctively, and that the moves can be learned, this book offers a number of imaginative templates for doing so. Praised for "demystifying the tricks of the writer's trade," They Say/I Say grows from Gerald Graff's award-winning Clueless in Academe.

Customer Reviews: Read 16 more reviews...

5 out of 5 stars

Fantastic approach to teaching persuasive writing July 28, 2006
21 out of 21 found this review helpful

I received this book too late to use it for my persuasive writing class. While I had moderate success with my other book, Everything's an Argument, I would certainly use this book if I had to do it all over again.

They Say/I Say is a short book with a simple premise -- it correctly states that no argument occurs in a vacuum, but must depend upon what others have to say about it. Moreover, the authors believe one of the principle difficulties which students have with persuasive writing is an inability to correctly utilize these necessary ingredients (introduce what others have to say on the subject, and then present their own voice on the matter). Though I am not a writing teacher, I have found this to be the case in my classes.

TSIS summarizes the important aspects of this conversation in persuasive writing and provides templates for students to summarize what others say, introduce their own points, and perform various other techniques. While one may think the use of such templates leads to formulaic writing, the authors suggest the opposite is the case. By understanding how to shape their ideas, students can learn to better express their orginal thoughts, thus making their writing more individual.

While I am inclined to agree, TSIS is not perfect. It certainly cannot be used as a thorough textbook on all persuasive writing, nor am I completely convinced that the exercises provided in the book are the most effective at using the templates in student writing. If teachers can get students to incorporate the ideas of TSIS into student's writing, however, they will accomplish much. Check it out for yourself.

5 out of 5 stars

An excellent guide for beginning college writers October 28, 2006
8 out of 8 found this review helpful

"They Say/I Say" teaching argumentation through a series of excellent exercises and templates. Generally I don't like templates for writing, but Graff demonstrates ways to use patterns and strategies that are extremely helpful for inexperienced writers. I will use this book or parts of this book in every composition class I teach.

5 out of 5 stars

They Say/I Say is a smart and satisfying book. February 26, 2007
8 out of 8 found this review helpful

Graff and Birkenstein have written the best book about academic writing I've read. Its
strategies, or moves, extend way beyond the purely academic to all kinds of non-fiction writing and have been put to rigorous classroom tests both by the authors and by many of their peers. They Say/I Say is also a pleasure to read: Graff and Birkenstein practice the very writing lessons they're advocating, so that the book becomes a testimonial to itself, and to the wisdom of its own teachings. Even the interior design of They Say/I Say is pleasing and helps to convey the book's message.

3 out of 5 stars

Not a bad start! September 5, 2006
6 out of 13 found this review helpful

I was really pleased when my university began using this text in its beginning composition classes since I assumed it was based on the years of experience that applied linguists have had in using genre analysis, moves, "templates" [scripts and frames] and other approaches that have influenced ESL/EFL and especially English for Specific Purposes (ESP) texts. I was quite surprised when I realized that the authors seem to have done no research in an already existing field as they wrote this text.

Now, this text, a good first attempt, is useful and serves a purpose; however, had the authors done their homework, they would have benefitted from the extensive work of others in this field (cf. John Swales or V. K. Bhatia) at both the theoretical and practical level.

Nor did it use any of the work on collocations from the existing corpus linguistics work that would have made the book much stronger.

Because this was a first attempt, the text lectures too much and provides fairly weak exercises. Fortunately, a good teacher can create his/her own exercises based on the good information the authors provide.

In spite of that weaknesses of the text, I want to thank the authors for ntroducing these important ideas and techniques to the larger composition community.

3 out of 5 stars

The Contemplative Mind October 4, 2008
5 out of 7 found this review helpful

Well, ok, here's my argument.

I say what is lacking in Gerald Graff's teaching philosophy is vision.

As president of the MLA Graff is a widely respected and influential figure, but what is lacking in his many books and articles is a vision of the intellectual life that transcends the kind of partisan bickering that marks so much of public life in American politics and education and media and champions the kind of broad-mindedness that sees beyond divisions and polarities (which are sometimes deep but often superficial) and works toward a higher synthesis, a larger vision, a longer view.

For example: A superficial gloss of the the culture wars would see two sides arguing from incommensurable positions, but if one steps back and surveys the field the two positions can be seen to be arguing toward the same end. Both sides believe in democratic principles of fair play and equal opportunity and academic freedom and the pursuit of the individual as well as the common good. Often the discussion gets bogged down because each side misunderstands the other side's position and therefore is suspicious of the other side's intentions so the dialogue never progresses past the level of mutual misrepresentation and mutual distrust.

I'll try to clarify by accurately representing each side's position and intentions. Each side has their ideal of what a university's mission should be and they are not mutually exclusive ideals. The social and cultural progressives believe that the liberal project has either been unsuccesful or is incomplete and that it is the American intellectual's duty to make America live up to its initial promise. Thus many progressive intellectuals do what amounts to social work by securing the rights of special interest groups (gender, racial, ethnic, queer). They do this not just by changing laws but also by changing the way we practice culture. The progressive does not necessarily see this as the only end of education but as an essential part of the work that they do. The social and cultural conservative believes essentially the same thing. They talk of preserving a tradition by teaching a core curricula and core values but egalitarianism and freedom are our core values and preserving these shared values means securing them for everyone, otherwise they are no longer shared values. As for cultural literacy there has never been one cultural literacy in American life, but multiple literacies. Multiculturalism is simply a new name for what has always been this nations reality; we are and having always been a collection of diverse peoples with diverse backgrounds, levels of education, and interests. But the common interests of our national public life have been consistent.

Since Alexis de Tocqueville we have heard voiced accusations that America is anti-intellectual. I think there is a mistrust of intellectuals in this country largely because there is a misunderstanding as to what they do. Graff speaks to us about how to teach persuasive writing but he rarely says anything about the higher aims of education. I think the higher aim of education is a broadness of mind that encourages students not to enter the fray and the partisan bickering that so often passes for discourse but to rise above the fray.

Teaching the controversies means that we no longer read the best essays only current ones. The best essays present us with minds that are not contestatory but contemplative. These essays present us with the best models of the intellectual life and the best way to live, and this should be the aim of education.

Powered by Associate-O-Matic