When I picture an analysis I see a long, boring document
with lots of charts and figures. That’s probably a false idea, based on the
research I’ve done for psychology classes in the past.
The purpose of an analysis, to me, would be to gather
together a lot of information on one topic and to somehow make sense of it. A
good analysis would not be boring, it would take the information and make it
understandable to the average audience, and it would make a point that is clear,
interesting, and defendable.
Based on our discussion in class, I can add that an analysis
is an in-depth look at something. I think it would involve research. But
researching the topic alone is only the first part. Making sense of the
information is the second part. That would entail arranging it in a logical
way, finding patterns and proposing ideas about it.
An analysis should take time. Looking at a frog can take a second,
analyzing a frog should take several. Time is inherent in the meaning of the
word.It means looking at all the
possibilities, considering the meaning of the information that turns up,
playing around with it, going deeper.
Simple research on a topic can involve very little of the
writer – just taking information and putting it back out again. An analysis requires thought. It requires real involvement.
What would I like to analyze? It’s still hard to say. There
is so much about language that interests me. Perhaps what aspects of writing in
English are the most challenging to ELLs, or why people think it is easier to
learn how to write a new language than speak it, whether language is simple a puzzle (figure out all the pieces, and
you can learn a new language) or if it’s something organic that has to be
cultivated. If its organic, how can we “incubate” the process so to speak, help
it to happen effectively?
I want to pick a topic that is manageable but interesting. Not
too simplistic, but not too involved.
No comments:
Post a Comment