Basic Guidelines for Academic Discourse

Note:

I wrote this short article in response to a reader who was very critical of my views on reading instruction. I welcome differing views on all my platforms. I do not delete comments that are critical of anything I publish or present. I do not block dissenters. However, the basic norms of academic discourse must be followed. This will avoid the chaos that we often see in political discourse.

After several months, this person was still unwilling or unable to engage in an academic discourse. Thus, I had to block this person. I’ve had to do this only five other times in my previous 15 years of online postings.

Please point out my errors. I’m sure I have many. But do so using the norms of academic discourse described below. This will carry the conversation forward.

An Academic Context

Reading instruction exists within a variety of contexts, including social, political, and economic contexts. However, in its true form, reading instruction exists within an academic setting. How best to teach reading is an academic discussion. In this context, one is less likely to be influenced by social, political, and economic forces. I say ‘less likely’ because nothing exists in isolation. However, in an academic context, research and reason are the currency used.

Academic Discourse

In an academic context, the term ‘argument’ is not an angry quarrel or dispute; rather, it’s the formal process of presenting a point of view and then making a case for it using supporting propositions. Academic discourse consists of these types of formal arguments using reason and research to make a case for one’s point of view. This type of discourse is at the heart of academia. Academia or the academy refers to the academic community within a field. These are the scholars and researchers who seek to maintain standards within their respective fields. Within the academy, disagreements and differing views are considered healthy as they lead to the continued evolution of the field. Academic discourse commonly takes place within peer-reviewed academic journals, books, and professional conferences; however, today it also takes place on digital platforms such as Substack and LinkedIn. Again, academic discourse is considered an essential part of the academy.

The Importance of Disagreement

It’s natural and good that there are disagreements related to reading instruction. Disagreements in which our ideas are questioned or our propositions challenged, invite us to review research, reflect, and either reify or revise our thinking. Also, disagreement using academic discourse avoids the inbreeding of ideas that occur when opposing ideas are silenced. Cognitive inbreeding leads to knowledge-based mutations and conceptual deformities.

As stated above, academic conversations are often taking place today on digital platforms. However, it has become obvious that many don’t know the basics of academic discourse or understand the process used to engage in professional conversations. Thus, I offer some basic guidelines here.

Basic Guidelines for Academic Discourse

The guidelines below will result in more meaningful academic discourse and, at the same time, enable you to make much stronger arguments for your position. I have put this in the context of my own experiences responding to questions and critiques of my articles, podcasts, YouTube videos, and various postings over the last 15 years. For ease of reading, I will use the term ‘article’ below to denote any blog, article, video, or podcast that has been posted on a digital platform or published in a book, an academic journal, or some other forum.

1. Read the article. Academic discourse is based on what has been published. This guideline seems like a very basic sort of thing; yet, too often, people disagree with things not written or related to anything in the article. This often misrepresents or mischaracterizes the author and serves to create a strawman argument.

2. Respond to or critique only those things posted in the article. Authors of articles often like to answer questions or address critiques; however, you can’t expect an author to respond to what has not been written. Some responders use questions or critiques to make a point unrelated to the article. However, if you wish to do this, you should use your own forum to do so.

3. Critique the idea, not the person. Bad people can still make good points. In academic discourse, you are not judging the quality of one’s character. You also cannot infer intent. Be specific. Identify what the person got wrong. Tell your audience the specific areas of disagreement. In my posts, I am often told that I am a bad person, an ignorant person, or a deluded person. All well and good. I could be all these things, but please specify what I got wrong.

4. Respond using your own words and thoughts. Quotes are not your own words. Quotes can illustrate your point or support your point, but they should not be used to make your point. Quotes illustrate somebody else’s ideas. A series of quotes patched together often creates no point other than that you have read things. If you have a point, make your point.

5. Use reason and research to make your case. Avoid terms such as “I think”, “You should”, “You need to”, “We have to”, “There needs to be”, “I found”, “I saw”, “In my experience I”, “You are”. These all represent anecdotal evidence, personal experiences, and ‘I-think-isms’. The rule of thumb is to try to respond without using any personal pronouns. Your personal experience is a result of things you have experienced personally. While impactful on a personal basis, we cannot generalize to larger populations based on a sample size of one. Research should always be filtered through your own experience, but your own experience should not be equated with research. What works for a first-grader in Blackwater, AZ, struggling with word recognition, may not work for a fourth-grader in Edina, MN, struggling with comprehension.

6. Do not demand that people send you citations or show you “the research”. In the past, when asked for research to support a particular point, I would often chase down some of the citations used in an article. This takes time. And I found that my response was ignored, or I’d be asked to show “the research” on some other point. Demanding to see “the research” does not make a strong case for any point you wish to make. It serves to derail the discussion. And more importantly, it demonstrates a naïve understanding of research. If you have a point related to the article, make it.

7. Do not demand that people read something somebody else has written. This does not strengthen one’s argument. Even if that person is well-known. You can reference that person or that research, but if you have a point, make it specifically.

8. Do not demand that people respond to something that somebody else has said or written. This does not make a strong argument for your own points. Academic discourse in an academic context focuses on what has been written or presented. If you have a point related to the article, make it. If you wish to start a discussion around somebody else’s work, do so on your own forums.

9. Do not use Chatbot or some other type of AI to make your point. These are not valid sources of information. They are responses based on algorithms from your own computer footprint. They also make you look silly. If you have a point related to the article, make it.

10. Do not use hate speech or demean the person. You can demean or discredit the idea, but not the person. Admittedly, I sometimes enter questionable territory here when I use the term “clowns” to refer to those who think they know more about something when they know very little about that something. But this is used in a general sense. I also have little patience for journalists who (a) insert themselves into these academic conversations with very little understanding, (b) write their stories to support their predetermined belief, or (c) use their larger platforms to demean or diminish teachers, public education, or teacher preparation programs. And I have special words for those in power who bully and threaten those who would disagree. I do not apologize for the use of colorful metaphors and similes to make my points. But when critiquing specific academic work or postings, you will notice that academic discourse is used.

11. Anything a person has published or presented in a professional forum is fair game. These are all part of the academic conversation. Personal conversations, email, and other exchanges are not, as it is very easy to pull things out of context and present things that are conveniently inaccurate.

Please Disagree

I welcome your alternative views. Please disagree with me. Be skeptical. Critically examine all information I or others publish. But for goodness sake, use the basic guidelines for academic discourse. This will create a useful discussion that will move the conversation forward and enable our field to evolve.

If you’re looking for accessible, research-based information that slices through the endless loads of overly worded baloney, I would encourage you to subscribe to my free Substack, The Reading Instruction Show.