Skip to main content

Week 21, Part 1 of 2. First person pronoun in Academic Writing, an error or a stylistic choice ?

Here I shall use the Nguyen 5 component model of reflection to structure this post. Discussed in my previous post in Week 20.

The trigger-

Week 22 class notes states "Try to avoid using the first person (‘I’ statements)." https://app.themindlab.com/course/release/1299-week-22-writing-a-literature-review

In the required reading: Common errors in literature reviews. https://app.themindlab.com/media/35179/view  comment 1 states "Don't use the first person in  a literature review."
Thoughts
I immediately felt a deep antipathy with this position.  In the 20th century, when I was an undergraduate, I copied the style of academic writing  I was reading. This mostly was written in the passive voice, using the third person, with absent authorial voice, and convoluted constructions.  This style of academic writing was hard to read, difficult to understand, and not engaging.
Recently, in the 21st century, at Professional Development sessions for Academics at the University of Auckland, I have learned to show my  voice  as the author by using the personal pronouns I and we (for multi author papers), and to use the active voice,  to increase clarity and concision.
Actions
To consider alternative views to this position  with evidence.
The instructions in the Mindlab literature review template state "Use formal, academic writing conventions…" Let's rephrase the instruction to an inquiry. Can the personal pronoun be used in academic literature reviews?

Attentive, critical, explorative, iterative

I think it is both clumsy and deceptive to write 'This literature review compares....' . It is a form of deception, because literature reviews don't  write themselves, they are written by the author/s. This sentence  is clumsy because it strangely gives the piece of writing agency of it's own, as a substitute for the absent author.    It is me, the author,  who takes responsibility for selecting and reviewing these articles and excluding others. I believe I/we the authors, can chose to use the authorial voice in academic writing, it is authentic and it makes academic writing more engaging and readable. The APA guidelines do not prohibit personal pronouns. http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2009/09/use-of-first-person-in-apa-style.html

The idea that using 'I' reduces objectivity is based on the incorrect premise that a selective review of the literature is  objective in the first place. A systematic review may be objective, but not a review of a select handful of articles such as for this assignment.



Using 'I' clarifies my role when discussing the existing literature, for example. "In this literature review I compare ….", it is clear that my role is doing the comparing, it is a description of the method.



Next I present exemplars from a contemporary reviews in a peer reviewed academic medical journals that use the personal pronoun. These reviews are multi authored so they use the inclusive 'our' and 'we'. The authors clearly distinguish  their thoughts and actions from the opinions expressed in the reviewed  literature. Here are examples, Bing-You uses the first person in the introduction, methods and discussion. The 'our traditional sources' in the discussion, includes the reader and is an example of the second person in academic writing.

In our view....

We conducted a scoping review....

Our aim was to explore....

Our goal...

We began by...

We determined ....

We reviewed the...

We selected

Our traditional sources…

Taveira-Gomes et al 2016 uses the first person for this multiauthor paper in the methods and results section.

In this systematic review, we aimed to…

We conducted…

We included…

We analyzed

We uncovered…
Blog post continued in part 2 due to 400 word count restriction.
REFERENCES
Bing-You, R., Hayes, V., Varaklis, K., Trowbridge, R., Kemp, H., & McKelvy, D. (2017). Feedback for learners in medical education: What is known? A scoping review. Academic medicine, 92(9), 1346-1354.
Taveira-Gomes, T., Ferreira, P., Taveira-Gomes, I., Severo, M., & Ferreira, M. A. (2016). What are we looking for in computer-based learning interventions in medical education? A systematic review. Journal of medical Internet research, 18(8).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Week 30. Activity 6. Analysing a global trend in education.

Self paced and personalised online learning - a global trend shaping education or an urban myth ? Analysing the gap between expectation and reality. Reflection using the Nguyen 5 component model. Trigger The OECD 2016 report on Trends Shaping Education Chapter 5 on technological development resonated with me, in particular, "self paced, interactive and personalised learning". OECD. (2016) Trends Shaping Education 2016, OECD Publishing, Paris. p101 OECD. (2016) Trends Shaping Education 2016, OECD Publishing, Paris. p110 Thoughts and actions  This resonated with me because in 2016  I created an open online library of elearning cases for learners to use as a self-paced and personalised resource. My learners are adults engaged in postgraduate higher education. This online library format was created as a resource to augment, not replace,  traditional teaching.  My assumption was that experienced Gen Y adult learners  have the knowledge, skills and ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Week 29. Professional online social networks

Activity 5: Using social online networks in teaching or professional development. Perceived affordances of social media for PD vs low quality content and information overload:  Finding my place in the information flow.  Reflection using Jay and Johnson (2002) reflective model. Step 1 (Descriptive stage):   Social media platforms I use in my professional development are my Research Gate page and a collaborative Wiki . Research Gate has been described as  "Linked In" for academic reseachers, in addition to acting as a repository for my academic publications, I also upload abstracts of academic conference presentations, and pdfs of conference posters.  I share printed conference posters by including a QR code, so a conference participant can  to link to the online version via their mobile device. My Wikispace is called Digipathed, I developed it in collaboration with two other Pathology Teachers, one in Wellington and...
Post a Comment
Read more

Week 28. Activity 4:Legal and ethical contexts in my digital practice

What Critical Incident : A medical student at the University of Auckland has taken photos of specimens of colon and lung cancer  from the School of Medical Sciences Pathology Museum, annotated the photos, turned them into a study guide, and posted them on his open access blog, which he uses to collate  study notes for himself and to share with other students in the class. There is a no photography rule in this Museum Auckland University School of Medical and Health Sciences Pathology Museum Image: https://www.fmhs.auckland.ac.nz/en/faculty/mslc.html   .. So What   Using Ehrich's framework, the most relevant competing forces are - University of Auckland policy that there is to be no photography in the Museum, - Society and community - some internet users may find such images disturbing, shocking or culturally offensive. On the other hand, the student has created a shared education resource for the benefit of his c...
Post a Comment
Read more