In the reading of “They say / I say”, I found it interesting in the way the author describes writing in the sense of a response or argument to what the topic is about. The author compares academic writing to argumentative writing, in which to say a good paper is one that challenges the work with his or her own ideas and thoughts, a conversation about the source instead of an agreement. This is something I have had trouble in the past. I have stayed the course of writing a paper with factual evidence that whoever reads my paper has no side or argument against my take on the idea. This may lead to a “boring” paper and one that does not express my own thoughts and questions about the work. Given this, I hope to be a part of the conversation with the work I am unraveling and give some critiques and questions of my own thoughts instead of agreeing with the work and actually backing up the point within the work I am agreeing with. By doing what I have been accustomed to, my work may become flat and not give the reader a reason to continue through my work as it may not challenge or present any new ideas in which the source has already brought up or challenged. I found it very beneficial through this reading to have a better sense of incorporating my own, and new, ideas to the reader that expand on the thoughts of my source and make for a compelling paper and not just five paragraphs on how I think the source is correct in all facets of their work. I want my work to be more original and creative rather than just regurgitating what I have read and proving that through supporting evidence within the source.
