Joining the conversation

            I have recently been thrown headfirst into academic argumentation in my discipline through a progression of a single idea.  In the fall, I met with one of my previous professors to talk about testing that the University of Michigan does on athletes.  Our first conversation snowballed into a research project investigating iron regulation in female athletes.  Over the last few months, I have been scouring the literature on the subject, reviewing what has already been done and looking at where our proposed research would fit in. 

In the meantime, the University of Michigan was selected to be the institutional research partner by the Women’s Sport Foundation and be the site for the Women's Sports, Health, Activity and Research and Policy Center.  The center recently proposed a pilot study grant competition for research pertaining to women and girls in sports.  Our small pilot study is currently unfunded and we are going to submit a proposal and I am responsible for writing part of it. 

This entire project has been challenging yet intriguing before the lab work even begins.  It has truly exposed me to how research works in my discipline, or basically any field.  The goal is to be able to develop even a single untapped question that can be investigated and discussed.  It seems like a simple goal but it is deceivingly difficult.  The difficulties lie not only in logistics, but in identifying an angle that has not been investigated and is possible to explore. 

I read a great analogy on academic argumentation that compared it to a conversation between educated individuals on a certain subject.  These people are having a conversation and you want to join but you cannot appear to be ignorant or repetitive.  Successful entry requires innovation, and this is when you know you belong in the discourse community.

         Right now I am working on making this entry into the conversation.  It is not necessarily being accepted by others that makes this entry significant.  What is especially significant is the entry symbolizes the potential to generate new knowledge instead of discussing what has already been established.  This is the ultimate role of academic argumentation is to generate new ideas that can be discussed and accepted or rejected and potentially add to the base of knowledge already established. 

        

         Because of this role of academic argumentation in science, I believe the science disciplines could benefit from the collaborative learning and “writing to make meaning” theories.  Since writing is the prime medium of collaboration and communication in this field, learning to think, write, and speak with peers in the discipline is invaluable. 

         As for my own entry into the discourse, I hope that I am successful not only in finding a niche to enter the academic conversation but the persuasive conversation to fund the project.  I need to not only determine where we fit in academia and but convince a very different community that it matters.  I could really use some collaborative learning right now.