They Say / I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing

by Gerald Graff, Cathy Birkenstein

Shows some signs of wear, and may have some markings on the inside. 100% Money Back .

Genres: Writing, Nonfiction, Education, School, Teaching, Reference, College

181 pages, Paperback

First published January 10, 2006

Reviews

[carol. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting premise, namely, looking at academic writing as participating in a dialogue. It's a fascinating idea that goes back to at least Greek roots in the Socratic dialogue. (Come to think of it, some Eastern teachers use that technique as well; I'm just not well-versed in non-Western history). I think it's a technique that helps a student place their work in a larger conversation, and elevate an academic essay above the "explanatory" work into a work that defends or promotes a viewpoint. The writers' mission can be summed up: "Yet despite this growing consensus that writing is a social, conversational act, helping student writers actually participate in these conversations remains a formidable challenge. This book aims to meet that challenge. Its goal is to demystify academic writing by isolating its basic moves, explaining them clearly and representing them in the form of templates."

Broken into four parts, the first part is called, "They Say," and gives students examples of how to take a position, then summarize and quote others in their works. The second section, "I Say," leads the writer how to respond to the "they say" arguments, and how to distinguish one's own position from differing ones. (Incidentally, my professor had us read Martin Luther King's "Letters from a Birmingham Jail" which uses nearly every instance of these techniques, and is a truly impressive essay. For that alone, I'm grateful to her). The third section addresses analysis and conclusions, and shows how to connect the parts, using one's own voice and metacommentary.

The last section addresses writing within specific settings, namely, writing for science, in the social sciences, entering class conversations and deciphering author viewpoints.

Each chapter ends with a few exercises which lead the reader through understanding the technique and how to implement it.

Contains templates to help beginning academic writers formulate ideas, and has a number of specific suggestions throughout to help writers integrate these techniques.

Overall, an interesting read for an academic book. It was required reading for an English Composition class. I wouldn't have mind having run into this in high school or college when I first started academic writing. Four stars for quality of ideas, approachability and useful techniques, if not actual enjoyment.

[Ayla · Rating 2 out of 5]

My two stars are generous. If you need this book's atrocious templates to write a paper, you have some serious literary remediation to do.

The templates, when strung together into a disjointed paragraph of concessions and cliches, make for an amazingly boring and unoriginal essay. Even when incorporated into an otherwise mediocre paper, they stand out as obvious regurgitations of what the writer feels an academic paper "should" say.

Any scholar who pridefully publishes the words "I'm of two minds about X's claim that______. On the one hand, I agree that _____. On the other hand, I'm not sure if______." in that order will drastically degrade his paper's quality and damage his credibility in the reader's mind.

Forgiving the contractions and weak verbs, because frankly I don't plan on writing an article on this template, this template lacks anything resembling style or interest to the reader.

"I'm of two minds..." Just... no. Orwell would shit his pants reading that (read "Politics and the English Language" if you want realistic and credible writing advice). The writer did absolutely no thinking in composing that phrase.

"One the one hand... on the other hand..." I could accept that in a middle schooler's persuasive paper, though I'd cringe a bit.

"I'm not sure if ____" No, fuck off. You're not sure? That's what you say when the waiter mentions the restaurant's special on fried squid testicles. Give me a clear position and argue it. And stop with the damn contractions.

[Lisajean · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was skeptical of the templates and worried that they would limit my students and lead to formulaic writing, but instead they helped students organize their thoughts, express more complex ideas, and frame their arguments as part of a larger conversation. After only a few exercise with the templates, I noticed students incorporating them into their writing on their own and doing so effectively. Although I’m happy with the results, the reason I’m not giving They Say, I Say more stars is firstly that it would have been better as an article rather than a book and secondly the authors suggest a much more extensive use of templates than I think is helpful for students. I would recommend using this book judiciously as a tool to help students organize their writing, but be careful not to overdo it. I would rather have slightly disorganized writing expressing authentic ideas in students’ individual voices than homogeneous, formulaic essays.

[Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

My writing is often competent, but not as effective as I'd like. I bought this expecting to screen it for use as a corrective to my students. I found it surprisingly useful for myself, although at a fairly detailed level. The most useful thing they say, which I should have known already, but didn't, is that it is critically important to remember that one's academic writing is a contribution to an ongoing discussion that one's reader likely has not been paying close attention to. As such, one needs to bring the reader up to speed on where the discussion was ("They Say"), to make it clear why one's own contribution makes any sense. Useful. Not genius, but useful

For your amusement: I came across it in Stanley Fish's provocative column on spending an entire semester trying to teach college students how a sentence works.

[Jenny (Reading Envy) · Rating 4 out of 5]

When students on my campus are flagged for citation troubles and tried for plagiarism, one thing they have to do is come to me for a plagiarism tutorial. Because students accidentally plagiarize (and sometimes not accidentally) for a lot of different reasons, I don't just have a pre-packaged tutorial I send them off to do. I'm finding that most often, students simply are not equipped to write about ideas they have found.

This book attempts to guide students through strategies for handling the ideas of others (even in the research and notetaking stages) and then how to signal they are using another's ideas in a paper. The authors then move into helping students understand how to write about their own ideas, which is another type of struggle. Entering the scholarly conversation can be terrifying!

The book is most useful in the first half, with lists of ideas, examples of quotations handled properly, demonstrates effective paraphrasing, etc. The second half contains full essays for students to reference, but I feel like unless they are required to interact with them in a class setting, they are unlikely to read those. I'm not sure they need to be in the book.

[Demetrius Rogers · Rating 4 out of 5]

For a book on academic writing, this was excellent. I wish this kind of thing, however, would be promoted at a much broader level. The principles of this book are not just for writing dissertations, but for having courteous conversations. Your response is only as good as your ability to listen. You can't even disagree (or know to agree) until you understand. Restate what you're hearing until the speaker is satisfied with your level of comprehension. Then, and only then, do you have the credibility to offer a response. The more intelligent a conversation, the more civil it will be. As one of my professors once said, "Charity precedes critique." This book is a terrific exposition of that idea.

[Gaijinmama · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of the most useful books I've ever encountered if you teach academic writing, reading, or critical thinking.
Some instructors might disagree, but I find the use of templates very helpful for my students. In my opinion, it is not encouraging plagiarism to give the students a template to make it easier for them. (For example, "Author X makes an excellent point that_____, but I would also add_____." They are not native English speakers and it is crucial for them to be given a clear idea of what is expected. Once they get used to it, they can bend the rules!

The articles at the end of the book are all good reads, in addition to being great examples of academic written discourse. I also respect the authors' position on the use of first person . They say it's acceptable, I more-or-less disagree but that is probably because my students have problems with it which may be particular to their cultural and linguistic background.
Finally, and most important, the author's main point, that writing is a kind of conversation, makes a lot of sense and they really develop this point clearly and effectively. Because of the focus on writing as a dialogue, this book is helpful for discussion and presentation skills as well as writing.

[Udeni · Rating 3 out of 5]

The authors' aim is to help student writers take part in an academic conversation. Their definition of writing well consists of summarising current debate (they say) and setting up one's own arguments (I say). Each chapter provides simple templates to help students make these move in their own writing. For example,
"In discussions of X, one controversial issue has been _____ . One the one hand, ____ aruges ____. On the other hand, ____ contends ____. Others even maintain _____ . My own view is _____."

Part One consists of three chaptres which cover how to describe a viewpoint, how to summarise a discussion, and how to correctly quote others. Part Two contains four chapters, which cover ways to respond to others' work, idetnifying one's own argument, introducing objections, and explaing the importance of a discussion. Part Three covers how to connect arguments seamlessly, writing in an individual voice and a revision chapter. Part Four has specific advice for writers in the arts, sciences, and social scients. There are some weaker chapters on digital communications and verbal discussions.

This is an essential book for 16-18 year olds, and useful for first year undergraduates. Non-native English speakers at postgraduate level will also find this book useful. Teachers can use the exercises at the end of each chapter for class discussions or homework.

The paperback edition loses one star for thin paper and for faint ink, which make the book flimsy and unreadable. Another star was dropped for the patronising writing style. A book that I will probably return to, but not with relish.

[Patrick Faller · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've taught the shorter, rhetoric-based version of this text before, and now, after having moved away from it to teach other texts that seemed even more "democratic" than this, I'm returning to this text next semester because other texts simply don't inspire students to begin writing with near as much purpose and confidence as this one does. I've ordered my copy of the 2nd edition, actually, which comes out on 15 November 2011. The rhetorical chapters haven't changed;
I'm sure they'll contain edits, perhaps a few updated examples, but the "moves," from summarizing to quoting to responding to saying why it matters, haven't been altered. What they've done is added another set of readings to the orginal sets, which dealt, respectively, with fast food, pop culture, economic mobility, and the notion that the American way of life is under assault. Also, they've updated each of these sets by adding several more timely essays, notably essays by Michelle Obama, David Foster Wallace, and Tom Bissell.

[Sarah Cammelot · Rating 2 out of 5]

I could appreciate this book as a great read for beginning writers, but I firmly believe that writing is learned by practice of creativity, not template. I personally feel that this book was too template-focused and did not emphasize the writers natural flow of words enough.

[Donna · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book was used for my class, The Writing Process. My class was 12 weeks long and having to use this book for 12 long weeks was excruciating. In my opinion, Graff does not give the student enough credit, as this neat little book tries to do all the work for you! Just fill in the blanks. I also thought this book was biased, old fashioned in some of its stories. I saw it as an agenda for a college professor and former MLA President to get colleges to use his book. I think this is a conflict of interest. He thinks he knows what the American Experience is. He defines street smarts in a unique way, not exactly what I have seen as a definition in my lifetime. He assumes too much for the reader. He should have given us more credit. I have to use this book for my next class also...

[Dario Boen · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'd have to say i might have started this book to feel productive without doing anything and yet, it has been a good resource for writing. Most likely ill be referring back to this fucker during my actual writing and taking lines (they have so many templates). Since this is non-fiction i'll leave the close reading for another time.

[Megan Alexandra · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read the first edition of this book in my freshman composition class and now I teach the fourth edition to the students in my freshman composition class. It's wild out here.

[Kris · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fantastic, actually helpful resource for academic writers.

It's very liberal/lefty, but that's exposed only in the pieces the authors selected for critique. The writing advice itself is very good.

I read the third edition, from 2016, which contains extra chapters on literature and modern Internet technology. This audiobook version also contained some excerpts at the end from essays and short stories to use for practical exercises.

Leave it to Norton Publishing to create a handy guide like this. A truly great addition to any writer's personal shelf, or in combination with another textbook or text.

[Alma · Rating 1 out of 5]

Let me sum up what each page in this 70 page waste of time says: when using information from and outside source, introduce the information, explain the information, and then have a "dialogue" with the information, making sure that you integrate your own ideas as well. I'm so glad I had to read this because I would never have thought all of that would be a good idea! I'm also really glad that the book was extremely repetitive, because otherwise I don't think I could have understood such complex ideas.

On the bright side, at least I like the cover design.

[Rashaan · Rating 2 out of 5]

Informative in terms of getting ideas for pinning down points of view and learning specific terms and phrases for rhetorical modes like comparison/contrast or transitioning between paragraphs, etc--but I'm very wary, very very wary of using templates. Inevitably, templates become too formulaic, and the students end up regurgitating the same terms, phrases, and words without any originality or creativity in wielding our English language.

[A · Rating 1 out of 5]

Could have been a 10 page essay. The basic premise is simple: writing should be written as a response to other writing, rather than as a context-less statement shouted into the ether. They managed to stretch that simple idea into 300 pages.

[Joshua Lister · Rating 3 out of 5]

Basic but in the exceedingly helpful kind of way. I'm sure I will reference this more in the future.

[Noah · Rating 4 out of 5]

“This is a book about canned writing,” I thought as I flipped open the first page. By the time I finished the introduction, however, I realized it is precisely the opposite — a book about how to move from canned writing to sous-chef writing. And yet they promised that they would teach me through templates. Templates?? To learn the basic moves in academic writing?? “These deeper habits of thought cannot be put into practice unless you have a language for expressing them in clear, organized ways,” they promised (2). Well, I’ve now read the book, and they’re right — but only in part. They’re right that good writers work with a mental repertoire of writing moves. And they’re also right that these moves must be named to be understood. But here’s where I think they’re wrong: templates. Ok, I mean the LONG templates. No one in their right mind is going to memorize or catalogue a list of templates and then whip them out in an essay like, “Proponents of X are right to argue that _____. But they exaggerate when they claim that _____.” Instead, what students need is for writing moves to be named. Like how an expert dancer teaches a novice: “You see that footwork right there? That’s called a six-step. And that arm placement? That’s called…” When the moves of writing are named and explained, they are demystified. Don’t get me wrong — that is exactly what Graff and Birkenstein do here, but then they also have all these multi-sentence, content-specific templates that defeat the purpose of pointed naming and explaining. Those longer, wordier templates are at best a waste of time. But those short, sweet, punchy templates (that really resemble naming more than they do “templates”) like “they say / I say” — those are moves I can savvy, appreciate, and, hopefully, emulate. Some might object that those longer templates are really just extensions of the shorter templates, and thus should be just as easy to pick up. While it may be true that they are extensions of the shorter templates, it does not follow that they are easier to understand. And if you’re going to write a book about demystifying writing, then you might as well strip it down to just the basics. That’s what I say.

[Ioana · Rating 5 out of 5]

2006, Literary crutches aren’t the worst thing: learning to listen and write in the age of LOL


I am so grateful for Gerald’s Graff and Cathy’s Birkenstein effort to lay down the rhetorical steps for dialogical writing. This book has opened my eyes to the countless mistakes I was and still am making. An excellent book!



notes:
-other opinions aside your own should be conveyed correctly and in good faith - this means the onnus is on the writer to listen
-don’t assume the reader knows everything. Explain quotes, add metacommentaries (reformulate your explanation with more clarity, demystify, reinforce the point you were making)
-include as many points of view as it is sensible and and allow them to interact with your original thesis
-”John Stuart Mill pointed up the connection when he observed that we do not understand our own ideas until we know what can be said against them.”(Clueless in Academe)
-plant the seed of doubt
-name the beholder of the opposing view
-there is too much of a thing as contrast
-the world is full of passive receivers of knowledge
-instead of retaliation, argument
-be receptive to other perspectives
-ideas should flow from one paragraph to the other; the argumentation should be easy to follow


My former choleric review:

Modern society is founded on the premise that divergence of opinions implies more dialogue than conflict, isn’t it. If that’s the case, why is the simple act of refusing to be like everyone else, oftentimes, a punishable offense? Or is my following perspective simply too pessimistic?


Dialogue? Entire discourses about learning to interact with others have been perorated by expert soliloquists. Length is now frowned upon no matter what. We speak in:
•bullet points.
There can be no “overture”. Skip that. Mention this in a letter to an alien and he’d be perhaps inclined to think we’ve reached some sort of enlightenment while we got rid of the agenda of pesky initiations and Minerva won. We’ve even abbreviated abbreviations (ONS). Thus, the future looks bright for any type of orgasms we look forward to. We’ve finally done it. We’re not conflictual anymore. We’re anesthetized.

Conflict? Gone are the days when ideological wars were sparked between writers of substance, decrepit Mars has long retired in a yoga centre. Instead of Camus vs Sartre we have Franzen vs Oprah’s book club (https://youtu.be/uPCB29a63W4). No Zola’s are rushing in any affairs. To be fair, we have Zizeks, Petersons and other princes of YouTube, as one Jordan Foisy of Vice argues (although nothing in his writing would make you think he’s past 14). I agree there are interesting and even valuable discourses taking place nowadays, but I doubt we can truly look up to people who contemplate divine percepts while selling you mugs or dating advice or whatever the hell else. What I’m trying to say is that everyone is so very unremittingly...in your face. I wonder if debates would take place away from public eyes between our “Youtube lords”. You think they’d bother if it weren’t for the tickets? I don’t know, you tell me. Any type of caxtons are published, as if an intransigent paranoid invisible committee is demanding us to release everything imaginable in order to somehow prove we uphold democratic values. This is just a light variation on Fahrenheit 451 - you see, there is no need to burn all the books -is it better to flood the libraries with anything?

Is there an intellectual need that is more acute than the need to be heard? Even solitude yearns to be understood, and this is why Gerald’s Graff and Cathy’s Birkenstein effort to lay down the rhetorical steps for dialogical writing matters. After all, it’s better to avoid Echo’s faith, who was punished to repeat the last words of others. https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2o...

Do we use writing as a mean to engage in dialogue with others or as another tool for nurturing uncritical thinking? Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert points out about group writing (but applies to other ‘-ings’):The main goal of group writing is to ensure that every sentence satisfies all the objectives of every person in the room. This can be problematic if all the participants have different objectives. You can minimize the impact of different objectives by focusing on the goals that all parties can agree on:
1. Don't convey any information whatsoever. 2. See number one.(The Dilbert Principle) The clear implication is that there’s no new information getting through as long as dissension is avoided with all cost. This is what happens when parents (mostly the new age mothers) tell their kids that in life there are no wins. Maybe it’s a new form of punishment, a successful substitute for the beatings from back in the days?


They say/ I say reminded me that the social predicaments of our times shouldn’t rob us of our opinions. That the true writer isn’t a vehicle for validating the myth of the lone genius, but more similar to the village drunkard, who, depending on his God-given predispositions, either fights or sings with everyone. And the more tame of us are neither loners or drunkards or clowns of that caliber, but animals capable of a more balanced act (unlike this review). Even if “Readers and writers are united in their need for solitude, in the pursuit of substance in a time of ever-increasing evanescence: in their reach inward, via print, for a way out of loneliness.”, that does not mean that “The first thing that reading teaches us is how to be alone.” If anything, that is the last thing I’d like reading to teach me.

[annabeth ☼ · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not the worst textbook I’ve ever read, but it was very elementary at times and felt like I wasn’t really being helped. If you’re just starting out with academic writing, though, I think this would definitely be a good source to turn to. Now that I think about it, I don’t understand why I was introduced to it in college and not high school. Definitely feels more on a high school level, to be honest.

[Haley S · Rating 2 out of 5]

The first portion of the book was really interesting! It gave me some good ideas for how to make my writing more interesting and understandable to all readers.
However, the articles or "readings" section was not as interesting or good, in my opinion.

[Sean · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 Real good stuff. Worth reading for anyone. The best "argumentation" teacher/student guide I've come across so far.

[Emilie]

Decent little book I’ll probably use as a reference to refresh myself while writing in my masters program.

[Audrey Blandford · Rating 1 out of 5]

This was NOT a favorite of mine. I disagree with a lot of the concepts that are introduced in the book. I felt like it wanted me to make my writing stiffer and compartmentalize it. Will not be absorbing anything I disagreed with.

[kk · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read this for class when I completely forgot how to write an annotated bibliography and I still don’t know how to write an annotated bibliography.

[Alicia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wow, I was super impressed at how useful and informative this was without the pretense of “you don’t know how to write so we’ll try to teach you but from our pedestal on high”.

Instead, this one literally said, we know writing is hard but we also know writing can be revised to be better too. Don’t you want to be understood? Here are templates, yes, templates, you’re welcome.

And to this I say thank you. It reinforced beliefs, dispels myths, and generally cares to help with a variety of chapters on whatever you need. I like it’s quick compact size. My only issue is the tissue-paper thin paper that might rip easily when using!

[Michelle · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book, given to me by my dear friend Scott who studied under Gerald Graff, singlehandedly improved my essays. It seems weird to have templates for writing essays, but they gave me better ideas about how to enter conversations in my essays and how to move from one paragraph to the next. I had my students read the whole book and then asked them to have 7 out of the 10 elements in their essays. The only things that I've noticed to be confusing for people is their absolute negativity towards using "I" in essays (so I've figured out ways to be personal without using "I" or "me" or whatever else is taboo in a lot of academic writing), and the fact that people don't know how to fit the ten elements neatly into the five-paragraph essay because the book doesn't really go over essay organization.

Don't get me wrong, the five-paragraph essay form has been great in getting a lot of people to learn how to write essays. But somewhere after the first year of writing them, it's time to move on and you just have to see how to really organize essays, five paragraphs or 2,000 paragraphs. So I would at least add to this book my advice that you should write your introduction and your conclusion last. Because you never really know what's going to happen in your writing until you're done. And even when you are writing the introduction and conclusion, sometimes you'll discover something new that needs to be incorporated into the body. So I guess there's one more thing--do NOT ever come up with some new ideas in your conclusion. A conclusion should really be called a "summary" in my opinion.

Wow, can you tell I have a lot of thoughts on this? Email me if you want help with your essay. Ha.

[Jørgen Espolin Johnson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am not particular religious. Indeed, I believe that the world would, in total, be better off without it. Don't get me wrong, religious people can do tremendous amount of good in the world. But these are the people, not the religious dogmas behind them. If it were up to me, then, religion would be replaced.

Replaced, that is, with the holiness of They Say/ I Say. If I were to start a religion, this book would be the holy text and Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein would be the prophets. The concepts of They say/ I say would be the gods; both two and one at the same time- a bit similar to Yin/Yang, God/Jesus, or taco and mango.

Back to being a bit serious, this book has helped me tremendously. As a psychology student, I read and write a lot. They Say/ I Say has helped me not only to write my own essays, but also to understand how what I read is built up (in all areas, from social psychology to neuroscience). This skill is also something I've found useful in other non-academic areas, such as understanding how arguments are built up in debates.

To conclude, this book is the book equivalent of a toolbox. As with toolboxes, one never quite finished with it.

EDIT: I've noticed in other reviews that people complain about how the templates are too strict, surpressing rather than enhancing thought. How I see them, however, they are suggestions or guidelines. One does not have to follow them, but they can be useful to base one's writing in. I often find myself starting with a template, only to change the formulation as the argument continues.

[MB (What she read) · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars.
Assigned textbook for class. This book is made up of about 1/3 teaching material and 2/3 essays, articles, speeches, etc. intended for reading/discussions/class assignments. Overall, I thought it did a pretty good job. The "They Say/I Say" part was clear and easily understood. Good examples were provided. The readings were divided into five main themes, and were pretty interesting. Some were new to me, and some familiar. (Some of the readings seemed a teensy bit dated now, but not too bad.)

Thoughts while reading: As far as a textbook goes, this one contains good information in an easy-to-understand and succinct form. However, I sure am noticing a lot of typos, and missing citations and/or attributions. Needs more proofing??? (Authors, get out the red pencil.)