논거 작성, Integrating Evidence in Writing
· 약 3분
논거 작성 중요성
- 내 주장은 문헌·연구·전문가의 근거 위에 세워져야 함
- ‘나만의 의견’이 아니라 evidence-based writing이 필수
- 리서치 스킬·비판적 사고·연결 능력을 평가
논거 통합 예시
In order to transform ourselves, we need to transform our assumptions. Through this project, all stakeholders were forced to confront their mental models (assumptions about self, others and “how the world works” – see Senge, 1995 and Kim,1993) about psychiatric patients and psychiatric disorders. Through exposure to such patients on a regular basis, all came to question their tacit fears and prejudices with respect to this phenomenon and, through collective engagement with it” (2007,p.200).
- 특정 원칙(leadership principle) 명확히 제시
- 본인 연구/사례와 연결
- 관련 논문 인용
- 실제 사례·프로젝트 결과로 확장
논거 활용법
- 직접 인용(quotation): 원문 그대로, 따옴표+출처 (전체 과제의 10% 이하 권장)
- 패러프레이즈(paraphrase): 아이디어를 내 말로 바꿔 표현
- 요약(summarize): 핵심만 간결하게 정리
인용 구조
Author-prominent
저자중심
- Author/year upfront: Goldsmith (2013, p.22) argues that as writing is not only a necessary attribute for engineering practice, but also a key element of learning and a means of clarifying one’s thinking and of exploring ideas, its development needs to be both acknowledged and made visible in the engineering curriculum.
- Author/year sandwich: Goldsmith identifies the lack of visibility of writing in the engineering curriculum as a key concern for engineering educators (2013, p.24).
Information-prominent
정보중심
- The current delivery of the engineering curriculum in the majority of Australian universities reflects a positivist epistemology (Radcliffe, 2006).
Claim – Evidence – Comment 구조
- Claim
- There is abundant evidence and research that points to how much writing engineers, both practising engineers and engineering academics, actually do as part of their work.
- Including evidence
- Winsor (1990) makes the point that writing is viewed as part of an engineer’s job, but not part of engineering (p.58). However, despite the perception that engineers have of themselves as people who work with objects, “writing is what engineers do” (p.68).
- Comment
- This point illustrates an essential conflict in how engineers see their work and may explain why writing is not seen as integral to the engineering curriculum.
- 근거(문헌/데이터) 인용 후 내 해설(코멘트) 반드시 추가
- 단순 인용/요약/패러프레이즈만 쓰면 감점, 내 논지와의 연결이 필수
Acknowledging verbs
아래 동사표를 활용해서, ‘사실 단순 전달’ ‘주장/강조’ ‘평가/비판’ 뉘앙스 표현
| 보고·묘사 | 주장·강조 | 평가·동의 | 비판·반박 |
|---|---|---|---|
| states | asserts | agrees | disagrees |
| points out | claims | justifies | contests |
| notes | argues | affirms | disputes |
| remarks | contends | clarifies | rejects |
| describes | maintains | supports | counters |
| believes | demonstrates | finds/found | challenges |
| adds | suggests | confirms | elaborates |
| reports | implies | indicates | illustrates |
| questions | theorizes | puts forward | counters |
| clarifies | offers | reasons |
- 동사 선택에 따라 정보가 사실인지, 주장/의견/이론/비판인지 의미가 달라짐
- 다양한 acknowledging verbs를 활용해 논거와 비판적 사고력을 드러내자
결론
내 주장은 문헌·데이터·전문가 근거에 세우고, 근거 인용 뒤에는 반드시 내 생각/코멘트로 마무리
- claim(주장)-evidence(근거)-comment(코멘트) 구조를 항상 의식
- 인용/패러프레이즈/요약 방식 혼합
- 인용은 반드시 Harvard 스타일로
- 인용 뒤 해설/연결문(코멘트) 반드시 포함