Research Methods – ENC 3266 – University of South Florida
Kenneth Bruffee (1984), drawing on philosopher Michael Oakeshott’s (1962) concept of "the conversation of mankind," now “humankind", likens learning the languages of academic and professional research to being a traveler dropped into a foreign land, surrounded by unfamiliar dialects and customs. In this framework, the dialects represent the distinct ways scholars and professionals speak, reason, and collaborate, while the customs reflect the epistemologies that guide their work. For both Oakeshott and Bruffee, knowledge is not produced in isolation but created and tested through dialogue — an ongoing exchange among researchers, past and present, whose studies, theories, and critiques form the archival record of human inquiry.
To learn a discipline, then, is not merely to master its vocabulary but to join a community that shares habits of mind, standards of evidence, and ways of justifying belief.
Research communities such as PTC are not monolithic. It's true to say, for example, that the work of scientists is largely shaped by positivism; the humanities, hermeneutics. Yet in the real world, in daily practice, researchers mix different methodological traditions. Even so, understanding the underpinnings of these research traditions, as you will see as you analyze research in this course, is critical to assessing the authority of a knowledge claim. Research communities such as PTC are not monolithic. The work of scientists is largely shaped by positivism; the humanities, hermeneutics. Yet in the real world, in daily practice, researchers mix different methodological traditions. Understanding the underpinnings of these research traditions, as you will find when you analyze research in this course, is critical to assessing the authority of a knowledge claim. This is especially vivid in PTC: because the field draws on humanistic, social scientific, and technical traditions, its researchers operate from different — and sometimes competing — assumptions about what counts as evidence and what research is ultimately for. This course helps students enter that conversation equipped not just to read and cite PTC scholarship, but to understand why researchers make the methodological choices they do, and what those choices reveal about the values embedded in the research itself.
Canvas is the course bible. The Modules page is where you will always find the current course schedule, deadlines, and announcements. If a deadline changes, it changes there first and nowhere else. The official Course Syllabus is also in Canvas. When in doubt, Canvas wins.
First-Day Attendance Assignment — Complete the First-Day Attendance Discussion in Canvas before the deadline. Per USF policy, you must complete this assignment to remain enrolled in the course.
The course journey
Four modules. Four research questions. One ongoing argument about what it means to read, write, and reason as a researcher.
|
Module 1
Listen
Analyze how PTC journals construct authority through rhetoric, style, design, and discourse conventions
|
Assessing Authority: Rhetorical and Genre Analysis of PTC Research Journals
How do PTC journals construct credibility, shape knowledge, and reflect the values of the research community?
Go to Module 1 →
|
|
Module 2
Trace
Learn how literature reviews map what is known, how citations construct participation, and how synthesis builds an argument
|
Critiquing Literature Reviews and Citation Practices in Research
How do researchers use literature reviews and citations to build credibility, trace the evolution of ideas, and position their work within scholarly conversations?
Go to Module 2 →
|
|
Module 3
Map
Visualize how the five communities differ — not just in methods, but in what they believe about knowledge, evidence, truth, and value
|
Mapping Ways of Knowing Across Research Communities
How do Creatives, Designers, Interpreters, Scientists, and Scholars differ in their ontological, epistemological, and axiological assumptions — and what does that mean for how they conduct research?
Go to Module 3 →
|
|
Module 4
Speak
Design an original study, situate it in a scholarly conversation, and pitch it to a real audience
|
Research Proposal
How do you design a study that is grounded in the epistemological assumptions of your chosen community, justified by prior research, and persuasive to a real audience?
Go to Module 4 →
|
New to the course?
Research Methods — Introduction to the Course
Why this course matters, how it’s structured, and what you’ll be able to do by the end. Start here before Module 1.
All Course Assignments
Every deliverable across all four modules, in order. Use this as your master checklist for the semester.
References
Bruffee, K. A. (1984). Collaborative learning and the "conversation of mankind." College English, 46(7), 635–652. https://doi.org/10.2307/376924
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Sage.
Miller, C. R. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70(2), 151–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638409383686
North, S. M. (1987). The making of knowledge in composition: Portrait of an emerging field. Boynton/Cook.
Oakeshott, M. (1962). Rationalism in politics and other essays. Basic Books.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
