Academic writing and
publishing workshop
Barbara Kamler
Pat Thomson
Our goals for the workshop
•
The workshop aims to:
– develop a conceptual framework for
academic writing and publishing
– explore the difficulties for early career
researchers of assuming an authoritative
and critical stance
– identify common writing problems in
abstracts and journal articles
– develop a publishing plan
Theoretical framework
• Research as writing
• Scholarly writing as text
work/identity work
• Scholarly writing as discursive
social practice
Research as writing
• Researchers write all the time – writing is the
means through which we work on and work out
our ideas. Research is writing (Richardson)
• We don’t just ‘write up’ – we have not found a
transparent truth which we then just put into
words
• Writing is a representation – we make choices,
and what we choose is a situated approximation
• Writing produces a text – it can be read in
multiple ways, including by the ‘writer’. Writing
along the way can thus assist reflexivity
• But, as writers, we can make our texts more
’readerly or writerly’
Taking on a scholarly identity
• There are two sides to writing a journal article
– Knowing the genres, conventions and textual practices, the text
work
– Assuming an ‘expert’ stance, the identity work
• The practices of writing produce a representation of the scholar and
her scholarly practice
• The struggle with scholarly writing is linked to the difficulty of
negotiating text work and identity work simultaneously – while at the
same time explicating and positioning the research
• The challenge is to learn to write with authority for and in a field of
expert others who judge and evaluate that writing
• The journal is a site where the e c researcher enters occupied
territory. She must define herself and her work in relation to others
who are already in the field
Becoming a scholar
•
•
•
•
Holland and colleagues ( 1998) argue that identity formation occurs in a
discourse community of practice - a ‘figured world’. They say “The self is a
position from which meaning is made, a position that is ‘addressed’ by and
‘answers’ others and the ‘world’ ( the physical and cultural environment). In
answering ( which is the stuff of existence) the self ‘authors’ the world including itself and others” (p.173)
They argue that identity formation goes through four ‘authoring’ stages:
– Identity devaluation, in which a new understanding of self
develops at the expense of an old one
– Personalisation of the identity, through identification with key
figures
– Emotional attachment to the new identity
– Identity reconstitution, through exorcising negative practices
This cycle is continuous. Identity/ies is/are always in formation
Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D. and Cain, C (1998) Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge,
Mass: Harvard University Press
Identity struggles: Crowded by the literature
• According to Belsey (2002:57), Jaques Lacan reinterpreted
Freud in the light of Levi-Strauss and Saussure- 'to delineate a
subject was itself the location of a difference'. Belsey goes on to
explain that, for Lacan, the human being is 'an organism in
culture'. According to Lacan, speech was central to psychoanalytic practice. He argued that during the first two months of
life a child's emergent sense of self was formed in relation
subjects, capable of signifying. Lacan calls this the 'Otherness
of language'. 'The big other', states Belsey, 'is there before we
are, exists outside us and does not belong to us'. The early
writing of Barthes, says Norris (1982:8), was aimed at a fullscale science of the text, modelled on the linguistics of
Saussure and the structural anthropology of Levi-Strauss. In
'Elements of Semiology' (1967), Barthes takes the view of
structuralism as a kind of 'mastercode' capable of providing
higher- level understanding.
Crowded by the literature
• We characterise Vera’s text as ‘crowded’ by the
literature (Becker 1986:149). She is traversing
complex theoretical terrain, but seems to be
‘drowning’ in the detail. She stands as an outsider,
piling up layers of ‘who said what about what’ as a
strategy for highlighting key theoretical ideas.
• ‘According to Belsey (2002:p57), Jaques Lacan
reinterpreted Freud in the light of Levi-Strauss and
Saussure…; The early writing of Barthes, says
Norris; Culler states that Barthes…
• But how do these ideas inform her study? And are
any ideas more important than others?
Identity struggles: He said, she said
• Mortimore (1998) also contributes to the school
effectiveness research agenda. He explains that school
effectiveness researchers aim to ascertain whether differential
resources, processes and organizational differences affect
student performance and if so, how? He is also of the view
that school effectiveness researchers seek reliable and
appropriate ways to measure school quality. Hopkins (2001)
suggests that one of the earliest studies that were done
compared the effectiveness of some secondary schools on a
range of student outcome measures. Reynolds and
Cuttance (1992) also point out that the effective schools
research entitled ‘Fifteen Thousand Hours” characterised
school efficiency factors as varied in the degree of academic
emphasis, teacher’s action in lessons, the availability of
resources, rewards... They emphasize that effective school
researchers claim that there are significant differences
between schools on a number of different student outcomes
after full account has been taken of pupil’s previous learning
history and family background. Hargreaves and Hopkins
(1991) also endorse this view by stating…
• We characterise Geraldine’s text as ‘he said,
she said.’ Every sentence begins by naming the
researcher followed by a fairly neutral verb, eg
‘Mortimer also contributes’, ‘Hopkins suggests’,
‘Reynolds and Cuttance also point out’,
‘Hargreaves and Hopkins also endorse.’
• Syntactically, the lack of connection between
sentences makes this more like a list, a
summary of ideas. The writer piles up one study
after another, but there is no so what? There is
NO evaluative stance.
Identity struggles: Standing outside the
field as novice
(1) Deal and Peterson (1994) argue very succinctly
that leadership itself is a paradox as it involves
working with so many participants. I could not
agree more when I consider leadership in
inclusive schools.
(2) To help us explore this concept a little further, I
particularly like the following quotation:
‘Man’s capacity for justice makes democracy
possible, but man’s inclination to injustice
makes democracy necessary’ (Niebuhr, 1994).
• Here the writing ends
up sounding
somewhat naïve. It
constructs a novice
researcher, writing
about her experience
and preferences as an
individual, rather than
as a participant in a
scholarly community
Identity struggles: Too much
‘hands on hips’
• In his discussion of self-writing, Foucault
agrees with me when he says: ‘These
practices are nevertheless not something
that the individual invents by himself. They
are patterns that he finds in his culture and
which are proposed, suggested and imposed
on him by his culture, his society and his
social group.’ (Foucault 1998:11)
• The me suggests that Foucault, were he alive, is
not only reading the doctoral candidate’s work,
but is confirming its worth. It is fairly humorous
for us to think of Foucault agreeing with Charles,
but not for Charles.
• This is not self-aggrandisement, but rather
Charles asserting his authority, without knowing
how to manage his position.
• Such textual overconfidence skews power
relations to the extreme and is just as
problematic for creating a credible doctoral text
as excessive diffidence.
• In charge of the literature: taking ‘a hands- on-hips’
stance and handling complex ideas with facility
•
•
The question of whether senior bureaucrats play an active role in policy development
or if their influence is more limited – even an impediment to the will of elected
ministers, is contested. There seems to be a pervasive view that ministers set the
policy agenda of government with the bureaucracy represented as a ‘necessary evil’
for enacting policy. Meanwhile, there is literature that positions the bureaucracy
more favourably, even suggesting a more authoritative role in policy development.
But, there appears to be no concurrence on the extent of involvement. While many
scholars agree that bureaucrats, either actively or tacitly, do play an important role in
policy development, it is safe to say that this does not represent the consensus
view. (Levin, 2002; Stone, 2002; Birkland, 2001; Lynn, 1996; Majone, 1989;
Goodsell,1985).
The casting of politicians as policy leader assumes that a public servant, senior or
otherwise is a ‘servant’ to the public, but more to the point, a servant to the minister.
Some see senior public servants as instruments of political processes but with a
severely limited role in policy formulation (Wilson, 1999). This theoretical
orientation is consistent with new corporate management ideologies that are
believed to foster a stronger separation between public administration and politics
but, as I will argue, do more to motivate bureaucrats to seek a more direct role in
government policy. As Cohn (1997) suggests, under such arrangements ministers
rely on deputies and other senior administrators to provide direction and advice on
policy, but the actual decisions are made at a political level. In framing policy
development in this way, there is some recognition of the role of the permanent public
service, to be sure, but it is one of implementation, stopping short of policy
formulation.
• We characterise Elizabeth’s’ text as ‘in charge of the
literatures.’ While she highlights what other scholars
have said, she frames her discussion as a debate –a set
of ideas in competition with one another. This allows her
to make ideas central – rather than other researchers –
and to take the lead in guiding the reader through the
different positions in the field. She uses evaluative
language to sort and clarify positions: ‘There seems
to be a pervasive view; ‘there is literature that positions
the bureaucracy more favourably’; ‘there appears to be
no concurrence.’ She also makes links to broader
discourses: ‘This theoretical orientation is consistent
with new corporate management ideologies...’ and to
her own argument: ‘...as I will argue, do more to
motivate bureaucrats to seek a more direct role in
government policy.’
Identity/ies are always formed in specific
discursive communities of practice
Fairclough’s 3 dimensional model of discourse
Process of production and
interpretation
Text
Layer 1
Discourse practice
Layer 2
Sociocultural practice
Layer 3
break
Outline of segment 2
• Abstracts as academic identity work
• How to write an effective abstract:
addressing the so what/now what?
• Questions to guide abstract writing
• Strategy: From conference papers to
articles or articles to conference papers?
Writing abstracts (TINY TEXTS)
• Writing abstracts for academic journals
is not just a tiresome necessity of
academic life, BUT an excellent way to
learn how to write persuasively.
• Abstracts highlight issues of authority
and identity and are a rich site for
textwork/identity work.
• We call abstracts ‘tiny’ texts because
they compress the rhetorical act of
arguing into a small textual space BUT
they are ‘large’ in the pedagogical
work they can accomplish.
•
Kamler, B. & Thomson, P. (2006) Helping
doctoral students write: Pedagogies for
supervision, p. 85-86.
• There is no set formula for writing abstracts. However, we suggest
(Kamler & Thomson, 2004) there is an informal and not necessarily
effective set of abstract formulae out in the field. While some
journals and conferences specify a formula, many don’t. In some
fields there is a de facto set formula for abstracts and what writers
do is a kind of fill-in-the-blanks in a relatively unthinking way (this is
a layer 3 convention).
• We have come up with a strategy to accomplish the text
work/identity work of abstract writing that is not blindly formulaic!
• We analyse abstracts in order to arrive at three categories of moves.
Rubric for analysing abstracts
• the first line of each abstract
• whether the abstract was a summary report or an
argument or some kind of blend
• how the researcher was represented in the text
• how the research was located (or not) in a wider field
of scholarship, practice, debates
•
Kamler, B. & Thomson, P. (2004) Driven to abstraction: Doctoral
supervision and writing pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education, 9
(2) 195-209.
The representation of the researcher as ‘this
article’ or ‘this paper’
• This article focuses on secondary school departments
and argues that the current approaches to school
improvement do not adequately reflect or incorporate the
department level. Drawing upon empirical evidence from
two evaluative studies, the article highlights the
processes that contribute to improved departmental
performance and subsequently, to school and classroom
improvement. The article concludes by suggesting that
the department is an important 'missing link' in school
improvement theory and practice. (British Educational
Research Journal, Harris 2001)
The absence of the researcher through the
passive verb form
A new theory of school effectiveness and improvement is outlined,
based on the master concepts of intellectual capital, social capital
and leverage, linked with the conventional concept of institutional
outputs. Each master concept is defined in terms of two subsidiary
concepts. Twelve specifically educational concepts are set within
this framework to provide the theory. It is proposed that, through a
simplified model, the range and fertility of the theory can be
exemplified and tested in three specific cases-the changing nature
of school effectiveness and improvement in knowledge economies,
citizenship education and teacher effectiveness. (British Educational
Research Journal, Hargreaves 2001)
The representation of the
researcher as ‘I’
•
Participatory research methods are often assumed to alter the roles,
relationships and responsibilities of researchers and participants in research
projects reframing research as collaborative inquiry. In my own research on
urban schooling, whenever possible, I have attempted to craft research projects
with and for the participants in the project, rather than conducting research on
them. For instance, in order to document urban adolescents’ perspectives on
their schooling, I asked high school students to join research projects as coresearchers. I learned that the core principles of participatory research become
complicated and, at times, problematic when put into practice with adolescents.
In this article, I describe three of the collaborative relationships I developed with
high school students in a single research project. I use this work with
adolescents to call for the reconsideration of conventional notions of
collaboration, participation, action and representation in participatory research.
(Australian Journal of Educational Research, Schultz 2001)
The abstract as identity work:
Alice (1)
In this article I argue that careful analysis of
very young children’s use of ICT and other
technologies suggests that both the
dominance of print in emergent literacy
education, and school expectations of the
literacy achievements of children prior to
formal schooling, may require review.
The abstract as identity work:
Alice (2)
In this paper I explore how three young boys in the
period of pre-school transition use ICT and other
technologies. I suggest that neither the dominance of
print in emergent literacy education, nor school
expectations of the literacy achievements of children
prior to formal schooling, attend to the versatility with
literacy technologies demonstrated by these very young
children and that this failure could inhibit their continuing
literacy development both in ICTs and print.
The abstract as identity work:
Alice (3)
Recent investigations of early and emergent literacy
seriously underestimate young children’s capacity to
use ICTs and other technologies in becoming literate,
and print continues to be privileged as the dominant
literacy for young children. In this article I examine how
three young boys used ICT in the period of pre-school
transition and highlight the complexity of their
multimodal reading and writing practices. I argue that
unless schools attend to young children’s versatility with
literacy technologies, this failure could inhibit their
continuing literacy development both in ICTs and print.
Revising abstracts: Kirsten draft 1
This study examines the broader contexts shaping homework, the
nature and underlying purposes of tasks children bring from school
for completion at home, the impact of homework on families, and the
kinds of parental labour performed in homes where homework is
completed. This paper presents the findings of a study which
reconceptualizes homework as a ‘field of practice’ and uses feminist
ethnographic research methodology to develop a Bourdieuian
analysis of parental management of homework across
socioeconomically diverse communities.
Revising abstracts: Kirsten draft 2
This paper reports on a feminist, ethnographic study of homework
which examines the nature and purposes of the homework tasks
children complete at home, the impact of homework on families,
and the kinds of parental labour performed. It reconceptualizes
homework as a ‘field of practice’ and develops a Bourdieuian
analysis of parental management of homework across three
socioeconomically diverse communities. The paper argues that the
work of the home is increasingly complex and that the labour
performed by parents is misunderstood and devalued in policies
which shape homework.
Abstract: McLeod AARE 2003
Shaping the self through psychotherapeutic means: gender and
cross-generational perspectives
This paper explores psychotherapeutic themes and modes of
thought emerging in interviews with mothers and daughters
participating in a cross-generational study of young women ‘on the
margins’. The focus of the discussion is two-fold. First it discusses
current theoretical debates concerning the ascendancy of
psychotherapeutic modes of constituting the self, and argues that
we require closer attention to the gendered and differentiated ways
in which these are registered and articulated. Second, through
cross-generational comparisons, it considers the different, and
common, ways in which three mother and daughter pairs draw upon
a repertoire of psychotherapeutic discourses to represent their
relation to schooling, self, family, and work. It concludes with some
speculative observations about the significance of attending to the
psychotherapeutic turn for understanding contemporary femininity.
Julie’s working formula
• Locate: specific paper in relation to larger
project/debates/issues
• Colonise: identify two (or three) particular
questions/issues/kinds of problems that the
paper will take forward/ explore/examine
• Direct: Open out the argument, analysis,
speculations.. ‘Overall’,’ In particular’…..
How did that work?
LOCATE
This paper explores psychotherapeutic themes ___.emerging in
interviews______in a cross-generational study.
COLONISE
The focus __is two-fold. First it discusses _____and argues that
we require ______. Second, through cross-generational
comparisons________[substantive, methodological and
theoretical focus established]
DIRECT
It concludes with some speculative observations about the
significance of attending to the psychotherapeutic turn for
understanding contemporary femininity.
Our reworking formula
• We suggest that the
journal abstract
generally consists of
three moves which we
can represent as:
•
Locate
•
Focus
•
Argue
Three moves
• Locate: specific paper in relation to larger
project/debates/issues
• Focus: identify the particular
questions/issues/kinds of problems that the
paper will explore/examine
• Argue: Open out the argument, analysis,
speculations.. ‘and indicate a point of view
Example 1
LOCATE: The fact that children growing up in poverty are likely to
be in the lower ranges of achievement on standardized literacy
tests is not a new phenomenon. Internationally there are a myriad
of intervention and remedial programs designed to address this
problem with a range of effects. Frequently, sustainable reforms
are curtailed by deficit views of families and children growing up
in poverty.
• FOCUS:This article describes an ongoing research study entitled,
Teachers Investigate Unequal Literacy Outcomes: CrossGenerational Perspectives, which made teacher researchers
central in examining this long-standing dilemma. It outlines the
research design and rationale and examines how two early
career teachers worked their ways out of deficit analyses of the
children they were most worried about.
• ARGUE: It argues that disrupting deficit discourses and redesigning new pedagogical repertoires to reconnect with
children’s lifeworlds is a long-term project that can best be
achieved in reciprocal research relationships with teachers.
From Comber, B. and Kamler, B. (2004) Getting out of deficit: Pedagogies of
reconnection. Teaching Education 15 (3), 293-310.
Example 2
LOCATE: Bullying is a serious problem in schools.
• FOCUS:This paper reports on a project in which the authors
worked with a group of secondary students in an innovative
school in the north of England to research issues of bullying and
safety. The student researchers used photographs to stimulate
conversations with focus groups of their peers. The data showed
that while there was little serious bullying in the school, there was
an everyday practice of name-calling, isolation, and physical
hassling associated with the formation and maintenance of a
hierarchy of sub-cultural groupings in the school.
• ARGUE: The students’ research not only challenges the notion
of bullying as necessarily involving a perpetrator and victim, but
also offers a lens through which to examine the imbrication of
educational differentiation via setting, testing and choice with
youth identification practices. It is suggested that this project also
has implications for the ways in which one understands and
works for inclusion.
From Thomson P and Gunter H ( 2008.) Researching bullying with students: a
lens on everyday life in an ‘innovative school’. International Journal of Inclusive
Education 12 (2) 185-200.
These two examples suggest that what goes in each of the three
moves varies in length and in complexity. The first example is situated
in a field where there is considerable debate and the authors need to
situate their position very clearly. In contrast, the second addresses a
problem that is well known and needs little further explanation. The two
examples also differ in the way that they argue. The first makes one
very strong point. The second draws three conclusions – a challenge to
existing thinking, a new lens on the problem and a potential implication
for a more general issue, that of inclusion.
We are offering categories of moves, not recipes for how much to say
about what. This depends on the topic, the research and the argument.
(Kamler & Thomson 2009)
Questions to guide the analysis
of your abstract
•
•
What’s the research problem being addressed?
How well is the work located in its field of scholarship or in relation to
broader educational issues?
– To what extent does the abstract locate your contribution in relation to wider
debates or concerns of the field?
– Can this location be made clearer?
•
Where is the researcher standing in relation to this problem?
– How have you represented yourself as scholar? Do you sound expert enough?
•
•
Has the abstract flagged up the kind of research that was undertaken and
the nature of the evidence offered?
What is the argument?
– Is there an argument being offered or a significance being highlighted? If not,
what is it? If so, can it be made stronger?
•
Is so-what/now what question addressed?
– Have you identified the significance of the approach, and any implications for
further research, policy or practice?
– Have you convinced the reader that they need to read this article?
From abstract to article
• What do I want the audience to remember about my research?
• What are the main points/topics/issues that matter most?
• What have I added to knowledge - have I got an ‘angle’ as well as
evidence?
• How can I best ‘chunk’ or structure my article to assist with the
above
Working from the abstract to devise a structure - this can become the
map of the paper
• What do I need to include?
• Does the abstract provide the ordering of the article - if not rewrite
the abstract so that it does…
LOCATE: Bullying is a serious problem in
schools.
FOCUS:This paper reports on a project in which
the authors worked with a group of
secondary students in an innovative school
in the north of England to research issues of
bullying and safety. The student researchers
used photographs to stimulate
conversations with focus groups of their
peers. The data showed that while there
was little serious bullying in the school, there
was an everyday practice of name-calling,
isolation, and physical hassling associated
with the formation and maintenance of a
hierarchy of sub-cultural groupings in the
school.
ARGUE: The students’ research not only
challenges the notion of bullying as
necessarily involving a perpetrator and
victim, but also offers a lens through which
to examine the imbrication of educational
differentiation via setting, testing and choice
with youth identification practices. It is
suggested that this project also has
implications for the ways in which one
understands and works for inclusion.
•
Introduction in current policy context (500
words)
•
•
•
LARGEST SECTION OF ARTICLE
Description of the site of study ( 500 words)
Account of methodology - trigger
photographs located in the visual research
literatures (1000 words)
Report of major findings - description of
thematised findings moving to analysis
(2,000 words)
Theorisation of inclusion, reference to
broader literatures on school sorting and
selecting ( 1,000 words)
•
•
Argument about the significance of the findings,
viz. disjuncture with prevailing policy
approach
Elaboration of some implications for research
and practice ( 1500 words)
Perils and Pitfalls
• Temptation to compress all the ‘thesis’ or research
report into one article
• Saying ‘everything’, focussing on ‘nothing’
• Not guiding the reader
• Not locating the contribution: for a particular audience, in
relation to wider debates, the specific argument of this
article
• Sounding like a newbie rather than an equal
• Does not adequately deal with the methodology ( see
Yates)
• Not significant - too local, done a lot, doesn’t add
anything ( no ‘angle’)
Discursive shifts in converting
conference papers to articles
Should we be encouraged to write the article first
and then prepare the conference paper OR write
the conference paper first and then develop the
article?
Discursive shifts in converting
conference papers
• Present/absent, familiar/unfamiliar, comfortable/scary
audience
• Implicit/explicit attention to the significance of the work:
‘so what’?
• Careful location of the work in wider debates and
contexts of the field
• Genre shift from narrative, recount or description
(powerpoint slides) to argument
• Negotiating a scholarly identity on paper
• Attending to the politics/epistemology and style of the
journal
The writing task
•
To develop a publication plan for the 2008-09 academic year.
Usually 3-4 articles, for the purposes of the workshop ONLY 2
articles
•
Research the journals: editorial board, types of articles, stance
epistemologically and writing style, ISI status
•
Plan all written work in relation to possible conference
presentations. Articles written first, then conference papers
•
What research, networking, workload re-structuring needs to be
done to achieve plan? What is a reasonable time line?
Publication plan
• Title of article
• Targeted Journal
• Timeline
• Drafting
• Feedback from others
• Submission
• Possible relationship to
conference
• Abstract (100 - 150 words)
• Keywords
Sharing publication plans: Groups
•
•
•
•
Why have you chosen these journals for
representing your work?
What other options do you have if the article is
rejected?
What do the articles offer that is significant or
distinctive? How do you answer the so what
question?
What do you particularly like about the
argument(s) you are offering?
Sharing publication plans
•
Tell the whole group about the first article
you will be working on:
– Title
– Target journal
– Key argument
Pedagogic strategy :
Standing in the shoes of an
authoritative writer - adopting
their discursive stance
Sentence skeleton (Dunsmire)
From Dunsmire, P. (1997). Naturalizing the future in factual discourse: A critical linguistic analysis of
a projected event. Written Communication, 14(2), 221-64.
The study builds on and contributes to work in
__________________________________________________________
Although studies in __________________________________ have examined
_________________________________, there has not been an extended
study of _________________________________________________.
As such, this study provides additional insight into
________________________________________________________.
The analytic focus on _______________________________ enables another
contribution.
This study analyzes
_________________________________________________________.
Although numerous studies (
) have
identified
__________________________________________________________
little analytic attention has been paid to
___________________________________________.I address this issue
by _______________________________________________________.
Sentence skeleton (Creighton)
From Creighton, B. (2000). One hundred years of the conciliation and arbitration power: A province
lost? Melbourne University Law Review, 24, 839-865.
As Australia enters _______________________________, there are
many who would argue
__________________________________________. Others
would go further and
say__________________________________________________
________________.
The purpose of this article is to analyse the manner in which
_____________________________________________________
and to consider
____________________________________________________.
This is done by reference to four key elements in
____________________________________________________.
Sentence skeleton (Lavie)
From Lavie,J (2006).Academic discourse on school-based teacher collaboration: Revisiting the
arguments, Educational Administration Quarterly, 42 (5), 773-805.
•
•
•
•
•
In this article, I discuss the main arguments that deal with the issue of
_________________. In distinguishing between ________________ it is my
purpose to highlight the ______________________________________by
pointing to
___________________________________________________________.
Besides providing a map of the___________________________________, I
assess the extent to which these
____________________________________________lay a groundwork for
____________________________________________________.
The article is structured as follows. After giving an overview of the scope of
the__________________________________________, I review the
particular___________________________________________________.
Next, I provide a summary of________________________________.
Finally, in the last two sections, I consider several implications derived
from______________________________________________________________
_______and argue that____________________________________.