Crafting a Position Statement

Last Modified 30 September  2005

Introduction to Position Statement Development

Identification of a usable topic or position statement often  bogs research and writing down until well into the quarter. Early in the process you worked on topic discovery. This work is quite general and includes much exploratory reading in topic areas of interest. You have identified a paper topic but may not have developed a position you wish to present. (You may have heard the word thesis as opposed to position, but I prefer the word position because the word thesis is often associated with a very long paper written by a graduate student at the end of two years of research.) A position is a point of view or idea which you will convince the reader is true through your paper. A topic or topic area is the subject-mater area that contains your position.  "A well-written ...position expresses an idea that can be adequately explained or defended within the limitations the writer has accepted" (Bruffee, 1980, p. 90). (The limitations are a six- to eight-page paper based on the primary literature.) A good position statement is difficult to write. You may have to rewrite it many times before it is useful, but time spent on the position statement early in the process will ultimately save you time later. With a good position statement in hand you will clearly know the point of your paper before you start writing.

There are several problems writers have with position statements (Bruffee, 1980). One is wordiness. If the position statement is too long, the reader may get lost and not know what the point is. For example, compare the following: Which is most clear? Which is most succinct?

  1. The Bagnold equation provides the best estimate of bed-load-transport quantities in high gradient streams.
  2. Several bed-load-transport equations have been used to estimate transport quantities, but few work, and the best is probably the Bagnold equation except when gradients exceed 10 percent and particle sizes exceed 90 cm.
A second problem is bifurcation. This means that the position statement contains more than one argument. Bifurcation is a particularly acute problem with short papers such as the one assigned for this course. The case above is again an example. The second statement above appears to diverge into several topics. Which of the following is the writer really exploring?
  1. There are several equations (really a descriptive paper rather than a persuasive one).
  2. Few equations work.
  3. The Bagnold equation is best.
  4. The Bagnold equation has limited use in gravel-bed rivers.
This example is of course severe. A position statement for a short paper such as yours should clearly address one central idea. There is not sufficient space to develop more.

A third problem is argument description. The position statement should identify what the point is rather than describe how the paper will develop the argument. The second wordy example above describes how the paper will develop rather than stating the point. If the reader knows clearly what the point is, following the argument should be easy as long as the argument is developed logically with a clear thread. Generally description of the outline of the paper is unnecessary. A clear, short, unidirectional, nondescriptive position statement focuses the writers attention on the task and draws the reader to the point the writer wishes to make.

If you do a good job of writing your position statement, the final product may appear deceptively simple. The first position above is really a very difficult one to write about because there is substantial disagreement in the literature regarding the best formula. While on the surface this position seems trite, in reality the issues are complex and the "correct" position is anything but clear. This is fertile ground for a scientific opinion backed up with facts -- your position.

The process of position development is iterative and cumulative. You should read book chapters, think about interesting ideas, read discussion and reply articles, and survey the secondary scientific literature (Discover, New Scientist, Science News, Scientific American), and brain storm some ideas with your peers to generate a topic area. You won't use the secondary literature as a source in your paper, but the articles may generate ideas which need further research and data. You might then start reading the primary literature. After you have a sense of the points of view and the data that supports these positions, write a position down, think about the idea, review more papers, rethink the position, rewrite the position, discuss the topic with your peers again, think about the position, revise and write the position again. The final product of these activities should be a clearly defined position statement which will be the focus of your writing for the rest of the semester.

Don't be surprised if your position statement changes slightly as your thinking progresses, but you should settle on the position so you can focus on crafting a persuasive argument. I do not expect to see major topic shifts after the next class. You should not come in next week with a position regarding groundwater contamination near filling stations and week after next decide to change your topic to precipitation-contouring in Africa. On the other hand, if you find yourself at the end of your first or second draft with a conclusion that differs slightly from that suggested in the position statement, you should reexamine the statement and ask whether it is really what you are writing about. Subtle changes in position are expectable, even desirable because the act of writing may force you to rethink what you believe to be true. Major topic shifts however usually indicate you have not been reading and have not yet really decided on a topic area much less the position you wish to take. Thus, topics are much larger and more general than a finely honed position statement (sometimes called a thesis) which identifies the position the paper takes.

Finally, avoid the data dump. A data dump is a paper that tries to express all the neat things the author discovered during research. A position that states the paper summarizes or describes all the data about an idea is  not appropriate. Focus instead on the position and convince the reader the position presented is the correct one.  Likewise, statements that indicate the author is learning about an idea does not constitute a good position statement.  A position that indicates the paper summarizes all the neat things you found out about a topic (data dump) makes a very poor position and a very weak paper.

Several introductory position statements from final student papers in courses in Earth Sciences have been provided below as a departure point for the discussion today. Which statements are most effective and why?

Activity:

    The class will break into small groups of 5 students.  Each group will review one of the positions and report back to the class regarding the quality of the position statement.  Then students in the group will share their position statement with the group for feed back.  Revision of the positin statement on the typed assignment is acceptable.

Questions:

  1. Review the introductory paragraphs from student papers presented below.  Which are the best position statements?   What makes a good position statement?
  2. Form groups of 4-6 students.  Share your position statements.  Are they effective?  Does the group have recommendations regarding improvement or is your position statement a good one?

Student Position Statements

REMEMBER, THESE ARE INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPHS.  YOU ARE TO FIND THE POSITION IN THE PARAGARAPH.  WE WILL ASSESS THE POSITION STATEMENTS  IN SMALL GROUPS DURING CLASS.  

Position 1.

 Downstream fining refers to the downstream decrease in size of grains composing a stream bed.  The grain sizes present on a stream bed decrease approximately exponentially with distance if no lateral inputs of sediment exist, such as from tributaries or adjacent valley slopes (Ferguson et al., 1996).  The cause of downstream fining has been hotly debated in geological literature (Paola et al., 1992; Huddart, 1994; Kodama, 1994a, 1994b; Paola and Seal, 1995; Pizzuto, 1995; Ferguson et al., 1996).  The earliest theories that attempted to explain downstream fining mechanisms focused on abrasion between particles moving in the stream (Sternberg, 1875; Kuhnen, 1956).  Abrasion includes grain attrition by "splitting (=breaking), crushing, chipping, cracking (superficially), and grinding" (Kuhnen, 1956, p. 336).  More recent studies have focused on the ability of selective transport to sort sediments according to size along the length of a stream.  The mechanism by which downstream fining occurs depends on the energy of the stream (Huddart, 1994).  Abrasion is the dominant control on downstream fining in high energy (high discharge and velocity) streams, while selective transport is the dominant control on down stream fining in lower energy streams.
 

Position 2

INTRODUCTION
 The High Plains aquifer has been termed an underground sea with enough fresh water to "fill Lake Huron to the brim, with water left over to fill one-fifth Lake Ontario" (Lewis, 1990).  An underground sea is a misperception because the water is actually contained within three porous sedimentary units much like water in a sponge.  While hydraulically connected and considered to be one single hydrologic unit by Stullken, Watts, and Lindgren (1985), the High Plains aquifer needs to be separated into the three units described by Weeks and others (1988), the Northern High Plains, Central High Plains, and the Southern High Plains (fig. 1).  These areas were used as subdivisions to model groundwater flow in the High Plains aquifer.  The Northern High Plains, Central High Plains, and Southern High Plains divisions and the diversity of each are important in order to address and manage increasing groundwater development and withdrawal.
 

Position 3.

Modern, high-yield, farming methods have interfered with enrichment of soils through natural processes.  The Platte River is no longer ‘a mile wide and an inch deep', for a vast array of reservoirs control annual flooding, which historically has saturated soils encouraging elimination of excess nitrates through denitrification.  In arable farming, soils are plowed under in the fall thus disturbing the roots' ability to assimilate nitrogen compounds and exposing topsoil to the erosive forces of wind and water.  Farmland is often expected to yield several crops per year, thus drawing away it's nutrients.  When soil textures are then damaged, a diminished capacity to store water and support necessary soil biota creates a lower nitrogen holding capacity.  Farmers react with the use of chemical fertilizers which are easily leached from the soil and provide no improvement to the basic soil structure.  "In many areas of the U.S. the land has been turned into a nearly lifeless medium that must be nursed along like an invalid at the threshold of death." (Firman Bear, "Earth: the Stuff of Life") Chemical fertilizers are simply ill-equipped to solve complex problems of soil structure and provide only a short term panacea.  Sewage effluent, when properly treated, monitored and applied, does not significantly impact ground water quality and it has benefits which make the recycling of human waste superior to the use of chemical fertilizers.

Position 4.

 The concept of dolomite precipitation suffers from three major fallacies: 1) the chemical synthesis of pure dolomite in any form has never been completed to the satisfaction of all, and the environmental requirements for dolomitization are still a matter of debate; 2) no conclusive evidence for the formation of a contemporary primary dolomite exists to date; and 3) the arguments used to point to the existence of primary dolomite in the rock record are illogical.  This paper will discuss the evidence for primary dolomitization in light of the three major questions outlined above.

Position 5.

 The proposed Hanford nuclear waste repository site in the Pasco Basin, in south-central Washington (Fig. 1), appears to be geologically sound, but is it?  One characteristic a repository must have is to insure that "...adequate isolation will be achieved for at least 10,000 years with no prediction of unacceptable decease in isolation beyond that time" (Coffman, 1982).  The repository site, targeted for the grand Ronde basalt formation of the Columbia River basalt Group (Fig. 2), is considered by many to have a low hydraulic conductivity (Spane, 1982).  Detailed examination of the rock body, however, reveals that many areas possess high hydraulic conductivities which suggest that the Grand Ronde Basalt formation should not be used as a nuclear waste repository site.
 

Position 6.

 Hydrogeologic investigations commonly use pump tests as a means of determining the principle aquifer characteristic transmissivity and storativity.  In practice, pump tests are executed as follows: The pumping well is pumped at a specific rate of discharge, Q, and the drawdown in an observation well(s) located at some distance from the pumping well is measured through time.  The data obtained can then be used to calculate transmissivity and storativity following the procedures presented by Theis (1935), Cooper-Jacob (1946) and others.  Pump tests can provide two (2) sets of data.  The first set of date is during the pumping stage, and a second set after the pump is turned off, when recovery levels are recorded in the observation well.  The data sets are then used separately to calculate T and S.  In most models used to determine aquifer parameters, the discharge of the pumping well is supposed to be held constant.  In practice, constant discharge is difficult to maintain.  Deviations may be caused by voltage fluctuations, and the vertical increases in pumping distance caused by drawdown in the well.  Recovery data is recorded after the pump is turned off and is free of these mechanical problems and a constant negative discharge is assumed.  For this reason recovery data is considered to be more reliable than the active pump data (Driscoll, 1986).
 

Position 7.

SLOPE IS KEY
 "An alluvial fan is a semiconical accumulation of coarse-grained and angular sediment deposited where a channel of an upland drainage basin intersects a mountain front" (Blair, 1994).  Many modern geologists lump alluvial fans with braided river systems or gravel bed rivers.  Fans are grouped with braided streams based on comparative morphology not stratigraphic evidence.  Many fans have abandoned stream channels and a stream flowing on their surfaces (McArthur 1987).  Geologist attribute these channels to fluvial processes.  They compare fans' stream channels to sedimentation from a network of braided channels, identical to those of braided streams (Blair, 1994).  The assumption that the processes presently active on the surface of the fan are the ones that constructed the fan is wrong (Blair, 1987).  The best way to separate alluvial fans deposits and river systems deposits is to focus on the processes that built them.  Alluvial fans are constructed in a unique environment, different than that of river systems. Slope is the critical difference between river systems and alluvial fans.
 

Position 8.

Recently the literature has begun to recognize the importance that the process of sediment reworking has on placer formation.  Studies on the Witwatersrand District in South Africa and on the Sixes River in Oregon substantiate the importance of sediment reworking.  The purpose of this paper is to become aware of the process of sediment reworking and how it relates to fluvial systems.

This Meeting's Assignment:

  1. Turn in a typed  revised position statement with your name on it at the end of class.  You do NOT need to write an introductory paragraph.  You do need to write a position statement.   This position statement should be short, and make a single point.  
  2. Read the Introduction to Position Statement Development above.  This secion will hopefully help you as you prepare your position statement.  

Time Commitment

0.5 hour writing position statement
1.5 hours reading what you have found
1    Reading, working on references cited
You are nearly ready to write seriously.

Grade:

    Attendance 1%; Position Statement 1%.  Points will be adjusted to reflect the quality of the work.