They Say / I Say, a widely-used academic resource in over 1,500 institutions, revolutionizes writing instruction. It focuses on rhetorical strategies, enabling students to effectively engage in academic discourse by understanding and responding to existing arguments.
Overview of the Book’s Core Principles
At its heart, They Say / I Say champions the idea that writing isn’t simply about proclaiming your own views, but about actively participating in an ongoing conversation. The book’s central tenet revolves around recognizing and summarizing what “they say” – the existing arguments, beliefs, and assumptions surrounding a topic – before articulating “I say” – your own informed position.
This approach isn’t merely a stylistic preference; it’s a fundamental rhetorical strategy. By explicitly acknowledging other perspectives, writers demonstrate intellectual honesty, build credibility, and avoid the appearance of operating in a vacuum. The book provides a structured framework for this process, moving students beyond vague assertions and towards nuanced, well-supported arguments.
Furthermore, They Say / I Say emphasizes the importance of “voice markers” – phrases that clearly signal your stance relative to others (agreeing, disagreeing, qualifying). These markers aren’t just cosmetic additions; they are crucial for guiding readers through your reasoning and understanding the relationship between your ideas and those of others. The book’s enduring popularity stems from its practical, template-based approach to mastering these essential skills.
The Importance of Rhetorical Strategies in Academic Writing
Rhetorical strategies are paramount in academic writing, transforming it from a mere presentation of facts into a persuasive and engaging dialogue. They Say / I Say underscores this by demonstrating how effective argumentation hinges on understanding and strategically responding to existing discourse. Ignoring established viewpoints weakens your claims, presenting them as isolated opinions rather than informed contributions.
The book highlights that academic success isn’t solely about what you say, but how you say it – specifically, how you position your ideas within a broader intellectual context. Mastering techniques like summarizing, agreeing, disagreeing, and qualifying allows writers to navigate complex debates with clarity and precision;
Moreover, employing rhetorical strategies fosters critical thinking. By forcing students to analyze others’ arguments, They Say / I Say encourages a deeper understanding of the subject matter and strengthens their ability to formulate well-reasoned responses. This approach moves beyond rote memorization, cultivating a more dynamic and intellectually rigorous writing process.
Widespread Adoption and Impact in Education
The remarkable success of They Say / I Say is evidenced by its adoption in over 1,500 educational institutions, solidifying its position as a leading resource for academic writing instruction. This widespread use isn’t accidental; the book directly addresses a critical need – equipping students with practical, transferable skills for effective argumentation.
Its impact extends beyond simply teaching students how to write; it fundamentally alters their approach to academic inquiry. By emphasizing the importance of entering an ongoing conversation, the book encourages students to view writing as a collaborative process, rather than a solitary act.
Furthermore, the book’s template-based approach provides a scaffold for students struggling with argumentation, offering clear models for summarizing others’ views and articulating their own positions. This accessibility, combined with its focus on core rhetorical principles, has made They Say / I Say a cornerstone of composition curricula nationwide, fostering a generation of more confident and articulate writers.
Key Concepts: “They Say” and “I Say”
The core of the book lies in the “They Say / I Say” framework, urging writers to summarize existing arguments (“They Say”) before presenting their own (“I Say”), fostering clear, contextualized reasoning.
Understanding “They Say”: Summarizing Existing Arguments
Effectively utilizing “They Say” involves more than simply acknowledging others’ viewpoints; it demands a precise and thorough summarization of their arguments. This isn’t about straw-manning or misrepresenting opposing ideas, but rather demonstrating a genuine understanding of the existing conversation. The goal is to accurately portray what “they” believe, establishing a clear foundation for your own response.
As highlighted by Graff and Birkenstein, this summarization serves as a crucial entry point into academic discourse. It signals to your audience that you’ve engaged with the relevant scholarship and aren’t operating in a vacuum. Identifying the core claims, supporting evidence, and underlying assumptions of others is paramount.
Furthermore, a strong “They Say” section often includes attributing these ideas to specific sources, lending credibility to your summary and allowing readers to explore the original arguments further. This demonstrates academic honesty and a commitment to intellectual rigor. The book emphasizes that accurately representing others’ views is not merely a courtesy, but a fundamental component of persuasive argumentation.
Without a robust “They Say,” your “I Say” risks appearing unsupported or irrelevant, lacking the necessary context to resonate with your audience. It’s the bedrock upon which a meaningful and engaging argument is built.
Identifying the “I Say”: Articulating Your Own Position
The “I Say” component of the framework demands a clear and assertive articulation of your own viewpoint, moving beyond mere agreement or disagreement with “They Say.” It’s about staking your claim within the ongoing conversation, presenting your unique perspective with confidence and precision. This isn’t simply stating an opinion, but formulating a well-defined thesis that responds directly to the ideas you’ve summarized.
Graff and Birkenstein emphasize the importance of “voice markers” – words and phrases that clearly signal your stance and ownership of the argument. These markers help readers understand where you stand in relation to others.
A strong “I Say” doesn’t shy away from nuance. It can involve qualifying your position, acknowledging complexities, or proposing alternative interpretations. It’s about demonstrating critical thinking and intellectual honesty, rather than presenting a simplistic or dogmatic view.
Effectively stating your position requires providing supporting evidence and reasoning, building a compelling case for your perspective. The “I Say” is the heart of your argument, the point you are striving to convince your audience to accept. Without a clear and well-supported “I Say”, the entire argumentative structure falters.
The Dynamic Relationship Between “They Say” and “I Say”
The core strength of the “They Say / I Say” framework lies in understanding the interconnectedness of these two elements. It’s not a simple opposition, but a dynamic relationship where each informs and strengthens the other. Accurately representing “They Say” – summarizing existing arguments fairly and thoroughly – is crucial for establishing your credibility and demonstrating that you’ve genuinely engaged with the conversation.
A robust “They Say” provides the necessary context for your “I Say” to resonate. It clarifies what’s at stake in the debate and why your contribution matters. Without a clear understanding of the existing discourse, your argument risks appearing isolated or irrelevant.
Conversely, a compelling “I Say” breathes new life into the conversation initiated by “They Say”. It offers a fresh perspective, challenges assumptions, or proposes innovative solutions.
This interplay fosters intellectual humility and encourages a more nuanced understanding of complex issues. The framework encourages viewing argumentation not as a battle to be won, but as a collaborative process of inquiry and discovery, where both “They Say” and “I Say” contribute to a richer, more informed dialogue.
Templates for Effective Argumentation
They Say / I Say provides adaptable templates for structuring arguments. These tools help writers introduce others’ views, respond with agreement, disagreement, or qualification, and clearly articulate their own positions.
Templates for Introducing What Others Are Saying
A core principle of “They Say / I Say” is effectively summarizing what others are arguing – the “They Say” component. The book offers numerous templates to smoothly integrate these existing viewpoints into your own writing. These aren’t merely about acknowledging opposing ideas; they’re about accurately representing the complexity of the conversation you’re joining.
Some key templates include phrases like “X argues that…”, “According to X…”, and “X maintains that…”. These allow you to directly attribute claims to their originators. More nuanced templates help avoid oversimplification, such as “X is known for arguing that…” or “X convincingly shows that…”.
Crucially, the book emphasizes not using vague “they say” constructions like “some people believe” or “it is often said.” These lack specificity and weaken your argument. Instead, identify who is making the claim. The goal is to create a clear and accurate portrayal of the views you’re responding to, setting the stage for your own “I Say” intervention. Using these templates fosters intellectual honesty and demonstrates a thorough understanding of the topic at hand, strengthening your overall argument.
Templates for Responding to Others’ Arguments (Agreeing, Disagreeing, Qualifying)
“They Say / I Say” doesn’t just focus on introducing others’ arguments, but also on responding to them effectively. The book provides templates for navigating the nuances of agreement, disagreement, and qualification – moving beyond simple “yes” or “no” responses.
To agree, templates like “X is right in that…” or “I concur with X’s point that…” demonstrate thoughtful alignment. However, the book encourages building upon the existing argument, not merely repeating it. For disagreement, templates such as “X’s claim that… is misguided because…” or “I challenge X’s assertion that…” offer direct, yet respectful, opposition.
Perhaps most importantly, “They Say / I Say” champions qualification. Templates like “While X is partially right to claim…, I believe…” or “Although I agree with X regarding…, I would argue…” allow for acknowledging merit in opposing views while still asserting your own position. This demonstrates intellectual humility and strengthens your credibility. These templates, adapted from Graff and Birkenstein, ensure clarity and precision in your argumentative responses, fostering productive academic conversation.
Templates for Stating Your Own Position
Once you’ve effectively engaged with “They Say,” “They Say / I Say” equips you with templates to confidently articulate your “I Say.” These aren’t rigid formulas, but rather starting points to help you express your viewpoint clearly and persuasively.
Simple assertion templates include “I believe that…” or “In my view…” but the book encourages more sophisticated phrasing. Templates like “What I’m suggesting is…” or “My point is…” signal a deliberate argument. To connect your position to the ongoing conversation, use templates such as “I agree that…, but I would add that…” or “I disagree with X’s claim because…”
Crucially, the book emphasizes the importance of “voice markers” – words and phrases that signal your stance (e.g., “I contend,” “I maintain,” “I propose”). These markers make your argument readily identifiable. Furthermore, templates like “Ultimately, I argue that…” or “My conclusion is…” provide a clear roadmap for your reader. Mastering these templates, as highlighted by Graff, Birkenstein, and Durst, transforms writing from simply stating an opinion to participating in a meaningful academic exchange.
Practical Exercises & Application
Applying “They Say / I Say” involves analyzing opinion pieces and articles, like those from the New York Times or discussions on technology and the Bible, to identify “They Say” and “I Say” components.
Analyzing “They Say / I Say” in Opinion Pieces
Deconstructing opinion pieces through the lens of “They Say / I Say” reveals how authors position themselves within ongoing conversations. A crucial first step is identifying where the author summarizes the views of others – the “They Say” component. This isn’t merely a listing of opposing ideas, but a careful representation of existing arguments.
Next, examine how the author responds. Do they wholeheartedly agree, vehemently disagree, or offer a nuanced qualification? The text will provide clues – explicit statements of agreement or disagreement, or more subtle rhetorical moves like concessions and rebuttals. Look for “voice markers” that signal the author’s stance.
The exercise, adapted from Graff and Birkenstein’s work, encourages students to move beyond simply invoking authorities. Instead, it promotes engaging with other viewpoints as if participating in a direct conversation. This involves pinpointing where the author establishes their own position – the “I Say” – and how it relates to the summarized arguments. Analyzing these dynamics fosters critical reading and strengthens argumentative writing skills.
Consider, for example, an opinion piece discussing technology. Where does the author acknowledge existing perspectives on its impact? How do they then articulate their unique viewpoint, building upon or challenging those prior claims?
Applying the Framework to Articles: Example ― Technology and the Bible
Applying the “They Say / I Say” framework to the article “What does the Bible teach us about Technology?” from ERLC.com reveals a nuanced argumentative structure. The author first acknowledges a prevalent “They Say” – the common anxieties and questions surrounding technology’s influence on faith and society. This involves summarizing concerns about distraction, superficiality, and potential for misuse.
However, the article doesn’t simply dismiss these concerns. Instead, it qualifies them, presenting a more balanced “I Say.” The author argues that technology, in itself, isn’t inherently good or bad, but a tool whose moral value depends on its user and purpose. Biblical principles, rather than outright rejection, should guide its application.
This approach demonstrates a sophisticated engagement with existing arguments. The author doesn’t ignore opposing viewpoints but incorporates them before offering a counter-perspective rooted in theological reasoning. Identifying this dynamic – the careful summarization of “They Say” followed by a reasoned “I Say” – illustrates the power of the framework in analyzing complex arguments and constructing effective responses.
The article exemplifies how to enter a conversation, not just state an opinion.
Brainstorming Exercises: Engaging in Conversational Writing
A core exercise within the “They Say / I Say” methodology involves moving beyond simple agreement or disagreement. Instead of merely invoking or contradicting authorities, the goal is to engage with authors as conversational partners. This requires actively listening to “They Say” before formulating a thoughtful “I Say.”
Begin by identifying a specific claim within a text. Then, brainstorm potential responses – not just “yes” or “no,” but nuanced reactions like “yes, but…”, “no, but…”, or “okay, but…”. These qualifiers demonstrate critical thinking and a willingness to engage with complexity.
Consider the author’s underlying assumptions. What motivates their argument? What might they overlook? Formulating questions helps to uncover hidden layers and develop a more informed response. Imagine yourself in a dialogue, anticipating their rebuttals and preparing your counter-arguments.
This exercise fosters a more dynamic and engaging writing style, transforming academic work from a series of assertions into a genuine conversation. It’s about building upon, challenging, and refining existing ideas, rather than simply imposing your own.