31 Contextualize
Karolyn Zuccarelli
Ensure that your readers have all the background information they need to understand how you’re using your sources.
What You’ll Learn:
- The importance of context (think of the reader)
- The problem with “info-dumping” and quote-dropping
- How to successfully integrate supporting evidence
Scenario: You and a friend are texting about plans for your birthday party next Saturday night. You’re going over the list of things you’ll need: music, food, extra chairs, etc. All of a sudden, your friend says, “We the North—Raptors for life.” The comment came out of nowhere. You’re confused and ask for clarification. Your friend then texts back saying, “Oh, I know you love the Raptors. Maybe we could do a purple and red Raptors-themed party?”
Why were you confused? The Raptors comment was unclear and out of context. Once the comment was explained and put in context, it made sense.
Writers can learn something from this example. Providing context in your writing matters greatly to your audience understanding your message.
Making connections between your ideas and supporting evidence is a key part of the writing process. Any time you include information from another source, whether it be a summary, paraphrase, or direct quote, be sure to guide your reader. This will help your audience to better engage with and understand your writing. It will also prevent your ideas from being misconstrued.
Let’s think about this in terms of essay writing. You already know that your thesis will have multiple parts and that each part will require supporting evidence (in the form of quotes, paraphrases, or summaries). This is where the following process for adding supporting evidence can be of value.
Check out this source from Lauren’s the Write Way (2016) for an overview of the quote sandwich.
Now let’s practice contextualizing the following quote:
“How much is society entitled to penalize smokers for their decisions because—in society’s view—those decisions are unhealthy?” (Samuelson, 1998, p. 47).
This quote needs an introduction and explanation in order for the reader to understand its significance. An in-text citation is given, but the reader needs more information to make sense of the quote.
Below, the quote is integrated into a sample student piece of writing from Thoughtful Learning (2020).
(Portions of this section have been adapted from the Thoughtful Learning article “Should Smoking Be Banned in Public Restaurants?” (2020) and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.)
While the argument rages over the effects of smoking on public health, the question that remains is this: “How much is society entitled to penalize smokers for their decisions because—in society’s view—those decisions are unhealthy?” (Samuelson, 1998, p. 47). Smoking tobacco is not an illegal act, yet the 25 percent of Americans who do smoke are often treated as if they were criminals. They are incessantly nagged, blamed for numerous illnesses and unpleasantries, and made to feel guilty by self-righteous nonsmokers (Bork, 1997, pp. 28-30). (“Should Smoking Be Banned in Public Restaurants?,” 2020)
The quote from Samuelson is integrated because it contextualizes and supports the author’s main point—the effects of smoking on public health. Another paraphrase is used (from Bork, 1997) to provide further supporting evidence.
When integrating evidence, you may want to use signal phrases. Using signal phrases helps add variety to the way you introduce and integrate summaries, paraphrases, and direct quotes (Purdue Online Writing Lab, n.d.).
Here are some examples of signal phrases:
- According to Samuelson…
- Samuelson claims that…
- Bork argues that…
- Bork implies… (Purdue Online Writing Lab, n.d.)
According to Samuelson (1998), “How much is society entitled to penalize smokers for their decisions because—in society’s view—those decisions are unhealthy?” (p. 47).
For more information on signal and lead-in phrases from Purdue Online Writing Lab (n.d.), view the source.
Info-dumping is when a writer includes blocks of text (think: direct quotes or paraphrases) from a primary or secondary source without providing context or background information for the reader. This can be confusing for the audience as it affects the flow and overall style of the writing.
Some ways to avoid info-dumping are:
- Provide background information (who, what, where, when, why, how)
- Be clear and avoid ambiguity
- Explain the information being integrated
Let’s compare and contrast a piece of writing that uses info-dumping with one with better and clearer research integration.
(Portions of this section have been adapted from the Thoughtful Learning article “The Killer Bean” (n.d.) and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.)
The following is from a sample student essay on the environmental impact of growing coffee. The two examples have been adapted from Thoughtful Learning, “The Killer Bean” (n.d.).
Bird species in coffee plantations have diminished by 94-97 percent since many farmers switched to sun-grown plantations (Smithsonian Institution, 1997). At the turn of the century, there were 65 species of common migratory birds found in Guatemala. Today, only one-third of these birds have stable populations, another one-third seem to be in decline and 25 species are missing (Wille, 1994, pp. 58–64). (“The Killer Bean,” n.d.)
As the rainforests disappear, so do the animals, especially migratory birds (Topic sentence introduces the content and provides some background information). One study found (clearly introduces the type of supporting evidence: a study) that bird species in coffee plantations have diminished by 94-97 percent since many farmers switched to sun-grown plantations. This is not surprising (gives commentary on the evidence) considering the fact that two-thirds of birds found in shade-grown coffee plantations live in the canopy of the trees, and less than ten percent actually feed among the coffee plants (explains why) (Smithsonian Institution, 1997, n.p.). At the turn of the century, there were 65 species of common migratory birds found in Guatemala. Today, only one-third of these birds have stable populations, another one-third seem to be in decline and 25 species are missing (Wille, 1994, pp. 58–64). (“The Killer Bean,” n.d.)
This example integrates research information in a number of ways:
- Topic sentence introduces the content and provides some background information
- Introduces the type of supporting evidence included: a study
- Gives commentary on the evidence
- Explains why bird species are diminishing
Read the source.
When adding a quote from a secondary source into your work, ask yourself:
- How does the quote relate to the information immediately before it and after it?
- How does the quote support the thesis statement or the author’s main argument?
- How does the quote contribute to the analysis of the author’s writing?
Try It!
Provide context for the following quotes by completing the following drag and drop activities.
Use this formula to help you: add context + introduce source with signal phrase + quote or paraphrase + document + explain.
In this subtopic, we covered how contextualizing information from sources can help provide clarity for your audience. We explored:
- How to avoid quote-dropping
- Understanding the needs of your audience
- Using signal phrases
The background situation or larger ground within which something is situated.
Multiple legitimate but clashing interpretations are possible. Meaning is ambiguous if a passage can be understood in different, contradictory ways.
Here, the writer has provided data (from the Smithsonian Institution and Wille) without context or background information. The supporting evidence is not explained or clearly integrated.