The Official Style: Not Necessary, But Needed

While searching through a scholarly article database, I discovered an interesting article on school suspension called, Understanding School Responses to Students’ Challenging Behaviour: A Review of Literature. The article was about how school suspension rates in all countries, particularly with an Australian focus, have increased. It looked at the main reasons why this may be happening and what needs to be changed in order to lower the increasing rates. The article was written in the official style, yet it was also readable. However, throughout the article it was evident that the official style was not necessary for the article, but needed.

To evaluate, like a typical official piece, the title was long with jargon, as was the rest of the article. The article was written by Samia Michail, whose credentials were written as so under her name, “a UnitingCare Children, Young People and Families, Australia.” The clear audience of the scholarly article is educators. While the article is readable, there are terms and phrases one would not know unless they had formal background in education or psychology.

The article starts out with an abstract (EX:1):

“This article explores the varied ways in which schools can respond to students who present with challenging behaviours and who are at risk of disengagement from learning. It sets out a typology of school responses and reflects on the philosophies which underpin each approach. In an effort to rethink the use of suspensions within schools, which contribute to the marginalization of children, the article highlights a range of alternatives to exclusionary practice. It outlines the key elements of approaches that are successful in reducing school suspension and makes evident the benefits of an approach that is tailored to the whole ecology of the child. Children who exhibit challenging behaviours at school are considered at increased risk of academic failure, delinquency, dropping out, gang membership and adult incarceration (Dunlap, 2006). These behaviours can be caused by biological, environmental, psychological and/or social factors and are a significant educational and social issue when they present at school. School responses to students’ challenging behaviour within the learning environment is varied but often involves excluding the student from their learning in some way. Mechanisms can include suspension, expulsion or other forms of exclusionary practice.”

[ ] Repetition

[ ] Jargon

[ ] Participial

[ ] Relative Clause

            The abstract before the actual article was extremely scholarly, particularly for an abstract, which is supposed to be a basic summary of the article. It had a large amount of jargon and extensive vocabulary. Some word choice shown was “philosophies” “marginalization” and “exclusion.” The readability score was at a 16.4 average grade level,  Flesch–Kincaid Grade Reading ease of 27.8. Considering the average American reads at a 7^th grade reading level, a large amount of people would not even be able to understand the summary of the article. Yet arguably to a college- educated individual it is still readable.

            Another example (EX: 2) further along in the article shows similar patterns:

“Exclusionary practices experienced at a young age will likely lead to ongoing and intergenerational exclusion in later life. Conversely, experiences of socially inclusive practices at an early age will model tolerable social behaviour for children. Adopting inclusive practices within the school milieu by prioritizing preventative and proactive \ school-based solutions at primary, secondary and tertiary levels of intervention is imperative. Students in general gain from violence prevention and well-being programs as do students at risk and students who have experienced exclusion. A holistic approach to behavioural issues, leads to a range of potential pathways for maintaining student discipline.”

[ ] Repetition

[ ] Jargon

[ ] Participial

[ ] Relative Clause

            Patterns begin to emerge throughout the article. “Students” “school” and “suspensions” is often repeated. This is to emphasize the main subject of the article.  The author also avoids particularly definitive statements, instead going with weaker implications such as “in general” “likely” or “a range of potential pathways.” The sentences have an average of about 23 words per sentence, which is much greater than the U.S. majority. Clearly, there is a gap between this style of writing and that of the average individual.

            In reality though, the article does not need to have the official style. The topic being discussed is truly not very complicated. The official style is not needed to discuss topics such as students and suspension. Any individual that has gone to school knows that students get suspended and that there are a few different things suspension can lead to. For example the first sentence in example 2, “Exclusionary practices experienced at a young age will likely lead to ongoing and intergenerational exclusion in later life.” The author simply could have said, “Children excluded at a young age are likely to be excluded later in life.” However, the author does not do this. She uses phrases such as “exclusionary practices” and “intergenerational exclusion” that make the sentence much more difficult than it needs to be.

            Why does the author do this? The article is not meant to inform the basic public on students and suspension rates. It is pertaining to a certain audience and sphere of activity.  Samia Michail is an educator herself, and in order to be taken seriously in the educational sphere of activity, has to write in this way. Her target audience is fellow educators, who are more likely to fully understand what she is writing about because they have experienced it at a closer realm. While she could write it more simplistically, the official style is necessary for competitive purposes. Had the journal been written in the unofficial style, it would not have been taken as seriously among her peers, who most likely write in the official style as well. If all the journals in her field are written in the official style, which in education they normally are, than if she wanted any recognition and the possibility to get published in an educational journal, she would need to write in the official style.

            Therefore, in this scholarly article, the official style was not necessary, but needed. The author could have written in an easier, plain-style type of writing, but she would not have been taken as seriously in her sphere of activity. She needed to write in a way that would show her peers she had credibility and was at their level of intelligence. This allows us to take a look at societal official writing as a whole.

            Is official style ever really necessary or is simply needed to compete with another’s peers? If Samia Michail’s colleagues did not write in a similar way, than she most likely would not have written in the way she did. I think in a lot of cases, particularly this one, official style is more used to “impress” and “fit-in” rather than an actual necessity. If people were more focused on “including” rather than “excluding,” concepts such as the one discussed in this article, then they would be better understood by the general public. The official style used in Understanding School Responses to Students’ Challenging Behaviour: A Review of Literature is no more than a reflection of competitive struggle of societal standards expected in the educational sphere of activity.

Alyssa Baldwin