I have found that I have a fairly organized approach to research papers, although I find if I am too structured in my research, I limit the direction of my paper. I usually like to begin a research topic by rereading the source materials or lecture notes that inspired the essay prompt. I grab a piece of scrap paper, and I write down as many ideas related to the subject as possible. I like to brainstorm prior to using internet search engines because I feel the internet can distract me and delay this portion of the writing process. After I have several different angles I would like to investigate, I begin to use online search engines. Google can be helpful in determining if the subject is widely written about, but I tend to use academic search engines more often, as I am more likely to trust those sources. I then collect my sources and really attempt to wrangle out a thesis. However,  my initial plan often changes once I actually find research. I usually like to go to office hours and discuss my paper with my professor, and I am often forced to rethink parts of my thesis and argument.

Reading the Methods and Skills textbook points out the importance of author bias and interpretation, and my biggest problem with research is I tend to rely on a lot of secondary sources. I usually use peer-reviewed sources, although I do need to look more closely into the primary sources. I have become used to accepting a majority of secondary sources at face value, although that is in large part due to the fact that a majority of research papers I have written have been scientific, not historical. I cannot recreate a scientist’s field data on salmon infected with sea lice, although I can read for myself a law passed during the eighteenth century that caused widespread outrage. My strategy for approaching research has been mostly successful, although I need to reframe my approach to match that of a skeptical historian.