Bullshit in Academic Writing - A Protocol Analysis of a High School Senior’s Process of Interpreting Much Ado about Nothing

Aug 27, 2026

The study investigates one high school senior’s process of “academic bullshitting” while composing an analytic essay interpreting Shakespeare’s Much Ado about Nothing for a British Literature class. Through protocol analysis and coding of subcodes across content, genre, and writing process, the researchers infer how generic academic conventions can substitute for insufficient play knowledge. Findings show that, lacking adequate content understanding, the writer can rely on discourse and genre processes to create the impression of sufficient knowledge. Implications for teaching and learning academic writing conclude the study.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages38

Reading Time1 h 36 min

AccessFree to download

Study Overview

Research Questions and Purpose

Participant Context and Observations

Bullshit Framework

Term Origins and Scholarly Gap

Conceptualization of Academic Bullshitting

Bullshit in Academic Writing: A Protocol Analysis of a High School Senior’s Process of Interpreting MuchAdo about Nothing Peter Smagorinsky ElizabethAnne Daigle The University of Georgia Cindy O’Donnell-Allen Colorado State University Susan Bynum Tulsa, Oklahoma This article reports a study of one high school senior’s process of academic bullshitting as she wrote an analytic essay interpreting Shakespeare’s Much Ado about Nothing. The construct of bullshit has received little scholarly attention; although it is known as a common phenomenon in academic speech and writing, it has rarely been the subject of empirical research. This study is comprised of a protocol analysis of one writer as she attempted to produce an academic essay on a topic in which her understanding of the play’s content was insufficient for the task of producing the essay. The coding system identified subcodes within the major categories of content, genre, and process that enabled the researchers to infer what is involved in academic bullshitting. The analysis found that, in the absence of sufficient content knowledge, a writer familiar in discourse conventions may employ knowledge of the genre of academic writing and processes for producing generic features to create the impression that her content knowledge is adequate. The study concludes with a discussion of the phenomenon of academic bullshitting and its implications for teaching and learning academic writing. I can think of a million things to say, but it would be BS, and although a lot of people believe BS is like a giant part of writing, sometimes I think that too. But you have to have like a decent platform of BS in order to successfully BS your way through a paper. Research participant and highschool senior Susan Bynum made this remark during a think-aloud protocol that she produced in conjunction with her composition of an essay in which she analyzed Shakespeare’sMuchAdo about Nothing for a British Literature class. For as long as The Bard has been a staple of the U. S. high school 368 Research in the Teaching of English Volume 44, Number 4, May 2010 Copyright © 2010 by the National Council of Teachers of English. All rights reserved. SmagorinSky, Daigle, o’Donnell-allen, anD Bynum Bullshit in Academic Writing 369 curriculum, teachers have provided anecdotal evidence that Shakespeare presents immense challenges to secondary school readers (e.g., French, 1968; Robinson, 1989; Townsend, 1929). When students are put in the position of having to sound more learned than they are, they often bullshit their way through their assignments to create the appearance of knowledge according to scholarly specifications, even in its considerable absence. Their writing often is garbed in what Macrorie (1970) called Engfish: the spuriously elevated language seemingly endemic to school writing. Susan, like many high school students across the ages, struggled with Much Ado about Nothing—particularly Shakespeare’s employment of irony—and so had to resort to “BS” in order to compose her essay. Throughout her school career she had been a high-achieving student, yet she acknowledged that writing this analytic essay—assigned by her teacher as preparation for the sort of writing she anticipated they would produce for college professors—was among the most difficult school tasks that she had ever taken on. In order to complete it, she relied on her ability to“BS”within the academic form of argumentation that her essay needed to assume. The notion of bullshit has served humanity well over the years to describe all manner of insincere and self-inflating performances. Before reporting our analysis of Susan’s writing process as an instance of academic bullshit, we explicate our understanding of how this term has been treated in scholarly expositions. This review in turn informs our interpretation of Susan’s composition of an academic text in which her understanding of Shakespeare’s labyrinthine plot appe

FAQs

What is the focus of the study described in the text?

The study focuses on how one high school senior “bullshits” academically while writing an analytic essay about Shakespeare’s Much Ado about Nothing despite insufficient understanding of the play.

How did the researchers analyze the writer’s process?

They used a protocol analysis of the student’s writing process and applied a coding system to identify subcodes within major categories of content, genre, and process.

What did the analysis conclude about academic bullshitting?

In the absence of sufficient content knowledge, a writer familiar with academic discourse conventions may use genre-based writing processes to produce the appearance of adequate knowledge.

Aug 27, 2026

Upload by Seraphina