This post is just a sample blog post demonstrating APA style. There are a few things I’m confused about regarding making a APA style blog post:
- There are not a lot of formatting choices on WordPress. I can’t choose how it spaces the lines, I have only some control over how it spaces paragraphs, and I don’t have control over indenting the numbers in this list.
- The “tab” button does not work the same way as it does in Word to indent the first line of a paragraph. Should I even bother indenting the first line? I would have to hit the spacebar about 10 times to make an indent.
- The thing that is most clear to me about how to make a blog post in APA style is that I could cite sources in APA format and then include the references at the bottom of the blog post in APA format (except I can’t do hanging indents). Other things can be done in APA style too, like writing nine instead of 9.
At any rate, here’s a blog post that I have written for something else, adjusted for APA style:
I recently bought a few books on identity that come out of the discipline of sociology. (The first one I bought has “further reading” in every chapter and I bought most of the books listed in the first chapter.) The one that arrived today talked about Gleason’s (1983) article in the first three pages. The article seemed worth looking for immediately, so I put the book down and quickly (and luckily) pulled it up.
I’m half way through the article and I had to stop reading to post about my joy! It’s not new that I’m joyful over finding readings that explicitly discuss what I call “Identity Confetti” (i.e., the confusion that is Identity Literature). But something about Gleason’s (1983) article is making me extra happy. It’s a quick read at 23 pages. It’s very clear! When Gleason (1983) discussed the problem of people not being clear about, and maybe not even knowing, whether they are conceiving of identity as a thing located within an individual, or as a social process I couldn’t help but think, “Look! Look! Look how long this has been an issue!” This is the same problem Darragh commented on in her 2016 review of mathematics identity literature. This is not a new problem, which makes it unsurprising that the issue has bled over to the newer fields of STEM identity literatures. I mean, of course it did.
I’m happy with my books so far. They have offered a great deal of insight. Gleason’s (1983) article is an especially great find among my finds.
Darragh, L. (2016). Identity research in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 93(1), 19-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10649-016-9696-5
Gleason, P. (1983). Identifying identity: A semantic history. The Journal of American History, 69(4), 910-931. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1901196