ESSAY 4—SYNTHESIS ESSAY: WHAT CONSTITUTES AN ETHICAL RESPONSE?
Proposal: Due Monday, Dec. 5th
Rough Draft: Due Thursday, Dec. 8th
Final Draft: Due Wednesday, Dec. 14th at 10:30 a.m.
Assignment:
In each essay that we have read, the writer has experienced a cultural conflict or
approached a crossroads in the way that she or he thinks or chooses to behave. In the
midst of this conflict (or conflicts), each writer makes a critical decision about what
constitutes an ethical response to a cultural dilemma or conflict. (NOTE: It’s useful to
remember that some of these writers experience this conflict within their communities or
subcultures while others find their values at odds with the larger national or international
culture.)
For the synthesis essay, you will examine how two writers approach the idea of “ethical
response. “ The essay will construct an argument (thesis) about the new insights you‘ve
gained about the theme by examining the two texts together. You will use specific examples
from the texts as evidence to support your thesis.
Essay Goals:
The essay will
 Construct an argumentative and original thesis that arises from the intersection of
two texts.
 After reading through and analyzing these texts carefully, how would you define
“ethical response” in these instances? Why is this idea significant?
 Where do the texts overlap or converge in their definition of an ethical response?
That is, in what ways might both writers agree?
 Where do the texts diverge or depart from one another? How significant is that
difference?
 Convey how each writer develops his or her own definition of an “ethical response” by
 identifying and presenting relevant evidence (approximately 3-5 references from
each text)
 analyzing the relevant evidence, asking “So what?” or “Why is this significant?”
 synthesizing the information by discussing how each text informs your reading
of the other text.
 And finally, near the end of the essay,
o Evaluate the ideas of ethical response developed in these essays. Are these ideas
still relevant? Why or why not?
o Explore the relationship between the ideas developed in the texts and your own
experiences, knowledge, and system of ethics.
NOTE: In some of the essays, the idea of ethical response is explored directly. However, in
many of the other texts, the answer to the question, “What is the ethical response?” is
implied or stated indirectly. In these texts, you will need to use evidence from the essay to
support your interpretation of what the “ethical response” might be.
Expectations:
The essay should be 4-5 pages, double-spaced, in Times New Roman font with 1” margins.
The essay should be formatted in MLA style and include a Works Cited page.
Questions to Consider for Freewrites and Responses:
 We have spent the quarter talking about “revolutions” and the idea of making a
fundamental change in yourself and/or your community. What kind of fundamental
change is each text calling for? Why is this change so significant? Can this change be
read as an ethical imperative?
 What seem to be the writers’ central values—that is, what do they consider worth
fighting for? How might these values be in tension with their own communities or
with the larger national and international culture in which the writer lives?
 According to these texts, is it ever ethical to break the law, go against the opinion of
the crowd, or disrupt the usual rules of civility and politeness? Why or why not?
 What kinds of action do the writers’ urge? Is this form of action or ethical response
still relevant today? Why?
Possible Texts:
Sherman Alexie, “The Joys of Reading and Writing: Superman and Me”
Gloria Anzaldua, “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”
Fredrick Douglass, “Learning to Read and Write”
Barbara Ehrenreich, “Serving in Florida”
Martin Luther King, Jr., “Letter from Birmingham Jail;”
Langston Hughes, “Salvation”
Audre Lorde, “The Fourth of July”
Nancy Mairs, “On Being a Cripple”
Excellent—4.0-3.5
High—3.4-2.5
Average—2.4-1.9
Minimum—1.8-0
Analysis
Provides substantial, specific
evidence from both source texts.
Thoroughly analyzes material
from both sources by answering
the "so what?" question for every
piece of evidence that she
provides. All claims are specific,
arguable and supported by
evidence from the source texts.
Explores the ideas presented in
full. 36-40 pts.
Provides significant evidence from
both texts, but more detailed
evidence is needed. Analyzes the
evidence from both sources,
answering the "so what?" question
for most pieces of evidence that
she provides. Most claims are
specific, arguable and supported
by evidence from the source texts
Explores most of the ideas
presented, but some of the ideas
remain underdeveloped. 32-34
pts.
Provides some evidence from
both texts, but evidence needs to
be more specific or presented
more clearly. Begins to analyze
the sources by answering the "so
what?" question for some pieces
of evidence, but some significant
evidence remains unanalyzed.
Some claims are specific,
arguable and supported by
evidence, but others remain
unsupported. Many ideas remain
underdeveloped. 28-30 pts.
Provides insufficient evidence
from one or both texts. The
source material is not
adequately analyzed; the text
fails to answer the "so what?"
question for crucial pieces of
evidence. Most of the claims
are not specific, arguable or
supported by evidence. The
essay does not adequately
develop the ideas presented.
0-26 pts.
Points
?? / 40
Comments
Thesis and
Topic
Sentences
The thesis statement and topic
sentences are specific and
arguable, clearly defining a
complex relationship between
texts and answering the question,
“So what?” The essay is driven by
and organized around a strong
thesis.
36-40 pts.
Comments
Most versions of the thesis
statement and topic sentences are
specific and arguable, but they are
unclear or under-developed in a
few places. The thesis expresses a
relationship between the two
source texts, but that relationship
could be more fully developed.
32-34 pts.
The thesis and topic sentences
are specific and arguable at some
points but unclear at other, or
they represent a statement of
fact rather than an argument.
The thesis begins to express a
relationship between the two
sources, but the link is unclear or
unconvincing. 28-30 pts.
The thesis and topic sentences
are difficult to identify
throughout the paper. The
thesis fails to answer the
question, “So what?” Topic
sentences are misleading or
unclear. The thesis does not
express a clear relationship
between the sources. 0-26 pts.
Ideas are organized in a clear and
logical fashion in relationship to
each other (local, within
paragraphs) and to the thesis
(the paper as a whole). Includes a
vivid, engaging, and informative
introduction and an inventive
and thorough conclusion. 36-40
pts.
Ideas are organized in a clear and
logical fashion in relationship to
each other (local, within
paragraphs) and to the thesis (the
paper as a whole). Includes an
informative, appropriate
introduction and a thorough
conclusion.
32-34 pts.
Although ideas are generally
organized in a logical fashion,
some sentences or paragraphs
are unorganized or unrelated to
the thesis or paragraph.
Transitions are often lacking,
leaving the reader lost. Includes
an adequate intro. and/or
conclusion. 28-30 pts.
Discernible organization is
minimal or nonexistent.
Underdeveloped or missing
introduction and/or
conclusion. Minimal or no
transitions between
paragraphs. 0-26 pts
Style and
Mechanics
Ideas are expressed in clear,
engaging prose. The writer uses
specific and vivid language. The
sentence lengths and types vary,
and word choice is appropriate
throughout. Demonstrates
attention to audience and
purpose. No grammatical,
proofreading, or mechanical
errors. 36-40 pts.
Most of the ideas are expressed in
clear, readable prose, but a few
sentences are awkward or difficult
to understand. The writer uses a
variety of sentence types, but
some sentences could be more
effective. Most word choice is
appropriate. Demonstrates
attention to audience and purpose.
Infrequent grammatical,
proofreading, or mechanics errors.
(Errors do not disrupt the flow or
clarity of the text.) 32-34 pts.
Some of the ideas are expressed
in clear, readable prose, but
there are many sentences that
are awkward or difficult to
understand. Uses the same
sentence type throughout. The
relationship to audience or
purpose is sometimes unclear.
There are some strong
sentences, but there are more
than 2-4 sentence structure
problems. Grammatical,
proofreading, and mechanical
errors sometimes impede flow
or clarity. 28-30 pts.
Most of the prose is difficult to
read. Does not demonstrate an
understanding of audience and
purpose. Frequent sentence
structure problems. Sentence
level, grammatical, and
mechanics problems seriously
impede the clarity of the text.
0-26 pts.
Points
?? / 40
Quotations
and citations
Comments
The paper incorporates some
ideas or quotations from both
sources, but the sources could be
used more fully. Most quotations
from both texts are cited
correctly. Quotations are
incorporated correctly into the
text, but some transitions are
awkward or unclear. 32-34 pts.
The paper incorporates at least
one quotation or idea from each
source, but more
citations/references are needed.
Quotations are cited, but some
citations are incorrect. At times
the relationship between the
quotation and the rest of the
essay is unclear. 28-30 pts.
The paper does not include
quotations from one or both of
the source. Some quotations
are not cited, and they are not
well-integrated into the text.
0-26 points pts.
Criteria
Points
?? / 40
Organization
Points
??/40
The paper incorporates
substantial ideas and quotations
from both textual sources. All
quotations from both texts are
cited correctly. Quotations are
incorporated seamlessly into the
text of the essay. 36-40 pts.
Points
??/40
Total Points:
/200