English 1010-19
Monday, Wednesday and Friday 4:00 – 4:50
Gibson Hall room 400D
Instructor: Dr. Vikki Forsyth
Office Hours: Monday, Wednesday and Friday 2:00-3:00; Monday and Wednesday 6:00–
6:30
Office: Norman Mayer Hall room 202
Email: vforsyth@tulane.edu
Imitation, adaptation and parody in literature and culture
This class will explore the most basic process of human culture and, as we’ll see in unit
two, of human life itself: adaptation. Replicating, imitating, copying or adapting: call it
what you will, it is central both to human life at the biological level and to all the
culture(s) that humans have subsequently created. We will cover a wide range of topics
within this theme, from DNA replication to cultural memes, fake news shows, imitations
of and by Shakespeare, and a new religion that regards copying as an act of worship.
Students will finally ponder the meaning of plagiarism in a digital age and in the light of
the centrality of copying to human experience.
Set texts
Graff, Gerald, Birkenstein, Cathy and Durst, Russel. They Say/ I Say: The Moves that
Matter in Academic Writing with Readings. New York and London: W.W. Norton &
Company, 2012 (second edition).
Other required reading for this class (outlined in the class schedule, below) will be
available on the class’s Blackboard page.
Course Description
The purpose of English 1010 is to teach students to write clearly and to organize complex
arguments that engage in a scholarly way with expert knowledge. Toward that end,
students will learn to conduct independent bibliographic research and to incorporate that
material appropriately into the sort of clear, complex, coherent arguments that
characterize academic discourse. More specifically, in English 1010, students will learn
that to write clearly means that they must take a piece of writing through multiple drafts
in order to eliminate any grammatical errors or stylistic flaws that might undermine the
author-audience relationship. They will also learn that, to write with meaningful
complexity, they must learn to practice a variety of invention strategies, from the five
classical appeals to freewriting to commonplaces to analytic reading strategies to library
research – and to revise continuously the material generated by these methods. Students
will also learn that, in order to make coherent arguments out of the material generated
through these invention strategies without sacrificing complexity, their practice of
revision must be guided by certain principles of style and arrangement -- for example,
principles of emphasis, cohesion, parallelism, figuration, and syntactic variation, to name
a few. Students must also grow adept in the genre of argument itself through work with
models and templates of the sort outlined in the standard rhetorics of argument (for
example, Williams, Heinrich, Toulmin, or Graff, Birkenstein and Durst). Students must
learn, moreover, that in order to create effective arguments they must cultivate strategies
for analyzing the texts of others – that is, they must grow adept at situating the texts of
others in a context, looking at them through the lens of some other body of thought, to
see how such a move heightens the significance of certain elements of the text under
analysis. And they must learn strategies for active, critical reading, strategies for
deciphering why a text might be arranged a certain way and what that arrangement might
mean, and strategies for summarizing and paraphrasing and quoting. They must also
learn to conduct research in the library, evaluating sources, incorporating the work of
others into their texts and doing so while following the proper conventions of citation
endorsed by the Modern Language Association. Finally, in order to maximize the
students’ potential for developing these abilities, the method of instruction in English
1010, week by week, will be organized as a hybrid that combines four different
instructional modes: 1) discussions as appropriate to a seminar; 2) hands-on, productive
work as appropriate to a studio or lab; 3) brief lectures; 4) regular one-on-one
conferencing with the teacher. Through all of these means, students in English 1010 will
learn to produce clear, complex, coherent writing with meaningful academic content.
Statement of Outcomes and Policies
Outcomes: Students will learn how to write clearly and how to develop complex,
coherent arguments that engage with expert knowledge through independent scholarly
research and correct citation of sources.
Attendance: Students in English 1010 develop skills that will serve them for their rest of
their academic and professional lives. What’s more, no matter how well a student writes,
he or she can and should always cultivate these skills yet further. To do this, students
must come to class, participate in class activities, and sustain positive, productive
membership in the classroom community of student-writers. Thus, attendance, punctual
arrival and participation are absolutely essential; moreover, cell phones must be silenced,
and text-messaging and emailing are strictly forbidden, for these disruptions, as with
tardiness, can be counted as absences.
When a student absence results from serious illness, injury or a critical personal problem,
that student must notify the instructor and arrange to complete any missed work in a
timely fashion. Students are allowed, over the course of the semester, to miss the
equivalent of one week of class without penalty. Thereafter, students will lose one third
of their final grade for every unexcused absence from class. Once a student has
accumulated the equivalent of three weeks of unexcused absences, he or she has
automatically failed the class.
In order to enforce the attendance policy, the instructor will document the dates of every
student’s unexcused absences and file an “Absence Report Form” for any of their
students who accumulate four unexcused absences. These forms are sent to the student
and the student’s dean (the instructor retains the third copy). If the student’s attendance
problem persists to a eighth unexcused absence, the instructor can file a second “Absence
Report Form” recommending that the student be withdrawn from the course with an F.
Academic Dishonesty: This link will take you to the Newcomb-Tulane Code of Academic
Conduct: http://college.tulane.edu/code.htm. All students must take responsibility for
studying this code and adhering to it. Instructions for accessing the Writing to the Code
quiz will be posted on the class Blackboard page. We will devote some time in class to
it. Our purpose, in these discussions, will be not only to teach you how to avoid
plagiarism and how to cite sources, but to initiate you into the contemporary discussion
of intellectual property and the nuanced dynamics between individuality, authorship, and
what’s sometimes called intertextuality, so that you can make informed and thoughtful
choices about your writing for the rest of your university career and later in life.
Late work: I do accept essays up to six days after the due date, but late essays have 5%
deducted from the final grade for every day that they are late. Late essays also receive
fewer and more cursory comments than essays that were submitted on time. An
extension can be arranged in advance of a due date if you can show that there is an
excellent reason (generally a medical reason) why you will not be able to complete the
work on time. Late short assignments will not be accepted.
The Grade of “Incomplete”: If a student has a legitimate excuse for being unable to
complete all of the work for a course, the instructor can give that student an “I”
(Incomplete) on the final grade sheet. If the student does not complete the work and the
instructor does not change the grade, however, that grade will revert to an F. The deadline
for addressing incompletes varies each semester but is usually about one month after the
final exam period. Before a student is given an “I,” the instructor will confirm with the
student – in writing – exactly what the student needs to finish and retain a dated copy of
this correspondence in the event that the student misses the deadline and then expresses
confusion about the new grade of “F.”
Students with Special Needs: Students who need special help with the course, such as
note-taking, free tutoring, additional time and/or a distraction-reduced environment for
tests and final exams, may contact the Goldman Office of Disability Services (ODS),
located in the Center for Educational Resources & Counseling (ERC). It is the
responsibility of the student to register a disability with ODS, to make a specific request
for accommodations, and to submit all required documentation. On a case-by-case basis,
ODS staff determines disability status, accommodation needs supported by the
documentation, and accommodations reasonable for the University to provide.
University faculty and staff, in collaboration with ODS, are then responsible for
providing the approved accommodations. ODS is located in the ERC on the 1st floor of
the Science and Engineering Lab Complex, Building (#14). Please visit the ODS website
for more detailed information, including registration forms and disability documentation
guidelines: http://tulane.edu/studentaffairs/erc/services/disabilityserviceshome.cfm .
Portfolio: All students should keep hard copies of all of their assessed written work for
the class in a portfolio, at least until the semester is safely over. You should also keep
returned work with my comments on it, for your reference. You are strongly advised to
keep electronic copies of all of your work, too, not least because you may well want to
revise some earlier assignments and incorporate them into later ones.
Assessments and Grading Scale
Graded work for this class
The class is assessed through four major essays, seven short (usually one-page)
assignments, and a presentation. The short assignments are designed to build up to each
of the main essays: their purpose is to get you thinking about the essay topic well in
advance of the due date. The short assignments will be posted on Blackboard (under the
assignments tab); completed assignments must be submitted to Blackboard by 11:59 p.m.
on the due date. Paper copies of the essay assignments will be distributed.
The due dates and grade-weights are:
Analysis Essay (5 pages) 15% of final grade due Friday 8 February
Argument Essay (5 pages) 20% of final grade due Monday 4 March
Research Essay (6 pages) 20% of final grade due Monday 8 April
Final Essay (6 pages) 25% of final grade due Monday 29 April
Seven short assignments, each 2% of the final grade (due dates shown below)
A presentation on some instance of creative adaptation in weeks thirteen or fourteen,
worth 2% of the final grade.
The final 2% of the grade is for attending the library research sessions. I take a very dim
view of students who fail to attend library sessions: after all, the librarians are giving up
their time to work with us.
Grading Scale
In my grading scale, 90% is an A, 80% is a B, 70% is a C, 60% is a D and 59% or lower
is an F. Plus and minus grades are also possible: an A+ is 97% or over (B+ is 87% and
C+ 77%) and an A- is 90-93% (B- is 80-83% and C- 70-73%). The essays are assessed
using the rubrics shown in Appendix 1. A grade and a percentage figure for the essay as
a whole will be assigned.
The short assignments are each worth 2% of the final grade for the course. They can
receive 2, 1 or 0 points (satisfactory; deficient; not handed in at all). I will also make
brief comments on them, designed to help you revise them for the essay assignment. The
presentation is also worth 2% and will receive 2, 1 or 0 points like the assignments.
Class schedule
The readings will be discussed on the days that they are shown. (Readings that are not in
the textbook will be posted on the class’s blackboard page.) Students should have read
the assignment before the start of class, and should bring a copy of the text(s) to class
(this might entail printing out texts that are posted on blackboard). Paper copies of essays
are due at the start of class on the days indicated. Assignments should be posted on
Blackboard on the due date (any time before 11:59 p.m.).
I have the right, and even the responsibility, to change the discussion topics and readings
shown on this schedule as circumstances warrant. Students should therefore frequently
check their Tulane email accounts and our class blackboard page for revisions to the
printed schedule.
Unit One: Fake news (Analysis essay)
The Analysis Essay (5 pages; 15% of final grade) is due on 8 February (Friday of
week four).
For this essay, students will analyze an episode of The Colbert Report and consider why
he chooses this particular method of creating comedy from the news. A more detailed
essay question will be distributed in class (and posted on our Blackboard page). The
other classwork in this unit is analytical in nature, and explores the impacts of seemingly
small choices writers make, such as word choice, sentence structure, and organization.
Week
One
Week
Two
Monday
Introduction
Martin Luther
King Day – no
class
Wednesday
The Colbert Report
They Say/I Say pp.141-4
Assignment 1 due: why does
Colbert choose to parody the
news?
Week
Three
Paragraphs
They Say/ I Say pp. Tone
133-4
Week
Four
The importance of
titles
They Say/ I Say
pp.121-8
Academic writing
They Say/ I Say pp.19-29
Liz Addison, “Two Years are
Better than Four”, They Say/ I
Say pp. 211-14
Friday
The news and comedy
Word choice
Assignment 2 due:
quote and analyze
Colbert.
Focus and flow
Analysis Essay due
They Say/ I Say pp.5577
Fox, “Is the Alcohol
Message All Wrong?”
Unit Two: Biological Imitation (Argument Essay)
The Argument Essay (5 pages; 20% of final grade) is due on 4 March (Monday of
week eight).
In the argument essay, you will have to either defend or reject the statement that our
ability to imitate exactly is what separates humans from other animals. (A more detailed
essay question will be distributed nearer to the due date.) You will not need to do any
additional research to complete this essay (the reading we do in class will be sufficient),
although you can do additional research if you would like to. The two assignments are
designed to help you move from the class readings to formulating your own considered
response to the essay question.
Week Five
Week Six
Week Seven
Monday
Mardi Gras – no
class
Wednesday
Introducing the
argument essay
Assignment 3 due:
response to
Friday’s discussion
They Say/ I Say
pp.30-41
The Selfish Gene
chapter two
No class
Individual meetings
Assignment 4 due:
essay plan (please
bring with you to
our meeting)
Extract from On the
Origin of Species
Evaluating
Arguments
Sebastian Mallaby,
“Progressive WalMart. Really”, They
Say/ I Say pp.62023
Friday
How apes and
humans learn by
copying (readings to
be posted on
Blackboard)
Meltzoff et al.,
“Foundations for a
New Science of
Learning”
Blastland, “Go
Figure: Would you
believe a man with a
beard, or a suit?”
Ropeik, “So You
Think You Can
Think? Think
Again”
Unit Three: Technological Imitation (Research Essay)
The Research Essay (6 pages; 20% of the final grade) is due on 8 April (Monday of
week thirteen).
In the research essay, students will both undertake research on the Stop Online Piracy Act
(SOPA) of 2011 and formulate a response to it (that is, an argument). Students will be
able to choose their own theses within this general topic. For this essay, doing some
research is compulsory. (A more detailed essay assignment will be distributed later in the
semester.)
Week Eight
Week Nine
Monday
Argument Essay
due
Introducing SOPA
They Say/ I Say pp.
78-91
Wednesday
Student library
research session:
SOPA
Assignment 5 due:
annotated
bibliography
Friday
Student library
research session:
SOPA
Kopimism (readings
to be posted on
Blackboard)
Evaluating sources
Week Ten
Examples
Robin Wilson, “A
Lifetime of Student
Debt? Not Likely”,
They Say/ I Say
pp.256-72
The Pirate Party
(reading to be
posted on
Blackboard)
Assignment 6 due:
essay plan and
thesis statement
Bissell, “Extra
Lives: Why Video
Games Matter”,
They Say/ I Say
pp.349-62
They Say/ I Say
pp.92-101
Second Life
(readings to be
posted on
Blackboard)
Unit Four: Imitation and Adaptation in Literature and Culture (Final essay)
The final essay (6 pages; 25% of final grade) is due on the last day of class, 29 April.
The final essay question is whether we need “new rules” for plagiarism, and if we do,
what these should be. The final essay must revise at least one piece of writing, either
short or long, that the student has submitted earlier in the course. The topic is
deliberately wide-ranging to allow students to bring in work from any of the three earlier
essays.
In this unit, students will make five-minute presentations on some instance, of their
choosing, of imitation or creative adaptation in fields such as music, art, movies, or other
media. The course will end in considerations of Shakespeare both as an adaptor (some
would say “plagiarizer”) and as the source of imitations and adaptations.
Week Eleven
Monday
Spring Break
Wednesday
Spring Break
Friday
Spring Break
Week Twelve
Holiday – no class
Defining plagiarism
Week Thirteen
Research Essay
due
Student
presentations
Can a computer
create art? (readings
to be posted on
Blackboard)
Student
presentations
The Selfish Gene
chapter eleven
Week Fourteen
The Seven Basic
Plots chapter two
Student
presentations
Week Fifteen
Sources for Romeo
and Juliet
Week Sixteen
Final Essay due
Versions of
Shakespeare
Student
presentations
Versions of Romeo
and Juliet
Assignment 7 due:
two-page formal
write-up of your
presentation
New rules for
plagiarism?
Parodies and
adaptations of
Romeo and Juliet
Appendix 1: Grading Rubrics
These are the rubrics that I will use to grade your essays. A grade and a percentage figure
for the essay as a whole will be assigned, based on the grades given in each of the five
categories of the rubric. An essay that gets mostly As will get an A grade, mostly Bs will
get a B grade, mostly Cs will get a C, and mostly Ds will get a D or an F.
GENERALIZED RUBRIC (FOR THE FINAL ESSAY)
CONTENT: IDEAS
ARE
…
many, complex, ambitious, surprising, carefully situated among readings
A
somewhat familiar, few in number, simpler, with limited relation to readings
B
only slight extensions of class discussion without real engagement readings
C
discernible only as repetition of class discussion without relevance to reading
D
COMPLEXITY: THE
PAPER AS A WHOLE OFFERS A
timely, passionate, uniquely voiced articulation of an intricately logical conflict
A
less urgently felt, more generalized articulation of a simpler issue
B
flat rehearsal of fairly obvious truisms
C
a complete absence of any engagement with the potentials of the assignment
COHERENCE / ARRANGEMENT: FOCUS
IS
…
D
…
achieved through many subtle strategies of coherence, cohesion, and emphasis
A
sustained but a few, rather minor transitions could be improved
B
compromised by more than one very abrupt, graceless transition
C
not achieved because strategies of coherence, cohesion, and balance too seldom used
COHERENCE / STYLE: SENTENCES
ARE
…
varied in distinctive, consistent, original voice and memorable phrases
A
is less varied, voice less distinctive, occasional lapsing into the less-than-graceful
B
sentence-structure repetitive, dull, and often awkward
C
several sentences sufficiently ill-formed to distract reader from intended message D
CLARITY: THE
PROSE HAS
…
No errors
A
only a few, very minor errors
B
a few errors that significantly distract the reader
C
D
several errors that significantly distract the reader
D
RUBRIC FOR ANALYSIS PAPER
CONTENT: INSIGHTS
ARE
…
many, complex, ambitious, surprising, and carefully situated among readings
A
somewhat familiar, few in number, simpler, and with limited relation to readings B
only slight extensions of class discussion without real engagement with readings C
discernible only as repetition of class discussion without relevance to reading
COMPLEXITY: THE
D
PAPER AS A WHOLE OFFERS
several insights disrupt a common-sense, first-glance at what’s analyzed
A
a few insights that shift the reader’s experience of what’s analyzed
B
only one insight that offers little by way of new perspective on what’s analyzed
C
no new insights at all
. . . .
D
COHERENCE / ARRANGEMENT: FOCUS
IS
....
an elegant juxtaposition of the entity under analysis with the context enabling the analysis
A
a more haphazard articulation of the dynamic between the analyzed text and context
B
an awkward, even jumbled rotating between text and context
C
no discernible relation between what’s analyzed and the context that would enable analysis
COHERENCE / STYLE: SAME
CLARITY: SAME
AS GENERALIZED MODEL
AS GENERALIZED MODEL
D
RUBRIC FOR ARGUMENT PAPER
CONTENT:
claim is important, delivered with sufficient warrants and evidence to be persuasive
A
claim is not as important, nor crafted well enough to be altogether persuasive
B
claim is delivered with an argument too flawed to be persuasive at all
C
claim is not discernible, nor is any argumentative craft
D
COMPLEXITY:
argument is multi-dimensional, re: kinds of evidence, warrants, and counter-arguments
A
argument offers more limited evidence, warrants, counter-arguments
B
argument weakened by overmuch simplicity in evidence, warrants, counterarguments
C
argument is missing a key element, either evidence, warrants, or counterarguments
D
COHERENCE / ARRANGEMENT:
argument follows the “they say, I say” template and larger craft with subtlety and elegance
A
argument follows the template and elements of craft more formulaically
B
argument follows the template and elements of craft almost not at all
C
argument is unformed
D
COHERENCE / STYLE: SAME
CLARITY: SAME
AS GENERALIZED MODEL
AS GENERALIZED MODEL
THE RESEARCH PAPER (15 POINTS POSSIBLE)
CONTENT:
the topic has been articulated as important question that the research answers
A
the topic has either not yielded an important question or research that answers it
B
the topic has neither yielded an important question nor any research that answers it
C
the topic is never defined adequately nor linked to any relevant research
D
COMPLEXITY:
the research question has multi-dimensional, contestable answers and implications
A
the research question has a simpler array of answers and few implications
B
the research question has only one, incontestable answer and one implication
C
the research question has no conclusive answer nor any clear implications
D
COHERENCE/ARRANGEMENT:
the movement from important question to researched answers is subtle and engaging
A
the movement from important question to research answer is simpler, more abrupt
B
the movement from important question to researched answer breaks into two halves
C
the movement from important question to research answer is never made
D
COHERENCE / STYLE: SAME
CLARITY: SAME
AS GENERALIZED MODEL
AS GENERALIZED MODEL
Appendix 2: Grading Standards for English 1010
Here are general guidelines for what constitutes an A, B, C, D or F essay, using language
borrowed from Douglas Hesse and William Irmscher. Please note that a paper does not
have to fulfill all, or even most, of the criteria for a particular grade to earn that grade;
rather, the paper’s most prominent features will locate it on one or another of these grade
levels.
The A Paper ... is characterized by the freshness, ambition, maturity, coherence, and
complexity of its content. Its claims are stated clearly and effectively, supported well,
with relevant nuances interpreted and delineated in ways that go beyond the obvious. It
manifests a distinctive voice that explicitly engages a meaningful rhetorical context and,
in turn, an actual audience. It situates itself thoroughly among assigned readings, perhaps
even key, related texts in public discourse. It effectively balances the specific and the
general, the compelling detail and the larger point, personal experiences and direct
observations of the outer world. It grows out of large-scale revisions (both in terms of
content and structure). It not only fulfills the assignment, but inventively uses the
assignment as an occasion to excel. Its only errors, if any, are purely typographical and
quite rare. Finally, it manifests a certain stylistic flair – the bon mot, the well-turned
phrase, the significant metaphor – that helps to make it, for the reader, memorable.
The B Paper ... is characterized by content that is a relatively familiar, less daring, less
integrated or a little simpler than one might hope. Its claims could use more support or
more exploration, or could perhaps be stated more directly. Its voice could be more
distinct and it could situate itself more engagingly in the rhetorical context and go farther
to reach its audience. It could do more with the assigned readings, create a better balance
between specific and general, detail and idea, personal anecdote and larger point. It
fulfills the assignment, but in a way slightly perfunctory. It makes very few errors and
shows no systematic misunderstanding of the fundamentals of grammar, but its overall
structure might appear somewhat uneven. Finally, it could benefit from more large-scale
revision and from more careful attention to its style at the sentence-by-sentence level.
The C Paper ... is characterized by overmuch dependence on the self-evident, is dotted
with cliché, and is inadequately informative. Its essential point is uninteresting or only
hazily set forth or developed aimlessly. It has no particular voice, nor any significant
sense of context or audience, nor any real engagement with other texts. In terms of the
dynamics between detail and idea, it seems to lose the forest-for-the-trees or vice versa. It
fulfills the assignment but does so in a way wholly perfunctory. It has grammatical errors
that significantly disrupt the reading experience. It has not been sufficiently revised.
The D Paper ... is characterized by minimal thought and effort, which shows through the
absence of a meaningful, central idea or the lack of any controlled development of that
idea. It fails to fulfill some key aspect of the assignment. It makes no meaningful use of
other texts nor ever situates itself in any sort of context. It needlessly offends its
audience. Its sentences and paragraphs are both built around rigidly repeated formula and
soon become predictable. It is riddled with error. It has apparently never been revised.
The F Paper ... is characterized by plagiarism or lateness or a total misunderstanding of
the assignment or is simply incomprehensible owing to a plethora of error or desperately
poor organization. It has not only not been revised – it really hasn’t been begun.
Appendix 3: Descriptions of an Analysis, and Argument and a Research essay
(N.B. These are only descriptions of the types of assignment students will undertake in
this class. Paper copies of the actual essay questions and topics will be distributed
separately as the class progresses.)
The Analysis Paper
In the simplest sense, an analysis paper is a paper that discusses some text through the
lens of some other text; it asks, in this new, explicit context, what special features of the
text under consideration become more important or more ambiguous or more
controversial or more meaningful than they otherwise might seem? What are the points of
tension between the text and its context? Also, what does the text seem to foreground or
repeat or emphasize or draw into stark opposition? What aspects of the text ought one to
quote in order to support the analysis under development? What aspects ought one to
paraphrase? Teaching students to write an analysis paper this way, always considering
one text through the lens of another, will enable them to control increasingly complex
relationships with multiple texts and, in turn, to manifest that complexity in the texts they
themselves create with greater and greater control and coherence; moreover, this dynamic
(looking at one text in terms of another) will enable them to handle increasingly
sophisticated academic content in their own papers, for this simple structural dynamic
governs what can otherwise be a very confusing jumble of viewpoints. Finally, students
will see that in developing analysis papers in particular, the process of revision follows
straightforwardly as a matter of adjusting the context through which they consider the
text under analysis to see what new features thereby emerge as important and worth
further comment and deeper analysis. To “adjust the context” means to adopt a different
“lens” (a different text) through which to consider the text one is analyzing. One can
accumulate multiple lenses, and thereby extend the analysis farther and farther. This is
how one revises an analysis-paper, as distinct from other kinds of papers. Example: to
analyze The Great Gatsby through the lens of an essay about the history of the Jazz Age
will lead certain parts of that novel to seem more important than others; but if one wants
to revise this analysis significantly, one can study the novel in the context of an essay on
gender-roles in the early twentieth-century, and this will lead one’s analysis in a new
direction.
The Argument Paper
In the simplest sense, an argument paper is a paper that stakes out a position that opposes
a position staked out in some other piece of writing. It coheres around a basic structure, in
which the paper first summarizes some particular position attributed to others and then
delineates its own position as a departure from that other position. This approach to
writing argument papers according to the “they say / I say template” (as Gerald Graff and
Kathy Birkenstein have dubbed it) can be found in any number of books on the craft of
argument. As students grow more adept at using this formula, they must then cultivate
other dimensions of the craft of argument: how to articulate claims, how to use warrants,
what counts as strong evidence, what kinds of logic to use, and how to avoid fallacies.
By cultivating these elements of craft, students will be able to write more coherently and,
in turn, grow adept at managing more and more complex ideas and relationships between
thoughts; the content of their work will grow more sophisticated. And this trajectory, in
turn, should shape how revisions proceed with argument papers: a more and more
nuanced and judicious exploration of what “they say,” and, in turn, a similar development
of what “I say,” as students grow increasingly adept at articulating claims and warrants,
marshalling evidence and using logic.
The Research Paper
In the simplest sense, a research paper is a paper that uses the writings of others,
discovered independently through research, in order to advance its claims and that
documents correctly the presence of the writings of others in the paper. Students must
learn how to move from a general area of interest to an actual topic; and they must learn
to turn that topic into a question that, in turn, can lead them to a set of sources where its
answer can be found. Moreover, they need to learn how to frame research-questions in a
way that identifies the costs of failing to arrive at good answers to the research questions
– that is, they need to grapple with what is sometimes called the ‘so what’ question with
respect to their project. The process of revising a research project as the research
proceeds will lead students to produce papers that are increasingly coherent and
increasingly complex, and it will lead them to sift through an array of sources as they
arrive at those that will give their paper sophisticated academic content. Revision figures
in the process of writing research papers precisely as this adjusting of focus as different
discoveries are made in the scholarly enterprise, as students learn to keep a lively
dynamic in play between the question they want to answer and the kinds of potential
answers that they begin to discover. Through this dynamic, students can ultimately arrive
at complex, coherent papers that deliver information as a solution to some problem in the
world that, without that information, would persist at some cost.