Spring 2016 – ENGL102

Spring 2016 – ENGL102 Evaluation Paper • Draft for peer review due Thu Feb 11 • Evaluation draft due Tue Feb 16 For the evaluation paper, you will write a critical analysis. A critical analysis paper asks the writer to make an argument about a particular essay or group of essays. The goal is two fold: one, identify and explain the argument that the author is making, and two, provide your own argument about that argument. One of the key directions of these assignments is often to avoid/minimize summary – you are not writing a book report, but evaluating the author’s argument. These nine articles deal with writing in general. Elbow and Fish discuss the teaching of writing; Didion, Goldberg and Hood explore pre-writing activities; Orwell and Lutz look at rhetorical situations; and Baron and Shipley & Schwalbe focus on applications of writing. For this assignment, choose one of the sets of readings from above (e.g., Elbow and Fish, or Orwell and Lutz). Potential points of criticism Sometimes it can seem intimidating to “criticize” an article; after all, they are professors and professionals. However, part of this exercise is to expose the fact that even though these authors are highly qualified, they are still advancing an argument and providing evidence—their aim is to persuade you that their argument is true, not to just present facts. Once you recognize that these authors are making arguments, you can analyze whether or not you find their argument compelling. Following are some possible questions you could ask to evaluate arguments: • Theoretical questions – How does the author understand the situation? What is his/her theoretical background? How would this influence their view of the situation? • Definitional questions - Are all the concepts in the text clear? Does the author define a concept vaguely to allow it to travel across different situations? If a concept can relate two seemingly different situations, is the concept meaningful? • Evidence questions – Does the author’s evidence support his or her argument? Does s/he have enough specific evidence to prove the more general point? Does the author underemphasize or ignore evidence that is contrary to his/her argument? Is the evidence credible? Can you identify a bias in the evidence? • Implication/Policy relevance questions – What are the implications of this argument? Are those implications positive or negative? How has the author dealt with this issue? • Other approaches – Is the author’s argument consistent throughout the text? Or, does the conclusion seem to offer a different argument than he/she presented in the introduction? Does the author’s background have important implications for their argument? Do the specific language choices of the author betray a certain ideology or bias, or frame the argument in a certain way? Structuring a Critical Analysis Paper Most critical analysis papers begin with a short summary of the work and then dive in to the argument. Since most of these paper assignments are short, it is important to be concise in all parts of your analysis. Writing an outline (and following it) is crucial to remain focused on your argument and avoid summary or irrelevant description. Following is a sample outline for a critical analysis paper: • Introduction o Identify the work being criticized o Present thesis, the argument about the work o Preview your argument -- what are the steps you will take to support your argument? • Short summary of the work o Does not need to be comprehensive -- present only what the reader needs to know to understand your argument • Your argument o Your argument will likely involve a number of sub-arguments -- minitheses you attempt to prove to support your larger argument's truth. For example, if your thesis was that the author's presumption that the world will soon face a "clash of civilizations" is flawed because he inadequately specifies his key concept, civilizations, you might support this by: § noting competing definitions of civilizations § identifying how the examples do not meet the example of civilizations § argue that civilization is so broad and non-specific that it is not useful. o This should be the bulk of the paper. • Conclusion o Reflect on how you have supported your argument. Point of the importance of your argument. Note potential avenues for additional research or analysis. You should write no less than 4 pages (approx. 1,000-1,200 words), double-spaced, standard 12-point font, with 1” margins. Make sure you include your name on your first page. Use a standard citation/documentation style (use the standard style in your discipline, or default is MLA). Your work will receive feedback on argumentation (originality, depth of critical thought), organization, evidence, and grammar/mechanics. Save your paper in .doc(x) or .rtf format following this file naming convention: lastnamefirstname_evaluation (e.g., my paper would be beach-david_evaluation.docx). To submit your paper, follow these instructions: • Click on the assignment name in Coursework • Scroll down to Attach File • Click on Browse My Computer • Select your file (be sure the file name follows the above convention) • Click Open in the file window • Click Submit