1. Question

2. ENGL 135/A26: Academic Reading and Writing Research Assignment Instructions

   Important Dates and Deadlines:

   • Library homework assignment due: Tuesday, February 28, 2017
   • In-class research essay proposal: Thursday, March 16, 2017
   • In-class draft workshop: Thursday, March 30, 2017
   • Final research essay due: Tuesday, April 4, 2017

   General Overview:

   Research is at the foundation of all work that goes on at a university. What’s more, it is a crucial part of the life-long learning educated people undertake when they encounter an important new subject or issue. This set of assignments is designed to help you (i) become an expert on a topic of your choice and (ii) develop an effective, specific argument about that topic. In the process, you will learn skills that will prove key in upper-level university classes and beyond.

   You will begin by identifying and choosing a controversial issue related to your major field of study around which to focus your research. How will you discover such a topic? You might have come across points of interest in other classes you are currently taking. You might consider exploring some high-quality periodicals for general audiences (such as national newspapers or news magazines) for discussions of current debates that relate to your chosen field of study. Once you discover a debate or disagreement, then you can bet you’ve located a controversy.

   Next, you will need to go to the library’s archive to ensure that sufficient published information exists for you to develop a well-informed research essay and argument. Your library homework assignment will require you to create a short list of sources related to your topic. There may be a number of sources out there, but try to determine which ones seem the most promising. Introductions to library resources, like our orientation session, help you to search out, refine that search, locate, and evaluate sources.

   After I have approved your choice of topic and seen your preliminary list of sources, you will then write a paper proposal in class to try out your ideas. Following upon this in-class proposal, each of you will meet with me to discuss how your project is developing (i.e. perhaps you will need to narrow your focus even more). A sign-up sheet will be circulated at a later date.

   The final research essay will be the culmination of all the work you have done over the course of the term in ENGL135. Thus, you should expect to bring foundational, analytical, rhetorical, stylistic, and research skills to bear on this project. You are very highly encouraged to use the resources at your disposal. For instance, speak with a UVic subject librarian or even a professor working in the field you’re investigating. Go to the C.A.C. for help. Of course, you should also discuss your project with me, especially during office hours.

   ENGL135/A26: Research Essay

   Length: 1250-1500 words (approx. 6 to 7 typed, double-spaced pages; this does NOT include your bibliography and audience analysis)

   Essay due: Tuesday, April 4, 2017 (our last class period)

   Overview:

   This final term paper is an opportunity to demonstrate the reading, writing, research, and rhetorical skills you have learned over the course of ENGL135. Consider the following: how can you best establish your ethos as the author of this essay? Do you need to include pathetic appeals to be most persuasive for your audience? What is the most effective order for making your logical claims? What kinds of exigency (i.e. the necessity of your argument) can you provide to convince your audience to recognize the seriousness of your chosen issue? You will also need to employ the language skills you have honed over the course of the term, since the task is to present your argument not only correctly, but with coherence, clarity, and style!

   Research:

   To complete this paper, continue your research so that your bibliography contains as many sources as you need. For most topics, this means a minimum of ten sources (including books/ebooks, journal articles, non-print media, government sources, and popular sources, such as newspapers). However, you absolutely must use a bare minimum of five academic, peer- reviewed essays. Make sure that all your source materials are up-to-date and that you select the most persuasive arguments to integrate into your own work. Don’t pad unnecessarily to fill up space!

   Ultimately, your final essay must demonstrate competence in using, integrating, and citing sources properly in a style appropriate for your intended audience and in ways that support your position and purposes.

   You will probably discover that some sources from your Library Homework and Essay Proposal assignments are no longer useful or necessary to include anymore. For example, articles that helped you create an overview for your topic in the Essay Proposal may not assist you in writing your own sharply focused argument. Having become much more familiar with the specifics of the controversy or debate, you may discover alternative key terms that will present new, more productive avenues for research. As you uncover more about your topic, of course, your position is likely to change slightly, grow more complex, or even shift to an entirely opposing perspective. This dynamic element is to be expected, so don’t resist it. A good paper will undergo many revisions as a result.

   That being said, the work you have done should never be completely discarded. It’s a good idea to keep a research notebook or binder in which to summarize what you’ve read along the way. Or compile a folder that includes the preparatory assignments. You might choose to integrate newly discovered material by reworking a paragraph or two from your Proposal. As you work on this long paper, I strongly encourage you to recycle and revise material whenever appropriate.

   Audience and Purpose:

   What scholarly field(s) will be interested in your argument? Consider the topic’s relevance to different areas of study. Once you’ve identified to whom you should be addressing, you must also conceptualize your readers as a group that either (i) requires convincing because they are neutral or (ii) because they are opposed to your position. Arguing with people who disagree with you is the most challenging rhetorical situation, the one requiring the greatest skill from an arguer in terms of selecting, organizing, and phrasing arguments. Though arguments addressed to those who are opposed won’t necessarily overturn their convictions, a well-argued case can nevertheless demonstrate to them that a reasonable and moral person can hold a different point of view. Arguments for a neutral audience have a good chance of influencing and even winning over readers. What is your purpose?

   Because your choice of arguments, your arrangement of those arguments, and even your wording depends so much on your audience, you must also describe your intended audience and explain your assumptions about them in a written audience analysis. This analysis needs to be a paragraph in length, and you’ll attach it to the back of your paper when you submit.

   Arrangement Advice:

   This paper is longer than the others you have written this semester in order to give you a chance to develop your own arguments in more detail – backing them up with appropriate support – and to respond to other positions. A full argument on a genuine issue where something is at stake deserves special care and preparation.

   The parts of a full argument (which we will cover in class) will help you to develop and organize your argument. You will need to introduce and contextualize the debate and let your readers know how you plan to address the issues/problems. One of the most important decisions you will have to make, then, is how to distribute the “confirmation” (i.e. arguments for) and the “refutation” (i.e. counterarguments). Should you refute your opposition first? This is the usual arrangement strategy when an audience believes the opposing arguments. Or, should your positive arguments come first? It is sometimes suggested that, even with hostile audiences, strong arguments boldly framed are more likely to persuade. Or, perhaps, your characterizations of other positions should be mixed with refutation, concession, or bridging. The possibilities are extensive, so an organizational strategy is necessary.

   The A-range paper

   Research Essay Grading Rubric

   Following the assignment: The paper meets (or exceeds) the length requirements for this assignment. It includes a fully developed audience analysis of a hostile or neutral audience. It offers a well-crafted argument in support of the author’s position on a controversial topic that acknowledges and effectively handles alternate and opposing arguments. The author creates strong exigency for the argument. All of the parts of a full argument are included in this paper. A sufficient number of sources are used (probably more than ten, including at least five peer- reviewed articles), and all in-text citations correctly adhere to the requirements of an appropriate, recognizable style guide.

   Content: The paper lays out a very persuasive argument in support of the author’s position on a controversial topic. Alternate and opposing positions are handled in ways that are accurate and fair, which will convince the intended audience to acknowledge or even agree with the author’s overall argument. Compelling evidence in the form of quotations, paraphrases, and summaries is offered to convince the reader that what the author is arguing is believable. The paper accommodates itself well to the values, interests, and previous knowledge of its intended audience.

   Research: There are a variety of sources used, and all are credible and authoritative sources of information. The author has analyzed material from sources and used it strategically within his or her paper to prove his or her position is the best possible one and to overcome alternate or opposing positions.

   Organization: The arrangement strategy effectively recognizes the needs and interests of the paper’s intended audience. Paragraphs are arranged so that ideas flow logically from one to the next, and this logical order is supplemented by transition words and phrases that signal to the reader logical relations among ideas. It is difficult to imagine how this paper could be organized more effectively for its intended reader.

   Mechanics and style: The prose is clear, apt, and memorable. The paper contains few, if any, errors of grammar, mechanics, word choice, or expression. None of the errors that are present undermine the overall effectiveness of the paper. The style of writing is appropriately formal for the topic and the audience.

   The B-range paper

   Following the assignment: The paper meets (or exceeds) the length requirements for this assignment. It includes a thoughtful audience analysis. The paper makes an argument in support of the author’s position on a controversial topic that acknowledges and handles alternate and opposing arguments. The author creates exigency for the argument. All of the parts of a full argument are included in this paper. There’s a sufficient number of sources (probably ten, including five peer-reviewed articles), and citations correctly adhere to the requirements of an appropriate style guide.

   Content: The paper lays out an argument in support of the author’s position on a controversial topic. Alternate and opposing positions are handled in ways that will convince the intended audience to acknowledge the author’s overall argument is reasonable. Sufficient evidence in the form of quotations, paraphrases, and summaries is offered to show the reader that what the author is arguing is believable. The paper recognizes the values, interests, and previous knowledge of its intended audience, but it might occasionally fail to explain a point thoroughly or concisely enough for its readers.

   Research: There are a variety of sources used, and almost all are appropriate and authoritative sources of information. The author has analyzed material from sources and used it strategically within his/her/their paper to prove his/her/their position is the best possible one and to overcome alternate or opposing positions; however, there may be a few places where additional research is needed to explain a concept or prove a point.

   Organization: The chosen arrangement strategy effectively recognizes the needs and interests of the paper’s intended audience. Most paragraphs are arranged so that ideas flow logically from one to the next; sometimes this logical order is supplemented by transition words and phrases that signal to the reader logical relations among ideas, but sometimes transitions are used to link ideas that don’t logically work together. While one might offer a few suggestions for how this paper could be organized more effectively for its intended readers, it is easy to understand why ideas are presented using this organizational strategy.

   Mechanics and style: The expression is more than competent. Not only is sentence structure correct, but also subordination, emphasis, sentence length, and variety are used effectively. Some sentences could be improved, but it would be surprising to find serious sentence errors, such as comma splices, fragments, or fused sentences. Punctuation, grammar, and spelling reveal proficient use of the conventions of edited academic English. The style and tone of writing is almost always appropriately formal, but there may be the occasional lapse.

   The C-range paper

   Following the assignment: The paper meets or exceeds the length requirements for this assignment. It includes an audience analysis, but this analysis could be more fully developed. The paper makes an argument in support of the author’s position on a controversial topic that acknowledges and handles a number of alternate and opposing arguments. The author creates some exigency for the argument. All of the parts of a full argument are included in this paper. There’s a sufficient number of sources (probably about ten, including five peer-reviewed articles), and citations pretty much adhere to the requirements of an appropriate style guide, although there are some errors.

   Content: The paper lays out an argument in support of the author’s position on a controversial topic, although clarity is comprised and some points seem to be missing. Alternate and opposing positions are mentioned, but they are not always handled in ways that will convince the intended audience to acknowledge the author’s overall argument is reasonable. The author might set up opposing arguments as “straw men” or otherwise misunderstand them. Evidence in the form of quotations, paraphrases, and summaries is offered to show the reader that what the author is

   arguing is believable; however, most of this evidence is obvious or under-analyzed. There is likely to be an over-reliance on source material as evidenced by many direct quotations. The paper only sometimes recognizes the values, interests, and previous knowledge of its intended audience.

   Research: There some different types of sources used, but not as great a variety as might have been consulted. These materials are mostly appropriate (i.e. authoritative sources of information), but a few inclusions may be questionable. The author sometimes analyses material from sources and uses it strategically within his or her paper to prove his or her position is the best possible one and to overcome alternate or opposing positions; at other times, the author seems to be simply reporting on his or her research without offering sufficient analysis. There may be several places where additional research is needed to explain or prove a point.

   Organization: The arrangement strategy does not seem to take into account the needs or interests of the paper’s intended audience. There is an implicit sense of organization, but several paragraphs and/or sentences within paragraphs are misplaced to the extent that the organizational structure is recognizable but disjointed.

   Mechanics and style: Sentence structure is generally correct although the writer may show limited competence with sentence effectiveness, failing to use such elements as subordination, sentence variety, and modifiers to achieve emphasis. Comma splices, unintentional fragments, and fused sentences – errors that betray inadequate understanding of sentence structure – may occasionally crop up. Vocabulary is fairly limited. The paper may contain errors in spelling, mechanics, and grammar that reveal unfamiliarity with conventions of edited academic English. The style is not inappropriate to the reader or topic; sometimes, it is wooden and uninteresting.

   The D-range paper

   Following the assignment: The paper minimally meets or falls below the length requirement for this assignment. It includes a basic audience analysis, but this analysis needs to be much more fully developed; the audience described might be friendly to the author’s position (instead of hostile or neutral). The paper might make an argument in support of the author’s position on a controversial topic, yet fail to acknowledge and handle alternate and opposing arguments. Alternately, the paper might only refute alternate and opposing positions, without really offering a positive argumentative contribution in support of the author’s own position. The author barely implies exigency for the argument. Most of the parts of a full argument are included in this paper, but some are underdeveloped or missing altogether. There are fewer than five peer- reviewed articles documented, and the total number of sources used appears inadequate. Citations are incorrect because that they don’t consistently adhere to the requirements of an appropriate, recognizable style guide.

   Content: The paper does not develop a positive argument in support of the author’s position on a controversial topic, or it fails to handle any alternate and opposing positions. Sufficient evidence to support points is usually not provided, but, when it is, it is under-analyzed. The paper does not often recognize the values, interests, and previous knowledge of its intended audience.

   Research: There might be only one type of source used, or the types of sources being consulted are inappropriate in some significant way. They may argue in favor of one side of the debate, present inaccurate information, or be written by authors with poor ethos. The author spends a great deal of the paper reporting on his or her research without offering sufficient analysis. Additional research is clearly needed to explain or prove a claim.

   Organization: The arrangement strategy ignores the needs and interests of the paper’s intended audience. The organizational strategy is difficult to discern. Material is not arranged in a logical order, and transitions to help guide the reader are usually missing.

   Mechanics and style: There are numerous errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation. The diction and/or syntax may be so weak that sentences are sometimes incomprehensible for the intended audience, although experienced readers can make sense of what is written. Lack of proofreading may turn an otherwise adequate paper into a D paper. The style is inappropriate to the reader or topic in that it is much too informal or too stiff and convoluted to make reading pleasurable.

   The F-range paper

   Following the assignment: The paper falls significantly below the length requirement. There is no audience analysis. The paper does not offer an original argument in support of the author’s position, nor does it handle positions the author probably opposes. There is no exigency. There aren’t enough sources consulted, and sufficient peer-reviewed research is clearly lacking. If citations are present, they are incorrect.

   and/or

   Content: Either the paper doesn’t offer an argument in support of the author’s position on a controversial topic, or it doesn’t handle any positions with which the author probably disagrees. Little or no evidence is offered as support. The paper inadvertently insults the values, interests, and previous knowledge of its intended audience.

   and/or

   Research: If sources are used in this paper, at least half are inappropriate, unscholarly, or inaccurate. The author sometimes profoundly misunderstands or misrepresents sources.

   and/or
   Organization: The organization seems to a significant degree haphazard or arbitrary. and/or

   Mechanics and style: Numerous and consistent errors of grammar, spelling, punctuation, diction, or syntax hinder clarity or even basic communication. Some sentences are incomprehensible. The paper can’t really be said to have a style because language usage seems out of the writer’s control.

Related Samples