introduction to academic writing hum101g€¦ · to write an academic paper for the first time...

1

VESALIUS COLLEGE

INTRODUCTION TO ACADEMIC WRITING – HUM101G

Course Description This course introduces students to the main conventions and requirements of academic writing and to basic elements of research processes. Students learn how to master the basic elements of a research paper, including how to formulate a research question, how to compose, analyze and synthesize arguments, to how compose a literature review and how to write strong conclusions. Students will learn and practice their critical thinking skills by engaging with research language and practice their academic writing and critical analysis skills. Students will learn how to select, question and analyze studies and how to use academic research in their own writing. In addition, critical thinking exercises will hone students’ ability to distinguish valid from invalid arguments and will teach students key analytical skills. Course prerequisites: None ECTS: 6

Learning Objectives

Knowledge

Understanding basic academic conventions and academic standards of one’s Major (Business Studies, Communications, International Affairs and International and European Law)

Understanding and applying the elements of an academically convincing argument

Basic knowledge of the academic research process, including how to locate, retrieve and choose appropriate evidence

Distinguishing between analysis and description

Skills

Arguing and Counter-arguing according to academic conventions

2

How to structure and compose a research essay, based on the reading of major theoretical approaches and their “critical opponents”

How to use appropriate style and a correct reference system

Attitude

How to reflect critically on one’s own thinking and academic skills

How to listen to arguments of others with an open mind

Academic honesty and ethical approaches to research

Course Materials

Textbook

Wayne C. Booth et al. (2008) The Craft of Research, Chicago: University of Chicago Press (3rd Edition)

Further Recommended Resources

Gordon Taylor (2009) A Student’s Writing Guide: How to Plan and Write Successful Essays, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Strunk, W., & White, E. B. (2000). The elements of style, Boston : Allyn and Bacon

Hayot, E. (2014). The elements of academic style: Writing for the humanities, New York : Columbia University Press

Ranjit Kumar (2011) Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Beginners, London: SAGE

Mats Alvesson and Jorgen Sandberg (2013) Constructing Research Questions, London: SAGE

Patrick White (2009) Developing Research Questions: A Guide for Social Scientists, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan

Course Schedule Overview

Week Topic Textbook

W1 Introduction to the Course: Becoming a Researcher Ch. 1 & 2

W2 Writing Introductions and Research Questions Ch. 3, 4 & 16

W3 Finding and Engaging with Sources I Ch. 5

W4 Finding and Engaging with Sources II Ch. 6

W5 Workshop: Citational Practice (Focus on APA) -

W6 Feedback: Research Questions and Introductions -

3

W7 – Reading and Writing Week

W8 Making Arguments and Claims Ch. 7 & 8

W9 Basic Rhetoric: persuasive appeals Ch. 9, 10 & 11

W10 Writing a literature review Ch. 12 & 13

W11 Critical thinking skills: Concept Mapping Ch. 14 & 15

W12 Elements of Style and Composition (Ch. 17)

W13 Academic Honesty and Plagiarism -

W14 Strategies for Getting Writing Done (On Time) -

W15 – End of Classes

Detailed course schedule

W01_S01 Introductory session

• Get to know each other. Student questionnaire. Presentation of the course rationale, schedule and objectives. Presentation of assignments and rubrics.

W01_S02 The mentality of the researcher

• What is research? What is the difference between academic writing and other genres? What kind of questions and reasoning we use in academic research? Becoming a researcher. Workshop: using your natural curiosity to motivate your research.

W02_S01 Start asking questions

• Getting from a general interest to a focused topic. Focus technique: ask what, where, who to find actors, processes and periods to examine. Design a good research question: focus on why and how questions to reveal patterns, causes and processes. Then ask questions about your questions. Evaluate them. Are they good enough? Can you answer them? Do you have enough (re)-sources?

W02_S02 Designing your first research question

• Workshop: work together with the professor and the class to focus your topic and design a good research question.

4

W03_S01 Introduction to the introduction

• The essential elements and the common structure of introductions. Hooking your reader to your topic and establishing common context. Presenting your research question and explaining your approach. Answering the perennial question: so what? Saying what you are going to say. Specific instructions for the 1st assignment: how to do it, what to expect

W03_S02 Finding sources I.

• Understanding the basic categories of sources. Academic and other sources. Identifying primary and secondary sources. Develop the skills to evaluate sources according to reliability, currency and significance.

W04_S01 Finding sources II.

• Seminar: Presentation of the academic databases and the online library catalogue of the VUB. How to locate sources online. How to find reliable, current and significant sources.

W04_S02 Engaging with sources

• Learn best practices for reading, note taking (and writing). Read to understand, read to criticize. Read more. When to summarize, when to quote. Take useful notes. Note context and bibliographical information. Write as you read. Manage stress.

• Strategies and techniques for deep engagement with sources. Group exercise: extracting a summary, a quote and the authority of a source.

W05_S01 Citing and referencing your sources

• Basic concepts of citation and referencing. Why and when we do it, why we follow a style. How citation deepens your argument and builds your credibility.

W05_S02 APA Style in focus

• APA is more than a reference style. Basic rules for formatting a paper according to APA. Basic language, citation and reference rules with examples.

W06_S01 Visit to the VUB library

• Presentation of the VUB library. Sections and subjects. Books and journals. How to locate physical sources. How to find more sources using sources.

W06_S02 Individual and general feedback on the first assignment

• You will receive your grades and personalized feedback. We will discuss/analyze some good and other not so good examples from the

5

submitted assignments (in full anonymity).

W07 Midterms (no classes)

• The course does not include midterm or final exams. Nevertheless you should take this week to find sources, read and write your second assignment. Deadline is coming up.

W08_S01 Making Arguments I.

• Argument as persuasion. Arguing in academic contexts. The essential elements of an argument. What is a claim or a thesis, how it becomes a conclusion. What are reasons, what kind of evidence you have to use. Basic structure and possible organizations of the argument.

W08_S02 Making Arguments II.

• Workshop: arguing with reasons and evidence, while engaging with sources.

W09_S01 Reviewing literature

• The literature review as a genre. The literature review as a process. Finding formative works as the pillars of your literature review. Identifying horizontal themes. Discussing, comparing and contrasting literature. The common language of literature reviews. Specific instructions for your second assignment: how to do it, what to expect.

W09_S02 Basic Rhetoric

• A very basic introduction to rhetoric. Patterns of reasoning and rhetorical appeals in academic writing. Workshop: using appeals to reason, emotion and authority in different contexts.

W10_S01 Planning your research paper I.

• Workshop: unpacking your argument. How to assemble all the ingredients of your argument in one page.

W10_S02 Critical thinking skills (for life and college)

• Some common patterns of logical fallacies or: how to identify bad arguments. The use of logical fallacies in everyday life and the public discourse. Avoiding common fallacies in academic writing.

W11_S01 Critical thinking skills (for life and college)

• Introduction to some basic theory of concept/mind mapping. The role of nodes, lines, and labels: the essential elements of a mind map. Speaking with shapes, creating propositions.

W11_S02 Planning your research paper II.

6

• Workshop: turning your argument into a concept or mind map.

• Also, personalized feedback for your second assignment.

W12 Planning your research paper III.

• Workshop: turning your argument into a concept or mind map.

W13_S01 Academic Honesty and Plagiarism I

• What is plagiarism and how to avoid it; definitions and legal implications; plagiarism in academic writing and copyright issues; fair use of academic content; types of plagiarism: copy-pasting, patchwork plagiarism and incorrect citation; unintentional plagiarism

W13_S02 Academic Honesty and Plagiarism II

• Workshop: identifying plagiarism

• Avoiding plagiarism: academic honesty, correct note taking, using your own research and ideas, and the importance of correct citation. Avoiding unintentional plagiarism: strategies for quoting directly, quoting indirectly and paraphrasing

W14_S01 Elements of composition and style I

• Basic grammar rules; the fundamental elements of style; format

W14_S02 Elements of composition and style I

• The paragraph as the building block of academic writing; paragraph length and structure; the title sentence and the concluding sentence; the lopsided U technique; strategies for connecting paragraphs aiming for consistency

W15 Final exams (no classes)

Course Assessment

Students will be evaluated in a continuous manner through a number of assignments which allows the student to show that they understood and can apply the learned skills and that will allow the teachers to verify that the students are able to do so. The assignments will include the formulation of three research questions, two literature reviews and one research paper. There will be no exams. Students will be evaluated on the basis of their performance as follows:

Introduction and Research Question

20%

Literature Review 1 40%

Literature Review 2 40%

Total 100%

7

Grading Scale of Vesalius College

Vesalius College grading policy, in line with the Flemish Educational norms, is as follows:

Grade Scale of 20 Scale of 100

A 17.0-20.0 85-100

A- 16.1-16.9 81-84

B+ 15.3-16.0 77-80

B 14.5-15.2 73-76

B- 13.7-14.4 69-72

C+ 13.1-13.6 66-68

C 12.3-13.0 62-65

C- 11.5-12.2 58-61

D+ 10.7-11.4 54-57

D 10.0-10.6 50-53

F Below 10 0-49

Detailed Description of Course Assignments

To write an academic paper for the first time might seem to be challenging to you but you will have the opportunity to learn academic writing step by step. To ensure that you make the best out of it, you will start your adventure with an exercise on writing introductions and research questions. You will then write two literature reviews based on two out of the three introductions you wrote earlier. Finally, from your previous exercises you will choose one topic to focus on and write a full paper of about 2000 words. Introduction and Research Question (20%) Dare to be curious and seek topics that interest you. Usually a researcher finds interest in a topic by studying interesting ideas from books or articles and identifies a blind spot - a question that remains unanswered. Start your writing exercise with reading, keep on open eye and follow your curiosity and your instincts. Observe your world attentively and think about developments in society. It will offer many puzzles you will want to investigate further. With your introduction you aim to create interest in your topic. Make sure that you provide enough information for your reader to understand your main arguments. You can best catch the attention of your reader if you include a hook at the beginning of the introduction. A hook is a beginning sentence that makes her or him want to know more your topic. It can be a controversial statement on your topic or something that is currently highly debated. Make sure that your information is well researched; you cannot just state anything because it is controversial. You always have to indicate where the information comes from. In your introduction you:

8

(i) Explain the choice of your topic and why it is academically relevant (ii) End your introduction with a clear and concise research question / statement (iii) Outline the structure of the paper and your main argument

In a well-written introduction the reader understands why he or she should read your paper. You should demonstrate that your paper contributes to the academic debate and how. You have researched an interesting topic, you might be able to fill in blind spots or you provide relevant information to the current debate. Explain clearly the relevance of your topic. How does your topic contribute to the debate? What is the importance of your topic? How can you embed your topic in the academic debate? This means you briefly state what has been said about your topic and how and why your paper contributes to the debate (only briefly – the main part of this aspect is the Literature Review – a separate section). You provide factual background on your topic and most important aspects of your topic. The first part of your introduction should lead to your research puzzle. This is the blind spot, the gap in research you aim to fill or the particular puzzling question you might have. From your research puzzle you state a clear and concise research question / statement. Make sure that your research question is detailed, but also relevant to wider debates. We will practice separately the art of writing and designing meaningful research questions. In the last part of your Introduction you explain how you will proceed in your paper. This is very straightforward because we provide you with a structure for your paper. In this section you also outline your main argument. Often readers (and indeed, professors that grade you) can already gauge from the quality of a research question the quality of the entire essay. If the research question is too broad and too general (e.g. “How to promote world peace”, “How to generate profits”, “What is the role of the Media?”, “How can we strengthen the law”) then the essay and the arguments themselves will be too broad and the author will not be able to answer the question satisfactorily with strong analysis. If the question is too narrow or too self-evident (i.e. the question can be easily answered in 1-2 sentences) then the paper or essay is too simplistic. Make sure your research question is answerable within 2,000 – 5,000 words (5,000 words being the maximum for research papers in the 3rd year of studies), is precise (i.e. define the key concepts) and related to wider significant phenomena or issues in your chosen Major. Read widely around the topic you’re interested in to gauge the level of research (and hence research questions) already generated. A good literature review on your topic of choice should help here. 2 Literature Reviews (40% each) In your literature review you summarize the existing state of knowledge about your topic. The literature review is a wonderful opportunity to become an expert on your topic. You start to research what have been said already about your topic. What does the academic community have to say about your topic? First you provide a general overview on the topic. This has the advantage that you know and show what has already been researched on your topic so that you don’t waste time ‘reinventing the wheel’. While reading and exploring the current debate you are able to gain new ideas and perspectives on your topic. It helps you to

9

understand to tackle blind spots, to see the flaws in the existing debate. How do you achieve this? You need to read, take notes and critically engage in the debate. In a nutshell, a literature review three main purposes:

(i) To summarize and synthesize findings emerging from previous literature and studies (ii) To show how accurate and complete the state of the debate (iii) To point towards core gaps in the literature

In order to identify arguments and conceptual debates you need to show that you understand the main academic debates on your topic. How do you do that? Be a detective! First you need to gain an overview over what has been said on our topic. Start with the most salient debates, the most famous or frequently cited articles. There you will find further citations and links to other debates. Often scholars cite not only their peers but refer to contradicting views. Conduct your research always with your question in mind! Be selective with the literature; only include literature that has a direct bearing on the central focus of your research. Always ask yourself how your topic fits or contradicts the debate. Before you are able to synthesize your findings you need to:

• Make sure that you can summarize the main claim of each article/book chapter. You should be able to describe in a sentence or two the general argument of each item you read

• Instead of summarizing the articles as a whole, only focus on the aspects that are relevant to your research question

After you have collected all the important information you will need to contrast, compare and synthesize your findings. This means you need to critically engage in the debate. What are the conflicting ideas and how does your research relate to this? Read your summaries critically, try to first understand what the scholar tried to achieve with his/her research and as to whether conclusions contribute to your research topic. Compare multiple findings, related them to your research topic and formulate your own arguments from the stated facts. Evaluate the strength and weaknesses of the literature and show the blind spots in the debate. Engage in the literature critically and try to find out which questions remained unanswered. Some papers state information that is out-dated or flawed. You should always be critical and read your articles sceptically. We know this is not an easy task. Bear in mind even famous scholars can be wrong. But do engage with publications in peer-reviewed, high-impact journals. But remember, there are always different perspectives, learn to perceive information from different angles. A blind spot can be that the authors only applied one theory to the phenomenon and you like to research the topic from another perspective or simply update the facts. In order to compare you need to understand the different schools, arguments and debates:

10

• Do not simply summarize item by item e.g. do not use this structure: Author A says this and Author B says

• Instead: Group the studies or authors into camps or schools of thought • You can group them by the theories they defend, or different methodological

approaches or different policies they favour • Chances are high that other scholars have classified the studies before • Get into the habit of associating individual authors and major camps or points of view

with each other • ?

Deadlines Introduction and Research Question Max 250 words Deadline W5 Literature Review 1 Max 750 words Deadline W10 Literature Review 2 Max 1500 words Deadline W13 All written assignments need to be submitted as a hard copy in class, via email and on TURNITIN (www.turnitin.com). Details for the Turnitin account will be given closer to the deadlines.

Vesalius College Attendance Policy As the College is committed to providing students with high-quality classes and ample opportunity for teacher-student interaction, it is imperative that students regularly attend class. As such, Vesalius College has a strict attendance policy. Participation in class meetings is mandatory, except in case of a medical emergency (e.g. sickness). Students will need to provide evidence for missing class (doctor’s note). If evidence is provided, the missed class is considered as an excused class. If no evidence is provided immediately before or after the class, the missed class is counted as an absence. Participation implies that students are on time: as a general rule, the College advises that students should be punctual in this regard, but it is up to the professor to decide whether to count late arrivals as absences, or not. If students are absent for too many classes for a single course, they receive a penalty on their overall grade for that course.

http://www.turnitin.com/

11

- If students are absent for five 1,5 hour class sessions of a course, they

receive a penalty of 5 points on their overall grade (out of 100) for that

course.

- For each additional absence (over five) for a 1,5 hour class session, an

additional penalty of 1 point is applied to the reduced course grade.

Example 1: at the end of the semester, a student has a course grade of 75/100. Over the course of the semester, s/he missed 4 unexcused sessions of 1,5 hours for the course. No penalty is applied. Example 2: at the end of the semester, a student has an overall grade of 75/100. Over the course of the semester, s/he missed 5 unexcused sessions of 1,5 hours for the course. S/he receives a penalty of 5 points (out of a hundred), and his/her final course grade is 70/100. Example 3: at the end of the semester, a student has an overall grade of 75/100. Over the course of the semester, s/he missed 7 sessions of 1,5 hours for the course. S/He receives a penalty of 7 points, and his/her final course grade is 68/100. Additional Course Policies

Late paper policy The College considers late submissions as disruptive and disrespectful practices and strongly recommends students to work on their time management. Late papers will be assessed as follow:

• 10/100 point will be subtracted for each day delay.

• Works submitted after seven days delay are graded with an F (0). In the event of exceptional circumstances which impede the delivery of assignments within the due date, a student may request prior to the assigned due date an extension without penalty. In this case, he/she will be asked to enclose the state of his/her paper. Students must accompany this request with a medical certificate or other proof of the extreme circumstance that impeded the fulfillment of the task. Professors will examine the request and decide whether an extreme circumstance exists or does not exist. ‘Extreme circumstances’ must be significant, unpredictable and serious. As follows, these include medical treatment or distress for a family crisis or loss. These do not include time management problems, technical problems with the computer, inability to find sources, attending a wedding.

Academic Honesty

Academic dishonesty is NOT tolerated in this course. Academic honesty is not only an ethical issue but also the foundation of scholarship. Cheating and plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) are therefore serious breaches of academic integrity. Following the College policy, cheating and plagiarism cases will be communicated in writing to the Associate Dean for Students and submitted to the Student Conduct Committee for disciplinary action. If you refer to someone else’s work or your own past work, appropriate references and citations must be provided. Grammar, spelling and punctuation count, so use the tools necessary to correct before handing in assignments.

12

Courtesy

Proper classroom etiquette includes arriving on time and staying for the full lecture, refraining from distracting other students during the lecture, listening attentively until the professor dismisses the class, and treating the opinions of other students with respect.

13

Major Learning Objectives, Teaching Methods, Testing and Feed-back Questionnaire Course code and course name: HUM101G Global Politics Summary: Number of assignments used in this course: 5: Research Questions and Introduction; Literature Reviews (2); Number of Feedback occasions in this course (either written or oral): 5: Research Questions and Introduction; Literature Reviews (2); Number and Types of of Teaching Methods: Ex cathedra; concept mapping; workshops; scaffolding exercises Does your course require graded student oral presentations? No

Please fill out the following table per course you teach.

Major Learning Objectives

Course Learning objectives addressing the Major Objectives (choose the most

important ones that your course actually addresses)

Methods used to Teach Course

Objectives

Methods (and numbers/types of

assignments) used to test these learning objectives

Type, Timing and Numbers of

Feedback given to Student

The bachelor has a profound knowledge of the main actors and the main processes in European and global international affairs and is able to apply this knowledge in the current international affairs.

-

- - -

The bachelor has a demonstrable insight in the theoretical and historical frameworks in the academic literature on international affairs. He is able to apply these frameworks in order to understand and interpret the current processes and

-

- - -

14





Objectives





dynamics in international affairs.

The bachelor has insight into the broad societal context and is able to take this societal context into account in the analysis and interpretation of current problems in international affairs.

-

- - -

The bachelor knows and is able to apply common qualitative and quantitative research methods and is able to apply these in the field of international affairs.

Understanding basic academic conventions and academic standards of one’s Major (Business Studies, Communications, International Affairs and International and European Law)

Understanding and applying the elements of an academically convincing argument

Basic knowledge of the academic research process, including how to locate, retrieve and choose appropriate evidence

Distinguishing between analysis and description

Arguing and Counter-arguing according to academic conventions

How to structure and compose a research essay, based on the reading of major theoretical approaches and their “critical opponents”

How to use appropriate style and a correct reference system

Ex-cathedra

Concept Mapping

Scaffolding

Workshops

Written Assignments (5) Written and oral feedback after each assignment

The bachelor has an open and academic attitude, characterized by accuracy, critical reflection and academic curiosity.

How to reflect critically on one’s own thinking and academic skills

How to listen to arguments of others with an

Ex-cathedra

Concept Mapping

Written Assignments (5) Written and oral feedback after each assignment

15





Objectives





open mind

Academic honesty and ethical approaches to research

Scaffolding

Workshops

The bachelor is able to apply a multi-disciplinary perspective in his analysis of international affairs.

-

- - -

The bachelor is able to work in a multi-cultural team.

The bachelor recognizes the importance of life-long learning.

- - - -

The bachelor is able to communicate clearly, fluently and accurately; as well in a written report as in an oral presentation.

- - - -

The bachelor is able to include ethical judgments in his analysis of current problems in international affairs and assesses the impact of these ethical judgments on the solutions proposed for current international affairs.

- - - -

16

HUM101G – APPENDICES

GRADING RUBRICS FOR ASSIGNMENTS Research Questions and Introductions

CONTEXT (40 points)

Topic Significance

/10 Points

The author provides a clear and convincing explanation of the choice of topic and highlights its significance

The author provides an explanation which is, however, not fully convincing

No or very weak explanation provided

Literature Review

/10 Points

The author understands and summarizes the current state of the debate in an appropriate manner

The author demonstrates limited understanding and engagement with the

current debate on the topic

No or very weak review provided

Condition/Problem

/10 Points

The author identifies an existing problem or disturbing condition (gap) in the state of the debate

The author provides a problem or condition in the literature, which is, however, not fully

accurate

No condition or problem identified

Consequence

/10 Points

The author explains in a convincing manner how the existing problem or disturbing condition in the literature is affecting our

understanding of the topic

The author does not fully grasp the consequence of the problem with the

current debate or fails to explain why it matters

No or unconvincing consequence offered

PROBLEM (40 points)

Research Question

/20 Points

The author provides a clear and meaningful research question. The research question is focused, relevant and ambitious to

allow for original and critical engagement with empirical developments, theories and debates.

The author provides a research question, but it lacks clarity, cannot be answered or is not ambitious enough (self-evident research

question).

No or poorly designed research question

Significance of the Research Question

The author provides a convincing explanation of the significance of answering the research question and succeeds in

keeping the reader interested and engaged

The author offers an answer the so what question, which is, however, not fully

convincing or superficial

No effort to convince of the significance of the research

question

17

(So What?)

/20 Points

STATEMENT (20 points)

Research Statement

/20 Points

The author provides a research statement on how to tackle the overarching research question or promises a convincing

solution

Muddled or unclear research statement and solution provided

No research statement

RUBRIC – Literature Review 100-LEVEL

Criterion Description Points Comments (or directly in paper)

Introduction

and Research

Question /

Statement /

Puzzle

(20 Points)

Explain choice of topic / concept and why it is academically and societally relevant (provide an

example)

/5

Clear and concise research question / research statement /10

Outline of structure of the paper and main argument /5

Literature

Review

(40 Points)

The literature review identifies the relevant (i.e. to the chosen topic) arguments and debates in the

literature and places the concept in the wider academic context

/10

It compares, contrasts and synthesizes the main authors and arguments /15

It evaluates strengths and weaknesses of the literature and identifies clear gaps the student’s paper

addresses

/15

Structure

(10 Points)

The paper is structured in a coherent and logical way – with clear subsections – supporting the

clarity of the argument and analysis

/5

A coherent line of argumentation, linking back to the main research question /5

Formal

Aspects

(20 points)

Correct use of language (spelling, grammar, expression) /5

Correct citation and bibliography /10

Appropriate number of sources /5

18

Criterion Description Points Comments (or directly in paper)

Conclusions

(10 points)

Stating in clear and succinct manner the result of the conceptual analysis and main answer to the

research question

/5

Critical, open-minded and non-defensive evaluation the validity of the student’s own arguments and

results to explore further avenues of research

/5

TOTAL Final and overall comments:

/100

APPENDIX –

EXPLANATION OF POINT VALUES FOR EACH MARKER

Criterion/Marker Excellent / Very good (A/A-) Good / Average / Below Average (B+ to D) Fail (F)

Introduction and

Research Question /

Statement / Puzzle

(20 points)

Choice of Topic (5) The author provides a clear and convincing explanation of the choice

of topic and highlights its significance (5-4.05)

The author provides an explanation which is,

however, not fully convincing (4-2.5)

No or very weak explanation

provided (2.45-0)

Clear and Concise

Research Question /

Research Statement (10)

The author provides a clear and meaningful research question. The

research question is focused enough to enable an in-depth analysis and

is relevant and ambitious enough to allow for original and critical

engagement with empirical developments, theories and author debates.

The author provides a research statement on how to tackle the

overarching research question. Sub-questions are used if research

question is too complex (10-8.1)

The author provides a research question, but it

lacks clarity, conciseness or is not ambitious

enough (self-evident research question). Muddled

or unclear research statement (8-5)

Poorly designed research question

No research statement (4.9-0)

Outline of Structure of

Paper and Argument (5)

The author provides a clear outline of the main argument and will how

she/he will structure the paper (5-4.05)

The author provides an outline of the main

argument and an indication of the structure – but

lacks clarity (4-2.5)

No or very weak outline (2.45-0)

Literature Review

Analysis (40 points)

Relevant Arguments and

Debates / Academic

Context (10)

The literature review identifies the relevant (i.e. to the chosen topic)

arguments and debates in the literature and places the student’s own

topic in the wider academic context (10-8.1)

The literature review identifies some relevant (i.e.

to the chosen topic) arguments and some debates

in the literature. The student places his or her own

topic in an academic context – but this is not fully

explored (8-5)

No relevant literature is provided or

only weakly explored. Limited or

no wider academic context

provided (4.9-0)

19

Criterion/Marker Excellent / Very good (A/A-) Good / Average / Below Average (B+ to D) Fail (F)

Compare, Contrast and

Synthesis (15)

The student compares, contrasts and synthesizes a wide range of key

authors and arguments in the literature review (15-12.15)

The student mentions some of the key authors

and arguments, but does not fully and actively

synthesize the material or compares and contrasts

in a limited manner; or only does one of the two

(12-7.5)

No or very weak synthesis and/or

comparing & contrasting or

arguments and authors (7.35-0)

Evaluation of

Strengths/Weaknesses and

Gaps (15)

The literature review evaluates strengths and weaknesses of the

literature and identifies the relevant gaps the student’s paper addresses

(15-12.15)

Some strengths and weaknesses of the literature

are identified but the gap the student’s paper

seeks to address is not fully clear (12-7.5)

No or very weak evaluation – gaps

not explained or weakly explained

(7.35-0)

Structure (10 points)

Clear Structure (5) The paper is structured in a coherent and logical way – with clear

subsections – supporting the clarity of the argument and analysis

(5-4.05)

The structure is generally logical and coherent,

but at places unclear – the sub-sections could be

clearer or better organized (4-2.5)

No or very unclear/incoherent

structure (2.45-0)

Clear and Coherent Line of

Argumentation (5)

A coherent line of argumentation (red thread running through the entire

paper), linking theories and empirical examples back to answering the

main research question (5-4.05)

Argumentation line is not always clear or

coherent – theories and examples are not always

linked back to the main research question (4-2.5)

Unclear / absent line of

argumentation – fragments that are

not linked back to the research

question (2.45-0)

Formal Aspects (20

points)

Language and Spelling (5) Correct use of language - correct spelling, grammar, and English

expression (5-4.05)

Use of language with occasional flaws in

spelling, grammar and expression (4-2.5)

Very flawed use of language with

many spelling and grammar

mistakes (2.45-0)

Citation (10) Correct and consistent use of citation method and correct bibliography

(10-8.1)

Occasional mistakes in citation method and

bibliography (8-5)

Recurring mistakes in citation and

bibliography (4.9-0)

Number of Academic

Sources (5)

Appropriate number of academic sources used (5 sources) (5-4.05) Acceptable number of sources (3 sources) (4-2.5) Inadequate number of sources used

(less than 3 sources) (2.45-0)

Conclusion (10 points)

Results (5) The student states in clear and succinct manner the result of the

analysis and main answer to the research question. (5-4.05)

General conclusions are provided, but research

question is not fully answered. (4-2.5)

Unclear conclusions / absence of

conclusions. Research question is

not answered

(2.45-0)

Evaluation of Own

Arguments and Further

Avenues for Research (5)

Critical, open-minded and non-defensive evaluation the validity of the

student’s own arguments and results to explore further avenues of

research (5-4.05)

Some evaluation of the validity of own

arguments, but more critical engagement with

own arguments and further avenues for research

not fully developed (4-2.5)

No or weak evaluation of own

arguments. No or weak outline of

further research avenues

(2.45 – 0)

introduction to academic writing hum101g€¦ · to write an academic paper for the first time...

Documents