English Composition 2 Paper

The Week 2 assignment is a formal outline for your academic argument, which requires understanding of weekly instructor guidance and College Writing Handbook chapters 1, 3, and section 2.1. In Week 1, you developed your topic and constructed a research question. In Week 1, you developed your topic and constructed a research question. This week, you’ve researched the topic and can begin to develop your argument. Create your argument based on the information you have gathered through research and tracked in your research notebook.

In this assignment, you will show that you are achieving important learning outcomes:

  1. Interpret information through close and critical reading.
  2. Demonstrate effective use of the writing process.
  3. Employ effective academic tone, style, mechanics, and citation method.
  4. Integrate relevant source material effectively and ethically.
  5. Support a position appropriate to the rhetorical situation.  

You will submit a formal, alphanumeric, full-sentence outline formatted in proper APA style. The outline must organize your argument into an introduction, conclusion, and at least five body sections (approximately 550 words or more). The introduction section must include a working thesis statement, which is an arguable response to your research question. Each body section should contain a topic sentence and subordinate claims and evidence from at least five credible and scholarly sources. Paraphrases, summaries, and quotes must be cited accurately and used with integrity. This assignment requires a title page and a reference list.

Research Paper / Step 1…The Focus Paper

Focus Paper (Note–this is due by Sunday night.  No grace period for this assignment.)

This is the first assignment designed to prepare you for the 7-10 page research paper.  This assignment is not an essay–it is a set of responses to 4 questions.  This is the first step in the Research Paper writing process.  There is a model available in the Modules–your Focus Paper should look like the model.  Each response is worth 5 points.

The purpose of the focus paper is to offer you a chance to organize your thoughts on your topic, to reflect on your rationale, and to strengthen your motivation for writing it.  To start, choose a topic from the list of possible topics given in the Research Paper assignment. Then, respond to the following prompts:

1. Prior knowledge and experience:  State your topic and explain its significance to you or its importance as a social or political issue.  What personal experience or prior knowledge do you have regarding the issue?   What is your tentative position on the issue?  (This may change as you conduct your research)

2. Research questions:  While you have a tentative position on the topic, you probably have at least 2 or 3 questions you hope to answer regarding your topic.  What are those questions?  Answer one as best you can without help of any sources.  (As you continue to go through your research, keep these questions in mind and note whether or not they have been answered satisfactorily.)

3. Initial source:  Offer a synopsis of the reading selection in Rereading America that you will cite in your research paper.   Do you have a sense of how you will use it in yøur paper?  Consider:  Does it offer helpful contextual information to your topic?  Does it offer evidentiary support for your position?  A counterargument?  Does it point you to other sources?
 

4. Concerns:  Describe 1 or 2 problems do you expect to encounter as you research your paper?  How do you plan to solve them?

Guidelines for the Focus Paper

Number your responses to each section.

Raquel asks:

“Professor, can you provide us with examples for each response section of the Focus Paper.”

Student Image Thinking.png

Yes I Can.  Below Are Model Responses.

Model Responses

The purpose of the focus paper is to offer you a chance to organize your thoughts on your topic, to reflect on your rationale, and to strengthen your motivation for writing it. In about two pages run through the following prompts:

1. Prior knowledge and experience: State your topic and explain its significance to you or its importance as a social or political issue. What personal experience or prior knowledge do you have regarding the issue? What is your tentative position on the issue? (This may change as you conduct your research)

My topic is immigration. 

My tentative position is this: College students who are “illegal immigrants” should be allowed to pay in state tuition fees.
My personal experience with the issue is that I have friends who are not here “legally” but they have been here since they were in elementary school—they are here because their parents brought them here. Now they have grown up and want to go to college and they are being punished for something out of their control! I want to argue that they should pay CA resident tuition fees at local colleges like ELAC instead of out of state tuition fees that run up to 2000 dollars for 2 classes at ELAC—that is wrong. Also, I just saw in the news that in California there was legislation that would allow illegal immigrants like my friend to pay my CA resident rate at ELAC and that legislation failed! Or I think it didn’t pass. So, I think this issue is current and important and controversial.

2. Research questions: While you have a tentative position on the topic, you probably have at least 2 or 3 questions you hope to answer regarding your topic. What are those questions? Answer one as best you can without help of any sources. (As you continue to go through your research, keep these questions in mind and note whether or not they have been answered satisfactorily.)

Here are my questions:
1) I don’t know exactly what the out of state tuition fees are for ELAC, Cal State LA or UCLA—I mean, if someone from Nevada were to come to California to go to college, how much do they have to pay more than someone who is a resident? I should know this for my paper.
2) It seems illogical that someone who is born in America but in Nevada has to pay more for an education at ELAC than someone who is here illegally—how can I resolve this contradiction? Am I going to argue that an American citizen from Utah has to pay more than an “illegal immigrant” for an education at ELAC–that would not make sense to a lot of people–and here is a related question–why does a Utah resident have to pay more than a California resident if the Utah resident wants to go to college in California? What is the fiscal and legal reasoning behind this reality? I should understand that for my position.
3) What will happen to the high school graduates who all of a sudden have to pay thousands of dollars for just one semester at a community college or university?

3. Initial source: Offer a synopsis of the reading selection in Rereading America that you will cite in your research paper. Do you have a sense of how you will use it in yøur paper? Consider: Does it offer helpful contextual information to your topic? Does it offer evidentiary support for your position? A counterargument? Does it point you to other sources?

I was reviewing Rereading America, and Vincent Parillo’s essay on “The Causes of Prejudice” seems like a source I will use. There are psychological causes of prejudice and sociological causes of prejudice. I think I can use his sociological causes of prejudice in my essay because so many people are prejudiced towards “illegal” or undocumented immigrants—I will probably be able to use Parillo as an expert and so as evidence in my essay.

4. Concerns: Describe 1 or 2 problems do you expect to encounter as you research your paper? How do you plan to solve them?

I have never written a research paper. I plan to be very organized and I plan not to procrastinate. I always procrastinate on long term projects—and that has to stop. In high school, I remember my first research paper was on whales—I chose whales because I was intimidated by the whole research project so I tried to keep it simple–whales! But in the end, it was so boring and uninteresting that I ended up procrastinating and I earned a fail for not turning it in. I am interested in my topic–it seems important and I think that will help me finish it. 

English task

Assignment Purpose: In this course, our topic is: What flaws in the critical thinking process do individuals, groups, politicians and entire governments make so that tyrants are able to rise to power? Previously, to help us answer this question, we explored how Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) rose to power; this week we’re going to explore what “critical thinking” is by deciding whether the 1933 Vatican Concordant with Hitler’s Third Reich  was the result of thinking critically on the part of the Vatican.

Directions: To help you decide whether the Roman Catholic Church engaged in critical thinking when Eugenio Pascelli (future Pope Pius XII) arranged for and signed the 1933 Concordant with the Third Reich, …

1.  Research credible sources (not Wikipedia!) on the Internet to review what critical thinking is.

2.  Use Gale’s Opposing Viewpoints in Context (West library databases to research the 1933 Concordant (helpful search term: Hitler’s Pope).  

Then … in 1,250 words (five double-spaced pages in Times-New Roman font, size 12) …

1.  Explain what critical thinking is and whether the 1933 Concordant was the result of critical thinking.

2.  Learn who Edith Stein was, introduce her, write about her thoughts in regard to the Concordant, and explain how she died.

3.  Define these terms in your essay: concordant, Vatican, Vatican City-State, Holy See, and Roman Catholic.

4.  Additionally, tell your readers when Roman Catholicism began, how many Germans were Roman Catholics in 1933, what leading Nazi figures were from Roman Catholic families, how many Germans are Roman Catholic in 2018, and the estimated world population of Roman Catholics in 2018.

Requirements:

1. Include a minimum of four quotes from sources you research, in correct MLA format, 8th edition.

2. Use correct MLA format, 8th Edition; 

3. Read the college-level essay in Chapter 1 of our textbook THIS LITTLE BOOK About How to Write a College-Level Essay, and read the college-level essay examples in Chapter 3. You will need to write the same kind of college-level essay, one that is NOT a Five-Paragraph Essay and that contains a variety of paragraphs.

4.  Remember … you are not writing to me or to your peers; don’t refer to anything taking place in this class.  You are writing to a broad reader group that may NOT be familiar with Hitler or his Nazi government.  Articulate your ideas clearly, and provide any necessary background information for your readers to follow your thoughts.  See the helpful video below about how to develop a rhetorical focus for your essay.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-21443313
http://www.vaticanstate.va/content/vaticanstate/en.html
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-german-churches-and-the-nazi-state
https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-critical-thinking-definition-skills-meaning.html
  • Posted: 12 Hours Ago
  • Due: 17/01/2019
  • Budget: $50

Evaluation Essay

For this assignment, you will write your evaluation essay. You are required to submit only your final draft for this assignment (though we encourage all students to take advantage of the additional feedback a draft can provide). Use the grader’s feedback and the rubric to make revisions to your draft before submitting the final. Your second draft will be graded.

Now that you have completed Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, you are in a good position to consider what critics have written about the novel. You will need a total of two critiques (also known as critical analysis essays) for this assignment.

First, use the selection of links below to locate a critical analysis essay written about the 1818 version of Mary Shelley’s novel. You may focus most of your attention on this first critique.

Choose from among these sources:

The questions in the study guides should have helped you evaluate this criticism in your head. Now it’s time to write it down!

Your evaluation may go more smoothly if you approach the guiding questions in this order:

Evaluate the critic/author:

Who wrote the criticism you read? What credentials does the author have? (If you are using a valid source, you should be able to find these easily; these details are usually just before or at the end of the essay.)

Find the thesis of the article:

What is the thesis of the critical article you’ve chosen? What point does the author want to make about Frankenstein?

Evaluate the thesis:

Do you agree with this thesis? Why or why not? We’ve covered many ideas in the study guides. Can you find points within the guides that support your agreement or disagreement with the critical writer(s)? Look for new supporting information rather than revisiting the same ones the critics have chosen.

Evaluate the support:

Whether you agree or disagree with the thesis, does the critic provide sufficient research from the text and outside references to make a strong case? What does the article have for support from the text or outside sources? In your opinion, what makes these references valid? Do you feel the author uses this support properly?

Next, locate a second critique about the novel that includes ideas somewhat similar (genre classification, for instance) to any of the discussions you have in your essay. The second critique can either support or refute any of the claims in your paper. The objective of this portion of the essay is to further support your opinion of the primary critic’s thesis or support. Therefore, for example, if you choose a secondary article that refutes any of your claims, you will need to counteract those ideas to bring the focus of your essay back in alignment with your essay’s thesis (your personal opinion of how the primary critic is either correct or incorrect in his or her thesis claim and/or how the first critic is either effective or ineffective in his or her support). Every discussion in this essay should ultimately support the claim you make in your thesis.

For instance, if the first critic argues that Shelley’s writing is juvenile, and if you agree, does the second critic also support this thesis? How so? If the second critic does not support your assessment of the first critic’s thesis, what evidence can you use from the text to argue that the second critic is incorrect? Consider another example: if the first critic believes the novel is autobiographical, and if you disagree, does the second critic help you argue you own view of the first critic’s thesis? If so, how? Perhaps the second critic disagrees with your view and feels the novel is autobiographical– if that’s the case, be prepared to use evidence from the text to refute the second critic’s thesis and support your own argument. Using two critiques in this way will allow you to create a polished, comprehensive Evaluation Essay that allows you to connect your own ideas to those of seasoned critics.

In addition to addressing each of the evaluative components above, develop your essay so it has a clear introduction, body, and conclusion. You must include an evaluative thesis statement both the introduction and the conclusion. Ensure that each of your claims are supported with valid evidence from the literary criticism you have chosen,the novel, Frankenstein, and/or the study guides.

Using proper MLA2 style, insert parenthetical citations for all borrowed information in addition to a Works Cited page for Frankenstein and your chosen literary critiques; you are not required to cite the study guides if you use them.

Helpful Hints: For a thesis statement, try answering a question like: How and how well does this piece of criticism state and support its argument regarding Frankenstein?

You might use these as possible guidelines in crafting your thesis statement:
(Critic, aka author of the critique) uses (add critic title) to (add an adjective to describe the effectiveness of the argument such as “adequately” or “inadequately”) argue that (add critic’s thesis) by (explain why and/or include your support).
OR
(Critic)’s (add critique title) (add an adjective to describe the effectiveness of the argument such as “adequately” or “inadequately”) argue that (add critic’s thesis) because (explain why and/or include your support).

More specific thesis examples:

John Smith uses “Frankenstein Critique Essay” to adequately argue that Victor’s mother created the first monster by coddling Victor as a boy.
OR
John Smith’s “Frankenstein Critique Essay” does not effectively argue that Victor’s mother created the first monster because the novel Frankenstein too strongly supports inherent good or bad, which means nurturing roles cannot be held responsible.

The guidelines for this assignment are:

Length: This assignment should be a minimum of 3 typed pages or at least 750 words.

Header: Include a header in the upper left-hand corner of your writing assignment with the following information:

  • Your first and last name 
  • Course Title (Composition II)
  • Assignment name (Evaluation Essay, Writing Assignment 4)
  • Current Date

Format:

  • MLA-style source documentation and Works Cited
  • Your last name and page number in the upper-right corner of each page 
  • Double-spacing throughout 
  • Standard font (TimesNewRoman, Calibri) 
  • Title, centered after heading 
  • 1” margins on all sides
  • Save the file using one of the following extensions: .docx, .doc, .rtf, or .txt

Underline your thesis statement in the introductory paragraph. 

Reminder: You need at least two critiques in addition to the novel in Works Cited in order to receive the highest score. In other words, you need three sources total in cited in the essay and on the Works Cited page in order to earn the maximum points in the corresponding column on the grading rubric. Failure to meet the source minimum will result in a severe decrease in your grade.