Research Paper

Three Ideas:
Project Ideas Due: Friday, March 25th by 11:59 pm
Percentage: 5%

Annotated Bibliography:
Annotated Bibliography Due: Sunday, April 3rd by 11:59 pm
Percentage: 10%

First Draft:
First Draft Due: Friday, April 15th by 11:59 pm
Percentage: 15%

Peer Review:
Peer Review Due: Monday, April 18th (BY CLASS)
Percentage: 5%

Final Draft - Grant:
Final Draft Due: Wednesday, April 27th by 7:30 pm
Percentage: 20%

Total Percentage: 55%

General Overview

Over the next few weeks, we will be working on writing an 8-9 page research paper (at least 2,500 words) making and defending an argument about either H. G. Wells’s Ann Veronica or Constance Lytton’s Prisons and Prisoners. The paper should have something to do with British Suffragettes, but your topic is largely up to you! You must use at least 5 peer-reviewed, scholarly sources (see below).

Three Ideas

For this component of the project, you need to pitch three ideas (or topics) for your paper to me. When I give you feedback on this portion, I’ll be trying to help you pick the best and most feasible idea. I will not accept other portions of this paper until your paper idea has been approved.

Please note that you are NOT writing a thesis yet. You need to have done research to develop a compelling and thoughtful thesis for a research paper. So, for this part of the project, you’re just pitching the topic.

When you pitch your three ideas, you’ll be writing a short (~100 word) explanation/description of each idea. Please order your ideas in order of preference, the first one being the one you’d prefer to work on the most. Your description should explain what your topic is and why you’re specifically interested in investigating that idea.

When coming up with your three ideas, it might be helpful to think of what questions you have about the text you are most interested in and go from there. Remember, you want an idea that lends itself to debate, but that’s still reasonable and able to be answered with textual evidence. We’ll talk more about this in class.

Evaluation Criteria

Follows the appropriate instructions (three ideas, ~100 words per idea)
Pitches three debatable topics (meaning, you couldn’t answer any associated questions with a “yes” or “no”)
Thinks critically about your ideas, both in the framing and in the description
Your ideas show engagement with the text, whether that be Ann Veronica or Prisons and Prisoners
Utilizes proper mechanics; style, sentence structure, and spelling promote coherence, clarity, and credibility

Annotated Bibliography

You will be responsible for finding at least five (5) scholarly, peer-reviewed sources related to your approved topic AND coming up with a thesis statement for your paper.

For each scholarly, peer-reviewed source, you must write a 100-150 word entry explaining the central argument of your source and it’s relevance to your topic (i.e. how you plan to use it). Be specific and clear here. All citations should be completed in MLA. We’ll talk about this more in class.

For your thesis, you should be focused and specific while providing a debatable and interpretive argument about either Ann Veronica or Prisons and Prisoners. We’ll talk about this more in class.

Evaluation Criteria

Follows the appropriate instructions (five peer-reviewed sources with 100-150 word descriptions; thesis statement)
The entries display engagement with the secondary sources and you have a debatable and interpretive thesis
Citations are complete and correct according the to the MLA style guide
Utilizes proper mechanics; style, sentence structure, and spelling promote coherence, clarity, and credibility

First Draft

Although this is called a “First Draft,” it should be a polished first draft, NOT a Shitty First Draft, although that will likely come first.

Your final draft will be at least 2,500 words, but the First Draft only needs to be at least 1,500 words (roughly five pages).

Your argument (or thesis) about your approved topic should be focused and specific and you will want to clearly state your argument as well as suggest the implications of that argument. Your introduction should contextualize your topic briefly and identify your thesis. The body of your paper should then provide support and evidence for your given thesis, and the conclusion should sum everything up.

You must use at least five scholarly, peer-reviewed sources. These can be the same as your Annotated Bibliography, but do keep my feedback on both your source choices and your thesis in mind as you draft your paper.

You paper and sources should be formatted according to MLA.

Evaluation Criteria

Follows the appropriate instructions (at least 1,500 words; uses five sources; formatted according to MLA)
The central argument is clear, interesting, and debatable
Any claims are well-supported by textual evidence (which you integrate and contextualize well) and you engage with primary AND secondary sources throughout with proper citations
All ideas are presented in a logical and coherent manner (i.e. your paper is well-organized and flows from idea to idea, all of which relate back to the central argument)
Utilizes proper mechanics; style, sentence structure, and spelling promote coherence, clarity, and credibility

Peer Review

Instead of providing the critically constructive feedback that is common in the professional peer-review process, student reviewers often refrain from making substantive suggestions for revision. However, for this assignment, we’ll be trying to make this process more useful by making peer review more closely resemble the “real-world” practice of scholarly peer review.

Your recommendations to your peer should provide them with advice for meeting the expectations of readers familiar with excellent student papers. Letting your peers know whether you are persuaded by all their arguments–and what it would take to persuade you if you are not–is some of the most useful feedback a writer can receive.

The purpose of this assignment is to write a peer review letter (of at least 400 words) to one of your classmates:

Step 1: Swap essays with classmate. I’ll be assigning you a peer review partner on the morning of Saturday, April 16th. If you do not turn in your first draft by the time I put people into groups, you will not be able to participate in peer review. Remember, the first draft of the research paper is due on Friday, April 15th by 11:59 pm.

Step 2: Read your partner’s draft fully for the first time.

A note on grammar and spelling: At this point in the writing process, we are not yet at the editing stage. This peer review should be more concerned with the overall structure and effectiveness of the argument. But you may be distracted by misspelled words or have questions about comma usage, so you can point out to your partner some editing concerns you spotted. However, don’t set out to look for these types of concerns.

Step 3: Re-read your partner’s draft fully for the second time and write a peer review letter.

Essentially, you will write a letter addressed to the paper’s author that encourages and helps them revise. Try to respond to the following prompts about your partner’s draft in your letter. Your honest yet diplomatic responses are invaluable. Have confidence in your reading skills and share your opinions of the draft’s strengths and weaknesses. If you are confused by (or, conversely, persuaded by) certain aspects of the draft, chances are other readers will respond similarly.

When I look at these letters for grading purposes, I’ll be looking at how well organized and supported your letter is. A letter is well organized if it prioritizes your advice–what are the most important things the writer should do? These suggestions go first. A letter is supported if you provide good, specific reasons for the recommendations you make. That might include pointing out specific passages from the paper; pointing to something else in either Ann Veronica or Prisons and Prisoners (whichever text applies) the author might consider (whether as another useful example or as something that complicates their argument); or noticing a more global issue with your peer’s writing. If the latter, make sure you provide examples–maybe something such as, “you tend to provide summary rather than analysis as shown by your third and fifth paragraph. To fix this, I would add in more textual evidence such as X.”

In many ways, this review is also an argument. You need to persuade your readers that your reading has been careful and your recommendations are sound. The following questions may guide your analysis, but to write a well-organized review that prioritizes your recommendations, you need not address these questions in this order.

Thesis. First, does the thesis make an interpretive claim? Second, do you think the thesis is compelling or arguable? In other words, does it make a claim its audience (which includes you, the rest of the class, and other literary scholars) might find provocative or illuminating and one that some of us (without given the evidence and reasoning the paper provides) might even want to counter-argue? Why or why not?
Evidence. Does the paper seem to support the thesis throughout? Are the claims made supported with sufficient evidence to be persuasive? Is there evidence that is not discussed in the paper that might be relevant? Which details from the text could be used to further develop the ideas presented here? Be specific–you can even point to pages and passages from the primary text (or secondary sources, if you share some in common).
Interpretive analysis. Is the presented evidence explained, or does your partner occasionally assume that the significance of the evidence to support a claim is self-evident? Where might you partner step in and explain the textual evidence more so that we will be certain to see in it what they do?
Accuracy. Is there any point where your peer mistinterprets or misrepresents the text in your view? Does the draft consider complications, implications, and/or potential opposing interpretations? How does the draft treat these complicating factors? How could it treat these factors more effectively or persuasively?
Organization. Is there a logical order for the paper’s argument? How would you describe the logic of the arrangement: does it build toward greater and greater illumination; does it start with a “bang” by placing its most provocative argument first; or is there some other logic, such as following the temporal sequence of the story? How does this arrangement affect you? Do you get confused or lost, or do you follow it easily? How might the arrangement of this draft be improved in revision?
What do you think are currently this draft’s two greatest strengths?
What do you think are this draft’s two biggest weaknesses?

Evaluation Criteria

Follows the appropriate instructions (at least 400 words, addresses the above questions as much as possible)
Thinks critically about your peer’s paper and offers helpful suggestions
The letter is well-organized and supported

Final Draft

The Final Draft of your paper should (again) be polished and take into account your peer feedback and my feedback on your rough draft. Your final paper should be at least 2,500 words (roughly 8-9 pages).

As before: Your argument (or thesis) about your approved topic should be focused and specific and you will want to clearly state your argument as well as suggest the implications of that argument. Your introduction should contextualize your topic briefly and identify your thesis. The body of your paper should then provide support and evidence for your given thesis, and the conclusion should sum everything up.

You must use at least five scholarly, peer-reviewed sources. These can be the same as your Annotated Bibliography/First Draft, but do keep my feedback on your first draft, source choices, and your thesis in mind as you edit and expand on your paper.

You paper and sources should be formatted according to MLA.

Evaluation Criteria

Follows the appropriate instructions (at least 2,500 words; uses five sources; formatted according to MLA)
Thinks critcally about both peer and instructor feedback and edits/expands/cuts as necessary based on this feedback
The central argument is clear, interesting, and debatable
Any claims are well-supported by textual evidence (which you integrate and contextualize well) and you engage with primary AND secondary sources throughout with proper citations
All ideas are presented in a logical and coherent manner (i.e. your paper is well-organized and flows from idea to idea, all of which relate back to the central argument)
Utilizes proper mechanics; style, sentence structure, and spelling promote coherence, clarity, and credibility

Late Work

Unless we’ve talked, I will deduct 5 points for every day each assignment is late.

I owe thanks to Dr. Jessica Apolloni for allowing me to adapt her materials for this project.

Back to Syllabus