AE #3 (10%)
due 11/19/14 by 2:00 p.m., submitted as .doc or .docx to Bb Assignments
Our theorists in this unit will help us to engage with mediated public discourse about higher education, and if you have done your work so far this semester, you will be well equipped to engage. For this assignment, I'm asking you to analyze how certain authors try to promote complex discussions of or raise questions about what are often seen as unquestional topics in higher education. Please choose one of the following tasks (all of these texts are located in “Cases & Genres” in Bb):
- An analysis of Meisenhelder “MOOC Mania” or Schweizer “Confessions of an Unreconstructed MOOCher” (Higher Education Debates).
- An analysis of the conversation constructed between Schiff “Can Wikipedia Conquer Expertise?” and Richtel's “In Classroom of Future, Stagnant Scores” (Higher Education Debates). Since you are accounting for a conversation between two pieces that deal with fairly different claims, you'll want to take plenty of time to read and think through the various positions each other takes. You may find that they share -- and do not share -- certain assumptions about the role of technology, and even the notion of "technology" vs. "technologies," in higher education.
- An analysis of the conversation constructed between Rose “Why School?” and Berger/Fisher “Fueling Economic Growth” (Higher Education Debates). Since you're accounting for a conversation, you'll want to take plenty of time to read and think through the various positions each author takes, since the conversation is not as simple as their simply agreeing or disagreeing on a single issue. You may find, however, that they share -- or do not share -- certain assumptions about the value of higher education.
- An analysis of the conversation constructed between Chomsky “America's Universities Destroyed?” and Berube “The Humanities Declining?” (Higher Education Debates). As above, since you're accounting for a conversation, you'll want to take plenty of time to read and think through the various positions each author takes, since the conversation is not as simple as their simply agreeing or disagreeing on a single issue. You may find, however, that they share -- or do not share -- certain assumptions about the purpose and function of higher education.
Please use 2-3 of our critical texts from the “Higher Education” and “Social Policy” spheres to aid your analysis of the genre you select. This gives you a lot of options to do a very deep analysis of the genre you select, and I want you to show off your abilities to really use the critical texts as analytical tools.
For example, your analysis might consider some of the challenges to traditional notions of ethics or integration in discussions of higher education curriculum. Or, you might consider how current in higher education policy come from having to redefine--or make us redefine--basic concepts like language, information, intellectual ownership, or education. Or, you might look for the principal stasis on which highly politicized arguments about education are conducted, or discuss some component of the argument's or the genre's rhetorical velocity, combined with its appeal to time, place, or some other shared identification or dis-identification. Or, you might consider the central controversy or conflict level, or how the writer tries to suspend or resolve it. You may do any combination of these things that makes sense and allows you to discover something unique or non-obvious about the mediated public discourse of higher education.
However, please remember that these concepts are merely your tools--they are not themselves your thesis statement. It is the discovery that will be your “thesis” for the Analytical Essay.
Citations for Genre Samples
- By this point in the semester, you should be accustomed to citing various genres, so I will remind you of the <Hacker/Bedford MLA Citation Guide>, which is also linked from the “Helpful Resources” page of our course blog. Any of the genres you are selecting from above will have a citation style that you can locate from the drop-down menu in Hacker's list.
Evaluation Criteria
Audience Construction – Although I am the first evaluator of the essay, you should compose it for an audience somewhat broader than me. Assume a thoughtful reader who needs to be convinced of your careful handling of textual and contextual evidence. You can assume some familiarity with our critical texts, but you should still find a way to implicitly communicate your reasons for writing and you should help your reader(s) understand the dilemma that prompts you to write.
Thesis & Argument – Your essay should be guided by a thesis statement (or statements) that demonstrates the complexity of your unique realization or claim, is not simply a summary of the texts’ main purpose or theme, and does not simply state the obvious about the texts you are reading. Your thesis may act like a “thread” for your main and supporting points. Think of this as your stasis—the question that you set out to answer. If you are comparing two texts, your thesis may involve discussing how they work together or what you learn about one from analyzing it alongside another.
Focus & Scope – Your analysis should make a unique claim—preferably, not too broad or general that it cannot be sufficiently supported, and not too narrow that it cannot be sufficiently developed. Your essay should demonstrate a knowledgeable (and even sophisticated) use of the concepts we are learning. If page length helps you get a sense of scope, then plan on ~3 single-spaced pages, not counting the “Works Cited.”
Organization & Coherence – How you organize your analysis should ultimately reflect the claim you want to support. This includes an engaging introduction and conclusion, useful transitions, and adequate development of each point. Offer your realization near the beginning of your essay, and consider your conclusion a synthesis rather than a summary.
Evidence & Justification – Above all, your claim should be relevant and valid to the discourse situation in which the text was written. It should provide reliable and specific examples from the genre sample(s) you examine, the critical texts we have read in class, and other relevant texts if you find you need them. It should adequately set up or introduce any quoted passages, explain outside references, and put these passages and examples into conversation with each other (beyond just referencing key terms). Please cite specific incidents, images, and other textual details, using parenthetical citations when you paraphrase or quote from any source. Please avoid extensive block quoting.
Language & Style – Your analysis can be confident and still carry a balanced tone, with neutral language and strong sentences. Your use of terms should be thoughtful, even elegant. You should not need to rely on excessive metadiscourse, “I think/feel/believe,” or “In my opinion” statements to carry your argument forward. It should always be clear who is saying what. Try putting dense or complicated language into your own words, and be sure to report names and titles accurately. No patterns of sentence- or paragraph-level error should get in the way of meaning. Spelling and punctuation should be checked.
Discourse Conventions – In addition to following MLA style for your parenthetical citations and Works Cited, please format your essay so that it is easy for me to read, including 11- or 12-pt. font, and standard 1” margins. Titles are important for foreshadowing your analysis and establishing common ground with an unfamiliar reader. The title of your analytical essay should engage us while also reflecting the argument you will ultimately make. Remember to cite or attribute visual components.
Please feel free to ask me if any part of the assignment is unclear or if you’re stuck while working through an idea. Start early!
