Christianity and Politics (POL-140) Spring 2016

Guidelines for Short Papers

Dr. Covington

From the Syllabus

Each student will write at least three short papers (3-pages, double-spaced) as part of preparation for class. The first half of the paper should summarize the most important ideas in the reading for that class period. The second half should offer a critical analysis of the reading or some major aspect of it. These papers will do well to address major themes in the readings, such as the nature and ends of politics, human nature, justice and political ethics, the relationship between ultimate beliefs and civil government, etc.

Finally, each student should append 3-5 analytical questions that probe the day’s reading. I will distribute a handout with guidelines for the short papers. These papers will help you learn to read texts with comprehension, distilling their content and subjecting it to critical scrutiny. They will also make for fruitful classroom discussions, as they require real engagement with the material prior to class.

These papers are due at the beginning of class and should be three pages long (word count 800-1000—this maximum is absolute). Please use double-spacing with 1-inch margins and a 12-point font. Your name should be on every page. The first page should also include the date of submission and a word-count. These papers cannot be turned in late.

General Layout and Content:

The first half of the paper should provide a concise summary of the core argument(s) in the assigned reading. This means selecting which ideas and arguments in the text are the most important and then summarizing them your own words, e.g.: “In this reading, Augustine contrasts the perfect right-ordering of divine justice with the limited, proximate justice of the temporal order.” Once the focal argument/point is identified, you can “unpack” and explain how it is derived/supported. Whenever you use conceptual terminology in explaining a text, you should clearly define what that text’s author means by that term. Well-selected quotations are quite important for this section, as you should support your claims with references to relevant texts. Parenthetical page numbers serve as adequate citations in these papers.

The second half of the paper should critically analyze the assigned reading. In it, you should focus on some puzzle or “problem” with the key ideas presented by the text. Look for logical inconsistencies, potential implications, discrepancies, ambiguities, or tensions related to key philosophical or theological ideas (see the course goals for examples). Analyzing the text in this way entails two steps: identifying a puzzle, and then seeking to answer it. This means first asking a question (or questions) of the text, e.g.: “Is Luther’s justification of coercion consistent with his endorsement of Christian love?” After exploring the question or apparent problem, you may come to a clear conclusion that resolves the puzzle, finding the author’s views to be vindicated. Alternatively, you may find that an author’s writing remains ambiguous or has an important flaw. “Critical” analysis does not mean that you must find something wrong with the author’s ideas; it simply means that you probe the text carefully and questioningly. While you should usually stay “internal” to the text in your analysis (analyzing it on its own terms) occasional comparison and contrast with other course texts can also be helpful.

NOTE: If you are leading class discussion, please bring copies of your paper for each member of the class to read at the beginning of our time together.
How to proceed:

1.  Read the questions relevant to the day’s reading. This will help you get a sense for some of the issues that arise in the reading, which will in turn prime you recognize them when you see them. I will usually distribute the questions in class and/or via e-mail.

2.  Complete the entire assigned reading. Be careful to resist the temptation to skim, looking for where my suggested questions are addressed explicitly. These only highlight several of the relevant themes—not all of them!

3.  Compile reading notes/index of important ideas. Not only is this important for our in-class discussions, but it will allow you to locate key passages as you write. Take the time; it is worth it.

4.  Distill the author’s top 1-3 points in the assigned selection. Note: do not use any external sources for this assignment (internet, books, etc.). Learning to draw out the ideas yourself is a critical part of the course.

5.  Compose your essay as per the descriptions above. Remember, if you are leading class discussion, you should bring a copy of the paper for every member of the class.

6.  Additional advice:

a.  Make every sentence count. Do not tell me what you are going to do—just do it. (You don’t need an introduction, thesis statement, or conclusion).

b.  Define your terms. Whenever you use conceptual terminology in discussing a text, be sure to clearly define what the author means by that term, e.g.: “Aristotle understands ‘happiness’ as an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue.”

c.  Cite the text. Back up your claims with references to the text. Parenthetical page numbers serve as adequate citations in these papers.

d.  Write objectively in the third person. Avoid even the implicit use of the first person. Affirmations of a text’s interestingness, practicality, or other quality (“it seemed….) are often asserted with an implicit “I think.”

e.  Write simply and precisely. Use short sentences, unobstructed by jargon. This will help you to determine exactly what you mean to say and communicate it to others.

f.  Use correct grammar, punctuation, syntax, and diction. This requires proofreading and editing. As part of this, read every paper aloud prior to submitting it—you will catch mistakes you would otherwise miss.

g.  Avoid the passive voice and helping verbs. Use active verbs and the active voice as much as possible. Any phrase to which you can add “by my grandmother” is in the passive voice; i.e. “The point was made…”

h.  Consider purchasing a writing guide such as Strunk and White’s Elements of Style.

Name ______
Word Count:______/ Exceeds Expectations / Meets Expectations / Falls Short of Expectations / Not Applicable
3 / 2 / 1 / 0
Written Communication:
1. The purpose, focus, and organization are clear, consistent, and effective
2. Sentence form, word choice, grammar, spelling, punctuation & mechanics are appropriate.
Research & Analysis Skills
3. Data/Evidence: Obtains and utilizes an appropriate range & depth of relevant evidence (information is accurate, well-elaborated & supported, terms defined, good use of text, etc.)
4. Research Question: Clearly identifies & articulates a research puzzle and its import (“Puzzle”)
5. Analysis: Provides thorough, probing, & objective analysis, making defensible conclusions
Class Leadership
6. Clearly articulates well-prepared discussion topics/puzzles, incorporates all members of the class in discussion, manages time well, provides summative “recaps” of discussion conclusions

Additional Comments:

Overall Evaluation

o  A / A- Excellent

o  B+ / B / B- Good

o  C+ / C / C- Acceptable

o  D Poor

o  F Not Acceptable

Sources

The “Research & Analysis Skills” section draws on the “Research Project Rubric” developed by the Political Science Department at Calvin College, in turn based on the work of Beverly Taylor. The “Written communication” section draws on http://www.csulb.edu/divisions/aa/personnel/fcpd/resources/ge/analytic/documents/analytic_rubric.rtf

1