paper 1:
Think of a hypothesis that fits the following model: X strengthens democracy or X weakens democracy. For X, you can think of any single, plausible explanation for democracy (or non-democracy) that interests you. Then, answer the following questions. A couple of sentences is sufficient for each and this does not need to be written as an essay (point-by-point is fine!)
1. What is your hypothesis?
2. What 2, 3, or 4 cases would be useful to compare to help test this hypothesis? (These will be countries for
most of you, but it could also be regions, cities, historical events, etc.) 3. Why is this a valid choice of cases—why do these cases actually test your hypothesis?
- Make sure to explain what you mean by “strengthen” or “weaken.
. Make sure it’s clear how your hypothesis could not only be supported, but also proven wrong. What would
it take to disprove your hypothesis?
. Common mistake: picking just two or three cases where X clearly exists and where democracy is very weak or very strong. This shows that X and democracy/non-democracy can go together…but what about all the other cases out there? Might there be democracies without X?
4, What are the limits of this case selection? (e.g.. this choice of cases misses another important explanatory factor, it isn’t very applicable for the rest of the world, etc.) Make sure to clearly explain why these might be problematic.
.
Why is this tradeoff valid? If you’re only looking at Europe, for example, why is your case selection still
useful?
These tradeoffs are part and parcel of any case comparison-your goal is to come up with the best
comparison, not the perfect comparison!
paper 2: This assignment is designed to give you practice in taking feedback, incorporating new information, and
focusing on a central argument.
For this paper, you should return to the hypothesis you discussed in Paper #1: X strengthens democracy or X
weakens democracy. For X, you can think of any single, plausible explanation that interests you.
Your goal now is to actually argue that this hypothesis is correct. Make a clear thesis statement, and show why the cases you examine not only test the hypothesis (that is, they could have proved the theory false) but why they actually provide evidence that your hypothesis is more plausible than the alternative.[1] Using the feedback from Paper #1, you may use the same set of cases you proposed or you may add/change cases in your comparison (you may also incorporate text from your prior paper, though hopefully edited and
elaborated upon).
Remember that your goal and audience has changed: In the last paper, you were justifying to the instructor why these case studies would be good for testing a theory. In this paper, you don’t need to justify your decisions but rather use the evidence to make it clear to any reader why your thesis is the most correct interpretation. Instead of showing why a case would be useful if you studied it…now’s your chance to actually study it.
4-5 pages should be your target, but there is no strict word limit on this paper and you can make it as long or short as you feel is appropriate. The paper will be graded primarily on how clear and plausible the argument is. and how well you use evidence to make your point. Please feel free to re-use as much text from your original paper as you feel remains appropriate for this new objective.
As before, you can draw on class readings, outside articles, databases like Freedom House, and/or news sources to help you determine which cases are worth comparing. You may use any citation style you wish, but make sure to cite the sources of any evidence you include! (You will likely need to include more citations and reference more readings/evidence than in your first paper.)
Paper 3; This assignment is designed to give you practice in taking feedback, making revisions, and organizing your paper to help the reader answer it.
Your goal is still to argue that your hypothesis is correct. Make a clear thesis statement, and show why the cases you examine not only test the hypothesis (that is, they could have proved the theory false) but why they actually provide evidence that your hypothesis is more plausible than the alternative. Using the instructor feedback and especially the peer feedback you got on Paper #2, make your argument even more convincing.
7-8 pages should be your target for this paper, but there is no strict word limit on this paper and you can make it a bit longer or shorter if you feel that is appropriate to making your point. The paper will still be graded on how clear and plausible the argument is, and how well you use evidence to make your point. Additionally, it will be graded on how well you incorporated feedback and how clearly organized the paper is. Please feel free to re-use as much text from your original paper as you feel remains priate for objective. new
In terms of organization, you should make sure that it is clear to your reader what each paragraph is doing, is clear about how it relates to your key point, and helps remind us where we are in your argument without too much “signposting” (i.e., try to be smoother than “Now that I have shown you the most important evidence for my argument, I am moving on to the potential counterarguments”). Think about topic sentences that preview the key point of each paragraph.
As before, you can draw on class readings, outside articles, databases like Freedom House, and/or news sources to help you determine which cases are worth comparing. You may use any citation style you wish, but make sure to cite the sources of any evidence you include! (You will probably need to include slightly more citations and reference more readings/evidence than in your second paper.)
Post a Comment