Sociology 322: Social Theory

Fall 2008. 10-10:50 MWF

Newcomb Hall, Room 2

 

Professor Kevin F. Gotham

Sociology: 220 Newcomb Hall                                              

Office Hours: By appointment                      

Phone: 862-3004                                                                    

Email: kgotham@tulane.edu

 

Course Description      

Sociology 322 is designed as an introductory survey of social theory.  We will examine a variety of classical and contemporary theories to understand and explain the transition from traditional to modern society, the nature of urbanization and industrialization, capitalism and social organization, democracy and individuality, and the dynamics of culture and social change.  The first eight weeks of the course will focus on the pioneering work of Karl Marx (1818-1883), Max Weber (1864-1920), and Emile Durkheim (1858-1917), and contemporary applications and variants of their theories.  We will examine the theories of Marx, Weber, and Durkheim not just as intellectual history, but as sources of unique and powerful systems of thought that continue to have a major impact on our understanding of the contemporary world.  We will read original writings by these theorists in an effort to grasp concretely how they understood and explained the dramatic societal changes affecting Europe and the United States during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.  In other weeks of the course we will examine critical theory; feminist theories; symbolic interaction theory; globalization theories; and postmodernity, postmodernism, and postmodern theories.

 

Course Objectives        

The objectives of this course are to present an overview of social theory in the historical context of its development, illustrate the links between theory and research, and foster a critical understanding of society. This means developing the ability to view the social world in a critical and systematic way, using empirical evidence and logical assumptions in order to answer questions of sociological interest.  Social theory is the backbone of the sociology discipline and all major substantive questions of sociological interest are directly related to theory.  We will examine different meanings and definitions of theory, how theories are evaluated, and how we can build on past and existing theories to build new ones to investigate society.  We will also seek to understand how theories are shaped by the historical context in which they are produced. 

 

One advantage of studying social theory is that it can help you cultivate and develop a “sociological imagination.”  C. Wright Mills referred to the sociological imagination as the quality of mind necessary to grasp the relationship between individual biography, social structure, and human history.  It is the mission of sociology, according to Mills, to help individuals achieve “lucid summations” of what is going on in the world and what is happening in their own lives.  Developing a sociological imagination requires a background in social theory.

 

 

Specific Objectives:

  • To understand how social structures and processes shape and influence individual lives, circumstances, attitudes, and behaviors  
  • To understand how societies change over time  
  • To improve your ability to organize and synthesize data and information through conceptual refinement and theoretical extension 
  • To sharpen your inductive and deductive reasoning capacities  
  • To learn about the history and development of social thought  
  • To foster critical thinking skills  
  • To nurture your ability to develop systematic and generic understandings and propositions about social processes

 

Required Readings

James Farganis. Readings in Social Theory. 5th Edition Boston: McGraw Hill.

 

George Ritzer. Sociological Theory. 7th Edition.

 

Peter Kivisto. Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited. 4th Edition. Pine Forge.

 

Sociology Writing Group. A Guide to Writing Sociology Papers. Saint Martins Press.  5th Edition.

 

.pdf copies of articles uploaded in Blackboard. 

 

Course Expectations and Requirements

This course will generally follow a lecture format. The purpose of lectures is to provide necessary background material (e.g., historical, biographical, and conceptual), exegesis of the original texts, as well as commentary and critique.  Readings are to be completed prior to each class meeting for which they are assigned.  The readings are extensive, complex, sophisticated, and will require many hours of hard work and effort. You cannot read the texts like a newspaper or magazine. You should locate a distraction-free environment (far away from the TV, radio, and other interruptions) and set aside a large block of time each day to read and concentrate. 

 

Everyone is encouraged to participate through open discussion and questions, including sharing thoughts and ideas, observations, and assessments during class time. Thoughtful and active participation means attending class regularly and being prepared to discuss the assigned subject matter.  In line with that, I ask you to be mindful that education is not a process whereby a professor dumps a bunch of information into the heads of passive receivers (students).  Learning is a collaborative process whereby information and knowledge is to be shared between the professor and students.  Please do not be worried about asking “dumb questions.”  If you are confused, chances are there are other people who are also befuddled and will welcome your efforts at clarification. 

 

All students are required to attend all classes unless they are ill or prevented from attending by exceptional circumstances. Preparedness, attendance, and participation are expected and will have a bearing on final grades.  Be on time to class and do not bring your cell phones. Anybody who has ever spoken in front of a group knows that it can be very confusing for a speaker when people wander in and out or when phones ring.  I always try to treat students with courtesy and respect.  It makes life easier for all of us when you reciprocate.

 

Your grade for this course will be determined by your performance on three papers (about 6-12 pages each), attendance, and my evaluation of your participation in class.  In each of the three papers, you may be asked to compare and contrast the way in which two different theories explain a given phenomenon. You may also be asked to connect the work of one or more classical theorist to some current event(s).  Another typical assignment could be to consider the strengths and weaknesses of a contemporary theory (Symbolic Interaction, neo-Marxian theory, etc.) in relation to a major concern of the classical theorists.  All papers are to be typed, double-spaced, with one inch margins, and page numbers in the top right hand corner. You will have about ten days to write each paper.  Papers will be graded on a scale of A, A-, B+, B, B-,C+, C, C-, D+, D, and D-.  One letter grade will be deducted for each day the paper is late. You are to hand in two copies of each paper.  One copy is to be turned in with a “Social Theory Paper Evaluation” (see last page of syllabus) stapled to the back of the paper. 

 

Finally, ten percent of your grade will be based on my evaluation of your participation in class and Friday group discussions where each group will do a textual analysis of a major chapter or series of chapters, and turn in an outline at the end of class.  A textual analysis explains what the author’s main points are, how they are connected, and offers a critique of the author’s argument. The class will be divided into 3-4 groups composed of about five people. The membership of these groups will be in alphabetical order and will remain the same throughout the semester.  On the specified Fridays, we will break into groups and each group will analyze the assigned readings.  Everyone is required to read the assigned chapter(s) before we meet on Fridays and break into groups (I recommend that each student put together a brief outline on the chapter(s) before meeting on Fridays).  Each group will discuss the reading, asking questions about the text(s), and identify the main points.  At the end of the Friday discussion each group will turn in a written outline that provides a brief summary, critical analysis, and evaluation of the chapter(s) using the following format:

1. Summary. Provide a brief summary outline of what the author is saying.  Identify the central questions, main points, and core arguments.  Rather than analyzing all the ideas that the author presents, you should focus in depth on one or two significant aspects of the text. 

2. Analysis. Analysis involves going beyond what the author says.  It means examining relationships between evidence and conclusions, between concepts in the text, and relationships between concepts in the work being analyzed and other texts.  Moreover, analysis means identifying and clearly explaining the devices the author uses to convince the reader that he or she is correct.  These devices can include logical reasoning (i.e., if/then statements), anecdotes (stories used to illustrate a point), appeal to authority, controlled study, and rhetorical virtuosity (skill at using language: big scientific words, humor, satire, irony, or nostalgia).  What is important is that you understand what the author is doing, to be able to analyze the devices the author is using.

3. Evaluation. How well does the author answer his or her question and verify that answer?  This is the realm of criticism and it assumes that you cannot really judge a text until you comprehend what the author is doing and how he or she does it.  Evaluation involves answering the following questions:

A. What is the argument of the text?  What concepts does the author use to support the arguments?

B. What are the implicit assumptions of the author’s argument? Identifying and evaluating an author’s assumptions are two intellectual skills most often demanded in social theory courses.  All authors make assumptions about the way the world works.

C. What are the conclusions and implications of the author’s work?  How do they connect with other readings?

D. Is the craftsmanship of the writing sound? Do the parts fit into a whole? Is the prose understandable? Do the ideas flow smoothly from one to another?

E. What other lines of reasoning or thinking occur to you as a result of reading this selection?  What is it about the chapters that interest you?  What are the strengths and weaknesses of the chapters or articles?  How does this chapter help you understand current events and social problems? 

 

Mastering the skill of textual analysis will help you write better papers and, more important, help you evaluate more clearly all books and articles you encounter in your academic career and beyond. Each unexcused absence for the Friday discussions will result in the lowering of your participation grade by one letter grade.  On the last day of class you will fill out a confidential evaluation of each member in your group.  This evaluation will ask you to evaluate the intellectual contribution, courteousness, and respectfulness of each member of your group.  

 

Some tips for group discussion

Ultimately, the success of a group discussion depends on the participants. Here are a few suggestions to make your discussions more enjoyable, productive and meaningful:

  • Speak up! Group discussion is like a conversation; everyone takes part in it. Don't expect to be called on to speak; enter into the discussion with your comments of agreement or disagreement.
  • Share your viewpoint and experience! When you find yourself disagreeing with other people's interpretations or opinions, say so and tell why, in a friendly way.
  • Listen thoughtfully to others! Try to understand the other person's point of view.  Remember, there are several points of view possible on every question. Be respectful, but also be critical:  Don't accept ideas that don't have a sound basis.
  • Be brief! Share the discussion with others. Be ready to let someone else speak. A good discussion includes everyone in the group. 
  • This is a discussion, not a debate! 
  • Come with your own questions in mind! As you read the chapters and articles, make note of the points on which you'd like to hear the comments of group members.  If the questions asked don’t address your concerns, raise your own!

All participants in the course have a responsibility to do the readings for the week, to listen to what is being said by other participants (rather than being overly preoccupied with what you are going to say), and not to interrupt people in the middle of sentences.  We hope to create a setting in which everyone feels comfortable talking, even if they do not have something “brilliant” or “profound” to say.  Sometimes the most simple questions can lead to the most fruitful discussions.

 

All students are required to abide by the Tulane University Honor Code.  “This code states that all academic work is the result of the student's own efforts, except when collaboration has been explicitly allowed, and that if a student has any doubts about how a particular assignment is affected by the honor code, it is his or her responsibility to consult the instructor for clarification … Any student behavior that indicates a lack of academic honesty and integrity is considered a violation.”  Examples of Honor Code violations include, but are not limited to:

·         Cheating--- Using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information, study aids, or the ideas or work of another in order to gain an unfair advantage.

·         Fabrication---Submission of contrived or altered information.

·         Unauthorized collaboration--Collaboration not explicitly allowed by the instructor.

·         Multiple submission--Presentation of a paper or other work for credit in two distinct courses without prior approval by both instructors.

·         Sabotage--Destroying or damaging another student's work, or otherwise preventing such work from receiving fair graded assessment.

·         Plagiarism--Unacknowledged or falsely acknowledged presentation of another person's ideas, expressions, or original research as one's own work.

·         Facilitation of academic dishonesty--Knowingly helping or attempting to help another student violate any provision of the code.

·         Tampering with academic records--Misrepresenting, tampering with, or attempting to tamper with any portion of a student's academic record.

·         False testimony--Knowingly presenting false accusation or testimony before the honor board or its representatives.

·         Improper disclosure--Failure of an honor board member or participant in an honor board hearing to maintain strict confidentiality concerning the identity of students accused of honor code violations.

The above material is quoted from: Tulane University. Undergraduate Honor Code of Tulane University. Provost’s Office. http://provost.tulane.edu/HonorCode.htm; accessed March 16, 2008. 

 

All grades, paper assignments, study questions and other important information about the class will be posted on the Blackboard Learning System.  

 

Course Grades:

Paper #1                                                                                  30 percent of final grade.

Paper #2                                                                                  30 percent of final grade.

Paper #3                                                                                  30 percent of final grade.

Class Participation and Friday Discussion Outline                 10 percent of final grade.

 

I do not give extra credit, extra assignments, nor other opportunities for improving grades.  Moreover, I do not negotiate about grades, except when you believe there is an explicit error in the grading procedures.  No grades will be determined by a curve.

 

 

TENTATIVE COURSE SCHEDULE

 

Week 1-2. Aug. 27 and 29; Sept. 3 and 5. Introduction

  • George Ritzer. Chapter 1. A Historical Sketch of Sociological Theory: The Early Years. Sociological Theory. Edited by George Ritzer.
  • George Ritzer. Chapter 6. A Historical Sketch of Sociological Theory: The Later Years. Sociological Theory. Edited by George Ritzer.
  • George Ritzer. Appendix. Sociological Metatheorizing and a Metatheoretical Schema for Analyzing Sociological Theory. Sociological Theory. Edited by George Ritzer.
  • James Farganis. Introduction: The Classic Tradition to Post-Modernism: An Overview.  Readings in Social Theory.
  • Peter Kivisto. Introduction. Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited.

 

Week 3. Sept. 8. Karl Marx

  • George Ritzer. Chapter 2: Karl Marx. Sociological Theory. Edited by George Ritzer.
  • James Farganis. Chapter 1. Karl Marx: Alienation, Class Struggle, and Class Consciousness. Readings in Social Theory.

·         Introduction

    • From Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: The Manifesto of the Communist Party.
    • From Karl Marx: Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844.
    • From Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: The German Ideology.
    • From Karl Marx: The Fetishism of Commodities and the Secret Thereof.
  • Sept. 12. Friday Group Discussion

 

Week 4. Sept. 15. Contemporary Neo-Marxian Theories and Analyses

  • George Ritzer. Chapter 8: Varieties of Neo-Marxian Theory. Sociological Theory.  Edited by George Ritzer.
  • John P. Walsh, Anne Zacharias-Walsh. Working Longer, Living Less: Understanding Marx Through the Workplace Today. Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited. Edited by Peter Kivisto.
  • Sept. 19. Friday Group Discussion. 

 

Week 5. Sept. 22. Max Weber

  • George Ritzer. Chapter 4: Max Weber. Sociological Theory.  Edited by George Ritzer.
  • James Farganis. Chapter 3. Max Weber: The Iron Cage. Readings in Social Theory.
    • Introduction
    • From Max Weber: The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.
    • From Max Weber: Bureaucracy.
    • From Max Weber: “Objectivity” in Social Science and Social Policy.
    • From Max Weber: Class, Status, Party.
  • Sept. 26. Friday Discussion

 

Week 6. Sept. 29. Contemporary Weberian Theories and Analyses

  • Charles Kurzman, et al. 2007. “Celebrity Status.” Sociological Theory. 25(4). December 2007 (posted on Blackboard). 
  • George Ritzer. The Weberian Theory of Rationalization and the McDonaldization of Contemporary Society. Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited. Edited by Peter Kivisto.
  • October 3. Friday Discussion
  • Hand out first theory paper topic (Friday, October 3). Papers due Monday October 13 (Yom Kippur falls on Thursday, October 9)

 

Week 7. Oct. 6. Emile Durkheim

  • George Ritzer. Chapter 3: Emile Durkheim. Sociological Theory.  Edited by George Ritzer.
  • James Farganis. Chapter 2. Emile Durkheim. Anomie and Social Integration. Readings in Social Theory.
    • Introduction
    • From Émile Durkheim: The Rules of Sociological Method.
    • From Émile Durkheim: Egoistic Suicide and Anomic Suicide.
    • From Émile Durkheim: The Elementary Forms of Religious Life.
  • October 10. Friday Discussion.

 

Week 8. Oct. 13. Contemporary Durkheimian Theories and Analyses   

  • Robin Wagner-Pacifici; Barry Schwartz. 1991. The Vietnam Veterans Memorial: Commemorating a Difficult Past. American Journal of Sociology. 97(2): 376-420. (posted on Blackboard).
  • Anne Hornsby. Surfing the Net for Community: A Durkheimian Analysis of Electronic Gatherings. Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited. Edited by Peter Kivisto.
  • October 17. Friday Discussion.

 

Week 9. Oct. 20. Symbolic Interactionism

  • George Ritzer. Chapter 10: Symbolic Interactionism. Sociological Theory. Edited by George Ritzer.
  • James Farganis. Chapter 5. George Herbert Mead: The Emergent Self. Readings in Social Theory.
    • Introduction.
    • From George Herbert Mead: Mind, Self, and Society.
  • James Farganis. Chapter 11. Symbolic Interaction. Readings in Social Theory.
    • Introduction
    • From Herbert Blumer: Society as Symbolic Interaction.
    • From Erving Goffman: The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life.
  • Gary Alan Fine and Kent L. Sandstrom. Wild Thoughts: An Interactionist Analysis of Ideology, Emotion, and Nature. Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited. Edited by Peter Kivisto.
  • Peter Kivisto and Dan Pittman. Goffman's Dramaturgical Sociology: Personal Sales and Service in a Commodified World. Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited. Edited by Peter Kivisto.
  • October 24. Friday Discussion.

 

Week 10: Oct. 27. Feminist Theories

  • Patricia Madoo Lengerman and Gilian Niebrugge. Chapter 13: Contemporary Feminist Theory. Sociological Theory.  Edited by George Ritzer.
  • James Farganis. Chapter 12. Feminist Theory. Readings in Social Theory.
    • Introduction
    • From Dorothy Smith: Women's Experience as a Radical Critique of Sociology.
    • From Patricia Hill Collins: Is the Personal Still Political?
  • Judith Lorber and Patricia Yancey Martin. The Socially Constructed Body: Insights from Feminist Theory. Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited. Edited by Peter Kivisto.
  • October 31. Friday Discussion.
  • Hand out second paper topic.  Papers due Monday, Nov. 10.

 

Week 11: Nov. 3. Critical Theories

  • Re-read section on “Critical Theory” in George Ritzer. Chapter 8: Varieties of Neo-Marxian Theory. Sociological Theory. Edited by George Ritzer.
  • James Farganis. Chapter 13: Critical Theory. Readings in Social Theory.
    • Introduction
    • From Herbert Marcuse: One-Dimensional Man.
    • From Jurgen Habermas: Religion in the Public Sphere.
  • Steven P. Dandaneau. Critical Theory, Legitimation Crisis, and the Deindustrialization of Flint, Michigan. Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited. Edited by Peter Kivisto.
  • Robert Witkin. 2000. “Why did Adorno ‘Hate’ Jazz?” Sociological Theory. 18(1).  (posted on Blackboard).
  • November 7. Friday Discussion.

 

Week 12: Nov. 10. Critical Theories

  • Harry Dahms. 2008. “How Social Science is Impossible Without Critical Theory: The Immersion of Mainstream Approaches in Time and Space,” in No Social Science Without Critical Theory, vol. 25 of Current Perspectives in Social Theory. Elsevier/Emerald (UK), (June 2008).
  • Kevin Fox Gotham and Daniel A. Krier. “From Culture Industry to the Society of the Spectacle: Critical Theory and the Situationist International.” in No Social Science Without Critical Theory, vol. 25 of Current Perspectives in Social Theory. Elsevier/Emerald (UK), (June 2008).
  • Kevin Fox Gotham. “Critical Theory and Katrina: Disaster, Spectacle, and Immanent Critique.” City: Analysis of Urban Trends, Culture, Theory, Policy, Action. 11(1): 81-99. April 2007. (posted on Blackboard).
  • November 14. Friday Discussion.

 

Week 13. Nov.17. Globalization Theories

  • George Ritzer. Chapter 15: Contemporary Theories of Modernity. Sociological Theory.  Edited by George Ritzer.
  • George Ritzer. Chapter 16: Globalization Theory. Sociological Theory. Edited by George Ritzer.
  • William H. Swatos, Jr.. Globalization Theory and Religious Fundamentalism. Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited. Edited by Peter Kivisto.
  • Kevin Fox Gotham. “The Secondary Circuit of Capital Reconsidered:  Globalization and the U.S. Real Estate Sector.” American Journal of Sociology.  112(1): 231-75. July 2006. (posted on Blackboard).
  • November 21. Friday Discussion

 

Week 14-15. Nov. 24 and Dec. 1. Postmodernity, Postmodernism, and Postmodern Theories

  • George Ritzer. Chapter 17: Structuralism, Poststructuralism, and the Emergence of Postmodern Social Theory. Sociological Theory. Edited by George Ritzer
  • James Farganis. Chapter 14. Post-Modernism. Readings in Social Theory.

·         Introduction

·         From Michel Foucault: The Carceral.

·         From Jean-François Lyotard, The Post-Modern Condition: A Report on Knowledge.

  • Kevin Fox Gotham. Contrasts of Carnival: Mardi Gras Between the Modern and the Postmodern. Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited. Edited by Peter Kivisto.
  • Dec. 3. Course evaluations.
  • Dec. 5. Friday Discussion.
  • Dec. 5.  Hand out third paper topic.  Papers due Monday, December 15. 

 


Social Theory Paper Evaluation.

Fall 2008. Gotham.

Name:

 

Paper #_____. Question #_____.

 

Paper grade: _____.

 

 

 

Analysis and Criticism:

 

POOR                         EXCELLENT

 

1          2          3          4          5          Thoughtfulness and organization of essay (e.g., is the essay well conceived and thought out or does it have a rushed and superficial quality to it). 

1          2          3          4          5          Follows the directions of the assignment (e.g.,  answers questions sufficiently).

1          2          3          4          5          Coherence of explanation. Clear statements. Succinct.

1          2          3          4          5          Key terms and concepts are defined and explained.

1          2          3          4          5          Assertions and arguments supported with specific cites to the original works.

1          2          3          4          5          Assertions and arguments supported with specific quotes from the original works.

1          2          3          4          5          Depth of coverage of existing literature and original works.

 

Technical presentation:

 

X denotes that attention should be paid to this problem.

XX denotes that extra attention is warranted.

 

_____ Late paper (one letter grade is deducted for each day the paper is late). 

_____ Paper format: pages numbered in top right hand corner, one inch margins, double-spaced.

_____ Appropriate citation format not followed.

_____ Text is too long or too short.

_____ Redundancy (wordy; can be trimmed without loss of meaning).

_____ Some statements are unsupported (e.g., undeveloped and/or vague statements).

_____ Insufficient coverage of existing literature.

_____ Insufficient depth of coverage.

_____ Typographic errors, misspelled words, punctuation errors.

_____ Incomplete sentences, awkward sentence structure.

_____ Some paragraphs are too long or too short.


Social Theory Paper Evaluation.

Fall 2008. Gotham.

 

Name:

 

Paper #_____. Question #_____.

 

Paper grade: _____.

 

 

Analysis and Criticism:

 

POOR                         EXCELLENT

 

1          2          3          4          5          Thoughtfulness and organization of essay (e.g., is the essay well conceived and thought out or does it have a rushed and superficial quality to it). 

1          2          3          4          5          Follows the directions of the assignment (e.g.,  answers questions sufficiently).

1          2          3          4          5          Coherence of explanation. Clear statements. Succinct.

1          2          3          4          5          Key terms and concepts are defined and explained.

1          2          3          4          5          Assertions and arguments supported with specific cites to the original works.

1          2          3          4          5          Assertions and arguments supported with specific quotes from the original works.

1          2          3          4          5          Depth of coverage of existing literature and original works.

 

Technical presentation:

 

X denotes that attention should be paid to this problem.

XX denotes that extra attention is warranted.

 

_____ Late paper (one letter grade is deducted for each day the paper is late). 

_____ Paper format: pages numbered in top right hand corner, one inch margins, double-spaced.

_____ Appropriate citation format not followed.

_____ Text is too long or too short.

_____ Redundancy (wordy; can be trimmed without loss of meaning).

_____ Some statements are unsupported (e.g., undeveloped and/or vague statements).

_____ Insufficient coverage of existing literature.

_____ Insufficient depth of coverage.

_____ Typographic errors, misspelled words, punctuation errors.

_____ Incomplete sentences, awkward sentence structure.

_____ Some paragraphs are too long or too short.


Social Theory Paper Evaluation.

Fall 2008. Gotham.

Name:

 

Paper #_____. Question #_____.

 

Paper grade: _____.

 

 

 

Analysis and Criticism:

 

POOR                         EXCELLENT

 

1          2          3          4          5          Thoughtfulness and organization of essay (e.g., is the essay well conceived and thought out or does it have a rushed and superficial quality to it). 

1          2          3          4          5          Follows the directions of the assignment (e.g.,  answers questions sufficiently).

1          2          3          4          5          Coherence of explanation. Clear statements. Succinct.

1          2          3          4          5          Key terms and concepts are defined and explained.

1          2          3          4          5          Assertions and arguments supported with specific cites to the original works.

1          2          3          4          5          Assertions and arguments supported with specific quotes from the original works.

1          2          3          4          5          Depth of coverage of existing literature and original works.

 

Technical presentation:

 

X denotes that attention should be paid to this problem.

XX denotes that extra attention is warranted.

 

_____ Late paper (one letter grade is deducted for each day the paper is late). 

_____ Paper format: pages numbered in top right hand corner, one inch margins, double-spaced.

_____ Appropriate citation format not followed.

_____ Text is too long or too short.

_____ Redundancy (wordy; can be trimmed without loss of meaning).

_____ Some statements are unsupported (e.g., undeveloped and/or vague statements).

_____ Insufficient coverage of existing literature.

_____ Insufficient depth of coverage.

_____ Typographic errors, misspelled words, punctuation errors.

_____ Incomplete sentences, awkward sentence structure.

_____ Some paragraphs are too long or too short.