American Politics Reading Response Guidelines
Length: 500 words minimum, 1000 word maximum
Format: Single-spaced, 12pt font, 1 inch margins, no title page
Citation style: Chicago Style (find instructions here: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html)
# of citations: You should cite the supplemental reading/podcast, your textbook, and one credible outside source
Submission: Submit via link provided on Canvas within corresponding module
Your paper should be organized as follows:
Introduction: This should be written last; I should be able to read it and know exactly what your paper is about and what you will argue. Tell me how your paper will be organized and don’t be afraid to say “I.” The last sentence of your introduction will have your thesis statement.
· Example thesis format: In this paper, I will argue _________ because of _________.
Body paragraph 1:Brifely outline the main ideas of the supplementary reading & connect it to theories, concepts, ideas, historical explanations found in the textbook
· Example paragraph format:
· Topic sentence
· Commentary
· Text support (direct quote or summary)
· Analysis
· Transition
(you may repeat this format several times if needed)
Body paragraph 2: In this paragraph, you should evaluate the text and the author’s claims. You don’t have to simply disagree or agree with the author- maybe they are right about some things and wrong about other. Use your own understanding of American politics (via your family, job, school, childhood), World History, or other cases studies to reject some of the author’s claims, add to them, or confirm them. Feel free to use qualitative data (personal stories, interviews, literature, historical examples), or quantitative data (statistics, numbers), or reasoning skills (maybe the author contradicts themself). Or all of the above!
Conclusion: Don’t simply re-summarize your paper. Instead, connect the topic to the bigger picture of American Politics. Maybe raise questions you still have—hint at areas for further exploration. Answer the “so what?” question; why does this stuff even matter? Why should we care?
Grade A applies only to an exceptional piece of work which has continued beyond the B grade category to develop a more advanced analytical and integrative command of the material and issues. It is awarded for work, which is superior (A-) or outstanding (A), in recognition of the substantial work and thought which will inevitably have been involved.
A papers excel in each of the following categories:
Follows Directions:
• responds fully and appropriately to the assignment in timely fashion & answers question using appropriate reading/content
Thesis
• easily identifiable, clear and concise, insightful, and appropriate
for assignment
Use of Evidence
• appropriate source information (typically primary) used to support thesis and buttress all arguments made in essay, excellent integration of quoted/paraphrased material into writing.
Analysis, Logic, and Argumentation
•all ideas progress logically from an identifiable thesis, compelling justifications are offered to support thesis, counter-arguments are anticipated and addressed, appropriate connections are made to outside material
Organization
•coherent and clear, all paragraphs support thesis statement, each paragraph supports its topic sentence,
excellent transitions
Mechanics (Grammar, Spelling, Language Usage, Sentence Structure, Citation Format)
• excellent command of language, proper use of grammar/writing conventions, few to no misspelled words, correct word choice, excellent variety and complexity of sentence structure, uses proper citation format
Grade B applies to work which goes beyond the foundation level to develop a more questioning and analytical approach. It is awarded to work which is of good quality (B-), very good (B), or excellent (B+).
B papers do a generally good job in each of the following categories:
Follows Directions
•responds reasonably well to assignment in timely fashion & answers question using appropriate reading/content
Thesis
•identifiable, clear, and appropriate
Use of Evidence
•appropriate source information used to support thesis and to buttress most arguments, good integration of sources into writing
Analysis, Logic, and Argumentation
•thesis is generally supported by logically compelling assertions and appropriate connections
Organization
•mostly coherent, generally supports thesis, good transitions
Mechanics (Grammar, Spelling, Language Usage, Sentence Structure, Citation Format)
•good command of language, generally proper use of grammar/writing conventions, minimal misspelled words, largely good word choice, some variety and complexity in sentence structure, generally uses proper citation format
Grade C is a passing grade which applies to work which is basically competent, although undeveloped (whether through lack of time, lack of interest, or because the relevant skills are still being practiced). It is awarded to work of just below average (C-), average (C), or showing signs of reaching above average (C+).
C papers are acceptable, but lack strength, in each of the following categories:
Follows Directions
•responds acceptably to assignment in a timely fashion & answers question by using at least some appropriate reading/content
Thesis
•somewhat difficult to identify, unclear, and/or slightly inappropriate for assignment
Use of Evidence
•sometimes weak use of source information (excessively secondary or not credible sources), inadequately supports thesis and/or sub-arguments, weak integration of quoted/paraphrased material into writing
Analysis, Logic and Argumentation
•insufficient support for some arguments, assertions are vague or lack focus, support offered is sometimes irrelevant, tangential, or repetitive
Organization
•often lacks coherence, mixed support for thesis, transitions often missing or weak
Mechanics (Grammar, Spelling, Language Usage, Sentence Structure, Citation Format)
•generally proper use of grammar/writing conventions, but with simple sentences generally lacking variety/complexity in structure, acceptable citation format
Grade D applies to unsatisfactory work (D-), very poor work (D) and work which is weak (D+). This is the grade category which often applies to work which has been done in a hurry, or has been done without proper understanding of the requirements.
D papers are weak in each of the following categories:
Follows Directions
•some significant failure to respond to assignment or untimely and does not use appropriate reading/content
Thesis
•very difficult to identify, unclear, and/or inappropriate for assignment
Use of Evidence
•very weak use of source information (excessively secondary and not credible), fails to support thesis and/or sub-arguments, very weak integration of material into writing
Analysis, Logic and Argumentation
•lacks support for arguments, unfocused, uses irrelevant information to support thesis
Organization
•incoherent, lacks support for thesis, transitions weak and often missing
Mechanics (Grammar, Spelling, Language Usage, Sentence Structure, Citation Format)
•weak use of language, poor grammar, and numerous mechanical errors undermine coherence, weak citation format
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Grade F, a fail, applies to non-submissions of work, late work, to work which is illegible and/or chaotic, and to work which may be competent, but is either irrelevant (i.e. does not address the requirements of the assignment) or which uses un-attributed material (plagiarism).
F papers are unacceptable, failing in each of the following categories:
Follows Directions
• wholly fails to respond to assignment given, and/or untimely
Thesis
•unidentifiably, unclear, and/or wholly inappropriate for assignment
Use of Evidence
•wholly failures to use sources appropriately
Analysis, Logic and Argumentation
•wholly fails to provide evidence for thesis statement
Organization
•wholly incoherent, unsupportive of thesis, and lacking in transitions
Mechanics (Grammar, Spelling, Language Usage, Sentence Structure, Citation Format)
•extremely weak use of language/poor grammar, and pervasive errors seriously undermine coherence, improper citation format
COLLEGE ENGLISH LITERATURE
Lesson 7: Overview and To Do List
Overview
Lesson 7 explores thesis statements and the Unreliable Narrator in literature.
Learning Outcomes
Upon completion of this lesson, the student will be able to do the following:
· Demonstrate an understanding of different narrative styles.
· Analyze, interpret, and evaluate a variety of texts for the ethical and logical uses of evidence.
· Respond to literature with rational judgments supported by evidence.
To Do List
In order to successfully complete Lesson 7, please do the following:
Readings
· Review: Chapter 3 - Narration and Point of View (textbook)
· Read:
· "The Cask of Amontillado" by Edgar Allan Poe (textbook)
· "The Yellow Wallpaper" by Charlotte Perkins Gilman (textbook)
· "The Tell-Tale Heart" by Edgar Allan Poe (see module)
Assignment Activities
· Complete discussion: "Unreliable Narrators"
· Complete assignment : "Thesis Practice Arguing the Narrator".
LESSON Presentation: What is Narration?
What is narration?
To know what an unreliable narrator is, it is important to be familiar with how narration works.
· Narration is the process of telling a story or recounting an event.
· The narrator determines what details are included and how they are arranged.
· The narrator is, essentially, the one determining point of view and the facts (or lies) that the reader gets to know.
The different kinds of common narration, or point of view (POV) in literature are:
· Third-person: This kind of narrator is not typically a character in the story, but instead is outside of the characters. This type of narration allows the reader insight to the action from several different perspectives.
· There are three types of third-person narrations:
· Omniscient (all-knowing): This type of narrator is able to give insight and perspective from several characters, mostly just the main characters (but a few minor characters as well). Because they are not a character in the action, they are not limited to any one character's perception.
· Limited omniscient: This narrator is generally tells the story around one of the major characters, focusing primarily on what this one character sees, feels, and perceives. There is very little revealed that this particular character does not know.
· Objective: Objective narrators tend to tell just the action of the story without focusing on any specific character and without revealing the characters internal thoughts. Stories with objective narration use dialogue and action to reveal how the characters think and feel, much like a movie.
· First-person: This narrator is typically a major or minor character telling their own story or the story of someone. This narrative style is mostly commonly uses the pronoun "I" .
· First-person narration reveals the internal thoughts and perspectives of only one character.
· The action of the story is clouded by the opinions of this one particular character and how they experience things.
· Unreliable narrators: The unreliable narrator tends to also be first-person and often uses the pronoun "I".
· Unreliable narrators are often insane, unstable, and, intentionally or not, tend to mislead the reader. Or they could be incredible brilliant.
· This type of narration forces the reader to come to their own conclusions about the action of the story once they figure out that the narrator is compromised.
· These stories could be told from the perspective of the "bad" guy, or villain.
· Sometimes the reader doesn't know that they have been deceived until the very end of the story when it takes a twist and gives an unexpected ending like in Ambrose Bierce's "Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge".
· Unreliable narrators aren't always crazy or bad. Sometimes they are sheltered or naïve. For example, the story could be told from the perspective of a child or someone innocent that doesn't know the value of what they are telling.
https://poemuseum.org/the-tell-tale-heart/
Individual Assignment: Theme Analysis
Assignment (Thesis Practice Arguing the Narrator)
Assignment Overview
Respond:
This week, you will write a thesis statement that could be used to lead a four-to-five-page fiction analysis essay over the narrator. Remember that a thesis statement is also a roadmap sentence, informing your reader of your intention and direction with the paper. For this thesis practice, choose a short story we've read during this unit and consider its use of narration. Write a thesis statement that includes: (1) the author's name, (2) the story's title, and (3) an arguable, supportable claim regarding the narration of the story. Your claim should emphasize how the narrative structure create or reinforce meaning in the story.
Some questions to help guide your answer:
1. What purpose does the narrative structure serve?
2. Does the story have an reliable/unreliable narrator?
3. How do you know (how will you support yourself)?
Here is an example submission: "In Edgar Allan Poe's "The Cask of Amontillado," the theme of revenge and its consequences is conveyed through an unreliable narrator and the use of irony in a setting that progressively intensifies the feeling of confinement."
Be sure you include the names of the stories and authors. If you use quotes from the stories, be sure to include page numbers. Do not consult or use outside sources for this assignment. Be sure you follow the assignment, proofread carefully, use complete sentences, and include details to support your points.
Be sure to follow MLA formatting guidelines.
Your journal entry should be a strong, cohesive thesis statement.
Guidelines
Your response should be cohesive (in paragraph form, not as a list). Use academic writing conventions and proofread before submitting. For journal entries, always copy and paste text into the journal entry (do not attach files; do not write in the comments box). Don't consult any outside sources. If you'd like to quote an article, be sure to include an MLA-style citation. All quotes should be in quotation marks (see MLA Help in Resources area for advice on this).
THESIS STATEMENT GUIDELINES
Thesis statement = Observation + Analysis + Significance. I like to simplify this by defining a thesis as topic + lesson learned. Observation and Analysis is the topic. What are we writing about and why? Significance is the “lesson learned”. Why is this important to us? What are we supposed to learn from this? If you can identify the lesson or significance, you will have a much stronger thesis.
STORY FROM TEXTBOOK (The Norton Introduction to Literature (Shorter Thirteenth Edition) by Kelly J. Mays 2018).
The Cask of Amontillado by EDGAR ALLAN POE (1809–49)
174 CH. 3 | naRRaTIon and PoInT oF vIeW
The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could, but when he ventured upon insult I vowed revenge. You, who so well know the nature of my soul, will not suppose, however, that I gave utterance to a threat. At length I would be avenged; this was a point definitively settled—but the very definitiveness with which it was resolved precluded the idea of risk. I must not only punish but punish with impunity. A wrong is unredressed when retribu-tion overtakes its redresser. It is equally unredressed when the avenger fails to make himself felt as such to him who has done the wrong. It must be understood that neither by word nor deed had I given Fortunato cause to doubt my good will. I continued, as was my wont, to smile in his face, and he did not perceive that my smile now was at the thought of his immolation. He had a weak point—this Fortunato—although in other regards he was a man to be respected and even feared. He prided himself upon his connoisseur-ship in wine. Few Italians have the true virtuoso spirit. For the most part their enthusiasm is adopted to suit the time and opportunity, to practice imposture upon the British and Austrian millionaires. In painting and gemmary, Fortu-nato, like his countrymen, was a quack, but in the matter of old wines he was sincere. In this respect I did not differ from him materially;—I was skilful in the Italian vintages myself, and bought largely whenever I could. It was about dusk, one evening during the supreme madness of the carnival season, that I encountered my friend. He accosted me with excessive warmth, for he had been drinking much. The man wore motley. He had on a tight-fitting parti-striped dress,1and his head was surmounted by the conical cap and bells. 5 I was so pleased to see him that I should never have done wringing his hand. I said to him—“My dear Fortunato, you are luckily met. How remarkably well you are looking to-day. But I have received a pipe2 of what passes for Amon-tillado, and I have my doubts.”
“How?” said he. “Amontillado? A pipe? Impossible! And in the middle of the
carnival!” “I have my doubts,” I replied; “and I was silly enough to pay the full Amontil-lado price without consulting you in the matter. You were not to be found, and I was fearful of losing a bargain.”
“Amontillado!” “I have my doubts.”
10
“Amontillado!” “And I must satisfy them.”
“Amontillado!”
Page 175
“As you are engaged, I am on my way to Luchresi. If any one has a critical
turn it is he. He will tell me——” “Luchresi cannot tell Amontillado from Sherry.”
“And yet some fools will have it that his taste is a match for your own.” “Come, let us go.”
“Whither?” “To your vaults.”
“My friend, no; I will not impose upon your good nature. I perceive you have an engagement. Luchresi——” “I have no engagement;—come.”
“My friend, no. It is not the engagement, but the severe cold with which I perceive you are afflicted. The vaults are insufferably damp. They are encrusted with nitre.”3 “Let us go, nevertheless. The cold is merely nothing. Amontillado! You have
been imposed upon. And as for Luchresi, he cannot distinguish Sherry from Amontillado.” Thus speaking, Fortunato possessed himself of my arm; and putting on a mask of black silk and drawing a roquelaire4 closely about my person, I suffered him to hurry me to my palazzo. There were no attendants at home; they had absconded to make merry in honour of the time. I had told them that I should not return until the morning, and had given them explicit orders not to stir from the house. These orders were sufficient, I well knew, to insure their immediate disappearance, one and all, as soon as my back was turned. I took from their sconces two flambeaux,5
and giving one to Fortunato, bowed him through several suites of rooms to the archway that led into the vaults. I passed down a long and winding staircase, requesting him to be cau-tious as he followed. We came at length to the foot of the descent, and stood together upon the damp ground of the catacombs of the Montresors. The gait of my friend was unsteady, and the bells upon his cap jingled as he
strode. “The pipe,” said he.
“It is farther on,” said I; “but observe the white web-work which gleams from
these cavern walls.” He turned towards me, and looked into my eyes with two filmy orbs that distilled the rheum of intoxication. “Nitre?” he asked, at length.
“Nitre,” I replied. “How long have you had that cough?” “Ugh! ugh! ugh!—ugh! ugh! ugh!—ugh! ugh! ugh!—ugh! ugh! ugh!—ugh!
ugh! ugh!” My poor friend found it impossible to reply for many minutes. “It is nothing,” he said, at last.
Page 176 CH. 3 |
35 “Come,” I said, with decision, “we will go back; your health is precious. You
are rich, respected, admired, beloved; you are happy, as once I was. You are a man to be missed. For me it is no matter. We will go back; you will be ill, and I cannot be responsible. Besides, there is Luchresi——”
die of a cough.”
“Enough,” he said; “the cough is a mere nothing; it will not kill me. I shall not “True—true,” I replied; “and, indeed, I had no intention of alarming you
unnecessarily—but you should use all proper caution. A draught of this Medoc6 will defend us from the damps.” Here I knocked off the neck of a bottle which I drew from a long row of its fellows that lay upon the mould.
40
“Drink,” I said, presenting him the wine. He raised it to his lips with a leer. He paused and nodded to me familiarly, while his bells jingled.
“I drink,” he said, “to the buried that repose around us.”
“And I to your long life.” He again took my arm, and we proceeded. “These vaults,” he said, “are extensive.”
“The Montresors,” I replied, “were a great and numerous family.” “I forget your arms.”
“A huge human foot d’or,7 in a field azure; the foot crushes a serpent rampant whose fangs are imbedded in the heel.”
“And the motto?” “Nemo me impune lacessit.”8
“Good!” he said. The wine sparkled in his eyes and the bells jingled. My own fancy grew warm with the Medoc. We had passed through long walls of piled skeletons, with casks and puncheons9 intermingling, into the inmost recesses of the cata-combs. I paused again, and this time I made bold to seize Fortunato by an arm above the elbow. “The nitre!” I said; “see, it increases. It hangs like moss upon the vaults. We are below the river’s bed. The drops of moisture trickle among the bones. Come, we will go back ere it is too late. Your cough——” “It is nothing,” he said; “let us go on. But first, another draught of the Medoc.” I broke and reached him a flaçon of De Grâve. He emptied it at a breath. His
eyes flashed with a fierce light. He laughed and threw the bottle upwards with a gesticulation I did not understand. I looked at him in surprise. He repeated the movement—a grotesque one. “You do not comprehend?” he said. “Not I,” I replied.
“Then you are not of the brotherhood.” “How?”
Page 177
“You are not of the masons.”1 “Yes, yes,” I said; “yes, yes.”
“You? Impossible! A mason?” “A mason,” I replied.
“A sign,” he said, “a sign.” “It is this,” I answered, producing from beneath the folds of my roquelaire a 65 trowel. “You jest,” he exclaimed, recoiling a few paces. “But let us proceed to the
Amontillado.” “Be it so,” I said, replacing the tool beneath the cloak and again offering him my arm. He leaned upon it heavily. We continued our route in search of the Amontillado. We passed through a range of low arches, descended, passed on, and descending again, arrived at a deep crypt, in which the foulness of the air caused our flambeaux rather to glow than flame. At the most remote end of the crypt there appeared another less spacious. Its
walls had been lined with human remains, piled to the vault overhead, in the fashion of the great catacombs of Paris. Three sides of this interior crypt were still ornamented in this manner. From the fourth side the bones had been thrown down, and lay promiscuously upon the earth, forming at one point a mound of some size. Within the wall thus exposed by the displacing of the bones, we perceived a still interior crypt or recess, in depth about four feet, in width three, in height six or seven. It seemed to have been constructed for no especial use within itself, but formed merely the interval between two of the colossal supports of the roof of the catacombs, and was backed by one of their circumscribing walls of solid granite. It was in vain that Fortunato, uplifting his dull torch, endeavoured to pry into the depth of the recess. Its termination the feeble light did not enable us to see. “Proceed,” I said; “herein is the Amontillado. As for Luchresi——” “He is an ignoramus,” interrupted my friend, as he stepped unsteadily for-ward, while I followed immediately at his heels. In an instant he had reached the extremity of the niche, and finding his progress arrested by the rock, stood stupidly bewildered. A moment more and I had fettered him to the granite. In its surface were two iron staples, distant from each other about two feet, hori-zontally. From one of these depended a short chain, from the other a padlock. Throwing the links about his waist, it was but the work of a few seconds to secure it. He was too much astounded to resist. Withdrawing the key I stepped back from the recess. “Pass your hand,” I said, “over the wall; you cannot help feeling the nitre.
Indeed, it is very damp. Once more let me implore you to return. No? Then I must positively leave you. But I will first render you all the little attentions in my power.”
“The Amontillado!” ejaculated my friend, not yet recovered from his
astonishment. “True,” I replied; “the Amontillado.”
Page 178
As I said these words I busied myself among the pile of bones of which I have
before spoken. Throwing them aside, I soon uncovered a quantity of building stone and mortar. With these materials and with the aid of my trowel, I began vigorously to wall up the entrance of the niche. I had scarcely laid the first tier of the masonry when I discovered that the
intoxication of Fortunato had in great measure worn off. The earliest indica-tion I had of this was a low moaning cry from the depth of the recess. It was not the cry of a drunken man. There was then a long and obstinate silence. I laid the second tier, and the third, and the fourth; and then I heard the furious vibration of the chain. The noise lasted for several minutes, during which, that I might hearken to it with the more satisfaction, I ceased my labours and sat down upon the bones. When at last the clanking subsided, I resumed the trowel, and finished without interruption the fifth, the sixth, and the seventh tier. The wall was now nearly upon a level with my breast. I again paused, and holding the flambeaux over the mason-work, threw a few feeble rays upon the figure within. A succession of loud and shrill screams, bursting suddenly from the throat of
the chained form, seemed to thrust me violently back. For a brief moment I hesitated, I trembled. Unsheathing my rapier, I began to grope with it about the recess; but the thought of an instant reassured me. I placed my hand upon the solid fabric of the catacombs and felt satisfied. I reapproached the wall. I replied to the yells of him who clamoured. I re-echoed, I aided, I surpassed them in volume and in strength. I did this, and the clamourer grew still. It was now midnight, and my task was drawing to a close. I had completedthe eighth, the ninth and the tenth tier. I had finished a portion of the last and the eleventh; there remained but a single stone to be fitted and plastered in. I struggled with its weight; I placed it partially in its destined position. But now there came from out the niche a low laugh that erected the hairs upon my head. It was succeeded by a sad voice, which I had difficulty in recognizing as that of
the noble Fortunato. The voice said—“Ha! ha! ha!—he! he! he!—a very good joke, indeed—an excellent jest. We
will have many a rich laugh about it at the palazzo—he! he! he!—over our 80
wine—he! he! he!” “The Amontillado!” I said. “He! he! he!—he! he! he!—yes, the Amontillado. But is it not getting late?
Will not they be awaiting us at the palazzo—the Lady Fortunato and the rest? Let us be gone.”
“Yes,” I said, “let us be gone.” “For the love of God, Montresor!”
85
“Yes,” I said, “for the love of God!” But to these words I hearkened in vain for a reply. I grew impatient. I called aloud—“Fortunato!”
No answer. I called again—“Fortunato!” No answer still. I thrust a torch through the remaining aperture and let it fall within. There came forth in return only a jingling of the bells. My heart grew sick; it was the dampness of the catacombs that made it so. I hastened to make
Page 179
an end of my labour. I forced the last stone into its position; I plastered it up. Against the new masonry I re-erected the old rampart of bones. For the half of a century no mortal has disturbed them. In pace requiescat! 2
Get help from top-rated tutors in any subject.
Efficiently complete your homework and academic assignments by getting help from the experts at homeworkarchive.com