Writing Assignment 4: Step-by-Step

SUBMISSION #3:

  • B-Draft (Big Revision / Building)
    • Strengthen the argument and deepen analysis: Refine your argument and clearly craft your discussion.
    • Submit a revised draft (2,000–2,500 words) that includes:
      • a refined thesis that lays out what you are claiming and your essential method of analysis
      • deeper analysis that has each paragraph explicating your argument in a thoughtful and deliberate manner
      • integrates secondary sources that serve to illuminate methodology, include theorization, and/or support your analysis

Feedback: You will post this draft for Peer Review. Your section-mates will respond, when directed, using the 3C+Q format (Compliment, Comment, Connection, Question).

DUE: Monday, April 20th by 9am

Roadblocks to Avoid:

  • The “Report” Trap: Avoid simply summarizing what different authors say about justice. You must make your own argument.
  • The “Justice in Art” Trap: Avoid broad topics. Focus your argument (e.g., instead of “Justice in 19th Century Art,” try “How Manet’s painting challenges 19th-century legal definitions of prostitution”).
  • AI Shortcut Trap: Because this assignment assesses your thinking and writing process, the use of generative AI tools at any stage (including brainstorming, drafting, revising, or paraphrasing) is not permitted; all ideas, analysis, and prose must be produced entirely by you.

—-

SUBMISSION #2:

C-Draft (Construction/Context)

Task:

  • Move from exploration to argument: Begin to write paragraphs that analyze your artifact and how you are understanding it/it is making meaning.
  • Submit a rough draft (2,000–2,500 words) that includes
    • methodology: What are you doing to analysis your artifact? How are you going about making claims?
    • analysis: What you are seeing? Interpreting? Understanding?
    • theoretical support: What is allowing you to make that claim? What has you understanding your artifact in that way?

Your writing should include a working thesis and an emerging structure, although that may develop as you write rather than be where you begin.

  • Highlight or bold what you think you are claiming, even if you are not sure that you are yet supporting it.

Feedback: You will receive specific feedback from your instructor on this draft to ensure your argument is viable before you write the full paper. Plan to make a meeting with them after submission.

———————-

SUBMISSION #1:

D-Draft (Discovery / Doing)

Task:

  • Identify your artifact for investigation
  • Locate and read at least three scholarly sources that will support your understanding and analysis of your artifact.
  • Respond to those things in writing. Submit at least 2,000 words of notes, quotations, ideas, questions, and exploratory writing that addresses what surfaces when you spend time with your artifact and your related readings.

Feedback: You will get a thumbs up or make a meeting with your instructor to make sure you have adequate/appropriate sources.

DUE: Monday, Mar 16 9am

 

If you are struggling with identifying suitable sources, please talk with your section leader, a librarian, or a fellow. You might also consult the following:  “Engaging Sources”, from The Craft of Research, can be a useful resource.

Also, you will search in specific library databases and we encourage you to use Zotero to save your sources, tag them with keywords that seem to you to name aspects of the debate, and take notes on them. Write as you read. Be descriptive in your notes. (This will be the heart of your D-Draft.)

Zotero is a powerful organizing tool for research and writing in the academy. Learn it and use it now and you will be less stressed with research projects throughout your time at Davidson.

Some Resources:

If you have questions or problems with the install process, the librarians are certainly happy to help you troubleshoot if you email them at library@davidson.edu or make an appointment through their Ask Us page.