Analysis Workshop

Workshop: The Analysis Paper

First: Read the paper through to get a feel for what it is about.
Second: Read it again. This time, comment in the text.

To do so:
First: Block out a section of the paper (from a paragraph to a page) and edit it heavily. In the margin the paper, identify any repeating grammatical or syntactical errors (ie run-ons, prepositions, etc).

Second: Examine the following.

Evaluate the way the issue is presented. Does the writer include information about the history of this debate, current relevance or its importance, the various positions in the debate and who the main players are. On the back--List any questions you have that were unanswered. List any information that the essay doesn’t include.

Are the opposing position clearly and accurately identified? Do you know enough about the various sides to this debate? Is the essay too biased (it is clear what the author thinks)? If so, on the back, tell the writer to take a more neutral tone and explore the “other” side in more depth to more fully understand it.

Here are some common problems:
The essay does not focus on the topics developed in the debate.
What topics need further explanation?
Is the issue clear?
The essay seems to be taking a position in the debate or evaluating one or both of the position essays.

Look at the Sources. Here are some issues with them:
The sources are not clearly identified, in part because of vague pronoun reference errors.
Quotes are used too much or not enough from the two position essays.
Citations are not smoothly incorporated into the writer’s text.
Sources are not paraphrased or quoted accurately
Omissions are evident on the works-cited page.
The writer needs to do more research.

Lastly, list the items in bold that the writer needs to focus on for his revision of this essay before he hands it in on Weds.:

Organization. Look at the beginning. Is it engaging? Does it forecast the direction of the essay to come? Does it have a thesis? Are there transitions that guide you through the paper—ie intro’s to each section that link it back to the main idea? Does the conclusion close the paper well, or should it do further.

Look at the transitions from section to section. Do you logically understand how the paper moves from point to point
Requirements: Paper is 2-5 pages, typed and double-spaced. Source material is cited.

Background: The paper presents adequate background information. Key events are identified, and the history of this controversy including how it became a controversy is evident. It is apparent the author has done ample research and uses that expertise to put this topic in context for the reader.

Mapping the Controversy: The paper adequately explores the various positions held in this debate. It presents the arguments from both sides (and in between) to give the reader an idea of what and how this topic is disagreed upon.

Consequences: This paper weighs what’s at stake in this controversy (ie why one side believes what they do, how they benefit from those beliefs, etc.).

Insight : The paper shows insight into the topic. The author explores this subject in all its complexity and reveals and examines the nature of that complexity in his/her essay. Such insights should not be implied but revealed and developed through good examples from the texts.

Grammar/Syntax: Your essay's prose is written in grammatically correct English; it has no spelling or grammatical errors; it shows a sound understanding of the structure of a good sentence and paragraph.

Now: rejoin your group and discuss what you:
A. Liked most about the draft
And B. Discuss how and where the draft needs to improve. Offer suggestions.