The Paper
Linguistics 430, Spring 2006
California State University, Northridge
Tim Black
For successful completion of this course, you must write an essay on a topic that is relevant to cognitive science. Your paper should be between 2500 and 3500 words (or between about 7 and 10 pages) in length. You will complete your paper in five stages:
· On March 21st, you must submit a thesis statement for your paper.
· On March 28th, you must submit an outline of your paper.
· On April 18th, you must submit three copies of the first version of your paper. Please submit your paper via email as a Word document! I will give each of two of these copies to another member of the class, who will then read and comment on your paper.
· On April 25th, you must submit two copies of each set of comments, and I will give a copy to the author of each paper you’ve read. You will then revise your own paper in light of the comments you receive from me and from your peers.
· You must submit the second version of your paper no later than 7:00 p.m., 2 May 2006. I will accept no paper submitted later than this. Please submit your paper via email as a Word document!
I will evaluate your paper—and your peers should evaluate your paper—on the basis of the quality of the arguments you provide in favor of your position. More specifically, your paper (a) must be well organized and readable, (b) must demonstrate your ability to provide charitable and reasonable interpretations of the arguments we encounter, (c) must demonstrate your ability to provide reasonable critical evaluations of those arguments, and (d) must demonstrate your ability to present and defend your own reasonable and persuasive argument.
Here are some guidelines for formatting your paper:
q Between 2500 and 3500 words (or between about 7 and 10 pages) in length
q Typed
q Double-spaced
q 12-point font
q One-inch margins all around
q Please number the pages of your paper!
Paper Topics
I strongly encourage you to write a paper on a topic of your own choosing. An acceptable topic will directly address one or more of the assigned readings. When writing a paper on a topic of your own choosing you should demonstrate your ability to present and defend your own reasonable and persuasive arguments, as well as your ability to provide charitable and reasonable interpretations and reasonable critical evaluations of the arguments of others. Make sure that your paper remains focused on the issues; do not let it degenerate into a report! If you choose this option, please present a paper proposal to me, either verbally or in writing, by Tuesday, March 14th. Here are some topics that are acceptable as paper topics, so long as they have some intersection with issues in cognitive science:
[1] Causal induction
[2] Probabilistic reasoning
[3] Problem solving
[4] Similarity and categorization
[5] Memory
[6] Amnesia
[7] Concepts
[8] Language acquisition
[9] Language modeling
[10] Language evolution
[11] Semantic Processing
[12] Depression
[13] Bipolar disorder
[14] Autism
[15] Psychopathy (or sociopathy)
[16] Schizophrenia
[17] Cotard, Fregoli and Capgras
[18] Synesthesia
[19] Split-brain
[20] Blindsight
Assessment Rubric for a Thesis Statement
LING ______20______- ______
Course Semester Student ID Number
4 = Exemplary; 3 = Accomplished; 2 = Competent; 1 = Marginal; 0 = Unsatisfactory
AVERAGE SCORE: ____
An exemplary thesis statement: / 4 / 3 / 2 / 1 / 0 / An unsatisfactory thesis statement:Takes a clear and specific stand on an important issue / Does not take a stand on any issue of importance, or takes a stand that is in some way unclear or vague
Is narrow enough to be defended in a paper of the assigned length / Is so broad as to be impossible to defend in a paper of the assigned length
Makes an interesting claim, one with which a reasonable person might disagree / Makes a trivial, illogical or dogmatic claim
Briefly describes the paper’s overall argument / Fails even to hint at the paper’s overall argument
Is stated in clear, precise, and reader-friendly prose / Is stated in unclear, imprecise, and/or unintelligible prose
Assessment Rubric for an Outline
4 = Exemplary; 3 = Accomplished; 2 = Competent; 1 = Marginal; 0 = Unsatisfactory
I. CONTENT AVERAGE SCORE: ____
An exemplary outline: / 4 / 3 / 2 / 1 / 0 / An unsatisfactory outline:Makes perspicuous the logical structure of the paper’s arguments (by making clear, for example, which ideas are meant to serve as reasons in favor of some other idea) / Fails to make perspicuous the logical structure of the paper’s arguments
Is sufficiently detailed, showing
§ how every space is filled in each of the
paper’s arguments, and
§ how every space is filled in the paper’s overall
argument, providing enough detail to make
it clear how the paper’s overall argument
progresses from beginning to end, and
making it clear how each part of the paper
contributes to a defense of the thesis / Is not sufficiently detailed; it
§ fails to show how every space is filled in each
of the paper’s arguments, and/or it
§ fails to paint a complete picture of the paper’s
overall argument, either failing to provide
enough detail to make it clear how the paper’s
overall argument progresses from beginning
to end, or failing to make it clear how each
part of the paper contributes to a defense of
the thesis, or both
Represents the paper as having a coherent and reasonable organization overall, by
§ representing the paper’s sections as
coherently and reasonably organized in
relation to one another
§ representing the ideas in each individual
section as coherently and reasonably
organized / Fails to represent the paper as having a coherent and reasonable organization overall, in that
§ it fails to represent the paper’s sections as
coherently and reasonably organized in
relation to one another, and/or
§ it fails to represent the ideas in each individual
section as coherently and reasonably
organized
Adheres to the principles of
§ Parallelism
§ Coordination
§ Subordination
§ Division / Fails to adhere to the principles of
§ Parallelism
§ Coordination
§ Subordination
§ Division
II. FORM AVERAGE SCORE: ____
An exemplary outline: / 4 / 3 / 2 / 1 / 0 / An unsatisfactory outline:Is clear, concise, and precise / Lacks clarity, concision, and precision
Exhibits a sophisticated (but unpretentious) writing style, adhering to the basic principles of composition / Has repetitive and simplistic sentence structures, uses unnecessarily inflated language, and/or fails to adhere to the basic principles of composition
Contains virtually no errors in grammar, spelling, or punctuation, and is properly formatted / Is riddled with errors of grammar, spelling, or punctuation, and/or isn’t properly formatted
Peer-Review Assignment[1]
Because rewriting and revising is essential to becoming a good writer, you will have the opportunity both to comment on other students’ drafts and to receive comments from your peers on a draft of your own paper. This assignment will not only generate valuable feedback on your paper, but it should also help you to understand how to spot problems in your own drafts. The shuffling of papers required for this assignment is potentially overwhelming, however. So, you’ll need to follow closely this procedure:
Procedure for the Exchange of Papers
1. On the date marked on the syllabus “First Version of Paper Due”, bring to class three copies of a complete draft of your paper. (This draft shouldn’t be your first draft; it should be as polished as you can get it on your own.)
· Make sure that your name is written at the top of all three copies, and that each copy is stapled.
· I will keep one copy of your draft, and I will give the other two copies to other members of the class, who will then read and comment on your paper.
2. When you receive your classmates’ papers:
· Write “Comments by:” and your name on the top of the two drafts you receive.
· For each of the two drafts you receive, you should read each paper that you receive, making comments in the margins of the paper itself, and type your responses to the peer-review questions given below.
· Bring the papers you’ve read, along with your type-written responses to the peer-review questions, to class on the date marked on the syllabus “Comments Due”.
3. During class (on the date marked on the syllabus “Comments Due”), I will return to you your peer-reviewed drafts.
· Revise your paper in light of the comments you receive from your peers. But don’t limit your revisions to those that your peers have pointed out. Note that they may have overlooked some problems, or they may have chosen to focus on only those problems that are the most serious. Thus, you should try to improve the whole paper, and not just the passages your peers have specifically mentioned.
4. On the date marked on your syllabus “Second Version of Paper Due”, you are to submit both of your peer-reviewed first versions, as well as the second version of your paper.
5. To make this work, you must submit the first version of your paper on the very date on which it’s due, and you must submit your comments on the very date on which they’re due. If you can’t have your first version or your comments ready on time, or if you forget to bring them to class, or if any other contingency keeps you from submitting on time either the first version of your own paper or the comments you’ve prepared on your classmates’ papers, you may not participate in the exchanging of papers, and you will not receive the points available for this assignment.
Tips for Commenting on Papers
§ Read each paper assigned to you twice. In each case, you should first read the entire paper in order to get a sense of its thesis and argument. Then on your second read, start making comments.
§ If any of the peer-review questions are unclear to you, ask the instructor for clarification.
§ Don’t confine your comments to negative ones. Point out strengths as well as weaknesses.
§ When discussing areas that need improvement, be nice. Offer suggestions, not commands.
§ Make sure your comments are constructive and specific (not This paper is confusing. It keeps saying the same things over and over again but rather It sounds like paragraph five makes the same point as paragraphs 2 and 3).
§ Focus on the quality of the arguments that the author gives rather than on whether you agree with the author’s position.
§ Don’t overwhelm the author with too much commentary. Stick to the major issues, those that are addressed in the peer-review questions.
§ Don’t try to rewrite anything; your job is not to help the author rewrite the paper but to point out what the author needs to revise.
§ Put an asterisk (*) next to each line where you think there is a grammatical mistake, spelling error, or awkward phrasing. Do not identify or correct these errors—it is the author’s responsibility to do this.
§ Before submitting your written comments, reread them to make sure that they’re clear and to make sure that they make sense.
§ Ask the writer questions like:
o “What are you trying to say here?”
o “Can you explain how this point relates to your argument?”
o “Should this paragraph be divided into separate paragraphs?”
o “Why did you put this idea here?”
o “Could you provide an example to illustrate this point?”
Peer-Review Questions
For each of the drafts assigned to you, provide hand-written comments on the drafts themselves as well as type-written responses the following questions.
Introduction & Thesis Statement
1. Is the issue well defined in the paper’s introduction? Is it clear why this issue is important?
2. If you’ve located the paper’s thesis statement, state it. Does it appear in the introduction? If not, where? Is it clearly stated? If not, what do you think the thesis might mean?
3. Does the introduction provide a preview of what’s to come? Explain.
The Body of the Paper: Content
4. Does the author offer convincing reasons for accepting her thesis? If so, list these reasons. Then consider each reason in turn, examining how it’s explained and supported. List any reasons that need to be more clearly explained or more convincingly supported.
5. Does the author make effective use of examples to illustrate her points? Are the examples given appropriate? Are there any places where examples are not provided but should be? If so, give specific examples.
6. Does the essay offer insights that go beyond the obvious, and does it offer original observations? How so?
7. Does the author address potential objections and counterarguments? List the objections and counterarguments that the author addresses. For each objection or counterargument, briefly summarize the author’s response(s). Are there any objections or counterarguments to the paper’s claims that the author does not address? If so, what are they?