Paper Assignments (Spring 2010)

CRTW 201

Dr. Fike

NOTE:  Focus is the most important part of college writing.

NOTE: When you write your papers, please boldface and underline the elements.  Here is an example:  "I considered various alternatives."  Always underline your thesis. Label the sections of your paper.  Number your paragraphs in the left margin.

Paper One:  World View

This assignment borrows from the work of Drs. Bird, Koster, and Macri.  Grateful thanks go to these colleagues for suggesting the assignment.  It is designed to encourage you to use the elements to uncover and discuss the impediments to your critical thinking.

Preamble

As we have stated in class, the purpose of CRTW is not to provide you with tools to shore up your preconceptions--to make you more elegantly agile in arguing for what you have always believed because someone told you to believe it.  The purpose of CRTW is rather to encourage you to use the elements and the standards of critical thinking to move your thinking to a higher level.  One way to do that is to examine the impediments  to your thinking (a.k.a. blocks, filters, lenses, background stories).  In order to do this first assignment, then, you will need to select part of your world view in which you are willing to see problems.  Do not select something about which you think you are 100% right unless you are willing to do some genuine self-reflection.  Traits of mind that are helpful here include humility, courage, empathy, integrity, and fair-mindedness.  If you are not open to the possibility that your world view developed through some sort of impediment, you would be wise to pick a different area--one where you can embrace the possibility that you need to think things through.  Of course, the fact that you may have titanic certainty about your world view probably means that you really do have an impediment such as intellectual pride, fear, lack of empathy, false integrity, or bias.  But it is important to begin the process of critical thinking in an area where motion is possible:  an area that you know impediments have affected.  It is like running a marathon:  you have to train over short distances before you can run the full 26 miles.

One more thing:  Most of you have not written classical arguments in WRIT 101 or HMXP 102.  You must now do so in CRTW 201.  Naturally, you will feel the pull of inertia, but I encourage you to embrace the process.  The paper is mapped out for you below.  I have even provided an outline and a sample thesis statement, an you may use the latter as a model for your own thesis. 

Requirements: 

• Write 5 pages minimum, 8 pages maximum plus a 9th page for work(s) cited.  Stay within the 5-8 page required length.
• Use all of the elements of critical thinking (Nosich 51, fig.2.1).
• The assignment does require a classical argument.  Follow the directions below.  You absolutely must not write a 5-par. essay.  That sort of high-school-style paper will receive an automatic F.
• Incorporate at least 1 quotation from Nosich's book (see especially pages 18-28).  Additional research is neither necessary nor desirable for paper one.
• You do not have to attach a paper comment sheet this time; however, it would be wise to use parts of it as a checklist as you prepare to submit your paper.
• Remember to follow the "Format for Papers" in the syllabus.
• Label the sections of your paper as follows:  introduction, background one (focused topic), background two (analysis of focused topic by the elements), arguments, objections, replies, conclusion.  Some of your sections may be more than one paragraph.
• Underline and boldface the names of the elements in background two.
• Take care to do each element in a single sentence, two maximum.
• You must submit your paper to turnitin.com.

Begin your writing process with an opinion that you hold dear.  My colleagues encourage their students to write about gay marriage, and you may well want to select this topic.  If you prefer, you may write instead about your political ideology, a religious or moral belief, or some other conviction that is very significant to your world view.  Prewriting:  See especially Nosich 71-72.  But understand that his items 1-10 do not constitute an outline for your paper.

Please understand the distinction between area of inquiry, topic, and focused topic.  Marriage is an area of inquiry.  Gay marriage is a topic.  A specific gay couple is a focused topic.  Your paper must have a focused topic.  If you cannot come up with a focused topic from your own experience, find one in the library or on the internet.  A segment of a news broadcast is a fine focused topic if it features a specific gay or lesbian couple.  Just be sure that you summarize the clip properly.  Obviously, the same imperative applies to written sources.

Caveat:  I realize that a lot of you will automatically want to write about abortion.  Let me caution you, however, that it is the most hackneyed and frequently messed up paper topic ever conceived.  You may write about it, though I would prefer that you not do so; but you must have a focused topic (not all of abortion but one person who had or is considering an abortion or some other personal experience related to the topic).  Make sure that you have a focused topic. 

Okay, let's say that gay marriage is your topic.  The paper's purpose is not to argue for or against it but rather to understand and analyze the origin of your world view--that is, where it came from, how it developed, what factors reinforce it, which impediments affect it.  Here, in other words, are the questions at issue:  Why do you believe what you believe about a focused example of a particular topic?  How did your world view come into existence?  Does its relationship to impediments cast any doubt on your belief?

Here is the structure that you should follow:

Introduction:  The first paragraph includes your world view, your focused topic, and thesis statement:  State your view on your topic, introduce your focused topic, and give your thesis, which should include your focused topic and a conclusion about your impediments (or lack thereof).  Underline your thesis.  I require 3-part thesis statements:  1) Although + qualification, 2) I will argue that + controversial idea about your impediment in terms of your focused topic 3) because of a reason/argument.  Be sure that all three parts relate to your focused topic and your impediment.  Do not bury the focused topic in the "because" clause.  Be sure that the "although" and "because" clauses are in a true opposition.  Be careful, in other words, not just to have some irrelevant generalization about gay marriage in society as a place-holder in the "although" clause.

Sample thesis statement:  Let's say that you choose gay marriage.  You might write a sentence such as this:  Although I have been trained to believe that my view of my friend's gay marriage is morally right (and therefore not an impediment), I will use his relationship to argue that I do have an impediment to my critical thinking (namely, intellectual pride arising from my religious upbringing) because my automatic reaction to learning about his life partner was that it is sinful and non-Biblical. 

Body:  Use the elements to analyze (or as Dr. Koster says, "break down, dissect, scrutinize") WHY you believe what you believe about your topic/focus.  In particular, what impediments--also called barriers or filters--have affected your world view?  You will surely want to incorporate the categories that structure Nosich's section on "Impediments to Critical Thinking":  see the section headings on pages 18-28 (the news, etc.).  The body of the paper is a good place to quote Nosich.  Note:  Understand that you will be evaluated not on what you believe but rather on how well you analyze why you believe it and how well you consider the impediments that surround your belief.

Body structure:  Begin with background information (describe your focused topic).  Then put your focused topic through the elements of critical thinking (begin with Q@I).  You are now ready to launch your arguments, which support the "I will argue that" clause in the thesis:  the argument section is where you argue that you do have an impediment as regards your focused topic.  Next, consider objections, which support your "although" clause:  no, you do not have an impediment.  Finally, reply to these objections so that you reaffirm your main assertion in "I will argue that."  In argument, objection, and reply paragraphs/sections, remember that your job is to write about your impediments in terms of your focused topic.  This is a paper about the intellectual problems that undergird your belief about a focused topic.

Conclusion:  Step back and reflect on what your analysis in the body has taught you about your thinking.  For example, what challenges do you face as you go forward in this course and in your life outside it?  Is your world view serving you well?  What should you do about any impediments that have surfaced?  If it helps, feel free to think of the conclusion as an evaluation of your world view and/as an application of your analysis.  What kind of change--think "deep learning"--arises from what you have learned in this paper?

Paper Two:  Major-related

Whereas paper one asked you to deploy the elements in search of your impediments, paper two adds the standards (Nosich 139-74) to your analysis and seeks to have you explore the thinking that you do in your major field. 

Requirements:

• The paper should be 5-8 pages in length plus a list of works cited.  The class visit should be on the WC list.
• Use the elements AND the standards of critical thinking:  the elements are to analysis as the standards are to evaluation.
• Focus on a class that you are currently taking.  It should ideally be one in your major or prospective major, but I realize that not all of you have a major course this term.  The next best thing is a course in your minor.  But whatever you choose, make sure that you select a class that involves lecture and/or discussion.  Studio classes will not work for this assignment.  Alternatives:  1) If you have no non-studio class this semester, focus on a session of a lecture class from a previous semester.  2) If there is a cultural event (a substantive lecture) that dovetails nicely with your intellectual interests or major field, feel free to use it, rather than a class session, as your focused topic.  It MUST be substantive:  a concert, for example, will not work for the same reason that a studio class will not work.  3) Ask a professor if you can sit in on his or her lecture class and use that class session as your focused topic.
• Paper two is not an argumentative essay, but it should not be a 5-par. essay either.  Follow the outline that appears below.
• Incorporate at least 1 quotation from Nosich somewhere in your essay.  Additional research is not necessary.
• You do not have to attach a paper comment sheet this time; however, it would be wise to use parts of it as a checklist as you prepare to submit your paper.
• Do not select a session of our class or of one of my other classes as your focused topic for this assignment.
• Be sure to use all 10 elements in your analyses of the course and of the discipline.  And always start with the Q@I.
• Underline and boldface all the elements.

Following Dr. Bird's lead, I am assigning the following structure of the formal report (be sure to use section headings):

Introduction:  State what you are investigating (a session of your chosen class:  give some details about the class) and your thesis.  Basically, the thesis statement should anticipate the evaluation of your class session.  As measured against the overall discipline, was it a success, a failure, or some combination of success and failure?  Your thesis answers this question.  It should state:  I will argue that [whatever class session or cultural event you choose as your focused topic] was a success because it met the standard of [whatever standard(s) you want to apply] with respect to the overall discipline.  If you see a qualification, put it in an although clause.  You will use the standards to support your evaluation, and one or more of them should appear in the thesis.  Note:  The purpose of this paper is not to rip on someone's teaching.  Be objective and analytical; deal with the material, not with your professor's personality or style.  It is probably best not to name your professor in the paper.  (not more than 1 page)

Apply the elements to the overall discipline.  Nosich provides examples on pages 100-03.  It may be helpful to do this stage before you analyze your class.  (not more than 2 pages)

Summary and analysis:  Present the substance of the class session within an analysis by the elements.  Here your job is to examine both the substance of the class and the kind of thinking that it required.  Note:  This is the kind of thing that the university hopes that you will do for every session of every class that is not a "studio class."  (not more than 2 pages) 

Evaluation:  Now apply the standards.  In light of your understanding of the thinking in your discipline, apply the standards to your focused topic (your class session).  How well did it plug into the kind of critical thinking that you mapped out in your survey of the discipline? I expect you to use at least 5 of the standards in your evaluation.  (not more than 2 pages)

Conclusion:  End by reflecting honestly on the "fit" between you and the major that the class represents.  Is that major right for you in terms of the kind of thinking that has animated your essay?  (not more than 1 page).

Paper Three:  Midterm Self-assessment

Your third paper is an in-class essay, which you will write in a bluebook that you must provide (bluebooks are available at the Bookworm; please get the larger size).  See http://faculty.winthrop.edu/fikem/CRTW%20201%20In-class%20Paper.htm for details.

Paper Four:  Researched Essay

Very few of you have ever thought about the paranormal, much less psychic functioning.  That is why this assignment offers a terrific opportunity to develop a position and to think about your thinking.  It should appeal especially to those of you who prefer fact-based thinking.  Whereas paper one deployed the elements and paper two deployed the elements and the standards, paper three adds the critical thinking traits (see the SEEI Journal assignment sheet or the ends of Nosich's chapters).  One of these traits should become a major theme of your paper.

Requirements:

• The paper should be 6-9 pages in length plus a list of works cited.  Under no circumstances should you turn in a paper fewer than six or more than 9 full pages of text. 
• Deploy the elements and the standards of critical thinking, but this time you should also consider your own critical thinking traits through the lens that this assignment provides.
• Focus on a specific example of psychic functioning.  I recommend that you select one of the short vignettes at http://www.issc-taste.org/index.shtml.  All of the examples here are from scientists, and the compiler (Charles T. Tart) is also a scientist, so point of view will be very interesting to consider.
• This paper does have to be a classical argument.  Follow the outline that appears below.
• Incorporate at least one quotation from Nosich.  You may, for example, want to note his dismissal of the paranormal on pages 21, 27, and 120, or his hubris on 130 (that is, his prideful ignorance of his own ignorance).
• Incorporate support from at least three sources, which may well include some of the Web sites listed below.  You may also need a fourth source to flesh out background 1.
• You do have to attach a copy of the paper comment sheet this time.  Use a paper clip to secure it to the front of the paper.  Be sure that the whole comment sheet appears on one side of one sheet of paper.

Focus and Thesis:

• Your focus should be an example of psychic functioning.  It should probably be one of Tart's vignettes; however, you are welcome to branch out if you wish.  My old paper assignment link (http://faculty.winthrop.edu/fikem/Courses/CRTW%20201/CRTW%20201%20Paper%20Assignments%2008F.htm) has some suggested paranormal topics, and some of them are extremely good.  Perhaps the very best example is remote viewing.  In this case, your focused topic would be one single viewing (e.g., Joe McMoneagle's viewing of a Soviet submarine, which conventional intelligence later corroborated).  The boldfaced topics are particularly well-suited for this assignment.  Here is another example:  Ghosts are a topic; one ghost is a focused topic.
• Your thesis should be an idea (you want to argue that something is the case; it is a clause that expresses something controversial).  Your thesis may not be a mere topic (it may not just announce that you will discuss X; instead give me an idea about X).  Put your focused topic in your thesis; your thesis must be about your focused topic.  Here's a formula:  Qualification (Although/Despite) + controversial idea about your focused topic (I will use [standards] to argue that) + controversial idea + argument/why you believe the controversial idea (because...). All three parts of the thesis must be about the focused topic!

Research:

You are required to incorporate into your arguments/objections/replies statements from at least three sources other than Nosich.  Thus your WC list should have at least four sources:  the focused topic, Nosich, one pro view, and one con view.  You might fruitfully begin your search by clicking through the following Web sites, which I have reproduced from the appendix of Tart's recently published book, The End of Materialism: How Evidence of the Paranormal Is Bringing Science and Spirit Together. All of the links work (I checked), but a few cannot be hyperlinked for some reason.  In those cases, just cut and paste them into your browser.  I have highlighted in red some of the sources that include skeptical approaches, and you can find various others on your own (see especially the work of debunker James Randi; googling paranormal and skeptics should also help).  The Web sites are here because Tart, a top guy in the field of parapsychology, recommends them:  they are a good place to begin.

• www.mindreader.com
• www.dbem.ws
• www.parapsy.nl
• www.integral-inquiry.com
• userpages.umbc.edu/~braude/
• jazzphilosopher.com/
• www1.psychology.lu.se/Personal/e_cardena/
• www.parapsi.com
• www.hi.is/~erlendur/
• www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/
• www.stanleykrippner.com
• www.parapsychologybooks.com
• www.DrGhost.com
• www.mceagle.com/
• www.AreSpiritsReal.com
• www.psiresearch.org/
• www.deanradin.com
• www.stephanaschwartz.com
• www.sheldrake.org
• www.jsasoc.com/
• www.homestead.com/mscourses/worldreligionsSFSUSpring06.html
• www.homestead.com/mscourses/EastBayWRspring06.html
• www.espresearch.com
• www.paradigm-sys.com/cttart
• lifebeforelife.com
• anson.ucdavis.edu/~utts
• www.sylviahartwright.com/
• www.after-death.com
• www.homepages.ed.ac.uk/ejua35/parapsy.htm
• blavatskyarchives.com/zeteticism.htm
• www.psi-mart.com/home.php
• www.roma1.infn.it/rog/group/frasca/b/parap.html
• http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/New/index.html
• http://publicparapsychology.blogspot.com/2006/12/mind-over-matter-study.html

Note:  Wikipedia.com is NOT a legitimate source for this paper.

Outline:

Be sure to provide section headings as you prepare your final paper.  Number your paragraphs in the left margin.

Introduction:  Begin with a statement about your thinking as regards the paranormal and move to your focused topic and a connection to one or more of the traits of mind.  Your thesis must set up a classical argument about your focused topic.  In particular, it must take a stand:  Although:  How might your because clause be qualified (an objection)?  Main clause:  Your focused topic is or is not a genuine example of psychic functioning.  Because:  Why you think so (an argument, a reason for believing the main clause to be true). All three parts of the thesis should be about the focused topic.  (note more than 1 page)

Background 1:  Give some brief background on your topic.  Then summarize your focused topic.  (not more than 2 pages)

Background 2:  Put your focused topic through the elements of critical thinking.  This section is for analysis.  (1 page)

Arguments:  Support your main clause.  Plug in the argument in the "because" clause.  (2 pages)

NOTE: Argument, objection, and reply sections are where you should use the standards of critical thinking.  This section is for evaluation.  Use at least three of the standards.  Be sure to underline and boldface your elements and standards.

Objections:  Support your "Although" clause.  Be sure that the "although" clause in the thesis is a genuine objection to your argument. (1 page)

Replies:  Give some ground (concession) but then reply to your objections in order to affirm your arguments and, in turn, your thesis (rebuttal). (1 page)

Conclusion:  This is where you should invoke one or more traits of mind.  For example, did you discover that you had been intellectually dishonest with yourself prior to this assignment?  Does your rationality interfere or assist your approach to the paranormal?  Have you been fair-minded?  Or did you discover that your impediments hung you up in major ways? (1 page)

This is from "Guidelines for Papers":  Most of your papers must be argumentative and should follow the structure of the classical argument.  See the link to "The Classical Argument" on our course home page.  It is particularly important to include arguments (reasons for believing the thesis to be true), objections (opposition to the arguments), refutation (part concession [giving ground to the opposition] and part rebuttal [overturning the opposition]), and a conclusion.

Paper Five:  Final Examination

The final examination appears at http://faculty.winthrop.edu/fikem/CRTW%20201%20Final%20Examination%2008F.htm on our course Web site, but please note that, as of January, it is a version that I used when I last taught the course.  Expect revisions.  However, even in its current form, it nicely encapsulates what I want to emphasize:  critical thinking is appropriate not only in your academic work but also in your personal, nonacademic life.  Therefore, your final essay asks you to focus on a decision that you have made or will soon make, to analyze it with the elements, to evaluate your thinking with the standards, and to give a sense of yourself as a critical thinker as you emerge from CRTW by invoking the traits of mind.