QCRM – Chapter 9 (279-312)
WUQR – Chapter 5 (93-120)
WUQR – Chapter 7 (151-164)
“Preparing and Submitting the Manuscript” – Thyer
[paper copy in your mailbox]
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Assignment 6: Functional Outline
The functional outline should be a "zero draft" of the research paper due on Friday, December 4. The purpose of this outline is to think strategically about the function of each section and sub-section of your paper.
You should follow these steps:
Step 1: Create the skeleton of the paper (traditional outline)
Step 2: Put [transition] in between sections and sub-sections
Step 3: Write a few (brief) sentences describing what you want to accomplish under each heading and sub-heading
Remember that you are often trying to accomplish more than one thing in any particular section or sub-section, so you should have more than one sentence after some headings / sub-headings.
For example:
Please post your functional outline on your research blog by 12 p.m. on Wednesday, November 25.
You should follow these steps:
Step 1: Create the skeleton of the paper (traditional outline)
Step 2: Put [transition] in between sections and sub-sections
Step 3: Write a few (brief) sentences describing what you want to accomplish under each heading and sub-heading
Remember that you are often trying to accomplish more than one thing in any particular section or sub-section, so you should have more than one sentence after some headings / sub-headings.
For example:
Literature Review
Synthesize most relevant literature to establish theoretical context.
Keep my own project prominent (use it for concrete illustrations).
Make the “gap” or “problem” clear, so the need for my project is obvious.
Please post your functional outline on your research blog by 12 p.m. on Wednesday, November 25.
Assignment 5: Contributions/Limitations
Your contributions/limitations section should be posted on your research blog by 12 p.m. on Wednesday, November 25.
Start this section by reminding the reader what your research accomplished (its contribution to theory or the field), then move on to discussing what still needs to be done (framed as directions for future research in this area, based on the limitations of your study).
This section of the paper is generally no longer than 1.5 to 2 pages. I would recommend reviewing the conclusions of several journal articles before sitting down to draft this section.
Additional examples from last year's class.
Start this section by reminding the reader what your research accomplished (its contribution to theory or the field), then move on to discussing what still needs to be done (framed as directions for future research in this area, based on the limitations of your study).
This section of the paper is generally no longer than 1.5 to 2 pages. I would recommend reviewing the conclusions of several journal articles before sitting down to draft this section.
Additional examples from last year's class.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Readings for Wednesday, November 4
"Analysing Media and Cultural Texts" from Jane Stokes' How To Do Media and Cultural Studies
"Rhetoric of the Image" by Roland Barthes
"A Currency of Signs" from Judith Williamson's Decoding Advertisements
(sorry for the small type on third reading - book is oddly shaped)
Remember to bring an advertisement (print or television) for semiotic analysis in class on November 4.
Update (10/28): I have one extra paper copy of the first reading. It's in my mailbox in the office. The first person to tackle the readings is welcome to take it.
"Rhetoric of the Image" by Roland Barthes
"A Currency of Signs" from Judith Williamson's Decoding Advertisements
(sorry for the small type on third reading - book is oddly shaped)
Remember to bring an advertisement (print or television) for semiotic analysis in class on November 4.
Update (10/28): I have one extra paper copy of the first reading. It's in my mailbox in the office. The first person to tackle the readings is welcome to take it.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Peer Editing of Literature Reviews
Does the structure move from known to unknown? Is literature synthesized rather than summarized? Are the RQs a natural result of the lit review?
Is it clear why (or how) each study cited is relevant to the current project?
Is the current study present throughout the literature review? Does the lit review identify gaps or disagreements in current knowledge and make a strong case for what the current study is contributing?
Is it clearly written (free from typographical and grammatical errors, poor word choice, overly long sentences, and awkward phrasing)?
Is it clear why (or how) each study cited is relevant to the current project?
Is the current study present throughout the literature review? Does the lit review identify gaps or disagreements in current knowledge and make a strong case for what the current study is contributing?
Is it clearly written (free from typographical and grammatical errors, poor word choice, overly long sentences, and awkward phrasing)?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
