Do NOT include Pals’ intro to the theorist in your map.
It is imperative to understand the arguments of the theorists we will study. You should have a head start on this before you come to class. Doing so will enable us to delve deeper into the theorists’ arguments during class time and will also allow us to engage in the important task of reflecting critically on their arguments. To enable the classroom environment described above, you are required to submit an argument map and reaction notes for the theorists you read prior to spring break. There are 7 chances to complete map and note assignments. Only your best 5 will count towards your grade. You can decide whether to only do 5 assignments or to attempt more.
The argument map should map the writing of the assigned theorist, i.e the assigned primary source. Do not include Pals’ brief introduction to each theorist in the map. The map should be structured as follows:
- List the author’s argument in 5-8 bullet points. Each point can range between 2-4 sentences. Make sure that the argument map follows the author’s line of reasoning, i.e., each bullet point should connect to the previous one, making apparent the theorist’s line of thought.
- Beneath each bullet point, write out a quotation from the theorist (1-2 sentences) that illustrates the point you just described. Provide a page number for the quotation; you don’t need to formally footnote or provide a bibliography. Only quote from the assigned text.
Following the argument map, provide some reaction notes. The reaction notes should be structured as follows:
- In a bullet point titled “strength” identify one strength of the author’s methodology, interpretive approach and/or argument? Write 2-3 sentences convincing me of the strength. For example, in your reaction note, if you identify one strength of Tylor as the logical construction of his argument, you need to defend/prove that point. Spend some time explaining what makes his argument logical.The strength you note must be substantial; noting, for example, that the author uses footnotes or has an impressive vocabulary does not count as a substantial strength.
- In a bullet point titled “weakness” identify one weaknesses of the author’s methodology, interpretive approach and/or argument. Write 2-3 sentences convincing me of the weakness. The weakness you note must be substantial; noting, for example, that the author uses antiquated terms does not count as a substantial weakness.