PARAMETERS
1. Typed, double spaced, 12 pitch, one inch margins, no more than five pages,
including references. Please note: when you refer to a book, please also include
page numbers. I will absolutely stop reading at five pages.
2. Use the last FIVE digits of your SSN as the running head. NO NAMES ON THE
PAPERS.
3. DUE NO LATER THAN 5:00 PM DECEMBER 17, AS AN EMAIL ATTACHMENT to BOTH
tuclasses@rbtaylor.net and
tuclasses@fastmail.fm. Papers also
can be handed in to my mailbox in the office, but if you do so ALSO SEND a
corresponding email letting me know you have done that.
4. There is NO penalty for submitting early papers.
5. LATE PAPERS will lose points and may jeopardize your grade.
ASSIGNMENT
Answer the following question
IF YOU READ The Corner:
Focus on the changes DeAndre goes through during the course of the year. Use
EITHER Hirschi or Sampson and Laub or Laub and Sampson to "explain" WHAT he does
and WHY he does what he does. Use only ONE of these theory books as the
interpretive context. Be sure to refer to specific pages and concepts in the
theoretical book you use, and specific incidents and pages in The Corner.
Be sure to tie it to specific incidents in DeAndre's life. You need not try to
illustrate ALL the points in the theory you are discussing; just pick a few that
you think are the most relevant.
IF YOU READ Rule of the Bone
Focus on Chappie's delinquency career up to the time of his arrival in
Jamaica. For the purposes of this paper, you can ignore everything after his
arrival there. Use EITHER Hirschi or Sampson and Laub or Laub and Sampson to
"explain" WHAT he does and WHY he does what he does. Us only ONE of these books
as the interpretive context. Be sure to refer to specific pages and concepts in
the theoretical book you use. Be sure to tie it to specific incidents in
Chappie's current or past life, using page numbers. You need not try to
illustrate ALL the points in the theory you are discussing; just pick a few that
you think are the most relevant.
GRADING RUBRIC
Papers will be graded on four dimensions, indicated below. Each dimension will
be counted equally
| Below Average (D) | Average (C) | Above Average (B) | Excellent (A) | |
| Writing Quality | Large number of grammatical and/or spelling errors; and/or writing is hard to understand; and/or connections between sections or ideas not clear | Moderate number of grammatical and/or spelling errors; small problems in overall paper organization; or sizable problems in paper organization | A small number of grammatical or spelling errors; overall construction acceptable but could be stronger | No grammatical or spelling errors; well constructed paragraphs; well connected paragraphs; strong overall structure |
| Cogency of Analysis | No appropriate connections made between the theory and the narrative material | Only one or two theory/narrative connections made; and/or the cogency of the connections is suspect, but is at least detailed; and/or the connections fail to address major points in the narrative | Connections made between specific theory elements and specific narrative elements, but the ties are not as clear as they could be, or do not address major points in the narrative | Strong, clear, cogent connections made between specific theory elements and specific narrrative elements |
| Reference to Supporting Theory | Paper fails to correctly reference key concepts or hypotheses from the supporting theory | Paper makes use of a couple of key concepts or hypotheses from the supporting theory, but the concepts or hypotheses are not clearly described or properly referenced; and/or the concepts used are not the most appropriate ones to use from that theoretical model | Paper makes correct use of a couple of key concepts from the supporting theory, with appropriate referencing; concepts used are the most relevant. | Paper makes correct use of at least 3-4 key concepts from the supporting theory, with appropriate referencing; concepts used are the most relevant |
| Reference to Volume Read | Makes no specific reference to the volume, or, the references that are made are not clearly relevant to the point being made | There are at least a couple of quotes referenced, but the connection with the theoretical point is not completely clear. |
Has 3 - 4 different quotes referenced, and each is exactly relevant to the point being made |
Has at least 6-8 different quotes referenced, and each is exactly relevant to the point being made |