• Due Date: 11/18/09
• Length: three to six typed and stapled pages
• Formatting: one-inch margins; 12pt. font, Times New Roman; MLA citation
• Grade: a standard letter grade will be given
I am giving you two options for this assignment:
I. Either defend/agree or attack/disagree with Truss’s argument(s) concerning punctuation and language. In your paper you must trace how Truss develops and reiterates this argument throughout the chapters we read in class; that is, supply evidence from as many chapters as possible.
II. Compare and/or contrast the Segment 4 Coursepack essays by authors Braden and Westlake.
Should you choose to utilize your article from Article Essay #2, you may only use it as secondary, supporting evidence.
General tips:
I have noticed that many students’ thesis statements are too general and not direct. Therefore, be specific and directly name the things you wish to compare and/or contrast between the two authors/texts.
• Here is a good thesis statement from the first round of Essay #3, “In the article ‘Title’ by Andrew Fiala, he explains the concept of jus as bellum or justice after war as does Marian Eide in her article ‘Title’. Eide writes from a feminist point of view and she discusses the position of women in war. She also discusses how just war and late feminism discourse are used to justify war. Andrew Fiala focuses more on the justification of war and pacifism. The similarity between the two articles is the idea of jus post bellum. The differences are that Fiala speaks more to the justification of war and Eide speaks of gender roles and feminist perspectives”
• Another example I deem to be quite direct and to the point is the following, “In ‘Title’, author Andrew Fiala suggests that citizens are not capable of fulfilling this position of what constitutes a justifiable war. He argues that instead, a citizen’s responsibility is to hold their leaders accountable for their policies and actions regarding just war. In ‘Title’ Bat-Ami Bar On constructs her thesis through a feminist lens by putting forth a call to Americans to not just look at war through the traditional ‘white-male’ perspective. The two authors both suggests that war is sometimes necessary and that ethics should not be brought into the conversation regarding war because often justice can be achieved through un-ethical warfare also known as, jus post bellum.”
• To begin thinking of ways to compare and/or contrast authors/texts, identify two or three issues, points, or items that you can discuss; for example, both Fiala and Eide discuss the “item” of pacifism. Crucially, how they each authors approaches pacifism and what they have to say about the “item” determines if they can be compared or contrasted.
Concerning the bodies of these essays, be sure to double check your body paragraphs.
• Examine each paragraph’s topic sentence, evidence, and transitional statements. Be sure that you are saying exactly what you mean to say and that the paper flows from paragraph to paragraph.
• Make sure that your body paragraphs are in the correct order; that is, the order outlined by the thesis statement.
In the conclusion, you can offer your opinion of the issues at hand, or even better, you can connect the present essays in question to other essays that we have read or to issues that we have discussed before in the class.
