Essay suggestions


Good afternoon,

I have finished grading my share of the papers which were submitted up until Friday. Grades will go up as I get through processing late marks, accommodation letters, doctor's notes, and emails.


Some general comments on the essays:


* Not writing on an assigned topic, not having an argument, or not having a bibliography could reasonably be grounds for a failing grade, but probably only resulted in a C-range grade this time.
* In your first paragraph - or certainly in your introduction - there must be a clear original thesis that answers the question posed by the assignment. Your essay must be structured to support this thesis.


1) Essay mechanics
* Always use one typeface and a 12pt font; unless told to use one don't include a cover page; include page numbers (not counting any cover page); indent paragraphs but don't leave spaces between them; single space the bibliography and alphabetize it by author; use a standard citation system with consistent formatting of footnotes and bibliography entries.
* Align left, don't 'justify' (unless typesetting in LaTeX instead of MS Word).
* Use one space after a period. If you were taught otherwise, it was by someone whose training was based on typewriters: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2011/01/space_invaders.html
* Only use a direct quote when the exact wording of a source is important. If their phrasing is generic, paraphrase and cite. Avoid using too many direct quotes in general.
* All direct quotes need citations. You can draw attention to a word with single quotes ('democracy' is a term which has long eluded easy definition), but anything in double quotes should be cited.
* Put the essay topic, essay title, your name, your student number, the date, the course number, and your TA's name on the first page (not on every page).


2) Authorial voice
* It's never necessary to say "this essay will" or "the author will". Anyone reading your essay knows what it is, and these phrases are always awkward and pretentious. Just make your argument! No reporter says: "According to this this article written by this reporter, writing in the New York Times, the situation in North Korea is unstable".
* If an assignment tells you to be analytical (explaining why things are the way they are) not normative (arguing for how things out to be) pay attention to the instructions. If you are told to explain the popularity of white nationalism, you aren't being asked to comment on whether it is a good thing or a bad thing. Similarly, in an otherwise analytical essay, there is no need to suddenly include a bunch of normative prescriptions in the conclusion, like ending a paper on declining voter turnout with a patriotic appeal for Canadians to do better.


3) Writing well
* Reading your work aloud will immediately help you locate and improve awkward and convoluted sentence structures. ("Awk" is written all over these papers.) It will help with grammar errors ("g") too.
* Never use "amongst" or "whilst" (or "whomst"!). They are normally used incorrectly, and always sound antiquated and pretentious even when used properly.
* If you start a sentence with a word like "thus" or "however", make sure it connects logically with what you said before. "My sister gave me a lovely gift. However, it made me very happy" doesn't work.
* Only use the word "ensure" if you really mean it. Visiting Antarctica with inadequate clothing might ensure frostbite, but few things in politics or its academic study are ever certain.
* Excessive signposting can easily become obnoxious: "In the previous paragraph, I described reasons why the popularity of Canadian political parties have changed. In the next sentence, the author will describe how changes in popularity relate to elections".
* There are two correct uses for semicolons. Look them up.
* Be careful with pronouns. If you say "this shows..." is it clear exactly what "this" refers to?


4) Logic and evidence
* Correlation isn't causation. The fact that you see two things happen together doesn't mean the first caused the second. It could be random. The second could cause the first. They could both be caused by some third thing you haven't considered. For instance, seeing that lots of democracies have low perceived corruption scores proves nothing causally: something might both cause countries to have low perceived corruption and encourage them to be democratic.
* One contrary example is not a disproof of a general claim. Consider what you are implying about the argument you're trying to refute. Does anybody claim that democracies have never experienced a single corruption scandal? Unless that's the claim you're trying to disprove, a single example doesn't do much explanatory work.
* Factual claims should be supported by citations: "On May 8th, Candidate X was polling at 25% support (citation)".
* A citation is not sufficient to prove a theoretical or normative claim, with no explanation of the logic or evidence the author used: "The United States is not corrupt (citation)". Rather than asserting the truth of such claims with a citation, explain how the author who you are citing makes their argument.
* When ranking many countries, small variations in rank are usually irrelevant: the second of fifth least corrupt or most literate countries are likely a lot like the absolute least corrupt and most literate. Avoid over-interpreting the importance of small differences.
* If you are asked to explain a change, make sure you do so. For instance, if you were asked to explain why some aspect of Canadian politics changed since the year 2000, talking about Canada's large size would be irrelevant since it didn't change in the period in question. Make sure you specifically explain how your explanation relates to the change that needs to be explained, during the relevant period in time.


Your papers will be handed back with detailed comments and if you wish to schedule a meeting during office hours to discuss how to improve, let me know.

Good luck with the exam and best wishes for the holidays,

Milan