this is for
Core Writing Assignment #2
Argument reconstruction and critique (20% of course grade)
_________________________________________________________
Paper length: 3.5 – 4 pages, 12 point font, 1” margins, double spaced
Format: MLA, Chicago, or APA format
Draft Due: March 30
Final Version Due: April 6
_________________________________________________________
Context: Our second unit in Core 110 focuses on historical identity.
One purpose of this unit is to appreciate how we understand historical identities through varying interpretations and sources.
Since Lutheranism is part of the historical identity that shapes Valparaiso University, we might assume that Martin Luther and his theology are integral to this institution’s identity.
But how we understand Luther’s identity depends on interpretations that vary—sometimes widely—depending on what scholar we are reading.
Reading: We will begin by reading a few pages from History in Crisis? that begin a chapter called “What is History?” This chapter discusses different ways of editing or structuring the past.
Then we will read two scholars’ opposing interpretations of Luther: Steven Ozment’s “The Mental World of Martin Luther” and Erik Erikson’s “Case and Event” and “The Fit in the Choir.” In class, we will discuss how these two scholars’ arguments relate to one another.
Also, as background, we’ll read a third perspective on Luther provided in the following pages of James Kittleson’s biography, Luther the Reformer: 9-13, 31-63, 83-114, 145-178, and 281-300.
Writing Assignment:
For your writing assignment, choose the chapter on Luther written by Ozment or the ones by Erikson. Based on the chapter(s) you choose, write an essay with two interconnected parts: For part one, reconstruct the author’s central argument or important sub-argument. For part two, assess (critique) some aspect of the argument you have reconstructed.
Your thesis will be the critique you offer in response to the argument you reconstruct.
Consider the following advice for the two parts of your essay:
a.) Argument Reconstructions:
For the first section of your paper, you will reconstruct the author’s central argument or an important sub-argument. Remember, the author is trying to accomplish many things in an article or book chapter, and is writing to a particular audience. The author might thus go down several paths that are of interest to the author’s audience, but might not be directly or immediately relevant to the central argument of your essay. In your reconstruction, you shouldn’t include those side issues. In fact, part of the challenge of writing this portion of the essay is figuring out what an important argument in the chapter is and how the author defends it.
You will be most successful in writing this portion of the paper, and in avoiding mere summaries, if you write the paper with your book closed, only opening it to make sure you get direct quotations exactly right. You must be extremely familiar with the reading assignments. It’s likely that you will be ready to write this portion of your paper only after reading the assigned texts at least three times, especially the text from what you are reconstructing an argument. First, skim the work to see where the argument is going. Second, attend to each sentence and argument, making sure you understand each one. Third, read the work a final time, putting the small pieces together to understand how they form the whole.
b.) Critiques:
For the second part of the essay, you will assess some aspect of the argument you have reconstructed and take a position. Your critique need not disagree with the author, but might instead point out some parts of the author’s argument that you believe should be foregrounded. You could also focus on objections or problems that you have already discussed in class. Remember that you must argue for your position, anticipating and responding to potential (hypothetical) objections from the author or from members of your Core class. During peer review, class members will put themselves in the author’s shoes, so to speak. Don’t just state your position—back it up with support!
