Senior Thesis: Making Claims Josefino Rivera, Jr. Literature and Personal Choice 30 March 2009

Working Bibliography: Common Mistakes  Entries were numbered.  Entries were not in alphabetical order.  Entries were missing a period at the end of the citation.  Entries did not have hanging indents.  Whole works are italicized (or underlined)  Books, albums, films, magazine, newspaper, journal  Parts of works are in quotes  Chapter title, song title, article  Websites need two dates: when it was published (first) and when it was accessed (second).

Notes Set #2  What worked well:  Formatting significantly better  Reliability of sources are getting stronger  Reflections are thorough  Suggestions:  Lack of variety (needed 6 sources, 3 print and 3 online)  Analysis is getting better but still too many personal reactions only. Not much argument with author or questioning of research.

The Research Cycle Topic Question Research Refine Question Refine Research Refine Question Refine Research Problems:

Problems  Practical Problems:  Caused by some condition in the world, from spam to terrorism, that makes us unhappy because it costs us time, money, respect, security, pain, even our lives. You solve the practical problem by doing something that changes the world by eliminating the causes that lead to its costs, or by encouraging others to do so.  Research Problems:  Motivated not by palpable (so intense you can see or feel it) unhappiness, but by incomplete knowledge or flawed understanding. You solve it not by changing the world but by understanding it better.

The Common Structure of Problems  Condition:  I missed the bus.  The hole in the ozone layer is growing.  Consequences & Costs:  I will be late for work and may lose my job.  Many will die from skin cancer. Practical and research problems have the same basic structure. Both have two parts: 1.A situation or condition, and 2.The undesirable consequences of the condition and costs

The Nature of Research Problems  Practical Problem Consequences and Costs:  Any state of affair whose cost makes you (or someone) unhappy  Research Problem Consequences and Costs:  Always is some version of not knowing or not understanding something Practical and research problems have the same structure, but their conditions and costs differ in important ways:

What’s Your Problem?  To be sure you have a pure research problem and not a practical or applied research problem, use the following formula:  I am studying…  because…  In order to…

What’s Your Problem?  Practical:  I am studying the difference between reading from the Hubble telescope in orbit above the atmosphere and readings for the same stars from earthbound telescopes because I want to find out how much the atmosphere distorts measurements of light and other electromagnetic radiation, so that astronomers can use data from earthbound telescopes to measure more accurately the density of electromagnetic energy.  Pure Research:  I am studying the density of light and other electromagnetic radiation in a small section of the universe because I want to find out how many stars are in the sky, in order to help readers understand whether the universe will expand forever or contract into a new big bang.

What’s Your Problem?  I am studying…  Because…  In order to…  Be sure your “in order to” only refers to understanding or knowing, not doing.

The Research Cycle Topic Question Research Refine Question Refine Research Refine Question Refine Research Problems: Claims Evidence Warrants Refine Research Outline or Preliminary Thesis Refine Research Refine Thesis Refine Research Polish Thesis

Claims  A claim, or thesis, is the central argument of your paper. It should be something substantive enough that a reader could be convinced of it and narrow enough that a reader can understand the need for your argument.

Argument and Conversation  A: I hear you had a rocky time last semester. How do you think this term will go?  B: Better, I hope.  A: Why is that?  B: I’ll finally be taking courses in my major.  A: Why do you think that’ll make a difference?  B: When I take courses I’m interested in, I work harder.  A: What courses?  B: History of architecture and introduction to design.  A: But what about the calculus course you have to take again?  B: I know I had to drop it last time, but I found a really good tutor.  A: But you won’t be taking 5 courses?  B: I know. It won’t be easy.  A: Will you pull up your GPA?  B: I should. I’m shooting for at least a 3.0, as long as I don’t have to get a part-time job.  Poses a problem that interests her, put in the form of a question.  Makes a claim that answers the question.  Asks for a reason to believe in B’s claim.  B offers a reason.  A doesn’t see how B’s reason is relevant to his claim that he will do better.  B offers general principle (or warrant) that relates to his reasons to his claims.  A asks for evidence to back up B’s reasons.  B offers evidence.  A offers a point that contradicts B’s reasons.  B acknowledges A’s objection and responds to it.  A raises another reservation.  B concedes a point he cannot refute.  A asks about the limits of B’s claims.  B limits the scope of his claim and adds a condition.

Making Claims  If you can imagine playing the roles of both A and B, you will find nothing strange about assembling your senior thesis, because every written argument is built out of the answers to those same five questions: 1. What do you claim? 2. What reasons support that claim? 3. What evidence supports those reasons? 4. Do you acknowledge this alternative/complication/objection, and how do you respond? 5. What principle (warrant) justifies connecting your reasons to your claim?

What are your claims?  Based on your research question, what claims can you currently make?

Homework  Create 2-4 more claims that answer either your entire research question or a part of it based on your research you have done so far.  Also, finish Notes Set #3. Remember, you only need 4 specific questions and you can reuse sources.

Criteria for Strong Claims and Evidence Josefino Rivera, Jr. Literature and Personal Choice 31 March 2009

Please take out:  Notes Set #3  Your working claims  A pen or pencil  Please begin class by updating your partner with your new research. Start with the person sitting away from the door and spend 2 minutes each.

Claims  A claim, or thesis, is the central argument of your paper. It should be something substantive enough that a reader could be convinced of it and narrow enough that a reader can understand the need for your argument.

A claim must be:  Specific  Language  Logic  Significant  Substantive  Contestable

A specific claim: language  Is composed of terms that will later be defined and supported with evidence in the body of the paper. The reader will want to see developed in the paper.  Not: How girls and boys communicate when they are young is connected to their adult communication patterns.  But: Gendered communication patterns in early childhood correlate strongly to ethical decision- making patterns in adult life and codify structures and modes of truth-telling.

A specific claim: language  Can be used to guide you in selecting the evidence you will use to support your point. Gendered communication behaviors in early childhood correlate strongly to ethical decision-making patterns in adult life and codify structures and modes of truth-telling. 1. How are communication behaviors gendered? 2. How is ethical decision-making defined? 3. How great is the correlation? 4. Which structures and modes of truth telling were studied? 5. How were they codified? 6. What are the implications of this correlation?

A specific claim: logic  Is composed of several logical arguments that will be pursued and supported later with evidence.  Not: Regular TV viewers overestimate by as much as 150 percent both the rate of crime in their neighborhood and the personal danger to themselves and their families.  But: Although violent crime is actually decreasing, regular TV viewers overestimate by as much as 150 percent both the rate of crime in their neighborhood and the personal danger to themselves and their families, because local TV evening news regularly opens with graphic reports of mayhem and murder in familiar locations, making many believe that crime happens nightly outside their front door.

A specific claim: logic  Although I acknowledge X, I claim Y, because of reason Z.  Introduce claim with a clause beginning with “although” or “even though”  It acknowledges:  (1) a point of view that conflicts with yours:  Although most people think they are the good judges of the security of their neighborhood, regular TV overestimates…  (2) a fact that your readers might believe but that your claim qualifies:  Although violent crime is actually decreasing overall, regular TV viewers overestimate…  (3) a condition that limits he scope or confidence of your claim:  Although it is difficult to gauge the real feelings about their personal security, regular TV viewers overestimate…

A specific claim: logic  Conclude claim with a reason-clause beginning with “because”  It forecasts reasons for believing in the claim:  Most important reasons  General reason that will encompass several others

 Conclude claim with a reason-clause beginning with “because”

A substantive claim  Engages the reader’s interest by doing more than  (1) restating the writer’s process or  (2) summarizing data.  A substantive claim does not say  (1) I have examined the role of the Federal Reserve Board in the recession. or  (2) This paper will discuss the role of OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) in the recession of  A substantive claim does say:  The recession did not occur because OPEC raised prices but mainly because the Federal Reserve tightened the money supply.

A substantive and specific claim  Although it has been generally accepted that the recession occurred because OPEC raised prices, the recession was mainly due to the Federal Reserve because it tightened the money supply.

A contestable claim  Readers want to read a claim that makes them think differently about something they have pondered in the past or about something they have never thought of before. They want to think “You’ll have to explain that.”  A contestable claim can be argued by disputing facts or reinterpreting them.  A contestable claim reflects knowledge of the field of study and can offer a new way of looking at the subject. For instance, your contestable claim may argue against acknowledged authority.

To test contestability  Revise the claim into its opposite: change an affirmative claim into a negative or vice versa:  Shakespeare is great playwright becomes Shakespeare is not a great playwright.  This report summarizes recent research on the disappearance of frogs becomes This report does not summarize the recent research on the disappearance of frogs.  If the reverse of the claim seems self-evidently false (like the first one) or trivial (like the second one), then most readers are unlikely to consider the original worth of the argument.

Assessing Claims and Criteria for Strong Evidence Josefino Rivera, Jr. Literature and Personal Choice 2 April 2009

Please take out: 1. A piece of binder paper 2. Purple Claims/Evidence handout 3. Green STAR notes handout 4. A pen or pencil Please begin class by responding to your third reflection on the piece of binder paper. I will come around and check for homework completion. You will get 10 points for having your working claims. Please put the purple handout on the top right-hand corner of your desk.

Reflection #3 10 minutes of silent reflection Title: Current research question (this should incorporate the feedback from Reflection #2) 1. What “aha!” moments or epiphanies have you had? What myths, misconceptions, or blind spots have you discovered in your thinking about your topic? 2. What biases have you had or will have to be aware of as you continue to research? 3. What frustrations do you have? How are they similar and different to your frustrations from last week?

Assessing the Claim  Essential to every research process is conversation. In order to articulate your ideas, you must subject them to the scrutiny of others. The feedback that you get from honestly puzzled and interested listeners will help you clarify your thinking and your writing process.

Partnered discussion  Reader  What is your claim?  What is your reason?  What is your evidence?  Why do you think your evidence supports your claim?  But what about…?  Are you entirely sure?  But what about…?  Then how strong is your claim?  Writer  I claim that….  I claim this because…  I offer the following pieces of evidence…  I offer this general principle…  I can answer that…  Only if….as long as…  I must concede that…  I limit my claim by/with…

How to have the conversation 1. Write your claim. 2. Give your written claim to your partner (“reader”). 3. “Reader” asks questions and transcribes answers to the first four questions. 4. “Reader” looks for possible exceptions, definable terms, areas for more research and transcribes answers to the last four questions. 5. Writer talks; Reader listens and questions. 6. Switch roles and do the same thing with the other paper.

Lectures and STAR Notes  College and lectures  Average of around 300 in classes  Notes are important

Evidence  Evidence must meet the following criteria:  Context Relevancy  Accuracy  Precision  Representativeness  Authoritativeness  Perspicuity

Evidence  Evidence must be relevant in both content and context.  In order to use the best evidence possible, make sure that the context in which it appears supports your reading/use of it.

Content Relevance  The subject of the quote is tied to the claim/sub-claim that you are making.  Example: You are researching the differences between the ways that fraternities and sororities conduct rush and connecting those differences to gender roles.  The quote you find refers to the fact that the rush process for both fraternities and sororities involves hazing, binge-drinking and other dangerous activities.  Seems relevant to show the incidence of these activities during rush.

Context Relevance  BUT, the full quote reads “The premise that barring single-sex fraternities and sororities will resolve binge drinking, eliminate hazing and improve the socialization between genders, and serve as powerful antidote to some complex problems is one that may only provide topical relief.”  While the quote refers to your topic directly, its context is one that is not related to the issue of studying gender per se. The argument of the paper is about the effects of barring or eliminating Greek culture.  Be careful about the context of the quote in considering whether and how to use it. You need to be faithful to the context in which it originally appeared.

Accuracy  Readers will be skeptical of your entire argument if there is even the smallest flaw in your data, a quote, a citation  If you are unsure of your data, acknowledge it. In fact, if you point to evidence that seems to support your claim but then reject it as unreliable, you show yourself to be cautious and self-critical--and thus, trustworthy

Accuracy Ask yourself:  What evidence am I certain of?  What evidence do I wish were more reliable?  What evidence do I have that I have not thoroughly assessed for accuracy?

Precision  Each discipline has its own language and own units of measurement that will be important to that field.  (i.e. physicist: fractions of a second, historian: months or weeks, paleontologist: tens of thousands of years)  Use that language and be as precise as possible

Precision Ask yourself:  What are the measures useful in your field? Caution: Watch your question (and claim!) for words like some, most, many, frequently, generally, usually.

Representativeness  Data are representative when they reflect the variety of the field from which they were drawn. (i.e. if you want to make a claim about “students at Mountain View” but you only get data from seniors, your data is “unrepresentative.”  Beginners tend to present unrepresentative evidence; they think they can prove a claim when they find support in one quotation, one bit of data, or one personal experience.

Representativeness Ask yourself: 1. What aspects of your evidence don’t reflect the variety in your field?

Authoritativeness  Sources must come from someone with authority in your field.  (i.e. dream psychology: Sigmund Freud; economics: Alan Greenspan; identity formation: Erik Erikson)  Authorities will be obvious because they will be regularly quoted and their names will be mentioned in the text, not just in the bibliographic information.

Authoritativeness Ask yourself:  What sources have less authority? Why?  Distinguish “authoritative evidence” from “evidence from authorities.” What are you going to do when the two best known researchers in your field disagree?

Perspicuity  Audiences won’t believe even the most reliable evidence if its connection to the claim is not thoroughly explained.  Perspicuity will be explain in more detail when we talk about warrants.

STAR Notes: Evidence Context:Evidence must be taken in context or its context is meaningless. Accuracy:Evidence must be recorded accurately or readers will not believe in argument. Precision:Use the language of the discipline you are studying, especially the units of measurement Representativeness: Go to many different sources to get a sufficient amount of evidence Authoritativeness: Find the authorities in your field and cite them. Perspicuity: Clearly connect the claim to the evidence.

Classwork 1. Match evidence from your Notes Sets to your claims. 2. Ask yourself if your chosen evidence fits the criteria of strong evidence. If not, find more evidence or find new evidence.