Scholarship Plus and Minus
Reading your essays, I’ll be looking for positive evidence of your scholarship, including your research of relevant materials and your appropriate processing of that material.
If you’ve managed to synthesize your own observations and experience with the points of view of other credible individuals and have given them credit for their contributions to your new awareness, you’ll be amply rewarded.
At the same time, I’ll be hoping NOT to find evidence of your inappropriate use of sources. The violations of scholarship or Academic Integrity are many, including:
- Representing the work of others as your own
- Representing YOUR OWN earlier work as work done for this course.
- Quoting, paraphrasing, or summarizing the words, thoughts, or even the argument sequences of others without citation.
- Misrepresenting the intentions or perspectives of others.
- Quoting out of context to mislead.
What Has to Be There
Evidence of Research
Comp II is a research course. Your point of view is extremely valuable and must be in evidence in everything you write, but it can be fully credited only when you support it with evidence gathered from other credible sources.
Technically, the trouble with your References list is easy to fix, MyStudent.
You’ve named five sources in your References, but you’ve cited only one (“The Island of Stone Money”). The others might belong in a Bibliography as sources you consulted, but since you didn’t cite them, they have no place in your References. Readers of your list will search your article for indications that you’ve used the sources.
Removing the four sources would fix your References.
However, you need to cite more than just the single primary source to earn a grade for this assignment. The harder fix is to read, absorb, reflect upon, and deliver your insights about, several other sources from those provided. And cite them, of course.
Rhetoric and Scholarship are inseparable in your case, MyStudent. You’re trying to thrive on observation and speculation alone, without bringing any evidence or support from the rich material at your disposal. You cite only the Yap, and you do so in a way that assumes your readers are all familiar with Milton Friedman’s article. They’re not. They haven’t listened to the NPR podcast. They have no idea what you’re talking about. They know only what you tell them. So tell them what you learned and help them understand.
Academic Reaction to the Evidence
Copy to come
Fair Use of the Material
Copy to come