The

basics of analy/cal wri/ng and argumenta/on: Part 1

Nego%a%on & Regula%on Tutorial 1 // 04.10.2013

Why this tutorial?

Diversity of student body at IHEID: mul%ple mother tongues, dis%nct backgrounds (not all social science, not all same social science etc.) Increasing importance of wri%ng in grad school Experience from last years teaching this class 100% of your grade comes from what you write!

Aims/Structure of Tutorial
Explain formal requirements of essay wri%ng + grading etc (!). Discuss the distributed readings in terms of how concepts are constructed and argued. Go over a real-paper from last year (if %me). Improve your grade. [Note for French speakers!]

First Essay: A Warm Up

Purpose of the essay: Very short, introductory paper, designed to give you a warm up in essay requirements: Construc*ng an original argument in conceptual terms, using appropriate empirical evidence.

First Essay: Formal Requirements

1500 Words, some leniency Pick 1/3 Ques%ons Draw on assigned readings (5-6 per q.) Can use outside sources but neither necessary nor recommended Due October 16th at 18:00, Geneva Time Submit Electronically to both TAs

Grading Scale
Ins%tute Grading Scale: 4.00 = Pass 4.25/4.5 = Major Problems 4.75 = Several minor + 1 major problems. 5.00 = Quite Good Essay 5.25 = Really Good Essay 5.50-75 = Very Good Essay 6.00 = (Virtually) Impossible

Assessment Criteria
How we evaluate your essays (order of importance): Understanding of argumenta%on in readings Originality and coherence of your own argument. Execu%on: syntax, logical connec%ons, explica%on. Formali%es (Word Count, Referencing, Quotes)

Assessment Criteria II
Examples for Grades
5.25: You have grasped the arguments of the readings correctly, unpacked the ques%on, produced an original argument that contains no logical aws, but some weaknesses remain. 4.75: You have, mostly, presented the arguments in the readings correctly, but your essay lacks an original argument or contains a logical aw (gap in argumenta%on, unclear use of concepts, etc.)

Basic Issues in the Past

Comprehension and/or presenta%on of arguments taken from readings is ohen problema%c. Summarizing instead of original argumenta%on. Argumenta%on unclear or implicit:
Overly general and abstract syntax Logical gaps/ lack of substan%a%on Implicit Arguments

How to avoid these problems

Dissec/ng the Ques/on
Carefully unpack the ques%ons
Core words: What? Explain! How? Discuss. Address THESE CLEARLY IN YOUR PAPER, they tell you how to answer!

Clearly explain how your argument relates to the ques9on:

No generali*es: lis*ng pros/cons Do not presuppose key terms, even those in the ques*on- e.g. legi*macy!- carefully explain how you are using them.

How to avoid these problems

Comprehension of Readings
Comprehension and engagement of the arguments in the reading is a key factor for your grade. Do not akribute your own interpreta%ons to the readings without jus%ca%on, do not take sides too easily. Do not just read, read and write: make notes as you read, and then reread before wri%ng your essay!

How to avoid these problems

Comprehension of Readings 2
Aher reading, summarize the texts key points in your own words: The structure/logical steps of the argument- which steps, if aRacked successfully, would undermine it? How does the evidence used in the paper substan%ate that argument- what could invalidate the argument empirically? Dierences in concepts between authors?

How to avoid these problems

Summarizing vs. Original Argument

Do not summarize, ever!

Explain your own contribu%on and use points from the readings to further this argument. If you need to explain an argument/concept discussed heavily in the reading in some detail, you have to explain why this is important for your own argument. Do not leave it ambiguous. E.g.: Bernstein & Cashore argue that NSMD systems can gain socially embedded legi%macy but, as Mgge makes clear empirically, this argument rests on a problema%c depoli%ciza%on of the no%on of legi%macy.

How to avoid these problems

Summarizing vs. Original Argument 2 Prac%cally:
Make a plan, all good essays have a clear structure through which the argument ows. Jot down your argument rst in two sentences! Sketch the argument structure and note how the arguments in each readings t into this structure, or not. Do not use long quota%ons, the word limit is too short. Embed quota%ons Use words, your own and others, economically

Developing your own argument

Bases on which to argue [ques/on directed]: Cri9que: These arguments are wrong Contradic9on: There is confusion in the literature Lacunae: Something is missing in the literature Solu9on(s): We might solve the above issues by A good essay will have more than one of these.

Part 2 Discussion of Distributed Papers

Mgge / Bernstein & Cashore Papers Parsing Concepts, Following Arguments

Why these papers? Essay Warning! Legi/macy: A complicated, contradictory concept, without a consensus deni%on. How you use a concept aects your applica%on. The essays speak to each other in a way (check bibliographies!).

Why is leg/macy a problem, today?

Why legi/macy?

What is Legi/macy in the ar/cles?

How can Mgge be seen to be cri/cal of the other ar/cles argument regarding legi/macy?

Part 3 Annota/ng Example Essays

Example Essays
Best essays from last year. Very dierent ques%ons. But same purpose/logic. Will be posted online.

Example Student Essay Annota/on

Introduc/on: - Contextualizing Claim - Situa%ng Conceptually - Immediate, clear, deni%on of thesis. - Plan of essay to come. Main Sec/on 1: - Begins with sec%on intro - Uses argumenta%ve paraphrases - Has a sub-thesis statement rela%ng to process - Concepts are further unpacked (Soh Law) - Suppor%ng empirical paragraph follows - Sec%on-specic conceptual conclusion

Example Student Essay Annota/on 2

Bridging Paragraph: - Explicit! - Linking words (nevertheless) - Indicates movement from process to structure. Serves as the intro for the next sec%on. Main Sec/on 2: - Dissects assump%ons to introduce the sec%on. - Uses Empirics to cri%que these assump%ons: an empirical cri/que. - Links this empirical cri/que to alterna%ve conceptual perspec/ves. - Detailed examples of poli%cs + power limi%ng CSOs. - Cri%ques the lack of appropriate concepts for voluntary in9a9ves. - Good words: crucial to understand, likewise, furthermore, hence - No hyperbole.

Example Student Essay Annota/on 2

Conclusion: - Rear%culates the preceding argument in short. - Uses new embedded quotes. - Balances its claims. - Ends on a quote: can be nice.

~5.5

Good Luck with the First Essay!