Academic Papers

T S

Writing Tutorial Service

215 Paterson Hall, 520-6632

www.carleton.ca/wts

Overview
Academic Writing
Introduction & Thesis
Transitions

September 13, 2015

- 30 minutes
- 45 minutes
- 15 minutes

Writing Tutorial Service

Class Activity #1 - Differences

What are the differences between
University and High-School writing?

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

Differences Between High-School

and University Level Writing
High School Level

University Level

5 paragraph Essay

Numerous Genres and

Lengths
Analysis & Synthesis
comprehension assumed
Supported Arguments
(referencing)
Sophisticated Thesis
Specifics
Empirical Evidence

Comprehension over
analysis
Opinionated Less
Support
General Thesis
More generalizations
September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

Class Activity #2 - Challenges

What are some common challenges you
experience when writing academically?

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

Common Challenges

Appropriate form for assignment

Unrealistic time management
Punctuation, grammar, style
General (thesis) unsupported and
unfocused writing
Insufficient analysis (critical thinking)
Inability to find your own voice
Difficulty in paraphrasing and summarizing
September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

Class Activity #3 - Process

How do you go about doing a significant
paper?

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

Stages of the Composing Process

Starting point

Editing
Reformulating

Exploration
Composing
Incubation

Illumination

SOURCE: Freedman, The Carleton University Writing Tutorial Service

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

Why is it important to examine

our own Writing Processes?
Because
it makes us realize that we cannot leave things until
the last minute
we begin to understand what strategies do and dont
work for us as writers
writing is an important part of everyday life - we can
all be successful writers, we just need to know what
works for us

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

Class Activity #4 - Sections

What are some of the sections that appear
in a research paper?
What does your professor expect to see?

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

10

Sections of a Research Paper

Introduction
Thesis
Roadmap
Purpose

Body
Context

Background information
Literature Review
History
Summary

Empirical/Quantitative Studies/Analysis
Methodology
Results
Discussion

Arguments
Conflicting Arguments

Analysis, Synthesis

Conclusion
What we have shown
Future research
September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

11

Tools
Brainstorming
Concept Maps
Organizing
(Reverse) Outline
Sticky Notes

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

12

Class Activity #5 - Thesis

Brainstorm
Concept Mapping
Research Question/Thesis Production
Organize ideas/supporting points

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

13

Topic, Purpose, Problem

Topic:
I am writing about _______
Purpose: because I want to find out
_______
Problem: in order to understand
________..

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

14

Introductions
To introduce to your reader what you
are going to be discussing often use
the triangle method
Tell your reader not only what you are
discussing but how are you going to go
about discussing these things

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

15

Example of an Introduction
Both men and womens gender roles in Canada have
drastically changed during the past one hundred years.
These changes have occurred both within the private
and public spheres based on many different
occurrences in society. The purpose of this paper is to
examine how the Canadian womens movement and
feminism have lead to these changes in society for both
women and men. This paper will examine the historical
gender roles women and men once held in society and
how and why these changes have occurred over time.
Contemporarily I will also examine what Canadian
feminist institutions are doing to continue to develop
policy initiatives to make gender a key issue that is
examined within Canadian society.
September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

16

March 2, 2005

(from http://www.ohrc.on.ca/english/news/e_pr_mardana_decision.shtml)

Court decision demonstrates more action needed to address racial discrimination

Toronto As Black History month comes to a close, Chief Commissioner Keith Norton today remarked on a
recent Ontario court decision that serves as an important reminder that racial discrimination is still a major concern
in our society.
On February 8, 2005, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court, overturned a decision of the Human
Rights Tribunal of Ontario in a case that originated as a complaint to the Ontario Human Rights Commission. The
complaint involved a Black employee of Mardana Ltd. (a Brampton Ontario location of Mr. Lube) who claimed he
and other Black employees had been subjected to hurtful racial slurs, taunts and name-calling in the workplace
over a period of three years, and alleged that he was dismissed from employment because of his race.
The Divisional Court rejected as common myth the notion that an employees dismissal cannot be racially
discriminatory simply because an employer had hired and promoted the employee. The Court ruled that the
employer was at least reckless, if not wilful, in allowing a poisoned work environment to exist and ordered the
employee an award of $10,000.00 for mental anguish and $25,131.35 to compensate for lost wages. The Court
also ordered the employer to implement a workplace anti-harassment policy, staff training, an internal complaint
process, and to provide management with human rights education under the Commissions supervision.
Reacting to the Courts decision, Chief Commissioner Keith Norton stated, This ruling sends a very clear
message that employers are responsible for ensuring workplace environments are free of harassment and
discrimination. They may be held liable for harassment carried out by any employee in a position of authority. They
may also be liable if they knew, or should have known about the harassment, but failed to take steps to prevent
it.
There is concern in other sectors as well. The Commission recently referred three complaints to the Tribunal; two
dealing with allegations of racial harassment, bullying, streaming, and discrimination arising from the application of
discipline in a school; the other dealing with allegations of racial profiling by a private security guard agency.
In a public statement last December marking the one-year anniversary of the Commissions report on racial
profiling, Chief Commissioner Norton voiced concern over the systemic and troubling nature of these issues and
called on government and public and private sector entities responsible for public safety and security to take
concrete action.
We cannot afford to shelve the issue, Norton vowed, stating the Commission is adamant that it will continue to
act if others do not. Meanwhile, the Commission is moving ahead on its own commitment to develop a policy on
racism and racial discrimination, which it plans to release later this year.
September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

17

March 2, 2005

(from http://www.ohrc.on.ca/english/news/e_pr_mardana_decision.shtml)

Court decision demonstrates more action needed to address racial discrimination

Toronto As Black History month comes to a close, Chief Commissioner Keith Norton today remarked on a
recent Ontario court decision that serves as an important reminder that racial discrimination is still a major concern
in our society.
On February 8, 2005, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court, overturned a decision of the Human
Rights Tribunal of Ontario in a case that originated as a complaint to the Ontario Human Rights Commission. The
complaint involved a Black employee of Mardana Ltd. (a Brampton Ontario location of Mr. Lube) who claimed he
and other Black employees had been subjected to hurtful racial slurs, taunts and name-calling in the workplace
over a period of three years, and alleged that he was dismissed from employment because of his race.
The Divisional Court rejected as common myth the notion that an employees dismissal cannot be racially
discriminatory simply because an employer had hired and promoted the employee. The Court ruled that the
employer was at least reckless, if not wilful, in allowing a poisoned work environment to exist and ordered the
employee an award of $10,000.00 for mental anguish and $25,131.35 to compensate for lost wages. The Court
also ordered the employer to implement a workplace anti-harassment policy, staff training, an internal complaint
process, and to provide management with human rights education under the Commissions supervision.
Reacting to the Courts decision, Chief Commissioner Keith Norton stated, This ruling sends a very clear
message that employers are responsible for ensuring workplace environments are free of harassment and
discrimination. They may be held liable for harassment carried out by any employee in a position of authority. They
may also be liable if they knew, or should have known about the harassment, but failed to take steps to prevent
it.
There is concern in other sectors as well. The Commission recently referred three complaints to the Tribunal;
two dealing with allegations of racial harassment, bullying, streaming, and discrimination arising from the
application of discipline in a school; the other dealing with allegations of racial profiling by a private security guard
agency.
In a public statement last December marking the one-year anniversary of the Commissions report on racial
profiling, Chief Commissioner Norton voiced concern over the systemic and troubling nature of these issues and
called on government and public and private sector entities responsible for public safety and security to take
concrete action.
We cannot afford to shelve the issue, Norton vowed, stating the Commission is adamant that it will continue to
act if others do not. Meanwhile, the Commission is moving ahead on its own commitment to develop a policy on
racism and racial discrimination, which it plans to release later this year.
September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

18

March 1, 2005

(From http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGAMR510472005)

In Roper v. Simmons, the Supreme Court found that executing

child offenders violates the US Constitution, concluding that a
national consensus against such executions had evolved since
1989 when it ruled that the execution of 16- and 17-year-old
offenders was constitutional. The Court had considered national
and international trends, scientific evidence, and appeals from
religious, human rights, legal and child advocacy organizations.

The international prohibition on executing people for crimes

committed when they were children reflects a common
understanding that the lives of child offenders -- due to a young
persons immaturity, impulsiveness, vulnerability and capacity for
rehabilitation -- should never be simply written off, no matter how
heinous the crime. Today, the US Supreme Court agreed. It found
that the inherent differences between children and adults meant
that child offenders "cannot with reliability be classified among the
worst offenders" for which the USA supposedly reserves the death
penalty.

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

19

March 1, 2005

(From http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGAMR510472005)

In Roper v. Simmons, the Supreme Court found that executing

child offenders violates the US Constitution, concluding that a
national consensus against such executions had evolved since
1989 when it ruled that the execution of 16- and 17-year-old
offenders was constitutional. The Court had considered national
and international trends, scientific evidence, and appeals from
religious, human rights, legal and child advocacy organizations.

The international prohibition on executing people for crimes

committed when they were children reflects a common
understanding that the lives of child offenders -- due to a young
persons immaturity, impulsiveness, vulnerability and capacity for
rehabilitation -- should never be simply written off, no matter how
heinous the crime. Today, the US Supreme Court agreed. It found
that the inherent differences between children and adults meant
that child offenders "cannot with reliability be classified among the
worst offenders" for which the USA supposedly reserves the death
penalty.

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

20

structure
while drafting

Thesis

controls the essay

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

21

structure
while revising

Thesis

controls the essay

September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

22

Transitions
(from: Controlling the Use of Force: A Role for Human Rights Norms in Contemporary Armed Conflict. Kenneth Watkin. The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 98, No. 1 (Jan., 2004),
1-34.)

Because armed conflict largely consists of the application

of deadly force, this balancing with humanity forms a major
and highly visible part of international humanitarian law.
This aspect of international humanitarian law sometimes
leaves the impression that, in contrast, human rights law is
absolute in nature. However, that normative structure must
also account for the taking of life so as to maintain social
order. Although legally sanctioned killing is often considered
in the context of the death penalty, the right to life is also
limited by competing interests such as the right to selfdefense, acting to defend others, the prevention of serious
crimes involving a grave threat to life or serious injury, and
the use of force to arrest or prevent the escape of persons
presenting such threats.63
On the other hand, the use of deadly force is strictly limited
by the requirement that a person not be "arbitrarily" deprived
of life.64 Examples of such limitations
September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

23

Writing Tutorial Service

www.carleton.ca/wts
What do tutors do?
We provide individual writing instruction, using a
paper you have to write anyway.
What should I bring?
We can work with you at any stage of the writing
process, even if you havent started yet. So bring the
assignment sheet, and any work you have done so
far.
Will you proofread my paper?
If you are interested in learning to proofread your own
papers, we can help you learn to identify your typical
errors and their solutions.
Phone 520-6632 to make an appointment!
September 13, 2015

Writing Tutorial Service

24