From ac329b2ea709243b827de44201ea6dc396ae42bc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Scott Richmond Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 19:45:22 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Add midterm.md --- midterm.md | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 83 insertions(+) create mode 100644 midterm.md diff --git a/midterm.md b/midterm.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..92f3f98 --- /dev/null +++ b/midterm.md @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@ +# Midterm Paper +## Analytical Summary + +**Due March 1, 2024, by 11:59pm.** + +Upload the paper to the #work channel on our Matrix chat. + +### Formal parameters +* Formatted according to standard manuscript style, according to the _Chicago Manual of Style_: + - Double-spaced + - Sans-serif font, 12 pt. + - Ragged-left (not full justification) + - Chicago style footnotes (MLA is acceptable) + - Page numbers, plus headers with author & title +* Between 1,500 and 2,000 words + - I will stop reading at 2,500 words + - This word count does *not* include notes + +NB: You can access the Chicago manual [here](https://www-chicagomanualofstyle-org.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/book/ed17/frontmatter/toc.html). + +### Prompt +Select one (1) essay from [_The Oxford Handbook of Film Theory_, ed. Kyle Stevens (OUP, 2022)](https://academic-oup-com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/edited-volume/44429). +You should be the sole student who has selected this essay. +Write an analytical summary of this essay, answering the following questions: + +* What is the argument this essay makes? +* How does the author situate its argument in the field? +* What are the _questions_ and _problems_ this essay poses? +* What is the archive/what are the cases this essay convenes? +* How does the author make the argument? +* What does the argument help you understand? +* What does the argument help you think? +* What is new in this argument? (To you, to the field...) +* What are the limitations of the argument? +* What is your sense of the importance of this argument for film theorists in 2024 and beyond? + +You need not answer these questions step-by-step, and you need not address all of them explicitly. +Instead, you should write this as a helpful guide to a reader who is (literally and actually) a fellow MA student at the University of Toronto who may want to work with this essay as part of their research. + +### Stylistic considerations +This essay should, in the first instance, be an aid to understanding for somebody else. +That means it should _clarify_, and thus be written with as little indirection as you can muster. +To the extent that you can (and these will be clarified in our writing workshop): + +* Write short sentences +* Put subjects and verbs next to each other +* Develop clear and cosistent characters and themes +* Repetition is not the enemy +* Use the first person pronoun judiciously + +In addition, while this is not a research or argumentative essay (and thus will likely not develop its own questions and problems), be as explicit as you can be about the questions and problems (à la Booth & co.) the essay poses in its own terms. +In other words, your task here is to track the posing and development of questions and problems in another scholar's essay. +(You will use your newfound abilities to talk about, describe, and track questions and problems to help you pose your own in your final research paper.) + +You should bring your own concerns and insights into this essay, and do so specifically with news that you want to share with your colleagues. +The piece of writing I've published that is closest in form and style to this paper is ["Faith in Abstraction."](https://www.provocationsbooks.com/2020/02/14/faith-in-abstraction-a-response-to-scott-fergusons-declarations-of-dependence/) +It's longer and more in command of a variety of fields than I expect you to be, but it's a good working model where the questions articulated above are worked through in something other than a paint-by-numbers approach. +It's also perhaps, a bit more "book review"-ish than you may wish to be; I'm not sure you'll want to call your essay "preposterous." +Your taste is your own business; we do, however, want your judgment. + +### Evaluation and marking +I will not offer a formal rubric for graduate students, since evaluation at this level ought to be more holistic. +However, I tend to evaluate across three categories: +* Style and clarity +* Technical argumentation and correctness +* Conceptual sophistication and ambition + +(If we were reading films, I would also include analytical verve.) + +Mid-term papers are worth 25% of your final mark. + +Marks will be on a letter scale. + +I mostly don't believe in A+es. + +In graduate school, B-level marks are cause for concern. + +A mark of B- or below is cause for grave concern, and looks like a failing mark. + +### Other details +* I will mark your paper within two weeks of submission. +* I will offer written comments if you submit your paper before April 1. +* There is no late penalty, but if you're more than 10 days late with your paper, I will expect you to have a meeting with me. \ No newline at end of file