Prompt
Construct a thoughtful, persuasive essay of 3000-4000 words that seeks to expand what is known about
the particular issue you’ve chosen. We’ve talked often this semester about the two false paths that such
essays may stray down: one leads to a report (summarizing the research of others without offering your
own new argument) and the other to an argument of policy (trying to galvanize your readers to action
instead of to new understanding). Since elements of both of those things are valid components of a
scholarly essay – you’ll have to acknowledge, for instance, and therefore summarize to an extent,
arguments of other scholars – it can be challenging to resist the temptation to let those elements take
over. It’s HARD to stop summarizing once you’ve started.
Remember to be guided by the They Say / I Say principles. Place your argument in the context of what
previous scholars have said about your issue (or about closely related issues). As we saw with both
Bartholomae and Zarakol, this “they say” contextualizing may happen several times during an essay,
particularly if you’re bringing together two separate strands of research. Remember also that most
evidence is not self-presenting or self-explanatory. You will need to analyze as you present. This takes
time and space, and it’s this careful step-by-step analysis of evidence that makes researched essays so
long and so densely packed with information. Your analysis needs to proceed in a logical sequence
(avoid the list-style thesis so familiar from the five-paragraph essay form).
Conclude your essay by discussing why your argument matters – not to action, but to knowledge. Why
should your fellow scholars (and other curious, educated people) care about what you have to say here?
Does it have implications for future research?
