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!