PAPER 2 BLUE FEEDBACKThese topics were very difficult so I am giving you a chance to redo your papers before I grade them.BLUE 1Spring 2002 • ENGLISH 20 • Professor TanakaPAPER 2 BLUE FEEDBACKThese topics were very difficult so I am giving you a chance to redo your papers before I grade them. Your next paper should be in the required Blue format with disks and the working draft. You need to do this.You may switch topics if you like.BLUE 1PURPOSE: THE PURPOSE OF BLUE 1 IS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOTYOU KNOW HOW TO USE “FACTUAL EVIDENCE” TO SUPPORT AN ARGUMENTBASED UPON THE MATERIAL IN OUR MODELS, PARTICULARLY CT 3. IT IS ALSOAN EXERCISE IN ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION, SINCE YOU ALSO HAVE TOAN ANALYZE THE ESSAYS AS FILMS AND DECIDE HOW TO CREATE A SET OFPREDICTIONS FROM THEIR RESPECTIVE ARGUMENTS. THE FIRST POINT IS DEMONSTRATED BY HOW YOU SET UP YOUR ARGUMENTSAND THE KINDS OF EXAMPLES YOU USE TO SUPPORT THEM.THE SECOND POINT IS COVERED IN THE FIRST PART OF YOUR BACKGROUND.IN GENERAL, DUBIK IS THE MORE DIFFICULT OF THE TWO BECAUSE HE ISTRYING TO BE CAREFUL NOT TO OVER-GENERALIZE. HENCE, HE DOESN’TMAKE SPECIFIC PREDICTIONS COVERING WOMEN IN COMBAT. MARANO, ONTHE OTHER HAND, EXPLICITLY FOCUSES ON WHAT HE PREDICTS WILL BE THERESULT OF ALLOWING WOMEN IN COMBAT.HOWEVER, MARANO’S ARGUMENTS ARE MORE CONFUSING THAN DUBIK’S,SO THEY STILL NEED SOME TWEAKING. FOR EXAMPLE, HE GOES BACK ANDFORTH BETWEEN DISCUSSING WOMEN IN COMBAT (AIR/SEA/GROUND/,WOMEN IN GROUND COMBAT AND WOMEN IN THE MILITARY IN GENERAL. REMEMBER THAT IT IS CRITICAL TO ALLOW WOMEN IN COMBAT IF WOMENARE TO BE CONSIDERED PART OF THE STANDARD PROMOTION TRACK, SINCESOME COMBAT EXPERIENCE IS USUALLY REQUIRED OF MOST OFFICERS FORPROMOTION INTO THE HIGHER RANKS.YOU ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO GIVE YOUR OPINIONS AS TO THE CONCLUSIONSMARANO OR DUBIK DRAW, BUT YOU CAN POINT OUT THE DIFFICULTY OFANALYZING THEM FOR THE PURPOSES OF DERIVING SUITABLE PREDICTIONS.The two essays present slightly different problems but since most of you did Marano, I will start with him.1) IF YOU SELECTED MARANOFirst of all, even though you did not have to critique Marano in your essay, you should have seen that his entire argument was weak on many different levels. One of most serious problems he had was over-generalization. He did not have the evidence he needed to support his universal claims about women and their unsuitablility for combat.Therefore, you should avoid doing what he does. However, many of you triedto argue that his predictions were wrong or invalid based upon two examples—Walden and O’Neil.Now you have the right to say that in your opinion, you think the facts do notsupport his predictions, but unless you provide a lot more than two or three examples, you can’t claim that his claims are wrong or invalid. On the other hand, you can argue that the reason that the essays by Zwick and Scott carry so much weight with you is that the two heroines exemplify the military’s own recognition of the value of women. When dealing with Zwick, you do not need to discuss any issues other than the parts that deal with Karen Walden.Lt. O’Neil qualified to be a SEAL, and this training is considered to be the most rigorous in the military. So it was the US Navy that asserted her fitness to lead.Capt. Karen Walden, on the other hand, was awarded the Medal of Honor, thehighest distinction that the military can award any service person for combat.So these two stories are very important. But you must state why they are important.INTRODUCTIONBACKGROUND 1Marano’s Predictions.BACKGROUND 2Scott and ZwickYou can assume that everything in the film is true. For example, you can say that Sgt. Monfriez so resented Walden that he disobeyed an order, used sexist language, shot her and then lied about her condition, which resulted inher death. This would be an example of a male who resented the fact that hewas being commanded by a woman.ARGUMENTSCONCLUSION2) IF YOU SELECTED DUBIKDubik was more difficult because his arguments were more carefully constructed and so he did not make the extravagant claims that Marano did so that is why you have to tweak his arguments to turn them into “predictions” like Marano’s.Part of your grade will be on how you translate D’s arguments into predictions.INTRODUCTIONBACKGROUND 1ADubik ArgumentsBACKGROUND 1BHere you turn his arguments into predictions about women in combat. The Marcos Breton articles would be relevant here. You don’t have to use them, but they relate to Dubik much more than to Marano.BACKGROUND 2Scott and ZwickARGUMENTSCONCLUSIONRemember to go over our Course Models, particularly CT3 on Development.Your have to make sure your examples match your topic sentences. Thepoint the Blue topics is to give you the chance to show you know how to usethe models.BLUE TWOPURPOSE: THE PURPOSE OF BLUE 2 IS TO SHOW THAT YOU UNDERSTANDHOW TO USE THE COURSE MODELS, PW/CT, AND HOW THEY ARE RELEVANTIN THE COURSE OF ANSWERING QUESTIONS AND SOLVING PROBLEMS IN THEEVERY DAY WORLD (AS REPRESENTED IN ZWICK’S COURAGE UNDER FIRE”).HENCE, YOU SHOULD CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:1) MAKE SURE YOUR OWN ANALYSIS FOLLOWS THE CT/PW MODEL.2) MAKE SURE YOU REFER TO OUR CT/PW MODEL IN YOUR THESISAND YOUR ARGUMENTS. DO NOT GET DISTRACTED AND GO OFFINTO OTHER
View Full Document
Unlocking...