Tips on Writing Papers for 17.901

Pablo Policzer

Clear thought usually leads to clear writing. Think what you want to say, then say it as simply as possible. But remember that papers are written not only with ideas, but with words and sentences.

These guidelines may help:

1. State the problem and your argument clearly. These are short papers, not books, and the argument does not have to be complicated. We are not looking for a "correct" answer or argument, but rather for your ability to express your ideas.

2. Your papers must have a structure. The structure will generally tend to take care of itself if the main argument and the statement of the problem are clear. But generally, an introduction (no more than a single paragraph in a paper this length) presents the problem and tells us what you're going to say; the body of the essay (no less than three, no more than six paragraphs) should say it in a logical and coherent manner; and the conclusion (one paragraph) should summarize what you've said and/or raise new questions.

 

3. We are more interested in knowing what you think than what you believe. Do not repeat "I believe" x, y, and z, without substantiation for these claims. You may have perfectly good reasons for believing, for instance, that Americans are too apathetic about politics, or that government is rife with corruption. But don't just leave these as mere assertions. You need to convince skeptical readers that these are plausible claims. What reasons do you have for these beliefs and why should we be persuaded? Put your beliefs to the test of skepticism.

 

4. Distinguish between "is" and "should," and try to avoid the latter. We want to know why you think things "should or "should not" be one way or another. More importantly, we want to see that you can analyze things as they are.

 

We may all agree that there should not be so much corruption in government or so much public apathy, but these statements do not really tell us much about what the problem actually is. What do the readings say about the problem? Are the authors pointing to what you think are the correct aspects of the problem? To aspects that are mutually contradictory with each other? Are there other aspects that you think deserve closer attention? Do you think the problem is worth bothering with at all? These are the kinds of questions that may help you avoid empty declarations of "should", in favor of more analytically rich observations and insights.

 

5. Distinguish between your ideas and those of the authors.The readings introduce you to a particular problem, and (we hope) bring up some of its main aspects. But often there is disagreement among the authors about what to do, or about what the issues are in the first place. (Otherwise, arguably, there would not be a problem.) The readings are not "Truth". The authors may have got some of it right and some of it wrong, and you should ask yourself whether you find their claims persuasive.

 

Looking at the readings with a skeptical eye will help you figure out your own views. While you do need to show us that you have understood the readings, we are also interested in your own ideas. You do not need to spend a lot of time repeating every last point in the readings. Summarize, but give us enough details to set up the problem and to explain your own argument.

6. On style, keep in mind some of George Orwell's elementary rules ("Politics and the English Language", 1946):

 

·Never use a long word where a short one will do.

·If it is possible to cut out a word, always cut it out.

·Never use the passive where you can use the active.

·Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

 

7. A techical note: Don't worry about formal citations. We know what you've read. You can refer to the authors simply by their last name (e.g. "Peters claims ..."). The only reason to use footnotes or bibliographies would be to refer to a source outside the required readings. But we would discourage this. Stick to a clear discussion of what you've read rather than make more work for yourself by trying to impress us with a large bibliography.

 

Last, a word about the grades.A "check" is an average mark, a "check +" is above average, a "check ++" outstanding, and a "check -" below average. The papers as a whole are worth 25% of the course. If you do very poorly on these (which we do not expect anyone to do) it's not the end of the world in terms of your final grade. This advice should simply help you get more out of the exercise. Use the papers to develop the kinds of writing skills that will serve you well in your internship and wherever else you may work in the future.