GUÍAS PARA LOS TRABAJOS DE REDACCIÓN / CRITERIOS DE EVALUACIÓN

ÍNDICE

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(0) General: De todo un poco. Recomendaciones para el análisis de textos narrativos literarios. Palabras claves/Keywords. Pregunta(s) claves/Research Question(s).

https://owl.purdue.edu/index.html

THE PURDUE WRITING LAB. Purdue University.

Graduate Writing Overview [writing as a conversation, a process, a social endeavor, a disciplinary undertaking.]: Writing at the graduate level is quite different from writing at the undergraduate level. As emerging scholars, graduate writers will need to become well-versed in the scholarly conversations taking place in the journals and at the conferences within their field. Where undergraduate writers may find themselves primarily writing for their professor as audience and to show mastery of subject matter as a purpose, graduate writers’ audience will be their colleagues in the field, and their purpose will be to engage in conversation with and to disseminate new research to those colleagues. A graduate writer’s identity as scholar requires a concurrent identity as writer.

https://wts.indiana.edu/writing-guides/index.html

WRITING TUTORIAL SERVICES. Writing Guides. Indiana University-Bloomington.

https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/

THE WRITING CENTER. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

--------------

https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/literature-fiction/

This handout describes some steps for planning and writing papers about literary texts. 

Demystifying the process: A good interpretation of fiction will:

• avoid the obvious (in other words, it won’t argue a conclusion that most readers could reach on their own from a general knowledge of the story)

• support its main points with strong evidence from the story

• use careful reasoning to explain how that evidence relates to the main points of the interpretation.

The following steps are intended as a guide through the difficult process of writing an interpretive paper that meets these criteria. Writing tends to be a highly individual task, so adapt these suggestions to fit your own habits and inclinations.

1. Become familiar with the text

2. Explore potential topics

Let’s assume for now that you are choosing your own topic. After reading your text, a topic may just jump out at you, or you may have recognized a pattern or identified a problem that you’d like to think about in more detail. What is a pattern or a problem?

A pattern can be the recurrence of certain kinds of imagery, vocabulary, formal elements (like rhyme and meter), or events. Usually, repetition of particular aspects tends to render those elements more conspicuous. 

A problem, on the other hand, is something that bugs you or that doesn’t seem to add up. 

If nothing immediately strikes you as interesting or no patterns or problems jump out at you, don’t worry. Just start making a list of whatever you remember from your reading, regardless of how insignificant it may seem to you now. 

3. Select a topic with a lot of evidence

If you’re selecting from a number of possible topics, narrow down your list by identifying how much evidence or how many specific details you could use to investigate each potential issue. Do this step just off the top of your head. Keep in mind that persuasive papers rely on ample evidence and that having a lot of details to choose from can also make your paper easier to write.

4. Write out a working thesis

Based on the evidence that relates to your topic—and what you anticipate you might say about those pieces of evidence—come up with a working thesis. Don’t spend a lot of time composing this statement at this stage since it will probably change. A changing thesis statement is a good sign that you’re starting to say more interesting and complex things on your subject. 

5. Make an extended list of evidence

Once you have a working topic in mind, skim back over the text and make a more comprehensive list of the details that relate to your point. 

At this point, you want to include anything, anything, that might be useful, and you also want to avoid the temptation to arrive at definite conclusions about your topic. Remember that one of the qualities that makes for a good interpretation is that it avoids the obvious. You want to develop complex ideas, and the best way to do that is to keep your ideas flexible until you’ve considered the evidence carefully. A good gauge of complexity is whether you feel you understand more about your topic than you did when you began (and even just reaching a higher state of confusion is a good indicator that you’re treating your topic in a complex way).

6. Select your evidence

Once you’ve made your expanded list of evidence, decide which supporting details are the strongest. First, select the facts which bear the closest relation to your thesis statement. Second, choose the pieces of evidence you’ll be able to say the most about. Select the details that will allow you to show off your own reasoning skills and allow you to help the reader see the story in a way he or she may not have seen it before.

7. Refine your thesis

Now it’s time to go back to your working thesis and refine it so that it reflects your new understanding of your topic. This step and the previous step (selecting evidence) are actually best done at the same time, since selecting your evidence and defining the focus of your paper depend upon each other. 

8. Organize your evidence

Once you have a clear thesis you can go back to your list of selected evidence and group all the similar details together. 

9. Interpret your evidence

Avoid the temptation to load your paper with evidence from your text. 

General hints

Select a topic of interest to you. Though you may feel like you have to select a topic that sounds like something your instructor would be interested in, don’t overlook the fact that you’ll be more invested in your paper and probably get more out of it if you make the topic something pertinent to yourself. Pick a topic that might allow you to learn about yourself and what you find important. At the same time, your argument will be most persuasive if it’s built on the evidence you find in the text (as mentioned in step 5).

Make your thesis specific. The effort to be more specific almost always leads to a thesis that will get your reader’s attention, and it also separates you from the crowd as someone who challenges ideas and looks into topics more deeply. 

-------------------------------------------

Palabras claves/Keywords. Pregunta(s) claves/Research Question(s).

https://library.defiance.edu/InfoLit-GettingStarted/keywords

From Research Question(s) to Keywords: One thing to keep in mind is that our focus is on using keywords in research databases rather than in a Web search such as in Google. Database searching requires a more structured approach to search them effectively. Once you have selected a topic for your research, the next step is identifying the keywords critical to describing your topic and generating more before you start searching one of the research databases. Let's say that your research question is: Does media have an impact on the self image of teenagers?

The next step is to pull out the key concepts.  This may seem simple but identifying the main concepts in the research question is important for a successful search. This question has three major concepts: Media, Self-image and Teenagers. These keywords will be the building blocks of our search. It’s best to search by keywords instead of phrases or sentences because the more words you add to a search box, the fewer results you’ll get back. You are more likely to find useful articles if you start your search with a minimal number of keywords. 

Note: You probably noticed the absence of “impact” as one of the keywords. “Impact” is certainly an important concept but starting out it will be of more interest to us to see what kind of publications are available on self-image, teenagers and media in total. Let’s hold “impact” in reserve in case we need to refine our search later. 

We can’t stop here with only those three keywords! There may be synonyms for your keywords that can help broaden your search or better describe your topic, not only to make your search comprehensive but to also improve your search results. Since this step can require more creativity it can be useful to brainstorm synonyms with friends or classmates. What other words can describe your main concepts? Start making a list of your alternative keywords and synonyms and have them ready when you start searching. You may need them!

------------------------------------------------------

https://library.defiance.edu/InfoLit-GettingStarted/conversation

Engaging in Research is engaging in a conversation. One of the early stages in the research process is when you investigate the existing research on your topic, which may include articles and books, magazines and newspapers, data, or other historical primary sources. Investigating that existing research is like listening to a conversation that’s already been going on--asking your own questions and producing a response is adding to that conversation. Academic research can be difficult, but you're not alone! Research is a conversation between many different "voices" that each contribute a unique perspective on a topic. There are many ways that you can use that conversation to help improve your understanding of a topic and discover what you have to say about it.

---------------------------

https://library.defiance.edu/InfoLit-GettingStarted/question

What is a research question? A research question is a clear, focused, concise, complex and arguable question around which you center your research. You should ask a question about an issue that you are genuinely curious about.

Research questions help writers focus their research by providing a path through the research and writing process. The specificity of a well-developed research question helps writers avoid the “all-about” paper and work toward supporting a specific, arguable thesis.

Steps to Developing a Research Question: 

Choose an interesting general topic. 

Do some preliminary research on your general topic. 

Consider your audience. 

Start asking questions. were slave narratives effective tools in working toward the abolishment of slavery?”

Evaluate your question: Is your research question clear? With so much research available on any given topic, research questions must be as clear as possible in order to be effective in helping the writer direct his or her research. Is your research question focused? Research questions must be specific enough to be well covered in the space available. (See flip side for examples of focused vs. unfocused research questions.) Is your research question complex? Research questions should not be answerable with a simple “yes” or “no” or by easily-found facts.  They should, instead, require both research and analysis on the part of the writer. 

Hypothesize. After you’ve come up with a question, think about what the path you think the answer will take. Where do you think your research will take you? What kind of argument are you hoping to make/support? What will it mean if your research disputes your planned argument?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) Bibliografías anotadas/Annotated Bibliographies/ Base para el repaso de la literatura en las monografías/ensayos argumentativos/tesis

https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/common_writing_assignments/annotated_bibliographies/index.html

Annotated Bibliographies

DEFINITIONS

A bibliography is a list of sources (books, journals, Web sites, periodicals, etc.) one has used for researching a topic. Bibliographies are sometimes called "References" or "Works Cited" depending on the style format you are using. A bibliography usually just includes the bibliographic information (i.e., the author, title, publisher, etc.).

An annotation is a summary and/or evaluation. Therefore, an annotated bibliography includes a summary and/or evaluation of each of the sources. Depending on your project or the assignment, your annotations may do one or more of the following.

• Summarize: Some annotations merely summarize the source. What are the main arguments? What is the point of this book or article? What topics are covered? If someone asked what this article/book is about, what would you say? The length of your annotations will determine how detailed your summary is.

For more help, see our handout on paraphrasing sources.

• Assess: After summarizing a source, it may be helpful to evaluate it. Is it a useful source? How does it compare with other sources in your bibliography? Is the information reliable? Is this source biased or objective? What is the goal of this source?

For more help, see our handouts on evaluating resources.

• Reflect: Once you've summarized and assessed a source, you need to ask how it fits into your research. Was this source helpful to you? How does it help you shape your argument? How can you use this source in your research project? Has it changed how you think about your topic?

WHY SHOULD I WRITE AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY?

To learn about your topic: Writing an annotated bibliography is excellent preparation for a research project. Just collecting sources for a bibliography is useful, but when you have to write annotations for each source, you're forced to read each source more carefully. You begin to read more critically instead of just collecting information. At the professional level, annotated bibliographies allow you to see what has been done in the literature and where your own research or scholarship can fit. To help you formulate a thesis: Every good research paper is an argument. The purpose of research is to state and support a thesis. So, a very important part of research is developing a thesis that is debatable, interesting, and current. Writing an annotated bibliography can help you gain a good perspective on what is being said about your topic. By reading and responding to a variety of sources on a topic, you'll start to see what the issues are, what people are arguing about, and you'll then be able to develop your own point of view.

To help other researchers: Extensive and scholarly annotated bibliographies are sometimes published. They provide a comprehensive overview of everything important that has been and is being said about that topic. You may not ever get your annotated bibliography published, but as a researcher, you might want to look for one that has been published about your topic.

FORMAT

The format of an annotated bibliography can vary, so if you're doing one for a class, it's important to ask for specific guidelines.

The bibliographic information: Generally, though, the bibliographic information of the source (the title, author, publisher, date, etc.) is written in either MLA or APA format. For more help with formatting, see our MLA handout.

The annotations: The annotations for each source are written in paragraph form. The lengths of the annotations can vary significantly from a couple of sentences to a couple of pages. The length will depend on the purpose. If you're just writing summaries of your sources, the annotations may not be very long. However, if you are writing an extensive analysis of each source, you'll need more space.

You can focus your annotations for your own needs. A few sentences of general summary followed by several sentences of how you can fit the work into your larger paper or project can serve you well when you go to draft.

-------------------------

https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/common_writing_assignments/annotated_bibliographies/annotated_bibliography_samples.html

SAMPLE MLA ANNOTATION

Lamott, Anne. Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life. Anchor Books, 1995.

Lamott's book offers honest advice on the nature of a writing life, complete with its insecurities and failures. Taking a humorous approach to the realities of being a writer, the chapters in Lamott's book are wry and anecdotal and offer advice on everything from plot development to jealousy, from perfectionism to struggling with one's own internal critic.

In the process, Lamott includes writing exercises designed to be both productive and fun. Lamott offers sane advice for those struggling with the anxieties of writing, but her main project seems to be offering the reader a reality check regarding writing, publishing, and struggling with one's own imperfect humanity in the process. Rather than a practical handbook to producing and/or publishing, this text is indispensable because of its honest perspective, its down-to-earth humor, and its encouraging approach.

Chapters in this text could easily be included in the curriculum for a writing class. Several of the chapters in Part 1 address the writing process and would serve to generate discussion on students' own drafting and revising processes. Some of the writing exercises would also be appropriate for generating classroom writing exercises. Students should find Lamott's style both engaging and enjoyable.

In the sample annotation above, the writer includes three paragraphs: a summary, an evaluation of the text, and a reflection on its applicability to his/her own research, respectively.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(2) Reseñas/Book Reviews/Base para el repaso de la literatura 2

https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/common_writing_assignments/book_reviews.html

Writing a Book Review

Book reviews typically evaluate recently-written works. They offer a brief description of the text’s key points and often provide a short appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses of the work.

Readers sometimes confuse book reviews with book reports, but the two are not identical. Book reports commonly describe what happens in a work; their focus is primarily on giving an account of the major plot, characters, and/or main idea of the work. Most often, book reports are a K-12 assignment and range from 250 to 500 words. If you are looking to write a book report, please see the OWL resource, Writing a Book Report.

By contrast, book reviews are most often a college assignment, but they also appear in many professional works: magazines, newspapers, and academic journals. They typically range from 500-750 words, but may be longer or shorter. A book review gives readers a sneak peek at what a book is like, whether or not the reviewer enjoyed it, and details on purchasing the book.

BEFORE YOU READ

Before you begin to read, consider the elements you will need to included in your review. The following items may help:

• Author: Who is the author? What else has s/he written? Has this author won any awards? What is the author’s typical style?

• Genre: What type of book is this: fiction, nonfiction, romance, poetry, youth fiction, etc.? Who is the intended audience for this work? What is the purpose of the work?

• Title: Where does the title fit in? How is it applied in the work? Does it adequately encapsulate the message of the text? Is it interesting? Uninteresting?

• Preface/Introduction/Table of Contents: Does the author provide any revealing information about the text in the preface/introduction? Does a “guest author” provide the introduction? What judgments or preconceptions do the author and/or “guest author” provide? How is the book arranged: sections, chapters?

• Book Jacket/Cover/Printing: Book jackets are like mini-reviews. Does the book jacket provide any interesting details or spark your interest in some way? Are there pictures, maps, or graphs? Do the binding, page cut, or typescript contribute or take away from the work?

AS YOU READ

As you read, determine how you will structure the summary portion or background structure of your review. Be ready to take notes on the book’s key points, characters, and/or themes.

• Characters: Are there characters in the work? Who are the principal characters? How do they affect the story? Do you empathize with them?

• Themes/Motifs/Style: What themes or motifs stand out? How do they contribute to the work? Are they effective or not? How would you describe this author’s particular style? Is it accessible to all readers or just some?

• Argument: How is the work’s argument set up? What support does the author give for her/findings? Does the work fulfill its purpose/support its argument?

• Key Ideas: What is the main idea of the work? What makes it good, different, or groundbreaking?

• Quotes: What quotes stand out? How can you demonstrate the author’s talent or the feel of the book through a quote?

WHEN YOU ARE READY TO WRITE

Begin with a short summary or background of the work, but do not give too much away. Many reviews limit themselves only to the first couple of chapters or lead the reader up to the rising action of the work. Reviewers of nonfiction texts will provide the basic idea of the book’s argument without too much detailed.

The final portion of your review will detail your opinion of the work. When you are ready to begin your review, consider the following:

• Establish a Background, Remember your Audience: Remember that your audience has not read the work; with this in mind, be sure to introduce characters and principles carefully and deliberately. What kind of summary can you provide of the main points or main characters that will help your readers gauge their interest? Does the author’s text adequately reach the intended audience? Will some readers be lost or find the text too easy?

• Minor principles/characters: Deal only with the most pressing issues in the book. You will not be able to cover every character or idea. What principles/characters did you agree or disagree with? What other things might the author have researched or considered?

• Organize: The purpose of the review is to critically evaluate the text, not just inform the readers about it. Leave plenty room for your evaluation by ensuring that your summary is brief. Determine what kind of balance to strike between your summary information and your evaluation. If you are writing your review for a class, ask your instructor. Often the ratio is half and half.

• Your Evaluation: Choose one or a few points to discuss about the book. What worked well for you? How does this work compare with others by the same author or other books in the same genre? What major themes, motifs, or terms does the book introduce, and how effective are they? Did the book appeal to you on an emotional or logical way?

• Publisher/Price: Most book reviews include the publisher and price of the book at the end of the article. Some reviews also include the year published and ISBN.

REVISING

When making the final touches to your review, carefully verify the following:

• Double-check the spelling of the author name(s), character names, special terms, and publisher.

• Try to read from the vantage point of your audience. Is there too much/enough summary? Does your argument about the text make sense?

• Should you include direct quotes from the reading? Do they help support your arguments? Double-check your quotes for accuracy.

----------------------------------------------------------

https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/book-reviews/

Book Reviews

What this handout is about:

This handout will help you write a book review, a report or essay that offers a critical perspective on a text. It offers a process and suggests some strategies for writing book reviews.

What is a review?

A review is a critical evaluation of a text, event, object, or phenomenon. Reviews can consider books, articles, entire genres or fields of literature, architecture, art, fashion, restaurants, policies, exhibitions, performances, and many other forms. This handout will focus on book reviews. For a similar assignment, see our handout on literature reviews.

Above all, a review makes an argument. The most important element of a review is that it is a commentary, not merely a summary. It allows you to enter into dialogue and discussion with the work’s creator and with other audiences. You can offer agreement or disagreement and identify where you find the work exemplary or deficient in its knowledge, judgments, or organization. You should clearly state your opinion of the work in question, and that statement will probably resemble other types of academic writing, with a thesis statement, supporting body paragraphs, and a conclusion.

Typically, reviews are brief. In newspapers and academic journals, they rarely exceed 1000 words, although you may encounter lengthier assignments and extended commentaries. In either case, reviews need to be succinct. While they vary in tone, subject, and style, they share some common features:

• First, a review gives the reader a concise summary of the content. This includes a relevant description of the topic as well as its overall perspective, argument, or purpose.

• Second, and more importantly, a review offers a critical assessment of the content. This involves your reactions to the work under review: what strikes you as noteworthy, whether or not it was effective or persuasive, and how it enhanced your understanding of the issues at hand.

• Finally, in addition to analyzing the work, a review often suggests whether or not the audience would appreciate it.

Becoming an expert reviewer: three short examples.

(1) Consider the following brief book review written for a history course on medieval Europe by a student who is fascinated with beer:

Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600, investigates how women used to brew and sell the majority of ale drunk in England. Historically, ale and beer (not milk, wine, or water) were important elements of the English diet. Ale brewing was low-skill and low status labor that was complimentary to women’s domestic responsibilities. In the early fifteenth century, brewers began to make ale with hops, and they called this new drink “beer.” This technique allowed brewers to produce their beverages at a lower cost and to sell it more easily, although women generally stopped brewing once the business became more profitable.

The student describes the subject of the book and provides an accurate summary of its contents. But the reader does not learn some key information expected from a review: the author’s argument, the student’s appraisal of the book and its argument, and whether or not the student would recommend the book. As a critical assessment, a book review should focus on opinions, not facts and details. Summary should be kept to a minimum, and specific details should serve to illustrate arguments.

(2) Now consider a review of the same book written by a slightly more opinionated student:

Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600 was a colossal disappointment. I wanted to know about the rituals surrounding drinking in medieval England: the songs, the games, the parties. Bennett provided none of that information. I liked how the book showed ale and beer brewing as an economic activity, but the reader gets lost in the details of prices and wages. I was more interested in the private lives of the women brewsters. The book was divided into eight long chapters, and I can’t imagine why anyone would ever want to read it.

There’s no shortage of judgments in this review! But the student does not display a working knowledge of the book’s argument. The reader has a sense of what the student expected of the book, but no sense of what the author herself set out to prove. Although the student gives several reasons for the negative review, those examples do not clearly relate to each other as part of an overall evaluation—in other words, in support of a specific thesis. This review is indeed an assessment, but not a critical one.

(3) Here is one final review of the same book:

One of feminism’s paradoxes—one that challenges many of its optimistic histories—is how patriarchy remains persistent over time. While Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600 recognizes medieval women as historical actors through their ale brewing, it also shows that female agency had its limits with the advent of beer. I had assumed that those limits were religious and political, but Bennett shows how a “patriarchal equilibrium” shut women out of economic life as well. Her analysis of women’s wages in ale and beer production proves that a change in women’s work does not equate to a change in working women’s status. Contemporary feminists and historians alike should read Bennett’s book and think twice when they crack open their next brewsky.

This student’s review avoids the problems of the previous two examples. It combines balanced opinion and concrete example, a critical assessment based on an explicitly stated rationale, and a recommendation to a potential audience. The reader gets a sense of what the book’s author intended to demonstrate. Moreover, the student refers to an argument about feminist history in general that places the book in a specific genre and that reaches out to a general audience. The example of analyzing wages illustrates an argument, the analysis engages significant intellectual debates, and the reasons for the overall positive review are plainly visible. The review offers criteria, opinions, and support with which the reader can agree or disagree.

Developing an assessment: before you write.

There is no definitive method to writing a review, although some critical thinking about the work at hand is necessary before you actually begin writing. Thus, writing a review is a two-step process: developing an argument about the work under consideration, and making that argument as you write an organized and well-supported draft. See our handout on argument.

What follows is a series of questions to focus your thinking as you dig into the work at hand. While the questions specifically consider book reviews, you can easily transpose them to an analysis of performances, exhibitions, and other review subjects. Don’t feel obligated to address each of the questions; some will be more relevant than others to the book in question.

• What is the thesis—or main argument—of the book? If the author wanted you to get one idea from the book, what would it be? How does it compare or contrast to the world you know? What has the book accomplished?

• What exactly is the subject or topic of the book? Does the author cover the subject adequately? Does the author cover all aspects of the subject in a balanced fashion? What is the approach to the subject (topical, analytical, chronological, descriptive)?

• How does the author support her argument? What evidence does she use to prove her point? Do you find that evidence convincing? Why or why not? Does any of the author’s information (or conclusions) conflict with other books you’ve read, courses you’ve taken or just previous assumptions you had of the subject?

• How does the author structure her argument? What are the parts that make up the whole? Does the argument make sense? Does it persuade you? Why or why not?

• How has this book helped you understand the subject? Would you recommend the book to your reader?

Beyond the internal workings of the book, you may also consider some information about the author and the circumstances of the text’s production:

• Who is the author? Nationality, political persuasion, training, intellectual interests, personal history, and historical context may provide crucial details about how a work takes shape. Does it matter, for example, that the biographer was the subject’s best friend? What difference would it make if the author participated in the events she writes about?

• What is the book’s genre? Out of what field does it emerge? Does it conform to or depart from the conventions of its genre? These questions can provide a historical or literary standard on which to base your evaluations. If you are reviewing the first book ever written on the subject, it will be important for your readers to know. Keep in mind, though, that naming “firsts”—alongside naming “bests” and “onlys”—can be a risky business unless you’re absolutely certain.

Writing the review:

Once you have made your observations and assessments of the work under review, carefully survey your notes and attempt to unify your impressions into a statement that will describe the purpose or thesis of your review. Check out our handout on thesis statements. Then, outline the arguments that support your thesis.

Your arguments should develop the thesis in a logical manner. That logic, unlike more standard academic writing, may initially emphasize the author’s argument while you develop your own in the course of the review. The relative emphasis depends on the nature of the review: if readers may be more interested in the work itself, you may want to make the work and the author more prominent; if you want the review to be about your perspective and opinions, then you may structure the review to privilege your observations over (but never separate from) those of the work under review. What follows is just one of many ways to organize a review.

Introduction

Since most reviews are brief, many writers begin with a catchy quip or anecdote that succinctly delivers their argument. But you can introduce your review differently depending on the argument and audience. The Writing Center’s handout on introductions can help you find an approach that works. 

In general, you should include:

• The name of the author and the book title and the main theme.

• Relevant details about who the author is and where he/she stands in the genre or field of inquiry. You could also link the title to the subject to show how the title explains the subject matter.

• The context of the book and/or your review. Placing your review in a framework that makes sense to your audience alerts readers to your “take” on the book. Perhaps you want to situate a book about the Cuban revolution in the context of Cold War rivalries between the United States and the Soviet Union. Another reviewer might want to consider the book in the framework of Latin American social movements. Your choice of context informs your argument.

• The thesis of the book. If you are reviewing fiction, this may be difficult since novels, plays, and short stories rarely have explicit arguments. But identifying the book’s particular novelty, angle, or originality allows you to show what specific contribution the piece is trying to make.

• Your thesis about the book.

Summary of content

This should be brief, as analysis takes priority. In the course of making your assessment, you’ll hopefully be backing up your assertions with concrete evidence from the book, so some summary will be dispersed throughout other parts of the review.

The necessary amount of summary also depends on your audience. Graduate students, beware! If you are writing book reviews for colleagues—to prepare for comprehensive exams, for example—you may want to devote more attention to summarizing the book’s contents. If, on the other hand, your audience has already read the book—such as a class assignment on the same work—you may have more liberty to explore more subtle points and to emphasize your own argument. See our handout on summary for more tips.

Analysis and evaluation of the book

Your analysis and evaluation should be organized into paragraphs that deal with single aspects of your argument. This arrangement can be challenging when your purpose is to consider the book as a whole, but it can help you differentiate elements of your criticism and pair assertions with evidence more clearly. You do not necessarily need to work chronologically through the book as you discuss it. Given the argument you want to make, you can organize your paragraphs more usefully by themes, methods, or other elements of the book. If you find it useful to include comparisons to other books, keep them brief so that the book under review remains in the spotlight. Avoid excessive quotation and give a specific page reference in parentheses when you do quote. Remember that you can state many of the author’s points in your own words.

Conclusion

Sum up or restate your thesis or make the final judgment regarding the book. You should not introduce new evidence for your argument in the conclusion. You can, however, introduce new ideas that go beyond the book if they extend the logic of your own thesis. This paragraph needs to balance the book’s strengths and weaknesses in order to unify your evaluation. Did the body of your review have three negative paragraphs and one favorable one? What do they all add up to? The Writing Center’s handout on conclusions can help you make a final assessment.

In review

Finally, a few general considerations:

• Review the book in front of you, not the book you wish the author had written. You can and should point out shortcomings or failures, but don’t criticize the book for not being something it was never intended to be.

• With any luck, the author of the book worked hard to find the right words to express her ideas. You should attempt to do the same. Precise language allows you to control the tone of your review.

• Never hesitate to challenge an assumption, approach, or argument. Be sure, however, to cite specific examples to back up your assertions carefully.

• Try to present a balanced argument about the value of the book for its audience. You’re entitled—and sometimes obligated—to voice strong agreement or disagreement. But keep in mind that a bad book takes as long to write as a good one, and every author deserves fair treatment. Harsh judgments are difficult to prove and can give readers the sense that you were unfair in your assessment.

• A great place to learn about book reviews is to look at examples. The New York Times Sunday Book Review and The New York Review of Books can show you how professional writers review books.

--------------------------

OTRAS: 

Navarro, Federico y Ana Luz Abramovich: "La reseña académica.": 39-44.

https://users.dcc.uchile.cl/~cgutierr/cursos/INV/navarro-resena.pdf

"Critical Reviews and Literature Reviews." University of Missouri-Kansas City.

https://www.umkc.edu/writingstudio/Documents/critical%20review%20or%20literature%20review%20handout.pdf

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(3) Guía para la lectura de artículos [pistas de trabajo] 

(3) GUÍA PARA LA LECTURA DE ARTÍCULOS [PISTAS DE TRABAJO]

(supuesto de base: la noción de comunidad discursiva/disciplina académica que determina y rige aquello de lo que se habla/se escribe y la manera en que se habla/se escribe de ello; comunidad que se estructura y se refuerza a partir de la constitución y circulación de un lenguaje común y de sus productos)

EL CONTEXTO DISCIPLINARIO

(modelo de conocimiento, metodologías de investigación, modelo de comunicación y expresión, procesos de socialización y comunicación)

*lenguaje común                                     *preocupaciones, cuestionamientos comunes

*acuerdos, convenciones                             *puntos de referencia comunes

*asuntos/issues, temas comunes               *debates comunes, posiciones afines o divergentes

*maneras de conocer el mundo *maneras de interrelacionarse (=maneras de expresar y negociar acuerdos y desacuerdos)

-----------------------------------------------------

TÍTULO

Leer el título con cuidado y atención: casi siempre ofrece una versión abreviada del tema o la hipótesis de trabajo del artículo.

INTRODUCCIÓN

HIPÓTESIS DE TRABAJO, TEMA PROBLEMATIZADO, PROPUESTA.

Identificar la hipótesis de trabajo (=propuesta, o tema problematizado) que el artículo pretende explorar o desarrollar. Esta servirá de hilo conductor en el artículo. Debe poder trazarse este hilo conductor a lo largo del artículo.

La hipótesis de trabajo (=propuesta, o tema problematizado) debería encontrarse en la introducción del artículo (=en el primer párrafo o en los primeros párrafos).

En la introducción también se encontrará una contextualización más o menos general de la hipótesis de trabajo (=propuesta, o tema problematizado).

Debe poder distinguir la formulación de la hipótesis de trabajo (=propuesta, o tema problematizado) de la contextualización que la sitúa en un marco/contexto mayor.

DESARROLLO O CUERPO ARGUMENTATIVO

MODOS DE ARGUMENTAR.

Fijarse en los modos de argumentar (=estrategias argumentativas, efectos retóricos, etc.) que sirven para presentar, organizar y desarrollar la hipótesis.

Identificar expresiones de posición, de postura propia (directas, indirectas, categóricas, matizadas: mirar el uso de adjetivos, adverbios, léxico, modales, etc.).

Examinar el tono utilizado (defensivo, burlón, sobrio, seco, altisonante, técnico, condenatorio, irónico, satírico, etc.) y el uso de estrategias retóricas particulares:

*Criterio de sentido común     *Criterio de autoridad

*Estadísticas, números, lenguaje técnico o matemático

*Uso de humor, burla, intimidación

*Apelar a emociones, a experiencias vividas o sentidas

*Apelar al intelecto, a conocimientos previos

Analizar el uso del mecanismo de la presentación por oposición (=montar un argumento, presentar otra posición para descartarlo/a o rebatirlo/a) o por comparación (= situar el argumento en relación con otro/s) o por contextualización (=situar en argumento en un marco mayor, en un contexto).

Estudiar los ejemplos utilizados y la relación entre el ejemplo, el análisis, el comentario (=el uso que se la da en el artículo).

Examinar las figuras o tropos utilizados (=metáforas, símbolos, etc.)

Ver la función de los nombres y de los textos citados en la presentación de argumentos.

LÉXICO.

Identificar las palabras claves o recurrentes y la relación entre ellas.

Estudiar el tipo de metalenguaje utilizado (religioso, filosófico, científico, emocional, figurado, etc.)

CONCLUSION

Examinar cómo se  vuelve a retomar el hilo conductor del artículo (=la propuesta inicial).

¿Es una conclusión cerrada (=se retoman el hilo conductor y los puntos clave del desarrollo argumentativo en forma de síntesis final y se cierra la discusión) o abierta (=después de cerrar la discusión iniciada por la propuesta inicial, se muestra un posible nuevo camino para investigación o discusión futura)?

SITUACIÓN DEL ARTÍCULO EN EL CURSO

¿A qué debate, a qué cuestionamientos contribuye el artículo o en qué debate se inscribe (= la literatura como representación, la muerte del autor, literatura y teoría del lenguaje,  literatura y género, el retorno de lo político y lo ético, etc..)? ¿Qué postura defiende, si alguna? ¿Qué propuesta concreta ofrece en este contexto, si alguna? ¿Qué conceptos importantes maneja? ¿Qué aspecto(s) de lo literario trata (=la relación autor-texto, el contexto social, el concepto de representación, el lenguaje, etc.)? ¿directa o indirectamente? ¿Cómo se relaciona con otras propuestas (=respuesta, defensa, oposición, elaboración, etc.)? ¿Es una propuesta representativa de alguna escuela, de algún movimiento, o acercamiento teórico o crítico identificable?

----------------------------------------

 (4) Criterios para la evaluación de lecturas critico-analíticas/reseñas breves de libros y artículos

(4) CRITERIOS PARA LA EVALUACIÓN DE LECTURAS CRITICO-ANALÍTICAS/RESEÑAS BREVES DE ARTÍCULOS Y LIBROS 

(1) Se ha identificado la hipótesis de trabajo / propuesta del artículo.

(2) Se ha citado la hipótesis de trabajo directamente del texto y/o se ha resumido la hipótesis en sus propias palabras.

(3) Se ha identificado y comentado la organización (el llamado " plan " o “estructura” ) del artículo.

(4) Se han identificado/resumido y comentado/analizado los argumentos/ideas principales que se utilizan en el artículo para desarrollar la hipótesis / propuesta.

(5) Se ha evaluado el artículo y se ha(n) explicitado el/los criterio(s) de la evaluación. 

(6) Se ha expresado opinión propia sobre el artículo y se ha fundamentado en argumentación sólida.

(7) Se ha indicado la contribución del artículo.

(8) Se ha utilizado el formato MLA.

(9) Se ha comprendido el artículo. No se han falsificado las ideas / los argumentos.

(10) Se han dominado los protocolos para citar o transmitir lo que el autor del artículo ha escrito [=sistema apelativo, discurso directo, discurso indirecto, se utilizan expresiones tales como: según, de acuerdo con, en palabras de, etc.]

(11) El trabajo está bien organizado. Hay transiciones apropiadas entre las partes. Hay coherencia del conjunto y de las partes. 

(12) Se ha usado el vocabulario con propiedad.

(13) No hay faltas notables de tipo gramatical.

(14) El trabajo se lee con facilidad. La expresión es clara, sin rebuscamientos o complicaciones innecesarias. No hay problemas de expresión notables.

(15) No hay repeticiones innecesarias.

(16) Las ideas/los argumentos de las frases se han completado en el mismo idioma. Se ha evitado utilizar más de un idioma en las oraciones.

(17) Las citas se han utilizado para apoyar las ideas/los argumentos del reseñista, no para completarlas/los. 

---------------------------

***(5) Criterios de evaluación de trabajos de tipo argumentativo (y por ende, del proyecto individual y de la monografía final): HOJA DE COTEJO

(5) CRITERIOS PARA LA EVALUACIÓN DE LOS TRABAJOS DE TIPO ARGUMENTATIVO:  HOJA DE COTEJO

0. TRABAJO CON FUENTES SECUNDARIAS (EN LA INVESTIGACIÓN PRELIMINAR Y EN LOS ENSAYOS ARGUMENTATIVOS)

* El estudiante puede realizar una revisión de la literatura adecuada para fines de trabajos monográficos en la disciplina. Sabe, para empezar, identificar diversas fuentes pertinentes para su trabajo utilizando referencias reconocidas en la disciplina.

* El estudiante utiliza una variedad de fuentes secundarias, tanto impresas como digitales.  Incluye e integra a su análisis documentos de alto rigor académico.

* El estudiante puede recopilar la información pertinente para su trabajo y relacionarla, combinando los datos y el conocimiento derivado de los documentos revisados y de los objetivos de la búsqueda.

* El estudiante es capaz de analizar la información recopilada en relación con los criterios/objetivos de la búsqueda, el marco conceptual y la literatura secundaria evaluada.

* El estudiante es capaz de distinguir entre lo medular y lo accesorio en los textos examinados.

* El estudiante es capaz de identificar y analizar puntos de convergencia y divergencia de los textos evaluados entre sí y en su relación con sus propias ideas.

* El estudiante puede comprender y evaluar la información obtenida, con el propósito de realizar inferencias y de sustentar las conclusiones o generalizaciones a las que llega.

* En el repaso de la literatura pertinente para su investigación y en el diálogo con fuentes secundarias, el estudiante demuestra que es capaz de presentar las ideas de otros verazmente y sin falsificarlas.

I. FORMATO DE PRESENTACIÓN GENERAL

* Se dominan los protocolos imperantes (citas, espacios, etc.)

* Se usa el formato MLA para las citas (en el cuerpo del trabajo)

* Se usa el formato MLA para las notas (al pie de página o al final del trabajo)

Errores más frecuentes:

No se identifican las citas

No se indica la página de las citas

No se dominan los protocolos para citar (expresiones y sistema de puntuación que indican que se va a citar a alguien, nombre de la fuente, ficha bibliográfica, etc.)

Hay demasiado (o demasiado poco) espacio entre las líneas

II. EXPRESIÓN

* Se dominan los medios de expresión (gramática, ortografía, acentuación, léxico)

* Se utiliza un registro de lengua de corte “académico” (=precisión léxica, dominio de la terminología propia de la disciplina de la metodología, corrección gramatical, tonalidad neutral)

* Se domina el uso de la cita como apoyo o evidencia textual y no para completar ideas en el cuerpo del trabajo. Para esto, se utiliza la paráfrasis, con la debida identificación de la fuente. 

* El trabajo está bien organizado. Hay transiciones apropiadas entre las partes. Hay coherencia. 

* Se ha usado el vocabulario con propiedad.

* No hay faltas notables de tipo gramatical.

* El trabajo se lee con facilidad. La expresión es clara, sin rebuscamientos o complicaciones innecesarias. No hay problemas de expresión notables.

* No hay repeticiones innecesarias.

* Las frases se han completado en el mismo idioma. No se mezclan idiomas.

 Errores más frecuentes:

Problemas de gramática

Problemas de ortografía y acentuación 

Problemas de léxico (=pobreza, muletillas, falta de precisión)

Problemas de registro de lengua : sintaxis y/o léxico (=demasiado coloquial, demasiado emotivo o hiperbólico)

La idea principal de una oración se expresa por vía de una cita, muchas veces en otra lengua, y no en las propias palabras

III. PRESENTACIÓN DEL ANÁLISIS Y DE LA ARGUMENTACIÓN

EL TÍTULO

* El trabajo tiene título

* El título recoge la hipótesis (propuesta o problema que orienta el trabajo) de forma abreviada

Errores más frecuentes:

El trabajo no tiene título

El título del trabajo es demasiado general y no indica nada sobre la dirección argumentativa que el trabajo va a seguir

LA INTRODUCCIÓN

* Se presenta/formula la hipótesis (propuesta o problema) explícitamente en la introducción del trabajo

* La hipótesis se contextualiza brevemente (=se inserta en campo de la metodología utilizada y/o se relaciona con el texto que se estudia y/o se indica el interés que puede tener)

Errores más frecuentes:

No hay  hipótesis de trabajo

El trabajo tiene una hipótesis pero ésta no se presenta explícitamente

El trabajo tiene una hipótesis pero ésta se presenta demasiado tardíamente 

En la Introducción se intercalan comentarios/observaciones innecesarios (=que no se relacionan con la hipótesis)

EL DESARROLLO ARGUMENTATIVO

* Se desarrolla una hipótesis propia de manera estructurada y se sustenta con la evidencia textual, los ejemplos y la elaboración concreta pertinente.

* La elaboración demostrativa de la hipótesis (la combinación de argumentos + evidencia textual) es  coherente, equilibrada, y, por ende, convincente

* El marco conceptual y/o la metodología analítica han sido bien escogidos (en relación con el problema que se desea estudiar)

* Hay un buen manejo del marco conceptual y de la terminología (=correcto y apropiado) que refleja que se han comprendido los conceptos y se saben utilizar 

Errores más frecuentes:

Trabajo desigual

Hay momentos en que el trabajo se va por la tangente (tendencia a comentarios/digresiones superfluos)

Hay incoherencias y contradicciones

El trabajo se reduce a una secuencia de comentarios sueltos y opiniones personales

Problemas con la división en párrafos (párrafos demasiado largos o demasiado cortos, párrafos sin idea central o párrafos con más de una idea central)

No hay suficiente evidencia textual

Las citas son más extensas que los análisis correspondientes 

No hay suficiente argumentación

No hay suficiente elaboración 

Tendencia a la repetición innecesaria

Hay problemas con el manejo de la teoría 

Aplicación errónea de los conceptos/terminología

Definiciones incorrectas

No hay suficiente reflexión teórica 

LA CONCLUSIÓN

* El trabajo tiene una conclusión que guarda una relación estrecha con la introducción y el desarrollo del trabajo: las conclusiones se derivan directamente y coherentemente de lo presentado en el desarrollo (=sus ideas con la evidencia textual  correspondiente y el apoyo de la literatura secundaria y del marco conceptual organizador). 

Errores más frecuentes:

El trabajo no tiene verdadera conclusión

En la conclusión se pasa directamente a un tema nuevo sin cerrar el que se ha estado desarrollando

-------------------------------------

(6) La propuesta del ensayo argumentativo/monografía final

(6) LA PROPUESTA DEL ENSAYO ARGUMENTATIVO/MONOGRAFÍA FINAL

Formato y otras especificaciones de la propuesta

Extensión: 4 páginas [sin incluir la bibliografía], división en partes [a-f]

Formato para la bibliografía: MLA

I. Presentación del proyecto

(a) título tentativo

(b) formulación de la hipótesis de trabajo/propuesta específica en una o dos oraciones completas (=lo que se va a demostrar, probar, argumentar)

(c) contextualización (=ubicación de un objeto en un conjunto que lo justifica y lo explica) de la hipótesis

(d) reflexión en torno a la hipótesis (=sus implicaciones, interrogantes que plantea y que habrá que tratar de contestar, áreas que se podrán o deberán explorar, vías de investigación, metodología, etc.) (e) marcos conceptuales/teóricos [=metodología/herramientas critico- analíticas] que se piensan utilizar y su explicación/justificación

(f) justificación del tema como propio de la literatura comparada /comparatismo [=Hacer referencia a las definiciones que se trabajaron en las primeras sesiones del curso.]

II. Bibliografía primaria

III. Bibliografía secundaria [=Comentada brevemente: deberá resumirse a grandes rasgos la contribución de los artículos al ensayo/Ver los documentos que describen lo que constituye una bibliografía anotada]

--------------------------------------------

(7) La hipótesis de trabajo/The working thesis /The thesis statement

(7) La hipótesis de trabajo/the "working thesis" /the thesis statement

https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/thesis-statements/

Thesis Statements: This handout describes what a thesis statement is, how thesis statements work in your writing, and how you can craft or refine one for your draft.

Introduction

Writing often takes the form of persuasion—convincing others that you have an interesting, logical point of view on the subject you are studying. Course assignments often ask you to make a persuasive case in writing. You are asked to convince your reader of your point of view. This form of persuasion, often called academic argument, follows a predictable pattern in writing. After a brief introduction of your topic, you state your point of view on the topic directly and often in one sentence. This sentence is the thesis statement, and it serves as a summary of the argument you’ll make in the rest of your paper.

What is a thesis statement? A thesis statement:

• tells the reader how you will interpret the significance of the subject matter under discussion.

• is a road map for the paper; in other words, it tells the reader what to expect from the rest of the paper.

• directly answers the question asked of you. A thesis statement is an interpretation of a question or subject, not the subject itself. The subject, or topic, of an essay might be World War II or Moby Dick; a thesis must then offer a way to understand the war or the novel.

• makes a claim that others might dispute.

• is usually a single sentence near the beginning of your paper (most often, at the end of the first paragraph) that presents your argument to the reader. The rest of the paper, the body of the essay, gathers and organizes evidence that will persuade the reader of the logic of your interpretation.

If your assignment asks you to take a position or develop a claim about a subject, you may need to convey that position or claim in a thesis statement near the beginning of your draft. 

How do I create a thesis statement or “working thesis”?

A thesis is the result of a lengthy thinking process. Formulating a thesis is not the first thing you do after reading an essay assignment. Before you develop an argument on any topic, you have to collect and organize evidence, look for possible relationships between known facts (such as surprising contrasts or similarities), and think about the significance of these relationships. Once you do this thinking, you will probably have a “working thesis” that presents a basic or main idea and an argument that you think you can support with evidence. Both the argument and your thesis are likely to need adjustment along the way.

Writers use all kinds of techniques to stimulate their thinking and to help them clarify relationships or comprehend the broader significance of a topic and arrive at a thesis statement. For more ideas on how to get started, see our handout on brainstorming.

How do I know if my thesis is strong?

When reviewing your first draft and its working thesis, ask yourself the following:

• Do I answer the question? 

• Have I taken a position that others might challenge or oppose? 

• Is my thesis statement specific enough?  Why is something “good”; what specifically makes something “successful”?

• Does my thesis pass the “So what?” test? 

• Does my essay support my thesis specifically and without wandering? 

• Does my thesis pass the “how and why?” test? 

Examples

 [1] Example 1. Suppose you are taking a course on contemporary communication, and the instructor hands out the following essay assignment: “Discuss the impact of social media on public awareness.” Looking back at your notes, you might start with this working thesis:

Social media impacts public awareness in both positive and negative ways.

You can use the questions above to help you revise this general statement into a stronger thesis.

• Do I answer the question? You can analyze this if you rephrase “discuss the impact” as “what is the impact?” This way, you can see that you’ve answered the question only very generally with the vague “positive and negative ways.”

• Have I taken a position that others might challenge or oppose? Not likely. Only people who maintain that social media has a solely positive or solely negative impact could disagree.

• Is my thesis statement specific enough? No. What are the positive effects? What are the negative effects?

• Does my thesis pass the “how and why?” test? No. Why are they positive? How are they positive? What are their causes? Why are they negative? How are they negative? What are their causes?

• Does my thesis pass the “So what?” test? No. Why should anyone care about the positive and/or negative impact of social media?

After thinking about your answers to these questions, you decide to focus on the one impact you feel strongly about and have strong evidence for:

Because not every voice on social media is reliable, people have become much more critical consumers of information, and thus, more informed voters.

This version is a much stronger thesis! It answers the question, takes a specific position that others can challenge, and it gives a sense of why it matters.

[2] Example 2. Suppose your literature professor hands out the following assignment in a class on the American novel: Write an analysis of some aspect of Mark Twain’s novel Huckleberry Finn. “This will be easy,” you think. “I loved Huckleberry Finn!” You grab a pad of paper and write:

Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn is a great American novel.

You begin to analyze your thesis:

• Do I answer the question? No. The prompt asks you to analyze some aspect of the novel. Your working thesis is a statement of general appreciation for the entire novel.

Think about aspects of the novel that are important to its structure or meaning—for example, the role of storytelling, the contrasting scenes between the shore and the river, or the relationships between adults and children.

Now you write:

In Huckleberry Finn, Mark Twain develops a contrast between life on the river and life on the shore.

• Do I answer the question? Yes!

• Have I taken a position that others might challenge or oppose? Not really. This contrast is well-known and accepted.

• Is my thesis statement specific enough? It’s getting there–you have highlighted an important aspect of the novel for investigation. However, it’s still not clear what your analysis will reveal.

• Does my thesis pass the “how and why?” test? Not yet. Compare scenes from the book and see what you discover. Free write, make lists, jot down Huck’s actions and reactions and anything else that seems interesting.

• Does my thesis pass the “So what?” test? What’s the point of this contrast? What does it signify?”

After examining the evidence and considering your own insights, you write:

Through its contrasting river and shore scenes, Twain’s Huckleberry Finn suggests that to find the true expression of American democratic ideals, one must leave “civilized” society and go back to nature.

This final thesis statement presents an interpretation of a literary work based on an analysis of its content. Of course, for the essay itself to be successful, you must now present evidence from the novel that will convince the reader of your interpretation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

(8) El artículo/ensayo argumentativo/la monografía final

(8) EL ENSAYO ARGUMENTATIVO/MONOGRAFÍA/ARTÍCULO FINAL

Formato y otras especificaciones:

Extensión: 8-10 páginas, doble espacio, “fuente” 11.

Formato: MLA

I. Introducción (hipótesis de trabajo, contextualización de la hipótesis, reflexión, metodología)

II. Desarrollo (en tantas partes como lo requiera la hipótesis)

III. Conclusión o conclusiones

IV. Bibliografía primaria [=texto(s) analizado(s)] y secundaria [dividida entre bibliografía citada y bibliografía general]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

***OBJETIVOS DEL PROYECTO DE INVESTIGACIÓN Y ENSAYO ARGUMENTATIVO / MONOGRAFÍA CORRESPONDIENTE

****************************************

EN SU CONJUNTO, EL PROYECTO INDIVIDUAL (INVESTIGACIÓN + MONOGRAFÍA) DEBERÁ DEMOSTRAR QUE EL ESTUDIANTE PUEDE INTEGRAR TEORÍA, INVESTIGACIÓN e INTERPRETACIÓN Y TRABAJAR A PARTIR DE UNA PERSPECTIVA Y EN UN CONTEXTO RECONOCIDOS COMO PROPIOS DE LOS ESTUDIOS LITERARIOS EN GENERAL, DEL ÁREA DISCIPLINARIA DE LA LITERATURA COMPARADA Y DEL ÁREA DE TRABAJO ESPECÍFICO DESARROLLADO EN LA CLASE (=la narratología) 

*formular y desarrollar una hipótesis de trabajo propia del campo disciplinario de la literatura comparada/comparatismo y del área de trabajo desarrollado en la clase (=la narratología)

*analizar, comentar e interpretar textos narrativos 

*utilizar marcos conceptuales/teóricos apropiados y necesarios para elaborar y desarrollar la hipótesis de trabajo y analizar los textos narrativos utilizados en el trabajo 

*fundamentar y anclar los análisis, las reflexiones, los temas en evidencia textual

*saber citar (discurso directo y discurso indirecto)

*argumentar de forma convincente las opiniones, los comentarios, los análisis, las observaciones

*leer, comprender, resumir, y utilizar fuentes secundarias para fines de apoyo argumentativo (=sobre la base del llamado “repaso de la literatura”)

*entablar diálogo y/o debate con las fuentes secundarias en torno a la hipótesis de trabajo y/o de los temas desarrollados 

*establecer un equilibrio entre los análisis personales, la evidencia textual y las referencias a las fuentes secundarias

------------------------------------------

(9) El abstract

https://writingcenter.gmu.edu/guides/writing-an-abstract

What is an abstract?

An abstract is a 150- to 300-word paragraph that provides readers with a quick overview of your essay or report and its organization. It should express your thesis (or central idea) and your key points; it should also suggest any implications or applications of the research you discuss in the paper.

According to Carole Slade, an abstract is “a concise summary of the entire paper.”

• The function of an abstract is to describe, not to evaluate or defend, the paper.

• The abstract should begin with a brief but precise statement of the problem or issue, followed by a description of the research method and design, the major findings, and the conclusions reached.

• The abstract should contain the most important key words referring to method and content: these facilitate access to the abstract by computer search and enable a reader to decide whether to read the entire dissertation.

Note: Your abstract should read like an overview of your paper, not a proposal for what you intended to study or accomplish. Avoid beginning your sentences with phrases like, “This essay will examine...” or “In this research paper I will attempt to prove...”

-----------------------------------------------------------

EXAMPLES

https://english.as.uky.edu/dissertation-abstracts 

Amy K. Anderson, 2014.

“Image/Text and Text/Image: Reimagining Multimodal Relationships through Dissociation”

Abstract:

W.J.T. Mitchell has famously noted that we are in the midst of a “pictorial turn,” and images are playing an increasingly important role in digital and multimodal communication. My dissertation addresses the question of how meaning is made when texts and images are united in multimodal arguments. Visual rhetoricians have often attempted to understand text-image arguments by privileging one medium over the other, either using text-based rhetorical principles or developing new image-based theories. I argue that the relationship between the two media is more dynamic, and can be better understood by applying The New Rhetoric’s concept of dissociation, which Chaim Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca developed to demonstrate how the interaction of differently valued concepts can construct new meaning. My dissertation expands the range of dissociation by applying it specifically to visual contexts and using it to critique visual arguments in a series of historical moments when political, religious, and economic factors cause one form of media to be valued over the other: Byzantine Iconoclasm, the late medieval period, the 1950’s advertising boom, and the modern digital age. In each of these periods, I argue that dissociation reveals how the privileged medium can shape an entire multimodal argument. I conclude with a discussion of dissociative multimodal pedagogy, applying dissociation to the multimodal composition classroom.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michael Todd Hendricks, 2014.

“Knowing and Being Known: Sexual Delinquency, Stardom, and Adolescent Girlhood in Midcentury American Film”

Abstract:

Sexual delinquency marked midcentury cinematic representations of adolescent girls in 1940s, 50, and early 60s. Drawing from the history of adolescence and the context of midcentury female juvenile delinquency, I argue that studios and teen girl stars struggled for decades with publicity, censorship, and social expectations regarding the sexual license of teenage girls. Until the late 1950s, exploitation films and B movies exploited teen sex and pregnancy while mainstream Hollywood ignored those issues, struggling to promote teen girl stars by tightly controlling their private lives but depriving fan magazines of the gossip and scandals that normally fueled the machinery of stardom. The emergence and image of the postwar, sexually autonomous teen girl finally began to see expression in mainstream melodramas of the late 50s, and teen girl stars such as Sandra Dee and Natalie Wood created new, “post-delinquent” star images wherein “good girls” could still be sexually experienced. This new image was a significant departure from the widespread belief that the sexually active teen girl was a fundamentally delinquent threat to the nuclear family, and offered a liberal counterpoint to more conservative teen girl prototypes like Hayley Mills, which continued to have cultural currency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

George Micajah Phillips, 2011.

“Seeing Subjects: Recognition, Identity, and Visual Cultures in Literary Modernism”

Abstract:

Seeing Subjects plots a literary history of modern Britain that begins with Dorian Gray obsessively inspecting his portrait’s changes and ends in Virginia Woolf’s visit to the cinema where she found audiences to be “savages watching the pictures.” Focusing on how literature in the late-19th and 20th centuries regarded images as possessing a shaping force over how identities are understood and performed, I argue that modernists in Britain felt mediated images were altering, rather than merely representing, British identity. As Britain’s economy expanded to unprecedented imperial reach and global influence, new visual technologies also made it possible to render images culled from across the British world—from its furthest colonies to darkest London—to the small island nation, deeply and irrevocably complicating British identity. In response, Oscar Wilde, Joseph Conrad, T. S. Eliot, and others sought to better understand how identity was recognized, particularly visually. By exploring how painting, photography, colonial exhibitions, and cinema sought to manage visual representations of identity, these modernists found that recognition began by acknowledging the familiar but also went further to acknowledge what was strange and new as well. Reading recognition and misrecognition as crucial features of modernist texts, Seeing Subjects argues for a new understanding of how modernism’s formal experimentation came to be and for how it calls for responses from readers today.