Global Studies 120 Short Paper

Global 120 Second Short Paper: Prompts and Cover Page Fall 2019

Professor Kai M. Thaler

Due November 19 in class

This paper should be between 1250 and 1500 words, and submitted double-spaced, in 12-point font,

with each page numbered. The pages should be stapled together and compiled in this order:

A. Please fill in the cover page included below and put it as your first page. B. As the second page, please include a copy of the rubric, with check marks in the boxes that you

think reflect the quality of your work. You may include comments to explain your reasoning.

This will help section leaders and me to understand if there have been issues with the clarity of

the assignment and expectations.

C. Your completed paper.

You are not expected to do any outside research or reading, but you can cite arguments, ideas, and

examples from lecture and optional, recommended readings. References to material from readings or

lecture and any short direct quotations must be properly cited. All work, wording, and ideas that are

not cited must be your own. You may choose any one of the following citation formats: APA, MLA, or

either Chicago style, but please use it consistently. Information on these formats is available here:

http://guides.lib.uw.edu/research/citations/citationwhich. If you are using in-text citations, then you must

provide a bibliography at the end listing the sources you have cited.

Prompts and Structure Please choose one of the two prompts below. You should provide an introductory paragraph about your

chosen topic, present a thesis statement, and then write several paragraphs providing examples and

elaborating on these to support your thesis. You should then have one or two concluding paragraphs

restating your argument and making a case for its significance.

Prompt 1. Colonialism entails a nation or state invading the territory of another nation and ruling in the

colonizers' own interests, rather than those of the local people. Some anti-colonial activists believed that

nonviolence was the best way to end colonial rule and achieve autonomy or independence. Others

argued that colonialism could only be defeated through violent struggle. Is violence justified in fighting

against colonial rule? Why or why not? Formulate an argument and support it using examples, from

readings and lecture, of authors’ arguments and real-world cases.

Prompt 2. In a postcolonial setting, how do new governments try to organize society? Cosmopolitanism

holds that all people are part of a single global community and so its followers advocate inclusion and

cooperation across political borders and differences of identity. Nationalists, while they may sometimes

cooperate across borders, believe that political and social systems should be organized on the basis of

group identity, as opposed to having a more integrated, pluralistic society. Compare and contrast the

cosmopolitan and nationalist positions, then choose one of the two and discuss the potential flaws or

downsides in its vision of how postcolonial society should be organized. Formulate an argument and

support it using examples, from readings and lecture, of authors’ arguments and real-world cases.

Global 120 Second Short Paper Cover Sheet

Name:

Perm #:

Prompt number chosen:

Section Leader:

Section Day and Time:

Academic Integrity I certify that this assignment is my own work, except where I have acknowledged the use

of the works of other people.

______________________ ______________

Signature Date

D C B A

GRADING/MARKING

CRITERIA

Achievement that

minimally meets the

course requirements

Achievement that

satisfactorily meets the

course requirements

Achievement that is

significantly above the course

requirements

Achievement that is

outstanding relative to the

course requirements

COMMENTS Thesis/Argument: Logical

reasoning, supported

claims, and critical thinking.

25 points.

Argument is unclear

and does not

adequately respond to

the prompt or

demonstrate

relationship to course

materials.

Simple, standard argument

taken directly from course

materials. Adequately

responds to prompt.

Fully-formed, complete and

wholly logical argument.

Demonstrates clear

understanding of course

materials and prompt, but

develops a new approach to

standard arguments.

Fully-formed, complete and

wholly logical argument.

Demonstrates clear

understanding of course

materials and prompt, but

advances an original

argument not directly

discussed in course

materials. Analysis/synthesis:

Examination and

interpretation of class

materials to compare and

contrast ideologies and their

principles or goals.

35 points.

Key elements or

arguments may be

incorrectly identified;

analysis may be

attempted but

unjustified. Limited

provision of examples.

Most key elements and

arguments are identified.

Generally accurate, but

superficial interpretation,

comparison, categorization,

analysis or explanation from

readily available sources,

using examples in exact same

manner as class materials.

Key elements and arguments

are identified. Accurate

interpretation and analysis

with some rationale or

justification integrated into

explanation from readily

available sources, presenting

some new interpretations and

ideas based on course

materials.

Key elements and arguments

are identified and clarified in

detail. Accurate, deep

interpretation and

justification using

independent thought,

building on course materials

to present new and original

interpretations and ideas.

Discussion: Development,

depth, breadth and

synthesis. 30 points.

Significantly superficial.

Discussion lacks depth,

breadth and/or

examples to support

argument. Examples or

concepts incorrectly

identified or defined.

Adequate evidence of depth,

breadth and/or examples

from course materials to

support argument, but

connections between

argument and evidence not

clear or consistent. Partially

accurate understanding of

course concepts and authors'

arguments. Some minor

irrelevancies and inaccuracies.

Connects examples together

and to different specific

aspects of argument. Some

standard criticism or pro/con

points from course materials.

Generally accurate, extensive

understanding of course

concepts and authors'

arguments. Few minor

irrelevancies and

inaccuracies.

Deep and copious evidence

and/or comparative detail in

supporting argument with

clear, logical examples.

Discussion fully developed

with author's opinion or

interpretation in taking a

stance of advocacy or

criticism. Completely and

fully accurate, extensive

understanding of relevant

course concepts and

authors' arguments.

GENERAL CRITERIA

Writing, organization, & structure: Clarity and accuracy of message; clear, logical structure and flow; grammatical or spelling errors do not

obscure arguments. 5 points. Proper citation of sources with formatted references (in-text citations/bibliography or footnotes). 5 points.