Instructionsforfinal.docx
2. Entry Specifications are as follows: a. Single Spaced or Double Spaced – 11 or 12 font, Times New Roman font b. .9-inch or 1-inch margins on all sides c. Provide proper citations, Turabian’s Chicago Style d. Page numbers and first & last name in top-right corner of EVERY page! e. Fill out and Submit Paper Composition Checklist with paper. f. All papers should be in Word Doc format and saved as FirstLastName_Entry1. 3. Remember to upload paper and checklist for each. 4. Remember to carefully proofread and edit your work! Assignment Description: “Exploring Perspectives on Paul” (4-5 pages in total) Imagine that you are writing a critical review and assessment of a scholarly perspective on Paul and introducing it to a reading audience like the Christian Century Magazine (https://www.christiancentury.org) or Good News Magazine (http://goodnewsmag.org). In the essay you want to summarize and respond to one particular perspective of Paul set out by a particular scholar or point of view. It should be the same perspective you did for the oral report. Provide an informed and critical review of that specific viewpoint and argument by engaging a one of the perspectives from the other set. For example, if your primary perspective comes from one of the scholars in the book (Schreiner, Johnson, Nanos), you MUST engage one of the perspectives from the packets (Asian American perspective, African American perspective, feminist perspective) and vice versa in this paper as your contrasting perspective. After establishing critical comprehension and clarity about the primary perspective under discussion, reflect on why you picked this particular perspective to engage and how it can inform your ministerial context and/or future work. (4-5 pages, double-spaced, 11 or 12 font times roman in total ** This assignment should not be confused with a book report. This is not merely a summary of contents, but critical engagement with a specific point of view and a clear and informed articulation of your own understanding of its merits and weaknesses, method and critical questions the perspective seeks to answer (or not answer). Essay Instructions: Answer prompt in full and provide relevant references/citations to scripture (parenthetical scripture citations preferred) and textbook (footnote citations required). Quote heavy responses are strongly discouraged and will count against the student. Responses should demonstrate comprehension in the form of laying out the issues in student’s own words and providing relevant supporting evidence. Proof texting is strongly discouraged. Responses should demonstrate an overall contextual understanding of respective texts and interpretative issues (historical, literary, theological). Responses should exhibit the ability to synthesize the information reviewed in class lectures and readings into critical reflections. All responses should stay WITHIN the page limit requirements• The general purpose of this critical review is similar to how one goes about writing a critical book review. The purpose is to critically evaluate the text and demonstrate a solid understanding of the perspective and the author’s position. It should give prospective readers a preview of what the perspective is about in the context of the larger conversation it is participating within. By this, I mean you describe the basic topic and state of the conversation the perspective engages. You also discuss the perspectives structure structure and thesis, briefly summarize what it is about, provide an appraisal of its strengths and weaknesses; and state and explain whether or not you, as the reviewer, enjoyed it. Your review can talk about the book in terms of the larger historical debates, historical records, and/or contemporary issues discussed. The idea of an academic book review is to briefly summarize the ideas of the book in order to give your opinion about the book’s merits. Like the academic book reviews, this essay is a critical analysis of the respective perspective on Paul you selected from the six options (Schreiner, Johnson, Nanos, Asian American, African American, or Feminist), NOT a book report. By “critical,” I do not mean that you are going to be malicious or harsh in your review. It means that you are going to evaluate objectively whether the perspective has fulfilled its objectives in understanding and engaging Paul, and whether it has used persuasive and unbiased evidence to support its asserted claims. Above all, your review should show perspective. The most important element of your review is that it is a commentary, not merely a summary. It allows you to enter into dialogue and discussion with the author/perspective and with other audiences (in this case, your professor). 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 perspective (after providing a strong and fair overview of the perspective first, of course), and that statement will probably resemble other types of academic writing, with a thesis statement, supporting body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Common features of book reviews expected to be included in your review: ü First, your review should give 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. This summary should include proper page citations so readers can consult the work as you describe and comment on it (using Turabian-Chicago style). The entire perspective essay or packet should be read and accounted for in your review. It is not acceptable to only read the first section or only one part of a packet and then write the review. ü Second, and more importantly, your 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. ü Finally, in addition to analyzing the work, your review should suggest whether or not the audience would appreciate it. Potential Question to Address in Your Review & Focus Your Thinking1 • Who is the author? What else has she/he written? • What type of book is this? Who is the intended audience? What is the purpose of the work? • The aims of the author: what he/she is trying to do in the book. A short summary of the argument may be appropriate. (One of my biggest objections to many book reviews is that they do not take time to think about the author’s aims – criticizing an apple for not being an orange.) These aims may not be overtly stated – it is up to you to tease them out. • 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 is the main idea of the work? What makes it effective, ineffective, groundbreaking, troubling? • Where does the title fit into the work? Does it effectively encapsulate the message and thesis of the book? • How is the book arranged? Does the chapter divisions and sections reveal any important information about the message of the work or it purpose? • What were your favorite chapters and/or sections and what were you least favorite? Explain. • 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 have read, courses you have taken or just previous assumptions you had of the subject? • How has this book helped you understand the subject? Would you recommend the book to your reader? • What quotes stand out? How does this shape and inform your reading and review of the book? • What was informative and challenging about the work? What was helpful and what least helpful? • What new information does the author provide or what issues does the author clarify, correct, challenge, confirm? • What areas should have been more developed or what areas were overdeveloped? • What one or two points will you discuss about the book? What worked well for you and how does this work compare to others by the same author or in the same genre 1 For further details about this assignment, see Purdue Online Writing Lab webpage called, “Writing a Book Review.” https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/704/01/ or see: http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/book-reviews/. Many of the elements mentioned above were adapted from these websites to help focus your reading, thinking, and writing.
pretig
0
