How the social media is changing the self-perception (or identity) of the youth in Iran.

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

The research essay must be 10 pages long (double-spaced, excluding the cover page and bibliography page) and reference at least 4 sources from the syllabus and 4 scholarly sources from outside the syllabus. The paper must make an argument that is well supported by empirical evidence and that helps to address your central thesis statement.

See the Syllabus for basic formatting, editing, and submission requirements.

Failure to adhere to formatting requirements will result, at minimum, in a 10% reduction in your score for the essay. 


Introduction: State your thesis statement very clearly. Your thesis statement should be located toward the end of your introductory section. Make sure to also discuss the significance of the thesis and provide a roadmap that tells the reader what to expect from the rest of the paper.

Body of paper: Present evidence and reasoning of your ideas in a logical and persuasive way. This is the place for evidence-based critical analysis.

Conclusion: Succinctly present the salient conclusions you have reached and their significance.

It is acceptable (and desirable) to organize the paper into sections with headings (and if needed, subsections with subheadings). This structure helps your reader navigate through the paper more easily. An example of headings: “Introduction,” “History of Facework,” “Facework in the Middle East,” “Facework and Mobility,” “Conclusion.”

Make sure that all pages beyond the cover page are consecutively numbered at the lower right of the page.

Make sure that there is a one-to-one correspondence between the material you cite in the body of your paper and the bibliography. Your bibliography must be alphabetized by the author’s last name and both the bibliography and citations must follow the Chicago Manual of Style.

RUBRIC

I. Introduction (4 out of 25 points)

Excellent: contains a very strong and clear thesis, an explanation of its significance, and a “road map” that guides the reader on the direction of your paper (4)

Good: contains a moderately strong and clear thesis, an explanation of its significance, and a “road map” (3)

Fair: contains a thesis, but does not effectively explain its significance; may or may not include a “road map” (2)

Poor: does not contain an effective thesis, explanation of its significance, or “road map” (0-

II. Improvement based on instructor feedback (4 out of 25 points)

Excellent: fully addresses feedback on proposal (4)

Good: addresses most feedback on proposal (3)


Fair: partially addresses feedback on proposal (2)

Poor: largely fails to addresses feedback proposal (0-1)

III. Structure and organization (4 out of 25 points)

Excellent: sections logically sequenced; outstanding use of “sign-posts” to indicate progression of ideas, ideas progress logically and coherently (4)


Good: sections logically sequenced; some use of “sign-posts;” most ideas progress logically and coherently (3)


Fair: some flaws in logical sequencing of sections; little use of “sign-posts;” some serious flaws in progression of ideas (2)

Poor: major flaws in sequencing of sections; little or no use of “sign-posts;” progression of ideas is illogical or incoherent (0-1)

IV. Mechanics and fluency (3 out of 35 points)

Excellent: very clear and consistent with no major grammatical errors; diction is formal, concise, and engaging (3)

Good: mostly clear and consistent with few grammatical errors; diction is generally formal, concise, and engaging (2)

Fair: only partially clear and consistent with some grammatical errors; diction is inappropriate or turgid (1)

Poor: largely unclear and inconsistent with many grammatical errors; diction is inappropriate or turgid; non-inclusive language is used (0)

V. Evidence (4 out of 25 points)

Excellent: all claims well supported with reliable, documented evidence; goes beyond minimum requirements for sources (4)

Good: most claims well supported with reliable, documented evidence; meets minimum requirements for sources (3)


Fair: some claims well supported with reliable, documented evidence; meets minimum requirements for sources (2)


Poor: evidence absent or does not support claims; unreliable sources; missing citations; falls short of minimum requirements (0-1)

VI. Analysis (4 out of 25 points)

Excellent: nearly all interpretations of evidence are logically sound, relevant, and referenced against other published analyses (4)

Good: most interpretations of evidence are logically sound, relevant, and referenced against other published analyses (3)

Fair: some interpretations of evidence are logically sound, relevant, and referenced against other published analyses (2)


Poor: interpretations of evidence are absent or irrelevant; not referenced against other published analyses (0-1)

VII. Citations and Bibliography (2 out of 25 points)

Excellent: citation style used consistently and correctly throughout, with all citations listed correctly and completely in bibliography (2)

Good: citation style mostly used consistently and correctly, with most citations listed correctly and completely in bibliography (1)

Fair/Poor: citation style used inconsistently and/or incorrectly, with citations missing or incorrect in bibliography (0)