Introduction to essay writing

1
Introduction to essay writing

• Dr Claudine Provencher

2
Why essays?

• Link between how we write and how we think
• Different codes for different professions
  developing your identity as an expert in your
  discipline
• Specific way of writing/thinking in social
  sciences
• An attempt to answer

3
Why only an attempt to answer?

• essay from latin exagium (to examine, to
  weigh, to judge)
• This is because accounting for human behaviour is
  hard
• The correct answer at the LSE is always Its
  complex, it depends on

4
Why are you wearing the socks you are wearing
today?

• Different explanations are possible and equally
  valid
• Physical necessity / comfort
• Culture / gender representations / identity
• Social psychological theories
• None of the research methods available will
  produce absolute knowledge
• Interviews honesty?
• Questionnaires sample bias, social desirability

5
Writing in the social sciences

• Given the complexity and limits of knowing
• Writing is making an argument on the basis of the
  evidence available
• These arguments reflect multiple causal
  influences there is almost never one sole cause
• Writing is qualified seems / appears /
  suggests
• Writing integrates theory and empirical evidence

6
Writing at LSE

• A game called essay
• Show you can think answer the question, show
  judgement (critical from kritos judge)
• Show you have read integration of literature
• Show real world knowledge illustration

7
What is criticality?

• Academic study involves reading particular
  sources and writing in a particular way, which
  requires thinking in a particular way
• Mainly done through questioning your readings and
  the material covered in your lectures
• Typical questions will include
• Expertise question How credible is expert E?
• Field question Is E an expert in the field A is
  in?
• Opinion question What did expert E assert that
  implies A?
• Trustworthiness question Is E personally
  reliable as a source?
• Consistency question Is A consistent with what
  other experts assert?
• Backup evidence question Is As assertion based
  on evidence?

8
How to approach this form of writing/thinking

• Analyse the question
• Plan a reasoned argument
• Read, review the plan, write
• Review the strength of your argument

9
Analyse the question

• Answering a question first requires you to
  analyse the question
• Non-monetary measures of poverty are better than
  monetary measures. Do you agree?
• The correct essay answer at the LSE is it
  depends / its complex. Any statement that is
  absolute, as this is, should be questioned
• What questions could you ask from this question?

10
Analyse the question

• Non-monetary measures of poverty are better than
  monetary measures. Do you agree?
• What are monetary and non-monetary measures?
• How and why are they used?
• How will I define poverty?
• How will I define better?
• For measuring poverty
• For guiding policy making
• One possible answer Since poverty is
  multi-dimensional, a multi-dimensional approach
  to its measurement seems appropriate. Monetary
  and non-monetary measures are thus complementary.

11
How to approach this form of writing/thinking

• Analyse the question
• Plan a reasoned argument
• Read, review the plan, write
• Review the strength of your argument

12
Plan a reasoned argument

• Win the game called essay through
• Thesis state the main idea / your opinion
• Justification explain your reasons / convince
  the reader as informed by literature
• Support back your reasons up with evidence

13
Thesis

• Provides the spine of your essay
• Introduction your answer and argument
• First sentences the idea each paragraph will
  argue
• The rest of each paragraph argues for the idea in
  the first sentence (justification support)
• Conclusion your argument and answer ( so
  what?)

14
Thesis - Introduction

• Establish the context why is the question
  important?
• Clarify / reframe the question if needed but
  beware!
• Set the limits of your essay
• Answer the question your thesis
• Give the reasons for your answer these reasons
  will be the paragraphs, so follow the same order
  (signposting)

15
Thesis Development

• In this model, the first line sentence of each
  paragraph gives the topic and the main idea of
  the paragraph. Good practice is to
• Ensure all topic sentences directly address the
  question / forward your argument
• That the topic sentence is you not Habermas
  argues that
• Keep topic sentences clear ( probably short)

16
Thesis - Conclusion

• Summarise the argument
• Restate your answer (sense of therefore)
• So what?

17
Justification

• The justification of your thesis is the place
  where you demonstrate your reading and grasp of
  the discipline
• Therefore
• include a range of references
• concentrate on the detail of the differences
  between positions / schools of thought

18
Planning a reasoned argument

• Non-monetary measures of poverty are better
• than monetary measures. Do you agree?
• Poverty is complex income / human development
  approaches
• Non-monetary measures may capture less tangible
  aspects (participation, social capital, etc.),
  but income is an essential element of human
  development and autonomy approaches to poverty
• Monetary measures capture income and consumption
  aspects of poverty, but the struggle to
  contextualise these, e.g. within households / may
  create arbitrary divisions between the poor
• Case HPI combines income and development
  indicators to provide a more holistic measure,
  but limitations remain (reporting)

19
Introduction
?

• The complexity involved in measuring poverty is
  derived from the inherent complexity of the
  concept itself. Definitions current in academia
  and government point to both monetary and more
  social aspects of poverty, with the latter
  typically captured by non-monetary measures, such
  as literacy rates and life expectancy figures.
  Given the interaction between income and
  individual capacity, measuring poverty would seem
  to require mixed methods approaches that allow
  for a more holistic understanding of the
  phenomenon. Relying on a purely non-monetary
  measure will offer just as partial a set of
  results as just relying on purely monetary
  measures. While not perfect, the UNDPs Human
  Poverty Index represents such a multi-dimensional
  measure.

20
Topic sentences
?

1. Poverty is inherently complex. This has
   inescapable consequences for its measurement.
2. While non-monetary measures may capture important
   aspects of human capability, an understanding of
   poverty that does not also measure income is
   necessarily partial.
3. Monetary measures address these shortcomings,
   however they themselves suffer from the inability
   to contextualise the consumption they measure.
4. A more satisfactory approach appears to be to
   combine monetary and non-monetary measures, as
   the UNDP does with the Human Poverty Index.

21
Conclusion
?

• The case for a multi-dimensional approach to the
  measurement of poverty appears clear. Central to
  this is the simple fit between a
  multi-dimensional social phenomenon and the
  measures used to investigate its incidence,
  causes and solutions. The implementation of such
  an approach to measuring poverty remains though
  far from simple. Taking the case of the HPI,
  significant choices are required in the setting
  and use of each indicator. Literacy may, at first
  sight, appear a straightforward ability to
  measure. However, the interaction between
  contextual language use and overall competence is
  uneven and which level to set as the benchmark is
  problematic. At very least, such a choice
  requires considerable judgement and this will
  depend greatly on the approach to poverty taken
  and political considerations affecting
  alleviation efforts. This, though, brings us back
  to the basic problem of the inherently complex
  nature of poverty itself.

22
How to approach this form of writing/thinking

• Analyse the question
• Plan a reasoned argument
• Read, review the plan, write
• Review the strength of your argument

23
Reviewing the strength of an argument

• Aristotelian rhetoric reasoning involves three
  proofs (pisteis)
• Ethos credibility of message and sender
• Pathos empathy, appeal to readers interests
• Logos internal logic, flow of argument

24
Good academic writing

• Ethos (credibility)
• Form of argument balanced and informed
• Writers voice / perspective indirect, detailed
  and specific
• Recourse to appropriate sources / detailed
  examples and cases
• Disciplinary / formal language

25
Good academic writing

• Pathos (effect on your reader)
• Originality of thought, comparison or expression
• Reference to key questions / debates / questions
  showing wider understanding
• Clarity and completeness of argument
• New information / analysis relevant to the
  readers interests

26
Good academic writing

• Logos (logic and flow)
• Answer the question
• Structure and form of the argument
• Clarity of basic plan specificity of support
  for the points made
• Flow of argument (narrative links)

27
Conclusion

• The correct answer is its complex, it depends
  on
• Know why you are writing demonstrate judgement
• Analyse the question and answer it
• Plan your reasoning and evidence to support this
  answer
• Read to develop your plan, dont read to make a
  plan
• Review your argument is it convincing?

28
Plagiarism

• LSE statement
• Work submitted by a candidate for assessment
  must be his/her own alone. The passing off of the
  work of others as the work of the candidate is
  plagiarism. It refers to any work by others,
  whether published or not, and can include the
  work of other candidates. Any quotation from the
  published or unpublished works of other persons
  including other candidates must be duly
  acknowledged.

29
Plagiarism includes

• Quoting without quotation marks or references
• Paraphrasing without referencing
• Summarising without referencing
• Taking an image, source, diagram without
  referencing
• Collaborating on what should be individual work
• Taking another students ideas and passing them
  off as your own
• Re-cycling your own work which has been submitted
  for assessment elsewhere

30
LSE penalties for plagiarism

• Record placed on file (esp. for coursework)
• Mark of zero on particular piece of work
• Mark of zero on complete paper (awarded in 50 of
  cases)
• Mark of zero for ALL papers that year
• Denying right of candidate to re-register.
• JISC plagiarism advice and detection service
• LSE uses TURNITIN.COM similarity index and
  checks work against
• A database of previously submitted material (i.e.
  other students essays and assignments)
• Over 1.8 billion web-sites
• Essays from cheat sites
• Selected subscription services

31
Disciplinary context is key!

• Department of Social Psychology
• Distinction (70 100)
• Work of exceptional quality, demonstrating a high
  level of conceptual ability and a thorough and
  consistent approach typically, excellent
  critical judgement, presentation and content.
  It is distinguished by a pattern of
• A thorough understanding of the topic and its
  implications
• A clearly expressed and convincing argument which
  is used to develop a coherent and logical
  framework within which to answer the question or
  address the topic, and which is well grounded in
  existing theory and research
• Excellent and appropriate grammar, punctuation,
  spelling and sentence construction.
• Clear, and often imaginative, structure
• Evidence of independent research or reading,
  going beyond lecture and seminar handouts.
• The absence of irrelevant or extraneous material
• An insightful argument showing signs of
  originality
• (Where relevant) Skilled use of referencing
  and/or appropriate stylistic conventions (e.g.,
  APA)
• (Where relevant) Mastery of analytic techniques
  or research methods.

32
Department of International History

• 7079 Work which shows both broad and deep
  knowledge of the historical evidence as well as
  conceptual command of the subject matter, and the
  ability - based on a close engagement with the
  question and informed analysis of the historical
  period and issues raised - to go beyond
  paraphrasing the work of other scholars and
  demonstrate some independent critical discussion
  and insight.