[home]

Capstone Project: Critical Positioning Paper

The Basics

• Brief Description: Write a paper that articulates your scholarly position within your research focus, analyzing key scholarly debates and trends while defining your contribution to the field.
• Research: Include at least 6 peer-reviewed scholarly sources—primarily articles, but books and book chapters are also acceptable.
• Format: Follow MLA Style for document formatting, citations, and the Works Cited page.
• Length: 1,200 to 1,500 words, not including the Works Cited page.

The Details

Building upon your Annotated Bibliography, this paper enables you to position yourself within the academic conversation surrounding your topic. This Critical Positioning paper will act as an expanded introduction to the arguments and trends you've discovered.

Address the Following Points:

1. Summary of Existing Scholarship: Discuss what has been said about your topic by various scholars.
2. Key Debates and Scholarly Responses: Explain how scholars have responded to each other’s work. What are the key debates?
3. Current Trends and Hot Topics: Identify important trends and current issues scholars are focusing on.
4. Your Scholarly Opinion: Provide your perspective on these trends and issues.
5. Gaps in Scholarship: Indicate what has been overlooked and how you plan to contribute.
6. Your Position and Tentative Thesis: Clearly articulate the position you plan to take in your research and outline a tentative thesis for your capstone paper.

Instructions

1. Identify and Review Sources: Choose at least 6 scholarly sources that you find most relevant for positioning your research. These could be sources that you have used in your Bibliography or Annotated Bibliography, or they could be all new sources.
2. Structure Your Paper: Follow the sequence suggested in the "Address the Following Points" section.
3. MLA Formatting: Ensure your paper and citations conform to MLA guidelines.

The Rubric

• 40% Depth and Insight in Argumentation
  • Insufficient (0-15%): Fails to articulate a scholarly position, lacking engagement with key debates and evidence of critical thinking.
  • Adequate (16-25%): Outlines a position with basic analysis and some integration of key debates, but arguments are not compelling.
  • Good (26-35%): Clearly articulates a position, integrating key debates and demonstrating broader understanding, but could argue more thoroughly.
  • Outstanding (36-40%): Insightfully articulates a position, thoroughly critiquing key debates and existing scholarship with compelling reasoning.
• 30% Relevance and Appropriateness of Sources
  • Insufficient (0-11%): Includes fewer than 6 sources, many of which are not peer-reviewed or relevant.
  • Adequate (12-20%): Includes the minimum number of sources but lacks in quality or relevance to the topic.
  • Good (21-27%): Includes relevant, high-quality sources but may miss some key contributions in the field.
  • Outstanding (28-30%): Sources are highly relevant, peer-reviewed, and provide a comprehensive foundation for the argument.
• 20% Accuracy and Consistency in MLA Formatting
  • Insufficient (0-7%): Numerous errors in MLA formatting, affecting readability and credibility.
  • Adequate (8-13%): Some inconsistencies in formatting but overall comprehensible.
  • Good (14-17%): Minor errors in MLA formatting that do not significantly detract from the paper's quality.
  • Outstanding (18-20%): Impeccable MLA formatting throughout the paper.
• 10% Organization and Presentation
  • Insufficient (0-3%): Poor organization and unclear presentation make the paper difficult to follow.
  • Adequate (4-6%): Some issues in organization or presentation but generally understandable.
  • Good (7-9%): Well-organized with minor flaws that do not impede comprehension.
  • Outstanding (10%): Excellent organization and presentation; the paper is easy to navigate and engages the reader effectively.