Writing
papers for REL 1300
The goal of writing papers for REL 1300 is to assess whether you
have
acquired the basic skills that are necessary for religious studies.
The
skills that are needed for religious studies are transferable
skills:
that is, they will be useful to you in areas other than religious
studies, in fact, you will probably find that these skills are
useful
to you long after you have left university.
The aim of this work is for you to demonstrate that you can arrive
at
informed conclusions on questions concerning the development of some
of
the world's major religious traditions in their formative stages.
The
conclusions that you arrive at must be your conclusions. The whole
point of a university education is that you learn how to think for
yourself, not merely to repeat without understanding the conclusions
of
other people. Plagiarism will be strictly
punished. The conclusions you arrive at must also be informed: you
must
demonstrate that you have read, and understood, relevant
information.
The marks will be divided as follows:
Grammar: Mark out of 5. You
should check your spelling, grammar and punctuation. A spellchecker
on
a word processor will help, but it won't always tell you whether you
are using the right word (e.g. "weather" or "whether", "conscience"
or
"consciousness"), and won't always be able to tell whether you have
a
well-formed sentence or not. Be aware that you can only get credit
for
grammar if you have written a passage yourself: avoid excessive
quotations for this reason.
Composition: Mark out of 5.
Your
essay should be well-planned. You will lose credit in this section
if
you repeat yourself unnecessarily, stray off the subject, spend a
disproportionate amount of time on a relatively unimportant matter,
or
if the essay is just too short. For example, students often lose
credit
because they have a very long introduction in which they state that
this is a difficult topic, that lots of people have written about it
before, but nobody is really sure, and its hard to tell, etc. There
is
usually no need to say all of that: better to get to the interesting
points. You will gain credit if you demonstrate that you can see how
various topics are connected, and arrange the material in a way that
reflects these connections. Essays that get full marks for
composition
are often divided into separate sections with sub-titles, but note
that
just because you have separate sections with sub-titles does not in
any
way guarantee a good mark for composition! You should think about
what
sections are needed, what will go in each section, and what order to
present the sections in.
If you want to ensure a good mark for composition, make it very
clear
to me that you have spent time thinking about this: an introductory
paragraph in which you tell me that the question is difficult is
wasted. An introductory paragraph in which you explain the reasons
why
you have arranged the material in a particular way is almost
certainly
not wasted.
Use of sources: Mark
out
of 10. In REL 1300, we will spend most of our time studying things
that
happened long ago and far away. We know about these events because
there are sources that remain that tell us about them: books written
by
people who were there, archaeological evidence, or customs and
traditions that have persisted through time. We are able to make
sense
of this evidence because of work done by other scholars. Books
can be translated, and commentators can explain the historical
circumstances in which they were written. Archaeological sites can
be
surveyed, and the artefacts studied. Customs can be observed, and
those
who participate can be interviewed, and so on.
But sources must be used critically: not everything that is written
in
ancient documents is correct, and scholars who write text-books and
encyclopaedia articles have made judgements about what is important,
what is true, and what is the significance of the ancient documents.
Such judgements might be good judgements, but they might be bad
judgements, and it is your task to decide which. So, how do you go
about sorting through sources?
First, it is extremely important that you understand the difference
between primary sources and secondary sources. When you are
investigating some historical event, the primary sources are the
sources that get us directly in touch with that event, for example,
reports written by eye-witnesses, skeletons on a battlefield, and so
on. Secondary sources are written by other people who have examined
the
primary source material, and are offering their opinions or
judgements.
You should always try to make use of both primary and secondary
sources, if possible.
Suppose that you heard two people talk about a baseball match. One
thought that the winning team deserved to win, the other thought
that
they played badly, and were lucky to win. They ask you for your
opinion. If you didn't watch the match, you're not able to form an
opinion of your own, you just have to decide which other person to
believe, without looking at the evidence. Your opinion will not be
an
informed opinion.
In this case, the obvious way to acquire an informed opinion would
be
to watch a video of the match. In the same way, when you are looking
at
the history of a religion, you should try to examine the
primary
sources that put us directly in touch with the development of the
religion, such as the sacred scriptures. Of course, you are not
expected to read the whole of the scriptures of any religion that we
study, this is a survey course. But you should try to read at least
some - this is one reason why the text-book includes a set of
readings
for each religion, and why I supply photocopies of selected sources
for
you to read.
Returning to the baseball match, I have to admit that, if I were
watching a baseball match, I would have difficulty distinguishing
what
was pure luck and what was the result of skill. I barely understand
the
rules of baseball. It would help me if there were someone who does
understand the game well to explain it to me. This is one reason why
sports channels employ commentators, to explain the finer points of
the
game to spectators. In the same way, when you are reading the
primary
texts of a religion, you probably won't be able to understand
everything. You need advice from people who know the religion and
its
history well, this is why we turn to secondary sources, such as the
text-book, encyclopaedias etc. These are not substitutes for reading
the primary sources, but they are a necessary supplement.
Frequently,
they will be able to refer you to passages in the primary sources
that
are worth studying, and to explain why some primary sources are c
considered more trustworthy than others.
Of course, sports commentators often disagree with each other, and
that
is one reason why its useful to have two commentators. If they
agree,
they are probably right, but not necessarily, but if even the
experts
disagree, that is a sign that there is something interesting and
difficult to understand, which might be worth investigating further.
For this reason, it is worthwhile checking out a few secondary
sources,
notice where they agree, and where they disagree.
If they disagree, you should ask yourself why. Returning to the
analogy
with a baseball match, perhaps one of the commentators is a big fan
of
the New York Yankees, and, whenever his team does well, he thinks it
is
because of the skill of the players, but whenever they do badly, it
is
because of bad luck. Once you realize this, you know not to take too
much notice if this commentator blames the Yankees' defeat on bad
luck.
In the same way, you should ask yourself whether your sources show
any
bias, whether there is any point that they are trying to prove, and
whether perhaps they manipulate the evidence to support their
conclusions.
The whole process of sorting through sources is a long and sometimes
difficult one. In order to get full credit for your hard work, make
sure that it is apparent to me when I grade the paper. Don't just
repeat what is written in a source: summarize it, then explain
whether
you agree or disagree and why: are you taking on board information
from
a recognised expert in the field, such as a university professor, or
is
it just from the first web-site that you found on google? If the
answer
is the former, then why not mention who the person is, and what
their
qualifications are, to demonstrate that you've taken some trouble.
Even
if your source is a university professor, that does not mean that
everything they say is correct: remember that we professors hope to
make a reputation for ourselves by making exciting discoveries. We
will
frequently make claims that cannot really be supported by the
evidence
because they fit some theory we want to prove - so, when you are
assessing the value of a secondary source, ask yourself whether the
writer of that secondary source demonstrates that their ideas really
are supported by the primary sources. Just as I will grade you for
your
use of sources, you should grade your secondary sources for their
use
of primary source material.
"One of the worst things of all about subservience to secondary
literature is that it means absorbing wholesale the mistakes of
others,
when it is bad enough having unavoidably to make one's own." (Bryan
Magee, Confessions of a Philosopher, p.242)
Always give a source for your information, at the very point in the
essay where the information is included. It is not sufficient to
include a bibliography at the end: from a bibliography, I cannot
tell
which source you were using at any particular point in the paper.
Even
if the information seems obvious, you should give the source in a
footnote, or in parentheses. For example, it used to be widely
accepted
that the Buddha's dates were 566-486 B.C.E., but now many scholars
think his dates were 448-368. You might find that an older edition
of
an encyclopaedia gives only the first set of dates, and if you read
just that as a source, you would probably think that it is common
knowledge that the Buddha's dates were 566-486, and put that in your
paper. So, even for a case like that, include a footnote giving the
source, which should include a date of publication. If all of your
secondary sources are quite old, it may well be that you have missed
out on a lot of recent discoveries!
As you progress in your studies, you will learn when it is safe to
give
information without a source, but it is much better to give
unnecessary
references at this stage, and develop good scholarly habits than not
to
give references when you should and receive an F for plagiarism. It
is
much better that, when you study a higher level course, you are told
"That's common knowledge, no need to give a reference" than to be
told
at this stage "You didn't give references, you get an F."
Understanding: Mark out of
10.
To understand the development of a religion, it is not sufficient to
know what happened. You should also be able to explain why things
happened, and to appreciate whether what happened was good or bad.
To understand why a religion developed in one way, you should
consider
the possible motives of the followers of the religion. What role did
social forces, economic, political and military play in the
development
of the religion? In what way did religious factors influence the
intellectual, legal and artistic history of a community?
Secondary sources often contain helpful suggestions on these
matters,
and you should consider whether you accept what they say. In order
to
arrive at judgments like this, it is helpful to have some general
ideas
about the relationship between, for example, religion and politics.
Of
course, it is only possible to arrive a theory about the
relationship
between religion and politics after you have studied several
different
societies. As you progress through the course, your ability to make
such judgements should improve, because you will have more knowledge
to
draw on. Your understanding of these issues will be enhanced if you
can
compare and contrast different religions, asking what are the
reasons
for the differences between them.
Skill in the use of sources and the ability to explain social
developments are both transferable skills: they will be useful to
you
long after you graduate. But there is a particular benefit from
learning how to apply these skills to religious questions. Religions
are an important part of the reality of 21st Century life, and, in
order to make important decisions concerning to society, it is
necessary to consider how to deal with certain religious issues. It
should be clear after September 11th that religion can be a major
source of good and evil in contemporary society. If that is so, we
need
to be able to evaluate religious movements, to see what is good and
what is bad about them.
I should make it clear, that I am not trying to impose my own values
and value judgements on you. However, I know from experience that
many
students will include such judgements in their essays anyway, and I
think it important that this be done well. Value judgements should
be
based on accurate information, and a proper understanding. They
should
be based on an ability to appreciate different points of view, even
though there will be some points of view that you reject as being
mistaken.
To explain this further, let me give an example of bad understanding
and good understanding:
Poor understanding:
Members of
Al
Qaida who launched an attack on the World Trade Center
obviously did not understand that religion and politics are
separate.
Religion is personal, and you shouldn't attack someone just
because
they disagree with your religion. Unfortunately, lots of Muslims
make
this mistake, perhaps because Muhammad was a political leader as
well
as being a prophet.
Better understanding:
It is an
interesting question why religion became separated from
politics in the Christian West, but not in the Muslim world. Both
Jesus
and Muhammad had a vision of a just society. Muhammad succeeded in
gaining control of his society, and he and his followers set about
putting his vision of a just society into action. Jesus never
gained
control of his society, either because he did not want to, or
because
he did not succeed. In the formative years of
Christianity, Christians were a distrusted minority seeking to be
tolerated. They emphasised that they had no desire to overthrow
the
state, whose function was to maintain social order, and so it was
that
it became possible to see the Christian religion as something
separate
from politics. Of course, not all Christians have desired such a
separation, and the Christian Churches have played an important
role in
political history, but it was at least possible to articulate a
theory
that separated religion from politics and, after the reformation,
this
theory gained wide acceptance, particularly in the United States.
One
response to militant Islam would be to propose that Muslims
should separate religion
from politics in the same way that many Christians do, but then
why
should Muslims accept this Christian understanding of the proper
role
of a religion? A better strategy might be to discourage the
excesses of
militant Islam by appealing to the values of the Quran, using it
as a
political document (which, in part, it surely is), and quoting it
against the likes of Osama bin Laden. This approach may be more
difficult, but has a better chance of winning the hearts and minds
of
Muslims.
You should be aiming to write things more like the second paragraph
than the first. Incidentally, you have entirely missed the point of
this whole handout if you think that the way to get an A is to state
in
your paper that you agree with what is in the second paragraph: this
paragraph is just another secondary source, which you should be able
to
evaluate, accept, reject or perhaps accept in part and reject in
part.
Total mark: The total mark
for
any one paper is out of 30. Your best two papers will, together,
count
for 60% of the final grade. The only exception is if you are guilty
of
plagiarism: in that case, your paper will receive 0/30, and this
mark
will count towards the final grade. For a second offense you will
fail
the course automatically. For more information see my notes on plagiarism.
One third of the marks for each paper are awarded for your generic
essay writings skills, grammar and composition. If you lack these
skills, you should take Freshman Composition. Two thirds of the
marks
are awarded for more subject-specific skills, use of sources and
understanding. Before you write a paper, think about how you can
demonstrate that you have these skills in what you write: if there
is
no indication that you have thought at all about your use of
sources,
or no attempt to show a deeper understanding, then I will not give
you
any credit at all, and you will fail.
If you do follow these instructions, you are still not guaranteed an
A,
or even a B: it takes practice to acquire these skills, and on the
way,
you will make mistakes. When you get your paper back, look at the
breakdown of the mark. Check that I have added the scores correctly,
and if you think you deserve a higher score, come to see me and talk
about it. If I think that I have made an error, I will modify your
score (perhaps yours was the last paper I graded at the end of a
long
hard day when I was feeling tired and miserable). Even if I don't
modify your score (and it is not very often that I do so), I will
explain in more detail what is wrong with your work, so that you can
improve next time. These skills are worth having, but they are
difficult to acquire. The only way you will acquire them is if you
learn from your mistakes, and if you have an incentive to improve -
the
prospect of getting a B or, if you are an extremely intelligent
student
and you work very hard, an A.
Is there an element of subjectivity in my grading? Of course. For
example, you lose marks for composition if you spend a
disproportionate
amount of time writing about what is less important, but I have to
decide what counts as unimportant, and what is disproportionate. You
lose marks if you place too much uncritical trust in unreliable
sources, but I have to decide whether you are too trusting, and
whether
the source is well-chosen or not. There is, unfortunately, no way to
teach you these skills without having someone like me make this kind
of
judgement. It would be an improvement if several professors could
form
a committee to grade papers, but that is not possible on this
campus.
Even with a committee, it would still be a matter of subjective
judgement by several professors rather than by just one. By
using
referring to this handout, and to the comments that you receive on
your
papers, it should be possible for you to figure out the kind of
thinking that is required to get a good grade, and if you don't do
so
well on your first papers, remember that you are here to learn. I
honestly think that I learned more from those occasions when I
received
a lower grade than I expected for a piece of work: and very often
when
I was a student, the work that I thought was my best was, in fact,
my
worst, because I had completely overlooked some important point.
As with most other subjects, if you work hard, you might find that
you
start to enjoy it, and to improve your grade.
Back to REL 1300