since 11/23/2003
I feel like there is a lot of stress out there among grad students about writing seminar papers, especially when we’re told that our goal should be to make an original contribution to the field. That idea can be quite intimidating when we’re just starting out. It feels like you’ve asked us to jump off the deep end of the pool and we don’t know how to swim.
I think part of the problem is that we’re still working out how to structure seminar papers.** Each paper we write is another step closer to a successful, effective, and affective paper; however, we’re still flailing our arms (and other miscellaneous body parts) around because we’re uncertain of exactly how to go about it. I realize, of course, that there is no one right answer. However, below is my suggestion at sticking your toes in the water.
**Addition: I have to add that I think Donna has done a whole lot this semester to try and help us see this fact and demistify the process.
I welcome your comments and/or suggestions. Also, if there are any sources you’d like to recommend, please comment away.
Section #1 — Introduction
Provide a little bit (or a lot) of motivation for the reader to read your entire paper. Failing that, your reader should know what the paper is going to be about by reading your introduction.
Paragraph #1 — Get some attention.
1. Provide a context by citing a recent text in the field — the point that is cited may or may not be the main point of the text — it is what jumped out at you.
2. Set-up broader context of what you’re going to do
Paragraph #2-?? — Define issue and the gap.
1. Define issue and any key terms
2. Limit scope as necessary
3. Establish significance of issue
4. State problem by defining the gap
5. Explain how present research attempts to fill the gap
6. Outline contributions (readers will see lit review for more detail.)
7. End with thesis and preview organization of the rest of the paper
Section #2 — Literature Review
Give some credit where credit is due.
1. Indicate the current state of the issue/problem/topic
2. Define or qualify terms
3. Engage sources in conversation with each other (don’t just copy in annotated bib)
Section #3 — Argument/Discussion
As stated in the Allyn & Bacon Guide to Writing: wallow in those complexities!!
1. Examine issue
2. Argue how issue can be mitigated, mediated, or mashed
3. Provide evidence and support
4. Make some lively commentary along the way
Section #4 — Conclusion
We’re almost done. Don’t quit now.
1. Summarize research question
2. Qualify argument/discussion if you need to
3. Explain where we go now
4. End well
Section #5 — Works Cited
1. Double check — Is everything listed on the works cited?
Tips: it’s ok to use sub-headings to keep yourself organized.
About m2h blogsMarcia Hansen works by day as a marketing manager in social media. At other times you'll find her traveling about speaking, writing, and learning. And, if she's lucky, it's on her Honda Shadow 1100.
Please note -- the postings on this site are my own and don’t necessarily represent my employer's positions, strategies, or opinions. If you want to know more about me, you can visit my About Marcia Hansen page above, or my home page at MarciaHansen.com.
Deb
December 6th, 2005 at 10:50 am
Handy and dandy!
marcia
December 6th, 2005 at 5:47 pm
I have hope that some day this seminar paper writing stuff will all seem really easy and it will just be the actual writing that takes the time. Whereas now, I feel like I psyche myself out a lot of the time. I have got to quit doing that.
Donna also mentioned in class on Monday night that many of our papers may not need a lit review section because there might not be much, if anything, published on our topics.
I do take some comfort that many of the other people that I talk to about this seems to struggle with it too.
Ancarett’s Abode » Blog Archive » Teaching Carnival V
January 15th, 2006 at 12:51 pm
[...] Discipline-Focused Discussions: When it comes to teaching literature, there are many excellent posts, beginning with Bardiac’s discussion on writing basics. There’s a great post at m2h on the structure of seminar papers. John, at Machina Memorialis, discusses a major overhaul he’s making to his science fiction course while Science and Politics tries to nail down the essential science fiction reading list. Dr. Virago details the ups and downs of teaching medieval drama from the Norton anthology and goes on to recount her tempestuous relationship with literature surveys and anthologies. Meanwhile, Bardiac takes the topic to the graduate level when she chronicles the humbling work of assessing graduate student portfolios. [...]
helen
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:35 am
thanks very much , from one ‘old’ student who wanted a bit of a guide of how to start, cheers
cathy
March 29th, 2006 at 4:38 am
Thanks for such a dtailed description of what to do. Ihave been a loggerheads prepping for a seminar paper and presentation. Please send word on whether this detail source is also in line with English literature papers as well? I am aware that when it comes to thesis proposals for instance we do things slightly different and much more uncomplicated.
Cathy
marcia
March 29th, 2006 at 9:31 am
Cathy, I’m glad you found it helpful. I don’t know if this would work for your lit papers as well, as my lit profs have asked me to position my argument historically or do a close reading which didn’t need any outside sources. Your best bet would be to ask your prof what he or she expects, or to talk about your own interests and ask them for suggestions on how you could approach the assignment. One prof even let me take a pedagogical approach to a text, which surprised me.
jax
January 2nd, 2007 at 2:01 am
Hi
thank you very much for helping an “older” student with a looming deadline.
Your succinct outline of a seminar paper was just what i needed.
once again
thanx
Jax
Nelson
February 5th, 2008 at 5:39 am
what is the meaning of the introduction?