HSV2001 Disability: Theory & Philosophy

Assessment 1

Aim:

1.    to demonstrate that you understand the content and key arguments of the article and;

2.    to employ your own critical analysis of the author’s argument.

Approach:

1.    You should devote similar (equal) attention to the above aims.

2.    Section 1 - Commence by outlining the thrust of the paper’s argument, e.g. what’s the main idea(s) being developed. It is a skill to be able to briefly and succinctly and say what the key points are in a ‘nut shell’.

3.    Section 2 - Your response: Is the author convincing? (Why, or why not?) Is her argument sound and logical or are there inconsistencies?  Are there any omissions or areas you believe are underdeveloped?

4.    You are required to fully reference each article/book. I’m not fussy about which bibliographic style you adopt as long as it is consistent.

5.    Given the overall word limit (2000 words) each review should be about 200 words each. This exercise challenges you to be sharp in your brevity.

Other points:

1.    It is a good habit to always consider the date of the article – is the time period important for the development of certain views? Remember sometimes it may take one to two years for an article to be published after it has been written. Other useful points to consider include the author’s disciplinary background e.g. sociologist or lawyer, their speaking status, e.g. disabled person or doctor and their regional location, e.g. U.K., U.S. and Australian pieces often differ in their politics, concerns and methodological influences.

2.    Annotated Bibliographies often help when it comes to write comparative essays.

Any questions or problems email Fiona Campbell at denfion@ozemail.com.au