WRITING ASSIGNMENT #4 W131 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Hannah-Hansen
Comparative Analysis: Comparative analysis is an analysis of "something out there" through the theoretical approaches provided by 3 source texts that analyze similar objects. You will only need to do side by sides on three articles. The paper focuses on the object of analysis, not on the sources; it engages the reader in a deeper sense of discovery about the object of analysis. The paper establishes how these sources view their "object," what arguments or positions are advanced, and in what ways the sources relate to each other. The paper then goes on to an analysis of a different object in the same class of objects testing the approaches taken by the source articles. It may, but need not, advance and apply its own theoretical approach or modify one of the approaches analyzed.
Assignment: In this 4-5 page paper you will analyze College Mall. Your approach can be one of the following:
Form your own conclusions about College Mall and its function. Compare its function to another institution such as a school or church.
Compare College Mall to one other shopping center (non-mall) such as Eastland Plaza.
Compare the function of College Mall with Bloomington’s downtown.
Compare College Mall with the Indianapolis airport.
Compare College Mall with the Bloomington Farmers’ Market
In the introduction to the WRAC unit "What’s Happening at the Mall?" the editors quote James J. Farrell, author of One Nation Under Goods: Malls and Seduction of American Shopping:
Shopping centers are constructed of steel and concrete, bricks and mortar, but they are also made of culture. Indeed, culture is about the only thing they can e made of…they’re a place where we answer important questions: What does it mean to be human" What are people for? What is he meaning of things? Why do we work? What do we work for? And what in fact, are we shopping for? Like college and churches, malls provide answer to these critical questions.
You may find Farrell’s point plausible, interesting, or maybe simply disconcerting. Having read several articles from the mall segment in WRAC, you undoubtedly have your own convictions. Note, then, consider the approaches those authors took in their analysis of the mall: Lewis, Kowinski, Paquet, Francaviglia, Gruen and Smith, Guterson, Zepp, and Cohen. Utilize their approaches while forming your own theoretical lens while. You will be generating a basis for analysis, a lens, based on the ideas of at least two of these authors. Keep in mind the basis for their perspective; for instance, Gruen was a developer and Zepp a Religious Studies professor.
Your paper should be thesis-driven; your theoretical lens should you draw heavily from the sources above. You may also find that you want to add your own thoughts to your lens. You may do so, but we need to have a discussion about your thoughts first. Your paper becomes a comparative analysis as you compare the different views in your theoretical lens and apply those
Length: 4-5 pages plus a separate works cited page
Strategies for writing a comparative analysis:
Review your two-sideds. Be sure that you understand the main points of each article and can identify the theoretical approach each takes. You might find the following questions useful:
What are the specific points each author makes in analyzing the mall or the function of malls?
How does each writer apply her/his theory to mall
What assumption does each author hold both about his/her theory concerning malls?
What are some interesting questions to ask about what each author has written?
Begin to compare the articles by charting how the theoretical approach one author takes compares to the one taken by the other author. Note significant differences between the two approaches. In other words, how does a mall developer look at malls compared to a journalist?
Formulate your theoretical lens.
Spend some time in the mall and really become the researcher. What do you see? How do you feel? Fill out the worksheets.
Go downtown. Walk around. How do your feelings differ? Or are they the same? What about the "strip malls?" How do they function? Walk the length of one. How do you feel?
Write the first draft of the comparative analysis paper.
Do not look at the draft for at least one day.
Remember; work on your introduction and conclusion after you have written the first draft.
Criteria for evaluation
The analysis aims to help a reader toward a deeper discovery about something formerly unknown about the mall. The paper establishes how other sources view malls, what arguments or positions each writer advances, and in what ways the theories of each writer relate to each other. The analysis assesses and draws conclusions about the validity or importance or quality of those theoretical approaches. (50 pts.)
An introduction that defines the topic, indicates your method of approach, provides necessary background or context, and offers a working thesis (hypothesis) for the paper. The introduction includes the authors and titles of the articles from which you are drawing your lenses. (20 pts)
A conclusion that culminates and does not simply summarize the paper nor restate the thesis. The conclusion reflects a revisiting of the broader context and significance of the analysis. It should acknowledge the limitations of your analysis. (20 pts)
Thesis statement that reflects an analytical rather than an argumentative approach provides work for the paper to do and sets out an idea or question worth pursuing. (15 points)
Sources are well integrated into your paper, not dumped. They are included as part of the conversation established in the analysis. Sources are analyzed (developed, modified, or applied), not simply used to prove a point and are not used out of context. You have documented not only the authors you have used to develop your lens, but also the versions you have looked at for your target. (15 points)
Organizational features: transitions between parts of the paper provide smooth and logical connections between sections; paragraphs are coherent with sentences logically linked; the parts of the paper develop along a logical line that can be followed fairly easily. (15 points)
Formal features follow standard conventions and are not distracting (paper format, citation style, grammar, spelling, language, punctuation, etc.). (15 points)