Last week was bitter-sweet: bitter in that I realized there my paper is terrible, sweet in that I have hopefully fixed most of the holes. My paper was destroyed and completely wrecked, like this car:
As I had expected, most of the biggest concerns were with my results and discussion. My results section was too wordy, repetitive, and confusing. I had tried to explain every single nuance that I found with my thematic analysis. However, after talking with Mrs. Haag and reading my feedback, I found that it was not necessary that I talk about every single nuance of every single theme. Now, I have condensed my results section to less than half the length of the original. Now that my results section is much more concise, hopefully my results will be easier to understand, and hopefully they don’t look like this:
My discussion section also faced a lot of backlash last week. A lot of the feedback focused on a paragraph where I made unsubstantiated claims and conclusions about the complexity of anime. I moved that paragraph and integrated it into the future research section of my discussion, because I realized that part was out of the scope of this paper. Instead, I replaced that part of my discussion with connections back to the literature review. I connected (or at least I tried to) my results to the studies of previous researchers and to the significance of the overall academic research. I’m just hoping that they are not in as bad of a shape as this:
I think that I have a pretty good handle on the first 3-4 rows of the rubric. These parts of my rubric pertain more to the literature review and the methods, which have been looked over and revised several times, and I am confident that these parts are a lot more solid and well written. It is the last few rows of the rubric that I need to work on. I included only one picture in my paper, and row 7 requires that there be multiple diagrams to enhance credibility of the author. So I will probably add at least one more diagram—a thematic flow chart—to my paper. Row 5 and 6 deal with my methods and discussion, and I am afraid that since I have only had them read once, that they are still quite raw. I am mostly not sure about how I have showed the significance in my discussion section. The purpose of my question was to find WHAT the thematic changes between American and Japanese anime are, and this question was easily answered in the results section because all it required was a list of the thematic changes. However, in my discussion section, I try to explore the significance of the themes I find and their importance to the academic field as well as other significance. This is the part where I still need to work on.
Regarding the presentation, I don’t feel to bad about the content and slides of it, I am confident that I will have a decent script and slideshow. What I am more nervous about is the actual presentation, but again, we will have plenty of time to practice it, so I should not fear. There is nothing about the presentation that I am really unclear about, I really just want to get that daunting presentation over with. We are so close to finishing, I can’t wait!
Word Count: 573
Gursajan,
ReplyDeleteGreat job on the paper!! I am really impressed with the thought you put into the paper and how well it flows. It is great that you used the sources to help guide you through the paper without being overridden by their voices. My biggest comment is the lack of focus on the big picture of the project. Throughout the paper you say that the important part is to find out more about anime, when really what the research will ultimately contribute to is knowledge of American culture and media. As you leave sections and ultimately the paper, leave the broader implications with the reader. Great job so far, keep up all the good work!!
Gursajan,
ReplyDeleteI think what you have is a really good start to the final paper, and with some edits I think it can be amazing. Anyways, I'll just go over each section and tell you how I felt about it.
First, I thought the literature review was structured really well. Your explanations were good, and for the most part, your transitions made everything easier to understand and allowed me to naturally arrive at your question. I just think there were one or two places where you could make a better transition.
Your methods section for the most part, was good, but when you were explaining the third step of your methods I got a little lost. I think you need to do a little better explaining there.
I was actually really surprised that you had such a problem with your results section because I like it a lot right now, actually. I think you could cut back a little bit, but for the most part, I thought you did a really strong job on this section.
With the discussion section, I still think you need some work. The biggest issue for me was that there wasn't a clear organization throughout the section, and I think you need to work on that.
As a final note, work on getting rid of passive sentences. I use them a lot too, and they usually just could the meaning of whatever you'r trying to say.
Akash
Hey Gursajan!!
ReplyDeleteYour paper was really interesting, and you did a good job of engaging the reader!! It was very easy to understand; you explained everything the reader wouldn't know. You also weren't over the word limit, so yay for that. I'll go into detail about the individual sections.
Your literature review, in my opinion, is what needs the most work. There were SO MANY claims that had no source or citation, and that is seriously going to hurt you. Even if you said the source in the previous sentence, have the citation in the next if you're using evidence from it. Without sources and citations, it sounds like you just got it off of an anime wikipedia page or something and it diminishes your credibility. There were also a few parts where you were missing important links to form your conclusions. I think you could also do a better job of telling me so what. You did do a good job of showing the gap, and everything you said in your lit review was clearly leading up to the question, which was the purpose, so good job!!
Your methods section was pretty strong, but there were a few parts missing some explanation.
The results section was really good. You did a good job of explaining everything you found and coming to conclusions without interpreting them.
In your discussion section, you did a good job of connecting what you found to past research, but I think you could have expanded on the significance just a bit more to really get to WHY the audience should care. You're almost there, but I feel like you're missing just one small step.
Anyway, good job, and good luck with finalizing the paper!! You're almost there!!