Individual Critical Analysis Essay (100 points)

You will be assigned a short story and critical lens based on your responses to the short story quiz due Sunday, November 5.

Technical details:

• 4-6 pages (1500-2000 words), typed, double-spaced, Times New Roman 12 pt font
• MLA format and citation style
• At least two outside sources, one of which is a scholarly journal like the article we worked with for Essay Three
• Essays will be submitted to Blackboard, your major’s Portfolio, and to the Project Manager for inclusion in the group critical edition website.
• Use of generative AI is allowed but must be cited and acknowledged, including links to chats and/or screenshots. Here’s more information on how to do this: https://idaho.pressbooks.pub/write/chapter/citing-generative-ai-in-academic-work/

Subject matter:

• Essays must cover the short story chosen by your group
• Essays must use one of the theoretical lenses we’ve covered in class as a critical approach to the work you have chosen. Each student will be assigned a different lens.
• You will “apply” for the short story and lens you prefer in the Short Story quiz due Sunday, November 5.

Approach:

• You will need to formulate a thesis about how you read the work you have chosen. This thesis should be appropriate to the theoretical lens you’ve chosen. Your essay should also get at the significance of whatever interpretation you’re making.
• Your thesis needs to be supported directly by the text. You’ll have several points that prove your thesis, and each of these points will need to use the text as backup—most likely through direct quotation, but paraphrase and summary may be useful as well.
• Assume an audience that has just read your piece and wants to examine it from a new angle. The essay shouldn’t be plot summary, but it will need to remind readers of key parts of the text that support your argument.

Grading:

• The essay is worth 100 points.
• Key areas of assessment will be thesis, support, application of critical approach, organization/structure, and language (including audience-appropriateness, overall tone, and grammar and mechanics). MLA formatting will also impact your grade.
• Peer review for this essay will be conducted within your group (not on EduFlow). Your group will decide how to do this. If you would like me to create a MyEssayFeedback assignment for comprehensive review, please let me know.

Annotated Bibliography (50 points)

Your group will jointly contribute to an annotated bibliography for the short stor(ies) you are assigned to work with. The audience is someone who has read the work (likely other students) and wants to know more. Your annotations should give readers an idea of whether they would like to read the secondary source in more detail.

Technical Details:

• Your group will need to have 3 annotated secondary sources per person (a group of 3 would have 9 annotated entries; a group of 4 would have 12). These must be unique entries—not duplicate articles.
• Annotations should be about 200-500 words (1-2 paragraphs) each. They must include an MLA-formatted citation for the work. They must also include a summary of the text, focusing on thesis and main supporting arguments/details. Finally, annotations should identify how a reader might use the text (is it a straightforward literary analysis? Does it apply a particular critical approach? Does it provide biography on the author? Does it give historical context in some way?). You can see an example of an annotated bibliography here: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/614/03/.
• Acceptable texts for annotation:
  • Peer-reviewed literary analysis articles (generally on the specific text, but author-focused pieces are fine too)
  • Books and book chapters—university presses are usually most authoritative; these may be on the specific text or author-focused
  • “Theory” pieces such as those in “Further Reading” in Critical Worlds (note that there should be no more than one of these per person in your group)
  • Peer-reviewed articles that cover historical contexts for your piece
  • Primary source material from the author’s and/or text’s time period for use in a New Historicist reading (no more than one of these per person in your group)
  • Texts that do not fall into one of these categories (websites, blogs, newspaper articles, magazine articles) must be approved by me ahead of time. There are quality pieces in these media, but they are few and far between.

Recommendations on Process:

• Locate potential sources (aim for more than you need—say 4-5) as soon as possible. If the library doesn’t have something in their collection, there will be time to acquire it or order it through interlibrary loan (which can take hours, days, or weeks).
• Read your sources with an eye toward annotating. You should read articles in full, but you may skim parts. You will likely read only sections of books to get a feel for them.
• Draft annotations individually; share and workshop as a group. You don’t need to aim for a single voice, but you will want to ensure everyone’s work is of consistent quality.
• If you think a source might be used in your individual essay, be sure to claim it and work with it early.
• Use the Blackboard Discussion Forum assigned to your group to create and edit these annotations.
• Your annotated bibliography editor should also look over the existing annotated bibliography entries for your assigned short story and should make any necessary corrections.

Formatted Critical Edition (100 points)

Your group will publish your work to a critical edition class publication in Pressbooks. This book will be available publicly and will count as a publication credit for your resume. You will need to license your work using Creative Commons. I will explain how to do this. Your group’s editor will complete your part of the class critical edition by our last day of class, when we will celebrate with a “book launch.”

Technical Details:

• Project Proposal: by Sunday, November 12, your group’s chosen project manager should post a project proposal to the group’s forum, detailing the roles that your group has chosen for each member.
• About Us: Please follow the existing conventions for this section of the book (include new contributors in the same style as previous contributors)
• Critical Introduction: A brief co-written piece that introduces the work, gives an overview of the history of criticism around the work and/or puts the work into a historical context, and briefly summarizes each individual essay (one paragraph per essay). I recommend that you individually draft these and that the editor compiles them in the critical introduction. The editor will add the new paragraphs to the critical introduction and also edit/revise the introduction.
• Annotated Bibliography: Include the group-produced annotated bibliography after the individual essays as a separate chapter.
• Individual Essays: Subtitle each essay’s page using the type of criticism (e.g. “Reader Response,” “Psychological,” etc.)
• Follow the publication’s existing format for your articles.

• Project Manager: Responsible for submitting proposal, collecting all articles and ensuring they meet the minimum requirements, enforcing deadlines, and communicating with the team and the instructor. Collects “About Us” information (the copy editor can also do this if you have five members).
• Annotated Bibliography Editor: Responsible for collecting and creating the final annotated bibliography from group member contributions. Edits existing entries from previous groups.
• Editor: Responsible for compiling article summaries into a critical introduction, revising the introduction and conclusion to that introduction, and proofreading your group’s final publication.
• Publisher: works with me in Pressbooks to produce the critical edition (this role does not require WordPress experience, but this will be helpful), adhering to existing publication style guidelines. The publisher may also include images that enhance your group’s work.
• Copy Editor (for groups of 5): If your group has 5 members, you may assign an additional copy editor role. This person will collect the “About Us” information and will be responsible for the final proofreading of the publication.