When I used to work in the essay clinic, I was asked to run workshops on how to write a paper in philosophy. The following remarks are based on how I opened some of those workshops. My general advice is to consider every philosophy paper first and foremost as a writing assignment, and not (just) a paper. You can click here to scroll down to a summary of my practical recommendations.
Background:
My students often tell me that they are not taught how to write a paper in their philosophy courses. Instead, they are given links to (e.g.) Jim Pryor’s website, or the Harvard guidelines (link opens to pdf). These are helpful resources, to be sure, and there are many others as well.
There are two common issues that I hear from students who have used these types of online resources. First, sometimes the different guidance you can find online will contradict each other. Second, sometimes the different guidance you can find online will contradict what the instructor asks for in the paper instructions. Beyond this, you may have noticed that the articles you read for class will sometimes look very different from each other, and very different the papers you are asked to write. Moreover, what someone calls a “paper” in one course may require very different things than in other courses.
Altogether, it can be hard to figure out what a “philosophy paper” might look like, and this is because a philosophy paper can look like many things! Trying to give advice on what makes a good philosophy paper can risk overgeneralizing across these differences. What makes for a good paper in one course or assignment may not necessarily make for a good paper in another.
This workshop is meant to give you a few strategies for navigating different kinds of philosophy papers, but it is important to remember that this advice always needs to be interpreted in context, for your specific assignments. So, our first tip for today is that we should understand philosophy papers first and foremost as writing assignments.
Papers as writing assignments: what does it mean?
An assignment assigns you specific tasks. To understand a paper foremost as a writing assignment is to understand that paper as a series of tasks. These tasks can differ between courses, or even within a course. It is common, for example, for instructors to “scaffold” assignments, so that your first paper is exegetical, explaining what an author says, while the next papers are more critical, adding your own arguments, considering objections, etc.
My recommendation, then, is to understand each assignment in context.
This might seem obvious, but I believe it is important to outline clearly. I often hear from students who were surprised by their grade because they were used to writing a particular way in other courses, and hadn’t read the instructions closely. This is one reason why a fourth-year student taking a 200-level course can sometimes receive lower grades than in their advanced seminars: a 200-level course often assigns different tasks than a 400-level course. Meanwhile, someone who has been receiving higher scores across their 200-level courses might miss the different expectations in a more advanced 300-level or 400-level course. In general, doing well on one assignment will not always predict success on another. Thinking in broad terms of writing papers can obscure the differences between assigned papers.
Practical suggestion: Assignment checklist
Understanding papers as assignments, it will help to figure out what we’re assigned to do. Since we will be graded based on how well we do the assigned tasks, it can be useful both for planning and editing purposes to develop an assignment checklist.
Creating the checklist:
- Step one: Review instructions and rubrics. Read through the instructions and make note of the specific tasks you’re expected to complete. For example: What specific questions are you supposed to answer? Are you supposed to summarize a reading? How much space should this take? (If you aren’t given a wordcount, how much weight to the instructions or rubric put on that summary? You can use this weight as a guideline to the portion of the wordcount you might spend on it, for example). Are you supposed to cite? Using what style manuals? Are you expected to cite outside sources? Are you required to only cite assigned readings? Are there any formatting requirements? What is the maximum length? The minimum length? Are you required to define all technical terms, or are you explicitly told you can assume the reader knows them? How many objections do you need to consider, if any? If there is a clear rubric, what would distinguish between a C and a B, or between a B and an A? Use the instructions, rubric, and questions like these to set up a checklist of the minimum requirements to get the grade you are aiming for.
- Step two: Review previous feedback. If you have already received feedback in this course, what did that previous feedback say? Did it give you any recommendations? Did it seem to focus on a certain type of issue (like needing more support, or issues with clarity)? When reviewing that feedback, ask how it could apply to this new assignment, and consider adding that feedback to your new checklist. What would be needed to improve from that previous feedback? If you did not receive feedback in this course, what feedback did you receive in other courses? How might that apply to this assignment? Remember to read all that prior feedback in context. [See my other resources on “SMART” plans and interpreting feedback; forthcoming].
- Step three: Review other available resources. Now that we have outlined some tasks, it is worth pausing to reflect on what resources I need to accomplish those tasks, and what resources are already available to me. For example, if I am unclear on previous feedback or on assignment expectations, I might make use of lecture recordings and office hours. If I know the deadline is in two weeks, maybe I try to arrange an appointment with the Philosophy essay clinic three days before it is due, so I can review a draft with the staff. If feedback suggests I have been struggling to make my ideas clear, maybe I consider the general writing centres, or multilingual writing workshops, or book a meeting with my College’s academic dons. Maybe I need to use a library computer because mine is unreliable, so plan days in the computer labs on campus. Maybe I work better in groups, so I plan to use my College’s writing groups. If I have been struggling with time management, maybe I prepare a meeting with a learning strategist on campus, or use the UTSC assignment planner tool (click to open). Add these to your checklist as resources you could use, or plan to use. While you might not need to use all of them, it is helpful having them listed out.
- Step four: Double check and ask questions. Take one more look over the instructions and rubric, just to double-check your interpretation. Having feedback and resources in mind can sometimes help spotlight things we missed. If anything is vague or unclear, this is a good time to reach out to your instructor or TA in office hours (or discussion boards, etc) to ask questions for clarification.
Using the checklist:
- Planning: Having outlined your main requirements in a checklist, you may find it easier to prepare an outline or to organize how you spend your time. In general, what would my paper need to look like in order to check all these boxes? How should I organize my paper in response to these particular tasks? You should also be able to give yourself an initial estimate of how much time each task will take, based on your own skills and what weight or importance those tasks have in the instructions.
- Editing: I recommend that you set aside a clean copy of your checklist, reserved just for your editing stages. If possible, try to finish a draft of your paper a few days before your deadline. After taking a day away from your paper, open it up and “grade it” using your checklist. While you can do this on a tighter schedule, it becomes easier to overlook our own mistakes. [See my other resource on the “expert problem” in editing, forthcoming]. Regardless of the timing, you should be able to tick every box of the main requirements, as well as those for the feedback and resources boxes as appropriate. If you cannot check every box, then this will be a guide for what you focus on when editing.
- Reviewing new feedback: Once you get your grade and feedback returned to you, consider comparing that feedback against your checklist and against your earlier impressions. If there is a mismatch, that could be a good time to use office hours to get clarity on expectations. But even without these meetings, a close reflection can help in planning your future checklists, and tailoring our expectations to those of the instructors.
C Dalrymple-Fraser 