4223 research presentation assignment

Research presentations:
As we're moving into plays of increasing complexity, it becomes increasingly helpful to refer to scholarly criticism to illuminate specific facets of the plays that we may not notice when reading on our own—or to find substantiation of our own views on the play in the writings of scholars and other experts on Shakespeare (other notable writers of literature, for instance).
For the research presentation assignment you will read some scholarly work focusing on some aspect of one play and then share with the class your understanding of the article's main points and also explain how the criticism has influenced your appreciation or understanding of the play.

Don't get too nervous or worried about these presentations. There are some basic requirements on what sorts of articles you'll need to use, but this assignment should not take an inordinate amount of time to complete or be very difficult to do well on. The length of your presentation should be between 500-700 words, meaning two typed page max, so it's nowhere near an actual "paper." Plus, at least half of each presentation will involve summarizing the key points of the article you've read, so you won't have to sweat too much over what to write about: the author of the article will have done most of the sweating for you; you'll just have to read carefully and then restate the essential points in your own words.

Also making this assignment considerably easier than doing research on most other writers of literature is the fact that, well, we're talking about Shakespeare here! There is more commentary and criticism on Shakespeare than on any other writer, without question. I'm sure you'll have no trouble finding plenty of material to choose from on each of the plays we have remaining. Materials from the World Wide Web are off-limits for research presentations, but you'll have access to many hundreds (if not thousands) of articles on Shakespeare via the RSU Library subscription databases—the JSTOR database, for instance, contains full-text electronic articles of the journal Shakespeare Quarterly going back over many years. And of course, you'll also be able to find plenty of Shakespeare sources in hard copy (i.e. in books or journals) in the RSU library.

Assignment specifics:

1) Step one: choosing a play
Select a play you'd like to present on from those remaining on our schedule of readings (Hamlet through The Tempest) and let me know in writing, either via email or in hard copy, your first and second choices for presentations.  On first-come, first-serve basis I'll post the list of presenters on the web at this

2) Step two: choosing an article
The first thing to do is browse through sources of scholarly criticism or commentary on the play you have signed up to present on and choose one to share with the class. Note that sources from web pages available freely to all on the World Wide Web are not valid for this assignment.

Scholarly criticism, sources valid for presentation
Scholarly sources are works of criticism or commentary written by established experts or others with particular authority to speak in an informed and learned fashion on a given subject: today most scholars are college professors, though professional writers and critics who are not technically "academic scholars" may also produce criticism or commentary that is considered scholarly. For instance, although the 19th-century poet John Keats was not a professional scholar or a university professor, he was indeed a great professional writer and certainly his comments on Shakespeare, even in casual letters, carry great weight and authority as "scholarly" despite his not being a scholar in the current formal sense of the term.
Generally the most authoritative sources of criticism and commentary on literary works are book-length studies ("monographs") written by a single author focusing on one particular subject (if not one particular literary writer or work more narrowly). I am certainly not expecting any of you to read whole books for this assignment, but your best first choice may be to locate a book of Shakespearean criticism or commentary in the RSU library, any other college library, or perhaps even in any local public library, and to present your findings on one particular chapter from this book.

Second on the list of most authoritative sources are articles collected or presented together in books of criticism such as Twentieth Century Interpretations of Henry IV, Part 1, edited by R. J. Dorius. This book is a collection of fifteen different critical essays by more than a dozen different authors. Collections of essays are sometimes composed of original articles written specifically for the book, but most often they reprint a number of the best or most important essays published originally in scholarly journals or presented orally at scholarly conferences or conventions.

Third on the list of authoritative sources are articles published in refereed scholarly journals, such as Shakespeare Quarterly (available in JSTOR). A journal that is "refereed" has an editorial review board composed of established experts in a given field who approve, as a group, the articles accepted for publication in the journal—as opposed to the fourth-most authoritative source of scholarly criticism, scholarly journals that are not "refereed," meaning that as few as one single editor decides which articles are accepted for publication. Most refereed journals list the "editorial review board" on one of the first pages of each volume or issue of the journal.

As noted above, you have it relatively easy finding sources of legitimate scholarly criticism on each of the plays we're reading. You have access to many hundreds (if not thousands) of articles on Shakespeare via the RSU Library subscription databases—the JSTOR database, for instance, contains full-text electronic articles of the journal Shakespeare Quarterly going back over many years. And you'll also be able to find loads of Shakespeare sources in hard copy (i.e. in books or journals) in the RSU library.

Note: select sources focusing only on the one play you have signed up for. If you find an interesting item whose central focus explores connections between this one play and another single play that we have read earlier in the semester, you may contact me about exceptions to this requirement.

Another note: sources must be at bare minimum eight pages in length. Shorter articles are not valid for presentation.

Sources not valid for research presentations:

3) Step three: getting your source approved
To ensure that your source is indeed valid and also to prevent duplication of sources when two or three students are presenting on the same play, you must email me the bibliographic information for your chosen source (see QD5: QD5M or QD5j and/or QD5el).


4) Step four: writing the presentation
Read the source carefully, identifying its thesis or central point and each of the major supporting claims that develop the thesis or main point. Make an informal outline (purely for your own use, not to be turned in) of the article's primary claims about the play. Reread the source, confirming, refining, and expanding your initial interpretation of it.

Write an evaluative summary of the source, 1) identifying its central analytical points of commentary upon the play, and 2) explaining how or why the source improves or impacts your appreciation or understanding of the play. You should present the summary of the article first, in one or two paragraphs at most, and then separately, after the summary, offer your explanation of how the source has influenced your perception of the play. You may also comment on the source's weaknesses, explaining which of the author's points you find least convincing, least valid, or least helpful in illuminating important facets of the play.


Format: Format your presentation according to the MLA guidelines for typed work as outlined on my "simple stuff' page. Begin the presentation with a correct "works cited" entry containing the bibliographic information for your source (see QD5M for items from books, QD5j for journal articles, QD5el for full-text electronic journal articles).


Note on length: The length of your presentation must be 500-700 words, meaning two typed pages max. Presentations shorter than 500 words will not receive passing grades, and presentations going beyond the 700-word limit will be penalized one full letter-grade for each 100 words beyond the limit. Although this assignment is weighted heavily at 100 pts., I do not intend that it be a truly major undertaking, and part of the point of a summary is brevity, so definitely don't get carried away with your writing!

Note on quotations: It's okay if you offer a few very brief quotations from the source, especially of its thesis or most central points, but do not at all quote extensively. Restate the author's primary points mostly in your own words. The idea here is to summarize and evaluate, not to copy the words of the author directly except in very small doses. It is perfectly fine and even desirable if you do not include any quotations from the source at all. Definitely do not include direct quotations from the play that are contained within the source you are presenting.

Model summaries: See the two sample research presentations on our schedule of readings and assignments: one on 1 Henry IV and another on Henry V. If you have a copy of Dr. Dial-Driver's Guide to College Writing you may also benefit from her discussion and illustrations of summarizing and evaluating sources in the "Specialized Forms of Writing" chapter, especially the "summarizing" and "making evaluations" sections, pp. 69-76 in the 6th edition. (These sections are also included in earlier editions, though the page numbering may be different.)


5) Step five: sharing the presentation
You'll have 2-3 minutes to share the presentation orally with the class on the day it's due, and you'll also turn in a typed final draft of the presentation in both hard copy and electronic format.  I may post research presentations on the web.