ASSIGNMENT

For this assignment, you must choose any ONE of the pieces listed on the next page. For the book chapters, we have tried to provide links via the Library. What seems to work is that you first sign in to the Library then Ctrl+Click on a link and it should (hopefully . . .) take you to the item.
Alternatively, you may need to paste the link into your browser. If this doesn’t work, let us know.
The journal articles can be reached by the usual routes.
The assignment is in three parts:

Part 1. In around 1000 words (no more than 1500 words), summarise – in your own words – what you think are the main lessons or issues emerging from the article. One way of approaching this is to imagine you are describing the main features of the article to a fellow student who has not read it and you are also telling them what you consider to be its strengths and weaknesses and the points you think would be most interesting to study further.

Part 2. Track down two further published (or even unpublished but easily accessible) papers that add to our understanding about one of the issues discussed in Part 1 and, using up to 1000 words for each of the two, explain and critically evaluate the additional contribution(s) made by each of them.

Part 3. In up to 1500 words, describe how YOU would explore one or more questions raised in Parts 1 and 2. This follow-up might be empirical, theoretical, or both. What we are looking for here is not something vague and general. We want to see evidence that you have given serious thought to your ideas and you should provide as much detail as you can within the word limit. For example, if you are thinking of an experimental follow-up, you should give an outline of the design and state the hypothesis or hypotheses you would seek to test (including some indication of the data you would need to collect and the tests you might hope to use).

So, your whole assignment should end up being around 4000-4500 words long, but definitely no more than 5000 words in total. Remember, it will be better to go into a few ideas in depth rather than cover many thoughts superficially. We will be looking for evidence of critical thinking and not merely the ability to describe – although careful and accurate description is, of course, important.