ARTS 130: Thinking Piece 2 Due Date: Thursday, February 7 (in-class) Formatting Guidelines: • 250-300 words, typed, double-spaced • 12 point font, Times New Roman • 1 inch margins all around (top; bottom; right; left) • Name and Student Number in top left-hand corner • “Thinking Piece #2” underneath your name • No title Choose between one of the following questions/prompts and write a critical and thoughtful reflection. Prompt 1: Interpreter of Maladies This prompt will help get you thinking about Lahiri’s short stories and your literary analysis. In many ways, Lahiri explores the idea that identity is defined on a geographical basis. In other words, she plays with the politics of where people are “from” (ancestral origin). Discuss the way(s) by which her stories complicate one or a combination of the following (you may focus on one or multiple stories). i. ii. iii. iv. Relationship between identity and geographic location Relationship between identity and home Difference & sameness Idea of national and cultural divisions OR Prompt 2: General Topic: Globalization and Identity Whether we like it or not, globalization is a (past & current) reality. Consequently, there will be more and more people who refuse to identify themselves in terms of nationality (i.e., I am Iranian). Do you see globalization (i.e., one world community) as a force for good or bad in this world (i.e., not literally evil, but what I mean to say is do you see it as a negative phenomenon)? Perhaps think about whether it would homogenize us or make us more inclusive; whether it might make us more cosmopolitan or feel more culturally rootless; whether it might get rid of the us/them attitude, or divide people more. Use reason to support your points. Rubric Thinking pieces are designed to make you think. This assignment gives you a space to thoughtfully and critically explore your response to topic/issue. That is, I am interested in the links, complications, or complexities you identify about the topic/issue. Each thinking piece is worth 5%. Please Note: I will not accept hand-written or emailed responses. I will only accept late reflections with official documentation excusing your absence. I will grade your thinking pieces according to the following criteria: Score of 4-5 Demonstrates high-quality exploration (i.e., insightful and thoughtful); addresses the assigned question, demonstrates that you have done the required reading, reveals engaged thinking; fulfills the length requirement. Score of 3-3.9 Shows evidence of some reflection about the reading and/or issue, but responses are generalized; lacking in depth; fulfills the length requirement. Score of 0-2.9 Shows little or no evidence or reflection about what was read and/or issue or demonstrates that you have read but your response is overly simplistic; too superficial; does not fulfill the length requirement. What constitutes a high-quality “thinking piece”? • Evidence of dialogic thinking—seeing complexities, finding cruxes and puzzles, confronting inadequate explanations—I reward students for looking or probing into the complexity of an issue • Demonstrates critical engagement; makes independent and thoughtful contributions, raises intelligent questions; makes interesting connections • It is generally easy to tell the difference between insightful and superficial. • The key question is not “how well written is this piece?” but “to what extent does this thinking piece reveal engaged thinking about this topic/issue?” • “High-quality” refers to being rewarded for showing the process as much as the product of thought.
Purchase answer to see full attachment