Academic Writing: The Essay: January 2012
Academic Writing: The Essay: January 2012
Academic Writing: The Essay: January 2012
net/publication/263863946
CITATIONS READS
2 61,545
1 author:
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Baden Ian Eunson on 14 July 2014.
Critical thinking
TABLE 7.1
Score Criteria
scoring guide
4 Consistently does all or almost all of the following:
■■ Accurately interprets evidence
Bacon’s approach
Many ideas are packed into the 454 words of this essay. In most writing, there is a link
between content and form or style, and this is certainly the case with Bacon’s essay.
He makes a number of key points, many of which are further broken down into sub-
points that are dialectically linked — that is, he sets out opposing arguments (on the one
hand this, and on the other hand that). Table 7.2 shows how this structure is created.
Structure of
TABLE 7.2
Key point First part Second part
Bacon’s essay ‘On revenge’
Revenge is a kind of wild justice The more man’s nature runs to . . . the more ought the law to
revenge . . . weed out that tendency in man.
Relationship of original wrong to The first wrong merely offends The revenge taken for the wrong
revenge for the wrong the law. undermines the authority of the
law itself.
Taking revenge or not taking By taking revenge, a man shows By not taking or by passing over
revenge: relationships with our that he is on the same level as revenge, man shows that he is
enemies his enemy. superior to his enemy.
Example of Solomon.
Revenge and time present, past Wise men have enough to do Those who are stuck in the
and future worrying about the present and past, preoccupied with revenge,
the future without being stuck in waste their time.
the past, which is what thinking
about revenge does.
Motivation for wrongdoing No-one does wrong for wrong’s Men do wrong because it
sake. will profit them, or give them
pleasure, or save their honour,
and for other reasons.
Futility of being angry with others If another man merely loves If a man should do wrong
himself better than he loves me, because it is his nature to do so,
that is not a good enough reason then he cannot help it.
for my being angry.
Revenge and the law Revenge is acceptable when the We need to be careful when we
law does punish wrongdoers. take revenge, because the law
might punish us for doing so,
and that would mean that our
enemies would triumph.
2. Main antithesis has 2Forgiveness and our friends Cosmus advises us not to forgive But Job advises us that we must
minor antithesis our friends. take the evil with the good in our
nested within it. friends (to a certain extent).
Cosmus’s paradoxical maxim The Bible commands that we . . . but you never read that we
forgive our enemies (e.g. Mark are commanded to forgive our
11:26: ‘But if you do not forgive, friends.
neither will your Father who is in
heaven forgive your sins.’) . . .
Revenge and wounds The man who studies revenge The man who does not study
keeps his wounds green, or revenge lets his wounds heal,
unhealed, and thus does badly. and does well.
Public and private revenges Public revenges for the most part Private revenges for the most
lead to good fortune: it made part lead to misfortune.
sense to kill Caesar (who was
intent on becoming a dictator),
Pertinax (who withheld his
soldiers’ pay) and Henry III (who
it was feared would recognise
a Protestant successor to the
French throne).
Vindictive people and Vindictive people are like . . . but the mischief caused
consequences witches . . . by witches brings down
consequences on them.
of reasoning, using specific He develops the viewpoint that certain acts of revenge or killing are justified, but that in
arguments or claims
most cases it harms both victim and perpetrator.
Proofs and examples:
■■ Proofs and examples. Bacon draws on historical evidence and authorities to substantiate
evidence to substantiate
assertions his assertions.
Expositional technique: the ■■ Expositional technique. Bacon develops the structure of his argument by using an explicit pat-
development of a structure of
propositions that can be easily
tern that the reader can follow without difficulty. He uses a double, or antithetical, structure
followed by a reader at the main level of argument and occasionally branches into a subsidiary, or nested, level:
Major point. Revenge-taking — open and concealed styles
Minor point. Motivation of open-style revenge-takers
ASSESS YOURSELF
Essay method
A contemporary academic essay will necessarily take a different form from the essay that
Bacon wrote in the seventeenth century. For example, typical academic essays today rely
more on using quoted sources to bolster their arguments, and are expected to cite full
details of those sources in a bibliography or reference list. Nevertheless, certain elements
are timeless, such as the creation and sustaining of an argument that makes sense. Better to
have an essay with a strong argument, but without a single reference, than an essay with
an elaborate bibliography and extensive use of quotation that is, in essence, nonsense.
■■ originality of thought.
Critical analysis
Your essay or paper will be an example of argumentation — the presentation of a mix of fact
and opinion. Argumentation is an underlying factor in most of the ways we communicate —
in writing, in speech, via the media, and even in non-verbal communication.
In constructing your argument, you need to be aware of and use the tools of argumenta-
tion, such as:
■■ the power of paradigms, or dominant worldviews or belief systems; and the nature of
paradigm shifts, or the processes of challenging those dominant world views or belief
systems
■■ logical argumentation categories (premises and conclusions, syllogisms, and inductive
Essay structure
Your essay needs to be structured in a particular way to maximise its effectiveness.
A typical structure is shown in figure 7.1.
INTRODUCTION
THESIS STATEMENT
PARAGRAPH
TOPIC SENTENCE
PARAGRAPH
TOPIC SENTENCE
PARAGRAPH
TOPIC SENTENCE
CONCLUSION
■■ using structuring approaches to generate content and aid exposition (indirect versus
direct approach, the 5W–H approach, question and answer techniques, diagramming or
mind-mapping, and outlining using software tools)
■■ editing and proofreading.
All of these issues are considered in greater depth in online chapter ‘Writing skills 5:
how to write’.
The main components of an essay are:
1. Introduction
2. Body or argument
3. Conclusion.
In the introduction, you need to set down the topic question you will endeavour to
answer. Here you set the scene, paying attention to the scope of what you are attempting —
that is, you will define what you intend to talk about.
There are five main factors to bear in mind in the management of intensive care patients, but they
are not always listed in order of importance.
How ironic that, as the world was moving towards unanimity on the Kyoto Protocol, the global
financial crisis should make many nations back off from commitments to lower carbon output when
they perceived it would cost too much to meet the targets.
It is a mistake to think that Keynes was not aware of the monetarist theories being developed by the
Chicago School in the 1930s.
The consensus method of group decision making has shortcomings, and I believe that these
outweigh its apparent strengths.
At first glance, Drucker does not appear to give the marketing function much importance in the
Topic sentences:
FIGURE 7.2 survival plans of the firm, but appearances can be deceptive.
some samples
Topic sentences should flag what is coming, but like leads in news stories written by
journalists, they should not only inform. Rather, they should also intrigue, making readers
want to learn more. Some software summarising programs or functions (e.g. Autosum-
marize and Document Map in Microsoft Word) can skim the first sentence of each of your
paragraphs and mechanically produce a meaningful summary of the entire document. It is
possible, and sometimes desirable, to delay the topic sentence — for example, for dramatic
effect — but don’t push your reader’s patience too far.
Writing topic sentences can help in the planning of your essay. Whether in full or summa-
rised in note form, a list of your topic sentences can help you create a meaningful structure.
Make sure that your paragraphs are not simply unrelated blocks of text floating in a sea
of white space. Link them logically and dynamically using words and phrases that define
relationships, such as:
■■ In spite of this, . . .
■■ Secondly, . . .
Such linkages help draw together your ideas in a coherent whole, and should not be
regarded as trivial (for more on the expositional tools of paragraphing and transitional
statements, as well as those of grammatical parallelism and rhetorical patterning, see
online chapter ‘Writing skills 3: style’).
Your conclusion should sum up your argument, drawing all the threads together. In a real
sense, the conclusion is the most important part of your essay, because it is the forum in which
your authentic voice is heard. No new information is introduced at this stage; it’s just you,
summing up your arguments, recapitulating, giving your final response to the thesis statement,
and spelling out the implications of this. You should not repeat the wording from the introduc-
tion, but there should be a symmetry between your introduction and conclusion. The three-
part structure of your essay, therefore, should follow the form of a good spoken presentation:
1. Tell them what you’re going to tell them.
2. Tell them.
3. Tell them what you’ve just told them.
Style matters. Some professors may even prefer essays that are well-structured and well-written
but not particularly brilliant, to those that contain a truly original insight cloaked in language
that would make Webster and Fowler turn in their graves. Writing a sonnet or a short one-act
play is not usually a good idea, but a student should be encouraged to bring all his [her] skills
as a writer to bear on the essay topic. After all, that is why the question is an essay question,
rather than a true/false or short-answer. (King 1998, p. 63)
When quoting other sources, make sure you use the citing conventions appropriate to
the subject or area in which you are writing. Use quoted material professionally: don’t, for
example, quote only part of a source to create a false impression of what that source is
really saying. Whatever you do, don’t plagiarise, or try to pass off someone else’s work as
your own (see chapter 3).
Academic texts are most frequently characterised by a desire to avoid making claims and
statements that are too direct and assertive, since academic discourse is often about theo-
ries, conclusions drawn from evidence, exchanging viewpoints, and so on, rather than hard,
indisputable facts. Therefore hedging (making a proposition less assertive) is very important
in academic styles. Less often, it is sometimes also necessary to assert a claim or viewpoint
quite directly and more confidently, a process we shall refer to as boosting. (Carter & McCarthy
2006, p. 279)
Hedging: qualification of Examples of hedging and boosting linguistic strategies are shown in figure 7.3 (for defi-
statements or claims nitions of grammatical terms such as adverbs and prepositional phrases, see online chapter
Boosting: assertion of
statements or claims
‘Writing skills 1: grammar’).
Hedging can go too far, of course: you can set off a statement with so many qualifica-
tions that your original proposition is negated, and it becomes a mystery as to why you
would have wanted to make such an assertion in the first place (see online chapter 6 ‘Sci-
entific and technical writing’).
Similarly, an over-use of boosting phrases may create the suspicion that you are trying
to bluster or deceive your way around a weak argument. By all means, use ‘clearly’ and
‘obviously’, but in moderation: let your reader be the judge of what is clear and obvious.
Use your common sense: be prudent but forthright in saying what you mean, and meaning
what you say.
Rather than simply making sweeping and unsupported assertions, and trying to bluff
your reader, it is better to make clear statements and then qualify those statements with a
judicious use of hedging or riders (figure 7.4).
You can also use boosting strategies or locutions (figure 7.5), but in the academic arena,
the reality is that you will end up hedging more than boosting.
I believe, therefore, that there is overwhelming evidence for the case presented by the researchers.
The parallels they draw are clearly compelling.
The four trial balance spreadsheet programs and templates available to firms therefore all have
much to offer, and the market leader has certain features that without doubt justify its place in
FIGURE 7.5 Stating and the market.
boosting: sample wording
Personal/direct Impersonal/indirect
Even within the use of first person pronouns, however, there may be subtle variations.
Tang and John (1999) suggest that there is a continuum of shades of usage for ‘I’ and ‘we/
us’ (shown in figure 7.7) (see also Harwood 2005; Kuo 1999; Freddi 2005; Hyland 2002).
These usages are:
■■ No ‘I’ (impersonal style)
■■ ‘I’ as representative (‘In this sphere, we have words like . . . ’ or ‘We know that all
dialects . . . ’)
■■ ‘I’ as guide (‘In example one, we see . . . ’ or ‘So far, we have said nothing about . . . ’)
■■ ‘I’ as architect (‘I will concentrate on . . . ’ or ‘In my essay, I shall . . .)
■■ ‘I’ as a recounter of research process (‘I recorded a conversation with . . . ’ or ‘All of the
that . . . ’)
■■ ‘I’ as originator (‘Hence, I will examine the factors . . . ’ or ‘To me, the phrase embodies
the whole process . . . ’). (Adapted from Tang and John, 1999)
So when should you use ‘I’? This is not always clear. The traditional academic/scientific
culture that shied away from personal pronouns and heavily favoured passive voice is
changing, and there is a move towards a more personal and active style in a number of
disciplines and publications. However, there is no uniform pattern here, and you may find
that a style that is acceptable in one subject (or even for one lecturer in one subject) is not
acceptable in another. You need to seek out clear guidelines on this. You have the right
1. In rhetoric, a distinction is sometimes drawn between plural majestatis, or ‘royal we’, sometimes used by royalty and
popes (an individual saying ‘we decree that . . . ’) and plural modestiae or plural auctoris, or authority’s or author’s
plural, which includes readers and listeners.
The plural majestatis tends to get short shrift in modern democratic societies: Mark Twain once observed that
‘Only kings, editors and people with tapeworm have the right to use the editorial “we”’, while US Navy Admiral Hyman
Rickover told a subordinate who used ‘we’ that ‘Three groups of people are permitted that usage: pregnant women,
royalty and schizophrenics. Which one are you?’.
’I‘ as recounter
No ’I‘ as ’I‘ as ’I‘ as ’I‘ as ’I‘ as
of research
FIGURE 7.7 A typology of ’I‘ representative guide architect opinion holder originator
process
possible identities behind
the first person pronoun in
academic writing
Least powerful Most powerful
Source: Tang and John (1999,
p. S29). authorial presence authorial presence
Technical language/jargon Often strong, although there Often strong, although there
are some attempts to simplify are some attempts to simplify
Boosting Low use; used when writing Low use; used when writing
is exploring possibilities and/ is exploring possibilities and/
or is deceptive or is deceptive
Layout factors
Traditionally, essays were written without headings or graphics such as figures and tables.
Now the genre of the essay is discernibly taking on features traditionally associated with
documents such as reports. Nevertheless, in some areas and disciplines, essay markers
are uncomfortable with such features. So before you begin, seek guidance on the format
expected and keep that guidance in mind as you develop your work.
ASSESS YOURSELF
1. Photocopy pages from journal articles or from books dealing with your area of enquiry. Using
highlighter pens, mark up the topic sentence in each paragraph. Now, respond to the following
questions.
(a) What function do these sentences play in the paragraphs?
(b) Are topic sentences hard to find or non-existent?
(c) Do these sentences help or hinder comprehension of the writer’s argument?
2. Cut and paste into a word-processing file some pages from journal articles or books dealing
with your area of enquiry. Now, use software-summarising tools to summarise or analyse the
structure of the argument of your selection. What does it reveal to you about the topic sentence
structure of the samples?
3. Look at textbooks and journal articles from 20 to 30 years ago and at those of today. Are there
any differences in authorial voice or style?
Before we go any further, let’s take stock of what we have learnt so far. We have looked
at the criteria of good and bad essay writing. Looking at Bacon’s essay, we have learnt the
importance of:
■■ having a point of view
■■ using a cumulative approach to build the plausibility of what you want to persuade
us of.
These goals remain the same after almost 400 years.
We saw that the most discouraging thing for essay writers — ‘How can I say something
original, when it’s all been said before?’ — can be partially overcome by processes such
as creative doubt. We have also looked at structuring topic sentences, thesis statements,
transitions, hedging and boosting, and authorial voice.
With concepts like these under our belt, let’s now see them put to work (or ignored) by
looking at two condensed sample essays that are both on the same topic.
1. Sarcasm may be The so-called1 ‘greenhouse effect’ is nothing but a crock of hype.2
inappropriate. 3Studies done by the Competitive Enterprise Institute show clearly
that claims of global warming are false:
2. Avoid use of slang. 4There are three reasons why this claim is not valid, according to
Dr Baliunas. First, most of the warming in the last 100 years occurred
before the build-up of greenhouse gases. Second, the surface
3. No introduction temperature record suffers from many confounding factors. The
to issues to be most important being the urban heat island effect, where growing
explored in essay cities surrounding thermometer stations bias the temperature record
upwards.5 6 Finally, the surface record suffers from inadequate
global coverage. ‘Good records’, according to Dr Baliunas, ‘with 9. Invalid citation
4. No lead-in to quote near-continual coverage of the last 100 years, cover only 18 percent method for web
or explanation of document — try,
of the surface.’
who the expert is wherever possible,
Computer models, which have been used to bolster the case to tie down to author
for global warming, are also deficient, said Dr Baliunas. surname: here,
5. Plagiarism: merely a The assumption that water vapor will increase with a rise Georgia (1998).
cut-and-paste from in man-made greenhouse gases, accounting for most of the
website source
predicted warming, has been ‘challenged by developments
in convection theory and new measurements.’ 10. But what,
specifically, do they
(http://www.cei.org/utils/printer.cfm?AID=1220)7 8 9
6. Grammatical error; say? This is abuse,
sentence fragment Many academics tend, predictably enough, to push a straight not argument.
(uncorrected) environmentalist or green line on ‘global warming’ (Botkin & Keller
2005; McElroy 2002; Stern, 2007; Oreskes & Conway, 2011), refusing to
acknowledge that there are many reputable scientists who think that 11. Selective quotation;
7. Website text is the whole thing is a lot of hot air.10 In fact the very use of the term the source then
ephemeral — a media goes on to say that
‘greenhouse’ is wrong, as Harvey points out:
release from 1998. there is, in fact, a
The URL has since The term ‘greenhouse effect’ is used to refer to the tendency similarity, and the
changed, as often of the atmosphere to create a warmer climate than would entire reference
happens on the net. accepts the notion
otherwise be the case. However the physical mechanisms by
It would have been of global warming.
better to seek out a which the presence of the atmosphere warms the climate and
more substantial and the primary mechanism that causes a greenhouse to be warm
up-to-date reference are in fact quite different. A greenhouse heats up by day as 12. Semantic quibbling;
from the same source, the air within the greenhouse is heated by the sun. Outside the essay writer is
e.g. Bailey (2008). the greenhouse, near-surface air that is heated through trying to show that,
absorption of solar radiation by the ground surface is free to because an analogy
rise and be replaced with colder air from above. This cannot is not perfect,
8. Cited text is happen in a greenhouse, where the heated air is physically the phenomenon
inconsistently prevented from rising and being replaced with colder air. The being analysed
laid out: indenting cannot be real. This
so-called greenhouse effect does not prevent the physical
and fonts. remains unproven.
movement of air parcels. (Harvey 2000)11 12
(continued)
Scientists have proven that ‘Global warming’ does not, in fact, exist
(Milloy, 2009; Horner, 2009). Rather, global cooling is what we should
be concerned about. Taylor (1999) has studied climate change and has
proven1 that another ice age is about to begin (Landscheidt, Theodor
1. Suggested, not
(2003) ‘New Little Ice Age Instead of Global Warming?’ Energy and
proven
Environment, Vol. 14, No. 2-3, pp 327–350).2 3
Buydko4 (1996) also points out that increased global warming would in
2. Sources cited tend fact be beneficial as increased levels of carbon dioxide would boost
to be sensationalist. photosynthetic processes and increase agricultural productivity, thus
ensuring that starving billions would not have to starve.5 6 The economic
costs of succumbing to greenhouse hype are considerable, and may
3. Second reference
well be crippling, when all economic, fiscal, monetary, macro-economic,
needs to be linked
with first into broader industrial, institutional and other factors are factored into any type of
point about cooling; reasonable decision making and problem-solving process, or processes.7
full details should Any rational and ethical decision maker would need to weigh up, consider,
not be cited in text, ponder, contemplate and factor in every possible scenario of cost-benefit
but in reference list. analysis to eventually arrive at reasonable policy outcomes that would
be acceptable to the democratic majority that needs must provide (or
withhold) the mandate needed in any democratic decision-making
4. Author’s name process. It is imperative that such a process not be held hostage by wild-
misspelled eyed radicals with a hidden agenda,8 as experts like Stott point out: 11. This is meant to be
a general definition,
Even if all 180 countries ratified the protocol and then actually met but it contains
their greenhouse gas emission targets — a highly unlikely political extremely, even
5. Topic change: new
scenario — we still might only affect temperature by between 0.07 overly, specific and
paragraph required
and 0.2° Celsius, and even this could be thrown out by a couple of technically complex
erupting volcanoes or altering landscape albedos. And what are the information, using
undefined terms.
6. Author suggests economics of this meaningless self-sacrifice demanded by Kyoto?
only that it might According to recent models, implementing Kyoto will cost anywhere
be possible. between $100b and $1000b, with a mean around $350b. Now that
12. What are these
amount of money could pay off the public debt of the 49 poorest
proposed changes?
countries of the world and provide clean drinking water for all! Need
Surely they would be
7. Non sequitur; is the one say more? (Stott 2001)9 a critical aspect of
essay writer denying
The greenhouse effect is comprised of a number of synergistically linked an essay on policy
or affirming warming?
processes such as radiative forcing, which is10 implications?
The cited author also
expresses concern
about warming. . . . due to the increases of the well-mixed greenhouse gases
from 1750 to 2000 is estimated to be 2.43 Wm−2. 1.46 Wm−2 from 13. Repetition, padding
CO2; 0.48 Wm−2 from CH4; 0.34 Wm−2 from the halocarbons; and
0.15 Wm−2 from N O.1 11
2
8. Padding, waffle 14. Unproven assertion
The hype surrounding the greenhouse effect cannot simply be shrugged
off. If the widespread changes12 advocated by greenhouse zealots
were to be implemented, then the financial costs would be crippling.
9. Quoted author is 15. Both factors could
No responsible administrator or politician could rationally contemplate
talking about the strengthen the
factoring in such pseudo-science when the real work of decision making argument, but they
Kyoto Protocol —
introductory needs to be undertaken in a democratic society, or for that matter, in are not explained or
wording setting an undemocratic society.13 Just as surely as the so-called ozone layer cited correctly (e.g.
this connection crisis was proven to be another fantasy, so too will the greenhouse Montford 2010).
up is needed. effect, so-called.14
The credibility of the whole idea has, anyway, been dispelled by
Climategate and the destruction of the hockey stick graph of change.15 16. Reference details
10. Lead-in text and in footnote: citation
quoted text not system different
grammatically from that of main
1
Houghton, J.T. et al (Eds) (2001) Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis
matched style used
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), p. 716
REFERENCES
2. Exposition of ideas WHAT ARE THE POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT?
uses standard style of
sequential narrative Martin Plaistowe
sentences; layout
ID No. 43211789
features of genres
such as reports — Tutorial Group: Wednesday 2–3 pm
such as bullet Lecturer: Dr Rolf Birtles
points — avoided.
The greenhouse effect and the associated concept of global warming present great challenges to
policy makers at local, state or provincial, national and international levels.
3. Impersonal academic 1The fundamental position of this essay will be that the responses of decision makers in public and
style used —
private sectors to the greenhouse effect phenomenon have been mixed, and this has reflected the
impersonal/agentless
passive voice a flawed consensus that exists within the scientific community. Trends may be emerging, however,
feature; no pronouns which indicate that some actors are behaving as if the effect is real, no matter what. Because their
in authorial voice actions may accord them strategic advantages in certain arenas, this may trigger a bandwagon
effect, whereby many decision makers ignore underlying uncertainties in order to preserve
commercial and national strategic positions.2 3
4. Definitions
There are, in fact, two greenhouse effects. The first is the ‘natural’ greenhouse effect,
whereby radiation from the sun hits the earth, and is retransmitted back to space: part of
that energy, however, is absorbed by certain greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane,
5. Lead-in text chlorofluorocarbons), which leads to a warming of the atmosphere — just like a glass greenhouse
grammatically retains some of the sun’s warmth to help stimulate plant growth within the greenhouse. The second
matches quoted effect is the ‘enhanced’ greenhouse effect, due to human activity such as burning fossil fuels and
material. deforestation, which creates greenhouse gases (Houghton, 2009, p. 22).4
Many scientists argue that in the past few decades the planet has undergone unprecedented
6. Topic sentences warming, and that this warming appears to have been caused by anthropogenic or human-caused
begin paragraphs. activity. The prestigious Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in its early 2001 report,
concluded that:5 6
In the light of new evidence and taking into account the remaining uncertainties, most of the
7. Square brackets observed warming over the last 50 years is likely [i.e., having a 66–90 per cent chance] to have
show essay writer
is interpolating
been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations. (Houghton et al. (eds.) 2001, p. 10) 7
explanatory text not
present in actual Such global warming could result in regional increases in floods and droughts, inundation of
quoted passage. coastal areas, increase in high-temperature events and fires, outbreaks of pests and diseases,
and significant damage to ecosystems (Jepma & Munansinghe 1998, pp. 28–34 ; Parks & Ellis 2005,
pp. 4–11; Gore 2007, pp. 2–14).8
8. Essay moves from Concerns about global warming led to the international meeting on climate change in Kyoto in 1997,
setting up of basic which led to the declaration of the Kyoto Protocol (McElroy 2002, pp. 232–51). The Kyoto Protocol
concepts to policy has been signed by many countries, including Australia, and commits them to specific reductions in
implications — the production of greenhouse gases. A number of countries, including the United States, have still
answering the
not signed the Protocol, arguing that committing to reductions would cause unacceptable damage
question posed by
lecturer setting topic. to their economies (Koh 2009, p. 325). On the other hand, some scientists, such as Plimer (2009),
argue that the greenhouse effect is a natural phenomenon alternating with ice ages over periods of
thousands of years, with anthropogenic causes having little effect.9
9. Summary of
background from
fairly recent sources
provides context.
Global warming skeptics see dangers in some or all of these policies (Zyrkowski 2006, pp. 2–16;
3. Writer now Singer & Avery 2007, pp. 3–12). Wildavsky, for example, sees global warming as a myth created
moves away from by environmentalists to engineer radical social changes such as lower growth rates, smaller
‘greenhouse effect’ populations, consuming less and sharing a much lower level of resources much more equally
as main concept,
(Wildavsky 1992, p. xv).4
using ‘global warming’
as a term covering
both ideas. A good Budyko also argues that increased warming may lead to rises in productivity of crops, which will be
strategy, or not? necessary to feed another five billion people born in the next few decades (although he does also
acknowledge potentially damaging effects of this) (Budyko 1996, pp. 113–119) (see also Stott 2001).4 5
4. Balanced treatment of Some writers have suggested, however, that it does not matter whether global warming exists or
non-mainstream views not, because if actors such as policy-makers and entrepreneurs act as if it does, then jobs and
wealth can be created by developing renewable energy industries. Lovins, for example, states
that the major controversy about uncertainties in climate science is immaterial because of this —
5. Use of print and money can be made from renewables, so why not do it anyway? (Amory Lovins, quoted in Hoffman
online sources 2009, p. 330)6
Further, Krause, Decanio, Hoerner and Baer (2002, p. 342) argue that there are ‘co-benefits’ to
6. New section raises behaving as if global warming was real, such as cleaner air due to less pollution and healthier
other possibilities people.
and trends, thus
picking up approach Lomborg (2008, 2010, 2011) follows up on this line, arguing that carbon limitation is a lost cause, as
foreshadowed in international conferences on carbon reduction keep failing. This failure will be exacerbated by the
thesis statement.
global financial crisis, with there being no ‘first mover’ advantage in imposing carbon taxes — the
opposite, in fact, is true. Lomborg notes that three US think tanks from opposite ends of the political
spectrum have come to a consensus that creation of affordable alternative energy sources is the
7. Restatement of part
only way — the middle way — between proponents of no carbon and a ‘deep green’ return to
of thesis statement,
giving overview of basiclifestyles. Lomberg argues that this can be done for the cost of 0.2 per cent of global gross
previous point product, or roughly US$100 billion a year, to invent alternative energy technologies that everyone
can afford.
8. Recapitulation If numerous political and industrial actors behave in this way, with a consensus to spend for
demonstrates that such a program, their actions may accord them strategic advantages in certain arenas, and this
original objectives may trigger a ‘bandwagon effect’, whereby many or most decision makers ignore underlying
of the essay have uncertainties in order to preserve commercial and national strategic positions.7
been met.
In conclusion, a number of points about global warming are now apparent. Is global warming real?
Probably, but it may not matter anyway. Some actors are moving the goalposts by redefining business
objectives and government policy to develop alternative industries, to improve public health and to
reap conservation benefits.8
(continued)
REFERENCES
Bailey, Ronald (ed). Competitive Enterprise Institute 2008, The true state of the planet: ten of the world’s
premier environmental researchers in a major challenge to the environmental movement, Free Press,
New York.
Balling, Robert C Jr 1992, The heated debate: greenhouse predictions versus climate reality, Pacific
Research Institute for Public Policy, San Francisco, CA.
Botkin, Daniel B & Keller, Edward A 2005, Environmental science: Earth as a living planet, 5th edn, John
Wiley & Sons, New York.
Budyko, MI 1996, ‘Past changes in climate and societal adaptations’, in Smith, Joel B et al. (eds),
Adapting to climate change: assessment and issues, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Christiansen, Atle & Wettestad, Jørgen 2003, ‘The EU as a frontrunner on greenhouse gas emissions
trading: how did it happen, and will the EU succeed?’, Climate Policy, 101, pp. 1–16.
Georgia, Paul J 1998, ‘Climate science briefings debunk greenhouse scares’, Competitive Enterprise
Institute: Free Markets and Limited Government, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC,
1 October.
Gore, Al 2007, An inconvenient truth: the crisis of global warming, Viking, New York.
Houghton, JT et al. (eds.) 2001, Climate change 2001: the scientific basis, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, UK.
Houghton, John 2009 Global warming: the complete briefing, 4rd edn, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, UK.
Jepma, Catrinus J & Munansinghe, Mohan 1998, Climate change policy: facts, issues and analyses,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Krause, Florentin, Decanio, Stephen J, Hoerner, Andrew & Baer, Paul 2002, ‘Cutting carbon emissions
at a profit (part 1): opportunities for the United States’, Contemporary Economic Policy, vol. 20, no. 4,
pp. 339–366.
Koh, Kheng-Lia, (ed.) 2009, Crucial issues in climate change and the Kyoto Protocol: Asia and the World,
World Scientific Publishing Corporation, New Jersey.
Lomborg, Bjorn 2008, Cool it: the sceptical environmentalist’s guide to global warming, Vintage, New York.
—— 2010, ‘A rational take on warming’, The Australian, 15 November, p. 14.
—— 2011, ‘Harness resources to save the earth’, The Weekend Australian, 29–30 January, p. 4.
McElroy, Michael B 2002, The atmospheric environment: effects of human activity, Princeton University
Press, Princeton, NJ.
Manne, Alan & Richels, Richard 2004, ‘US rejection of the Kyoto Protocol: the impact on compliance costs
and CO2 emissions’, Energy Policy, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 447–54.
Parks, Peggy J & Ellis, Barbara G 2005, Global warming: our environment, Kidhaven, San Diego, CA.
Plimer, Ian 2009, Heaven and earth: global warming: the missing science, Taylor, London.
Rink, Deane 2007, Global warming, Facts on File, New York.
Singer, S Fred & Avery, Dennis T 2007, Unstoppable global warming: every 1500 years, Rowman and
Littlefield, Lanham, MD.
Stern, Nicholas 2007, The economics of climate change: the Stern Review, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Stott, Philip 2001, ‘The Kyoto Protocol: dangerous for both science and society?’, The Chemical Engineer,
September.
Tükay, Belgin Emre & Telli, Yasin 2011, ‘Economic analysis of standalone and grid connected hybrid
energy systems’, Renewable Energy, vol. 36, no. 7, pp. 1931–43, doi:10.1016/j.renene.2010.12.007.
Vesterdal, Morten & Svendsen, Gert Tinggard 2004, ‘How should greenhouse gas permits be allocated in
the EU?’, Energy Policy, vol. 32, no. 8, pp. 961–8.
Warnatzsch, Erika Alison & Reay, David S 2011, ‘Cutting CO2 emissions from the US energy sector:
meeting a 50% requirement target by 2030’, Carbon Management, vol. 2, no.1, pp. 23–39.
Wildavsky, Aaron 1992, ‘Introduction’ in Robert C Balling Jr, The heated debate: greenhouse predictions
versus climate reality, Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, San Francisco, CA, pp. xv–xxi.
Zyrkowksi, John 2006, It’s the sun, not your SUV: CO2 does not cause global warming, St Augustine’s
Press, South Bend, IN.
Evil genius Motivation Sample essay question Sample essay response Analysis
1. The Sycophant thinks if Why are political In their brilliant, ground- Sycophantism is, of course,
The she butters up the marker scientists concerned with breaking work, Almond a bad idea. Essays like this
Sycophant (e.g. by praising the the concept of ‘political and Verba address the read more like the minutes
lectures or the reading culture’? concept of political of a Soviet Communist
assignments), the marker culture. As Professor Party congress than a
will be likely to think better Jones demonstrated in her response to an exam
of the content of the essay excellent and stimulating question. The fact that a
itself. lecture, the concept lecturer has assigned a
of political culture is particular reading during
important. By using it, as a course is no guarantee
Professor Jones cogently that he/she thinks that the
argued, political scientists author of the reading is
can explain a number of ‘right’. Indeed, testing the
political phenomena . . . student’s ability to engage
critically with assigned
readings, instead of merely
accepting them as fact
because they are written by
professional academics, is
one of the chief reasons for
asking essay questions in
the first place.
KEY TERMS
assertion p. 227 cumulative method p. 228 proofs and
authorial voice p. 237 expositional technique examples p. 227
bias p. 229 p. 227 thesis statement p. 233
boosting p. 236 hedging p. 236 topic sentence p. 234
creative doubt p. 230 point of view p. 227 waffle p. 235
REVIEW QUESTIONS
1. Identify three criteria of failure in critical thinking.
2. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the structure used in Bacon’s essay on
revenge?
3. What is ‘creative doubt’?
4. Identify four factors associated with worthwhile sources and proofs.
5. What role does the topic sentence play in a paragraph?
6. When is it appropriate to use ‘I’ in writing?
7. Identify three strategies for keeping focused when writing an essay.
8. What is the purpose of judicious hedging?
9. Identify four errors that an essay writer should avoid.
10. Identify and describe three Evil Geniuses of essay writing.
APPLIED ACTIVITIES
1. Examine some essays you have written, and reconsider the marks given and the
comments made by the marker. Assuming the mark and comments are not grossly
unfair, can you detect any trends apparent over a number of assignments submitted
over time?
2. Consulting one or more books of quotations, find at least ten substantially different
quotations on at least one topic: love; money; anger; a discipline or industry you are
familiar with; a city you know or, in fact, anything you like. Now use these quotes in
W H AT W O U L D YO U D O ?
Your studies are going well. In the past eighteen months you have received seven A grades
for your essays. It’s not easy surviving, though: you have found it difficult to make ends
meet while you are studying. Today you received a phone
call from a cousin who lives interstate. She’s doing a sim-
ilar course, but is not doing as well as you. She offers
you a healthy sum of money if you will email all your
essays to her so that she can copy them and hand them in
under her own name. She has promised that she will not
show them to anyone else, but in the past she has actu-
ally forwarded sensitive emails you have sent to her on
a confidential basis to her friends. Later today someone
tells you that a new national anti-plagiarism database is
going to be set up in the next few months. You are only
six months away from graduating. The manager at the
place where you work part-time rang today and told you
that you no longer have the job.
How will you respond to your cousin’s request?
SUGGESTED READING
Anderson, Jonathan 2001, Assignment and thesis writing, 4th edn., John Wiley & Sons, Brisbane.
——— 2003, Academic writing: a practical guide for students, Routledge/Taylor & Francis, London.
——— 2006, Academic writing: a handbook for international students, Routledge/Taylor & Francis,
London.
Bailey, Stephen 2011, Academic writing: a handbook for international students, Routledge,
London/New York.
Barry, Marian 2011, Steps to academic writing, Georgian Press, New York City.
Baumann, James F & Graves, Michael F 2010, ‘What is academic vocabulary?’ Journal of Adolescent
and Adult Literacy, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 4–12.
Behrens, Laurence M & Rosen, Leonard J 2007, A sequence for academic writing, 3rd edn., Longman,
New York/London.
Bender, Sheila 2001, ‘Personal essays: arguing your viewpoint’, Writers’ Digest, July, pp. 20–1.
Brittenham, Rebecca & Hoeller, Hildegard 2004, Key words for academic writers, Pearson,
London/New York.
Cassell, Susie Lan & Moore, Kathleen Muller 2007, Techniques for the thesis bound essay, Longman,
London/New York.
Davis, Lloyd & McKay, Susan 1996, Structure and strategies: an introduction to academic writing,
Macmillan, South Melbourne.
Dwyer, Edward J 1992, ‘Using a journalism model for teaching essay writing’, Journal of Reading,
vol. 36, no. 3, November, pp. 226–7.
McClain, Molly & Roth, Jacqueline D 1999, Schaum’s quick guide to writing great essays,
McGraw-Hill, New York.
Mulvey, Dan 2007, Write on! Your easy-to-follow guide for writing essays and term papers, Barron’s
Educational, New York.
REFERENCES
Baumann, James F & Graves, Michael F 2010, ‘What is academic arkets and Limited Government, Competitive Enterprise
M
vocabulary?’ Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, vol. 54, Institute, Washington, DC, October 1.
no. 1, pp. 4–12. Harwood, Nigel 2005, ‘“We do not seem to have a theory . . . the
Biber, Douglas & Grava, Bethany 2010, ‘Challenging stereotypes theory I present here attempts to fill this gap”: inclusive and
about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness’, exclusive pronouns in academic writing’, Applied Linguistics,
Journal of English for Academic Purposes, vol. 9, no. 1, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 343—75.
pp. 2–20. Hyland, Ken 2002, ‘Options of identity in academic writing’, ELT
Blattner, Nancy H & Frazier, Christina L 2002, ‘Developing a Journal, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 351—9.
performance-based assessment of students’ critical thinking King, Charles 1998, ‘Battling the six evil geniuses of essay writing’,
skills’, Assessing Writing, vol. 8, pp. 47–64. PS: Political Sciences and Politics, March, vol. 31, no. 1.
Carter, Ronald & McCarthy, Michael 2006, Cambridge grammar of Kuo, Chih-Hua 1999, ‘The use of personal pronouns: role
English, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. relationships in scientific journal articles’, English for Specific
Doyle, Arthur Conan 1994 [1892], ‘Scandal in Bohemia’, in The Purposes, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 121—38.
adventures of Sherlock Holmes, Penguin, London. Read, Barbara, Francis, Becky & Robson, Jocelyn 2001, ‘“Playing
Drucker, Peter 2002, The effective executive revised, safe”: undergraduate essay writing and the presentation of the
HarperBusiness, New York. student “voice”’, British Journal of the Sociology of Education,
Freddi, Maria 2005, ‘Arguing linguistics: corpus investigation vol. 22, no. 3.
of one functional variety of academic discourse’, Journal of Tang, Ramona & John, Suganthi 1999, ‘The “I” in identity:
English for Academic Purposes, vol. 4, pp. 5—26. exploring writer identity in student academic writing through
Georgia, Paul J 1998, ‘Climate science briefings debunk the first person pronoun’, English for Specific Purposes,
greenhouse scares’, Competitive Enterprise Institute: Free vol. 18, pp. S23—S39.
5_60_66172_com21st3e_Ch07.indd
View publication stats 253 18/06/11 6:38 AM