Junior Work Guidelines
Junior Independent Work in NES
Topic: 20 September
First draft to advisor: 29 November
Due date: 7 January
First draft to advisor: 18 April
Due date: 6 May
A Junior Paper written in the Department of Near Eastern Studies is normally an essay of 20 to 30 double-spaced pages that is clearly focused on one—or several related--questions, problems or issues.
The range of subjects suitable for such essays is very wide in NES. But most projects involve one or more of the following elements:
· defining a significant question, formulating a hypothesis, gathering and assessing evidence
· reviewing critically the work of others on this subject, evaluating alternative methods of inquiry
· critically reviewing one's own arguments, and relating one's findings and conclusions to a larger context of issues.
Some juniors will have acquired enough language proficiency to be able to use sources in their language of specialization, and if so, they are encouraged to do so.
The Junior Paper is not a passive review of the existing literature nor just a summary of facts. It presents a critical and creative analysis of a question, problem or issue. A presentation of the student's own well-reasoned views is an essential part of this exercise.
Juniors are strongly encouraged to take advantage of the NES Writers' Group, meeting this year with a graduate student in NES. The Group typically meets three or four times at the beginning of the semester to orient students to a subject area and to help them define individual paper topics. Students are expected to attend the sessions scheduled, including a library tour.
The middle part of the semester is spent writing the paper and consulting with their faculty advisors on an individual basis.
Advisors may be counted upon to help students define a topic (usually the largest obstacle to be overcome), develop a project of appropriate length and difficulty, develop a bibliography, find sources of data, select appropriate methods, and present a lucid analysis. Students should feel free to meet with and to ask their advisors for comments during office hours on outlines and first drafts; but it is the juniors responsibility to initiate meetings, or work out a schedule to meet on a regular basis, if necessary.
As comments received on the first draft may be crucial to the project's success, the first draft should reach the advisor by 29 November. Advisors will make every effort to return drafts, with comments, within two weeks before Winter Recess. This will allow students to make final revisions during the break.
The deadline for receipt of the Fall Junior Paper by the NES office in 110 Jones is by 5:00 pm 7 January.
The above applies to the second Junior Paper the student writes for NES in the Spring Semester. Again, students must have a topic by 10 February; rework and refine their topic, and submit the draft to their advisor by 18 April. They are to receive the advisor's comments by 25 April to allow students to make adjustments, if necessary.
The deadline for receipt of the Spring Junior Paper by the NES office in 110 Jones is by 5:00 pm 6 May.
It is wise to begin thinking about the topic of a senior thesis during the junior year. Often students write their second junior paper on a topic that will lead to a thesis. Some discover that the subject is not the one they want after all; for others it encourages summer research on the thesis that simplifies and enriches their thesis work during their senior year.
Students are welcome to consult the Departmental Representative: Michael A. Reynolds, at firstname.lastname@example.org or 258-0256.
Standards for Grading JUNIOR PAPERs
The junior paper provides NES majors with their first opportunity to
engage in independent scholarly research. Junior papers are supposed to
define a significant question or problem and to answer it through
a process of systematic research which may, depending on the nature of
the topic selected, involve reading primary and secondary literature or
original documents, interviewing, or compiling and analyzing statistical
A. A junior paper in the A range will have elements of originality in its
conception of its subject, in the evidence and reasoning it brings to bear
on that subject, in the analytical techniques it employs, or in all of these.
It will demonstrate attention to important works on the subject, and will
indicate with care and precision the importance of its questions and
conclusions for the understanding of politics. When appropriate, it will
also anticipate and respond to major objections to its position. To merit an
A, a junior paper should be well written, developing its arguments in an
orderly way and presenting its ideas clearly and crisply. Poor grammar
and style and more than occasional misspellings have no place in an A
The mark of A+ should be reserved for junior papers that satisfy all of
these criteria to a high degree. The mark of A- should be given a junior
paper which demonstrates intellectual creativity but does not meet in a
fully satisfactory way some other requirement of junior papers in the A
B. A junior paper in the B range is a less outstanding treatment of a
significant subject. A well done case study which yields few lessons of
general import, or a good critical review of a significant body of thought
which does not go beyond previous work on the subject would merit a
grade in this range. Like the A junior paper, one in the B range should be
grounded in substantial research appropriate to its objectives, but the
latter will fall short in some way, as for instance by ignoring important
sources or by failing to anticipate major objections. A junior paper in the
B range should be clearly written and logically organized.
A grade of B+ is appropriate for a sensibly conceived, well-written
project that shows little originality or creativity. A B- is appropriate for
well-conceived junior papers that have some significant flaw in execution
or a number of less important shortcomings.
C. A junior paper in the C range is a competent but not distinguished
treatment of a significant subject. It will show evidence of substantial but
not wholly adequate research. It may be flawed in one or two additional
ways as well: the logic of an important argument may be faulty, the
conclusions or findings may not be explored adequately, or the writing
may be mediocre. An informative case study that offers little analysis or a
review of some body of literature that generally gets things right but does
little with them should be given a grade in the C range.
A grade of C+ should be given to the most informative of the junior
papers in the C range; a C- to those that meet the basic requirements of
the category but have several serious flaws.
D. To merit the grade of D, a junior paper must treat a non-trivial subject
and must show evidence that the writer has some substantial
knowledge about that subject. Beyond that little can be said in praise of a
junior paper in the D range.
F. A junior paper that does not meet the minimal requirements for the
grade of D should be given an F.