research paper
What are the results of our research? What is the relationship between our independent variables and dependent variables? Do we have an argument to make about the influence of our selected variables on demographic decline? If not, negative results should also be reported.
The final product of our efforts is the production of a paper presenting our results. This will be a collaborative project among everyone in the class.
The structure of the paper will be discussed and decided during class but it will follow the standard format of most scientific and empirical papers with the following distinct sections: Introduction, Background, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion.
Lead authors of each paragraph and/or section will be noted within the text so that a fair assessment can be made of individual contributions.
Audience: The audience for a research paper determines the style of writing and citations. The audience is determined by the research question and the claim. Our audience is primarily archaeologists and students studying archaeology in undergraduate and graduate institutions. We also seek a public audience for our work that is interested in archaeological problems and results.
RUBRIC:
I strongly encourage you to read Kintigh 2005, Writing Archaeology: Analyses and Archaeological Argumentation (click here). It clarifies my expectations and provides excellent advice for writing in many disciplines.
Exceeds expectations. The research report is an excellent example of a cross-case comparative study. The report and associated data are accurate (as demonstrated by abundant, relevant sources), clearly written, and understandable by an audience with a general archaeological background. The structure is coherent and well organized around a central claim. Significant progress was made answering the research question, within the constraints of the research design. The report is pleasing to read and the results are understandable, compelling, interesting, and make progress in our understanding of the factors that may have influenced demographic decline.
Meets expectations: The research report is a good example of a cross-case comparative study. The report and associated data are accurate (as demonstrated by adequate, relevant sources), clearly written, and understandable by an audience with a general archaeological background. The structure is mostly coherent and somewhat organized around a central claim. Progress was made answering the research question, within the constraints of the research design. The report is readable and the results are mostly understandable and some progress was made in our understanding of the factors that may have influenced demographic decline.
Does not meet expectations: The research report meets expectations. The report and associated data appears to be accurate (as demonstrated by some relevant sources), mostly clearly written, and somewhat understandable by an audience with a general archaeological background. The paper is not well organized around a central claim and results are not fully understandable. Minimal progress was made answering the research question. The report is challenging to read and the results ambiguous. Little progress was made in our understanding of the factors that may have influenced demographic decline.
The final product of our efforts is the production of a paper presenting our results. This will be a collaborative project among everyone in the class.
The structure of the paper will be discussed and decided during class but it will follow the standard format of most scientific and empirical papers with the following distinct sections: Introduction, Background, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion.
Lead authors of each paragraph and/or section will be noted within the text so that a fair assessment can be made of individual contributions.
Audience: The audience for a research paper determines the style of writing and citations. The audience is determined by the research question and the claim. Our audience is primarily archaeologists and students studying archaeology in undergraduate and graduate institutions. We also seek a public audience for our work that is interested in archaeological problems and results.
RUBRIC:
I strongly encourage you to read Kintigh 2005, Writing Archaeology: Analyses and Archaeological Argumentation (click here). It clarifies my expectations and provides excellent advice for writing in many disciplines.
Exceeds expectations. The research report is an excellent example of a cross-case comparative study. The report and associated data are accurate (as demonstrated by abundant, relevant sources), clearly written, and understandable by an audience with a general archaeological background. The structure is coherent and well organized around a central claim. Significant progress was made answering the research question, within the constraints of the research design. The report is pleasing to read and the results are understandable, compelling, interesting, and make progress in our understanding of the factors that may have influenced demographic decline.
Meets expectations: The research report is a good example of a cross-case comparative study. The report and associated data are accurate (as demonstrated by adequate, relevant sources), clearly written, and understandable by an audience with a general archaeological background. The structure is mostly coherent and somewhat organized around a central claim. Progress was made answering the research question, within the constraints of the research design. The report is readable and the results are mostly understandable and some progress was made in our understanding of the factors that may have influenced demographic decline.
Does not meet expectations: The research report meets expectations. The report and associated data appears to be accurate (as demonstrated by some relevant sources), mostly clearly written, and somewhat understandable by an audience with a general archaeological background. The paper is not well organized around a central claim and results are not fully understandable. Minimal progress was made answering the research question. The report is challenging to read and the results ambiguous. Little progress was made in our understanding of the factors that may have influenced demographic decline.