Sample Article Summary and Raven Evaluation

(SAMPLE ARTICLE SUMMARY AND RAVEN EVALUATION)

AP Capstone Research Research Topic Assignment #1 (Your Name) (The Date)

Topic: Language Revitalization Programs in Indigenous Communities

Source: Schlesinger, Arthur, Jr. The Disuniting of America: Reflections on a Multicultural Society.

Summary:

In his 1998 book The Disuniting of America: Reflections on a Multicultural Society, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. argues that America’s focus on multiculturalism is divisive. Schlesinger sees English as the only language that provides social mobility in American society, and as such he promotes monolingual education. However, his argument against bilingual education goes much further than the lobbyists of the England-Only movement, who claim to favor English-only education because of its instrumental value for non-English speaking immigrants. Schlesinger refers to bilingualism as a “separatist impulse” and English as the one ‘essential bond of cohesion’ that unites all Americans (p.115). He is not opposed to native languages that are learned in the home, or to English speakers learning a second language in school, but to ‘institutional bilingualism,” exemplified by public school programs that either aim to accommodate non-English speakers or help them retain their native languages.

‘Institutional bilingualism’ is just one of the many things that Schlesinger accuses of dividing America. It is part of his larger argument that the various multicultural movements that have formed to promote ethnic and cultural pride and challenge Euro-centrism have become ethnocentric themselves, creating an institutionalized ‘cult of ethnicity’ that threatens to destroy America’s ‘melting pot.” This ‘melting pot’ period in America’s history was a time in which people of different cultures and ethnicities recognized their differences but were bound together by a common American culture, political system and languages.

There are several problems with Schlesinger’s argument. First, although he does not shy away from discussing racism in America, his description of the ‘melting pot’ is a romanticized idealization. He writes about the 19th century European immigrants who readily abandoned their native languages in order to assimilate into American society (p112), but does not discuss the many indigenous tribes who were literally forced to abandon their native languages for English. For many Native Americans, assimilation into American culture was not a choice…

RAVEN Analysis:

Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. was a renowned 20th century historian, social critic and public intellectual. He had a long career in writing and politics and worked for President Kennedy in several capacities, notably as a speech-writer and adviser. He has been published many times by well-respected university presses and he is often looked to as an authoritative voice on 20th century American political history. As a prominent, well-respected, and long-time historian, he has specialized knowledge and is in a good position to understand and write about American culture. He has no apparent vested interests at stake. It should be noted that this book was published eighteen years ago, though due to the nature of the topic, the argument nevertheless remains relevant. AP Capstone Research Research Topic Assignment #1 (Your Name) (The Date)

Topic: Efficacy of Online Education

Source: Horowitz, Doogie. Distance Learning’s Downfall. Journal of Modern Education. 2013. Vol. 4, Issue 65, pp. 114-123.

Summary:

In Distance Learning’s Downfall, Dr. Doogie Horowitz talks about the ups—and, more recently, multiple downs—of the online-based learning systems we’ve all seen on late-night commercials and in online ads. While the Internet has its education potential, Horowitz says that for-profit institutions can also use it for less altruistic purposes in the names of higher learning.

The abundance of opportunities to cheat are first on Horowitz’s list of problems. With a simple online search, less scrupulous students can find ghostwriters willing to sit through an entire semester’s worth of classes for around $1500. Plagiarism is a problem anywhere, of course, but the anonymous nature of online classes, specifically those that don’t require webcams, can cause huge trouble.

Worse are those institutions that seem not to care as long as they’re paid for it. Horowitz has few figures to back this up, since these institutions have no obligation to discuss their internal policies and practices. However, he makes the rational claim that those companies most driven to big advertising programs, and thus likely making the biggest profits, would probably have an incentive to be lax with their expulsions and suspensions. At the very least, he argues, lax policies, like those not requiring webcams as part of class attendance, or those that don’t wish to pay for online anti-plagiarism software, indicate a commercial motive, not an educational one.

There is also, Horowitz says, the lack of hands-on experience inherent in many online classes. While some do require external volunteer work, internships, or classwork, nothing matches the experience of attending a class, looking a professor in the eye, and getting your hands dirty with various lab activities. For this argument, Horowitz produces an online article that claims learning absorption is better done in an area devoted to learning. Other places, like coffee shops or the living room couch, often provide distractions outright banned in the classroom.

Finally, Horowitz claims that the educators in this field are often little more than mercenaries. He claims that his own biases from his time as a university professor might shine through, but that overhearing online teachers in the pub bragging that they get paid X amount for X classes in a semester is a microcosm of the whole for-profit online learning “scheme.” While any education is better than none, he claims, a student might be better served attending a nearby community college—many of which cost a fraction of an online tuition bill.

In the end, Horowitz says online classes are “a problem—maybe not a catastrophic one, but a problem.” Because of the for-profit motive and cheater-friendly systems, he says, education as a whole is compromised. Given the reputation even traditional colleges have received, all reputable learning systems should work to distance themselves from their less honest cousins.

RAVEN Analysis:

Dr. Horovitz has published many academic works in the last decade, though mainly in medical journals. Thus while he has written a few articles opposing online education in popular magazines, it must be noted that his background is in medicine, not education. Furthermore, while Dr. Horovitz writes an impassioned argument against online education, he cites few statistics to back up his claims, which therefore need to be substantiated. Source Evaluation (RAVEN Analysis in other words)

Credibility Who is the author? Are any credentials given? Who is the publisher? If you can’t tell the answer to the above questions or if there isn’t any clear information, be suspicious. For websites, you may have to check the homepage or the “About us” page to find who is behind the site. If the source is published by a university press, it is likely to be scholarly. Check the edition or for any updates on the source, further editions indicate a source has been revised and updated to reflect changes in the content and may include any omissions from the previous edition. Also, many printings or editions may indicate that the work has become a standard source in the area and is reliable.

Currency What is the date of publication? For websites, when was the site last updated? Think about your topic and how important recent information is to it; is the source current or out-of-date for your topic? For a history project on the Spanish American War, currency may not be very important. For a paper on human cloning, currency would be very important.

Point of View or Bias Was the information intended to persuade, inform, entertain or sell? For websites, what does the address end with - .com, .edu, .gov? Is it easy to make out the author’s opinions or point of view? There’s nothing wrong with a source having a point of view, but you need to be aware of it so you can investigate the other sides of the issue. Once you have checked the Credibility on the source, you might have an easier time determining any bias. For example: Information on gun control written by the National Rifle Association.

Accuracy Are the sources for any factual information clearly listed so they can be verified? Is the information free of grammatical, spelling, and typographical errors? Are any research studies and/or statistics discussed, if so are they listed in a works cited? Generally, the presence and quality of a bibliography or works cited reflects on the attention with which the authors have prepared their work. You may not know enough about the topic to judge so look for solid evidence, such as research studies, a bibliography or references to other source the author used. All of these things indicate the information is based on research rather than just opinion.

Coverage Is the work a primary or secondary source? If you were researching Robert Oppenheimer’s role in the development of the atomic b omb, Oppenheimer’s own writings would be one of many primary sources available on this topic. Others might include relevant government documents and contemporary newspaper and journal articles. Scholars use this primary material to generate interpretations which become secondary sources. Books, encyclopedia articles, and scholarly journal articles about Oppenheimer’s role are considered secondary sources. Choose both primary and secondary sources when you have the opportunity.