NCC Reading Journal, Spring 2020
Due on June 11th/July 9th, by 5pm
Submit it via email to maran@nagoya-u.jp
NOTE: if you have not received my confirmation mail after the submission, mail me again; my university mail sometimes is not compatible with your mail system.
BASICS
1) Students are expected to submit two 300-400 word reading journals (in WORD document; can go over the word limit) reflecting upon their reading progress in the previous month (1st Journal to review the literature by Week 7; 2nd Journal to review literature until early July);
2) For each assignment, you should engage with at least TWO reading(s) listed in our syllabus for the designated period of time, and focus on a very specific topic/research question (e.g., ‘national/transnational cinema’; ‘direct cinema’; ‘xianchang and Chinese independent cinema’; ‘film festival’ etc.).
3) The submitted WORD file should contain “NCC” + the student’s name in its file name;
4) Preferred referencing style is Harvard (a link of the style has been embedded in the first post in our course blog). Please self-study the style (Citation Tools will help you to do the job effectively!).
Don’t be overly concerned with grammar (although spell-check will be helpful!), but do put a lot of thinking into your reading journals since they will be key to fruitful discussions in class and even your final paper.
FORMAT Include the following information at the top of each assignment:
Your Name
Course Title
Submission Date
Title of article [please do NOT use the bibliographical item as your title…]
Mainbody
Works Cited
|
What We Want?
This Reading Journal is a simplified version of Literature Review (if you do not know what is literature review, refer below); we use it to keep updated about your learning progress, and get to know your understanding of the critical theories and discussions on certain film studies-related concepts, contexturalised and historicized. You would get our feedback on your assignment in the Google Cloud (Ran comments on all; Hao comments on BAs’ works).
I’d rather you start from something small and more specific, and orient your discussions AROUND the readings themselves, NOT simply your own feelings and evaluations (I feel blahblah…this is the very basics of academic writing in humanities), or random impressions of certain image/cultural texts=we want to read how you support your discussions with “evidence”. Again and again, we DO NOT WANT a summary of ALL the readings in the previous month (please do NOT do that) =you do not have to cover all the issues discussed even by one singular author.
How?
You are expected to review, evaluate and even critique certain theoretical concepts (such as keywords proposed by scholars) and/or arguments (much detailed explanations) presented in the cited sources; you should be able to present your own interpretation and viewpoints (instead of simply copying and pasting quotes). Further relevant analysis of case studies (visual materials/films) etc. will be welcomed but NOT a must at the stage (given the length of the assignment). For your Final Paper, you are encouraged to develop some of the underdeveloped ideas presented in the Reading Journals, by engaging closely with the case studies.
WHAT DO WE MEAN BY… ‘LITEREATURE REVIEW’
A literature review … has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis. A summary is a recap of important information about the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information. It might give a new interpretation of old material or combine new with old interpretations. Or it might trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates. Depending on the situation, the literature review may evaluate the sources and advise the reader on the most pertinent or relevant of them.
Comments
Post a Comment