Academic skills II: Reading, Using, and Writing Scholarship

Subject is not scheduled Not scheduled

Code Completion Credits Range Language Instruction Semester
940AS2 exam 6 English academic year

Subject guarantor

Name of lecturer(s)

Contents

Getting to grips with published scholarship – theory, history, criticism, and combinations thereof – is among the most challenging but important aspects of doctoral research. Accordingly, this course aims to strengthen students’ understandings of the crucial roles scholarly engagement can play in their theses, spin-off projects, and academic life generally. The course is therefore built around three complimentary, intersecting strands which structure each of its six sessions: reading scholarship, using scholarship, and writing scholarship. The first strand invites students to confront the opportunities of identifying helpful “takeaways” in existing scholarship, by analyzing a published essay each week. The second strand invites students to consider how such outputs can enrich their own work, with sessions devoted respectively to 1) methods, 2) conceptualization, 3) inspiration, 4) support, 5) blind-spots, and 6) flaws. And, the third strand involves one student delivering a presentation each week on a piece of academic work they are drafting, to discuss issues they may be having with it and receive feedback from the rest of the group. In so doing, it is hoped that students can confront this intimidating aspect of academic life, empowering them to deepen their understandings of their field and maximizing the quality and “publishability” of their work.

Learning outcomes

By the end of this course, students are expected to show growing competencies in:

•Methodological self-awareness

•Conceptualizing key ideas

•Conveying importance

•Academically supporting arguments

•Addressing knowledge blind-spots

•Addressing intellectual flaws

Prerequisites and other requirements

N/A

Literature

Calavita, Marco. “‘MTV Aesthetics’ at the Movies: Interrogating a Film Criticism Fallacy”, Journal of Film and Video 59.3 (2007), pp. 15–31.

Kraszewski, Jon, “Recontextualizing the Historical Reception of Blaxploitation: Articulation of Class, Black Nationalism, and Anxiety in the Genre’s Advertisements”, The Velvet Light Trap 50 (2002), pp. 48–61.

McRobbie, Angela. “Postfeminism and Popular Culture: Bridgit Jones and the New Gender Regime”, Feminist Media Studies 14.3 (2004), pp. 255–264.

Mittell, Jason. “A Cultural Approach to Television Genre Theory”, Cinema Journal 40.3 (2001), pp. 3–24.

Nowell, Richard. “Hollywood Don’t Skate: US Production Trends, Industry Analysis, and the Roller Disco Movie”, The New Review of Film and Television Studies 11.1 (2013), pp. 73–91.

Sconce, Jeffrey. “Trashing the Academy: Taste, Excess, and the Emerging Politics of Cinematic Style”, Cinema Journal 36.4 (1995), pp. 371–393.

Evaluation methods and criteria

Participation (100 percent)

Given the practical nature and student-oriented approach of this course, it is essential that students are actively involved in all sessions. Accordingly, the breadth, depth, and relevance of their contributions will be taken in to account, as will be their willingness to engage in constructive peer-to-peer evaluation. A short presentation delivered by each student will also be taken into account when formulating grades.

Further information

No schedule has been prepared for this course

The subject is a part of the following study plans