CIE100: Common Intellectual Experience - Thesis Workshop (10 Points)
Assignment Goals
The goals of this assignment are:- To draft a working thesis early enough that it can still change
- To test a thesis against explicit, repeatable criteria
- To diagnose weak theses by deliberately writing one
- To name the conversation an essay enters before entering it
The Assignment
Purpose
Before each essay, this short workshop asks you to draft a working thesis — working, because its job is to be improved, not defended. A thesis written the night before a draft is due can only be obeyed; a thesis written now can be tested, argued with, and replaced, which is the entire advantage. This is a standalone mini-assignment: it prepares you for the upcoming essay without changing anything about the essay assignment itself.
Task
Write your response in three parts (roughly a 1-2 paragraph equivalent in total) and submit it through Canvas before the start of class:
-
The working thesis. One or two sentences stating the argument you currently intend the upcoming essay to make.
- The test. Check your thesis against the four criteria below, with one sentence of self-assessment for each:
- Arguable: could a reasonable person who has done the reading disagree with it? If everyone would nod, it is a summary wearing a thesis’s clothes.
- Specific: does it name the texts it is about and the relationship it claims between them (extends, complicates, contradicts, reframes)?
- Provable: could it be supported with quotable evidence from the texts — actual passages you could put on the page?
- Consequential: does it answer “so what?” — why would the argument matter to someone who is not being graded on it?
- The deliberately weaker version. Rewrite your own thesis as a worse thesis on purpose, then diagnose in 2-3 sentences exactly why it is weaker: too broad, unfalsifiable, or summary-not-argument. Learning to see the failure modes in a thesis you built is the fastest way to stop building them by accident.
Close with the “they say / I say” move: one sentence naming the conversation your thesis enters — what “they say” (a reading, a common view, a claim from one of our texts) that your thesis answers (Graff, G. and Birkenstein, C., “They Say / I Say”: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing, W. W. Norton).
Criteria
A strong response has a thesis that survives (or is honestly revised by) all four tests, a weaker version that is genuinely diagnosable rather than a strawman of a strawman, and a “they say” sentence that names a real position rather than “some people think.”
Formats (UDL)
You may render your response as prose, as a labeled list (thesis, four one-sentence tests, weaker version plus diagnosis, “they say” sentence), or as a two-column table (criterion and self-assessment), as long as all parts are present.
See also: Evidence Workshop (/Participation/EvidenceWorkshop) and Counterargument and Concession (/Participation/Counterargument), this workshop’s pre-draft companions, and the argument-building section of How to Read Hard Texts in CIE (/Assignments/ReadingGuide).
Submission
Submit a word processed or PDF document through Canvas before the start of class.Please refer to the Style Guide for code quality examples and guidelines.