Midterm Take-Home Essay Assignment Principles Of Sociology M ✓ Solved

Midtermtake Home Essay Assignmentprinciples Of Sociology M Ferlises

Your midterm is a take-home essay exam. You have one full week to complete it. You must hand it in during the following class. Your midterm essay should be a two-page critical review of only one of the following articles: 1. “But What Do You Mean, Women and Men in Conversation,” by Deborah Tannen 2. “Eating Your Friends is the Hardest, The Survivors of the F227,” by James Henslin Please follow these directions carefully:

1. Choose either the Henslin or Tannen article (above) and read it carefully.

2. On your first page, provide an accurate and faithful review (i.e., summary) of the article you have selected. Do this in the same manner that you have done with your previous reviews. On the left-hand side of your paper, before your first sentence, type “REVIEW.” (Please see the example for this provided on the next page).

3. For the second page, offer a critical evaluation of the methodological problems in the author’s research and discussion. In other words, critically evaluate the way the author conducted his or her research. Specifically, indicate its weaknesses and how that affects the author’s thesis or theory. On the left-hand side of your paper, before your first sentence, type “CRITIQUE.” (See the example on page 2 below.)

a. Focus exclusively on methodological problems and the validity of the study. i. Ask yourself if there are problems with how the author 1) defines his or her topic and issue, 2) gathered the information, and 3) interprets the meaning of that data in his or her article.

ii. Consider what methods the author used for gathering the data and how well or how poorly the author uses those methods. Also, consider the advantages and disadvantages of the methods he or she uses for gathering information.

iii. Show how the methodological problems you point out affect the validity of the study or the author’s theory or thesis (i.e., what the author claims to be true).

iv. Be clear and systematic in your discussion. Please note: Your papers must be typed (Times New Roman, size 12 font), double-spaced, with standard margins and stapled. State your name and the name of the author and title of the article you will be discussing.

Below is an abbreviated sample of how you should format your paper.

Menendez, Christina Soc101-09 / Spring 2020 Midterm Critical Review of “But What do You Mean,” By Deborah Tannen

REVIEW

In her article “But What do You Mean,” Deborah Tannen discusses the different ways……… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………….... 1 (Menendez/Soc101-09/Spring 2020)

CRITIQUE

One of the methodological problems we encounter in Tannen’s study involves the way she ……….. ………………………………………………………………………………..………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 2

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Critical Review of Deborah Tannen’s “But What Do You Mean”

REVIEW

In her article “But What Do You Mean,” Deborah Tannen explores the complexities involved in cross-gender communication. She investigates the ways men and women often misinterpret each other's language and behavioral cues due to cultural and social differences. Tannen underscores that communication styles are deeply rooted in gender socialization and differ significantly, leading to misunderstandings and conflicts in everyday exchanges. She provides numerous anecdotal examples derived from her observations of conversations in various social settings, emphasizing that men tend to prioritize status and independence in their speech, whereas women emphasize connection and intimacy. Tannen asserts that these divergent communication styles can deepen gender divides, even when both parties intend to be clear and friendly.

CRITIQUE

One methodological problem in Tannen’s study involves her reliance on anecdotal and observational data without employing systematic data collection techniques such as surveys or controlled experiments. The nature of her evidence is primarily qualitative, based on her personal observations and interpretations, which raises concerns about the validity and generalizability of her conclusions. Her approach lacks rigorous sampling methods; the conversations she analyzes are context-specific, often limited to specific social settings, and may not represent the broader population’s communication behaviors. Consequently, her findings may be influenced by observer bias, where her interpretations are shaped by personal expectations or cultural stereotypes rather than objective measures. Additionally, her reliance on anecdotal examples makes it difficult to establish causality or to differentiate between correlation and causation regarding gender differences in communication. These methodological weaknesses limit the validity of her conclusions and suggest that her theory, while insightful, should be considered within the context of these limitations. Employing more systematic and empirical data collection methods could strengthen her arguments and provide a more comprehensive understanding of gender communication patterns.

References

  • Tannen, Deborah. “But What Do You Mean: Women and Men in Conversation.”
  • Henslin, James. “Eating Your Friends is the Hardest, The Survivors of the F227.”
  • Griffiths, Paul. “Research Methods in Anthropology and Sociology.”
  • Creswell, John W. “Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches.”
  • Babbie, Earl. “The Practice of Social Research.”
  • Buckingham, David. “Researching Adolescents’ Media Uses and Effects.”
  • Bogdan, Robert, and Sari Biklen. “Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theories and Methods.”
  • Marshall, Catherine, and Gretchen B. Rossman. “Designing Qualitative Research.”
  • Silverman, David. “Interpreting Qualitative Data.”
  • Patton, Michael Quinn. “Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods.”

Related Assignments