Writing Better Papers
A Guide to Clear Analytical Writing
(C)2002 CJP
The Overall Strategy
Writing a good paper is not easy. In fact a good piece
of writing shouldn't be easy to produce. Writing is an art that requires
a great deal of skill, and it takes years of practice and study to become
proficient at it.
Most of you at this point in your school career probably think you are good
writers, and have been told this by innumerable teachers. To be honest, my
experience reading college writing at this level tells me that these compliments
-- for most of you -- are not really true. I'm not saying this to insult your
writing, but rather to head off the (possible) arrogance that some students
have regarding their writing -- they feel that they are already good
writers, and feel they have nothing new to learn. Such arrogance will prevent
you from progressing. You must be humble regarding your writing or you are
doomed to remain a flawed writer.
One of my goals in this class is to help you to learn how to write better
and with more confidence. Although there are countless things in writing that
one can work on to improve, in this class I will concentrate on argumentative
support and overall structure. Generally, the two are:
Issue #1: Overall Structure
The Problem
- Almost all college students (before they learn to structure
their writing) write in "stream of consciousness" or "stream of memory."
A familiar sight: you get the assignment and have a very vague idea of what
to do and where to go with the paper. So you sit at the computer, stare at
the blank screen and begin typing whatever comes to mind relevant to the
assignment. Thus the progression of the paper is really just a record of
what occurred to you when. If you remember subject A on page 3, you talk
about it, then remember something about subject C, then B, then F, and then
maybe on page 6 you remember something about subject A again. There is no
real structural transition from A to C to B to F to A. It just occurred to
you in that order. Hence the paper has no organization, no flow, and no clear
sign of purpose. In other words -- it is a bad paper. What to do?
- Most students, even when they do have an general idea
of what they are trying to accomplish in a paper, have no real idea of how
to accomplish the goal they have. You can tell because the paper starts out
with a fairly clear goal, and then it wanders throughout the paper, sometimes
dealing with that goal and sometimes not. There's no logical setup for how
to attack the problem, and so the paper, while not as bad as the "stream of
memory," is not a very good piece of work.
Solution: Learn to structure your paper logically and analytically.
By the end of this course you will learn to
- Write an abstract for your papers. Every paper you write
should have an abstract. An abstract is like a "roadmap" for the reader that
tells the reader what the problem is, what your solution to that problem is,
and how you intend on showing the reader, step-by-step, how you arrived
at this solution.
- Abstracts allow you to understand exactly what you are doing
in the paper, and why. This will prevent you from "meandering" and losing
focus.
- Abstracts allow the reader to understand what you are
doing, and why. This allows the reader to get a good sense of the point of
the paper. Badly focused papers are painful to read. Well focused papers show
confidence and grace.
- The "step-by-step" analysis indicated in the abstract points
to the fact that you will be sectioning your papers. You will learn
to treat each logical step in your paper in a different section. Thus your
abstract will tell the reader, briefly in a sentence or two, what each section
discusses and why.
- Sectioning allows you to beat the "psychological" game of
writing a long paper. A 15-page paper sure sounds intimidating. Once
you learn how to logically section your paper, you realize that really you
have two 7 page papers to write (if two sections) or three 5 page papers
(if three sections). If done well, these sections are independent of one
another, and so the thought of three 5 page papers should not intimidate
you at all.
- Sectioning allows you to clearly see what you are doing. In
this class you will generally work on two-section papers. These two sections
are usually
- a non-argumentative explication of the concepts or
theories involved in the problem you will be addressing.
- an argumentative section which then state the problem
clearly and then argue for your solution to that problem.
- Note that (2) above hints at the fact that section II
in this schema has two sub-sections -- stating the problem and arguing
for a solution. Although you need not explicitly section this out in the paper,
you will learn to keep these issues separate in that given section. Seen
from this angle, section II -- 7 pages in length -- now turns out to be two
sub-papers, one maybe 2 pages long and the other 5. Notice that the paper
gets more and more manageable the more it is stuctured and sectioned.
- Sectioning forces you to learn to put issue A, B and C where
they belong, logically, and it teaches you to learn to edit better. Noticing
that you discuss subject C a bit in section II -- when it is supposed to be
discussed in section I -- allows you to see where you are "digressing" and
losing focus.
Issue #2: Argumentative Support
The Problem:
- The most obvious problem is the most prevalent: most students
have absolutely no idea now to support an argument. For the most part, this
isn't your fault -- you've never been asked to, and frankly we don't live
in a society that really values solid argumentation (you know, "everybody
has a right to their own opinion," no matter how pathetically argued for).
Roughly 99% of the courses you have taken in the past have not asked you to
support conclusions, rather relying on the "don't worry, you can't be wrong"
approach or the "just memorize the facts" approach.
- Students are uncomfortable supporting their arguments, because
it opens them up to the risk of being wrong, or the risk of having a bad argument.
Most are more comfortable just spouting opinions, since opinions can't be
wrong (so it's safer).
Solution: Become more comfortable with argumentative
support, and learn how to apply it in different ways in writing.
- If you make a key point, you must back it up.
In this class, "backing it up" comes in two different forms, each corresponding
to the two different goals of your paper. Recall that you are going to be
asked to write an explicative and an argumentative section.
Argumentative writing and writing that aims for explication have different
aims, so "support" will differ in form, though not in "spirit."
What are the two different types?
Argumentative Writing
Argumentative writing aims at convinving the reader of a specific argument
that you have constructed. If you want to convince me that chocolate is the
best flavor of ice cream, then "chocolate is the best flavor" is your conclusion
(it is the statement you are arguing for) and the reasons you advance
in favor of that conclusion are your premises. The better your premises
support the conclusion, the better your argument (for chocolate) has been
supported. An argument gains a better and better degree of support when the
argument becomes more sophisticated and thought-out, and less prone to counter-argument.
A highly sophisticated argument will recognize at least some counter-argument
that could be put against your conclusion, or your reasons for the conclusion,
and such an argument will show how such counter-arguments do not actually
work, or are not really convincing.
- So, "support" in the argumentative section
of your paper is measured by the sophistication of your (premises) reasons,
and just how well they succeed in supporting they conclusion you are trying
to argue for.
Explicative Writing
Explicative writing aims not to convince the reader of an argument, but
rather to convince the reader of a certain way of understanding a piece of
text, or a certain way of understanding an issue or argument. As such,
writing which is explicatory in nature is essentially interpretative.
You are arguing for a certain way to interpret something. So, in a
way, you are arguing for a conclusion, but not the same kind
of conclusion you are aiming for in argumentative writing. Your conclusion
in this case is your interpretation (of the text, of the issue,
whatever). Well, you'll need to provide support for this interpretation.
In this type of writing, argumentative reasons are not the proper
premises. Rather, you'll need to provide evidence for your interpretation
by citing and quoting appropriate text that you think shows your reading,
and/or secondary literature arguing for a similar interpretation as yours.
- This paper assignment has
two different but interconnected goals.
- The first goal is to achieve
mastery in explication. Your aim -- in the first section -- section ( I )
-- is to develop a concise, detailed, and thorough analysis of virtue ethics
as a system. Your aim here is maximum accuracy
and precision in your description. You are not arguing for or against virtue ethics,
you are explaining what virtue ethics is. While explaining virtue ethics to the reader you will also demonstrate
your mastery of the appropriate texts -- Confucius's Analects and Aristotle's
Ethics -- by citing the text where it is appropriate and then
interpreting and analyzing those textual selections.
- The second goal is argumentative.
Glaucon's argument to Plato is that virtue ethics (all ethics, actually)
is really just a sham. People act virtuously -- Glaucon argues -- simply
because they know that if they do otherwise they will get punished. So,
according to Glaucon no one is really ethical at all. Rather, people do
what looks ethical merely because they have been "trained" that way through
punishment and reward. Do you think Glaucon is right in his assertion that
if anyone were given the Ring of Gyges they would stop being virtuous? Here
you must develop some arguments for your position (whatever that is). Essentially,
if Glaucon is right, everyone is an egoist at heart. If he is wrong -- and
virtue ethics is right -- altruism (and thus ethics) is indeed possible.
Here you will make a stand in favor of your own personal values.
- Write for the audience of the
wide world, not just for me, yourself, your peers, or people
of your own gender, race, culture, or century. Hence, be sensitive
to the fact that large sectors of your audience share few if any
of your values or background assumptions, and simply do not take
for granted what you take for granted. Assume that your audience
has read the books for the course, and is open-minded, but does
not (yet) agree with you on their meaning or merits. Make sure that
this very diverse audience knows (1) what you are talking about,
(2) why it should agree with you, or at least why it should find
your view reasonable and responsible, and (3) why it should care.
Writing a paper is like selling a product to a buyer. You want to
convince the buyer that he/she understands the importance of the product,
and wants it.
- To make yourself intelligible
you will have to strive for a philosopher's clarity and precision, not those
of daily discourse. To make yourself persuasive you will have
to make cogent use of textual evidence (in your interpretation)
and argument (in your evaluative comments). The request to argue
is not a request to be quarrelsome, defensive, or aggressive.
It is a request to be accountable to your audience, giving it good
reasons in place of asking readers to take your word or to believe
blindly.
-
Always think of yourself as a salesman pushing a product. You
must show the reader that your product is (a) useful, (b) right,
(c) better than the other available products. A failure to do
(a) usually results in a dogmatically "argued" paper. You assume
that your audience agrees with you already, and so you "preach
to the choir", essentially listing a number of conclusions you
think are right, but with no argumentation behind them. You must
assume that your readers do not
agree with you at all. No salesman assumes that his/her audience
is already convinced about the usefulness of the product. Having
a bad dogmatic attitude turns the reader off from your project.
A failure to do (b) and (c) can take a number of directions. You
fail to clearly show what
the other available products claim to have to offer, or you
do so in a manner which makes the other products appear entirely
worthless. In addition, you do not argue for your theory or against
the other theory, but rather state that yours is better than theirs
is. Sell your reader -- a reader you assume to be hostile to your point
of view -- on your argument.
|
Introduction:
Your Abstract
|
Your abstract is your paper's "mission statement" or the "advertisement"
of the paper to your prospective audience. Your abstract is essentially
a concise summary that draws out the "roadmap" your paper's argument takes.
Your abstract is the first thing written, and should be wholly contained
on page 1. Essentially, it will look like this (the blah blah blah is the
abstract):
Your Name
Pg. 1
Prof. Panza
Values Analysis, Spring 2003
"Your Title Here"
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blahl
|
Begin the main body of the paper here.
Abstracts contain the following:
(1) A statement of your thesis. Example: "It has
been argued by some -- namely Glaucon from Plato's Republic -- that
a virtuous person would not remain virtuous if it were impossible for that
person to get caught doing unethical things. In this essay I will argue
that Glaucon is wrong -- it is difficult, but possible for a person to be
virtuous even if no one would notice the ethical or unethical deeds done
by that person."
So first you "set up" the paper by telling your reader what your main
goal is.
(2) You tell the reader how you will accomplish the goal(s) you laid
out in (1). Here you will detail your strategy for argumentation,
and present that strategy in parts. For example, you can say "To accomplish
this goal, I have divided this paper in two parts. Since there is no sense
discussing what a virtuous person would do until we understand what it means
to be a virtuous person, in section ( I ) I will examine
in detail what virtue ethics is. Then, with this explanation at hand,
I will turn in section ( II )...."
You get the point. You must lay out for the reader step-by-step
what your argumentative strategy is.
(3) When you are done, double space and center a " ( I ) " in the middle
of the page to signal that you are ready to start section ( I ) as laid
out in the abstract. Then begin section ( I ).
|
Section ( I ) - Explicating
Virtue Ethics
|
The paper is not due until week 7. However you must make an appointment
with me in either week 5 or 6 to have a tutorial about the paper. During
this time we can speak about possible ways
you might want to go, or just about general things you've been thinking
about with regard to the paper.
I also
highly recommend that you form
study groups. These are excellent ways to talk about the arguments and
see what obvious objections others might have to your position. This
in invaluable
when writing a philosophy paper. Most people shrug off this advice. Those
that take the advice -- and treat it seriously -- often do well. Some helpful
things to do:
- By the time the first
draft is due, we will have only covered two authors in class
-- Confucius and Aristotle.
So you needn't discuss any other authors.
- In trying to understand what virtue ethics is, remember
that virtue ethics is a part of a larger system of ethics called "agent ethics".
How does "agent ethics" differ from "act ethics"? Find quotes in Aristotle
or Confucius that seem to highlight which side of this basic distinction
they are on.
- What makes a virtue ethicist a virtue ethicist? Is it
enough to do the right acts? Does the agent need the right character? The
right intentions? Find quotes.
- What is character? Is character simply a conglomeration
of habits? Quotes.
- Does a conformist individual have character, according
to Confucius and Aristotle?
- What are the virtues? How
do they play a part? When does a habit to tell the truth become a sign of
a virtuous character?
- Find more quotes.
- If you want to use the web to help you understand something
regarding virtue ethics, that's fine. But do not quote or footnote web sources
(they are often unreliable).
These are not the only questions you should be asking, but it
is a good start to begin with them. Essentially you want to pull together
what you take to be the essential parts of virtue ethics, along with a
series of good quotes to back up the more important points you will make.
As you are constructing the explication, use the quotes intelligently. Introduce
a quote, and then after using it, explain it. Do not let the quote
explain itself. Explain what it means and then show how it fits into what
you were talking about.
Use the text to support your interpretation. If you think
Confucius's theory
says that a person must do X, Y and Z to be virtuous, find a quote
where Confucius says that (or says something that you think implies it).
Part of your job as a paper writer is convincing your audience that you
know what you are talking about and that you are well aware of the texts
in question and can use them expertly to back up what you say.
Explain the quotes
you use. This means that you quote and then tell the reader what
the quote means. Be patient. Do not rush. Then connect the quote
to the text around it. (Why did you quote it? For what reason?)
This part of your paper should be in the area of 6 - 8 pages (depending
on whether the paper turns out to be 10 or 12 pages long).
|
Part 2 - Can Virtue Ethics
Stand Up to The Ring of Gyges?
|
Glaucon's challenge to Plato is
no small one. According to Glaucon, all supposedly virtuous
people would turn wicked eventually, once they were given the Ring of Gyges.
To answer the challenge one way or the other you must first ask some questions
about your own value system:
- what is the core of my value
system?
- Do
I think an altruistic ethics is possible?
- Do
I think that everyone is really just an egoist at heart?
- Why
am I on one side or the other? What are my arguments for my side and against
the other side?
- What do you think Confucius would respond,
if asked this by Glaucon?
In constructing your argument either against Glaucon or for him, you
must be thoughtful and knowledgeable. Do not simply spurt opinions. Give
reasons for what you say. Remember that your reader will be hostile
to your argument. So you must work to convince him (that's me)
that you are right. To assist you in arguing for Glaucon, you might want
to go back to earlier chapters about egoism in Rachels. Similarly, re-reading
Rachels might help your out if you are against Glaucon. Either way, make
sure your argument is well thought out. Be passionate in argumentation.
You are arguing for what you believe in -- you are arguing here about a point
that is central to who you are.
Here is the proper format for a using
a footnote, using as an example a small blurb from my doctoral dissertation:
Thus the brain is affected, but no mental impression
is formed, and thus no subjective experience had. This view was
not
uncommon in Locke's time. Descartes talks the same way, claiming
that:
|
We know sufficiently well that
it is the mind that senses, not the body; for we see that when the
mind is distracted by an ecstacy of deep
contemplation, the entire body remains without sensation, even though
it is in contact with various objects.1 |
Locke of course agrees, and essentially repeats Descartes' position,
asking:
|
How often may a Man observe in
himself, that whilst his Mind is intently employ'd
in the contemplation of some Objects and curiously surveying some
Ideas that are there, it takes no notice of impressions of sounding Bodies
made upon the Organ of Hearing...a sufficient impulse there may be on
the Organ, but it not reaching the observation of the Mind, there follows
no Perception; and though the motion, that uses to produce the Idea
of sound, be made in the Ear, yet no sound is heard. 2 |
Like Descartes, Locke is very clear here in explicitly
pointing out that in terms of the body everything is
working as it would be in cases where one was aware of the sound
produced (the ‘sound', again, being...
------------------
1. Descartes, Optics, Discourse V from The Philosophical
Works of Descartes , (Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1967), pg. 42.
2. Locke, Essay, II. ix. 4.
Notice a
few things.
- Quotes are indented to
the same degree you would indent a new paragraph.
- Quotes are single spaced,
not double spaced .
- Spacing between quotes
and the body of the text is double spaced, not triple spaced.
- The first time you quote
from a work (footnote 1 in this case), type the author's name,
then the book it came from in
italics , then in parentheses
the city the book was published in, followed by a comma, then the
publishing company, followd by a
comma, then the year of publication. Then after
the parentheses place a comma and the page number followed by a period.
- If your next quote (immediately)
is from the same work, this time simply put the author's name, the work
title (in italics), and the page number.
|
|
- Only use Times New Roman
font.
- Font size: 12 point.
- Margins: one inch on
every side (top, bottom, right, left). Not even 1.1 inch fonts.
Don't try it -- I'll spot it.
- No independent cover page needed. Your
first page should follow this example:
Mary Smith
Pg. 1
Prof. Christopher Panza
Values Analysis, Fall 2002
"Place Your Title Here"
Begin the body of your
paper here.
- Note that there is no additional line spacing between your
name, my name, and the name of the class.
- You then skip down three
lines, and type the name of your paper
- You then skip down three
lines and begin your paper, starting with the proper new paragraph
indentation.
-
Place page numbering in the top right corner.
-
Do not name your paper "Draft #1," or "Paper on Confucius," or
"Values Analysis Paper," or anything that sounds remotely similar to
these. Your paper title is the first thing that catches your reader's
eye. Remember you are a salespereson. Get your reader interested by
first having a good title. Something acceptable could be a title like
"Are Intentions Really Important in an Ethical Theory?" or "An Analysis
of Ethics without Consequences". Your title should give the reader a
good idea of the subject matter of the paper. Be different,
interesting, and informative. "Great Moogley Boogley" is different and
interesting but doesn't meet the "informative" criterion (this was used
by someone once). "Paper on Confucius" is somewhat informative (it tells
me the paper deals with Confucius), but it doesn't give me any other
information regarding your position, not to mention being boring and
typical. "Draft #1" or "Values Analysis
Paper" fails all the criteria for a good title.
People who title their papers "Values Analysis Paper" give off a clear
impression to the reader that they didn't care about the essay . 99 times out of 100, this impression is
confirmed after the paper has been read.
- The
proper spacing between the end of one paragraph and the start
of a new one is double spaced
- The
paper should be a minimum of 10 pages. When I say "10 Pages" I
mean that ALL ten pages of the essay must be
filled with text. An unacceptable paper has a final sheet
of paper with "pg. 10" in
the right top corner and then a paragraph of text written below it (such
a paper is 9 pages long).
- For every
page the paper is short, your draft loses the % of text missing as a penalty.
A 10 page paper that is 9 pages long starts with a full grade deduction
(A-). A paper 8 pages long starts at B-, and so on. It is NOT worth it
to short cut the length. There are ALWAYS
areas in the paper that need more detail and/or thought.
I. Grading Criteria for Papers and Exams
Let me try to be as up-front as possible about the method used
for grading your papers and exams. Hopefully this will get rid of some
of the inevitable "I'm not sure what you want" questions and statements.
1. The criteria for grading has been pre-established by
the Philosophy and Religion department. What this means is that the
criteria for an "A", a "B" and so on are fixed by the department as
a whole by agreement. So although I am in full agreement with the criteria,
they are not my "personal" criteria shared by no one else.
Here are the Philosophy and Religion Department criteria:
Standard Average:
Grade of C = This grade indicates that the assignment
has been fulfilled at an adequate level.
|
|
A paper will receive a "C" if
all of the following four criteria are met:
|
| a) Pertinent material from the assigned
readings, lectures, and class discussions is included in the content
of the paper. |
| b) There is a basic level of
organization with an identifiable thesis, introduction, body, and
conclusion. |
| c) Basic concepts are included and
explained at an introductory level. |
| d) There are no more than three mechanical
errors per page (i.e., syntax, spelling, grammar, and punctuation).
In addition, a standard form of documentation is employed
(i.e., notes and work cited). The Department recommends the Modern
Language Association Manual
or the Chicago Manual of Style. |
To me, a "C" means average work for a sophomore level
class . Please be sure to understand that "B" does
not mean "average" -- it means above average.
Do not expect to do average work in this class and get a "B".
Regarding (d), some students do not believe
that a serious grade reduction will result for typographical/spelling/grammar
errors in papers (I do not penalize for such errors in exams). It
should be noted here that I interpret multiple errors of this sort
as a lack of care about the assignment. Please be assured that since I
care about the course and your learning, such a lack of care
will not be rewarded. Although it seems inevitable that at least one
or two students always end up testing me on this policy every semester,
it is not worth it to do so. I will deduct for such errors.
You are forewarned!
Regarding (c). Expositions at an above "C" level must be
capable of moving beyond a simple "reproduction" of the basic
concepts in the literature. You must show a detailed and nuanced
understanding of the material. Be prepared to write in detail about
the subject. Show me that you have done more than simply taken notes in
class and leisurely perused the readings. Of all the grades of "C" and
below that I give out, this criteria is usually the one that students
have failed to master as their expositions remain introductory and basic.
Regarding (a). You must be capable of showing the reader
(that's me) that you can skillfully use the relevant texts in your
papers by using quotations where appropriate. A paper that lacks quotation
at important junctures is an average or below paper.
Above Average:
Grade of B = This grade indicates that the assignment has ben fulfilled
at an above average level.
|
|
To receive a "B" all of the
following criteria must be met
|
| a) More extensive material from the
assigned readings, lectures, and class discussions is included in
the content of the
paper. Where appropriate, use of additional resources
(e.g., reserve readings, library materials) will be expected. |
| b) There is an identifiable thesis
which is integrated into the structure of the entire essay and is
defended in a logical and
systematic manner. |
| c) There is a greater mastery of writing
and thinking skills, including effective use of quotations and
paragraph organization; a greater reliance on putting
ideas and concepts into one’s own words rather than relying on direct
quotations; a greater ability to recognize and articulate diverse
points of view; and a demonstrated ability to engage in critical reflection,
analysis, and synthesis. |
| d) There are no more than two mechanical
errors per page, and standard documentation is employed (MLA or
Chicago). |
Criteria (a) states that your ability to write about the
subject matter has moved beyond a mere introductory level analysis.
Criteria (b) states that your essay/paper has a thesis statement/argument,
and that this statement/argument is integrated throughout the whole
work. In addition, your thesis/argument is logically defended/presented
(this means that you must use arguments to make your points).
Superior: Grade
of A = This grade indicates that the assignment has been fulfilled
at an exceptional level.
|
|
To receive an "A", all of
the following criteria must be met:
|
| a) Exceptionally extensive material
from assigned readings, lectures, class discussions, and outside
resources is included in the content
of the paper. |
| b) The thesis and its defense demonstrate
exceptional accuracy regarding both supported claims and others’
claims
(including the evidence and arguments of those claims). |
| c) Exceptional critical stylistic
ability is demonstrated in the writing. There is an ability to
express in writing one’s own
thoughts in a “voice” of one’s own, which shows that the
writer has succeeded in finding a clear and aesthetically
pleasing use of words,
idiom, and phrasing. |
| d) There is no more than one mechanical
error per page, and standard documentation is employed (MLA or
Chicago) |
Below Average:
Grade of D = This grade indicates that the assignment has been fulfilled
at a below average level.
|
|
To receive a "D" you have failed to meet
any of the following criteria:
|
| a) The essay demonstrates that
the student has read and at least partly understood the material in
the text. |
| b) There is a vague or nonexistent
thesis in the essay. |
| c) There are no more than four stylistic,
spelling, and grammatical errors per page. Standard documentation
is poorly
constructed or absent. |
| d) The essay demonstrates little
creativity and primarily involves an incomplete recitation of the
arguments in the assigned materials. |
| e) Part of the assignment is
ignored. |
Failure: Grade
of F = Quality of the work is less than a D grade
|
| A failing grade will be applied
to any assignment that is not turned in or has not even minimally
met the requirements for the assignment. A failing grade will also
be applied to any assignment that is not in accordance with policies
regarding academic honesty. A failing grade for the course will be
applied when student’s work across assignments and components has not
demonstrated sufficient grasp of course material and/or has not met
the requirements set forth in the syllabus. |
|