I have attached the instructions for the assignment. put a title on please.
LABR-1290 A01: Introduction to the Canadian Labour Movement, Fall 2021 Critical Review Assignment InstructionsFor this course, you will prepare four (4) critical review essays, each of them between 800 and1,000 words (between three and four standard typescript pages). These papers are due onOctober 1, October 22, November 19, and December 3, and each is based on the paired readingsassigned for the week in which they are due.Learning ObjectiveThe purpose of this assignment is to build your critical reading and writing skills by requiringyou to isolate key ideas and arguments in scholarly essays and to identify areas of intersection.Critical ReviewIn the wider academic world, review essays are commissioned by journals to “take thetemperature” of a discipline. A scholar is invited to review a handful of recent works and todiscuss emerging trends, theoretical debates, and new approaches that are changing the field. Your task in this assignment is analogous, but slightly different. You can’t fall back on a deepunderstanding of the discipline, so you won’t be able to assess the contribution of the reviewpieces to a wider scholarship. Instead, you will focus on isolating core arguments from eachpiece and making connections between them. Your analysis will integrate answers to thefollowing questions:1)“What is the major argument, or thesis, of each assigned text?”; and2) “Taken together, what do these texts contribute to a reader’s understanding of the topicsand themes they address?”Try not to approach this as a summary, an opinion piece, a personal reflection, or a research essaybased on limited sources. A useful way to think about this is that your topic is the readingsthemselves, not their shared topic. And don’t be fooled by the words “critical review”–your task is neither to assess the merits ofthe assigned readings nor to find something to criticize. Until you have read widely, you aren’tin much of a position to do either, and you pretty much have to go on faith that the assigneditems have scholarly integrity and merit. Similarly, the fact that you are either persuaded orconfused by an essay or article, or that you liked or disliked it, isn’t really material and doesn’twarrant comment; you are asked for a scholarly analysis, not a personal opinion.Presentation and FormatShowcase your academic writing. I would like to see a brief introduction which establishes thenarrow context or topic, elegant writing, a careful argument, and a conclusion that consolidatesyour argument and situates it in its wider context. Develop an appropriate, original title that reflects the thematic content of your essay. As is theconvention with review essays, supply a full, Chicago-style bibliographic citation for each sourcebelow the title. Here, you are best to simply cut-and-paste from the syllabus. See the example ofa properly-formatted review essay on the UMLearn site.1 Avoid lengthy quotations; quote only if you wish to call attention to an author’s use of language,never to communicate narrative detail. If you do include a short a quotation, provide aparenthetical citation to the page number only, e.g., (86). If you cite a source outside of the itemsunder review, for example, another reading in the course, include a full Chicago-style footnote. The conventions of a review essay are different from a research essay; granular footnotes and aseparate bibliography are not required, so please do not include them.Include a title page that includes your name and student number and my name and the coursenumber. Number the pages, use a standard 12-point font and 1″ margins, and double space.Upload your completed assignment to UMLearn in PDF of MSWord format by 6:00 PM on thedue date. Do not submit your essay by email.Reading Strategies for Review EssaysPrint each reading in hard copy if you can, and annotate in the margins as you read. Makingnotes as you read will help you to process what you are reading. Highlighting or underlining istypically less useful, but can also be a good strategy.Try to isolate the author’s thesis statement. Pay attention to the “signposts” in the abstract, in theconclusion, and in the first few pages of an essay, places where authors are most likely to beexplicit about they set out to prove. Remember that some social science papers withhold theirargument for a “discussion” section at the end of the essay, but humanities papers–whichconstitute most of what we will read–usually put it up front.As you read, keep a Wikipedia window open and look-up any unfamiliar terms. Develop yourown glossary of terms that you can refer back to late in the course.Ask the question “who are the change agents in this piece?” In other words, who is the articleabout? Who controls the discourse, or who is making change happen? Sometimes articles havea “top down” orientation where they are concerned with how the state and powerful institutionsshape the conversation. Others are more “bottom-up,” concerned with how ordinary peopleunderstand and navigate the world, resist powerful institutions, and make change around them.When you have completed a reading, set it aside and to write a one- or two-sentence answer tothe following question: “What is the key argument, or thesis, that the author is advancing in thiswork?” If you can do this, you have probably understood the reading well enough to move on.When you have completed both readings, set everything aside and try to write a one- ortwo-sentence answer to the following question: “Taken together, what do these texts contributeto a reader’s understanding of the topics and themes that they address?”If you can do this, you are ready to write. And what you have already written will serve as thescaffolding for the review essay itself!2 Writing Strategies for Review Essays:Before you sit down to write, carefully review the assignment requirements. Remember, theconvention of a review essay are different from those of a research essay, and the requirements ofthis assignment are likely different from what you have been required to do in other courses.Assume an expert reader. Imagine that you are writing for a scholarly journal, and don’t wastetime on definitions or potted histories. Open by establishing the narrow, not the global, context.Pay attention to, and deploy, the theoretical vocabulary of the essays under review. By adoptingthe language of the discipline, you will make more precise arguments that have greater fidelity tothe original, and you will use fewer words to do so.Don’t second-guess an author’s choice of language. Academic authors choose their termscarefully, and rarely is it appropriate to “correct” terms that seem stigmatizing or anachronistic. Such terms are typically deployed for specific historical, theoretical, or political reasons. and ifyou substitute, you will often introduce anachronism or factual error or inadvertently take anunintended political position. Check in with me if you are uncomfortable or uncertain.Always pay attention to who owns ideas and actions, and be sure not to conflate authors and theirsubjects. Scholars often write about ideas, actions, and ideologies they find personallyrepugnant, so make sure that you don’t attribute to academic authors ideas or positions thatbelong to their subjects.Be temperate. Scholars find ways of signalling their politics without letting expressions ofcondemnation, rage, or horror overtake their analysis. Your job, as a scholar, is to draw insight,not simply to condemn. You needn’t bury your politics and personal reactions, but remember,you are writing a scholarly review, not an opinion or personal reflection piece.Avoid amplification and superlatives. Remember, something need not be intrinsically importantto be a source of insight. Authors sometimes write about small things and not everything worthstudying is a “first” or an earth-shattering, game-changing event.Check yourself to be sure you are writing about the essays themselves, not their shared topic. Remember that the core exercise is to discuss how selected scholars have addressed a certaintopic, question, or theme. In other words, you are writing a critical review, not a research essaybased on limited sources.Remember that essays don’t make arguments, people do. By deploying constructions like “[theauthor] argues…” you remind your reader that there is an active personal agent at work, and youforce yourself to engage at the level of argument, not narrative.Avoid the passive voice; it obscures agency. Always write in the active voice; this will force youto attach a personal agent to every idea and action.Using correct tenses helps avoid conflation and confusion. As a general rule, use a present tensewhen discussing the work of contemporary scholars, and a perfect tense when discussinghistorical subjects and completed actions.3 Review Essay ChecklistReading:( )Have you carefully re-read the assignment instructions before starting to read?( )Have you downloaded and carefully read and annotated the reading questions specific tothe reading set?( )Have you identified the shared topic, or theme, of the two pieces?( )Have you isolated the thesis, or core argument, from each piece?( )Have you re-stated the thesis, or core argument, of each essay in your own words?Writing:( )Does the essay have a title page?( )Have you created an original title that reflects the topics and themes of your essay?( )Have you included a full bibliographic citation for each review item below the title?( )Does your essay include an introduction which establishes the narrow context for yourdiscussion?( )Have you re-read and followed the guidelines around when and how to cite and quote?( )If you have cited a source outside of the two items under review, have you supplied a fullChicago-style footnote?( )Does your essay include a conclusion that consolidates your argument and discusses itswider significance?( )Have you proofread your essay (preferably out loud and from a hard copy) for errors insense, flow, tense, and voice?( )Have you spell checked you essay, paying particular attention to proper names?( )Have you saved a backup copy in a secure location?Course-Based Writing Tutors:This course has been assigned Course-based Writing Tutors from the Academic Learning Centre.The tutors are experienced peer writing coaches who can support you to understand assignmentguidelines, clarify your ideas, and help you with the organization and structure of your reviewessays as well as with the flow of your ideas.A tutoring schedule will be established that will provide each student with a 30-minute liveonline appointment to discuss their work-in-progress on Review Essays #2 and #3. Instructionsfor booking an appointment are posted to UMLearn. Consider using the ALC services and writing tutors in connection with all your assignments.4