LAS 384: Proseminar Current Issues in Latin Americanism Fall 2013
Mondays 1:00-4:00 SRH 1.313 (Hackett Room, LLILAS)
(Emiliano di Cavalcanti, 1929, mural, Teatro João Caetano, Rio de Janeiro)
Course Instructor: Dr. Lorraine Leu Email:
[email protected]
2
Office hours: T/TH 1:00 – 3:00 Office number: SRH 1.327 INTRODUCTION The seminar has 4 goals: introduce some of the most influential topics and theories that have informed contemporary scholarship on Latin America in various fields; introduce research approaches and sources; help students develop analytical thinking and writing skills; encourage students to take their first professional step/s in a supportive setting. These goals inform the content and structure of the seminar, and will be met through a combination of reading, discussion, Canvas postings, presentations, and research exercises. PROVIDING COMPREHENSIVE KNOWLEDGE OF EACH FIELD COVERED IN THE SEMINAR IS NOT POSSIBLE; NOR IS IT FEASIBLE TO COVER ALL IMPORTANT THEMES IN LATIN AMERICANISM, OR ALL FORMAL FIELDS OF STUDY. Instead, the course will introduce students to how discussions surrounding some ideas have resonated and impacted the practice of scholarship on Latin America. There will always be subjects that are not covered extensively, or covered at all on the course. Students have the opportunity to pursue areas of interest not included in the course in their individual research projects, and in the courses offered by the 165 faculty members affiliated to LLILAS. The course will equip you with some basic theoretical tools and analytical skills necessary for successful participation in graduate seminars and for developing an original research project during your course of study in the program. By the end of the seminar, you should be able to: engage actively in critical discussions of the scholarly literature; analytically review a topic of relevance to your research interests; develop a research proposal. SUMMARY OF COURSE STRUCTURE AND REQUIREMENTS Assignments are designed to help you learn to analyze and critique the scholarly literature assigned on various topics, and ultimately to be able to think through the place of your own research within this scholarship. 1. Posts: Students are required to do 3 posts on the Canvas discussion forum, which will contribute towards the final grade. These are 350-500 word responses to a particular week’s readings and must be posted by MIDNIGHT on SUNDAY before class, except for Post 1#, which is due earlier. See the Appendix for detailed guidelines on this assignment and how it will be assessed. 2. Professional development: Students will take an initial step towards building a sense of belonging to a professional community. Here are some examples of forms that this can take:
3
Identifying a faculty member participating in a LLILAS Faculty Research Initiative in an area that impacts your own research interests. Click on this link for a list of current projects funded by LLILAS: http://www.utexas.edu/cola/insts/llilas/faculty/fri.php Alternatively, you can identify a faculty member with research interests similar to your own and contact them to arrange a meeting and discuss whether they need research assistance.
Affiliating with an activity independent of the university that relates to your research and professional interests.
Participating in the organization of a conference with a team of people, for e.g. the ILASSA Spring Conference organized by our graduate students every year.
Attending a conference or other professional meeting in an area relevant to your interests. Students may work individually, or in pairs or groups for their professional activity, and will submit a 2-paragraph report either on November 1 or 8. This exercise is a course requirement.
3. Research proposal: As a final project, each student will design a 5 page double-spaced proposal for summer research grants and IRB approval (this should be the basis of your final MA thesis/ PhD dissertation), to which a working bibliography of at least 20 sources must be appended. You will receive guidance in class on this, and a rubric for assessment is contained in the Appendix. As part of this assignment, you will also present briefly to the class the most useful book or article you have read for your project, and we will work on formulating a Problem Statement that outlines your research idea, which you will also present to the group. GRADING CRITERIA Credit will be assigned for work that meets the criteria laid out in Columns 3 and 2 of the Grading Rubric for each assignment, and for fulfillment of non-graded course requirements. In assigning the final grade for the course the assignments will be weighted in the following way: Research Proposal: 40% Presentation of Research Proposal in class: 20% Posts: 30% Participation in class discussion & other presentations: 10% Course requirements (not graded, but obligatory): Professional development activity Reporting back to class on reading for your research project
4
Presentation of Problem Statement in class LATE SUBMISSION OF WORK WITHOUT CONTACTING ME IN ADVANCE TO REQUEST AN EXTENSION BEFORE THE DEADLINE WILL BE PENALIZED BY A LOWERING OF THE GRADE. CLASSROOM ETIQUETTE Technology: Students may bring their laptops to class for note taking, but emailing or social networking during class is entirely unacceptable. Mobile phones should also be turned off for the duration of the class, unless you have children and need to be reachable for emergency contact. Attendance: Attendance is a requirement of the seminar. If there is a compelling reason why you need to miss a class, please contact me ahead of time, if possible. Similarly, if you are obliged leave class early, or arrive significantly late, please discuss this with me beforehand. REQUIRED READING All readings are available on Canvas, except those available in e-books via UT libraries. For all sessions for which reading is assigned, please come to class prepared to discuss the following questions about each of the assigned readings (for more questions to consider see guidelines for Posts in Appendix.) 1. What is/are the principal argument(s) in the assigned reading? 2. What evidence does the author offer to support her or his argument? 3. Do you think that the evidence presented by the author(s) has demonstrated the argument/thesis? Why or why not?
COURSE SCHEDULE AUG 31
Introduction to the Seminar How to tackle and write a post
SEP 7
University closed for Labor Day holiday
SEP 14
Topic 1 [Modernity] (Post #1 due Thurs Sep 10 by 12:00 noon) Readings1: 1. Quijano, Aníbal. “Paradoxes of Modernity in Latin America.” International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society 3.2 (1989): 147-177.
1
For all topics, please read articles in the order in which they appear on the list.
5
2. Grosfoguel, Ramón. “Developmentalism, Modernity, and Dependency Theory in Latin America.” Nepantla: Views from the South 1.2 (2000): 347-374. 3. Escobar, Arturo. 1998. “Power and Visibility: Development and the Invention and Management of the Third World.” Cultural Anthropology 3 (4): 428-443. Practical/research skills & professional development: Making contact/establishing relationships with professors/future advisers SEP 21
Topic 2 [Post-coloniality and Decoloniality] (Post #2 due at MIDNIGHT on SUNDAY) Readings: 1. Quijano, Aníbal. “Coloniality of Power, Eurocentrism, and Latin America.” Nepantla: Views from South 1.3 (2000) 533580/ or “Colonialidad del poder, eurocentrismo y América Latina” (English and Spanish versions on Canvas) 2. Coronil, Fernando. “Elephants in the Americas? Latin American Postcolonial Studies and Global Decolonization.” Coloniality at Large: Latin America and the Postcolonial Debate. Eds. Mabel Moraña, Enrique Dussel, and Carlos A. Jáuregui. Durham /London: Duke University Press, 2008. 396-416. 3. Mignolo, Walter. “Epistemic Disobedience and the Decolonial Option: A Manifesto.” Transmodernity: Journal of Peripheral Cultural Production of the Luso-Hispanic World, 1(2), 2011. 4. Rappaport, Joanne. “The Challenges of Indigenous Research.” Journal of Latin American Cultural Studies 22.1 (2013): 5-25. Practical/research skills & professional development: Visit to class by AJ (Adrian Johnson) from the Benson Library on sourcing research materials.
SEP 28
Topic 3 [Indigenous Politics & Cultural Rights] (Post #3 due at MIDNIGHT on SUNDAY) ** Visit to the class by LLILAS Director Professor Charlie Hale ** Readings: 1. Hale, Charles. “Neoliberal Multiculturalism: The Remaking of Cultural Rights and Racial Dominance in Central America.” PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review 28.1 (2005): 10-19. 2. Lucero, José Antonio. “Decades Lost and Won: Indigenous Movements and Multicultural Neoliberalism in the Andes.” Beyond Neoliberalism in Latin America. Eds. John Burdick, Philip Oxhorn and Kenneth Roberts. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. 63-82. 3. Further readings to be determined by Professor Hale
6
Practical/research skills & professional development: Developing a Research Proposal: What Funders Want Reading: Przeworski, Adam and Frank Solomon, “On the Art of Writing Proposals,” Social Science Research Council, 1988. OCT 5
Topic 4 [Racial Formation] ** Visit to the class by LLILAS Faculty affiliate Dr. Christen Smith ** Readings: 1. Smith, Christen. Forthcoming 2016. Afro-Paradise: Blackness, Violence and Performance in Brazil. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Practical/research skills & professional development: Developing a Research Proposal: Deconstructing a submitted proposal
OCT 12
Topic 5 [The People] Readings: 1. Beasley-Murray, Jon. “Epilogue: April 13, 2002.” Posthegemony: Political Theory and Latin America. Minneapolis, MA: University of Minnesota Press, 2010. 284-296. 2. Coronil, F. (2005). Estado y nación durante el golpe contra Hugo Chávez. Anuario de estudios americanos, 62(1), 87112. 3. Duno Gottberg, Luis. (2004). Mob outrages: reflections on the media construction of the masses in Venezuela (April 2000–January 2003). Journal of Latin American Cultural Studies, 13(1), 115-135. 4. García-Guadilla, María Pilar. “Urban Land Committees: Co-optation, Autonomy, and Protagonism.” In Venezuela’s Bolivarian Democracy: Participation, Politics, and Culture under Chávez. David Smilde and Daniel Hellinger (eds.). Durham: Duke University Press, 2011. 80-103. [Available online as an e-book via UT libraries] 5. Blackmore, L. (2014). Capture Life: The ‘Document-Monument’ in Recent Commemorations of Hugo Chávez. Journal of Latin American Cultural Studies, 23(3), 235-250. Practical/research skills & professional development: Developing a Research Proposal: Creating a Problem Statement
OCT 19
Topic 6 [Informality] Reading:
7
1. Hernández, Felipe and Peter Kellett. Introduction in Rethinking the Informal City: Critical Perspectives from Latin America. New York: Berghahn Books, 2009. [E-book available via UT library website] 2. Fiori, Jorge & Brandão, Zeca. 2010. “Spatial Strategies and Urban Social Policy”. In Rethinking the Informal Cities: Critical Perspectives from Latin America, eds. Felipe Hernandez, Peter Kellet and Lea Allen, Oxford & New York: Berghahn Books, pp. 181-206. [E-book available via UT library website. 3. Kellett, Peter. “The Construction of Home in the Informal City”. In Transculturation. Cities, Spaces and Architectures in Latin America. Edited by Felipe Hernández, Mark Millington and Iain Borden. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2005. 4. Leu, Lorraine and Sara McTarnaghan. “Mega-events, ruination, and the workings of empire in the 21st century: The dispossession of Vila Autódromo favela.” Submitted July 31, 2015 to Antipode: A Radical Journal of Geography. 5. Alves, Jaime Amparo. (2014). From necropolis to blackpolis: Necropolitical governance and black spatial praxis in São Paulo, Brazil. Antipode, 46(2), 323-339. Practical/research skills & professional development: Developing a Research Proposal: Locating your research Students report to class on an item or items from their reading for the research project that is particularly useful or insightful in helping to think about or frame their research idea. How might your project build on that research, or perhaps challenge it? More broadly, what might your contribution be to this area of study? (7 students, 5 mins each, hand in 1 to 1.5 double spaced page(s) outlining utility of article/s or book/s.) OCT 26
Topic 7 [Neoliberalism] 1. Klak, Thomas. Globalization and Neoliberalism: The Caribbean Context. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1998. Chapters 1 and 5. 2. Martin, Patricia. “Comparative topographies of neoliberalism in Mexico.” Environment and Planning A, 37 (2005). 203220. 3. Centner, Ryan. “Microcitizenships: Fractious Forms of Urban Belonging after Argentine Neoliberalism.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 36.2 (2012). 336-62. 4. Tinsman, Heidi. “Fables of Abundance: Grape Workers and Consumption in Chile”, in Tinsman, H. (2013). Buying into the Regime: Grapes and Consumption in Cold War Chile and the United States. Duke University Press. Practical/research skills & professional development: Developing a Research Proposal: Locating your research Students report to class on an item or items from their reading for the research project that is particularly useful or insightful in helping to think about or frame their research idea. How might your project build on that research, or perhaps challenge it? More broadly, what might your contribution be to this area of study? (7 students, 5 mins each, hand in 1 to 1.5 double spaced page(s) outlining utility of article/s or book/s.)
8
NOV 2
Developing a Research Proposal: Problem Statement Workshop. We will be working on Problem Statements in this class. The Problem Statement will form the basis of your final project, the proposal for a summer research grant. Your Problem Statement should contain a statement of the central question to be addressed, a statement justifying the research, a brief overview of the methods you would use to conduct the research, and the expected outcomes or results. We will discuss and give helpful feedback on the Statements of 10 students in this class. A final (revised and edited) version of your problem statement should be posted on the Canvas discussion forum by noon the day before this class. Readings: No readings for this week.
NOV 9
Developing a Research Proposal: Problem Statement Workshop continued. Students not presenting this week hand in a 2-paragraph report on professional activity chosen/undertaken, stage of involvement, reflections on experience.
NOV 16
Topic 8 [Gender] Readings: 1. Marysol Asencio. Chapter 15, “Latina/o Sexualities: Probing Powers, Passions, Practices, and Policies.” New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2010. 2. Cortez, J., & Herbert, P. (2004). Sexilio/Sexile. 3. Lionel Cantú, Chapter 1 "Sexuality, Migration, and Identity" in Sexuality of Migration: Border Crossing and Mexican Immigrant Men, 2009. 4. Luz Clavo and Catriona Rueda Esquibel, Chapter 14 "Latina Lesbianas, BiMujeres and Trans Identities" in Latina/o Sexualities: Probing Powers, Passions, Practices, and Policies, 2010. Practical/research skills & professional development: Developing a Research Proposal: Locating your research Students report to class on an item or items from their reading for the research project that is particularly useful or insightful in helping to think about or frame their research idea. How might your project build on that research, or perhaps challenge it? More broadly, what might your contribution be to this area of study? (7 students, 5 mins each, hand in 1 to 1.5 double spaced page(s) outlining utility of article/s or book/s.)
NOV 23
Presentation of research proposals
NOV 30
Last class: Presentation of research proposals
9
DEC 8
Submission of hard copy of Research Proposals by 5:00 p.m. Appendix
Guidelines for posts: Purpose: In these assignments, student will 1. Analyze and discuss important issues in Latin American Studies 2. Help to facilitate instructor feedback, guidance, and deepening of in-class discussion Format:
Original post: o 350 to 500 words. o Should address all readings o Correct in-text citation for any reference: (Last Name Date, Page Number);( Durst 2011, 92). o Original post on Canvas by noon on Thursdays (except for Post #1). Comments/responses to Post #1: o At least one comment to a fellow student’s post for Topic #1 (Modernity) of about 3 – 5 sentences. I agree/I disagree is not sufficient. Rather, posts should deepen the analysis by providing support/critique of the argument of your peer. o Correct in-text citation for any reference: (see above) o Disagreement is welcome, but all comments should be supported with evidence of some sort and should be conveyed in a professional manner. Content: o Your weekly posts, assignments and presentations should not summarize the readings or issues. Instead, they should identify, compare, and analyze key issues, problems, arguments, evidence, and conclusions. Sound analytical thinking starts with asking questions about what you read. As a rule, you should always assume that a given work has both positive and negative attributes. Earlier in the syllabus, we presented 3 questions that you should ask of each assigned reading. Considering or answering some of the questions below will help you deepen your understanding of what you are reading; though not all of them may be relevant to every article you read.
1. What is the author’s point of view/perspective/approach? 2. What is/are the main research question/s? 3. What assumptions (if any) does the author make? Do they make sense?
10
4. What kinds of data (evidence) are presented to answer the main research question? 5. Are the data reliable? accurate? relevant? compelling? 6. Are there other data that might be useful, but which were not utilized? 7. Do the conclusions follow from the data? 8. Do the conclusions answer the main question/s? 9. What are the biases and/or limitations of the article, chapter, etc.? 10. In comparing readings on the same theme, is one researcher’s approach better than another’s? 11. Is the analysis generalizable to other places, times, artistic works, etc.? 12. Would it be possible to synthesize approaches/analyses? 13. Is the work original? timely? 14. Does the work have implications beyond or different from those identified by the author? Final Project (Research Prospectus) Guidelines: A prospectus explains a research project you intend to carry out. It consists of a problem statement (i.e., primary research question(s), the context and significance of the research (i.e., where it fits in a particular field and why what you propose to do is important), a brief literature review, discussion of the methodology you will use, and a statement of the results you expect. To write a prospectus, you must think around the topic that interests you, and formulate a researchable problem or question. To get to this point, you should do some general background reading on the subject or area. Once you have formulated a research question, you must become familiar with the research already done on your topic so you can explain how your question and/or research approach differs, and what you expect your completed study to add to existing knowledge on the subject. Purpose: In this assignment students will 1. Design a high-quality, peer-reviewed proposal for summer research funding 2. Conduct preliminary secondary source research regarding topic of choice 3. Evaluate the methods, biases, and limitations of intended field research 4. Start thinking about supervising faculty Format: 1. Initial problem statement: 2 paragraph maximum* a. Concise statement of the central question to be addressed b. Relevance of research c. Consideration of methods and limitations d. Theoretical/disciplinary approach e. Expected outcomes or results f. Consideration of faculty advisor/reader
11
2. Bibliography: 20 sources, consistent style 3. Research Proposal a. Introduction: Central question and relevance b. Theoretical/disciplinary approach c. Consideration of methods and limitations d. Expected outcomes or results e. Tentative budget 4. Proposal presentation: 10 minutes a. Final problem statement b. Historical context and relevance c. Theoretical/ Disciplinary approach, including biases and limitations d. Methods e. Expected Results 5. Peer feedback and evaluation
* Your Problem Statement should aim for: • Concise
(no more than 2 paragraphs) and clear throughout • Offer enough context/background so your project is understandable to the non-specialist Conciseness/ Style • Aim for an attention-grabbing opening and articulate your ideas to maintain reader interest
Relevance/ Justification
Methods/ Limitations
• Strong, clear justification for research • Problem is relevant and timely
Selection of methods is appropriate and complete • Existing
limitations of research/methods clearly identified and adequately addressed
response to limitations
Tentative Outcomes/
To conclude, venture an answer (or answers) to the initial research question you posed at the outset
12
Results
Choosing a potential supervising Professor 1. Research area Do a literature search of the prospective advisor's publications. Selecting an advisor with a research area compatible with your interests is important, but it does not have to be an exact fit, and often there is no exact fit. You need to think about what you can “get” out of this person – for example, advice on method or fieldwork because this person has worked extensively with the same kind of pitfalls you may be working with in the field? Is this person a whiz on a particular set of debates/issues/theories that could be useful in framing your own project? A shared geographical focus could be a good basis, but should not over-determine your choice; more important are whether you admire the approaches taken in the person’s work, or the ways they present ideas in a class, and would like to be inspired by those approaches in your own work. 2. Your career goals If your focus is career oriented, and you are not intending on doing a PhD, then you may want to choose a supervisor with contacts and experience applying their research to areas outside of academia. Getting to know that faculty member may open up an opportunity for experiential learning that will enhance your CV. 3. Attitude of the Faculty Member to Advising Ask other students in the 2nd or 3rd year of the program their feelings about your potential advisor picks, but don’t take just one person’s word for it, sometimes personalities just clash! Students can also often get a sense of what kind of advisor a faculty member would be after taking a class with them. Were they accessible and approachable? Can they explain ideas with clarity? How do they lead in-class discussions – do they challenge students and leave plenty of room for student opinion while providing guidance and a firm steer about the issues and ideas? Or are they very hands off, allowing students to lead and manage discussion without much faculty leadership? Which do you prefer? Ask other students in the year/s above you who have taken classes with relevant faculty members these questions too. 4. Your research idea Be able to articulate your research idea in 3 or 4 sentences for the first email contact with faculty with relevant interests. It’s ok to say that this is the likely subject of your thesis and you have begun to research faculty members with whom you would be excited to work if there was interest in your project. Meeting with a Potential Supervising Professor 1. Remember YOU drive the agenda and process of your dissertation research, so a potential supervisor will want to work with someone proactive, committed, and enthusiastic. 2. However, they will not expect you to know everything about your subject, or the research interests you share with them, so feel free to ask questions. This actually shows a desire to learn and someone open to communication. 3. And communication is key. Do you feel comfortable talking to this person? If not, why not? What intimidated you? Read up a bit about their work so you will be able to ask them a question, however general, about their research. How did they explain their research to you? How did they respond to your questions? Did they ask you questions about your research idea?
13 4. Don’t overstay your welcome! Ask for a 30 minute appointment and stick to the allotted time. Although they may be very interested in your topic and potentially advising you, faculty members have many demands on their time. 5. If the meeting went well and you think you may end up asking this person if they would like to supervise your project, be sure to follow up the meeting with a one or two line email thanking them again for their time and looking forward to being in touch with them in the future.
14
Appendix 2: Pro-Seminar Assignments: Grading Rubrics & Grading Scale Grading Scale:
A = 100-90
B = 89 – 80
C = 79-70
Research Prospectus Rubric (Each criterion is worth a maximum of 20 points) 20 15 Bibliography 20 or more correctly cited sources 20 or more correctly cited sources All sources are relevant to research Some sources are not particularly topic, and cover both classic and relevant to topic, or failed to contemporary research sufficiently cover classic and contemporary research Problem Problem statement provides concise, Problem statement is wordy, Statement clear, and compelling description of unclear, or not compelling primary research question, …or primary research question, historical/theoretical context and historical/theoretical context, or relevance/ importance of research relevance of research are unclear Literature Literature review thoroughly Literature review either fails to Review though concisely addresses relevant thoroughly research on topic (according to … or concisely address relevant bibliography). research on topic (according to bibliography). Methods/ Selection of methods is Methods selected are somewhat Limitations appropriate and complete inappropriate or deficient Clear description of Somewhat unclear description of implementation of methods implementation of methods Existing limitations of Failed to identify some limitations research/methods clearly identified of research and adequately addressed response to … or inadequately addressed response limitations to some limitations Outcomes/ Expected outcomes are clearly Expected outcomes are identified, Results articulated and are consistent with but not explained sufficiently clearly methods. or are inconsistent with research methods Clear, compelling explanation of …or explanation of relevance/ relevance/justification of potential justification is unclear, not research findings compelling, or lacks depth
10 Less than 20 sources, sources incorrectly cited Too many sources are not particularly relevant to topic, or failed to sufficiently cover classic and contemporary research Problem statement is wordy, unclear, or not compelling …and primary research question, historical/theoretical context, or relevance of research are unclear Literature review fails to thoroughly … and concisely address relevant research on topic (according to bibliography). Methods selected are largely inappropriate or deficient Unclear or nonexistent description of implementation of methods Failed to identify serious limitations of research ...or failed to address response to limitations Expected outcomes are not clearly articulated or are inconsistent with previous description of research (methods/ relevance) …and explanation of relevance/ justification is unclear, not compelling, or lacks depth Total
Total
15
Posts Rubric (Each criterion is worth a maximum of 25 points)
Breadth
25 Adequately addresses all readings for that week
Depth
Dense, concise, deep analysis
Clarity Format
Clear, articulate, original
Correct citation for all referenced material 350 to 500 words
20 Addresses all readings for that week, but some only superficially Some superficial, wordy analysis
15 Fails to address all readings for that week or all readings addressed only superficially Overly superficial, wordy analysis
Somewhat unclear, repetitive
Very unclear, repetitive
Failure to correctly cite once More than 500 words
Failure to correctly cite more than once Less than 350 words Total
Total