[SOLVED] Representing Diverse Identities Prof. Mershon, Spring 2022

1 of 2
PLCP 3500, Representing Diverse Identities Prof. Mershon, Spring 2022
Take-home Final Exam Announced Saturday, April 30, 5 pm
Instructions. To complete this exam, write two (2) essays, one long and one short. You choose
one of two long essay options and one of two short essay options. The long essay counts for 80%
of your final exam grade and the short essay, the remaining 20%. The exam, to be taken
remotely, is open book and open notes. If you quote directly from a source, enclose the quoted
material in quotation marks and briefly specify the source (e.g., “quoted material” [O’Dwyer, p.
x]). If you paraphrase from a source, briefly specify the source (e.g., paraphrased material
[Weldon, pp. xx-yy]). Do not draw from material that is not assigned in course.
You see the principal focus of each question in underlined boldface. Be sure to write every
element of your essay so that it targets a question’s principal focus; but do not ignore other parts
of a question, which offer additional guidance. Together, your 2 essays must show knowledge of
a total of at least 3 countries and at least 3 readings; the table below gives an example.
The total length for the exam should run from a minimum of 950 words (3.9 pages, assuming
Times New Roman 12 font, double-spaced) to a maximum of 1,000 words (4.1 pages, assuming
Times New Roman 12 font, double-spaced; source on both: https://wordcounter.net/words-perpage). If you were to tailor an essay’s length to an essay’s weight in the exam, then the long
essay would have 800 words and the short, 200. This exam is due at the latest at Collab
Assignments by Thursday, May 5, 5:00 pm. Be sure to pledge your exam.
Part A. LONG ESSAY OPTIONS. Choose one of the following two long essay options. Recall
that if you tailored an essay’s length to its weight in the exam, then the long essay would have
800 words. Note that whereas Option #1 focuses on marginalized groups as spearheading action,
Option #2 focuses on dominant groups.
1. Compare multiple strategies that marginalized groups have used in efforts to make
representatives respond to their concerns and to achieve representation for themselves.
What broader lessons do you draw from this comparison? (Again, Option #1 focuses on
marginalized groups as spearheading action and Option #2 focuses on dominant groups.) In
building your answer, discuss (a) arguments and evidence from one reading and one country
before the midterm (your choice of reading and of country) and (b) arguments and evidence
from O’Dwyer and one country (your choice of country) studied in O’Dwyer, which we read
after the midterm. Be sure to engage in critical evaluation. Mere summaries do not suffice.
2. Compare multiple responses that dominant groups have made to the concerns and
demands of marginalized groups. What broader lessons do you draw from this
comparison? (Again, Option #1 focuses on marginalized groups as spearheading action and
Option #2 focuses on dominant groups.) In building your answer, discuss (a) arguments and
evidence from one reading and one country before the midterm (your choice of reading and
of country) and (b) arguments and evidence from O’Dwyer and one country (your choice of
country) studied in O’Dwyer, which we read after the midterm. Be sure to engage in critical
evaluation. Mere summaries do not suffice.
2 of 2
Part B. SHORT ESSAY OPTIONS. Choose one of the following two short essay options.
Recall that if you tailored an essay’s length to its weight in the exam, then the short essay would
have 200 words.
3. Compare (a) either the Weldon reading on “Movements, Marginalization, and
Representation,” or the Arora et al. reading on “Framing Police and Protesters” with (b) any
chapter we have read in the Kauanui book, “Speaking of Indigenous Politics” (your choice of
a chapter that was a course reading assignment). How are the themes in the chapters
similar, and how are they different? What broader lessons do you draw from
comparing the two chapters’ themes? Be sure to engage in critical evaluation. Mere
summaries do not suffice.
4. Compare (a) the Harold book chapter on UVa, “No Ordinary Sacrifice,” with (b) any chapter
we have read in the Kauanui book, “Speaking of Indigenous Politics” (your choice of a
chapter that was a course reading assignment). How are the themes in the chapters similar,
and how are they different? What broader lessons do you draw from comparing the
two chapters’ themes? Be sure to engage in critical evaluation. Mere summaries do not
suffice.
Table: Example of 2 essays comparing at least 3 countries and at least 3 readings.
Part of exam Countries (represented by letters) Readings (represented by letters)
Essay #1 A, C X, Z
Essay #2 A, B Y, W
Entire exam 2 essays: A, B, C (doing A twice) 2 essays: W, X, Y, Z
Note: In this illustration, the student “specializes” in Country A, discussing A twice while still
showing knowledge of three countries. No such specialization appears for readings.