Micro Vs Macro Narrative Essays

1. Pederson A. M. “South Dakota and abortion: A local story about how religion, medical science, and culture meet,” Zygon. 2007;42(1):123–132.

2. Ferree M. M. “Resonance and radicalism: Feminist framing in the abortion debates of the United States and Germany,” American Journal of Sociology. 2003;109(2):304–344.Feltham-King T., Macleod C. “Gender, abortion and substantive representation in the South African newsprint media,” Women’s Studies International Forum. 2015;51:10–18.

3. Bloomer F., O’Dowd K. “Restricted access to abortion in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland: Exploring abortion tourism and barriers to legal reform,” Culture, Health & Sexuality. 2014;16(4):366–380.[PubMed]

4. Cook R. J., Dickens B. M. “Human rights dynamics of abortion law reform,” Human Rights Quarterly. 2003;25(1):1–59.[PubMed]

5. Anderson B. Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso Books; 1983. Merry S. E. “Transnational human rights and local activism: Mapping the middle,” American Anthropologist. 2006;108(1):38–51.

6. Ferree M. M. “Resonance and radicalism: Feminist framing in the abortion debates of the United States and Germany,” American Journal of Sociology. 2003;109(2):304–344.

7. Lemaitre J. “By reason alone: Catholicism, constitutions, and sex in the Americas,” International Journal of Constitutional Law. 2012;10(2):493–511.

8. An-Na’im A. A. Human rights in cross-cultural perspectives: A quest for consensus. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 1995. Donnelly J. “The relative universality of human rights,” Human Rights Quarterly. 2007;29(2):281–306.

9. Coomaraswamy R. “To bellow like a cow: Women, ethnicity, and the discourse of rights,” In: Cook R., editor. Human rights of women: National and international perspectives. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 1994. pp. 39–56.

10. Merry S. E. “Transnational human rights and local activism: Mapping the middle,” American Anthropologist. 2006;108(1):38–51.

11. Anderson B. Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso Books; 1983.

12. Berry K. “Developing women: The traffic in ideas about women and their needs,” In: Sivaramakrishnan I. K., Agrawal A., editors. Regional modernities: The cultural politics of development in India. Stanford: Stanford University Press; 2003. pp. 75–98.

13. Benford R. D., Snow D. A. “Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment,” Annual Review of Sociology. 2000:611–639.

14. McNeilly K. “Framing wrongs and performing rights in Northern Ireland: Towards a Butlerian approach to life in abortion strategising,” Journal of International Women’s Studies. 2013;14(4):95–108.

15. Ferree M. M. “Resonance and radicalism: Feminist framing in the abortion debates of the United States and Germany,” American Journal of Sociology. 2003;109(2):304–344.

16. Ferree M. M. “Resonance and radicalism: Feminist framing in the abortion debates of the United States and Germany,” American Journal of Sociology. 2003;109(2):304–344.

17. Ferree M. M. “Resonance and radicalism: Feminist framing in the abortion debates of the United States and Germany,” American Journal of Sociology. 2003;109(2):304–344.

18. An-Na’im A. A. Toward an Islamic reformation: Civil liberties, human rights, and international law. New York: Syracuse University Press; 1996.

19. Thomson J. “Thinking globally, acting locally? The women’s sector, international human rights mechanisms and politics in Northern Ireland,” Politics. 2016;37(1):82–96.

20. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. G.A. Res. 1979;34(180)

21. Coomaraswamy R. “To bellow like a cow: Women, ethnicity, and the discourse of rights,” In: Cook R., editor. Human rights of women: National and international perspectives. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 1994. p. 40.

22. Westeson J. “Reproductive health information and abortion services: Standards developed by the European Court of Human Rights,” International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. 2013;122(2):173–176.[PubMed]

23. Zampas C., Gher J.M. “Abortion as a human right—international and regional standards,” Human Rights Law Review. 2008;8(2):249–294.

24. McNeilly K. “Framing wrongs and performing rights in Northern Ireland: Towards a Butlerian approach to life in abortion strategising,” Journal of International Women’s Studies. 2013;14(4):95–108.

25. McGarry J., O’Leary B. Explaining Northern Ireland: Broken images. London: Wiley-Blackwell; 1995.

26. Kennedy R., Pierson C., Thomson J. “Challenging identity hierarchies: Gender and consociational power-sharing,” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 2016;18(3):618–633.

27. Taylor R. Consociational theory: McGarry and O’Leary and the Northern Ireland conflict. London: Routledge; 2009.

28. Dickson B. The European convention on human rights and the conflict in Northern Ireland. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.

29. Dickson B. The European convention on human rights and the conflict in Northern Ireland. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.

30. Dickson B. The European convention on human rights and the conflict in Northern Ireland. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.

31. “The Agreement reached in the multi-party negotiations”. Belfast: Northern Ireland Office; 1998.

32. McNeilly K. “Framing wrongs and performing rights in Northern Ireland: Towards a Butlerian approach to life in abortion strategising,” Journal of International Women’s Studies. 2013;14(4):95–108.

33. Dickson B. The European convention on human rights and the conflict in Northern Ireland. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.

34. Deiana M. A. “Women’s citizenship in Northern Ireland after the 1998 Agreement,” Irish Political Studies. 2013;28(3):399–412.

35. Dickson B. The European convention on human rights and the conflict in Northern Ireland. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.

36. Pierson C. Gender security: Women’s experiences of (in)security and policing in post-agreement Northern Ireland. Ulster University: Unpublished PhD Thesis; 2015.

37. Thomson J. “Thinking globally, acting locally? The women’s sector, international human rights mechanisms and politics in Northern Ireland,” Politics. 2016;37(1):82–96.Deiana M. A. “Women’s citizenship in Northern Ireland after the 1998 Agreement,” Irish Political Studies. 2013;28(3):399–412.

38. Thomson J. “Thinking globally, acting locally? The women’s sector, international human rights mechanisms and politics in Northern Ireland,” Politics. 2016;37(1):82–96.

39. Human Rights Consortium. Belfast: Human Rights Consortium; 2016. “UN Spotlight on Northern Ireland at UK Human Rights Review”http://www.humanrightsconsortium.org/un-spotlight-northern-ireland-uk-human-rights-review-3 Available at.

40. Bloomer F., Pierson C. a“Abortion Mythology in Northern Irish Political Debate: Dispelling common myths about abortion,” In: Bloomer F., McQuarrie C., Pierson C., Stettner S., editors. Abortion in anti-choice islands: Crossing troubled waters. Prince Edward Island University: Island Studies Press; forthcoming.

41. Bloomer F., Hoggart L. “Abortion policy: Challenges and opportunities”. Briefing paper: Northern Ireland Assembly; 2016.

42. Amnesty International Northern Ireland. Attitudes to abortion. Belfast: Amnesty International Northern Ireland; 2014.

43. O’Hara V. “Sinn Fein man Cathal O Hoisin’s tears for his baby with fatal abnormality as he urges a ‘humane’ change to abortion law,” Belfast Telegraph. 2015 Feb 27;

44. Bloomer F. “Protests, parades and marches: activism and extending abortion legislation to Northern Ireland,” In: Fitzpatrick L, editor. Performing feminisms in contemporary Ireland. Dublin: Carysfort Press; 2013.

45. Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, 4th Periodic report of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, 6th periodic report of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

46. Committee on the Rights of the Child, Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

47. Irish Family Planning Association. Universal Periodic Review. 2016 https://www.ifpa.ie/Hot-Topics/Universal-Periodic-Review Available at.

48. Bryman A. Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.

49. Hansard. Official Report of the Northern Ireland Assembly. 2013 Mar 12;:48–49. http://archive.niassembly.gov.uk/record/reports/000620b.htm Available at.

50. Hansard. Official Report of the Northern Ireland Assembly. 2013 Mar 12;:48–49. http://archive.niassembly.gov.uk/record/reports/000620b.htm Available at.

51. Hansard. 2007.

52. Precious Life. Homepage. http://www.preciouslife.com Available at.

53. Hansard. Official Report of the Northern Ireland Assembly. 2012 Oct 31;

54. Cannold L. “Understanding and responding to anti-choice women-centred strategies,” Reproductive Health Matters. 2002;10(19):171–179.[PubMed]

55. Hansard. Official Report of the Northern Ireland Assembly. 2016 Feb 10;

56. Hansard. Official Report of the Northern Ireland Assembly. 2016 Feb 10;

57. McNeilly K. “Human rights and Northern Ireland’s abortion law: Understanding the high court decision”. Belfast: RightsNI; 2015. http://rightsni.org/2015/12/human-rights-and-northern-irelands-abortion-law-understanding-the-high-court-decision Available at.

58. Amnesty International. https://www.amnesty.org.uk/actions/northern-ireland-abortion-not-crime

59. McNeilly K. “Framing wrongs and performing rights in Northern Ireland: Towards a Butlerian approach to life in abortion strategising,” Journal of International Women’s Studies. 2013;14(4):95–108.

60. Bloomer F., O’Dowd K., Macleod C. “Breaking the silence on abortion: the role of adult community abortion education in fostering resistance to norms,” Culture, Health & Sexuality. 2016:1–14.[PubMed]

61. Ferree M. M. “Resonance and radicalism: Feminist framing in the abortion debates of the United States and Germany,” American Journal of Sociology. 2003;109(2):304–344.

Henry Farrell, among other things also tells how to structure your essay at all these three levels:

You should structure your essay at three levels.

Macro-structure

This is the broad structure of the essay itself. Unless you feel very comfortable that you are an excellent writer, it is usually best to stick to the traditional frame of an introductory section, a main body, and a conclusion. The introduction tells the reader what you are going to say. The main body tells the reader what you are saying. The conclusions tell the reader what she has just read (perhaps adding some thoughts as to its broader implications if you are feeling adventurous).

This not only helps the reader understand your argument, but disciplines your thought and prose. It forces you to begin your essay with a clear, concise account of your major claims. When you write the main section of the essay (or re-write it, as needs be) the introduction will provide you with a roadmap of what you need to do. Your conclusions, in contrast, should draw the threads together, showing how the facts and arguments you have laid out in the main body actually speak to the broad themes discussed in the introduction, and drawing the threads of your narrative together into a proper whole. Of course, for this to work it is necessary that the main body of your essay actually speak to the arguments laid out in your introduction, that your conclusions relate to the main body, and so on.

Meso-structure

This is perhaps the most commonly neglected element of structured writing. It concerns the paragraphs into which your prose is organized. Each paragraph should focus on one main point. The point of each paragraph should build on that in the previous paragraph, and create the foundations of the next. Each paragraph should be a necessary part of the overall structure of your essay.

I find that a useful mental exercise is to boil down the arguments of each paragraph, one after the other, into single sentences. Then, put all these sentences together into a consecutive narrative, looking to see whether each sentence can be made to flow naturally from the sentence previous to it, and into the sentence following. This will highlight any major structural problems. If you are not able to boil down each of the paragraphs into a single sentence summary (however simplistic), then the offending paragraphs most likely need to be rewritten more clearly. If there are gaps or non-sequiturs when you put the one sentence summaries together, then the meso-structure of your essay needs to be re-organized, by cutting and pasting paragraphs, or by introducing new paragraphs to fill the gaps, or deleting old paragraphs that detract from the flow of your argument.

Micro-structure

What is true of the paragraph is also true of the sentence. Each individual sentence should flow in a logical and obvious way from the sentence before, and into the sentence after. Consider the following paragraph, taken from a term paper on global warming which is available for free online.

Weather these days has become very unpredictable. The increase in the world’s temperatures, believed to be caused in part by the greenhouse effect which is known as global warming has and will have a serious effect on the future. Global warming creates massive concerns for the entire earth. If the heat continues to increase several species may struggle to survive. There are numerous political, environmental, economic, and social issues when it comes to global warming. Global warming is an inevitable issue and by no stretch of the imagination can be slowed down easily. There is an inconceivable amount of causes that connect to global warming.

This is quite wretched writing. The first sentence is a vague generality that does not mean very much. The second sentence does not flow in any obvious way from the first. What does the greenhouse effect have to do with unpredictable weather? No explanation is provided for the reader. The third sentence merely repeats the argument of the second, with greater rhetorical alarm. The fourth does a little better, but loses force because it is so badly written (the claim that ‘several species’ may struggle to survive suggests that only five or six species are in danger, which sits awkwardly with the previous sentence’s suggestion that global warming causes “massive concerns” for the entire earth). The fifth sentence seems to build a new set of claims, and should be at the beginning of a new paragraph. However, it never goes anywhere. Instead, the sixth sentence warns that global warming is “an inevitable issue” (whatever that means), while the seventh sentence wrings its hands in despair over yet another new claim – that there is an “inconceivable amount” (sic) of causes “that connect” to global warming. These sentences are not only bad in themselves – they are not connected in any logical or orderly way. The result is that they do not add up to a coherent argument.

0 thoughts on “Micro Vs Macro Narrative Essays

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *