Kindly check the document below
Sanneh Response Paper
For THEO 5473: Cultural Understanding and Theological Engagement
This is a response paper that is similar to a book review but with less summarization and more evaluation and application. It should run between 750-1500 words.
A book review summarizes the most salient parts of a book for the audience of the review and then provides evaluation of some mix of its content, the author’s agenda, the appropriation of the content to the main or other subject matters, and application to the reviewer’s interests. The reviewer can also bring in outside ideas or their own constructive considerations.
As all students in the course are reading Sanneh and the material is being discussed in class, this review should focus on the student’s evaluation of the book as a reviewer. Therefore, about 20-25% of the overall material in this review should contain summarization of material from
Whose Religion is Christianity?: The Gospel Beyond the West, while about 75-80% should go directly to evaluative material from the student’s own perspective. Reviews can take on many different forms, and they should reflect substantial engagement with the main ideas of the author, though the student reviewer will need to be selective.
The rubric on the next page details the grading standards that will be used in evaluating your paper:
|
Grading Rubric: Grading Area |
A-range |
B-range |
C-range |
D- and F-range |
|
Followed Directions (10%) |
All directions are properly followed. |
Almost all directions are properly followed. |
Several lapses in following directions. |
Numerous lapses in following directions. |
|
Quality of Writing, including Chicago Style formatting and citations (10%) |
No or almost no errors in writing. Quality of writing is altogether appropriate to a course at the master’s level. |
Several writing errors. Quality of writing is mostly appropriate to a course at the master’s level. |
A number of writing errors. Quality of writing includes lapses inappropriate to a course at the master’s level. |
Regular errors or problems in writing. Quality of writing has regular lapses inappropriate to a course at the master’s level. |
|
Quality of Summarization of Sanneh (20%) |
Material from Sanneh has been well summarized in a way that does justice to his ideas and communication through this text. |
Material from Sanneh has been summarized in a way that shows a moderate amount understanding of his ideas and communication through this text. |
Material from Sanneh has been summarized in a way that shows a minimal understanding of his ideas and communication through this text. |
Material from Sanneh has not been summarized or is wholly inadequate. |
|
Constructive Evaluation of Sanneh and Topics (40%) |
Ideas are presented in a manner that provides substantial evaluation and articulates key themes with sufficient breadth. |
Ideas are presented in a manner that some evaluation and articulates key themes with sufficient breadth. |
Ideas are presented in a manner that provides inadequate evaluation and does little to articulate key themes. |
Ideas are presented in a manner that provides no or very minimal evaluation and does not articulate key themes. |
|
Quality of Critical Thinking and Evaluation of Topic (20%) |
Utilizes cogent and sound critical thinking and constructs strong evaluative remarks which present the perspective of the student as graduate-level ministry/theology student. |
Utilizes mostly cogent and sound critical thinking and constructs strong evaluative remarks which present the perspective of the student as graduate-level ministry/theology student. |
Utilizes somewhat cogent and sound critical thinking and constructs strong evaluative remarks which present the perspective of the student as graduate-level ministry/theology student. |
Fails or largely fails to utilize cogent and sound critical thinking and constructs strong evaluative remarks which present the perspective of the student as graduate-level ministry/theology student. |
10% of total grade for the course
