Knowledge, simple regurgitation, is very limited “as Professor Expert says (2006) . . . ”

Comprehension is a little more complex and requires some thought “within the context of 21st century literary review of 19th century literature, Professor Expert (2006) notes . . . ”

Application is more complex yet.

Analysis is about all I ever hope for in undergrads – good undergrads can do it. Take a point of view (feminism, capitalism, neoconservatism . . . ) and use that as your central analysis. “Professor Expert (2006) wrote that . . . and from a newconservative perspective she failed to account for the social context of the 19th century writer, and only commented from within a limited socio-political 21st century construct.”

Papers with analysis rock, and papers with dual, or triple levels of analysis rock even more, but they are tough to write.

If you want an A, read Bloom, and figure out what your Prof wants using the Bloom taxonomy, then write it up, treating references appropriately – parrot-wise and analytically. Note that many Professors only want good parrots, so have a care.

This is how your instructor tests your mettle, separating the parrots (who do fine repeating what others have said) from the thinkers who are able to apply what they’ve learned or read, mull it over, and support agreement or disagreement.

If you’re good at this, you’re a likely candidate for a good college, and later a masters or doctoral degree.

I understand your point, and I admire your seemingly moral standards, but look at it from another view (the writers).

If you end up as one of those writers your main goal is to get as many people as possible reading your work. People usually don’t read it unless they know about it, so you have to advertise for them.

I know you probably just googled your subject and came accross the article but why do you think it was at the top of the list instead of #24,000?

sorry :((