Original Paragraph:

Michael Carter has an ideology about every major falling into categories called metagenres. I believe political science falls under two metagenres, those being empirical inquiry and problem solving. I say empirical inquiry because Carter himself uses political science as an example of it. The learning outcomes of Carter match those of UNE’s. They are worded different but do have the same meaning. One of Carter’s learning outcomes is “identify important research questions”, I believe this goes along well with UNE’s first learning outcome (Carter 397). UNE’s first learning outcome focuses on students having the ability to know what makes an important research and political question. Both learning outcomes are similar, confirming Carters ideology of empirical inquiry to be true. However, he is where I add something to his ideology because I also believe Political Science falls under the problem solving metagenre. Using one of Carter’s learning outcomes which is “apply appropriate methodologies to collected data”, meaning using problem solving to deal with the data one collects from research. Political science falls within these two metagenres and in a sense challenges Carter’s ideology of a major only fitting into one metagenre. 

Revised Paragraph:

Michael Carter has an ideology about every major falling into categories called metagenres. I believe political science falls under two metagenres, those being empirical inquiry and problem solving. I say empirical inquiry because Carter himself uses political science as an example of it. The learning outcomes of Carter match those of UNE’s. They are worded different but do have the same meaning. One of Carter’s learning outcomes is “identify important research questions”, I believe this goes along well with UNE’s first learning outcome (Carter 397). UNE’s first learning outcome focuses on students having the ability to know what makes an important research and political question. Both learning outcomes are similar, confirming Carters ideology of empirical inquiry to be true. However, he is where I add something to his ideology because I also believe Political Science falls under the problem solving metagenre. Using one of Carter’s learning outcomes which is “apply appropriate methodologies to collected data”, meaning using problem solving to deal with the data one collects from research. Carter has these set metagenres already when I believe he should have taken into account that certain majors may fall into many metagenres. Take Political Science, it falls under empirical inquiry and problem solving, that is just one persons opinion, others may believe it falls into different metagenres as well. Carter should have made certain metagenres that include the topics of many to better categorize majors that fit into multiple metagenres. Political science falls within these two metagenres and in a sense challenges Carter’s ideology of a major only fitting into one metagenre.