What kind of structure would best serve to move this project away from a report (that is, a general summary of research, pretty much limited to  rehashing what others have said about your topic) to a piece that takes on interest/significance because it connects to the reader, or engages a reader to connect to you, the writer?

Possibilities: A day (week, year) in the life of your artifact.

                  My artifact and me.

                  Five (or other number) ways of looking at my artifact

                 A history of the world (or something smaller) without my artifact in it.

                 Five (or other number) world leaders (or other category of notables) and their ______________.

Or another structure that comes to you.  This is not just a prompt to up the creative level (although it is that). Academic writing demands that the author participate in an ongoing discussion, not just report it. Since you probably don't have the time/resources to discover brand new information about your artifact, you should focus on presenting a slightly different view of it or a different understanding.  Getting out of the traditional argument structure is a way to do that. Of course, you still have to work in background, evidence, support, acknowledgment of other viewpoints.

When putting together your paper, you need to be sure that you’ve presented all the necessary information and support, and that everything you include pertains to developing and explaining and clarifying your thesis.  Talking about your project can help you clarify in your own mind what your goals are, and what kind of work (research/analyzing/connecting) you still have to do to make your paper a unified, interesting document. So, in small groups, tell each other the following about your papers:

1.  This is my thesis, in one sentence: (Probably it is along the lines of “In our culture(corporations, schools, homes, garages, purses, etc.  _________  is used for ___________, but it symbolizes/highlights/conflicts with/ represents/falsifies etc.

social class/status/income/specific value/power hierarchy etc. etc. etc.”)

2. What kind of background information can you provide about your object? Why does it exist? What about the history of your object seems to be most relevant to your thesis? What is missing that might help?

  3. Have you sufficiently described your object?  Have you focused on materials, appearance, construction, shape, texture, feel, smell (not all are necessary.) Which parts of your physical description are most relevant to your thesis? What is missing that might help?

 4.If your artifact relates to some aspect you have chosen to describe our society (ie: materialism, social status, wastefulness) you need to show that this condition is present in our society.  Have you done this?  How can you do this?

5. What patterns can you identify connected to the artifact?  Who uses it? Why? How do others view it? Can  you categorize your artifact (some kinds "better" than others?)  How do users of  your artifact want to be seen?  What features in the artifact cause certain individuals to reject or select it?  WHAT DOES IT SAY ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO USE IT?

  6.  How can you use outside sources to increase interest/support your statements?