Checkpoint #3 is mostly for you: selecting a section of your piece to focus in on

and writing a brief proposal on what you would write about (it’s not set in stone,
it’s for you to start generating ideas). For the paper, use anything from the
semester that’s relevant. I imagine most pieces will rely heavily on SHMRG (which
is totally fine!), though it’s possible the piece you choose incorporates
identifiable modes/scales or vertical structures (material from Exam #1) or more
likely a bit of set theory might be useful, especially if there are melodic motives
or similar gestures (material from Exam #2).

This paragraph from the project guidelines might be helpful to return to if you get
stuck:

"Ultimately, we are looking at engaging more closely with extended techniques,

looking at notation and notational issues that may arise (and composers' strategies
for dealing with this), how the extended technique is incorporated into the piece
(what function does it serve), and bringing all this information and observations
together to attempt concise and focused analysis of a select excerpt of this work
using the tools and resources we've learned about over the course of the semester.”

How a performer engages with challenges of the piece is also very relevant for
generating musical observations (hence, Checkpoint #2). I’m not looking for
analysis that accounts for every note, but something where you identify a few
topics (using SHMRG, anything you’ve learned about extended techniques, etc) and be
able to communicate your findings in writing. “Analysis” is truly a broad term, I
like to think of it as finding ways to better understand a piece, then putting this
into prose to help someone else understand it.