Overview
Now that you have drafted three pages of your paper and have taken your first steps in persuading your audience as to why they should agree with your viewpoint, consider the other side of your argument. Remember in Week 1 when you discussed that your topic had two easily identifiable sides or viewpoints? Consider those opposing viewpoints now.
Consider…
- Who would disagree with you and why?
- In a debate regarding your topic, what do you think those people would say to you as a way to convince you that your viewpoint is not the strongest one?
In this part of your paper, you should identify and explain at least three (3) of these opposing viewpoints. This should be two (2) pages long.
- Use outside sources and research to support their views and remember to cite all research you use with internal citations and references in APA format.
- Consider what your rebuttals would be. Rebuttals are our response(s) to the opposing viewpoints. Despite what the opposing view is saying, why do you believe that your argument is still the stronger viewpoint and more valid as an argument?
- Your rebuttals should also be based on factual information that you can gain from research, along with your own ideas and analysis regarding your topic. You should have one (1) for each opposing viewpoint that you have identified.
- Think about how you can attract the attention of your audience and make it easy for them to understand your message.
- You will then conclude your paper with a paragraph that sums up the main argument in your paper
100Week 3 Rough Draft - Revised Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction 5 ptsExcellentFirst paragraph has a hook or catchy beginning. The introduction clearly contains details that reflect relevance between the topic and the intended audience.4 ptsGoodThe first paragraph has a hook, but it could be more engaging. The introduction contains details that reflect relevance between the topic and the intended audience.3 ptsAcceptableA catchy beginning was attempted, but it could be stronger. The introduction contains some details that may reflect relevance between the topic and the intended audience, but they could be stronger or clearer.2 ptsEmergingVery little attempt was made at having a hook to start the paragraph. It is difficult to identify the relevance between the topic and the intended audience.0 ptsNot evidentNo attempt was made to catch the reader's attention in the first paragraph. No attempt was made to include details that reflect the relevance between the topic and the intended audience of the argumentative research essay. 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThesis Statement 10 ptsExcellentThe thesis shows originality and creativity, is well-developed, and appropriate for the assignment. The thesis provides the scope of the paper without being too broad or narrow. There is a clear claim and three reasons to support the claim. The thesis statement is presented as the last sentence of the introduction.8 ptsGoodThe thesis is adequate. It may need to be broadened or narrowed to better provide the scope of the essay. The claim is generally clear, as are the three reasons to support the claim. The thesis statement may or may not be presented as the last sentence of the introduction.6 ptsAcceptableThe thesis may be weak and may or may not provide the scope of the paper. The claim may be unclear, and/or there may not be three reasons to support the claim. The thesis statement may or may not be presented as the last sentence of the introduction.4 ptsEmergingThe thesis provides little to no understanding of the scope of the essay. The claim and three supporting reasons may or may not be included or clearly presented. The thesis statement may or may not be presented as the last sentence of the introduction.0 ptsNo MarksThe document lacks a thesis statement. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeArgument 25 ptsExcellentThe argument is clearly presented with three key supporting reasons. The reasons are balanced, thorough, and well-supported.23 ptsGoodThe argument is presented with three key supporting reasons. The reasons are balanced, thorough, and supported.21 ptsAcceptableThe argument is presented with three key supporting reasons. The reasons may or may not be balanced, thorough, and supported.15 ptsEmergingThe argument may have fewer than three key supporting reasons. The reasons may be unbalanced and/or lack sufficient support.0 ptsNot evident 25 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCounterarguments & Rebuttals 25 ptsExcellentThree counterarguments and three rebuttals are clearly presented. The counterarguments and rebuttals are supported with research. There is a balanced and fair approach to both sides of the presented argument.23 ptsGoodThree counterarguments and three rebuttals are presented. The counterarguments and rebuttals are supported with research. There is a balanced and fair approach to both sides of the presented argument.21 ptsAcceptableThree counterarguments and three rebuttals may or may not be presented. The counterarguments and rebuttals are supported with research, though that research may be limited. There may not be a balanced and fair approach to both sides of the presented argument.15 ptsEmergingThere may be fewer than three counterarguments and three rebuttals. The counterarguments and rebuttals may or may not be supported with research, though that research may be limited or irrelevant. There may not be a balanced and fair approach to both sides of the presented argument.0 ptsNot evident 25 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion 5 ptsExcellentThe paper comes to a clear conclusion where key arguments are effectively synthesized.4 ptsGoodThe paper comes to a clear conclusion. Key arguments are restated in a way that reinforces the main argument.3 ptsAcceptableThe conclusion offers a basic summary of the key points.2 ptsEmergingThe conclusion is weak. There may be limited connections to the main argument.0 ptsNot evidentThe paper lacks a clear conclusion. 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization 5 ptsExcellentThe paper demonstrates exceptional logical flow with smooth transitions and clear connections between ideas. Topic sentences align with the key points in the thesis statement and provide clear structure to the essay's organization.4 ptsGoodThe paper presents a clear, logical argument with strong organizational structure and smooth transitions. However, the organization may or may not clearly align with the thesis statement.3 ptsAcceptableThe paper maintains basic argumentative structure with some logical connections. However, the organization does not follow the structure established in the thesis statement.2 ptsEmergingThe argument is disjointed; there may be weak organizational logic. The organization does not follow the structure established in the thesis statement.0 ptsPoorThere is no attempt at presenting a clear argumentative structure or logical progression. 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar & Style 10 ptsExcellentThere are very few spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors in the document.8 ptsGoodThere are a few spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors in the document. The introduction may be written in the 1st person rather than the 3rd person.6 ptsAcceptableThere are significant spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors in the document. The introduction may be written in the 1st person rather than the 3rd person.2 ptsPoorThe final draft has spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors that significantly interfere with understanding the essay. The introduction may be written in the 1st person, rather than the 3rd person. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Layout 5 ptsFull MarksThe paper is formatted correctly according to APA 7th edition guidelines.4 ptsGoodThe paper is mostly formatted according to APA 7th edition formatting guidelines. Errors may be minor.3 ptsAcceptableThere are several deviations from APA 7th edition formatting guidelines, but a clear attempt was made.2 ptsEmergingFrequent errors in formatting are noted, and those errors are inconsistent with APA 7th edition formatting guidelines.0 ptsPoorThe paper is either not formatted according to APA 7th edition formatting guidelines or the errors significantly deviate from the standards. 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn-Text Citations & References 10 ptsFull MarksIntegrates 4+ credible academic sources with correctly-formatted APA citations and references.8 ptsGoodEffectively uses 4+ scholarly sources with mostly correct APA formatting and appropriate citations. Errors may be minor.6 ptsAcceptableMay use fewer than 4 sources with mostly correct citations and references. There are some obvious formatting errors.4 ptsEmergingLimited source usage with inconsistent or incorrect citations and/or references.0 ptsNo MarksReferences and/or citations are missing and/or significantly incorrect. 10 pts