Writing Question

Planning for essay:

1. 8 or more pages (typed double-spacing) MLA format
2. with an outline before the paper (not in page count)
3. and works cited/reference page after these pages for the sources that you use (not in page count)
4. Use ONE of the linked article readings module 3 midterm selections as a foundation for this essay. You will research for an article that takes the OPPOSITE position than the linked article that you have selected so that the two articles present a DEBATE on the issue.
   • Choose ONE of the linked articles (from module 3) that you did NOT use in module 3--You will "live" with this choice for the rest of the semester as the foundation of your research project:
     • Niccolo Machiavelli (historical piece from 16th century Rennaisance) excerpt chapter 18 from The PrinceLinks to an external site.
     • Yaniv Heled"Cheaper Versions of the Most Expensive Drubs Are Coming, but Monopolies Will Likely Remain"Links to an external site.
     • Matthew Larson "Juneteenth--Freedom's Promise Is Still Denied to Thousands of Blacks Unable to Make Bail"Links to an external site.
     • Tristan Bove "Tech Companies Dealing with Data Center Protests Are Fighting a Losing Battle: Only 8% of Opponents Actually Live Near One"Links to an external site.
   • And use a source suitable for collegiate work to research an opposing article so that you have a debate to analyze (to consider to increase your "knowledge nutrition")
     • New York TimesLinks to an external site.
     • Washington PostLinks to an external site.
     • Wall Street JournalLinks to an external site.
     • Economist Links to an external site.
     • New YorkerLinks to an external site.
     • Atlantic Links to an external site.
     • Google ScholarLinks to an external site.
     • Foreign PolicyLinks to an external site.
     • And. . .news sources outside the U.S.A. like Al JazeeraLinks to an external site. and BBCLinks to an external site.

This is formal writing, so you are addressing a large audience of co-workers, colleagues, and people who are interested in hearing an authority and mention of experts (a way of showing that you research ideas instead of relying on opinion, guesswork, or gossip).

NOTE: we will all be use Carson's excerpt in the final research project--do NOT use this piece for this essay.

(The following is a checklist for the content of the paper)

• An outline AS a cover page before your essay if you are using MLA format (not included in page count).
• an informative title;
• an opening with interest;
• consideration of audience;
• a clear thesis;
• well-considered academic word choice and tone;
• avoiding subjective "I" needlessly (formal writing focuses on the material, not personal reaction);
• avoiding "dead" words like "it" or "things";
• transitions between ideas;
• supporting evidence/details/specificity/authority/fact/data, etc.;
• using researched material accurately (to MLA format) when referencing
• commentary as demonstration of your developing skills in using research to forward/prove your thesis;
• counter-arguments;
• response to counter-arguments;
• a conclusive ending
• a works cited/reference page per MLA style (not included in the page count)—there are only two sources in this essay

Context:

An analysis of a debate offers an assessment, a judgment about disputants regarding a topic using reasonable, relevant criteria to base the evaluation on. Evidence for analysis exists in terms of the standards/criteria that can be compared/contrasted, making the evaluation/judgment persuasive to an audience, not just subjective opinion. In argument, the writer needs to anticipate reader's objections or alternative evaluations.

Effective organization is necessary in an evaluation. When a topic is being compared/contrasted with another, the writer can organize the essay

• subject by subject (all about A; then all about B)
• or point by point (point X—how A and B address it; point Y—how A and B address it; point Z—how A and B address it).

The writer should keep consistent throughout the essay in using one or the other method

Directions:

Use BOTH of the essays as you construct your response about the strategies that the writers have employed.

Prompt:

1. Which author seems to make the stronger case and why? Your answer to this question will become your thesis. Remember—the stronger essay may NOT be the one that you agree with. . .the one that you disagree with may have better/more convincing strategies. DO NOT include your personal reaction to the issues in this essay (it is an analysis). Put yourself in the position of an Olympic judge who is looking at two excellent athletes (arguers) but must determine who is performing better than the other; one is gold and the other is silver because of their performance.
2. Evaluate the effectiveness of the strategies/argumentative rhetoric the authors use to support their points. Again, like an Olympic judge, you have to “score” their performances, not your feelings about the issue.
3. Be sure you address the types of evidence used in each piece and whether the evidence is convincing (or not). Evidence goes beyond mentioning a reference—you must pull in specific support from the essay by quoting/referencing. Also, avoid overuse of restating/summarizing what the authors say--id and analyze the how and why of their choices in stating what they offer.
4. Topic sentences must connect/invoke the thesis to reveal organization and direct the paper’s flow
5. Formal academic writing highlights the material, not the writer’s personal reaction/response to the material

While you are evaluating the “performances” of each author as an arguer, you DO NOT need to research their issue (pay attention to the rhetoric).

Suggestions for organizing essay:

These frames suggest the traditional 5 paragraph essay, but you may see an opportunity to break with tradition as you delve into examples and see places for necessary paragraph breaks. NO 2-page paragraphs!

Option 1

I. Introduction

1. 1. Hook/orientation to topic
   2. Background/id of authors and titles, essential info for their stances
   3. Thesis: which author makes the stronger case (notice PRESENT tense) and why

RCB (reason, counter, rebuttal)=Toulmin argument!

II Body

A Piece that supports your thesis (the “stronger” essay) (Reason)

1. 1. 1. Criteria 1
      2. Criteria 2
      3. Criteria 3, etc.

B Piece that supports your thesis (because it’s the “weaker” essay) (Counter)

1. 1. 1. Criteria 1 NOTE: these are still strengths in another interpretation!
      2. Criteria 2
      3. Criteria 3, etc.

C Why the weaker essay falls short/stronger essay succeeds (Rebuttal)

1. 1. 1. Additional criteria observations
      2. Additional criteria observations
      3. Additional criteria observations

III Closure—the take-aways of what a stronger argument can achieve

Body option 2

A Piece that supports your thesis (because it’s the “weaker” essay) (Counter)

1. Criteria 1 NOTE: these are still strengths in another interpretation!
2. Criteria 2
3. Criteria 3, etc.

B Why the weaker essay falls short/stronger essay succeeds (Rebuttal)

1. Criteria 1
2. Criteria 2
3. Criteria 3, etc.

C Piece that supports your thesis (stronger essay) (Reason)

1. Criteria 1
2. Criteria 2
3. Criteria 3

Body option 3

A Criteria 1

1. Stronger essay (reason)
2. Weaker essay (counter)
3. Rebuttal for why weaker falls short/stronger succeeds

B Criteria 2

1. Stronger essay (reason)
2. Weaker essay (counter)
3. Rebuttal for why weaker falls short/stronger succeeds

C Criteria 3

1Stronger essay (reason)

2Weaker essay (counter)

3Rebuttal for why weaker falls short/stronger succeeds

Criteria: found throughout our course: ethos (character, persona, fairness), logos (facts, evidence, or assumptions), pathos (humor, gravity; word choice/tone), audience, language, handling of counters, publication, etc.!

Tips: Avoid digressing into discussions about the issue/content—the goal is to address and judge how the authors succeed or fall short in being persuasive because of the strategies that they use (their crafting of the argument); do not provide quotes without analysis/do not assume readers know what the strategy is—that is your role. . .to discuss what the example is and why it’s effective or not (i.e. an assumption, manipulation of language, fair acknowledgment of objection, sensitive persona, reliable facts, etc.)

do NOT submit AI generated response; consult AI policies

Rubric

Composition Rubric (2)

Composition Rubric (2)

Criteria	Ratings
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome6 exceeding expectationsIDEAS --contains claim --shows depth of understanding and critical thinking/independent judgement of the material, -insightful support/evidence, clearly defined which includes effective reasoning/analysis, vivid details, unique insight, --and creative development of the prompt -no plagiarism ORGANIZATION -solid organization, clear sense of completeness, control of flow, and well-chosen transitions and plan DICTION/VOICE -strong voice and tone using appropriate, mature, specific vocabulary to student’s level, avoids vagueness, and does not reflect reliance on "dead words" like "it, things, a lot, stuff, indefinite this/there is"; Note: informal work may include informal/personal "I" expressions CONVENTIONS -extremely few or no errors in conventions, sentence clarity -clear, legible presentation and format --MLA applied if required
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome5 accomplishing expectationsIDEAS -contains claim -better than average understanding of material but may reach some obvious conclusions --has thoughtful support/evidence, clearly defined which includes effective reasoning/analysis, relevant details, --fully develops prompt -no plagiarism ORGANIZATION -logical coherence between components that are clear, specific, and show pertinent transitions for the plan DICTION/VOICE -expanded vocabulary, little vagueness, appropriate word choice to student’s level, avoids non-specific language CONVENTIONS -few violations of conventions, sentence clarity -clear, legible presentation and format --MLA applied if required
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome4 demonstrating expectationsIDEAS --contains claim --understanding of material, but may not consistently show understanding or may not provide full details, --may not be as focused -generalizations supported by relevant details, but may repeat observations made in materials rather than formulate original ideas/analysis --includes suitable details, --may contain obvious conclusions or some summary but develops major expectations of the prompt -no plagiarism ORGANIZATION -a clear subject with logical structure that is functional may not be well written with strong control, and may have few minor digressions from the plan DICTION/VOICE -some expanded vocabulary, appropriate word choice for student's level; may contain some clichés or triteness CONVENTIONS -some violations (but not many) in conventions and sentence clarity -clear, legible presentation and format --MLA included if required
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome3 developing expectationsIDEAS --unclear claim -lack of understanding of the material, --textual inaccuracy, --undeveloped paper, --summarizing/ retelling instead of analyzing -writer's position not stated. --Support is irrelevant, missing, contradictory, or repetitive -no plagiarism ORGANIZATION -a subject related to the given topic with structure that may contain minor digressions but addresses major intention of prompt DICTION/VOICE -common vocabulary, colloquial or inaccurate diction, clichés or slang without some attention to one’s written presentation for academic work CONVENTIONS -some violations in conventions or sentence clarity which do not impede reader's understanding -clear, legible presentation --MLA attempted if required
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome2/1 falling short of expectationsIDEAS -no claim --no understanding of material -unclear subject, or absent main idea, or missing thesis, or off topic, --barely addresses intention of prompt, --simplistic, repetitious, vague, or confusing comments -paper too brief or unfinished -any plagiarized elements ORGANIZATION -lack of organization, no plan attempted or followed DICTION/VOICE Limited vocabulary, inappropriate word choice CONVENTIONS -violations of conventions or sentence clarity which interfere with communication -illegible, ignores format -MLA missing if required