composition

Assignment 4: Contributing Your Reasoned Argument to the Conversation

Overview: We began looking at various conversations surrounding Healthy State, reading, and

thinking critically about each text. Once we immersed ourselves in the ongoing conversations,

we began thinking about how to take the arguments we heard and shift them to a different

context, hence taking our critical thinking skills to new levels and beginning to consider the

importance of perspective. Finally, you have asked an inquiry question, guiding you through

research of a debatable issue and its various stakeholders. With a specific stakeholder as your

audience, you are now ready to contribute your own, reasoned argument to an ongoing

conversation. The argument you write for this assignment will be an academic, source-based

argument for one of the specific stakeholders you’ve examined. You may use the sources you’ve

already gathered, but you can also continue to find new sources to support your evolving

argument. Consider including any field research done in the previous assignment, or feel free to

conduct field research now. Furthermore, your argument should add something unique or new to

the conversation rather than just repeating someone else’s argument.

Purpose: The purpose for this assignment will depend on your intended stakeholder. It will

most likely fall into one of the following general categories:

o To convince undecided stakeholders to accept your thesis.

o To make opposing stakeholders less resistant to your thesis.

o To convince stakeholders who agree with you to act.

Audience: Your audience is a specific stakeholder—which means a person, group, organization,

etc.… who has a vested interest in the issue. Use the analysis of stakeholders you completed in

the previous assignment to help you choose the most appropriate stakeholder for your argument.

Not only does your stakeholder have a vested interest in the issue, but they also have several

expectations of you as an author. To begin with, the stakeholders expect that an argument is

well-researched, and that the argument is supported with reasons and evidence. They want to see

that you are familiar with the conversation on the issue and how your argument uniquely

contributes to that conversation. In addition, such stakeholders are reading as academics,

meaning that they expect an academic argument to emerge. An academic argument means that

you use full citations for all sources used and your writing is clear and concrete. You’ll need to

carefully consider your readers’ expectations as you write your argument.

Author: Present yourself as a knowledgeable, fair-minded, credible, and as appropriate,

empathetic person. You do not need to be an expert on your issue to write an argument, but you

do need to have confidence in what you do know and believe about it. Show that you approach

the issue with enthusiasm, intellectual curiosity, and an open mind.

Argument Strategies and Requirements: An effective argument achieves its purpose with its

audience and is appropriate for an academic context. To achieve your purpose with your

audience, be sure to:

• Review the stakeholder analysis you completed and familiarize yourself with the assumptions, beliefs, values, and needs of your intended audience.

• Rely on audience appeals logos (appeal to reason), ethos (appeal to character), and pathos (appeal to emotion). Be sure that the appeals used suit the rhetorical situation.

• Possibly continue conducting effective research to support your developing argument.

• Organize your argument effectively to best support your claim and reasons.

• Show how well-informed about the conversation you are by including at least one other stakeholder whose viewpoint differs from your own. Accurately and fairly represent and

respond to such an alternative viewpoint on the issue. At least one counterargument must

be presented, and a proper refutation offered.

• Demonstrate that you have conducted effective inquiry into the issue by summarizing, paraphrasing, and directly quoting appropriately and by documenting sources correctly in

MLA style. This will bolster your ethos with your audience.

• Include a minimum of six relevant, reliable, and recent sources. These sources do not necessarily need to be from the previous assignment. You may choose to incorporate an

interview with a major stakeholder as one of your sources.

• Give yourself plenty of time to draft, revise, and polish your argument.

Details:

• The paper should be formatted according to MLA conventions. This includes MLA-style heading and page numbers, parenthetical citations within your paper for all sources used

(quotes, paraphrases, facts, ideas, etc.…) and a Works Cited page at the end of the paper.

• The paper should be between 5-7 pages, double-spaced, 12-point font.

• We will workshop on Friday, April 29th, and Monday, May 2nd.

• The paper is due Wednesday, May 4th.

• This paper is worth 25% of your total grade.

**NOTE: At the end of your paper, include the following honor pledge: “"I have not given, received, or used any unauthorized assistance."

Academic Argument Grading Rubric

Excellent Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

Logos. The central claim is clearly

stated and appropriately qualified.

It is debatable and has exigence.

Reasons effectively support the

central claim, and concrete

evidence develops the reasons.

Connections between claims and

reasons, and between reasons and

evidence, are clearly stated.

The argument is organized in a

coherent, linear fashion.

The paper adds a unique and

engaging argument to the ongoing

conversation.

The central claim is generally

clear but could benefit from

further clarification, improved

debatability, or clearer

exigence.

The author may need to clarify

reasoning and/or provide

additional evidence and/or

explain how and why the

reasons and evidence support

the claim.

The paper clearly argues for a

position on the issue rather than

merely reporting or

summarizing information

although at times the paper

briefly lapses into mere

summary.

The claim is vague, may

change or is not

maintained.

Reasoning is unclear or

faulty and/or the argument

lacks enough support,

enough, relevant evidence,

or connections between

claim and support.

The paper focuses more

on reporting or

summarizing information,

rather than arguing for a

position on the issue.

Ethos. Source authority and

credibility is presented explicitly

and cited formally.

Tone and language are fair and

even handed and avoid alienating

the reader.

The writer uses a variety of

sources to prove each reason,

showing that they have researched

the issue thoroughly.

While your readers may have

moments of doubt about your

character due to lapses in source

authority or maintaining a fair

tone, they will find you

trustworthy.

In general, the writer uses a

variety of sources to prove each

reason, although at times may

rely too much on one or two

sources.

Readers will be skeptical

about your character

because of the sources you

cite, a lack of citation,

how you deal (or don't)

with other perspectives, or

the tone in which you

present your argument.

The writer relies too much

on only one or two

sources, showing that

he/she has not researched

the issue thoroughly.

Alternative Arguments: Specific

alternative viewpoints are fairly

represented and responded to

effectively.

Alternative viewpoints could be

better represented OR receive a

more effective response.

Alternative viewpoints are

not represented, are

misrepresented, and/or do

not receive an effective

response.

Conventions & Style: Correct

MLA citations are used, in text

and in the Works Cited page.

The paper is formatted according

to MLA standards.

Prose is clear, direct, and free of

sentence-level errors.

Your paper is generally readable

but would benefit from more

careful proofreading and editing

and/or correct MLA

citation/formatting.

Readers will have

difficulty understanding

your meaning or accepting

your claim because your

paper needs to pay closer

attention to conventions

and to readers' needs.

Overall Effectiveness: The

cumulative effect of this argument

is one of thoroughness and unity,

leaving informed readers likely to

accept or consider your central

claim seriously.

Readers will be inclined to

consider or accept your claim,

but the argument and/or appeals

could be more effective.

Readers are not likely to

accept your claim—you

may not have a clear sense

of audience and/or

purpose.