Four to Five Pages Rough Draft

12

Assignment 3: Evaluation Argument Proposal Due: Monday, July 23rd

Rough Draft Due: Thursday, July 26th Final Draft Due: Friday, July 27th

Prompt: An evaluation argument assesses the quality of a subject by applying reasonable criteria to it and supporting the assessment by these criteria through evidence gathered from reliable sources. In other words, an evaluation provides a judgment meant to persuade and the criteria used to arrive at that judgment (NHG 174). Process: For brainstorming, think about categories (dogs, sports cars, romcoms, rappers, coffee shops, etc.) that interest you. Once you settle on a category, consider what makes a member of that category excellent. This move from category to criteria is a crucial step toward making an ethical evaluation. The criteria you choose should apply equally well to anything in your subject’s category. What criteria make for a great coffee shop? Quality of coffee, comfort of seating, ambient sound? Or something else? Next, choose a subject within this category. You are more likely to make a strong, insightful, and fresh argument about a subject pertinent to your hometown or university than about national or global issues like Barack Obama’s presidency or the Winter Olympics. So, if your category is coffee shops, choose one you frequent in State College—Saint’s, Webster’s, Barranquero, etc. As part of your proposal, describe your chosen subject and identify its category. Explain at least four criteria that determine the quality of items in that category. Describe your exigence—why evaluating the subject matters and to whom (name your audience). In addition, provide a copy (or link) of one review by another writer evaluating a subject that belongs to the same category as your subject. For example, if you are evaluating Pollock Dining Commons, you could find an article critiquing Penn State cafeteria dining overall. As you are drafting, consider what persuasive arguments, examples, reasoning, and rhetorical appeals will best achieve your purpose and avoid fallacies, especially the fallacy of special pleading. To support your position, you should have sufficient evidence (from credible sources) that is properly integrated, cited, and developed through your own reasoning. As you revise and edit, consider tone. The one-page cover letter should explain your rhetorical decision-making and, specifically for this paper, should include: (1) an explanation of your rhetorical purpose in relation to the subject/category and your audience, and (2) several examples of rhetorical choices you made to achieve your purpose with (3) an analysis of their outcomes. Format: Your final draft should be four to five pages (double-spaced, TNR or Calibri font, 1” margins). When citing your outside source(s), follow MLA format (see NHG Ch. 19 and/or the PSU Libraries’ Citation Guide: guides.libraries.psu.edu/mlacitation). Grading Criteria: Your essay should

(1) state the category of your subject clearly; (2) define and defend the criteria you apply to that category; (3) address and influence a specific audience; (4) make a case for the quality or lack thereof of your subject; (5) support your claims with examples, details, and reasoning; (6) use research that is credible, appropriate, and properly cited following MLA guidelines; (7) demonstrate the potential to influence your audience toward your purpose; and (8) explain and defend these rhetorical choices in a cover letter.