argument research about illegal immigrants

Project 3: Researched Argument on a Current Issue & Group Study of Affects on Writing Processes of a Rhetorical Focus.

For our third project, we will be conducting somewhat of an experiment. A large part of our course has been a focus on how writing is social, so how does your knowledge of writing as a social interaction change your processes of writing? To determine this scientifically, rather than anecdotally, you will form into groups and study yourselves and each other as you write a classical argument on a current controversial issue to be published in a specific designated place for a particular audience and in an appropriate genre for the ecology of that publication. Using Paul Prior’s article in Writing about Writing (492–526), your group should use as many methods as you can to collect data on the processes you each use to write your classical argument.

Since your research question is “How does focusing on the ecology and rhetorical situation that I am writing for affect my writing processes?” You will each need to first provide an account of what your usual process for writing has been prior to this course, which you can then compare to the data you collect to find differences that can be linked to a social focus.

This project, then, entails two major parts: the classical argument and the research report that your group will write collaboratively. Both parts will have several required components.

Part 1

For the first part of the project, you will need to find a controversial issue that is currently being debated in the particular forum or publication that you will target. You will then need to thoroughly research both the subject (public and academic sources) and the ecology and rhetorical situation. As you work toward writing your argument, you will need to complete and turn in the following steps:

· A proposal of the topic with evidence that it is current and controversial with a list of prospective publications where this topic has been part of the ongoing conversations.

· Research notes with a full description of the rhetorical situation (using Grant-Davie’s elements of rhetorical situations), the ecology in which the publication you choose circulates (using Coopers model of interlocking systems), and a list of relevant sources on the topic, those from the publication you have chosen, other public sources, and, most importantly, academic databases so you can make a truly informed argument based in research and not just biased perspectives.

· Your researched argument (approximately 1000 to 1500 words).

What I’ll be looking for in Part 1

· A cover letter following the instructions for cover letters in the separate assignment sheet.

· Effective rhetorical choices aimed at the expectations of the ecology of the publication you have chosen.

· An effective introduction that establishes the topic in an engaging way, indicates its importance, presents an exigency for the argument, and provides a guiding statement or statements that establish the main purpose of the text.

· A background section that defines terms, provides a summary of the current history of the topic, and synthesizes/summarizes the current conversation, presenting the different perspectives on the issue as fairly/”objectively” as possible, though with a focus on the argument you are making.

· A response to previous arguments that is nuanced, thoughtful, and based on scholarly sources.

· A positive argument that presents an original (not just an agreement with what others have already said) and thoughtful position on the issue with claims, reasons, and evidence that the readers of the publication would find persuasive.

· A conclusion that reiterates the argument, down-plays opposing views and objections, and amplifies the possible outcomes of the argument (answers the question “So what?”).

Part 2

The second part of project 3 should be started prior to beginning part 1. In your group, you need

· Plan when and how you will collect your data (use multiple methods from Prior’s article on process).

· Write your accounts of your “usual” process of writing (when you gave it time and did your best) prior to this course.

· Keep careful notes, recordings, etc. of your processes as you write.

· Organize your data and determine how you will “code” for changes that seem to have occurred in your processes because of your focus on the ecology and rhetorical situation. Focus especially on decisions about reasons, evidence, tone, etc. that were linked to your analysis of the audience for your argument—times when you paused to consider if what you were writing or the way you were writing it would successfully appeal to the ecology of the publication.

· Create charts, graphs, tables, etc. to present your results.

· Write up your research report following a Introduction, Methods, Results, Conclusions format for social science empirical research reports.

What I’ll be looking for in Part 2

· An effective cover letter from each member of the group that follows the instructions for cover letters in the separate assignment sheet but also adds a paragraph discussing the contributions of each member of the group and the effectiveness of your collaborative efforts.

· An effective introduction that establishes the topic in an engaging way, indicates its importance, presents the exigency for the study (empirically testing the claims of writing theorists about the real effects of focusing on ecologies and rhetorical situations on student writing processes). In a research report, the introduction also includes the synthesis/review of literature on the subject, so this is where you would summarize what our class texts have said about the social nature of writing, rhetorical situations, and the supposed benefits to student writing of focusing on them. You would then end with a guiding statement(s) about how you conducted the study, hinting toward what your results might indicate.

· A methods section that details how you collected and analyzed your data from your study (which is technically an auto-ethnography).

· A results section that clearly and “objectively” presents the data.

· A conclusion section that interprets the data to draw conclusions about what affect focusing on a particular ecology and rhetorical situation had on your writing processes, and suggests areas for further research.