Need help with assignment for (Research Pro) only

Counterargument Paper

This paper assignment expands upon your Week One Assignment and prepares you for the Final Paper. The expansion is to learn to improve one’s argument after investigating and fairly representing the opposite point of view. The main new tasks are to revise your previous argument created in Week One, to present a counterargument (an argument for a contrary conclusion), and to develop an objection to your original argument.

Here are the steps to prepare to write the counterargument paper:

· Begin reviewing your previous paper paying particular attention to suggestions for improvement made by your instructor.

· Revise your argument, improving it as much as possible, accounting for any suggestions and in light of further material you have learned in the course. If your argument is inductive, make sure that it is strong. If your argument is deductive, make sure that it is valid.

· Construct what you take to be the strongest possible argument for a conclusion contrary to the one you argued for in your Week One paper. This is your counterargument. This should be based on careful thought and appropriate research.

· Consider the primary points of disagreement between the point of view of your original argument and that of the counterargument.

· Think about what you take to be the strongest objection to your original argument and how you might answer the objection while being fair to both sides. Search in the University Library for quality academic sources that support some aspect of your argument or counterargument.

In your paper,

· Present a revised argument in standard form, with each premise and the conclusion on a separate line.

· Present a counterargument in standard form, with each premise and the conclusion on a separate line.

· Provide support for each premise of your counterargument. Clarify the meaning of the premise and supporting evidence for the premise.

· Pay special attention to those premises that could be seen as controversial. Evidence may include academic research sources, supporting arguments, or other ways of demonstrating the truth of the premise (for more ideas about how to support the truth of premises take a look at the instructor guidance for this week). This section should include at least one scholarly research source. For guidance about how to develop a conclusion see the Writing Center’s Introductions and Conclusions.

· Explain how the conclusion of the counterargument follows from its premises. [One paragraph]

· Discuss the primary points of disagreement between sincere and intelligent proponents of both sides. [One to two paragraphs]

· For example, you might list any premises or background assumptions on which you think such proponents would disagree and briefly state what you see as the source of the disagreement, you could give a brief explanation of any reasoning that you think each side would find objectionable, or you could do a combination of these.

· Present the best objection to your original argument. Clearly indicate what part of the argument your objection is aimed at, and provide a paragraph of supporting evidence for the objection. Reference at least one scholarly research source. [One to two paragraphs]

· See the “Practicing Effective Criticism” section of Chapter 9 of your primary textbook for more information about how to present an objection.

For an example of how to complete this paper, take a look at the following Week Three Annotated Example. Let your instructor know if you have questions about how to complete this paper.

Total Possible Score: 10.00

Presents the Revised Main Argument in Standard Form

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Presents the revised main argument in standard form. The argument contains no errors of logic.

Proficient - Presents the revised main argument in standard form. The argument contains few errors in clarity or logic.

Basic - Presents the revised main argument. The argument contains some errors in clarity or logic and/or is not in standard form.

Below Expectations - Attempts to present the revised main argument; however, the main argument contains many errors in clarity or logic and is not standard form.

Non-Performance - The main argument is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Presents a Counterargument in Standard Form

Total: 2.00

Distinguished - Presents a clear counterargument in standard form. The argument contains no errors of logic.

Proficient - Presents a counterargument in standard form. The argument contains few errors in clarity or logic.

Basic - Presents a counterargument. The argument contains some errors in clarity or logic and/or is not in standard form.

Below Expectations - Attempts to present a counterargument; however, the argument contains many errors in clarity or logic and is not in standard form.

Non-Performance - The counterargument is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Provides Support for the Premises of the Counterargument

Total: 2.00

Distinguished - Provides support for all premises of the counterargument by comprehensively providing clarification of the meaning of each premise and supporting evidence. The supporting evidence provides clear and appropriate reasons for thinking each premise is true.

Proficient - Provides support for all premises of the counterargument by providing clarification of the meaning of each premise and supporting evidence. The supporting evidence provides appropriate reasons for thinking each premise is true. Minor details are missing or unclear.

Basic - Provides support for most premises of the counterargument by providing clarification of the meaning of each premise and supporting evidence. The supporting evidence provides somewhat appropriate reasons for thinking each premise is true. Relevant details are missing and/or unclear

Below Expectations - Attempts to provide support for all premises of the counterargument; however, does not provide clarification of the meaning of each premise and supporting evidence. The supporting evidence does not provide appropriate reasons for thinking each premise is true, and significant details are missing and entirely unclear.

Non-Performance - The supporting evidence for the premises of the counterargument is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Explains How The Conclusion of The Counterargument Follows From its Premises

Total: 0.50

Distinguished - Clearly and comprehensively explains how the conclusion of the counterargument follows from the premises. 

Proficient - Explains how the conclusion of the counterargument follows from the premises.  Minor details are missing or slightly unclear.

Basic - Partially explains how the conclusion of the counterargument follows from the premises. Relevant details are missing and/or unclear.

Below Expectations - Attempts to explain how the conclusion of the counterargument follows from the premises; however, significant details are missing and entirely unclear.

Non-Performance - The explanation of how the conclusion of the counterargument follow from its premises is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Discusses the Primary Points of Disagreement and Presents an Objection to the Original Argument

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Comprehensively discusses the primary points of disagreement between sincere and intelligent proponents of both sides and clearly presents a central objection to the original argument, thoroughly indicating the part of the argument the objection is aimed at and provides appropriate supporting evidence for the objection.

Proficient - Discusses the primary points of disagreement between sincere and intelligent proponents of both sides and presents a central objection to the argument, indicating the part of the argument the objection is aimed at and provides supporting evidence for the objection. The discussion or objection has minor weaknesses in clarity or strength or is slightly underdeveloped.

Basic - Partially  discusses the primary points of disagreement between sincere and intelligent proponents of both sides and somewhat presents a central objection to the argument, minimally indicating the part of the argument the objection is aimed at and provides inappropriate supporting evidence for the objection. The discussion and/or objection has weaknesses in clarity or strength and/or is underdeveloped.

Below Expectations - Attempts to discuss primary points of disagreement between sincere and intelligent proponents of both sides and present a central objection to the argument; however, does not indicate the part of the argument the objection is aimed at and does not provide appropriate supporting evidence for the objection. The discussion and objection has significant weaknesses in clarity and strength and is severely underdeveloped.

Non-Performance - The discussion of the primary points of disagreement and objection to the original argument are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.

Written Communication: Control of Syntax and Mechanics

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors and is very easy to understand.

Proficient - Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors and is mostly easy to understand.

Basic - Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors which may slightly distract the reader.

Below Expectations - Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors which distract the reader.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Written Communication: APA Formatting

Total: 0.50

Distinguished - Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.

Proficient - Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors. 

Basic - Exhibits limited knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements. 

Below Expectations - Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Written Communication: Word Requirement

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - The length of the paper is equivalent to the required number of words.

Proficient - The length of the paper is nearly equivalent to the required number of words.

Basic - The length of the paper is equivalent to at least three quarters of the required number of words.

Below Expectations - The length of the paper is equivalent to at least one half of the required number of words.   

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Written Communication: Resource Requirement

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.

Proficient - Uses the required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.

Basic - Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.

Below Expectations - Uses an inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

The Counterargument Paper

· Must be 500 to 800 words in length (not including title and references pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Writing Center (for more information about using APA style, take a look at the APA Essay Checklist for Students webpage).

· Must include a separate title page with the following:

· Title of paper

· Student’s name

· Course name and number

· Instructor’s name

· Date submitted

· Must use at least two scholarly sources in addition to the course text.

· The Scholarly, Peer Reviewed, and Other Credible Sources table offers additional guidance on appropriate source types. If you have questions about whether a specific source is appropriate for this assignment, please contact your instructor. Your instructor has the final say about the appropriateness of a specific source for a particular assignment.

· Must document all sources in APA style as outlined in the Writing Center (for more information about how to create an APA reference list, take a look at the APA References List webpage).

· Must include a separate references page that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Writing Center.