[meteor_slideshow slideshow=”adssa” metadata=”height: 126, width: 630″]
Topics: Select a verbal argumentative text, analyze its rhetoric, and respond. The
text should be long enough to supply enough substance.
? Argumentative text chosen should be on public issues in the US: such as; Obamacare, tax, government regulations and policies etc.
1. Choose one or two pieces (by the same author) with an argumentative purpose.
2. Or choose no more than three pieces by different authors arguing for differing points of view on a single issue.
The pieces may be from sources such as?
? Newspapers and magazines with editorials and opinion pieces, including online periodicals.
? Web sites maintained by political advocacy groups.
? For this option, the pieces you select must have been authored in 2012 or later.
Recommended length of the items you select is at least 500 words each.
The pieces you select to critique must be accessible via the Web or, if hard copy, attached to your essay.
The main point is to identify, describe, and evaluate rhetorical strategies of an argumentative text and then critically respond in your own words to the said text, you may also take sides in your response.
For example, an Essay thesis for a discussion of the Van Munching article, while examining how he employs rhetoric, would focus on defending a position on the argument itself
Researched information must be properly quoted or paraphrased, attributed, and documented following APA or MLA format with an accurately formatted list of sources (Works Cited) at the end of the paper
The essay should address these points:
? must include brief (not more than two paragraphs) summaries in your own words following your introductory paragraph.
? It should then analyze, evaluate, and respond to the authors? arguments, focusing on such aspects as:
The quality of supporting evidence.
Signs of bias or fallacies in assumptions, selection of evidence, or conclusions. Evidence of tone and other pathos strategies and whether they are fairly used. Ethos?whether the writer(s) establish credibility.
? The final paragraph sums up your argumentative position in relation to the author?s. It can address the ?so what? question (why the outcome of this dispute matters to the public) or the ?now what? question (if your point is proven, what comes next; what might the audience do).
Avoid the traps:
? Keep summaries complete and fair but brief.
While focusing on your own position, keep ethos, logos, and pathos in mind
[meteor_slideshow slideshow=”best” metadata=”height: 126, width: 630″]