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 29
th
, and Monday, May 2nd
.
• The paper is due Wednesday, May 4
th
.
• 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.
