English Question

Page Count: 6-8 pages (1500-1800 words) with 6 FULL pages or 1,500 words written minimum. Abstract, title page, and reference page do NOT count in the page or word count.

NOTE: As you put this together, are you following the critical analysis process that we emphasize in critical reasoning? That is, fairly considering all research before reaching a conclusion.

  • Introduction: Includes background information on your topic. Define key terms that are part of this topic. Give background information on why this topic is how something has changed or developed from an earlier time to its current form.
  • Arguments that support one position (2-3 paragraphs)
  • Rebuttals (What are the best arguments on the other side of your issue? (2-3 paragraphs)
  • Applicable rhetorical devices or fallacies commonly used in debating this topic.
  • A statement of your conclusion (as the researcher) on the issue (What are your conclusions based on the research you did and the most convincing arguments.
  • Minimum 5 research references in APA format, and in-text citations in your paragraphs.

The Purpose of this Essay: The goal of this paper is to construct a fair-minded, unbiased, analytical analysis of a topic in a comprehensive essay.

  • This is NOT an opinion piece NOR is it a persuasive essay that simply aims to prove or reinforce what you already believe; this would be Confirmation Bias, and bias is to be avoided in this project.
  • This project needs to avoid harsh rhetoric or language that is harmful and hurtful in nature; the point to be object and unemotional in your approach.
  • This essay SHOULD be written in fair, academic, respectful, and most importantly analytical manner regardless of any of your opinions, feelings, or preconceived notions about the topic.
  • Both sides of your topic must be treated with equal attention both in terms of the number and quality of sources and in terms of the depth and breadth of their presentation in your essay. Both sides should have about the same number of quality source and about the same number of equally sized paragraphs addressing the details of their argument in roughly equivalent detail.
  • There MUST be 2 paragraphs in this project that identify and define rhetorical devices and logical fallacies on both sides of the argument; be sure to indicate which specific rhetorical device and fallacy you have found, and that there is evidence in your sources of these course concepts in practice that is cited in your paper.
  • You will present statements and claims for and analyzing BOTH sides of the topic; only then should you state you own conclusion as an objective, critical thinker given the information presented

Required Sections:

  • 1) A Properly Formatted APA Title Page
  • 2) A Properly Formatted APA Abstract
  • 3) Intro paragraph
    • For example, you may choose any of the following:
      • State the topic directly.
      • Define the Problem.
      • Ask one Question and provide an answer.
      • Tell a short, brief story related to the topic.
      • Use a brief quote and explain its meaning.
    • 4) Side A Paragraph
      • Expand on the major sources and support with supplemental sources and evidence
    • 5) Side B Paragraph
      • Expand on the major sources and support with supplemental sources
    • 6) Rhetoric and Fallacies (One paragraph for side)
      • Be specific. Cite Rhetorical Devices and Fallacies used in sources and research; do NOT be general.
      • Present evidence from your sources that show the Rhetorical Devices and Fallacies being used
    • 7) Concluding Paragraph
      • If the reader is to look at both sides equally and analyze both sides fairly, what conclusion should the reader reach?
      • The answer does not have to be absolute, but it should not be equivocal. If both sides have good arguments, which is better, even if only slightly better, and what is the argument that tips the scales in the sides favor? Why does that point tip the scales?
    • 8) A Properly Formatted APA Reference Page
      • The Sources should appear in Alphabetical Order according to the last name of the first author listed on the source.
      • If there is no Author(s), then the source should be cited by Title or Organization.

Rubric

PHIL_341_BL – Signature Assignment

PHIL_341_BL – Signature Assignment

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUnderstanding the ArgumentsDoes the student demonstrate the ability to discern the speaker’s 1) issue, 2) target audience, 3) conclusion, 3) main points, and 4) unstated, implied, or assumed perspectives. Does the student accurately and faithfully summarize them in the students own words in detail without being too reductive or without oversimplifying the sources points?

60 to >52.2 pts

Exceeds Expectations

The student is specific and detailed in describing the speakers position and main ideas. The student can systematically explain what the speakers claims are and describe how the speakers claims relate to one another, exemplifying sophistication, and comprehension. The student clearly identifies the sources target audience.

52.2 to >45.0 pts

Meets Expectations

The student describes the speakers position and main ideas and identifies the sources target audience.

45 to >35.4 pts

Approaches Expectations

The student generalizes or oversimplifies the speakers claims, and/or may have trouble expressing how the points relate to one another. The student may not clearly identify the target audience.

35.4 to >0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

The student misinterprets or misrepresents the sources claims, and/or how the claims relate to one another. The student reacts personally or shows little understanding of the target audience.

60 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentifying and Applying Course ConceptsDoes the student accurately identify and define the course terms and ideas indicated by the prompts? The student can correctly identify course concepts including objectivity/subjectivity, facts/beliefs/ideas, fallacies, biases, rhetorical devices/appeals, valid and sound deductive syllogisms, stronger or weaker inductive syllogisms, and various types of moral reasoning.

25 to >21.75 pts

Exceeds Expectations

The student accurately and adeptly identifies and defines all the course terms and ideas indicated by the prompts, exemplifying sophistication and comprehension.

21.75 to >18.75 pts

Meets Expectations

The student accurately identifies and defines most of the course terms and ideas indicated by the prompts.

18.75 to >14.75 pts

Approaches Expectations

The student identifies and defines all of the course terms and ideas indicated by the prompts, but they may be generalized, incomplete, or oversimplified.

14.75 to >0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

The student does not accurately identify or define the course concepts indicated by the prompts, or egregiously misinterprets those course concepts.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysis and Evaluation of Course ConceptsCan the student explain if the sources use of course concepts are effective or ineffective, and why they would be effective or ineffective to the target audience? The Exceeds response assumes the student understands who the target audience is and can posit how that audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. They are explaining why a specific rhetorical strategy works on the target audience or how a fallacy like ad hominem preys on an in-group bias.

25 to >21.75 pts

Exceeds Expectations

The student understands who the target audience is and can posit how the audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The student may also explain why a specific course concepts improve or diminish the effectiveness of other course concepts.

21.75 to >18.75 pts

Meets Expectations

The student understands who the target audience is and can posit how the audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The student may also explain why specific course concepts are generally effective or ineffective and provides a detailed rationale for their assertions.

18.75 to >14.75 pts

Approaches Expectations

The student may generally understand who the target audience is and may posit how the audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The student inadequately or inaccurately explains why a specific course concept is effective or ineffective and provides a detailed rationale for their assertions.

14.75 to >0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

The student does not understand who the target audience is, nor can they posit how the audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The student does not explain why specific course concepts are generally effective or ineffective.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormat/Crediting Sources

10 to >8.7 pts

Proficient

The writer makes minimal (if any) errors in APA format, citations, or references.

8.7 to >7.5 pts

Acceptable

The writer makes some errors in APA format, citations, or references.

7.5 to >5.9 pts

Needs Improvement

The writer makes numerous errors in APA format, citations, or references.

5.9 to >0 pts

Unsatisfactory

The writer makes significant errors in APA format, citations, or references.

10 pts

Total Points: 120