Drew Kopp
CCII
Unit 2:
Unit2
Assignment
Persuasive Essay: The Documented Argument
Context and Purpose: Write a persuasive, argumentative essay about a controversial issue. The
controversy could be related to what you have collaboratively researched, or you can pursue research into
an issue not having anything to do with what you are your group have done. If you are pursuing an issue
within the controversy your group has researched, you may share sources, but each group member must
distinguish a particular issue from within the controversy that has at least two sides, but that is distinct
from the issue the other group members have selected.
Proposal: You will need to define the issue you wish to research and write about by composing a
proposal for research and writing. Your proposal is a layout of the controversy, the fundamental question
or premise that guides your inquiry, the network of controlling values that inhabit the controversy, your
position or prejudice concerning the issue, possible audiences for your argument, and strategies for
research.
Audience: As you work through revisions of your proposal, and while researching and composing your
annotated bibliography, begin to think about and then select a target audience, i.e., determine a network of
controlling values and think about writing to the controlling value that the audience views the controversy
from. In choosing your target audience, be sure that you will not be “preaching to the choir.” In other
words, your audience should consist of people who will not automatically see the same context or
problem that you do, i.e., they do not already agree with your argument. You should work to persuade
readers who operate within controlling values that diverge from yours; you should not work to confirm
readers’ existing opinions.
Wikipedia and YouTube: Each group will either select an already existing Wikipedia entry related to
the controversy, or create a new entry. The already existing entry must lack significant research and
citations, and/or must suffer from a single-minded perspective. In any case, your job is to elevate the
Wikipedia entry to a more academic and trustworthy level. Simultaneously, each group will select a
YouTube video related to the controversy, and stage a discussion on the message board of the video, with
a similar aim to elevate the level of discourse present on the message board. Both of these projects will
require research, and so are reflective of your work on the annotated bibliography.
Research and the Annotated Bibliography: The research you will conduct for this essay should be part
of a sincere, open-minded attempt to understand and master the controversy thoroughly—its history,
context, and the various positions other researchers have taken on it. In other words, even though it is
necessary to begin with your prejudices, it is not acceptable just to hunt for sources that support and
justify your viewpoint; you’ve got to move beyond this initial horizon. Use your acquired mastery of the
controversy (through your extensive research) to develop your credibility, provide convincing examples
and arguments, thereby evoking various emotions in your intended audience.
Research Requirements: at least 12 sources, including:
• At least three sources that are books.
• At least four sources that are scholarly journal articles.
• Of the above two categories, at least four sources must express divergent viewpoints.
Remaining sources, to make up at least 12, may include most anything else: websites, films, interviews,
newspaper and/or magazine articles, photographs. When in doubt, ask me. In any case, all sources must
be cited correctly in your annotated bibliography with TWO paragraphs:
Paragraph one includes a concise but sufficient summary of the controlling values. These
summaries must also include details pertinent to your argument while at the same time re-
Drew Kopp
CCII
Unit2
Assignment
presenting the steps of the argument. You need to find a good balance between the generality of
the controlling values and the particulars of the argument.
Paragraph two includes the rhetorical strategies employed in the source, while also speculating on
specific ways you might use this source in your documented argument. This exercise is meant to
assist you in developing mastery of the issue and the various arguments that surround the issue,
especially regarding finding and elaborating connections between all your sources.
Presence: Be in control of your own essay. Your thoughts and words, i.e., your controlling value,
should predominate. Do not merely assemble a bunch of quotations and hide behind them. The sources
you quote should support your own “voice,” not replace it. Introduce your sources properly, summarizing
the key arguments while using signal phrases to introduce specific quotations. Work to enter the
“conversation” about your chosen controversy. Do not end paragraphs with quotes; subordinate them to
your controlling idea by explaining what the quote does to your argument.
Style: Write in a style that is appropriate for your audience. Refer to Williams’ book Style to assist you in
making stylistic decisions.
Rhetorical Appeals: Now it's time to consciously practice and develop your own rhetorical strategies.
Once again, how you choose to employ the appeals and strategies will depend on your audience, and your
purpose and context. You must exercise tact in addressing an audience to follow your reasoning. In any
case, you will need to establish and maintain credibility in your text that invites an audience to listen to
your reasoning, and that evokes emotions sufficient to sway them to consider and perhaps adopt your
viewpoint.
Length and Format: Draft one: at least 4 pages. Draft two: at least 4 pages. Draft three: 7-9 pages (AT
LEAST 2000 words). All drafts, when handed in for Unit 2 must be typed, double-spaced, Times New
Roman 12 pt., with one-inch margins, using MLA documentation, which includes in-text citations and a
Works Cited. Please note that the Works Cited page is NOT the same document from your annotated
bibliography.
What to Hand In: Contained within the pockets of a FOLDER, include your revised individual proposal
and revised annotated bibliography. You must also include at least three distinct drafts of the documented
argument. Each document needs to have the proper date in the heading so that I can determine what
version it is in relation to the others. DO NOT hand in numerous documents with the same date. While
each individual item should be stapled, please do not staple everything together into one bundle.
Draft 1: Write from the point of view of your projection concerning the controversy, that is, write from
the controlling value that you identify with. Your job in the first draft is to bring the audience to see their
purpose in the light of your controlling value, i.e., as your context, thereby bringing them to entertain and
adopt your purpose. The audience you are writing to operates according to the opposing controlling value.
In order for them to listen to your reasoning, and so experience the emotional transitions that following
your reasoning will lead to, you must establish and maintain credibility. In order to write this draft, you
need to have performed a sufficient amount of research, which must include the required sources that
embrace several perspectives. This version must be at least 4 full pages.
Draft 2: Keep in mind that the paper must undergo a transformation. Draft 2 is NOT a bigger better
version of your first draft. It is a re-vision of the paper either in purpose or audience, or both, wherein you
will assume the perspective of the opposing controlling value and write to persuade the writer of the first
draft. Draft 2 should also be at least 4 full pages, including significant research, with sources adequately
introduced, and where signal phrases introduce actual quotes. Do not leave any quote unexplained—
Drew Kopp
CCII
Unit2
Assignment
always connect it back to your argument. Create connections between ideas even if they seem too
different. Do not merely argue a collection of opinions. That was allowed in the first draft to some degree,
but not for this one.
Draft 3: After performing a value graph of each of your drafts, begin thinking out how to include both
efforts in the third and final version of this assignment. The aim here is to bring your audience through a
progression of development of your position regarding the issue, wherein you present each side with
equal persuasive weight.
I recommend that you assume the ethos of someone investigating the controversy and the divergent points
of view within the controversy, such that you bring your audience to see and honor the value of each
perspective in turn. Think of it like a narrative of your research process, only arranged in a way more
suited to bring your audience to draw the conclusions (or confusions) you’ve drawn. You might want to
begin with honoring the value of your audience, but then reveal a significant threat to that point of view,
followed by a reaffirmation, followed by a complete overthrow of the original view, followed with doubts
that lead to re-valuing the original point of view, etc. Each step of the way you will need to use your
research to provide catalysts for reversals. Make it into a dialogue between multiple voices rather than a
single-sided opinion piece.
This then will likely require additional research and the construction of a new paper: while some elements
from the first two drafts may be included, they cannot be included without significant alterations. Since
this version is a conversation between opposing sides, you must include sources that are significantly
divergent in relation to the controversy. You must also include scholarly articles and books, in addition to
other incidental sources, as per the requirements for sources for the annotated bibliography.