English 101: Introduction to College Writing
Instructor Name
Assignment 3: Definition Argument
Overview:
Legal issues are everywhere in society today and exert a major influence over our work, student, and even social lives.
This assignment gives you the opportunity to engage in a legal debate with your peers. You will pick one of the three
topics below and find a classmate who disagrees with your stance on the topic to work with you. You and your classmate
will be the primary audiences for each other’s papers. You will then write a definitional argument using academic and
legal sources that tries to persuade your partner to acknowledge the merits of your position.
Goals:
This assignment is designed to
 Improve your ability to engage in controversial topics by learning to respond respectfully to readers who disagree
with you.
 Provide you with an opportunity to work with challenging readings and use them to make your own argument.
 Give you practice writing a thesis-driven definitional argument.
 Give you practice paraphrasing and quoting from other authors as you insert your voice into ongoing arguments.
Requirements:
Your analysis should
 Be 4-6 double-spaced pages (at least 1000 words, although strong papers will probably be longer).
 Paraphrase or quote at least two sources, one of which must be a law review or academic research article. You
may want to change this to three sources.
 Contain a list of works cited (not included in the word count) Decide how much emphasis you want to place
on the works cited and whether you want to require correct MLA or APA citation style.
How to Proceed:
1. Read the short news articles associated with each of the three topics below. Decide whether or not you find the
issue interesting and what your initial stance is on the issue.
2. Find a partner who disagrees with your stance on the issue. (You may need to be flexible and allow students
to get into groups of three with say two people who agree and one who disagrees).
3. Try to pinpoint the source of the disagreement between you and your partner: do you disagree with your partner’s
reasons or with your partner’s warrants? For example, if you agree on the criteria for your definition (e.g., religion
requires regular meetings) but disagree over whether a particular case meets that criteria (e.g. whether a
particular religion has regular meetings), you are most likely disagreeing with your partner’s reasons. However, if
you disagree over whether a particular criteria should even be part of the definition (e.g., you disagree over
whether regular meetings are necessary to qualify a group as a religion), then you are disagreeing with your
partner’s warrants. (you may want to adjust the vocabulary here to match what you have discussed in
class).
4. Read the legal and academic articles associated with your topic, trying to find evidence that supports your
position and answers your partner’s objections. You will want to look for criteria that have been used to make
decisions, reasons to reject criteria that your partner might propose, and analogies that might help you to argue
for particular criteria.
5. After you have read more material, meet again with your partner to see if the source of your disagreement has
changed.
6. Write your essay in a manner that will persuade your partner to at least reconsider his or her point of view.
7. Once you have pinpointed the source of your disagreement, make sure that you dedicate substantial space in
your paper responding to your partner’s objections.
The Topics:
Topic 1: Student athletes on university scholarship are/are not university employees.
Student athletes on university scholarships typically receive stipends and have specific tasks that they are expected to
carry out. But should they be considered university employees? For instance, should student athletes who are injured
while practicing receive worker's compensation? The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) says no, claiming
that because college rules prohibit direct payment for playing, "a student-athlete is no more an employee than a regular
student who is not participating in athletics." The NCAA calls student athletes amateurs, not employees, and argues that
if student athletes were considered employees, then they could be sued for failure to perform, either academically or
athletically. Many student advocates disagree.





News article: Polly Hughs, "TCU athlete paralyzed in 1974 loses suit" from The Houston Chronicle:
News article: Joe Drape, "Paralyzed Athlete Loses Workers Compensation Appeal" from The New York Times
Opinion Piece: Ira Berkow, Amateurism: The Myth is Upheld from The New York Times
Law Review: Jason Gurdus, "Protection off of the Playing Field," from The Hofstra Law Review
Law Review: C. Peter Goplerud, "Stipends for College Athletes," from Kansas Journal of Public Policy
Topic 2: Internet Addiction is/is not a real medical disorder
Whether or not someone is officially diagnosed with a mental disorder can determine eligibility for health insurance,
disability status, and legal discrimination arguments. Currently, Internet Addiction is not listed in Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders – Fourth Edition (DSM-IV). Should it be?





News article: Nicholas Geranios, “Internet Addiction is starting to be seen as a form of addiction” from The
Virginian-Pilot
News article: Richard Halicks, “The New Mental Disorders?” from The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
General information website: Heather Maisel, http://www.slais.ubc.ca/COURSES/libr500/04-05wt1/www/H_Maisel/index.htm
Academic Article: Warden, Phillips, & Ogloff, “Internet Addiction,” from Psychology, Psychiatry and the Law
Law Review: Blake Bertagna: “The Internet—Disability of Distraction?” from Hofstra Labor and Employment Law
Journal
Topic 3: Dressing in blackface as a Halloween costume is/is not racial harassment.
On Halloween 2001, members of the TKE fraternity at UofL held a party at which four white fraternity members wore
blackface paint, and a black member of the fraternity wore a Ku Klux Klan robe which he later burned. The fraternity was
eventually suspended for six months. The administration and many students and faculty feel that by hosting this party the
fraternity was endorsing racial harassment on campus. Others feel that fraternity members were simply exercising their
right to free speech.









News article: Matt Batcheledor, "Frat members wore black paint" in The Courier-Journal
News article: Mark Pitsch, "U of L suspends fraternity after probe of racial incident" in The Courier-Journal
News article: Patrick Jonsson, “Racial harassment rises in a ruder America” in The Christian Science Monitor
Opinion: Robyn E. Blumner, " Political correctness threatens to swallow free speech" in St. Petersburg Times
Opinion: Ken Emerson, “Only Correct” in The New Republic
Law Review: Richard Delgado, " Legal Theory: Campus Antiracism Rules: Constitutional Narratives In Collision"
in Northwestern University Law Review
Academic Article: Gordon & Johnson , “Race, Speech and a Hostile Educational Environment” in Journal of Social
Philosophy
UofL Policy: “Discriminatory Harassment” http://louisville.edu/hr/policies/PER110.html
UofL Policy: “RSO Student Code of Conduct” http://louisville.edu/dos/policies-and-procedures/rso-code-ofconduct.html
OR
Topic 3: Policies banning Satanic symbols in schools or prisons are/are not violations of religious freedom.
In a number of court cases, students have been banned from wearing clothing or jewelry containing symbols of Satantic
or Wiccan religions, or common symbols that have also been used as insignias by local gangs. Similarly, Kentucky
prisons have recently banned inmates from holding Satanic worship services because the philosophies the Satanic
church promotes might lead to discipline or control problems in the prisons. Advocates for free religious expression in
schools and prisons disagree with these policies.






News article: The Associated Press, "Kentucky prison suspends services by inmates".
News article: The Associated Press, " Teen Sues School For Right To Wear Symbol Of Witchery"
Law review: Ann Koras, "Losing My Religion: Controlling Gang Violence Through Limitations On Freedom Of
Expression" in Boston University Law Review.
Opinion from a Christian Publication: Russ Wise, "Satanism: The World of the Occult"
Opinion from a Satanic Publication: Matt Paradise, "Satanism Behind Bars"
Supplementary Material: The Church of Satan Website
Formatting:
Be sure to include
 page numbers (in Word, go to the Insert menu and select Page Numbers)
 a title
 your name
 a list of works cited (modify to specify the citation format)
Evaluation Criteria:
Your analysis will be evaluated using the following criteria: (modify to reflect what YOU have stressed in class). You
may want to add weights to each of the criteria.
Criteria
Argument &
Audience
Use of Sources
Organization
Completeness &
Mechanics
Goal
The essay provides clear and detailed criteria for defining the category under discussion and
uses evidence from authoritative sources to defend both the criteria and the criteria-match.
The essay presents and responds respectfully to opposing viewpoints and makes arguments
that could potentially persuade those who disagree.
The correct number and types of sources are used. The writer treats sources fairly and
ethically. Quotations are introduced effectively and it is clear how all material quoted or
paraphrased fits into the argument.
The essay has a clear thesis and clear, argumentative topic sentences. Each paragraph
contains one main idea and appropriate transitions are used to connect main ideas.
The paper was turned in on time and formatted correctly. It contains no grammatical errors
that interfere with the reader's ability to understand the argument. The style is efficient and
clear. The essay has a correctly formatted list of works cited.
Due Dates: See the daily schedule (on Blackboard) for all due dates associated with this assignment.