Overview: To complete the second portion of this portfolio, you will revise the first argument from Portfolio 3. You will shape your writing to meet the needs and interests of your readers. You will also modify your argument to meet the demands of this context (For instance, readers of the New York Times can be expected to be more varied than readers of the National Review.)
Purposes for this Essay: To write for a specific, public audience arguing your viewpoints on the issue you explored in Portfolio 2 and argued in the first essay for Portfolio 3; to convince your audience to agree with your viewpoints or to persuade your audience to act on your viewpoints.
Audience: Address your arguing essay to the second audience outlined in your Context Comparison, specifically readers of the New York Times. In general, your audience is likely to expect you to thoroughly explain the points you are making and to support your argument using appropriate forms of evidence. Your readers are likely to expect you to acknowledge other participants in the conversation, although you would not cite sources in the newspaper. You can efficiently and effectively refer to other important participants in the conversation by naming them in the text of your paper. It is not necessary to accompany this revision with a Works Cited page.
Portfolio Content: Please submit your final essay in a folder at the time of the final exam clearly labeled with your name. Your portfolio should include:
Essay Requirements: Your second arguing essay should be of a length appropriate for the New York Times Editorial page.
The first arguing essay, complete with all elements of the folder, is worth 20% of your course grade. The revision, or the second arguing essay for the Editorial page, is worth an additional 15%. Total value of Portfolio 3 is therefore 35% of your final grade in the course.