• download WordPerfect file of Appendix
• dowload RTF file of Appendix

Arguing Essay Proposal

The purpose of writing the proposal is twofold. First, it helps you think through your ideas about your paper. You can try out your tentative ideas and discover ideas as you write the proposal. Often, writers find that they need to get ideas laid out on paper to be able to work with them effectively. Second, by explaining your tentative plans to me, I can help guide you toward a more successful final paper.

"How do I know what I think until I see what I say?"

--E.M. Forster

Write a 1-2 page (typed, single-spaced) overview that includes the following:

• The specific issue your paper will address
• A discussion of the major categories of positions that are argued on the issue (as determined by your research). You will talk about what people and/or groups of people are saying about the issue, why the issue concerns them, and what sides they take.
• What side you will be on with regard to this issue, and why you have chosen this side.
• Your (tentative) position on the issue. You can state this as a working thesis/claim.
• A brief explanation (about a paragraph) that supports your position, i.e. why do you think your position is right or true? What reasons support your position?
• A list of questions you need to answer in your paper. (In other words, what will people reading your essay expect you to address?)
• Any questions you have for me about the assignment or about how to deal with your topic.

Your annotated bibliography will serve as a representation of the research you have done so far, and of the discussion on your topic that is forming in your mind. Your bibliography will include at least 8 sources, and you will cite these sources using correct MLA format (See PHG 360-6). All research must be relevant in some meaningful way to the issue you are concerned with. (For the specific requirements of the Annotated Bibliography, see the attached Annotated Bibliography Guidelines sheet.)

You will be doing a detailed analysis of your intended audience, as a way of preparing to address this audience in your Arguing Essay. (For analysis questions and requirements for this portion of the proposal, see the attached Audience Analysis sheet.)

Evidence of having searched a variety of library and Internet resources. A copy of this log can be found in your Research Packet, and you should record all searches in it from the time you begin your research.

Copies of sources listed in the bibliography, with appropriate bibliographic information written on the first page. See the Research Packet for more information about what specific bibliographic information is required for each type of source. [NOTE: You don't need to make a NEW copy of your source to hand in to me. Handing in your originals is fine. However, if you do hand in your original copy, it would be a good idea to write down all bibliographic information and notes about location for these sources, so that you can get back to them in case they get lost. (Always a good policy anyway.)]

The proposal counts as 10% of your semester grade. Grading criteria: completeness (in terms of expressing your initial ideas and the results of your initial research), thoroughness of research and of recording research, complexity of analysis (where the audience analysis is concerned), adherence to this assignment sheet, style.

In your research, you will be investigating a range of positions on the issue you're addressing. Your task is to 1) find appropriate sources from the library and the Internet, 2) read and process these sources, and 3) document these sources in your Annotated Bibliography. You will need to have at least 8 entries (8 sources) in this Annotated Bibliography.

What is an Annotated Bibliography? A bibliography, as you know, is a list of sources on a particular topic. To annotate a bibliography, you simply include some information about each source. An annotation is a short explanatory note about the contents of a source, and differs from a summary by its brevity. It requires you to capture in just a few words the main ideas of an entire article, chapter, or book. In this particular annotated bibliography, I am asking that your summary include some specific information: information about the position taken by the author of the source, the value/usefulness of the source, and the research method(s) which led to your finding it.

Each annotated bibliography entry should include the following:

1. The publication information from the source:

• author (or editor)
• title
• title of book it is in (i.e., essays in Living Languages)
• (for books) place and date of publication
• (for articles) name of journal, magazine, etc., volume and issue number, date of the issue, and page numbers.
• (for electronic sources) the specific information required for particular types of electronic sources. For forms, see PHG 563-6 and the information in your Research Packet.

All of this bibliographic information should be presented in correct MLA format. NOTE: SEE PHG 560-66 FOR MODELS OF CORRECT MLA WORKS CITED FORMAT FOR YOUR ENTRIES.

Lawrence, Charles R. III. "Regulating Racist Speech on Campus." Exploring Language. Ed. Gary Goshgarian. 7th ed. New York: HarperCollins, 1995. 356-61.

2. A quick 2-3 sentence summary of the source, including the source's position (thesis or claim).

Lawrence addresses the issues surrounding regulating hate language on college campuses. He writes from a pro-regulatory perspective, with the position that regulating free speech does not violate the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. He uses legal precedence to support his position.

3. Your statement on the value of the source--how could the source feed into your own topic or research? (Response and Evaluation)

This would be useful because Lawrence is a law professor at Stanford University and the University of California at Los Angeles, and therefore has some expertise in the legal issues associated with this topic.

4. A statement about which research method(s) yielded this source. (How did you find it, in other words?)

This source came from the CO150 textbook, Exploring Language.

Example of a full entry:

Lawrence, Charles R. III. "Regulating Racist Speech on Campus." Exploring Language. Ed. Gary Goshgarian. 7th ed. New York: HarperCollins, 1995. 356-61.

Lawrence addresses the issues surrounding regulating hate language on college campuses. He writes from a pro-regulatory perspective, with the position that regulating free speech does not violate the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. He uses legal precedence to support his position.

This would be useful because Lawrence is a law professor at Stanford University and the University of California at Los Angeles, and therefore has some expertise in the legal issues associated with this topic.

This source came from the CO150 textbook, Exploring Language.

(Adapted from Crusius and Channell, The Aims of Argument)

Successful written argumentation requires that the writer try to think like his or her audience--"get into their heads," so to speak--inasmuch as such a feat is possible. It is necessary that a writer understanding how s/he is like and unlike the intended audience, determining what motivates them, what they value, and what they have invested in the issue we're investigating--so that s/he can write a convincing or persuasive argument. As writers, if we fail to think about these things, we are simply shooting in the dark, writing the argument we ourselves want to hear.

The following audience analysis questions are designed to help you understand your audience and how they should be approached. At this point, you have compiled a good deal of research and knowledge on your topic. These questions will help you to shape this research and knowledge to address a specific audience successfully.

1. Specifically, write out the position you will be taking on your topic in the Arguing Essay.
2. Why are you interested in this topic? What is the relationship of this issue to your current studies, or more generally, to your life?
3. What position do you take with regard to the issues involved in this topic? (You may have already answered this one in question "a".
4. Who benefits and who suffers in the situation surrounding this topic?
5. How would each group you just named define the issue/question?
6. Which group defines the issue/question most similarly to the way you do in questions "a" and "c" above? Which one defines it most differently?

General Characteristics of the Audience and their Connection to the Topic

7. What is your purpose for writing (to convince those who disagree with you or are neutral, to persuade those who agree or are neutral to act, to mediate a dispute between pro/con views)?
8. Who is your intended audience?
9. Specify the characteristics of your audience. How would you define them in terms of age, economic and social class, gender, education, and so forth?
10. What typical attitudes, stances, or biases about your topic does this audience hold?
11. What in their background or daily experiences helps explain their point of view?
12. What are they likely to know about your topic?
13. How might they be uninformed or misinformed about it?
14. How would they like to see the problem, question, or issue resolved, answered, or handled? Why? That is, what personal stake do they have in the topic?
15. In what larger framework--religious, ethical, political, economic--do they place your topic? That is, what general beliefs and values are involved?

Differences Between Writer and Audience

16. The process of written argument begins with the assumption that the audience the writer is addressing needs to hear this argument in order to be won over to a different way of thinking or acting. Therefore, when you launch an argument, you have to understand that you are addressing an audience which differs from you in their position on the topic in certain essential ways. The trick is to figure out specifically how and why the audience disagrees with you. The following questions can help you to examine the roots of these differences. To respond to this portion of the analysis, simply choose the set or sets of questions that seem to address your differences from your audience best, then respond to those questions with a short paragraph or two.
17. Is the difference a matter of assumptions? If so, how can you shake your readers' confidence in their assumptions and offer another set of assumptions favorable to your position?
18. Is the difference a matter of principle, the application of general rules to specific cases? If so, should you dispute the principle itself and offer a competing one the audience will also value? Or should you show why the principle should not apply in some specific instance relevant to your case?
19. Is the difference a matter of hierarchy of values--that is, do you and your audience value the same things but to different degrees? If so, how might you restructure your readers' values?
20. Is the difference a matter of ends or of means? If of ends, how can you show that your vision of what ought to be is better or that realizing your ends will also secure the ends your readers value? If a difference of means, how can you show that your methods are justified and effective, more likely to bear fruit than others?
21. Is the difference a matter of interpretation? If so, how can you shake your readers' confidence in the traditional or common interpretation of something and show them that your interpretation is better, that it accounts for the facts more adequately?
22. Is the difference a matter of implications or consequences? If so, how can you convince your readers that what they fear may happen will not happen, that it will not be as bad as they think, or that other implications or consequences outweigh any negatives?

Commonalties Between Writer and Audience

23. When writing an argument, it is important to keep in mind not only the nature of your differences from your audience, but also the nature of your similarities with them. These similarities provide you the basis for identification with this audience, allowing you to see what resources you can draw on in order to make effective argumentative appeals and to build your credibility and trustworthiness as a writer on your topic. To complete this portion of the analysis, answer (like you did in the last section) only those questions which seem to be appropriate to the audience you have chosen.
24. Do you and your audience have a shared local identity--as members of the same organization, for example, or students at the same university?
25. Do you share a more abstract, collective identity--as citizens of the same region or nation, as worshippers in the same religion, and so forth?
26. Do you share a common cause--such as promoting the good of the community, preventing child abuse, or overcoming racial prejudice?
27. Is there a shared experience or human activity--raising children, caring for aging parents, helping a friend in distress, struggling to make ends meet?
28. Can you connect through a well-known event or cultural happening--a popular movie, a best-selling book, something in the news that would interest both you and your audience?
29. Is there a person, historical event, or document that you both respect?

Building An Argument

30. What claim do you want your audience to accept? How strong a claim can you realistically expect them to accept?
31. What reasons are likely to appeal to this audience? What might you have to rule out?
32. What kinds of evidence do you think your audience will expect as support for these reasons? What sources of information will they find credible?
33. What can you do to present yourself as a person this audience can trust and respect?