An argument mediates among many concerns: the knowledge, interest, opinions and position of the author--as well as that of the audience--and the language, style and organizational expectations of the discipline in which it is based. Each of these concerns is an individual element contributing to the overall context.
Before beginning to construct an argument, it's a good idea to answer a few self-directed questions about these contextual elements. For instance, questions about:
What, about the issue or topic, intrigues you the most? Why do you care? Do you already have a position? Are you convinced it is correct? Are you leaning one way or the other or are you undecided? What, about the issue, do you already know? What do you need to find out? What kind of research is involved? What kind of evidence will you need? What makes you credible? What makes you an authority?
Who are they? What side of the issue are they likely to be on? Are you preaching to the choir or is the audience divided? What will convince them to hear you out? Are they sympathetic and trusting or skeptical and full of questions? What does the audience already know about the issue? Are they experts in the field or new to the topic? How much information will they need? What kind of evidence does your audience trust? Do you want to leave them with food for thought or a call to action? In the end, of what do you want to convince them?
What, about your issue or topic, has the discipline already argued to death? What has been left unresolved, open for discussion or further examination? What lines of inquiry are most important or urgent? What information will be considered common knowledge? How far has current research carried the conversation? What kind of evidence has already been presented? Are you adding something brand new to the body of knowledge? A new Perspective? An Answer? A Solution?
How does your academic discipline expect you to state your position? Must you begin with it or can it wait till the end? Must it answer a research question or can you simply take and explore a stance? What kind of introduction is expected? Must you be completely objective? How should you present evidence? What documentation style should you use? What about organization? Are there disciplinary conventions to follow? What are they? Is personal experience acceptable? Are emotional appeals credible? Must you provide a literature review?
As you can see, there's a lot that goes into writing an argument, all of which fit somewhere under the general heading--CONTEXT--meaning the elemental concerns that define an argument's appropriateness and play a part in its construction, contribute to the shaping of its message and affect its meaning.
The importance of examining these elements stems from the fact that individual academic disciplines, having different methods for interpreting and examining the world around them, have different expectations and conventions regarding how research is to be conducted, the findings reported, the arguments written and the sources documented.
What constitutes a viable research question or acceptable evidence in one discipline may be inappropriate in another. In an English class, a question about the human condition might be answered by interpreting the works of Shakespeare. In a psychology class, a case study or a controlled experiment would be more likely.
The tone and style of presentation and its organization are also affected. Consider the following two introductions below for arguments addressing the treatment of patients with Alzheimer's disease.
Lower-division courses are a bit more relaxed when it comes to writing for specific disciplinary audiences but, if you are writing for possible publication, or for an upper-division, capstone or graduate course (including theses and dissertations) your audience will expect you to be informed about their conventions.
At eight-thirty it is time for breakfast and Jane is wheeled down to the cafeteria, whereupon she is spoon-fed by yet another unfamiliar face. The meal has been pureed and does not appear very appetizing. Jane begins to cry. Eventually she no longer responds to food and is wheeled back to the nurse's station. While there, she sits next to other residents even though she is completely oblivious of their existence. Once again Jane begins to cry as she mumbles words that do not make any sense.
When the audience is non-academic or in a humanities field, like English or Sociology, which accepts personal experience as a field of knowledge, this is an appropriate introduction, however, it would be a poor one in a scientific field.
Approximately 10% of U.S. Citizens over the age of 65 are affected by Alzheimer Disease (AD). Furthermore, potentially 50% of individuals over the age of 85 may be at risk (Greene, et al. 461). AD is a disease that results in progressive deterioration of mental and, eventually, physical functions. Scaled according to the Global Deterioration Scale, this progressive decline ranges from 1 to 7 with 1 corresponding to normal traits, 4 to moderate, such as inability to perform complex tasks, and 7 to severe deterioration characterized by loss of verbal abilities, psychomotor skills such as walking or sitting, bowel and bladder continence, and the ability to smile and feed oneself (Bennett 95; Greene, et al. 464).
This is a good introduction when the audience is part of an academic field that values objectivity, criteria-based definitions and analytical diagnosis. It would be a poor introduction in a humanities field.
The best way to analyze the context of an argument is by subdividing the task and examining it from different contextual perspectives: writer, audience, issue or topic, and language style. At the end of your examination you will be better informed and better able to pick and argue a position within the conventions of the discipline to which you belong.
That's you. What do you want to say? What can you say? How much of a role do you want your opinion to play in the argument you are writing? How much is allowed? What position are you taking? What's your point? These are all serious questions. To help define the context of the writer, consider the following:
Your personal interest in the issue at hand is a key factor in building a successful argument. It's hard enough to invest time and energy in this type of thing, but try it when you're not interested. Pick something about which you have strong feelings or in which you believe deeply: something that you care about.
Your audience will notice and it will make all the difference. Their perception of your personal commitment will reflect directly on how well they receive your argument. If you're not invested, it will be apparent in your writing and the audience will pick up on it right away.
Your authority to speak is always a concern. Besides your level of interest, the level of your authority must be evident. Lacking a strong persona, or voice, seriously undermines the power of any argument. As a student, you will naturally lack the authority bestowed by simple name recognition, such as that of Stephen King to speak about writing in the horror genre, for instance; however, there are ways to establish your credibility and right to speak.
Doing your homework is number one. Show that your argument is well researched. Draw on respected texts within your disciplines existing conversation and present viable, verifiable evidence to back up your claim. Take into account opposing points of view, comparing and contrasting them with your own. And finally, respect the conventions of your discipline.
Your ethical obligations may seem most relevant when writing in an opinionated, first person, voice, yet they apply just as much-if not more so-when the author's voice is not so apparent.
In the absence of a strong authorial "I" voice, an objectively written argument can easily lead an audience to conclude that the statements made are true and generalizable when, in fact, they may be anything but: they may merely be the opinion of one person. And that's the problem: One person's opinion does not an argument make.
A deliberately skewed portrayal of a sitting president's actions, for instance, may not break any ethical rules on the Rush Limbaugh Show or the O'Reilly Factor, but it's a different story when delivered, or portrayed, as true on the NBC Nightly News. A talk show is not a news show and different ethical obligations apply.
In all situations, the onus, or obligation, to be forthright and clear lies squarely on the author's shoulders: The audience requires it, deserves it and will expect nothing less.
Key ethical expectations of all academic writers include:
Who are they? What do you know about them and what do you need to find out? What do they already know about the issue, topic or point? Of what do you need to inform them? These are all serious considerations.
How much does your audience know? Good question. It depends on who they are and the relationship they have to the material out of which your argument is going to be built. It also depends on whether they are professionals or novices. As a student, you can safely assume that your instructor, a professional who knows more than you, is your primary audience.
You may also find that your instructor has assigned another audience-one that you must create in your own mind-ranging anywhere from the specific to the general. If so, you will have to find out how much latitude you are permitted in creating that audience and the amount of credit you are permitted to extend regarding what and how much they know.
Depending on the goal of the assignment, you will likely be expected to prove 1) that you understand the in-class, course material, and 2) that you have the ability to move beyond and build an argument incorporating outside material.
Unless otherwise indicated, neither your instructor nor your created audience will need detailed explanations of information revealed in the course material, however, both will require a careful explanation of anything brought to your argument through outside materials.
When in doubt of your audience, query your instructor. Some will make a designation (e.g., imagine writing an architectural design critique for the Sunday Supplement to the Denver Post), others will not. And finally, analyze the actual assignment for clues, as in the examples below.
Another good question: It's a difficult concept involving the projection of feelings and thoughts into an argument that you want the audience to hold and share. Although you have some control over how they react by the way in which you write, you may not go so far as to break disciplinary norms.
Certain academic fields consider emotionally positioning the audience to be poor writing; others consider it very strong and persuasive. Here are a few ways in which to do it when it the circumstances are acceptable:
This is a question of authority and credibility and the answer hinges directly on the identity of your audience. Who are they? What do they expect? The power of your argument will be severely undercut if you misdiagnose and provide personal experience as evidence to an audience expecting findings from a carefully controlled research experiment. Here are a few general guidelines to follow:
What's in it for them? This goes to the heart of the matter: Your goal. What purpose does your argument serve? More often than not, your assignment will make this clear: a call to action, for instance, or validating a solution.
If your assignment is not clear, turn to other published works to see what goals and purposes previous arguments in your discipline have historically served and how the authors went about constructing them.
All semester we have looked at various theories of how adolescents develop. In this paper, position yourself among them by creating your own theory of adolescent development. You may either agree with one theory or combine different aspects of all or some of the others. Make sure your theory is well supported by the course texts.
Analysis:
From this assignment several things can be assumed.
What environmental policies has your state implemented? Investigate and decide whether or not you think the actions taken were sufficient. Write an argument defending your point of view using the criteria for evaluating policy we've discussed in class. (Taken, in part, from Writing in the Disciplines. Third Edition. Orlando: Harcourt, Brace, and Co., 1995: 33)
Analysis:
From this assignment several things can be assumed.
Since the publication of Henry James' Turn of the Screw over 100 years ago, critics have argued about whether the ghosts in the story are real or psychological manifestations of the governess' psyche. Take a position on either side of this issue and defend it with specific references to the story.
Analysis:
From this assignment several things can be assumed.
What is it? What makes it so important? What disagreements are there in its regard? How many sides are there? What makes an issue or topic acceptable? What grounds do you have for building an argument? Can you argue about anything, so long as it is in some way related to the coursework? All good questions: to help define the context of the issue or topic, consider the following.
Notes & class discussions will reveal a great deal about what's important in your discipline or field of inquiry. What are the burning questions? What has your instructor explored in lectures and class discussions? What have you been asked to think about most often? Chances are these are the current questions in which the professionals in your field are most interested.
Library research will turn up specialized professional articles not meant for the general public. Ask your professor for journal recommendations and look closely at the introductions, searching for position statements. What issues do the writers take on? What are their positions? Although you probably aren't expected to be quite so extensive, these articles can give you a good idea about what matters and what some of the acceptable questions are regarding your issue or topic.
Asking your instructor will unearth examples of the issues and topics former students have explored and argued about in previous years. Ask to see their papers--particularly "A" grade papers--and look for what turned them into convincing arguments. Take advantage of regularly posted office hours to visit and discuss the ideas about which you are most interested. If you can, talk to fellow students who have already taken the class and ask to see their papers; pay attention to the margin comments for what impacted or impressed the instructor most.
Note: Be especially aware that-just as much as books and journal articles-another student's work is considered an outside source and, if referenced or quoted in any way, must be documented according to the conventions of your discipline. Avoiding plagiarism is of the utmost importance.
Issue or topic examples in which to build an argument for a Vietnam War-Era Literature class follow, along with explanations about what makes them acceptable or not.
Issue Example: Whether the United States should have been involved in Vietnam.
Unacceptable: In a literature class, issues have to be focused on literary texts. If a relevant question arose in the text itself, then the context of this issue fits and an argument can be made, otherwise, it's more appropriate for political science or history.
Topic Example: How the music of the 1960's represents the same issues as three Vietnam War-era novels.
Acceptable: Yes, though not perfect. Although there is a focus on literary texts, it seems contextually weighted on the music side. A better topic would be how music reflected the literature of the Vietnam War era.
Issue Example: Why previous critics' interpretation of a given Vietnam War-era novel is wrong, and what the correct interpretation is.
Acceptable: Arguing about matters of interpretation is one of the central issues in literary studies.
Issue Example: A certain Vietnam War-era novel is great literature because it made the best-seller list back then and everyone you've talked to from that time loved it.
Unacceptable: Although issues of popularity may work their way into literary analyses, an argument based on that alone lacks credible evidence. It is both insubstantial and unsustainable.
How formal should you be? Is speaking in the first person acceptable? What are the textual conventions of your discipline? Are there any field-specific language expectations? More good questions and tough to answer: Despite how pervasively they affect everything in a given text, language-also known as text conventions-are difficult to generalize about since they involve matters of tone, style, organization and even, sometimes, sentence structure.
Although we all have our own personal style, we can't always write like we speak or in the way we feel most comfortable or in emulation of another. William Faulkner's style, for example, although admired by many, would sound absurd in a scientific article.
"Faulkner does Science": As the wisteria blooms over the Southern mansion where his father was born and from where his grandfather left to fight in the Civil War, I sit and write of chaos theory, an apt metaphor for much of what occurs in Yaknopitopwa County--the butterfly effect describing almost perfectly the confluence of history on the lives of everyday citizens in the present.
The best way to get a sense of what is expected is to read and analyze the writings of one or more professionals already publishing in the field of your study.
Note: One thing that can be generalized--addressing the audience in a casual, familiar manner, such as "you may think" or "as you may already know" is considered bad form in almost every academic argument. If you are unsure about this, ask your instructor.
Although most academic writing is argumentative-particularly published writing-it may not be your professor's intention. Many times, the goal of an assignment is to prove that you understand a concept or material discussed either in class or through your own research.
Analyzing an assignment is your first priority; it will help you determine whether an argument is being called for or not and, if so, what type.
Answers to some basic questions regarding an assignment will help you determine whether an argument is being called for not. Look for the following:
If you can answer "yes" to any of these questions, your professor expects you to construct an argument. With that in mind, here's a list of keyword phrases to look for that will also help you make this determination.
There are three basic types of arguments- Persuasive, Defensive, and Offensive-out of which extended versions can be constructed by combining various elements from each. Although they have different goals, each type has two common requirements: a clearly stated position, or claim, and authoritative evidence that an audience will find acceptable.
Knowing which type of argument to write depends a great deal on how you assess your audience and what your instructor asks for in the assignment. Here is a brief overview of each type and some hints about what to look for in the assignment.
Persuasive arguments are geared toward uninformed and under-informed audiences who have either vague ideas, or none at all, on an issue. With a strong enough argument they may be persuaded to your way of thinking.
To identify this type of argument, look for keywords in the assignment that asks you to define an issue and persuade or convince others that your stated position is valid.
Defensive arguments are geared toward informed audiences that are familiar with an issue and comprehend that you are taking a position in its regard. They do not need an argument that raises the issue; rather, they need one that clearly supports your position.
To identify this type of argument, look for keyword phrases in the assignment that ask you to "state an opinion," "take or defend a position," or "support a claim."
Offensive arguments are geared toward informed audiences who are fence-sitting on an issue or opposed to your point of view entirely and need a heavy-hitting offense to convince them otherwise. They will expect to hear strong refutations, or rebuttal, of other arguments.
To identify this type of argument, look for two-sided, keyword phrases in the assignment that invite you to "agree or disagree," phrases that set up clear options or stances on an issue or ask you to investigate or explore opposing viewpoints.
Note: Offensive and persuasive arguments are often combined and the distinction is not often made in the actual assignment.
In discussing hypothetical dilemmas, how effective are case studies in preparing you for the pressures of an actual dilemma in the workplace? Develop your answer into an argument synthesis that draws on three or more cases in this chapter. If possible, refer to actual ethical dilemmas with which you've struggled in your own work. (Behrens and Rosen, 815)
Is this assignment asking for an argument?
No
You answered no.
Oops! Try again.
Yes
You answered yes.
You are correct. The assignment asks you to take a position on an issue-the effectiveness of case study learning-and defend it with evidence from personal experience and course work.
Write a narrative of your past experiences reading and writing in school. Use these stories to analyze what function literacy education serves. Be sure to consider the explanations we've discussed in class of literacy's functions: to prepare you for the workplace, to teach you not to question the status quo, to prepare you to take part in a democracy, etc.
Is this assignment asking for an argument?
No
You answered no.
You are correct. Although you are asked to take a position on literacy education, this position is simply the conclusion to an analysis. You are not asked to argue for why this position is valid or to justify your conclusion.
Yes
You answered yes.
Oops! Try again.
What policies has your state implemented to address an environmental issue about which you are particularly concerned? Investigate this and decide whether or not the actions taken are sufficient. Defend your point of view and offer up an alternative solution. (Taken in part from Writing in the Disciplines. Third Edition. Orlando: Harcourt, Brace, and Co., 1995: 33)
Is this assignment asking for an argument?
No
You answered no.
Oops! Try again.
Yes
You answered yes.
You are correct. Although much of this assignment suggests a research paper without a position, the key word "defend" makes clear that a supported argument for your answer is expected.
All semester we have looked at various theories of how adolescents develop. In this paper, position yourself among these theories, either agreeing with one or combining different aspects of others, and creating a theory of your own. Make sure your theory of adolescent development is well supported by the course texts.
Is this assignment asking for an argument?
No
You answered no.
Oops! Try again.
Yes
You answered yes.
You are correct. Although you are not asked to take a for/against stance, the words "position yourself" and "well supported" suggest an argument in which you clarify, illustrate, and justify your theory to others.
During World War II, press photographers were censored and not allowed to show the full horror of dismembered bodies and other such battle results. During the Korean and Vietnam conflicts such censorship was not in place. After investigating the issue, argue for the policy you favor. (Taken from Writing in the Disciplines. Third Edition. Orlando: Harcourt, Brace, and Co., 1995: 32)
What type of argument is this?
Correct! Although the assignment asks for an "investigation" of the issue which might suggest persuading the reader to take action or find opinion valid, it clearly sets up a context in which only two sides of the debate are possible: to censor or not to censor. Further, it suggests an audience that is aware of the two sides since they are summarized in the assignment.
All semester we have looked at various theories of how adolescents develop. In this paper, position yourself among these theories, either agreeing with one or combining different aspects of others, and creating a theory of your own. Make sure your theory of adolescent development is well supported by the course texts.
What type of argument is this?
Correct! This assignment clearly uses words like "position" as well as implying that your audience expects a theory of adolescent development. It doesn't need you to justify such theories as a viable issue to take on a position.
Consider three important decisions Lincoln made during the Civil War and present an argument explaining why you think those decisions did or did not unnecessarily prolong the war. (Taken from Writing in the Disciplines. Third Edition. Orlando: Harcourt, Brace, and Co., 1995: 32)
What type of argument is this?
Correct! Although the assignment asks you to take a clear position on a debatable issue ("arguing a clear side of a debatable issue")--why the decisions did or did not prolong the war--it also gives you options for deciding which decisions are at issue, a persuasive task more like "Persuading the reader to take action or find opinion valid".
Recent court cases show that patients and their families are increasingly seeking the right to make their own decisions regarding life-support systems to sustain hopelessly terminal cases. Who should make the decision: patients or their families, a judge, a doctor? After investigating this issue, write an argument explaining your opinion. (Taken from Writing in the Disciplines. Third Edition. Orlando: Harcourt, Brace, and Co., 1995: 33)
What type of argument is this?
Correct! This assignment assumes that the right to die issue has already been decided but that what remains to be argued is who should decide. As such, you have many options and will need to persuade your audience on your opinion rather than argue for or against a stance as in arguing a clear side of a debatable issue
What policies has your state implemented to address an environmental issue about which you are particularly concerned? Investigate this and decide whether or not the actions taken are sufficient. Defend your point of view and offer up an alternative solution. (Taken in part from Writing in the Disciplines. Third Edition. Orlando: Harcourt, Brace, and Co., 1995: 33)
What type of argument is this?
Correct! Although the main part of this assignment focuses on defining your own position and explaining it to others, as in "position statement," it also asks that you persuade others to accept an alternative recommendation, a call to action as in "persuading the reader to take action or find opinion valid"
Whether comprised of one individual or many, an argument is always written to an audience, so it makes little sense to begin without first figuring who the audience is and what they want or expect. This can be done with a little analysis.
As a concept, it sounds pretty simple: Think about who is going to read your argument and why, and then write in a manner that will most help them comprehend the position you are taking. Easier said then done. It turns out that writing-and revising-for a particular audience is much harder than you think. It requires audience awareness and analysis.
The first thing you will need to find out is why the instructor is having you write the paper, and to whom. Sometimes you will be asked to write as if to a larger audience, but for most assignments you will be writing to your professor, an audience of one.
Some are designed to help students learn new information or expand their thinking on an issue. For these, academic conventions are often less important than showing what you've learned or thought about. Other assignments are designed to help students learn what it's like to write within the context of a specific discipline. For these, academic conventions are extremely important.
Does the assignment specify using outside sources? If so, can interviews and field research be included or just library sources? Does the assignment indicate whether you can use personal experience or critical analysis? Most professors who expect to see personal experience or thinking on an issue say so pretty clearly in the assignment sheet.
Do you have to follow a specific format? If so, what are the section headings? These can be used to help identify the kind of material you will need to generate. Does the assignment note specifically the level of formality? Does it, for instance, note that you should write for possible publication in a journal?
Does the assignment specifically note expectations about proofreading? Often, a professor who reminds students about taking care with punctuation and spelling is asking for a more, carefully edited paper.
Even within the same discipline, professors will have different expectations. For example, in sociology, one might ask you to write mainly about your own experience and reactions. Another might want you to do library or field research and disregard your own experience or attitudes.
Ask your professor to view a sample paper from a prior term or point you in the right direction to find journal examples and other professional publications. You can learn a lot about what is expected by what he or she has accepted in the past or views as a credible source material. Also, if you have written papers for this professor before, look at them again to remind yourself of his or her expectations.
As you look at the samples and models, take note of how various aspects such as outside sources, personal experience and critical analysis, section headings, language constructs and proofreading standards come into play.
Is your academic discipline itself in transition? Are younger professors doing different kinds of research than those who've been established in their professions for many years? Is the style of their arguments different?
What kinds of methodologies are being used and what does your professor use in his own work? Does he or she expect you to use the same kind of techniques? Has your professor assigned topics like this one for a number of years or is he or she experimenting with a new approach, more open to exploring a wider range of responses?
What kinds of evidence do professionals in your discipline find most convincing? For instance, a philosophy professor might well be convinced by an argument that relies solely on logic without any tangible evidence. On the other hand, an engineering professor might require a mathematical or physical model.
Take the time to brainstorm about what you've learned about the professor to help you meet his or her expectations. You probably know much more than you think and asking questions will help you to remember details about how he or she expects the material to be treated.
Assignment One: Business Ethics 402
(Your essay should be 7-10 pages.)
In discussing hypothetical dilemmas, how effective are case studies in preparing you for the pressures of an actual dilemma in the workplace? Develop your answer into an argument synthesis that draws on three or more cases in this chapter. If possible, refer to actual ethical dilemmas with which you've struggled in your own work. (Behrens and Rosen, 815)
Look at the Assignment
Notice that there are three key parts to the assignment:
Notice also that you have plenty of room-up to ten pages-in which to develop these three elements.
Look at Samples & Models
The assignment doesn't specify format, use of outside sources, or levels of formality and so you might want to ask about those points or look closely at samples to gather more information.
Notice that samples are included in the material that the assignment asks you to review. These can be used as models to help you write about your own experiences. You can frame your experience in much the same way as the case studies using the same kinds of detail in your supporting evidence.
Consider Your Academic Discipline
Ask yourself what you know about your professor's approach to the discipline. Does he or she always expect carefully argued positions and claims? How important is it that cases be accurately summarized before referring to them? Will this professor be looking for an argument synthesis that shows how the cases all support one point or will this professor be more interested in seeing how the cases complicate one another?
Assignment Two: Psychology 100
(Your paper should be about 6 pages.)
The 1969 My Lai massacre in Vietnam was a particularly egregious case of over-obedience to military authority in wartime. Show the connection between this event and Milgram's experiments. [Milgram used his authority as a researcher to convince subjects to administer what they thought were painful, even life-threatening, shocks to uncooperative people.] Note that Milgram himself treated the My Lai massacre in the epilogue to his Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View (1974). (Behrens and Rosen, 384-5).
Look at the Assignment
Notice that you are being asked to show the connection between one person's research work and an historical event. Why: to determine if you have an intellectual understanding of the "over-obedience to authority" issue.
To show the connection you will need the following:
Notice also that you have only 6 pages with which to work. In order to provide background and describe both Milgram's work and the My Lai massacre, and show the connection between the two, you will need to be succinct and clear.
Look at Samples & Models
The assignment doesn't specify format, use of outside sources, or levels of formality and so you might want to ask about those points or look closely at samples to gather more information. Nor does it ask you to include personal experiences or contribute personal analysis, but as you draw the connection you will undoubtedly rely on your understanding of the event and your interpretation of sources.
Consider Your Academic Discipline
Ask yourself what you know about your professor's approach to the discipline. Do you already have enough information about Milgram and My Lai? If not, you'll definitely need to do some library work. Notice that the assignment sheet suggests looking at Milgram's 1974 publication, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.
Throughout the semester, what other works has your professor mentioned? Has he or she shown a preference for particular kinds of evidence gathering and argument styles? Think carefully about your professor's prior assignments and use your observations to help shape your writing.
Formal methods for organizing and presenting an argument have existed in Western culture since before the time of Aristotle. One of the oldest is still in use today. Organized along the lines of ancient classical rhetoric, it has six parts:
Just because it's ancient doesn't mean it's carved in stone, however; there are other ways to organize an argument. Some people begin by writing up everything they are going to include and organizing later; others work out the order for each section ahead of time. Either way, when the time comes, it's probably best to work from an outline.
One way to think about organization is in terms of your audience and how they will react to your evidence. List all the evidence that favors your position, and then look at it through their eyes:
Rank your evidence from the most persuasive and authoritative to the least. Organize your argument according to these rankings: either begin with the least persuasive and build to the most incontrovertible, or begin with the most persuasive points, getting the audience on your side, and then present the less persuasive as you go along. Try not to end with your least persuasive, however, as it's always a good idea to exit on a strong note, a power point for the audience to remember.
This is a simple way to outline the essential reasons for taking or defending a position. Make a list of answers that satisfy the question around which your position is focused. For instance, a list of "because" statements for the claim "Grades should be abolished in non-major courses" might look like this:
Do you see how easy it will be to turn this list into sections of an argument? Each "because" statement becomes a sub-claim, or section, that can be connected logically to each other. If properly supported, with credible evidence, each can contribute to a persuasive argument with which to convince your audience that your position is the correct one.
Since there are at least two sides to an argument, you can begin by organizing a simple list of pros and cons: all the reasons for, and all the reasons against, the position you are going to argue.
Organize this list from strongest to weakest, for and against. Shuffle them around:
Choose the strongest reasons for your position, the facts which back them up, and the one or two best-known arguments against-those that you know you will need to refute-and start designing the order in which to argue.
Here are some tried and true organizational structures for organizing academic arguments in a pro/con fashion. Examine the models below to see which one best fits the style and conventions of your discipline.
| Model One | Model Two | Model Three |
|
|
|
Donna LeCourt, Kate Kiefer, and Peter Connor. (1994-[m]DateFormat(Now(), 'yyyy')[/m]). Planning an Argument. The WAC Clearinghouse. Colorado State University. Available at https://wac.colostate.edu/repository/writing/guides-old/.
Copyright © 1994-[m]DateFormat(Now(), 'yyyy')[/m] Colorado State University and/or this site's authors, developers, and contributors. Some material displayed on this site is used with permission.