Rhetorical Analysis Of A Debate On An Issue ✓ Solved

Rhetorical Analysis of a Debate on an Issue (...)

Your goal in this assignment is to understand conflict or debate from multiple viewpoints through navigating at least two sources that disagree on some ISSUE.

You have TWO OPTIONS for your focus in this Project:

1. Option 1: Focus on an ISSUE related to the community you studied in Project 2 (e.g., abusive language in gaming; devaluing Arabic in English language schools, etc.); OR

2. Option 2: Choose an entirely new ISSUE related to some aspect of your life that you are concerned about and that has relevance to you.

Identifying Issues: An issue can be defined as some problem that people in a community do not agree about, something that causes conflict and/or debate about what to do to solve the problem. If you choose an issue such as “global warming,” how will YOU say anything new or different from what has already been said by experts? You need to choose an issue that YOU can contribute something to.

Identifying (at least) TWO Sources That Disagree on Your Issue: Read, annotate, reread, analyze, and evaluate your two (or more) sources to find what they disagree upon—claims, evidence, data, methodologies, or impacts. Look for a gap that needs to be filled through additional research.

Composing Your First Draft (Rhetorical Analysis of Sources): Using the rhetorical strategies (logos, ethos, pathos) ANALYZE the two (or more) sources. First, briefly SUMMARIZE each source: What is the MAIN point? What is discussed? What additional important points are included. If someone asked what this source “says,” what would you say? Use verbs like reports, discusses, examines, identifies, reveals, details, etc. Then, ANALYZE each source: How does the author, publication, date, audience, and purpose affect the information contained in this piece? How does the organization of the piece – the people or perspectives focused on, the people/perspectives not present, the facts/statistics used and the sources for those facts/statistics – might shape the audience’s understanding of the content. HOW (be specific) do you know whether the information is reliable and/or credible? HOW do you determine whether this text is intended to be objective? Or, if it is not intended to be objective, how do you know?

Remember that even if it is objective, the piece may present a particular “slant” or “perspective.” It may be useful to think in terms of ETHOS, PATHOS, and LOGOS. In what specific ways does the author use these rhetorical appeals in her/his presentation of information? Finally, decide how primary research (from your previous project or from your own experience, observations, interviews with people) may either add to previous research or respond to ideas in the sources. Write a research introduction (1-2 paragraphs) using the CARS model. You should cite your sources according to a particular academic style, such as APA, MLA, or a citation style used in engineering, such as IEEE.

Paper For Above Instructions

Answer the cleaned instructions below in a structured, well-supported paper. The paper should clearly articulate the chosen issue, identify at least two sources that disagree on the issue, summarize each source's main claims, evidence, and limitations, and then provide a rigorous rhetorical analysis (ethos, pathos, logos) of how each source constructs its argument. Include a synthesis that explains the implications of the disagreement, the gaps in the literature, and how your own primary research (from Project 2 or personal experience) could contribute to resolving or reframing the debate. Conclude by presenting a cohesive introduction to your own research in the CARS framework (Create a research space), including a brief outline of anticipated methods and a justification for the chosen approach. Ensure all sources are cited in-text and in a full reference list using an appropriate academic style (APA, MLA, or IEEE).

In addition to the analysis, incorporate at least two concrete examples from real-world debates to illustrate how different stakeholders frame the issue, what data they rely on, and what values they emphasize. Your paper should demonstrate critical engagement with the sources, a clear understanding of argumentative structure, and a thoughtful plan for integrating primary research to advance the discussion.

Guidance: Maintain academic tone, avoid first-person overuse, and balance descriptive summaries with critical analysis. Use clear topic sentences and logical transitions between sections (introduction, methods of analysis, source summaries, rhetorical analysis, synthesis, primary research, and conclusion). The final paper should be about 1000 words, with properly formatted citations and a references section.

Paper Structure and Formatting Guidance

Introduction: Contextualize the issue, state the debate, and present the two (or more) sources that you will compare. Include a thesis that previews the analysis you will perform.

Source Summaries: For each source, provide a concise summary of the main claim and supporting points, followed by a discussion of the intended audience and purpose.

Rhetorical Analysis: Apply logos, ethos, and pathos to each source. Examine evidence quality, persuasive strategies, authority, and emotional appeals. Discuss reliability, credibility, potential bias, and context.

Synthesis and Gap: Identify where sources agree or conflict, what is missing, and how your primary research can contribute to addressing the gap.

Primary Research Section: Propose or describe how you would collect or have collected data (interviews, surveys, observations) and explain how this data would inform the debate.

Conclusion: Revisit the objectives, summarize key insights, and articulate how the analysis advances understanding of the issue.

References: List all cited sources in the chosen format; ensure hanging indentation and consistent styling according to the selected style guide.

References (sample formatting guidance)

Note: The list below is for illustration of formatting style and does not reflect the actual sources used in your analysis. Replace with your actual references in the final submission.

References

  1. Bloom, N., Liang, J., Roberts, J., & Ying, Z. (2015). Does Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese Experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130(1), 165-218.
  2. Gajendran, R. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2007). The good, the bad, and the unknown about telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1124-1143.
  3. Bailey, D. E., & Kurland, N. B. (2002). A review of telework research: Findings, new directions, and lessons for the study of modern work and organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(4), 383-400.
  4. Casper, W. J., & Meeusen, V. (2010). The impact of telework on team collaboration and performance: A systematic review. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 343-369.
  5. Golden, T. D. (2007). Teleworking: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(1), 233-256.
  6. Jo, J., & Kim, S. (2012). Remote work and productivity in knowledge-based industries: A comparative study. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(9), 1845-1863.
  7. OECD. (2019). The Future of Work: Teleworking and productivity in the digital age. OECD Publishing.
  8. Pew Research Center. (2020). The state of remote work in the post-pandemic era. Pew Research Center.
  9. World Economic Forum. (2020). The Future of Jobs Report. World Economic Forum.
  10. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2021). Telecommuting in the American workforce: Trends and implications. BLS Reports.

Related Assignments