You are hereby challenged to write a dialogic argument with a delayed thesis for a resistant audience, just like Jane Tompkins did. Once you have determined your conclusion (major claim), you will work to persuade a resistant (perhaps uninformed) reader to consider (maybe even accept) your position through the carefully constructed “story” and experience of your research, as Tompkins did, with advanced analysis, evaluation and synthesis of a variety of perspectives.
You will no doubt find your charting of Tompkins, as well as the “Organizational Plan for a Delayed-Thesis Argument” (Ramage 135), helpful in your construction of this dialogic argument.
Purpose:
This challenging writing project provides you with the opportunity to demonstrate your understanding of the content and skills you have learned in this course by entering an important conversation (aka, discourse) in the United States and producing a sophomore-level, college research project.
a. Critical Reading
b. Critical Reasoning & Writing
a. Critical Reading Content
b. Critical Writing Content
Once you have completed your research for one of the subjects below and determined your major claim (your position), you will write a dialogic, delayed-thesis argument for a resistant audience (a viewpoint contrary to your own). This strategic argument is particularly effective for a resistant audience, a way of showing (rather than “telling”) and persuading them to arrive at your conclusion. Yes, you may use “I,” as you are taking your audience through your epistemological adventure, but be strategic with it (as Tompkins is). Rarely is this type of argument meant to utterly convince an audience; in fact, it is enough to just get a resistant audience to reconsider their own position/perspective in light of reading your comprehensive research and inductive (delayed-thesis) argument. One might also say that many people do not have fully informed opinions on subjects–this paper counters that. As you have learned, arguments at this sophisticated level are not about “winning,” and this is not a debate. Your task concerns persuading a resistant reader (one who does not agree with you) to reconsider their position.
While you may already have a position on the issue you select below, do not formulate your conclusion/major claim until thoroughly researching a diversity of perspectives on the issue. Your opinion may change if your research is authentic. Cherry-picking sources to support a preconceived position is the opposite of what Tompkins does. Practice the critical inquiry skills you have learned in this course and keep an open mind. You may want to review previous modules, but you should give your mind and heart over to the research and the process of discovery–about the issue and about yourself. Tompkins shares a lot with her readers, and this, in turn, strengthens her argument. You should do the same.
Once you have decided the conversation you want to enter, conduct extensive research on the question/problem and distinguish between different perspectives and their context, as Tompkins did, and then narrow them down to best represent a diversity of perspectives in your paper. You are not restricted to U.S. sources. You must analyze and synthesize a minimum of 5 perspectives, which include the three that are required. Tertiary sources and other research will undoubtedly be needed and used, but they do not count in the 5 minimum required perspectives (because they do not represent perspectives).
Like Tompkins, use the following “3-Part” structure:
PART I: Set Up Your Project
It is suggested that you use the following bullet points and the “Organizational Plan for a Delayed-Thesis Argument” (Ramage 135)
Part II: Provide the Story of Your Research