In Module 2, you will find, evaluate, and analyze 2 pieces of commentary about your topic that are â€œopposing.â€ In preparation for this module, please read
Recall from ENG 1101 learning about the rhetorical situation, and how the perspectives of the author and audience have an impact on how each approaches topics. When conducting research on the Internet, we need to be able to consider the websites we are on and what the (political) perspectives of these sites/authors/intended audiences are. This might mean taking some time to build our own political literacy as well. I’ve attached a Pew Research Center quiz you can take to learn about your own political perspective. At the bottom of this page, you will find a table with perspective websites organized by political perspective. After you take the quiz, try to go to one of the websites that corresponds with your perspective. Do you find yourself agreeing with the opinions shared on the website? What topics do you find yourself disagreeing with the opinions shared on the website?
For the project associated with this module, I am asking that you find 2 opposing ARGUMENTS about your topic from the Internet (these may be referred to as “opinion” or “op-ed,” “commentary,” “analysis,” or “perspective” depending on the website). For this exercise, we want to make sure you are not finding “news” as we did in Module 1.
Opposing arguments may not necessarily mean opposite, but drawing meaningful differences in perspective. For example, if you were writing on the topic of police brutality, you need not look for one argument that police brutality is a problem and another argument that police brutality does not exist. Instead, it may make more sense to find two articles that agree that police brutality is a problem, but argue for different solutions to this problem. One may argue for increasing diversity in police departments, while the other may argue this is not enough, we should go so far as to not allow police to carry guns on daily patrol but only unless they are specifically called on a violent crime in progress.
- Pre-reading: assess the rhetorical situation
- 1st reading: read for understanding; summary
- 2nd reading: read for rhetorical strategies; how does the specific author actually persuade their specific audience; do they fall prey to any argumentative fallacies
2 options for finding your articles:
- Explore specific websites below, with an understanding of their different perspectives. Try some of your search terms in their search bars and see if they have published articles about your topic in the past.
- Use the â€œOpposing Viewpointsâ€ library database linked in this folder. You will need to log-in using your Marauder ID card, or contact the librarian (JBeachman@centralstate.edu) to activate your account.
In These Times
L.A. Review of Books
The New Republic
The New York Times (Op-Ed)
Los Angeles Times (Op-Ed)
The Washington Post (Op-Ed)
Wall Street Journal (Op-Ed)