UNDERSTANDING ARGUMENTS
Level I
RATIONALE: Politicians, advertisers, journalists, corporation executives, clergy, and community activists—a great many people are trying to influence what we think and do. These efforts often take the form of arguments aimed at persuading us to believe one thing rather than another. Being able to understand how arguments about public and community service are put together and whether their claims are well supported is a basic analytic skill. It is important for the development of critical consciousness and for full participation in society, as well as for virtually all academic and professional work.This competency focuses on developing both a broad awareness of the range of arguments we encounter in our everyday lives and an understanding of strategies of persuasion. It requires close, critical reading of texts. It requires the ability to separate your point of view from those you have read. It also requires a knowledge of how to recognize when someone is “selling you a line” rather than making a legitimate case for a claim. Mastering these specific skills will provide a foundation for analysis and evaluation of more complex theoretical and ideological arguments. It will also give you the building blocks to construct sound arguments of your own.
CRITERIA:
1. Identify the main claim of arguments about public and community issues in a variety of everyday texts.
2. Identify the reasons and evidence, including numerical data, given in support of the main claim of each argument.
3. Identify the intended audiences for each argument.
4. Explain how language choices and numerical data are used to try to persuade audiences to accept claims.
5. Compare different texts that address the same issue in terms of the strength of the support for their claim
6. Using the texts compared in Criterion 5, discuss which argument you find more convincing and explain why.
STANDARDS:
1. For Criterion 1, you should choose texts such as newspaper editorials, letters to the editor, campaign speeches, opinion pieces, press releases, sermons, Internet chat group messages, etc.
2. For Criteria 1, 2, 3, and 4 you must analyze at least three different arguments chosen from a range of texts. The first argument should be the length of a brief editorial or Letter to the Editor (i.e., two to three paragraphs); the second and third should be the length of an op-ed column or long editorial (i.e., 1 to 2 pages). The second and/or third arguments must make substantial use of quantitative evidence. You may use audio, video, or Internet statements with approval of the evaluator. Outlines may be used to demonstrate Criteria 1 and 2. They should contain an appropriate mix of the general and the particular.
3. The description of the intended audience referred to in Criterion 3, should include consideration of:
a. who wrote the argument and what was the author’s purpose;
b. when and where the argument appeared; and
c. other clues which reveal the particular group the argument is aimed at.
4. The explanation in Criterion 4 should include identification of:
a. language which is designed to elicit emotions;
b. where relevant, numerical data (graphs, charts, statistics, etc.) which present a compelling or distorted picture of significant facts; and
c. biased or stereotypical or ambiguous statements.
You should also discuss how the above elements are used to persuade the audience to believe the claim.
5. Texts used to address Criterion 5 should be at least the length of an op-ed column or long editorial (i.e., 1 to 2 pages). You might consider two or more accounts that present an issue in different ways or two or more texts that make opposing arguments on the same issue. At least two of the texts must make substantial use of quantitative evidence. In comparing texts, you should identify key differences that lead to different perspectives on the issue. For instance, you might consider key facts that are highlighted or omitted from accounts, the use of sources, the use of emotive language, etc.
6. Your explanation of which argument is more convincing (Criterion 6) should clearly state the main claim, reasons, and evidence given in support of that claim, and your own reasons for finding the position persuasive. Your explanation must draw on the two or more texts compared in Criterion 5.
EXAMPLES OF DEMONSTRATION:
1. Prior Learning: A student would successfully complete a diagnostic test (test can be obtained in Student Services).
2. Independent Learning: A student wishing to do this competency independently is advised first to complete a self-assessment diagnostic test which will help to determine what parts of the competency he or she would need to work on. In completing the competency, the student would obtain an evaluator’s approval of the issues and texts the student plans to work on. Students intending to demonstrate this competency through Independent Learning are advised to review a critical reading or “everyday logic” text as part of their preparation. Recommended texts include: Writing Arguments by Ramage & Beam, Critical Thinking by Moore & Parker, Elements of Arguments by Rothenberg, and Everything’s an Argument by Lundsford & Ruskiewicz.
3. Course: Students may demonstrate this competency by successfully completing the requirements of a CPCS course or other approved course that is designed to provide students with experience in close, critical reading of texts and basic guidelines for understanding arguments.