I listened to Michaela's project (I couldn't find a title anywhere) about fracking and the harmful effect it has on Oklahomans. I think what I provided was a content recommendation.
Basically I feel that her project was very informative and educational, but not exactly argumentative. She presents both sides very clearly, but doesn't distinguish one as an argument and one as a counterargument. Until the very last sentence, I'm not completely sure of what she's arguing for or what she wants me to believe. So I suggested she try to frame her evidence not as background on the story, but as reasons to believe her side. Just subtle word choice and the way she introduces pieces of evidence can place her on a side and help her argument naturally materialize.
This is helpful because without it, her project seems more like the Controversy Postmortem than a Public Argument. It's obviously critical to defend a stance, and Michaela herself was worried she sounded too neutral. I think calling her attention back to that in these last few days could allow her to really strengthen her argument before submission.
No comments:
Post a Comment