These are the outlines of Starting Lines essays that we developed in class on 27 April. I encourage you to use this process as a model for looking at your own writing as you evaluate and revise it; constructing a reverse outline of your own work is a good way to get a handle on the logical structure of your own argument.
The Nature of Cognitive Enhancements, Heitzel Orantes, pp. 116-19
topic: use of amphetamines to enhance cognitive performance
thesis:use of amphetamines for cognitive enhancement is unfair
topic sentence often at end of paragraph
logical/rhetorical problems? Or things that are suboptimal in these matters?
repeats himself a lot
logical inconsistencies regarding effects of consistent use of amphetamines
author may not have thought out implications of own position
argument structure/outline:
ingestion of Ritalin and Adderall causes same physiological response in body regardless of biochemical situation
(description of biochemical effects on the body); what the body itself does and how it focuses; how drug affects that process
4th paragraph: again, in more depth
application to specific situation of students
application to specific situation of workers: feel need to use drugs get hired, to avoid being fired
short-term and long-term effects
causes dependence: when not on the drug, you think you can't perform (addiction/withdrawal)
tolerance: more and more required
(more repetition)
conclusion: quote at the end from Dalai Lama
not judged relevant: the Dalai Lama is not an expert in the field of biochemistry
unconsidered use of a famous person's voice
argument from authority, or at least from celebrity
Prohibition of Same-Sex Marriage Violates Constitution, Daisy Lee, pp. 120-23
topic: argument of position expressed in title
thesis statement: again, in title: specifically, 14th amendment
logical/rhetorical problems? Or things that are suboptimal in these matters?
First argument (acknowledges other positions) is not on topic, or undermines own point.
Not effectively integrated into rest of argument, or not effectively framed.
Doesn't effectively disprove the counterargument; just disagrees. (Tries to do DH4 on Graham, but it's not fully effective. Probably DH3.)
topics don't map cleanly to paragraphs.
Doesn't always analyze texts that she's quoting, but often just restates.
argument structure/outline:
2nd paragraph (first body paragraph): 14th amendment protects all people's rights.
3rd paragraph: 14th amendment is very ambiguous (no detail about why author disagrees)
4th paragraph: 14th amendment is violated by prohibition of same-sex marriage.
Previous court cases: interracial marriage prohibitions infringe on citizens' rights. (Logical connection between situations is not made.)
Conclusion: is a summary.
Native Mockery: The Washington Redskins, Yarvoh E. Williams, pp. 127-129
topic: Question of Redskins mascot for Washington NFL team is offensive to native Americans
thesis: mascot is offensive and should be changed.
Logical/rhetorical problems? Or things that are suboptimal in these matters?
Introduces counterargument, but doesn't (fully) effectively refute it; not enough evidence provided.
What is connection between name and mascot?
Armadillo Roadkill with Obama quote: what does it accomplish?
Conclusion is comparatively weak: what is logical connection?
Last quote is lengthy: interpretation moves from specific to general very quickly
Asserts what are probably fair descriptions of stereotypes, but pulls characteristics apparently out of nowhere; more connections would pay off.
I can't find the stupid link with Wikipedia quote.
Citation is unnecessary anyway because the fact that it supports constitutes common knowledge.
Is Wikipedia a credible source?
argument structure/outline:
This year's Super Bowl XLVIII and the general deeper focus on football also rekindled a debate about an NFL team not even involved in the game: the Washington Redskins
2nd paragraph (1st body paragraph): Native American mascots are problematic because they can reinforce the tradition of racism against the Native Americans and dehumanize them when not used correctly.
3rd paragraph (2nd body paragraph): Though seemingly indirect and not having much to do with ...