Analytical Writing

This is an ongoing self-test of critical thinking and analytical writing skills. It is to assess my ability to articulate and support complex ideas, analyze arguments, and sustain focused and coherent discussions. It is NOT assessing specific content knowledge.

THE ARGUMENT TASK: requires me to critique a given argument by discussing how well reasoned I find it. I will be considering the logical soundness of the argument by critically examining the line of reasoning and the use of evidence rather than agreeing or disagreeing with the position it presents. This is primarily a task in analyzation. Therefore, I will follow these steps in my approach:  ¶  Read the argument – MORE THAN ONCE; identify as many of its claims, conclusions, and underlying assumptions as possible; think of as many alternative explanations and counterexamples as I can; think of what additional evidence might weaken or lend support to the claims; and ask myself what changes in the argument would make the reasoning more sound?

ARGUMENT SCORING: A 6 paper presents a cogent, well-articulated analysis of the complexities of the issue and conveys meaning skillfully.  ¶  A typical paper in this category presents an insightful position on the issue; develops the position with compelling reasons and/or persuasive examples; sustains a well-focused, well-organized analysis, connecting ideas logically; expresses ideas fluently and precisely, using effective vocabulary and sentence variety; and demonstrates facility with the conventions (i.e., grammar, usage, and mechanics) of standard written English but may have minor errors.  ¶  A 5 paper presents a generally thoughtful, well-developed analysis of the complexities of the issue and conveys meaning clearly.  ¶  A typical paper in this category presents a well-considered position on the issue; develops the position with logically sound reasons and/or well-chosen examples; is focused and generally well organized, connecting ideas appropriately; expresses ideas clearly and well, using appropriate vocabulary and sentence variety; and demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English but may have minor errors.  ¶  A 4 paper presents a competent analysis of the issue and conveys meaning adequately.  ¶  A typical paper in this category presents a clear position on the issue; develops the position on the issue with relevant reasons and/or examples; is adequately focused and organized; expresses ideas with reasonable clarity; generally demonstrates control of the conventions of standard written English but may have some errors

THE ISSUE TASK: requires me to discuss the given issue from any perspective(s) I wish, so long as I provide relevant reasons and examples to explain and support my views. This is a task in critical thinking and persuasive writing. Therefore, I will explore the complexity of the given issue by asking myself these questions:  ¶  What, precisely, is the central issue? Do I agree with all or with any part of the claim? Why or why not? Does the claim make certain assumptions? If so, are they reasonable? Is the claim valid only under certain conditions? If so, what are they? Do I need to explain how I interpret certain terms or concepts used in the claim? If I take a certain position on the issue, what reasons support my position? What examples – either real or hypothetical – could I use to illustrate those reasons and advance my point of view? Which examples are most compelling? What reasons might someone use to refute or undermine my position? How should I acknowledge or defend against those views in my essay?

ISSUE SCORING: A 6 paper presents a cogent, well-articulated critique of the argument and conveys meaning skillfully.  ¶  A typical paper in this category clearly identifies important features of the argument and analyzes them insightfully; develops ideas cogently, organizes them logically, and connects them with clear transitions; effectively supports the main points of the critique; demonstrates control of language, including appropriate word choice and sentence variety; and demonstrates facility with the conventions (i.e., grammar, usage, and mechanics) of standard written English but may have minor errors.  ¶  A 5 paper presents a generally thoughtful, well-developed critique of the argument and conveys meaning clearly.  ¶  A typical paper in this category clearly identifies important features of the argument and analyzes them in a generally perceptive way; develops ideas clearly, organizes them logically, and connects them with appropriate transitions; sensibly supports the main points of the critique; demonstrates control of language, including appropriate word choice and sentence variety; and demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English but may have minor errors.  ¶  A 4 paper presents a competent critique of the argument and conveys meaning adequately.  ¶  A typical paper in this category identifies and analyzes important features of the argument; develops and organizes ideas satisfactorily but may not connect them with transitions; supports the main points of the critique; demonstrates sufficient control of language to express ideas with reasonable clarity; and generally demonstrates control of the conventions of standard written English but may have some errors.