In this assignment, you will summarize two conflicting arguments and then, by identifying positions upon which both side could agree, you will establish a level of consensus.
• The paper needs to be 1000-1200 words in length; any quoted material and bibliographic information in the Works Cited list must be in addition to this requirement.
• Your paper must adhere fully to MLA documentation style; five points may be lost based upon MLA inaccuracies.
• The final draft of this paper must be submitted to SafeAssign.
• Students are prohibited from writing about subjects that served as a basis for extensive class discussion/activity or that were the subject of sample papers.
• Students are not allowed to write upon topics that they have already discussed in previous papers.
• This paper is also a research assignment; you will need to find, read, cite, and document at least two “viewpoint” articles that you identify in the SIRS database. I also strongly recommend that students focus on a policy issue (i.e. laws and regulations) rather than write upon extra-judicial affairs.
• Students are not allowed to write on the following topics:
iii) Death Penalty
The following is a basic model of the consensus paper; you should emulate this design in your own paper.
1) Introduction. What is the issue? Why should readers care?
• Introduce your topic to your reader using any of the usual strategies: something from the news, an interesting fact, etc.
• To establish a tone of open-minded inquiry, present the issue as a question at the end of the introduction.
2) Body. What are the two opposed positions of your authors on the issue?
• Summarize the articles one by one rather than doing both at the same time.
• Clearly articulate the thesis of each article. Then proceed to explain the points that the writer uses to support his/her argument.
• Your purpose at this stage of the paper is not to argue for or against one side or the other; instead, you should provide a fair and balanced summary of the arguments proposed by the two authors.
3) Conclusion. What is the middle-ground position?
• Play the role of arbitrator between opposing parties. Establish any common ground upon which the two authors could meet. What shared values could both authors acknowledge? Upon which core assumptions could the two authors agree?