Rhetoric Workshop

Example 1

The biggest refutation to my hypothesis of grass fields being safer than turf fields is of course that grass fields are more dangerous. This seems obvious to a lot of people; grass fields are choppy and unkempt. Well, this isn’t the case for NFL stadiums. They literally hire people to keep the field in great playing conditions.

Author’s Position: In the NFL, grass fields are safer than artificial turf.

Your Worthy Opponent Says: Grass fields are choppy and unkempt.

The Rhetorical Strategy: Unmask the False Analogy that NFL fields are like high school fields.

Explanation: Common knowledge is incorrect. People’s concerns about grass turf, the Author can suggest, is derived from their experience of amateur, collegiate, or high school fields of play. Those concerns don’t apply to playing surfaces in the NFL, which are pristine.

Additional Notes: We can indicate with signal phrases that we’re making a rebuttal argument without directly signaling “the biggest refutation to my hypothesis.”

  • I’ll use blue to highlight signal phrases that indicate there are other points of view.
  • I’ll use red for accommodations that show respect for the divergent viewpoint.
  • And I’ll use green to indicate where the rebuttal begins.


Critics of natural grass playing surfaces like to cite the woeful condition of their neighborhood high school field to illustrate the danger to athletes’ ankles and knees. Granted, those fields suffer a lot of abuse, and playing on them after several home games in a row is hazardous. It’s even true that many school districts have replaced their grass fields with artificial turf because they can’t afford the high cost of maintaining perfect grass. But the NFL, for the sake of reducing player injuries, is willing and able to make that continuing investment. 

Example 2

Having a college degree can give a graduate the opportunity to receive higher paying salaries and stable incomes. A college degree can also give a student the potential to receive higher raises. Not every student who receives a degree gets a stable income. Student A attended college, received a degree, and found a career that had a stable salary. Student C attended college, received a degree, and found a job that offered salaries that do not pay enough to pay off student’s expenses. The push to try to make students attend college is leaving many students optioning out the “build your own business” idea, which is the idea many of the billionaires in today’s society had.

Author’s Position: Some, but not all, college degrees are good financial investments.

Your Worthy Opponent Says: On average, college degrees pay off.

The Rhetorical Strategy: Unmask the False Conclusion that students should be encouraged by “average outcomes.”

Explanation: Readers should be unable to escape the comparison between Student A and Student C, two graduates in different disciplines whose outcomes should not be “averaged.”

Additional Notes: The more appropriate comparison is between Graduates, not Students. Debt becomes a burden after graduation, when it needs to be repaid.

  • I’ll use blue to highlight signal phrases that indicate there are other points of view.
  • I’ll use red for accommodations that show respect for the divergent viewpoint.
  • And I’ll use green to indicate where the rebuttal begins.

Defenders of expensive college degrees like to point out that “college graduates, on average, earn $750,000 more than non-graduates in their lifetimes.” And it is true that certain graduates in high-paying fields do thrive. But it is also true that when Bill Gates pulls up a stool at his local bar, he raises the “average income” of all the patrons by tens of millions of dollars without actually benefiting any of his drinking buddies. So, the fact that Graduate A, whose MBA launches her directly into a well compensated financial services job, can easily repay her student loans, does not benefit Graduate C, whose new degree in the philosophy of philology lands him no job at all, even though their degrees were equally expensive.

Example 3

It is sometimes hard to believe that a device used to alert you of a fire is actually causing them. There have been some reported fires that have started due to a detector, which have not been researched to see what actually caused the fire. An article titled “Fire services on alert after smoke detector is blamed for causing two blazes,” published by Daily Mail, provides two cases in the United Kingdom where smoke detectors caught fire inside houses. Fire investigators on the case say they are on the side of caution because of these incidents and are taking the situation very seriously. These detectors were installed by fire services for a fire prevention safety campaign.

Author’s Position: Not only do smoke detectors not always alert residents to home fires, they sometimes actually cause fires.

Your Worthy Opponent Says: Smoke detectors are “slam dunk” beneficial devices for home safety.

The Rhetorical Strategy: Paint the divergent opinion into a corner.

Explanation: In itself, an anecdote about a faulty smoke detector wouldn’t be persuasive, but failure of the Ideal Smoke Detector probably will be.

Additional Notes: This is the third argument in a row for which the Rebuttal Position is represented by the fairly weak Straw Man of “common knowledge.” The better paper would find a legitimate, credentialed spokesperson for the Rebuttal Position and then obliterate that point of view. I found someone to take the fall.

  • I’ll use blue to highlight signal phrases that indicate there are other points of view.
  • I’ll use red for accommodations that show respect for the divergent viewpoint.
  • And I’ll use green to indicate where the rebuttal begins.

No one would deny the value of smoke detectors for preventing tragic loss of life from home fires. But they are not the “slam dunk” always-beneficial devices safety professionals commonly declare them to be. Battery-operated models work only when they’re charged. Hard-wired models operate only if they’re properly installed. Short-circuits in wired models can actually spark fires. And homeowners are notorious for choosing bad locations for detectors, or installing them poorly, or failing to maintain them.

But the clearest indication that detectors are not foolproof occurred in 2011 in Humberside, England. British fire professionals had selected the Fire Angel ST 620 for its “ground-breaking” smoke detection technology and its 10-year power pack. Local firefighters installed more than half a million of these smoke alarms for free in homes throughout the UK in a massive public safety initiative. Despite their high quality and the reliable installations, these devices, when they sounded their low-battery warning, were uninstalled by homeowners and then spontaneously caught fire. Chris Blacksell, Humberside’s Director of Safety, was forced to admit: “We have contacted every fire service in the country to find out if there have been any other incidents involving detectors [and] have decided to not fit that type of detector until our investigation is complete.”

Example 4

The video also claims that nothing short of an enthusiastic “Yes!” qualifies as consent. Anything along the lines of “okay” or “sure” would therefore not be valid. But again, has every person that has answered in such a half-hearted manner felt as though they were raped?

Author’s Position: The definition of rape as sex without consent is a bar so low that no one can engage in sex without fear of committing a crime.

Your Worthy Opponent Says: Consent, even between loving partners, is rarely unambiguous, and rarely continuous, and even when it is, the sex partner cannot know it, so most sex takes place without known consent, and that is rape by the current too-inclusive definition.

The Rhetorical Strategy: Reduce the definition of consent to absurdity.

“No means no” was a functioning definition of rape that served us well for decades. Any sex act that proceeded following a “no” was rape. The sex partner who heard the “no” was obliged to suspend intimacy or proceed with a crime. Such terms were manageable. Today, the sex partner is at a loss to know whether a crime is being committed or not, because to proceed without knowing that continuous unambiguous consent is being granted is to risk being accused of rape. Sex without consent can occur without a “no” being uttered. Rape can take place any time a “yes” is not being heard. It’s no longer the obligation of the less interested partner to say “Stop this now.” Instead, it’s the obligation of the more interested partner to hear, without interruption, a constant chorus of “Yes! Oh God, yes!”

Example 5

So how does that apply to people whose skin color is white or lighter but are not even white? they are Hispanic, African American, or any other ethnicity. This is an ongoing issue because people who are multiracial have been told that they have the privilege and that they are treated better because they are not fully one of the ethnicity. But how is anyone supposed to know what privilege is if they all believe it is only based on a lighter skin color.

Author’s Position: Multiracial Americans are uniquely oppressed because they are stigmatized by at least two races.

Your Worthy Opponent Says: Multiracial Americans, are advantaged over black or Latino Americans because they enjoy the privileges of being white.

The Rhetorical Strategy: Expose the duplicity of the argument.

Explanation: Failure to acknowledge discrimination in others is a fatal flaw in those who argue their own discrimination.

  • I’ll use blue to highlight signal phrases that indicate there are other points of view.
  • I’ll use red for accommodations that show respect for the divergent viewpoint.
  • And I’ll use green to indicate where the rebuttal begins.

Surely no one wants to be treated badly, but that doesn’t prevent minorities from competing for the distinction of being “the most oppressed.” Black Americans rank their suffering against that of Latino Americans, who assert their relative oppression by the majority culture against the deprivation status of Asian or Arabic immigrants. Each group has reason to believe that members of other groups enjoy privileges denied to others. Even aggrieved majority white Americans assert that they suffer from reverse discrimination. At the heart of all such assertions is the underlying claim that members of other races “can’t understand what it’s like” to live in another’s skin. The obvious irony of the argument that multiracial individuals are privileged by their part-white ethnicity is that it’s made by people who “can’t understand what it’s like” to live at the juncture between two ethnic cultures.

In-Class Exercise 1

Background: American public schools are funded primarily by local property taxes on the homes and businesses in their own neighborhoods.

Not only do these children endure difficult lives at home, for low-income areas often lack resources, they are being sent to school to endure even more difficulty with developing and learning. The middle class seems to be dissipating as the gap between the rich and the poor grows wider and wider. Funding has been cut a tremendous amount and in some states, pre-K education has been cut entirely and some schools had to deny some kids from attending school due to population. The states have not hesitated to cut funding, yet they haven’t made any true effort to gain money to support the schools. Most of the children from poor areas come to school without having eaten breakfast, or having just encountered secondhand smoke, abuse, or neglect, dressed in thin, poor clothing and torn shoes. The bottom line is that their lives are difficult enough. Why should they suffer even more in the place they are supposed to succeed? In the place they have a right to succeed? Everybody talks about the gap, but nobody does anything to fix the gap, or even attempt to do so. Children from these areas are dropping out of high school before they graduate. There were about 3 million teens in 2009 that did not have a high school diploma or were not enrolled in school at all. The drop out rate for low-income students is five times greater than the drop out rates of high-income schools: 7.4%. High school dropouts are not able to apply for 90% of the world’s jobs. This means that children from low-income areas are denied a job that pays enough to support them before they even get a chance to get an interview for the job; they are turned down on the spot, and it is all because of the lack of funding in low-income communities.

What is the Author’s Position? Keep it short.

What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? State it positively like any other reasonable claim.

The Rhetorical Strategy: What would be the best strategy to refute the claim?

Explanation: Explain if needed.

In-Class Exercise 2

Background: Adderall is prescribed millions of times to treat hyperactivity, attention deficit, and obsessive-compulsive behaviors, particularly in youth.

This is where the problem starts, depending on the drug to make you perform, rather than relying on what you are normally equipped with to perform. The purpose for the pill is being put into effect, but what happens if the pill is not there? An article titled, “Adderall Addiction and Abuse” posted by the Addiction center states, “The brain of an addicted person is dependent on Adderall to stimulate alertness and productivity. Without Adderall, addicted people often feel tired and mentally foggy. These are symptoms of Adderall withdrawal, a strong sign of an addiction.” Someone who relies on this artificial performance, after receiving the skills they have obtained through the drug, can act like a bubble pop when the drug is taken away. It becomes a way of life. You take that pill everyday because the doctor prescribed it, and now you are reliant on that pill to succeed. Take coffee as an example, I’m sure many people insist that coffee is what gets them through the day. Without this coffee, they would be useless.

What is the Author’s Position? Keep it short.

What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? State it positively like any other reasonable claim.

The Rhetorical Strategy: What would be the best strategy to refute the claim?

Explanation: Explain if needed.

31 Responses to Rhetoric Workshop

  1. runnerd4 says:

    exercise 1:

    The author’s position is that they are fed up with the fact that although people are upset about the fact that children in these lower-income areas get low-quality education, they do nothing about it to try to fix it. The funding plan that they use makes the schools poor in poor neighborhoods.

    The refuting argument would come from richer neighborhoods that have a well-funded school. They would not want all of their property taxes to go another neighborhood. They will not do anything to change the funding plan.

    The rhetorical strategy used was to attack the other argument.

    They attacked the other argument by stating facts about the children who come from these weak educational systems.

    Exercise 2:

    The position of the author is that taking Adderall leads to addiction and people should avoid taking it.

    The position of the opponent would be that taking Adderall is helpful and that adderall addiction is not as big of a problem.

    The rhetorical strategy used was to create a causal argument stating that taking Adderall does cause addiction.

    They used this causal claim to emphasize their main point. Saying that taking Adderall gets you addicted and makes you experince withdrawal could be a strong reason why not to take it.


    • davidbdale says:

      Assuming you’re right in your description of the Rhetorical Strategies used by the two authors, Runner, are you prepared to declare them to be the Best strategies? The question I asked is, “What would be the best strategy to refute the claim?”


      • runnerd4 says:

        Sorry I read that completely wrong
        For example one, the best strategy would be to make factual claims along with a few moral claims to grab the attention of the reader. It would give clear evidence along with making the people in higher income communities feel bad for those in lower income communities.
        For example two, the best rhetorical strategy would be to use factual claims against the other argument. When arguing over something as serious as a drug addiction, it is important to use real evidence.


  2. oaktree1234 says:

    #1 Author’s Position: Children from low-income areas are treated unjustly at school
    Opponent: no clear rebuttal
    The rhetorical strategy: with a topic such as this, it would be best to use factual claims when refuting the argument and focus on real statistics about low-income areas

    #2 Author’s Position: Adderall is an addictive drug and makes people perform poorly in their day to day lives
    Opponent: Adderall allows individuals to focus and stay alert; without it they are less productive
    Rhetorical strategy: in regard to this argument, causal claims should be made. Its important to find actual medical research done on the effects of Adderall


    • davidbdale says:

      #1. What facts would convince the residents of an expensive town that their tax dollars should be spent improving the schools in other neighborhoods?
      #2. Are you saying that if the consequences of Adderall addiction are severe enough, or widespread enough, your “opponent” will stop advocating for the value of the drug?


  3. Nimadhury says:

    Example 1: the author is stating that low-income students are at an academic disadvantage due to a low amount of property taxes being invested into the local public school.

    Worthy appointment: individuals and families are not being held at their will to remain in these low-income communities. Like anything else, you get what you pay for, but for some reason, this logic is overlooked when assessing the performance of the public school system. The discrepancy in quality across school districts is not an injustice, but rather a service like anything else in life

    Rhetorical Strategy: show that more money can afford better things. So why not have a better quality of education when a district can afford it?


  4. clementine102 says:

    In class Example 1:
    Author’s Position: Low income children should not have a difficult time at school since their lives at home is difficult enough.
    Worthy Opponent: Middle class/Upper class families should not compensate poor schools in other parts of their town.
    The Rhetorical Strategy: To show that money affects the lives of certain income families, especially children.

    In class Example 2:
    Author’s position: People who are addicted to Adderall are dependent on the drug which ultimately makes a new artificial way of life.
    Worthy Opponent: Taking Adderall enhances productivety so doctors should not take it away from those who are addicted to it.
    The Rhetorical Strategy: This writer created a causal arguement to show that Adderall can cause an addiction.


  5. rowanstudent24 says:

    In Class Exercise 1:
    What is the Author’s Position? Public schools in low income areas should be funded by more than just their area’s property taxes because they are lacking the resources in order to succeed in school.
    What does the worthy opponent say? Receiving property taxes from other neighborhoods in addition to their own is unnecessary because these students have enough resources to succeed in school.
    The Rhetorical Strategy: Provide some specific examples of the resources higher income schools have that the lower income schools do not have.
    Explanation: Providing some specific examples can help paint a clearer picture that the worthy opponent doesn’t see.

    In Class Exercise 2:
    What is the author’s position? Adderall is not needed because it can cause a person to get addicted to it.
    What does the worthy opponent say? Adderall helps an individual get through the day because it boosts their energy and helps them get through the day.
    The Rhetorical Strategy: Go more into detail on why Adderall is bad for someone to take on a daily basis.


  6. Nimadhury says:

    Example 2: Adderall is being over-prescribed and the fact that many patients can not function without it is proof that people are getting addicted to it.

    Worthy Appointment: Refutes that medication is used for when a condition is debilitating from functioning in day to day life. So the fact that patients are unable to function without it shows that they had a need for it in the first place.

    Rhetorical Strategy: define addiction and draw the line between needing something and being addicted to it.


  7. malcolmyarber says:

    The author is saying that children from low-income neighborhoods have a harder chance at life than children from wealthy neighborhoods. A lot of these children would be forced to live in unimaginable conditions and would drop out of high school. Some people may claim that it would be unreasonable to drop out of high school and it would be more beneficial to push through for a diploma to have a better chance at life. In the article it states 90% of high school drop outs would not even be able to apply for jobs in this day and age. They would not even be offered the chance to be accepted. I believe that in this modern society a high school diploma is not the key to success and there are other ways to be successful and make a decent income.


  8. cardinal7218 says:

    Exercise 1

    What is the Author’s Position? Students in low-income areas struggle in school because their schools lack funding.

    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? Taxes from higher-income neighborhoods should be put toward the community who paid the taxes rather than toward low-income schools.

    The Rhetorical Strategy: Use facts and statistics to dismantle the opposing claim.

    Explanation: Explain if needed. Appealing to pathos probably won’t work with people who are already more concerned with their own money benefitting themselves rather than people in need. Therefore we must turn to logos and make funding low-income communities the more logical argument.

    Exercise 2

    What is the Author’s Position? Prescribing Adderall is an issue because those taking it depend on it in order to perform.

    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? Adderall is beneficial because it helps people with certain disorders to focus and be productive.

    The Rhetorical Strategy: Expose withheld information.

    Explanation: The opponent only wants to state the benefits of Adderall, so expose the effects of Adderall addiction to dismantle it.


  9. shadowswife says:

    Exercise 1:
    Author’s Position: Kids in low-income communities do not have a good education because of the lack of funding for their communities.
    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say?: Wealthier communities should not fund these low-income communities because nothing is stopping low-income families from attending better schools.
    Rhetorical Strategy: Point out some of the many inconveniences low-income families would have when struggling to afford a more expensive school.
    Explanation: It should explain why low-income families decide to stay in schools that lack good education.
    Exercise 2:
    Author’s Position: Youths continuously taking Adderall causes them to develop an addiction at a young age.
    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say?: It is reasonable to take this medication because it helps these people get through daily life.
    Rhetorical Strategy: Discuss what causes and effects of addiction and how it is associated with the topic.


    • davidbdale says:

      What Does the Worthy Opponent Say?: Wealthier communities should not fund these low-income communities because nothing is stopping low-income families from attending better schools.

      Well . . . nothing is stopping them from attending better schools EXCEPT their inability to afford to live in those expensive communities with the better schools. The very nature of needing to LIVE in the neighborhood is critical to keeping these communities apart.


  10. corinne buck says:

    author’s position- students in low income areas are disadvantaged education wise.
    Worthy opponent- taxes from a community should be spent on THAT community, not used for elsewhere.
    rhetorical stategy- use factual claims and some casual claims
    authors position- Adderall is over prescribed, and can cause people to be dependent on it, which then negatively affects their lives.
    worthy opponent- adderall helps people focus, be alert, and productive.
    rhetorical strategy- show direct cause and effect of adderall use


  11. sonnypetro29 says:

    Exercise #1

    Authors position: The author of this piece is fighting on behalf of the lower income communities who do not have the same
    Opportunity to strive in the classroom like other communities do.

    What does the worthy opponent say ? Tax dollars go to the community where those tax dollars came from, they should not be taken from another community.

    Rhetorical Strategy: To show that the more money brought in can change the outlook of a community and impact lives.

    Exercise #2

    Author’s position: adder all leads to addiction and that people should rely on what they are equipped with and not what something artificial does to you.

    What does the worthy opponent say ? Adderall helps people function in ways that they couldn’t normally do and is helpful to their everyday life.

    Rhetorical Strategy: see the effects of a child with adderall and when they are not using adderall.


  12. gooferious says:

    Exercise 1:
    What is the Author’s Position? The author is on the children’s side. They believe that low-income neighborhoods are being neglected by them not getting funding for their public schools.

    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? The opposing side agrees with the author’s claim but have failed to do anything to improve the situation.

    The Rhetorical Strategy: The best way to refute the claim is by showing hard core facts and stats regarding low-income students in high schools; more specifically more stats regarding drop out rates and rates of jobs being denied for the drop outs.

    Exercise 2:
    What is the Author’s Position? Adderall is an example of a substance that is being prescribed to people so they can function, but why is this the case as it could lead to dependency and/or addiction.

    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? The opponent states that it is needed to get them through the day.

    The Rhetorical Strategy: I believe using stories from people who have this problem (dependency and addiction) should be included to help further get the point across.

    Explanation: The author is trying to get us to see that doctors are understandably trying to help but in reality they are causing a long-term harm to their patients as they will inevitably become dependent as substances such as Adderall.


  13. BabyGoat says:

    Ex 1

    What is the Author’s Position? Low-income students are struggling with schooling.
    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? . The higher classes shouldn’t have to worry about using their own money for others’ education.
    The Rhetorical Strategy: Show how money can affect a family’s resources.

    Ex 2

    What is the Author’s Position? Prescribed drugs like adderall can lead to a reliance on drugs, which is a sign of addiction
    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? Most drugs are prescribed because they are needed for that specific reason.
    The Rhetorical Strategy: Explain how prescribed drugs aren’t always a good thing, and compare and contrast a need and an addiction.


  14. mhmokaysure says:

    Example 1
    What is the Author’s Position?
    Students in low-income areas struggle in school due to the school’s lack of funding, setting these students up for failure later in life.

    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say?
    Instead of just talking about the issue, taxes from higher-income areas should be put towards the improvement and equalizing of school systems.

    Rhetorical Strategy
    Use factual evidence to show the disparities between low income and high-income communities.

    Example 2
    What is the Author’s Position?
    Many people being prescribed Adderall are unable to function without it, showing the overuse and addiction that is being formed because of it.

    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say?
    There is scientific data showing that Adderall helps people with certain disorders in focusing, making it essential to those who need it to function.

    Rhetorical Strategy
    Causal arguments can be used to define and explain the facts behind addiction to Adderall.


  15. l8tersk8ter says:

    Exercise 1
    Authors Position: Students in low income areas endure difficult lives at home and at school which leads to high dropout rates and inevitable failure.
    Opponent: Everyone has a choice to stay in school so no one is being forced to drop out and limit their opportunities for success.
    The Rhetorical Strategy: Separate low-income from high-income environments/lifestyles.
    Explanation: low-income students have different needs and responsibilities. They may need to eventually get a job to support their family and basic needs like food and shelter, which could take priority over school.

    Exercise 2
    Authors Position: Adderall is addicting to everyone that takes it and they go through withdrawal and become useless without it.
    Opponent: People that need the medicine are not productive without it to begin with.
    The Rhetorical Strategy: Argue that other medicines could be less addicting.
    Explanation: there are other forms of medicine that focus on targeting the same behavioral deficits that are found to be less addicting. Prescriptions can be different based on severity or at least try other medicines first.


  16. profs22 says:

    In class exercise #1
    What is the authors’s position: Low income students are not treated fairly in the school system.

    What does the worthy opponent say: High income communities do not want their tax dollars going towards something that does not benefit them.

    The rhetorical strategy: Prove that high income students are given more opportunity in being successful than low come students using factual evidence and statistics.


  17. dayzur says:


    Author’s Position: More funding should be put towards schools other than just property tax payers as students in low income schooling are not given a fair chance to succeed.

    What does the worthy opponent say?: What does the tax payers money have to do with anything for this child to succeed in any school?

    Rhetorical Strategy: Info on the disparity of dropout rates between low income students vs. high-income students.


    Author’s Position: Addiction to adderall makes a person completely dependent on it and cannot function as they normally would without it.

    What does the worthy opponent say?: Some people cannot function normally without adderall and need it as it benefits them.

    Rhetorical Strategy: A causal argument showing that usage can lead to addiction and if it isn’t fed, then these addicts may not be able to function as they would before.


  18. comicdub says:

    Exercise 1:
    Author’s Position: Public schools in low-income areas should receive more funding from other higher-income areas.
    Opponent: The use of tax money should be contained to the area that the taxes originally come from, rather than going to other areas that are in need
    Rhetorical Strategy: The use of statistics and examples to disprove the opposing argument

    Exercise 2:
    Author’s Position: Adderall is proven to be very addictive, therefore, it shouldn’t be prescribed
    Opponent: People who are treated for hyperactivity, attention deficit, and obsessive-compulsive behaviors, need Adderall to help them function as a normal person
    Rhetorical Strategy: The author creates a causal argument that Adderall causes addiction which is backed by proven symptoms of Adderall withdraw


  19. pardonmyfrench13 says:

    In Class Example #1
    Authors Position: Schools in low income areas lack funding, which results in students struggling academically.
    Worthy Opponent: Higher income neighborhoods should not have to compensate lower income schools. Students in the lower income school districts have enough resources to be able to succeed as is.
    Rhetorical Strategy: Use statistics about low income areas to capture attention and use factual claims to dismiss whatever you are not trying to prove.
    Extra Explanation: The attitude seems to be caring more about money than anything to do with the quality of a child’s education. Must try to appeal to that in the argument in order to be successful.

    In Class Example 2:
    Authors Position: Patients who take Adderall are now unable to function without it, proving it has become addictive and overprescribed.
    Worthy Opponent: Adderall is needed in order to treat multiple disorders that enable people to function and live a normal everyday life.
    Rhetorical Strategy: Define addiction in order to argue the point. Also give more information on the negative effects of Adderall if over prescribed in order to better inform the audience.
    Extra Explanation: Author already explained the causal argument for addiction so that’s why these rhetorical strategies would make the argument even stronger.


  20. profs 22 says:

    In class exercise #2
    What is the author’s position: Adderall is addictive and should not be relied on by patients.

    What does the worthy opponent say: Adderall is needed to treat those with hyperactivity and ocd disorders.

    The rhetorical strategy: Compare and contrast the pros and cons of adderall but ultimately prove that it is a dangerous drug.


  21. hailthegreat8 says:

    Exercise 1
    -The author is fed up with the people who are complaining about children in low-income areas who receive low education and aren’t doing anything about it.
    -This doesn’t faze individuals in well rounded because it doesn’t affect them.
    -Showing how money affects different income individuals.

    Exercise 2
    -Taking too much Adderall can lead to addiction. I believe that the position the author is trying to take.
    -Using Adderall can help someone focus and allows them to be more productive
    -You have to go more in-depth on why Adderal can negatively affect you if you take it daily.


  22. aquarela says:

    Exercise #1
    What is the Author’s Position? Public schools in poor areas deserve receiving more resources besides their area’s property taxes, because those students are already facing poverty in their homes.
    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? Rich people are not responsible for low-coming families’ children and shouldn’t pay for their education.
    The Rhetorical Strategy: Explaining that taxes belong to the government and should be used for everyone’s well-being.
    Exercise #2
    What is the Author’s Position? The use of adderall affects people’s daily lives.
    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? Adderall has its benefits such as helping people staying focused.
    The Rhetorical Strategy: Finding some research done about the use of adderall might be helpful.


  23. wafflesrgud22 says:

    exercise 1:
    What is the Author’s Position? Students should get funding for their school in low-income areas.

    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? HIgher-income communities should reap the benefits of having high taxes by seeing it go back into their own community rather than the low-income community who don’t pay as high of taxes.

    The Rhetorical Strategy: Statistics and claims to support: “7.4%. High school dropouts are not able to apply for 90% of the world’s jobs. This means that children from low-income areas are denied a job that pays enough to support them before they even get a chance to get an interview”

    exercise 2:

    What is the Author’s Position? Giving patients adderall creates an unhealthy dependency on it.

    What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? Providing adderall helps individuals who need it be more productive and focus with day to day tasks.

    The Rhetorical Strategy: I’m not sure there is any strategy. There is nothing to back up with data nor evidence

    Explanation: The goal is to bash adderall and it’s purpose, so instead of provide a substitute for it possibly, they list reasons why it is not a good substance to give to the youth


  24. gabythefujoshi18 says:

    Exercise 1:
    Author’s Position- Schools in low-income communities should receive more funding so the students have a higher chance in getting stable jobs in the future.
    Worthy Opponent Statement- Schools in low-income communities receive enough funding from the property taxes of households and other businesses.
    Rhetorical Strategy- Get statistics and data of the amount that is funded in the low-income communities compared to high-income communities, what is done for both schools by comparison to show that there isn’t enough funding in low-income communities to provide better education.

    Exercise 2:
    Author’s Position- Adderall is an addictive prescription drug and is detrimental to the well-being of people.
    Worthy Opponent Statement- People who have problems focusing need Adderall to perform their daily tasks.
    Rhetorical Strategy- Finding data on the positive and negative effects Adderall can have on one’s body and mental functions.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s