Wednesday October 29 and Friday October 31

1. Wednesday October 29 and Friday October 31 Rhetorical Goals for the Body of Position Papers IPHY 3700 Writing Process Map

2. Conventional Rhetorical Goals for the Body of Position Papers 1. Present data-driven lines of support, to convince readers to accept your claim. 2. Present concept-driven lines of support, to convince readers to accept your claim. 3. Present the necessary warrants, to show readers how your claim and lines of support are connected. 4. Argue for the methodological strengths of studies that support your claim, to convince readers that the data derived from the studies are valid. 5. Acknowledge limitations to your argument and respond to them so that readers don't dismiss your claim. 6. Acknowledge and refute counterarguments, to convince readers that you're considering all sides of your issue and that your argument is stronger than alternatives.

3. Rhetorical Goal: Present data-driven lines of support, to convince readers to accept your claim. 1. If you’re presenting numerous studies that support your claim, synthesize them. 2. Present the specific research questions that motivated your supporting studies, and show readers how the research questions are relevant to your issue. 3. Present the most relevant details about the supporting studies' methods, to help readers understand how the most important results were obtained. 4. Present the most relevant results from the studies that support your claim, including the actual data (e.g., means, correlations, measures of variability), and values that reflect their statistical significance. Use graphics to present large amounts of supporting data in a synthesized, organized, and powerful way. *5. Explain how the data support your claim. That is, present necessary warrants and discuss the practical significance of the data. *6. Argue for the methodological strengths of the studies from which you've derived data. *7. Acknowledge and explain methodological weaknesses and shortcomings associated with your supporting data. Model Position Paper

4. Rhetorical Goal: Present concept-driven lines of support, to convince readers to accept your claim 1. If necessary, explain why you're making a concept-driven argument rather than a data-driven argument. 2. For each line of concept-driven support, present the scientific knowledge, mechanisms, theories, and/or reasoning that support your claim. Consider the knowledge needs of your readers to determine how much background knowledge to provide and how deeply to explain concepts. 3. Explain how the concepts support your claim. That is, present necessary warrants. 4. Present the necessary evidence and reasoning to convince readers that your concept-driven line of support is based on a strong foundation of consensus knowledge in the scientific field. 5. When possible, use indirect data to strengthen your concept-driven lines of support. 6. Acknowledge and explain shortcomings associated with your concept-driven lines of support. Model Position Paper

5. Rhetorical Goal: Argue for the methodological strengths of studies that support your claim, to convince readers that the data derived from the studies are valid.Flip side: Argue for the methodological weaknesses of studies that do not support your claim, to convince readers that the data derived from the studies are problematic. 1. Clearly identify the most important and convincing methodological strengths of the studies that support your claim. For our paper I'm looking for deep holes, so you might focus on only 1 methodological strength from 1 supporting study. 2. Explain how the methodological strengths likely influenced the studies' outcomes, leading to valid results and conclusions. Avoid simply listing methodological strengths. 3. Explain how the strong methods in studies supporting your position are superior to weaker methods in studies supporting the counterarguments. That is, directly compare related methodological approaches across studies that support your argument and the counterargument.

6. Rhetorical Goal: Acknowledge limitations to your argument and respond to them so that readers don't dismiss your claim 1. Acknowledge only those limitations that might meaningfully influence your argument. That is, don't focus on limitations that readers might say are unimportant. 2. Explain the nature of the limitations and how they influence your argument. 3. Explain how your argument would be strengthened if the limitations didn't exist. 4. Convince readers that, despite the limitations, your argument has merit and is still stronger than alternative arguments. Model Position Paper

7. Rhetorical Goal: Acknowledge and refute counterarguments, to convince readers that you're considering all sides of your issue and that your argument is stronger than alternatives General Strategies 1. Present the counterargument: its overall claims, lines of support, and warrants. This strategy is important to show readers that you deeply understand alternative arguments to yours. 2. Present all of the necessary details to explain studies that support the counterargument: the research questions, methods, results, and conclusions. 3. Discuss the strengths of the counterargument to show your audience that (a) you understand why people might support it and (b) you're not unfairly biased against it. 4. Refute the counterargument by discussing (a) methodological problems in studies that support it, (b) why the data from its supporting studies are not completely convincing, and (c) why the conceptual arguments that support it are not completely convincing. Model Position Paper