This important assignment will act as a bridge between the first and second halves of the course. The first half of the course involved looking at issues in the current media and learning how to identify the parts of an argument. In the second half of the course you will be refining your analytical skills and working towards creating an argument paper. This assignment requires you to consolidate your research and thinking on a current issue in Canada.
This assignment relates to the following Course Learning Requirements:
1.) Identify current issues in Canadian society.
2.) Distinguish between fact and opinion as they are expressed in a variety of viewpoints.
4.) Establish coherent and complete positions on both sides of various controversies.
- Choose an issue (it will be easiest to use the one you selected for Journal 1, but it can be a different one if you like). It must be stated as a single, grammatically correct question. It must be an issue that can be argued about objectively. For example, if you have an issue such as “will the climate get better?” you will significantly reduce you chance of getting a good mark since this cannot be argued objectively as “better” will mean something different to different people and makes the issue too imprecise to be The issue must also be current and the two sides of it represented in the media.
- List at least 3 individuals who have had a notable influence on this issue. Their first and last names must be listed with no other information, and they must be individuals that are commonly related to the issue in a web search. You have to conduct independent research to accomplish this
- Outline, using a sequentially numbered list, the main stages in the historical evolution of this issue. The events must be commonly related to the issue in a web
- Create the framework of an argument supporting your own conclusion on this issue. There must be at least three clear, objectively justifiable and logically supportive reasons that prove the conclusion, each expressed in a single, grammatically correct
- List at least 2 references from reputable sources (journals, newspapers, etc.) in APA format
Example (note that the example shown here is primarily to illustrate the required format; the content is not meant as a serious example)
- Should Canada dissolve as a federation and the provinces become new States in the USA?
- Individuals of note: Super Dave Osborne, Frank Zappa, Ronald
- Historical Outline:
- Reagan introduces the idea in 1982 as a cost saver for both
- Super Dave Osborne jumps over Sarnia cross-border customs area in a monster
- Frank Zappa issues posthumous album entitled “Give it up to USA, eh,” sparking national
- Argument framework:
- Conclusion: Canada should not dissolve its federation and become part of the USA
- Premise 1: insert logically valid one-sentence reason here
- Premise 2: insert logically valid one-sentence reason here
- Premise 3: insert logically valid one-sentence reason here
- Author, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Date of publication). Title of article. Title of Online Periodical, volume number (issue number if available). Retrieved from http://www.someaddress.com/full/url/
- Author, A. A. (Year, Month Day). Title of article. Title of Newspaper. Retrieved from http://www.someaddress.com/full/url/
|Issue||States issue as a question which is current, objective, and grammatical.||Issue is either outdated, subjective, or ungrammatical and/or not a question.||Issue is unclear in its wording and/or is not demonstrably an issue.||No issue is discernable|
|Players||Accurately identifies 3 issue-influencing people.||Accurately identifies 2 issue-influencing people.||Accurately identifies 1 issue-influencing person||Does not accurately identify any people of influence|
|History||Sequentially and clearly lists events of historical importance||Includes one item that is either unclear or not historically important, or the list is not sequential.||Includes more than one item that is either unclear or not historically important.||List does not contain historically relevant information|
|Argument||States conclusion clearly and includes 3 logically valid premises.||States conclusion clearly and includes 3 premises of which 1 or 2 are logically valid.||States conclusion unclearly and includes fewer than 3 premises and/or has only one logically valid premise.||Conclusion cannot be inferred from any of the stated premises.|
|References||Correctly references 2 sources from reputable sources in APA format.||References 2 sources from reputable sources in APA format but makes minor errors or uses dubious sources.||Only lists one source and/or makes multiple orthographic errors.||References are not cited.|
What Students Are Saying About Us.......... Customer ID: 12*** | Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"Honestly, I was afraid to send my paper to you, but you proved you are a trustworthy service. My essay was done in less than a day, and I received a brilliant piece. I didn’t even believe it was my essay at first 🙂 Great job, thank you!"
.......... Customer ID: 11***| Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"This company is the best there is. They saved me so many times, I cannot even keep count. Now I recommend it to all my friends, and none of them have complained about it. The writers here are excellent."