Introduction:
Does Ajay's introduction give readers a clear sense of what is to come in his paper? Do you think his introduction will engage readers, both through the ethos he starts to establish but also through how he offers his concerns?
In college, do I want to be a student engaged with education—or a customer buying a product?
Until I read my sources for this paper, I did not understand that this question mattered. At first the difference between “student” and “customer” does not seem large: students learn something; customers buy something. Exploring the differences between learning and buying, however, and exploring the consequences of thinking of students as customers, has helped me learn that the differences do matter. If I really want an education, then I do not want to think of myself as a customer—and I certainly do not want my teachers or college to think of me as a customer.
Transitions:
Notice how Ajay repeats terms he introduced in the preceding paragraph: "learning and buying." Also notice how he uses "first" in this sentence: How do you think his use of "first" helps readers understand Ajay's organization?
Consider first the differences between learning and buying.
Style:
ENGAGEMENT: Ajay decided to title his paper with a question and to have his first sentence also be a question. Do you think these questions help readers initially engage with what Ajay is writing? How would this opening be different if Ajay had made statements rather than ask questions?
Can you buy an education?
In college, do I want to be a student engaged with education—or a customer buying a product?
Style:
CLARITY and ENGAGEMENT: Ajay uses his opening sentences to state clearly what he is writing about and why. How do the structures of these sentences help Ajay do this clearly? Do you think Ajay's use of the first person "I" helps him both be clear and engage readers with the topic? Why?
Until I read my sources for this paper, I did not understand that this question mattered. At first the difference between “student” and “customer” does not seem large: students learn something; customers buy something. Exploring the differences between learning and buying, however, and exploring the consequences of thinking of students as customers, has helped me learn that the differences do matter. If I really want an education, then I do not want to think of myself as a customer—and I certainly do not want my teachers or college to think of me as a customer.
Style:
ENGAGEMENT: Look at the verbs Ajay has chosen in these sentences (both in his own writing and in the quotation he chose to include): flunking out, walking in, putting down. These are informal in tone; do you think Ajay's readers will be engaged by these verbs? Do you think such choices help Ajay make his overall argument?
As scholar David George describes in The Journal of Socio-Economics, since flunking out is always possible, to remain a student and eventually earn a degree signals further that one had something besides money that made the degree possible” (George 971). Learning in college, then, requires more than walking in, putting down some money, and getting a degree; students have to prepare and make efforts to succeed in college.
Structure of argument:
Ajay starts his paper with a question, a question that is dependent on a distinction between students and customers. What expectations might such a distinction set up for readers about the structure of what is to come?
In college, do I want to be a student engaged with education—or a customer buying a product?
Structure of argument:
This paragraph's opening sentence signals to readers that Ajay will in the paragraph explain the differences between learning and buying- the first move in his argument about which we should be in college. Do you think Ajay develops clear and compelling differences in this paragraph?
Consider first the differences between learning and buying.
Use of examples:
Why might Ajay have chosen to use an example here-rather than a plain description-to begin explaining differences between buying and learning? How might the example be different if Ajay had, instead of a hamburger, written about buying a car or a refrigerator?
When I buy a hamburger, I don’t have to do anything. I stand at the counter, place my order, and they give me a hamburger. I eat it. That’s it.
Use of examples:
Why might Ajay have used three short examples here (buying a car, suntan lotion, or a book) instead of one? What other kinds of objects might Ajay have used, and how would your suggestions change how readers think about differences between buying and learning?
If I buy a car, for example, I have to take care of it by changing its oil, keeping the brakes working, and so on; if I buy suntan lotion I have to pay attention to how I use it, and if I buy a book I have to put in effort to read it.
Use of evidence:
How well do you think this example-of buying a hamburger-serves Ajay as evidence that buying and learning are different?
When I buy a hamburger, I don’t have to do anything. I stand at the counter, place my order, and they give me a hamburger. I eat it. That’s it.
Use of evidence:
How does the opening of this sentence-"As scholar David George describes in The Journal of Socio-Economics..." -prepare Ajay's audience to read the quoted words that follow? Why might Ajay have decided to use these quoted words here rather than explain this point in his own words?
As scholar David George describes in The Journal of Socio-Economics, “since flunking out is always possible, to remain a student and eventually earn a degree signals further that one had something besides money that made the degree possible” (George 971).
Use of evidence:
Do you think the three examples in this sentence-buying a car, suntan lotion, and a book-provide sufficient evidence to support the point made in the previous sentence, that some products require efforts similar to what education requires?
If I buy a car, for example, I have to take care of it by changing its oil, keeping the brakes working, and so on; if I buy suntan lotion I have to pay attention to how I use it, and if I buy a book I have to put in effort to read it.
Transitions:
Ajay again uses repetition of terms-here "seeking"—to help his readers follow the steps he is making in his argument. He also phrases the first sentence of the new paragraph as a question, to shift from the topic of the preceding paragraph into a new topic. How might this transition be different for readers if Ajay had made a statement instead of using a question here?
George writes, however, that education “appears to be in a class by itself in requiring the demonstration of abilities prior to being accepted as a ‘customer’ and requiring the putting forth of effort before one can receive what one is ultimately seeking” (972).
And what is it we students are ultimately seeking?
Transitions:
Ajay uses "But..." to help readers understand that he is going to shift or add to what he offered in the preceding paragraph. How does this sentence help readers prepare for what is to come in the new paragraph?
But there is another aspect of education that my reading got me to think about.
Transitions:
With "those words," Ajay shows readers that he is continuing to develop ideas initially presented in the preceding paragraph. In this sentence, Ajay starts with the ideas he is carrying forward to move into a new part of his argument, that "education is supposed to be hard." Do you think this transition is too subtle, or just right, or...? Why? How else might Ajay have made this transition?
As several Montana college teachers have written, “our students contract with us to be challenged and to exceed their previous intellectual limits. … They, like all of us, are involved in the process of becoming wiser” (Cheney, McMillan, and Schwartzman).
Those words help me see why Love and other writers describe how education is supposed to be hard.
Style:
ENGAGEMENT: Go through Ajay's entire essay, looking for where he asks questions. In what circumstances does he use questions? Do you think Ajay's readers will be engaged by these questions? How would the passages where Ajay uses questions be different if the questions were statements?
And what is it we students are ultimately seeking?
Style:
ENGAGEMENT: Once again, Ajay speaks of himself, in language more informal than we might expect in an academic paper. Why might have Ajay chosen to speak of his own reading responses here? How might the passage be different if Ajay had not spoken of his own responses to the article he read?
This is odd language to me, but it pulls at me. The words suggest that education is about being stretched, being helped to push against our limitations, and trying to be and do more than I thought I could. I am in college, then, to learn what will help me get a good job but also to learn how to keep stretching.
Structure of argument:
With this sentence, Ajay shows that he is continuing to explain differences between students and customers. How does what Ajay argues in this paragraph help readers further understand Ajay's concerns?
And what is it we students are ultimately seeking?
Structure of argument:
This paragraph's opening sentence signals that Ajay is continuing to explain and elaborate differences between students and customers. On what difference does he focus here? Why might he use a new paragraph for this information?
But there is another aspect of education that my reading got me to think about.
Use of evidence:
In this paragraph, Ajay works to persuade readers that students in college want more than just a diploma. Do you think Ajay offers sufficient evidence here to persuade readers to consider that students do indeed want more?
Although a diploma is certainly important, I don’t think anyone would be happy if someone described our school as “selling diplomas” (see George 970)—and I think that what we hope results from our efforts in college go beyond that piece of paper. As Laurie Lomas writes in Quality in Higher Education, a student is “only able to reflect fully upon the benefits of the knowledge and skills acquired and the attitudes that have been developed after a number of years when there has been sufficient opportunity to realise what they have learnt” (35). Getting a diploma means we have learned something, but I think Lomas is arguing that we won’t really know what we have learned until we have time to put ourselves to the test in the real world.
Use of evidence:
Why might Ajay decide here to turn to a source-and use a quotation-to support his point that education is about more than a job?
In the Journal of Philosophy of Education, Kevin Love builds an argument about what is essential to be educated; he writes that “to be educated is to exceed oneself, to exceed the inadequacies of the oneself” (27).
learning often involves some discomfort, disequilibrium, and challenge. Students learnthrough the cognitive conflicts that occur when they face new points of view, newinformation, and new perspectives. Students learn when they are encouraged to reflectactively on the information that is unfamiliar and initially illogical or even threatening. Insuch situations, the dynamic tension created between the known and the new causes newthinking, analysis, and reevaluation. (Tasie, 312)
learning often involves some discomfort, disequilibrium, and challenge. Students learnthrough the cognitive conflicts that occur when they face new points of view, newinformation, and new perspectives. Students learn when they are encouraged to reflectactively on the information that is unfamiliar and initially illogical or even threatening. Insuch situations, the dynamic tension created between the known and the new causes newthinking, analysis, and reevaluation. (Tasie, 312)
Transitions:
This paragraph serves readers as a transition not from paragraph to paragraph, but from one section of Ajay's argument to the next. The paragraph's first sentence points back to what has been written earlier, to summarize it; the second sentence points forward, to help readers understand what Ajay wants to build. Can you suggest ways Ajay might have made this transition clearer or stronger?
I hope I have made clear what I have been persuaded are differences between being a student and being a customer, between learning and consuming. What I hope to make clear next are consequences of not paying attention to these differences, of treating students as customers.
Transitions:
In the first sentence highlighted here (which ends a paragraph), Ajay states that he is about to discuss consequences of "trying to please students"; in the second sentence, he names the "first" consequence. How does this transition prepare readers for the next several paragraphs? What might readers assume about how the next paragraphs will be shaped? Does Ajay meet those expectations?
Some consequences of trying to please students will trouble most of us, I think.
First, teachers who worry about pleasing their students can dumb down their classes or emphasize their entertainment value so students won’t complain about hard work.
Style:
CLARITY: These sentences could be written in a much more complicated, more-academic-sounding tone. Why might Ajay have chosen to use such direct sentences here?
Those words help me see why Love and other writers describe how education is supposed to be hard. It is supposed to be hard because we are to be challenged and to challenge ourselves. I don’t think wisdom comes easily. Love writes that a “teacher is not there to satisfy the student but to dissatisfy; not to provide but to demand” (Love, 28).
learning often involves some discomfort, disequilibrium, and challenge. Students learnthrough the cognitive conflicts that occur when they face new points of view, newinformation, and new perspectives. Students learn when they are encouraged to reflectactively on the information that is unfamiliar and initially illogical or even threatening. Insuch situations, the dynamic tension created between the known and the new causes newthinking, analysis, and reevaluation. (Tasie, 312)
Style:
EMPHASIS and CONCISION: What strategies has Ajay used in shaping these sentences so that readers will hear the importance of what he is doing in this short paragraph?
I hope I have made clear what I have been persuaded are differences between being a student and being a customer, between learning and consuming. What I hope to make clear next are consequences of not paying attention to these differences, of treating students as customers.
Structure of argument:
These sentences show that Ajay is adding still more differences between learning and buying-making a total of four paragraphs so far that he has used to explain the differences. What point(s) does he make in each of the four paragraphs? Do you think Ajay has arranged these paragraphs so that the order makes sense to his readers?
Those words help me see why Love and other writers describe how education is supposed to be hard. It is supposed to be hard because we are to be challenged and to challenge ourselves. I don’t think wisdom comes easily.
learning often involves some discomfort, disequilibrium, and challenge. Students learnthrough the cognitive conflicts that occur when they face new points of view, newinformation, and new perspectives. Students learn when they are encouraged to reflectactively on the information that is unfamiliar and initially illogical or even threatening. Insuch situations, the dynamic tension created between the known and the new causes newthinking, analysis, and reevaluation. (Tasie, 312)
Structure of argument:
This paragraph serves as a transition from the preceding section to a different part of Ajay's argument. The first sentence summarizes the four preceding paragraphs; do you think this is an accurate summary? The second sentence signals what is to come; how do you think this sentence will help readers?
I hope I have made clear what I have been persuaded are differences between being a student and being a customer, between learning and consuming. What I hope to make clear next are consequences of not paying attention to these differences, of treating students as customers.
Structure of argument:
In this paragraph, Ajay claims that the primary concern of business is to please customers; he then says he will explore consequences of making this be the same concern of schooling. Do you think Ajay has prepared readers well for this new concern?
For anyone running a business, the primary question (as James C. Carey asks in his article “University or Corporation”) is “Will this please the majority of my customers?” (443). When schools think of themselves as businesses and their students as customers, then they too ask the same question. The articles I read describe how colleges and universities, because they often compete for students and need tuition, want to please their students to keep them enrolled. Some consequences of trying to please students will trouble most of us, I think.
learning often involves some discomfort, disequilibrium, and challenge. Students learnthrough the cognitive conflicts that occur when they face new points of view, newinformation, and new perspectives. Students learn when they are encouraged to reflectactively on the information that is unfamiliar and initially illogical or even threatening. Insuch situations, the dynamic tension created between the known and the new causes newthinking, analysis, and reevaluation. (Tasie, 312)
Use of evidence:
Why might Ajay decide here to use two sources - and a long quotation - to support his point that education is supposed to be hard?
Love writes that a “teacher is not there to satisfy the student but to dissatisfy; not to provide but to demand” (Love, 28). As George O. Tasie writes in Educational Research and Reviews:
learning often involves some discomfort, disequilibrium, and challenge. Students learn through the cognitive conflicts that occur when they face new points of view, new information, and new perspectives. Students learn when they are encouraged to reflect actively on the information that is unfamiliar and initially illogical or even threatening. In such situations, the dynamic tension created between the known and the new causes new thinking, analysis, and reevaluation. (Tasie, 312)
I need a bit more motivation. …Basically, I don’t want to study. I’m lazy… I want[teachers] to excite me and make me want to be passionate about learning that subject.…If it doesn’t grab my attention I’ll just doze off, even though I might not be tired. Myattention span is severely lacking in a subject that doesn’t grab my attention at all. (qtd. inWhite, 599)
It gets kind of frustrating when [professors] … can’t hold my attention. I don’tunderstand why they should be so high and mighty and tell me off for keeping myselfamused. … it’s their own fault if they can’t hold my attention and do an interestinglecture. (qtd. in White, 599)
I need a bit more motivation. …Basically, I don’t want to study. I’m lazy… I want[teachers] to excite me and make me want to be passionate about learning that subject.…If it doesn’t grab my attention I’ll just doze off, even though I might not be tired. Myattention span is severely lacking in a subject that doesn’t grab my attention at all. (qtd. inWhite, 599)
It gets kind of frustrating when [professors] … can’t hold my attention. I don’tunderstand why they should be so high and mighty and tell me off for keeping myselfamused. … it’s their own fault if they can’t hold my attention and do an interestinglecture. (qtd. in White, 599)
Transitions:
Here Ajay makes a transition to a second consequence of "trying to please students." Do you think he has made it clear enough to readers that he is continuing to explore those consequences? How might he make this clearer, if you think that would help readers?
When students and schools both think of students as customers, grade inflation can happen.
Style:
ENGAGEMENT: Why might Ajay have chosen the expression "dumb down" rather than "simplify" or "make easier"?
can dumb down
I need a bit more motivation. …Basically, I don’t want to study. I’m lazy… I want[teachers] to excite me and make me want to be passionate about learning that subject.…If it doesn’t grab my attention I’ll just doze off, even though I might not be tired. Myattention span is severely lacking in a subject that doesn’t grab my attention at all. (qtd. inWhite, 599)
It gets kind of frustrating when [professors] … can’t hold my attention. I don’tunderstand why they should be so high and mighty and tell me off for keeping myselfamused. … it’s their own fault if they can’t hold my attention and do an interestinglecture. (qtd. in White, 599)
Style:
CONCISION and CLARITY: Try changing this sentence to make it more complicated and longer; also try to make the sentence shorter. Why might Ajay have chosen to try to make this sentence as short as possible?
When students and schools both think of students as customers, grade inflation can happen.
Structure of argument:
With this opening word, Ajay signals to readers that he will present several different consequences of schools trying to please students. With this opening word, Ajay helps readers see the structure of his argument. Why might a writer want to help readers see the structure of their writing?
First,
I need a bit more motivation. …Basically, I don’t want to study. I’m lazy… I want[teachers] to excite me and make me want to be passionate about learning that subject.…If it doesn’t grab my attention I’ll just doze off, even though I might not be tired. Myattention span is severely lacking in a subject that doesn’t grab my attention at all. (qtd. inWhite, 599)
It gets kind of frustrating when [professors] … can’t hold my attention. I don’tunderstand why they should be so high and mighty and tell me off for keeping myselfamused. … it’s their own fault if they can’t hold my attention and do an interestinglecture. (qtd. in White, 599)
Use of examples:
These three paragraphs offer examples of what can happen when teachers and schools treat students as customers rather than as students. Do you think these are the right examples for Ajay's readers? Do you think Ajay offers enough examples?
First, teachers who worry about pleasing their students can dumb down their classes or emphasize their entertainment value so students won’t complain about hard work. Students can then come to expect such treatment, as these two quotations from university students show:
I need a bit more motivation. …Basically, I don’t want to study. I’m lazy… I want [teachers] to excite me and make me want to be passionate about learning that subject. …If it doesn’t grab my attention I’ll just doze off, even though I might not be tired. My attention span is severely lacking in a subject that doesn’t grab my attention at all. (qtd. in White, 599)
And
It gets kind of frustrating when [professors] … can’t hold my attention. I don’t understand why they should be so high and mighty and tell me off for keeping myself amused. … it’s their own fault if they can’t hold my attention and do an interesting lecture. (qtd. in White, 599)
Although I think teachers should try to make their classes interesting, what I have written in earlier paragraphs about education and what students need to do implies that teachers shouldn’t have to entertain us; we have responsibilities to make ourselves learn, too.
When students and schools both think of students as customers, grade inflation can happen. Grade inflation is when, over a number of years, the average grade given in the same class for the same work goes up. The writers I read explain that this happens for several reasons. Students think that what they are buying in school is a grade (see George 973 or White 600, for example). And when schools tell teachers that they have to keep students happy so that students will keep paying tuition, the teachers raise grades (White 594-595). Also, in such circumstances, schools evaluate teachers based on student evaluations, and so some teachers raise grades to make sure that their students give good evaluations. (White 594-595)
Finally, when students and schools both think of students as customers, then that’s all the students become through their education. All that I have read and presented above supports Love’s argument that, when students become customers, the main consequence is that all of schooling “seems less concerned with the formation of citizens and more concerned with encouraging individuals to become consumers” (21).
Use of evidence:
In these three paragraphs, Ajay offers evidence that teaching and learning practices change, for the worse, when schools, teachers, and students think of students as customers. Has Ajay presented this evidence in ways that you think are likely to persuade readers of his points? Do you think he has offered enough evidence? What additional evidence might he have offered?
First, teachers who worry about pleasing their students can dumb down their classes or emphasize their entertainment value so students won’t complain about hard work. Students can then come to expect such treatment, as these two quotations from university students show:
I need a bit more motivation. …Basically, I don’t want to study. I’m lazy… I want [teachers] to excite me and make me want to be passionate about learning that subject. …If it doesn’t grab my attention I’ll just doze off, even though I might not be tired. My attention span is severely lacking in a subject that doesn’t grab my attention at all. (qtd. in White, 599)
And
It gets kind of frustrating when [professors] … can’t hold my attention. I don’t understand why they should be so high and mighty and tell me off for keeping myself amused. … it’s their own fault if they can’t hold my attention and do an interesting lecture. (qtd. in White, 599)
Although I think teachers should try to make their classes interesting, what I have written in earlier paragraphs about education and what students need to do implies that teachers shouldn’t have to entertain us; we have responsibilities to make ourselves learn, too.
When students and schools both think of students as customers, grade inflation can happen. Grade inflation is when, over a number of years, the average grade given in the same class for the same work goes up. The writers I read explain that this happens for several reasons. Students think that what they are buying in school is a grade (see George 973 or White 600, for example). And when schools tell teachers that they have to keep students happy so that students will keep paying tuition, the teachers raise grades (White 594-595). Also, in such circumstances, schools evaluate teachers based on student evaluations, and so some teachers raise grades to make sure that their students give good evaluations. (White 594-595)
Transitions:
Here Ajay makes a transition to a third consequence of "trying to please students." Do you think he has made it clear enough to readers that he is continuing to explore those consequences? How might he make this clearer, if you think that would help readers?
Finally, when students and schools both think of students as customers, then that’s all the students become through their education.
Style:
ENGAGEMENT: After speaking of himself and using "I" in earlier paragraphs, Ajay now switches to "we" and "you." Why might he do that here, at the end of his paper?
When we are in college, then, we should ask ourselves who we want to be and become. Do we want our educations to be about becoming customers—people who are known for nothing but buying and wanting simple satisfactions? Or do we want our educations to be about becoming people who learn, who know how to stretch and take on hard work, who can be citizens, who seek wisdom?
Who do you want to be?
Structure of argument:
With this opening word, Ajay signals to readers that he has finished presenting the different consequences of schools trying to please students. Do you think readers could easily name those different consequences? How might Ajay's structure help them name and remember those consequences?
Finally,
Structure of argument:
Here is Ajay's conclusion. As we look back at his paper, we can see that it has two main parts: first, he describes the differences between learning and consuming; then he describes the consequences of considering learning through the lens of consuming. Do you think Ajay's conclusion adequately pulls together his different points? Do you think readers are prepared to encounter his conclusion in the way is appears in his paper?
When we are in college, then, we should ask ourselves who we want to be and become. Do we want our educations to be about becoming customers—people who are known for nothing but buying and wanting simple satisfactions? Or do we want our educations to be about becoming people who learn, who know how to stretch and take on hard work, who can be citizens, who seek wisdom?
Who do you want to be?
Conclusion:
Ajay concludes his paper by restating the central concern of his argument, the differences between being a customer and being a student. Why do you think Ajay decided to use questions to end his writing? Why do you think he separated his final question so that it stands alone? Why do you think the last question addresses readers directly? Do you think this strategy might be effective for Ajay's readers?
When we are in college, then, we should ask ourselves who we want to be and become. Do we want our educations to be about becoming customers—people who are known for nothing but buying and wanting simple satisfactions? Or do we want our educations to be about becoming people who learn, who know how to stretch and take on hard work, who can be citizens, who seek wisdom?
Who do you want to be?
Works Cited
Carey, James C. “University or Corporation?” Journal of Higher Education 27. 8 (1956): 440+. Jstor. Web. 7 May 2012.. Cheney, George, Jill J. McMillan, and Roy Schwartzman. “Should We Buy the ‘Student-As-Consumer’ Metaphor?” Montana Professor 7.3 (1997): 8-11. Web. George, David. “Market overreach: The student as customer.” Journal of Socio-Economics 36 (2007): 965–77. Science Direct. Web. 5 May 2012. Lomas, Laurie. “Are Students Customers? Perceptions of Academic Staff.” Quality in Higher Education 13.1 (2007): 31–44. Academic Search Premier. 7 May 2012. Love, Kevin. “Higher Education, Pedagogy and the ‘Customerisation’ of Teaching and Learning.” Journal of Philosophy of Education 42.1 (2008): 15–34. Print. Tasie, George O. “Analytical observations of the applicability of the concept of student-as-customer in a university setting.” Educational Research and Reviews 5.6 (2010): 309–13. Academic Journals. Web. 5 May 2012. White, Naomi Rosh. “‘The customer is always right?’: Student discourse about higher education in Australia.” Higher Education 54.4 (2007): 593–604. Academic Search Complete. Web. 5 May 2012.Documentation Sample Papers MLA
Introduction:
Riley started her paper with three quotations because she thought her readers needed to hear about women’s personal experiences; Riley thought this would engage her readers with her topic.
Do you think these quotations work as Riley wants?
In Afghanistan, under the Taliban regime, Estorai ran her home-based beauty parlor in secret, fearing reprisals for violating the ban against cosmetics. Today, with FINCA loans, her business is flourishing and Estorai is determined her daughter will receive the education she needs to succeed in the new Afghanistan. (“Change for the Better in Afghanistan”)
…
Says Nyamba Konate, a microloan beneficiary, “I can now ensure that my children go to school, and I can better support my husband by buying food and stocking it to get us through the difficult rainy season.” (“Microloans and Literacy”)
…
“Miriam began operating her own taxi business a few years ago with the help of microloans. . . . Miriam and her husband were able to build a home, and now put the profits towards their children’s education and saving for the future. Miriam even purchased a computer for her daughter, which helps with her university studies and also allows her to offer desktop publishing services to other students and community members.” (“Improving Lives”)
Introduction:
In these two paragraphs, Riley describes the exact focus of her paper in order to introduce readers to what is to come.
Do you think these paragraphs prepare readers to read what is to come? How do these paragraphs set up readers’ expectations for what is to come?
Google “microloan” and you’ll get over two million results. Many results link to organizations that offer very small loans—called “microloans”—to people who do not qualify for traditional bank loans. The websites tell stories like the ones above, about the positive changes microloans make in poor women’s lives worldwide, including the United States.
In this paper, I question what microloans are capable of doing. After giving a brief history and explaining how microloans work, and then describing the claims many make for microloans, I show how different critics question the purposes and potentials of microloans for women. I consider how microcredit could be offered to poor women so that their communities really are enriched and the women join the global economy in ways that make sense to them and not just to the people who make the loans.
Style:
ENGAGEMENT: Riley starts her introduction with a suggestion that her readers use Google. How might such a suggestion—which probably encourages readers to imagine using Google—engage readers?
Google “microloan” and you’ll get over two million results.
Examples:
Riley starts her paper with three examples—all in quotations. How does starting with these examples shape how readers read the rest of the paper?
In Afghanistan, under the Taliban regime, Estorai ran her home-based beauty parlor in secret, fearing reprisals for violating the ban against cosmetics. Today, with FINCA loans, her business is flourishing and Estorai is determined her daughter will receive the education she needs to succeed in the new Afghanistan. (“Change for the Better in Afghanistan”)
…
Says Nyamba Konate, a microloan beneficiary, “I can now ensure that my children go to school, and I can better support my husband by buying food and stocking it to get us through the difficult rainy season.” (“Microloans and Literacy”)
…
“Miriam began operating her own taxi business a few years ago with the help of microloans. . . . Miriam and her husband were able to build a home, and now put the profits towards their children’s education and saving for the future. Miriam even purchased a computer for her daughter, which helps with her university studies and also allows her to offer desktop publishing services to other students and community members.” (“Improving Lives”)
Examples:
Riley’s introduction includes the example of using Google, suggesting to readers what they might find were they to do this. How might such an example shape readers' engagement with this writing? How might this example shape how readers respond to Riley’s points about microloans and women?
Google “microloan” and you’ll get over two million results. Many results link to organizations that offer very small loans—called “microloans”—to people who do not qualify for traditional bank loans. The websites tell stories like the ones above, about the positive changes microloans make in poor women’s lives worldwide, including the United States.
Transitions:
Riley uses a question to move her readers from microloans to wondering whether they work. How well do you think such a question helps readers move from one part of her writing to the next?
But does the system work for borrowers?
Style:
CLARITY and EMPHASIS: With these sentences, Riley clearly explains the steps her writing will take, helping to emphasize those steps for readers. What other ways of styling her paragraph might Riley have used for engaging readers?
In this paper, I question what microloans are capable of doing. After giving a brief history and explaining how microloans work, and then describing the claims many make for microloans, I show how different critics question the purposes and potentials of microloans for women. I consider how microcredit could be offered to poor women so that their communities really are enriched and the women join the global economy in ways that make sense to them and not just to the people who make the loans.
Style:
ENGAGEMENT: How might the effect of this sentence have been different if Riley had not used a direct quotation but had instead written something like “the fear of embarrassment”?
“the threat of being shamed before neighbors and relatives”
Style:
COHERENCE: Look how Riley uses long sentences that reference the websites and articles she describes in the first sentence of this paragraph. How does the repetition of words like “article” or “writings” help readers follow these long sentences? What sort of tone do these long sentences create? Does that tone seem appropriate for this paper?
Almost all the writing celebrates the microloan movement’s successes, describing—as in my opening quotations—how women in poor communities turn small loans into small businesses, have enough money to send their children to school, and sometimes even start providing jobs for others. These writings also often show the same expectations about microloans as the Nobel Peace Prize committee did when they gave the 2006 prize to Yunus and the Grameen Bank: The Committee wrote that “lasting peace can not be achieved unless large population groups find ways in which to break out of poverty” and that “Microcredit has proved to be an important liberating force in societies where women in particular have to struggle against repressive social and economic conditions” (“Nobel Peace Prize”).
Structure of Argument:
In these sentences of her introduction, Riley describes exactly the structure of her writing. Does she follow this structure? Do you think her readers will understand why she uses this particular structure?
After giving a brief history and explaining how microloans work, and then describing the claims many make for microloans, I show how different critics question the purposes and potentials of microloans for women. I consider how microcredit could be offered to poor women so that their communities really are enriched and the women join the global economy in ways that make sense to them and not just to the people who make the loans.
Structure of Argument:
Before she wrote her paper, Riley talked with several of her readers, and she learned that they did not know about microloans. To make her argument, then, Riley has to explain to her readers what microloans are. Do you think she explains microloans well enough for her readers?
Microcredit originated in Bangladesh. In the 1970s, Muhammad Yunus, an economics professor at a Bangladeshi university, started making very small loans to villagers so they could buy supplies for their small businesses; Yunus had learned that traditional banks would not give loans to the villagers. Eventually, out of Yunus’s loan-making came the Grameen Bank. The Bank makes loans to groups of five villagers who are responsible for each other’s debts. Because of the groups, villagers have repayment incentive: “the threat of being shamed before neighbors and relatives” (Giridharadas and Bradsher).
The successes of Grameen Bank led to many other organizations following the same pattern: Loans are made to a small group, each member of which is responsible that all repay their loans. In addition, Grameen started another pattern, of loan recipients meeting regularly to learn community-building habits. For the loanmakers, this system seems to work: The repayment rate on microloans through microenterprise organizations is at least 95% (“Microenterprise Quick Facts”). But does the system work for borrowers?
Examples:
Riley explains microloans through the concrete example of the founder of microloans. How might her use of such a concrete example help readers better understand microloans?
Microcredit originated in Bangladesh. In the 1970s, Muhammad Yunus, an economics professor at a Bangladeshi university, started making very small loans to villagers so they could buy supplies for their small businesses; Yunus had learned that traditional banks would not give loans to the villagers. Eventually, out of Yunus’s loan-making came the Grameen Bank. The Bank makes loans to groups of five villagers who are responsible for each other’s debts. Because of the groups, villagers have repayment incentive: “the threat of being shamed before neighbors and relatives” (Giridharadas and Bradsher).
Evidence:
In this paragraph, has Riley offered enough (and the right kind of) evidence for making the claims she does in the paragraph’s last two sentences?
Almost all the writing celebrates the microloan movement’s successes, describing—as in my opening quotations—how women in poor communities turn small loans into small businesses, have enough money to send their children to school, and sometimes even start providing jobs for others. These writings also often show the same expectations about microloans as the Nobel Peace Prize committee did when they gave the 2006 prize to Yunus and the Grameen Bank: The Committee wrote that “lasting peace can not be achieved unless large population groups find ways in which to break out of poverty” and that “Microcredit has proved to be an important liberating force in societies where women in particular have to struggle against repressive social and economic conditions” (“Nobel Peace Prize”). Again and again in writings about microcredit those two themes emerge: Microcredit will help poor populations break out of poverty and it will be women who do this by using microloans to help themselves and their families. From the Nobel Peace Prize Committee to New York Times opinion pieces (Bajaj; Freid; Kristof; Temes), from bills passed in the U.S. Congress (Smith) to articles in environmental magazines (Kelly), those two claims are repeated over and over.
Most victims of severe poverty are children. According to UNICEF, at least halfof the 12 million children aged five or younger who die each year die frommalnutrition associated with severe poverty. The most direct way to improvechildrens’ survival and welfare is to strengthen their own mothers’ ability to takecare of them. (“Frequently Asked Questions”)
Transitions:
Riley ends one paragraph by summarizing the two main points she sees people making about microloans (that they help people leave poverty and that they are most useful to women). She starts the next paragraph by asking why women are so important to microloan programs.
Do you think this strategy—of starting a paragraph with a question that refers back to the paragraph before it—will help Riley’s readers follow her arguments?
Again and again in writings about microcredit those two themes emerge: Microcredit will help poor populations break out of poverty and it will be women who do this by using microloans to help themselves and their families. From the Nobel Peace Prize Committee to New York Times opinion pieces (Bajaj; Freid; Kristof; Temes), from bills passed in the U.S. Congress (Smith) to articles in environmental magazines (Kelly), those two claims are repeated over and over.
Why are women so important as beneficiaries of microloans?
Most victims of severe poverty are children. According to UNICEF, at least halfof the 12 million children aged five or younger who die each year die frommalnutrition associated with severe poverty. The most direct way to improvechildrens’ survival and welfare is to strengthen their own mothers’ ability to takecare of them. (“Frequently Asked Questions”)
Style:
ENGAGEMENT and EMPHASIS: Look through this paper to see how many times Riley uses questions to transition from one of her main parts to another. How might making statements, rather than asking questions, change how readers respond?
Why are women so important as beneficiaries of microloans?
Most victims of severe poverty are children. According to UNICEF, at least halfof the 12 million children aged five or younger who die each year die frommalnutrition associated with severe poverty. The most direct way to improvechildrens’ survival and welfare is to strengthen their own mothers’ ability to takecare of them. (“Frequently Asked Questions”)
Structure of Argument:
In these sentences, Riley not only summarizes the information that she has introduced in the preceding paragraph. She also makes the first step she needs to make in her argument: That most people believe these two main points about microcredit. Do you think she has provided enough information, from appropriately authoritative sources, to persuade her readers to accept these points about microcredit?
Again and again in writings about microcredit those two themes emerge: Microcredit will help poor populations break out of poverty and it will be women who do this by using microloans to help themselves and their families. From the Nobel Peace Prize Committee to New York Times opinion pieces (Bajaj; Freid; Kristof; Temes), from bills passed in the U.S. Congress (Smith) to articles in environmental magazines (Kelly), those two claims are repeated over and over.
Most victims of severe poverty are children. According to UNICEF, at least halfof the 12 million children aged five or younger who die each year die frommalnutrition associated with severe poverty. The most direct way to improvechildrens’ survival and welfare is to strengthen their own mothers’ ability to takecare of them. (“Frequently Asked Questions”)
Evidence:
Do you think Riley has used appropriate sources for showing why most microloans go to women?
Another well-known microfinance organization, the Foundation for International Community Assistance (FINCA), says that it lends primarily to women because
Most victims of severe poverty are children. According to UNICEF, at least half of the 12 million children aged five or younger who die each year die from malnutrition associated with severe poverty. The most direct way to improve childrens’ survival and welfare is to strengthen their own mothers’ ability to take care of them. (“Frequently Asked Questions”)
The United Nations has put out a “Guide for Best Practices” in microcredit, which argues that women’s “access to microfinance not only benefits women but also their families and communities” because it not only improves women’s economic lives but also improves women’s places in society (Burjorjee, Deshpande, and Weidemann 7). Microloans are supposed to help women gain confidence in taking part in local economies and asserting themselves in their communities, and any income they get from the loans is expected to be applied to their families and so to the betterment of their communities.
Transitions:
Here again Riley uses a question to show readers she is moving from one step of her paper to the next. Do you think readers might get tired of all these questions? What other strategies might Riley use to help show her readers that she is transitioning from one focus to another?
But can those effects really “liberate women” and help “large population groups . . . break out of poverty” as the Nobel Prize committee suggested? Many do not think so, given the evidence.
Style:
EMPHASIS and ENGAGEMENT: Notice the different lengths of these two sentences. How does this change in length help Riley emphasize the point she wants to make?
The anecdotes that begin this paper, like the others that appear in almost every source I’ve mentioned so far, suggest that, to some extent, microloans do help women make their—and their children’s—lives better. There has been some research to support these claims.
Style:
EMPHASIS and ENGAGEMENT: Notice how this paragraph differs in length from all the other paragraphs. How does this change in length help Riley emphasize the point she wants to make?
But can those effects really “liberate women” and help “large population groups . . . break out of poverty” as the Nobel Prize committee suggested? Many do not think so, given the evidence.
Style:
EMPHASIS and CLARITY: Here is a long paragraph in which Riley offers a long list of evidence for her contention that women who receive microloans need more support than they currently receive. The length of this paragraph emphasizes how much evidence Riley has collected—and each separate sentence clearly indicates each separate bit of evidence. How else might Riley have presented this information for emphasis and clarity?
For example, in terms of poverty, the writer of the paper for the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, quoted above, says, immediately after the passage I summarized, that most studies of microcredit programs “find very small increases in income for quite large numbers of borrowers; in only a very small number of cases are there significant income increases” (Mayoux 39). In addition, studies also find that microcredit benefits women who are not at the lowest levels of poverty; the poorest of the poor may, in fact, get poorer trying to repay (MacIsaac 11-12; Mayoux 40-44). The benefits from microcredit also don’t last long because borrowers often can’t use loans for anything but immediate need (MacIsaac 15; Mayoux 41) or the borrowers take up work where they make only a little bit of money and where they gain no economic clout (Feiner and Barker; Roy). Under such conditions, women’s positions within the overall economy do not change, meaning that their communities are unlikely to “break out of poverty.” Even though microcredit has been in existence for over twenty years, Robert Pollin, co-director of the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts, pointed out in 2006 that “Bangladesh and Bolivia are two countries widely recognized for having the most successful microcredit programs in the world. They also remain two of the poorest countries in the world” (qtd. in Cockburn 9). And what of women being liberated by microcredit? Using the loan often adds to, rather than changes, women’s daily work: When women use their loans to make and sell food or other items, it is on top of running their households and taking care of their children, and sometimes they have to pull their children out of school to work in order to repay loans (Cheston 25; MacIsaac 13). And rather than learning about money use themselves, a significant number of women give their loans to male relatives because in their communities, men are supposed make economic decisions (Cowen; MacIsaac 13; Mayoux 25). For the same reasons, when women do use their loans, it can lead to both verbal and physical violence against them from their families (MacIsaac 22; Mayoux 24; Rahman, slides 23-24).
Structure of Argument:
Here Riley shows the validity of the first of her two main points. Do you think she is preparing readers well enough to question these points?
The anecdotes that begin this paper, like the others that appear in almost every source I’ve mentioned so far, suggest that, to some extent, microloans do help women make their—and their children’s—lives better. There has been some research to support these claims.
Structure of Argument:
Riley directly questions the earlier claims about microloans. Do you think she has prepared her readers well for this question? What do you think of the direct way she asks this question?
But can those effects really “liberate women” and help “large population groups . . . break out of poverty” as the Nobel Prize committee suggested? Many do not think so, given the evidence.
Evidence:
In this one long paragraph, Riley offers all the evidence she has for showing that there are problems with microloans. Do you think she has offered sufficient evidence from the right sources? How else might she have offered this evidence?
For example, in terms of poverty, the writer of the paper for the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, quoted above, says, immediately after the passage I summarized, that most studies of microcredit programs “find very small increases in income for quite large numbers of borrowers; in only a very small number of cases are there significant income increases” (Mayoux 39). In addition, studies also find that microcredit benefits women who are not at the lowest levels of poverty; the poorest of the poor may, in fact, get poorer trying to repay (MacIsaac 11-12; Mayoux 40-44). The benefits from microcredit also don’t last long because borrowers often can’t use loans for anything but immediate need (MacIsaac 15; Mayoux 41) or the borrowers take up work where they make only a little bit of money and where they gain no economic clout (Feiner and Barker; Roy). Under such conditions, women’s positions within the overall economy do not change, meaning that their communities are unlikely to “break out of poverty.” Even though microcredit has been in existence for over twenty years, Robert Pollin, co-director of the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts, pointed out in 2006 that “Bangladesh and Bolivia are two countries widely recognized for having the most successful microcredit programs in the world. They also remain two of the poorest countries in the world” (qtd. in Cockburn 9). And what of women being liberated by microcredit? Using the loan often adds to, rather than changes, women’s daily work: When women use their loans to make and sell food or other items, it is on top of running their households and taking care of their children, and sometimes they have to pull their children out of school to work in order to repay loans (Cheston 25; MacIsaac 13). And rather than learning about money use themselves, a significant number of women give their loans to male relatives because in their communities, men are supposed make economic decisions (Cowen; MacIsaac 13; Mayoux 25). For the same reasons, when women do use their loans, it can lead to both verbal and physical violence against them from their families (MacIsaac 22; Mayoux 24; Rahman, slides 23-24).
Structure of Argument:
In this sentence, Riley summarizes the evidence she offered in the preceding paragraph. Do you think she has offered enough evidence (and evidence of the right kind) to persuade her readers that “the evidence does not support the grand hopes for microloans that many hold”?
There is no question that microloans have helped some women, as all the anecdotes on all the organizational websites and in many writings show—but the evidence does not support the grand hopes for microloans that many hold.
Examples:
How does her use of this quotation—with its examples of Bangladesh and Bolivia—help Riley make her points?
“Bangladesh and Bolivia are two countries widely recognized for having the most successful microcredit programs in the world. They also remain two of the poorest countries in the world”
Examples:
Why do you think Riley has organized this set of examples in the order that she has?
When women use their loans to make and sell food or other items, it is on top of running their households and taking care of their children, and sometimes they have to pull their children out of school to work in order to repay loans (Cheston 25; MacIsaac 13). And rather than learning about money use themselves, a significant number of women give their loans to male relatives because in their communities, men are supposed make economic decisions (Cowen; MacIsaac 13; Mayoux 25). For the same reasons, when women do use their loans, it can lead to both verbal and physical violence against them from their families (MacIsaac 22; Mayoux 24; Rahman, slides 23-24).
Structure of Argument:
Finally, Riley offers evidence of what more can be done to help the women who receive microloans. Has she provided enough evidence to persuade readers that women who receive microloans need more support than they currently receive?
These studies acknowledge the problems I’ve noted about microloans, and, in response, acknowledge that women have to be given support in addition to loans. When women take part in regular support groups where they talk about how to use money and make economic decisions—and where they can talk about family and social circumstances— they gain both knowledge and confidence; they learn they have support for making decisions about money. In addition, when they are given information about economics and building businesses, and when they are provided mentoring, they are in a better position to understand possibilities for and consequences of their decisions.
Conclusion:
In this conclusion, Riley summarizes her main points. Do you think this is an appropriate conclusion for her paper? If you think her conclusion could be more effective, what recommendations would you make?
As I have described, there has been much good that has come from microcredit. But if we truly do want to end poverty, we cannot just give loans to women. We must also help women learn how to operate within the larger economy, help them make their own decisions, and give them resources for dealing with the familial and community structures that stand in the way of their confidence and abilities.
Works Cited
Bajaj, Vikas. “Out to Maximize Social Gains, Not Profit.” New York Times. New York Times, 9 Dec. 2006. Web. 22 Nov. 2007. Burjorjee, Deena M., Rani Deshpande, and C. Jean Weidemann. Supporting Women’s Livelihoods: Microfinance That Works for the Majority: A Guide to Best Practices. New York: United Nations Capital Development Fund/Special Unit for Microfinance, 2002. Print. “Change for the Better in Afghanistan.” FINCA. FINCA International, July 2007. Web. 20 Nov. 2007. Cheston, Susy. “Women and Microfinance: Opening Markets and Minds.” Economic Perspectives: An Electronic Journal of the U.S. Department of State 9.1 (2004): 23-26. Web. 19 Nov. 2007. Cockburn, Alexander. “The Myth of Microloans.” Nation 6 Nov. 2006: 9. Print. Cowen, Tyler. “Microloans May Work, but There Is Dispute in India over Who Will Make Them.” New York Times. New York Times, 10 Aug. 2006. Web. 19 Nov. 2007. Feiner, Susan F., and Drucilla K. Barker. “Microcredit and Women’s Poverty.” Dollars and Sense Nov.-Dec. 2006: 10-11. Print. Freid, Joseph P. “From a Small Loan, a Jewelry Business Grows.” New York Times. New York Times, 12 Nov. 2006. Web. 19 Nov. 2007. “Frequently Asked Questions.” FINCA. FINCA International, n.d. Web. 20 Nov. 2007. Giridharadas, Anand, and Keith Bradsher. “Microloan Pioneer and His Bank Win Nobel Peace Prize.” New York Times. New York Times, 13 Oct. 2006. Web. 19 Nov. 2007. “Improving Lives: Miriam Carolina Mejía, Juticalpa, Honduras.” Global Partnerships. Global Partnerships, 2007. Web. 21 Nov. 2007. Kelly, Sean. “Banking on Women: Microcredit in Northern Ghana.” Natural Life May-June 2007: 34-35. Print. Kristof, Nicholas D. “You, Too, Can Be a Banker to the Poor.” New York Times. New York Times, 27 Mar. 2007. Web. 21 Nov. 2007.Works Cited
MacIsaac, Norman. “The Role of Microcredit in Poverty Reduction and Promoting Gender Equity: A Discussion Paper.” Canadian International Development Agency. Strategic Policy and Planning Division, Asia Branch Canadian International Development Agency, 12 June 1997. Web. 18 Nov. 2007. Mayoux, Linda. “From Vicious to Virtuous Circles? Gender and Micro-Enterprise Development.” United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, 1995. Web. 18 Nov. 2007. “Microenterpise Quick Facts.” Economic Perspectives: An Electronic Journal of the U.S. Department of State 9.1 (2004): n. pag. Web. 16 Nov. 2007. “Microloans and Literacy Are Contributing to Food Security in Poor Upper Guinea.” USAID Africa Success Stories. USAID, 2005. Web. 24 Nov. 2007. Norwegian Nobel Committee. Nobel Peace Prize for 2006. Oslo: Norwegian Nobel Institute, 13 Oct. Norwegian Nobel Committee. Web. 22 Nov. 2007. Rahman, Aminur. “Microfinance and Gender-Based Violence: Experience from the Grameen Bank Lending.” Slide program. Canadian International Development Agency. Canadian International Development Agency, 9 Nov. 2004. Web. 24 Nov. 2007. Roy, Ananya. “Against the Feminization of Policy.” Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Nov. 2002. Web. 23 Nov. 2007. Smith, Christopher H. “Microcredit Loans Are Critical Tools for Helping the World’s Poor.” Economic Perspectives: An Electronic Journal of the U.S. Department of State 9.1 (2004): n. pag. Web. 17 Nov. 2007. Temes, Peter. “Bridgeport v. Bangladesh.” New York Times. New York Times, 1 July 2007. Web. 20 Nov. 2007.Documentation Sample Papers APA
Style:
Compare this final version of Tyler’s paper to his original draft (in the Peer Response or Revision modules); you can see how Tyler has put this paper into formal APA style, with a cover page and running heads.
Electronic Voting Only Sounds Like a Good Idea
Tyler Hunt
Utah State University
November 5, 2013
Introduction:
Tyler starts with a quotation that he hopes will pull in readers. What values and concerns does this opening show that Tyler hopes his readers will have in mind at the very beginning of his paper? What does a reader have to know about Josef Stalin for this opening to work?
After having written about the importance of fair votes, Tyler describes how states are using electronic voting machines and that these machines might not be trustworthy. How would you describe his tone here, and do you think that tone will help readers share his concern? How helpful to readers do you think it is that Tyler ends his introduction by so directly naming his three main points?
“It’s not the people who vote that count. It’s the people who count the votes.” That statement may seem Machiavellian or just plain pessimistic, but consider its source: Josef Stalin. The Soviet Union’s former dictator realized the power of elections to give a regime at least a veneer of legitimacy—and so his words remind us how important it is for voters to trust that elections are fair and that votes are accurately counted.
After the problems with manual vote counting in Florida in the 2002 presidential election, many states moved to electronic voting machines. In this paper, I hope to show how, unfortunately, the current use of electronic voting machines in U. S. elections threatens voting accuracy. Much of the praise of electronic machines, also called direct recording machines, hinges on their ease of use and their ability to make the entire voting process, from registration to counting, efficient. Technically, electronic voting includes any electronic means of casting a vote in a referendum or an election, including the use of the Internet. Because using the Internet to vote is almost universally seen as unsafe and riddled with possible points of attack or fraud, I focus here on direct-recording electronic voting machines, or DRE voting. I hope to show that voters should currently resist DRE voting machines for three reasons: first, the machines do not yet function solidly enough; second, they are vulnerable to manipulation; third, they do not yet give voters a record of their votes.
Transitions:
Notice how Tyler has called back to his first paragraph by repeating “vote” and “counting”—and by again tying them to possible problems. How does such repetition help readers uderstand what Tyler is focusing on in this paper?
problems with manual vote counting
Transitions:
The preceding paragraph ended with Tyler promising readers that he would offer three reasons why voters shouldn’t trust electronic voting machines. Tyler transitions to this paragraph by repeating the first point from above. How does this kind of repetition help readers follow Tyler’s writing?
My first point
Style:
ENGAGEMENT: How does the tone of Tyler’s title set a reader’s expectations for the overall style of Tyler’s paper?
Electronic Voting Only Sounds Like a Good Idea
Style:
ENGAGEMENT: Are these opening sentences very formal or somewhat relaxed? (What about the sentences and their structures encourage you to say what you do?) How do you think the style of these opening sentences prepares readers to read? What attitude toward the author do they encourage?
That statement may seem Machiavellian or just plain pessimistic, but consider its source: Josef Stalin. The Soviet Union’s former dictator realized the power of elections to give a regime at least a veneer of legitimacy—and so his words remind us how important it is for voters to trust that elections are fair and that votes are accurately counted.
Style:
CLARITY: In this sentence, Tyler uses the first person pronoun, “I.” Do you think readers will find this too informal, or does this choice instead encourage readers to trust the author as a thoughtful writer? As you read the rest of Tyler’s paper, look to see how he presents himself: Do you think he estabilishes an effective balance of friendliness and authority?
In this paper, I hope to show how, unfortunately, the current use of electronic voting machines in U. S. elections threatens voting accuracy.
Style:
CLARITY and CONCISION: How do you think readers are likely to be helped by this sentence, in which Tyler foretells the structure of his paper?
I hope to show that voters should currently resist DRE voting machines for three reasons: first, the machines do not yet function solidly enough; second, they are vulnerable to manipulation; third, they do not yet give voters a record of their votes.
Style:
CLARITY: What sorts of sentences has Tyler chosen for giving this background information about Diebold machines? Do you think this is an effective choice for what these sentences need to accomplish for readers?
The Diebold company started producing safes in the 19th century, and in the 1970s started producing ATM machines. In 2002, the company acquired another company that produced touch-screen voting machines, and so Diebold entered the DRE voting arena. Diebold voting machines are now the most widely used—and were also the most widely criticized in the 2004 elections in several states.
Structure of argument:
Tyler gives sign posts to his readers here, letting them know that he will argue that there are three main reasons they should not trust current electronic voting machines. As a reader, do you find this helpful? Does this structure help Tyler make his arguments clear to you? Does he hold onto that structure?
I hope to show that voters should currently resist DRE voting machines for three reasons: first, the machines do not yet function solidly enough; second, they are vulnerable to manipulation; third, they do not yet give voters a record of their votes.
Structure of argument:
Note here how Tyler creates coherence for his readers by starting this paragraph with “My first point…” He is referring back to the list in his last sentence of the previous paragraph. When he tells you that this is his “first point,” how does that help you understand and hold onto his arguments?
My first point is that the machines do not yet function solidly enough.
Use of examples:
Imagine that Tyler did not start his paper with this example from Stalin. Imagine that he had instead started his paper by simply reminding readers “how important it is for voters to trust that elections are fair and that votes are accurately counted.” How differently are readers likely to respond to this other possible opening?
“It’s not the people who vote that count. It’s the people who count the votes.” That statement may seem Machiavellian or just plain pessimistic, but consider its source: Josef Stalin.
Use of examples:
Tyler starts his second paragraph with the example of the 2002 elections in Florida. Why might he have started with this particular example?
After the problems with manual vote counting in Florida in the 2002 presidential election,
This sums up what has flawed most electronic voting machine production: a desire for efficiency outpacing security concerns. In their haste to get machines to market—and without extensive testing—companies have produced flawed machines. In March 2008, for example, Ohio carried out the "Evaluation & Validation of Election-Related Equipment, Standards & Testing" (or EVEREST) process, “in which ‘critical security failures’ were found in every system tested by several teams of both corporate and academic computer scientists and security experts” (Friedman, 2008, para. 3); the testing found that some machines made by a subsidiary of Diebold could not keep accurate vote counts. In fall 2012, voters using electronic touch screen machines in North Carolina noticed that their votes were switched to the other candidate; an election official said “it's not a conspiracy, it's just a machine that needs to be corrected” (Clayton, 2012, para. 21).First get into a business you don't understand, selling to customers who barelyunderstand it either. Then roll out your product without adequate testing. Don't hireenough skilled people. When people notice problems, deny, obfuscate and ignore.Finally, blame your critics when it all blows up in your face. (Gimbel, 2006)
This sums up what has flawed most electronic voting machine production: a desire for efficiency outpacing security concerns. In their haste to get machines to market—and without extensive testing—companies have produced flawed machines. In March 2008, for example, Ohio carried out the "Evaluation & Validation of Election-Related Equipment, Standards & Testing" (or EVEREST) process, “in which ‘critical security failures’ were found in every system tested by several teams of both corporate and academic computer scientists and security experts” (Friedman, 2008, para. 3); the testing found that some machines made by a subsidiary of Diebold could not keep accurate vote counts. In fall 2012, voters using electronic touch screen machines in North Carolina noticed that their votes were switched to the other candidate; an election official said “it's not a conspiracy, it's just a machine that needs to be corrected” (Clayton, 2012, para. 21).First get into a business you don't understand, selling to customers who barelyunderstand it either. Then roll out your product without adequate testing. Don't hireenough skilled people. When people notice problems, deny, obfuscate and ignore.Finally, blame your critics when it all blows up in your face. (Gimbel, 2006)
Transitions:
To begin this new paragraph, Tyler gives a quick summary of the preceding paragraph and then asks a question that shows how the new paragraph’s topic grows out of the preceding paragraph. Do you think readers will be able to follow this transition? If you think such a transition strategy is effective, how might you use it in your own writing?
The problems I just noted result from how the machines work in and of themselves— what happens if someone wants to make intentional changes in how the machines count votes?
Style:
EMPHASIS: The quotation Tyler has chosen to use has a strong—and negative—judgmental tone. How well do you think this tone works to help Tyler make his argument?
First get into a business you don't understand, selling to customers who barely understand it either. Then roll out your product without adequate testing. Don't hire enough skilled people. When people notice problems, deny, obfuscate and ignore. Finally, blame your critics when it all blows up in your face. (Gimbel, 2006)
Style:
EMPHASIS: In these sentences Tyler continues the judgmental tone of the quotation above. How do you think Tyler’s readers are likely to respond to this tone, when it’s in his own words (and not a quotation)?
This sums up what has flawed most electronic voting machine production: a desire for efficiency outpacing security concerns. In their haste to get machines to market—and without extensive testing—companies have produced flawed machines.
Style:
COHERENCE: Notice how Tyler repeats important words from the end of one paragraph in the opening and following sentences of the next paragraph. How do such choices help readers follow Tyler’s arguments?
it's just a machine that needs to be corrected” (Clayton, 2012, para. 21).
The problems I just noted result from how the machines work in and of themselves—
This sums up what has flawed most electronic voting machine production: a desire for efficiency outpacing security concerns. In their haste to get machines to market—and without extensive testing—companies have produced flawed machines. In March 2008, for example, Ohio carried out the "Evaluation & Validation of Election-Related Equipment, Standards & Testing" (or EVEREST) process, “in which ‘critical security failures’ were found in every system tested by several teams of both corporate and academic computer scientists and security experts” (Friedman, 2008, para. 3); the testing found that some machines made by a subsidiary of Diebold could not keep accurate vote counts. In fall 2012, voters using electronic touch screen machines in North Carolina noticed that their votes were switched to the other candidate; an election official said “it's not a conspiracy, it's just a machine that needs to be corrected” (Clayton, 2012, para. 21).First get into a business you don't understand, selling to customers who barelyunderstand it either. Then roll out your product without adequate testing. Don't hireenough skilled people. When people notice problems, deny, obfuscate and ignore.Finally, blame your critics when it all blows up in your face. (Gimbel, 2006)
Structure of argument:
Here Tyler reminds us that he is laying out three main problems for us, and that he is now describing the second problem. How well are you following his points in the paper? Were you waiting for him to tell you his second point? Do you think he took too long to get to this point?
A team of professors from Princeton University demonstrated how easy it would be for someone to manipulate the Diebold code, making my second point about how vulnerable the machines are to being manipulated.
This sums up what has flawed most electronic voting machine production: a desire for efficiency outpacing security concerns. In their haste to get machines to market—and withoutFirst get into a business you don't understand, selling to customers who barelyunderstand it either. Then roll out your product without adequate testing. Don't hireenough skilled people. When people notice problems, deny, obfuscate and ignore.Finally, blame your critics when it all blows up in your face. (Gimbel, 2006)
Use of examples:
In this paragraph Tyler uses two examples, one from 2008 and one from 2012. How effective would this paragraph be if Tyler had used only the first example? Why?
In March 2008, for example, Ohio carried out the "Evaluation & Validation of Election-Related Equipment, Standards & Testing" (or EVEREST) process, “in which ‘critical security failures’ were found in every system tested by several teams of both corporate and academic computer scientists and security experts” (Friedman, 2008, para. 3); the testing found that some machines made by a subsidiary of Diebold could not keep accurate vote counts. In fall 2012, voters using electronic touch screen machines in North Carolina noticed that their votes were switched to the other candidate; an election official said “it's not a conspiracy, it's just a machine that needs to be corrected” (Clayton, 2012, para. 21).
Use of evidence:
Tyler uses this quotation from Gimbel about Diebold to try to demonstrate that the Deibold company has not done a good job in developing voting machines and that other companies have followed this model. Do you think the quotation from Gimbel is persuasive in the ways Tyler seems to hope it will be? Why? What other sorts of evidence might be more effective here?
One author describes what has happened with Diebold as a “five-step plan guaranteed to make an obscure company absolutely notorious”:
First get into a business you don't understand, selling to customers who barely understand it either. Then roll out your product without adequate testing. Don't hire enough skilled people. When people notice problems, deny, obfuscate and ignore. Finally, blame your critics when it all blows up in your face. (Gimbel, 2006)
This sums up what has flawed most electronic voting machine production: a desire for efficiency outpacing security concerns. In their haste to get machines to market—and without
Use of evidence:
Tyler offers evidence from two sources to suggest that electronic voting machines in general are not trustworthy. Is this enough—or the right—evidence to persuade readers to be uneasy about voting machines? Why?
In March 2008, for example, Ohio carried out the "Evaluation & Validation of Election-Related Equipment, Standards & Testing" (or EVEREST) process, “in which ‘critical security failures’ were found in every system tested by several teams of both corporate and academic computer scientists and security experts” (Friedman, 2008, para. 3); the testing found that some machines made by a subsidiary of Diebold could not keep accurate vote counts. In fall 2012, voters using electronic touch screen machines in North Carolina noticed that their votes were switched to the other candidate; an election official said “it's not a conspiracy, it's just a machine that needs to be corrected” (Clayton, 2012, para. 21).
Use of evidence:
Tyler offers two pieces of evidence here, both involving teams of computer scientists. Do you think Tyler’s readers are likely to take this evidence seriously? Why?
A team of professors from Princeton University demonstrated how easy it would be for someone to manipulate the Diebold code, making my second point about how vulnerable the machines are to being manipulated. The professors were able to open a Diebold machine and install a virus, all in under two minutes—which is all the time someone might normally take in a voting booth. The professors’ virus could influence election results however they wanted; it could spread to other machines that shared cards with the infected machine, and it could eventually delete itself so as to be undetected. (The professors posted a video of their work online, and a complete description of their methods appears on the Princeton University Web site [Feldman, 2006].) Later, in 2012, a different team of computer scientists from the University of Connecticut described how they were able to “attack” a more recent version of the Diebold machines: using “precisely the same information and access to the system that is normally available to, for example, election administrators (supervisors, poll workers and other officials)” (Davtyan, Kiayias, Michel, Russell, & Shvartsman, 1490), they swapped votes for candidates in “only a few minutes” without leaving any evidence that the machines were doing anything but “functioning normally for all operations during the election” (Davtyan et. al., 1492).
Transitions:
With these words, Tyler is able to help readers in at least two ways.
One, with “frightening,” Tyler sums up the emotional response he believes readers should have to what he described in the preceding paragraph.
Two, with “Perhaps even more frightening,” he helps readers understand that what he is about to describe connects to what he just described.
How do you think Tyler’s intended readers are likely to respond to “Perhaps even mor frightening…”?
Perhaps even more frightening
Transitions:
Given how Tyler has structured this paragraph’s opening sentence, do you think readers will be able to follow how this paragraph builds from what preceded it? Do you think readers will be able to follow the addition of these new ideas to Tyler’s overall argument?
According to some scientists, including Professor Aviel Rubin (2006) of John Hopkins University, most of the problems with electronic voting could be avoided by providing a separately printed and counted paper record of each voter's decisions.
Style:
EMPHASIS: Tyler has chosen here to use quotations from others to help him make his points. How effective do you think this is, given Tyler’s purposes and audience? (Also note Tyler’s use of APA style.)
using “precisely the same information and access to the system that is normally available to, for example, election administrators (supervisors, poll workers and other officials)” (Davtyan, Kiayias, Michel, Russell, & Shvartsman, 1490), they swapped votes for candidates in “only a few minutes” without leaving any evidence that the machines were doing anything but “functioning normally for all operations during the election” (Davtyan et. al., 1492).
Style:
EMPHASIS: How does the use of a shorter paragraph here possibly shape how Tyler’s readers pay attention?
Perhaps even more frightening is the possibility that someone involved in the design, manufacturing, or distribution of voting machines could manipulate the software before the machines even go to states. Vote fraud could be perpetuated on a large scale, potentially in all states that use the new technology.
Style:
CLARITY and CONCISION: How useful to readers is information like that contained in this phrase? What sorts of authority does such a clear and concise statement add to Tyler’s writing?
Professor Aviel Rubin (2006) of John Hopkins University
Style:
CLARITY and COHERENCE: How (do?) such informative and to-the-point statements—reminding readers where they are in Tyler’s argument—help readers follow his argument?
This is my third point about the problems with these machines
Structure of argument:
Tyler now offers his third main point. Have you followed his writing so far? Can you repeat his main points? Why or why not? (Should you be able to?)
This is my third point about the problems with these machines: currently a voter has no way to verify his or her vote beyond trusting the machine into which the vote has been entered.
Use of examples:
In this paragraph, like the preceding paragraph, Tyler gives two examples, one from 2006 and one from 2012. How effective would this paragraph be if Tyler had used only the first example? Why?
(The professors posted a video of their work online, and a complete description of their methods appears on the Princeton University Web site [Feldman, 2006].)
Use of examples:
In this passage Tyler describes what COULD be done, but provides no examples of how using a paper record could prevent fraud. Do you think Tyler’s argument would be stronger if he had provided such a specific example? Why?
According to some scientists, including Professor Aviel Rubin (2006) of John Hopkins University, most of the problems with electronic voting could be avoided by providing a separately printed and counted paper record of each voter's decisions.
Use of evidence:
In suggesting that someone could consciously try to manipulate voting machines, Tyler offers no evidence. Do you think he should offer evidence here? Why?
Perhaps even more frightening is the possibility that someone involved in the design, manufacturing, or distribution of voting machines could manipulate the software before the machines even go to states.
Transitions:
Notice how Tyler repeats the phrase “paper trail” in order to carry over the ideas from the preceding paragraph into this new paragraph; he is in this paragraph addressing objections to what he offered in the preceding paragraph. Do you think Tyler’s intended audience will be able to follow this transition?
Those who argue against voter-verified paper trails cite the increased cost and effort necessary to organize an election process in which electronic voting machines must be procured and maintained and, at the same time, paper ballots must be handled carefully and separately.
Style:
EMPHASIS: How does a sentence like this—which sums up the preceding paragraph—help readers?
An independent paper trail that each voter could use to verify the result would go a long way toward reducing the possibility of election machine fraud.
Style:
EMPHASIS and ENGAGEMENT: Tyler could have written this as declarative rather than interrogative sentence. How are readers likely to respond to the two different kinds of sentences here at the end of this paragraph?
Critics of implementing paper trails ask, if a machine has been tampered with so that it does not accurately record a voter's intention despite informing the voter that it has done do, what is to stop it from voiding a correct paper ballot as soon as the voter leaves the booth and printing out a new one with doctored results (ProCon.org, 2007)?
Style:
CLARITY and CONCISION: How would you characterize the tone of these sentences? Does Tyler use the same tone through most of his paper? How might this tone affect how readers read and respond?
Perhaps the most reliable method of eliminating the problem of accuracy would be to have each voter check the paper copy of his or her vote and then place it in a receptacle where all votes will be stored and later tabulated if necessary. In this way the voter will know that the record is separate from the machine, and the only way to tamper with the paper records will be by human intervention—which is a problem in any system. As for the problem of cost and additional work, the critics have a valid point. The paper trail will increase costs and make the entire process a little more complicated and time consuming.
Style:
EMPHASIS and ENGAGEMENT: Here is another paragraph that Tyler has ended with questions rather than statements. Why might he use this strategy more at the end of his paper?
Do we want to pay a bit more for a safe and secure vote? Can we put a price on reliable democratic process?
Use of evidence:
Tyler paraphrases the ProCon.org source here instead of using a quotation. Why might he have done this? Do you think this is an effective paraphrase? Why?
Critics of implementing paper trails ask, if a machine has been tampered, with so that it does not accurately record a voter's intention despite informing the voter that it has done do, what is to stop it from voiding a correct paper ballot as soon as the voter leaves the booth and printing out a new one with doctored results (ProCon.org, 2007)?
Conclusion:
These questions are part of a paragraph in which Tyler is still developing his arguments; nonetheless, they echo the concern with which he opens his paper—and so they help Tyler remind readers of that big concern. How do you think readers will respond to these questions? How might this ending be different if Tyler had directly stated his concern rather than ask questions?
Do we want to pay a bit more for a safe and secure vote? Can we put a price on reliable democratic process?
Style:
EMPHASIS: Back on the first page of Tyler's paper we noted that he was using the first person “I”; how often has he used “I” between there and this final paragraph? How might his choices of when to use “I” in this paper shape how readers read? How might his NOT using “I” in the majority of the writing shape how readers respond?
I hope I have demonstrated that current electronic voting machines should not be trusted with our votes until the machines are designed to be more trustworthy, cannot be so easily hacked, and provide voters with a physical record of their vote.
Structure of argument:
Here Tyler repeats his main points. Do you think this is useful for a reader? Why—or why not?
I hope I have demonstrated that current electronic voting machines should not be trusted with our votes until the machines are designed to be more trustworthy, cannot be so easily hacked, and provide voters with a physical record of their vote.
Conclusion:
Tyler’s final paragraph offers only one sentence. In this sentence, Tyler straightforwardly summarizes his main points. Do you think such a summary is appropriate for Tyler’s paper? What other sorts of conclusions might Tyler have offered?
I hope I have demonstrated that current electronic voting machines should not be trusted with our votes until the machines are designed to be more trustworthy, cannot be so easily hacked, and provide voters with a physical record of their vote.
References
Clayton, M. (2012, October 26). Could e-voting machines in election 2012 be hacked? Yes. Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved from http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/2012/1026/Could-e-voting-machines-in-Election-2012-be-hacked-Yes Davtyan, S., Kiayias, A., Michel, L., Russell, A., & Shvartsman, A. A. (2012). Integrity of electronic voting systems: Fallacious use of crytography. Applied Computing: Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium 25–29 March 2012 (pp.1486-1493). Riva del Garda, Italy. Feldman, A. (2006, September 13). Security analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS voting machine. Retrieved from http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/ Friedman, B. (2008, October 8). Q&A: E-voting security results 'awful,' says Ohio secretary of state. Computerworld. Retrieved from http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9116465/Q_A_E_voting_security_results_awful_says_Ohio_secretary_of_state Gimbel, B. (2006, November 3). Rage against the machine. CNNMoney. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006/ 11/13/8393084/index.htm ProCon.org. (2007). Do electronic voting machines improve the voting process? Retrieved from http://www.votingmachinesprocon.org Rubin, A. D. (2006). Brave new ballot: Battle to safeguard democracy in the age of electronic voting. New York: Morgan Road.References
Use of evidence:
Do you think Tyler’s readers will believe that he has found enough—and the right—sources to make the arguments he does in this paper? If you were to recommend other kinds of sources to Tyler, what might you recommend?
Clayton, M. (2012, October 26). Could e-voting machines in election 2012 be hacked? Yes. Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved from http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/2012/1026/Could-e-voting-machines-in-Election-2012-be-hacked-Yes Davtyan, S., Kiayias, A., Michel, L., Russell, A., & Shvartsman, A. A. (2012). Integrity of electronic voting systems: Fallacious use of crytography. Applied Computing: Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium 25–29 March 2012 (pp.1486-1493). Riva del Garda, Italy. Feldman, A. (2006, September 13). Security analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS voting machine. Retrieved from http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/ Friedman, B. (2008, October 8). Q&A: E-voting security results 'awful,' says Ohio secretary of state. Computerworld. Retrieved from http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9116465/Q_A_E_voting_security_results_awful_says_Ohio_secretary_of_state Gimbel, B. (2006, November 3). Rage against the machine. CNNMoney. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006/ 11/13/8393084/index.htm ProCon.org. (2007). Do electronic voting machines improve the voting process? Retrieved from http://www.votingmachinesprocon.org Rubin, A. D. (2006). Brave new ballot: Battle to safeguard democracy in the age of electronic voting. New York: Morgan Road.
Documentation Sample Papers MLA
Introduction:
Harley starts with an example from personal experience—but it‘s an experience she believes many in her audience share. (Notice how she uses a question that encourages her audience to think of similar experiences.)
In the final paragraph of her introduction, she makes her argument general instead of personal by making a connection—sentence by sentence—from family dinners and politics to our abilities to talk with each other as citizens. How would you describe her tone in this introduction? How does it address readers and pull them in?
My father can roast a chicken so perfectly is looks like a magazine ad. Every Sunday when he carries that to the table I picture us having a dinner like those in the old happy family movies my granddad watches on TCM. But our dinners always turn out awful. Everyone ends up screaming at each other about healthcare or unions. My stomach is in knots. I don't know why we keep doing this.
Are your family dinners like this, too?
For this paper I researched families and political arguments. I discovered that what happens at our table is a sign of something larger. many families have trouble with controversial topics, but so do we as a country. From my research I came to the conclusion, for now, that being able to talk about controversial topics-which requires being civil to each other-is necessary for having a democracy and its freedoms. I also learned from my research, however, that (as I will argue) civility isn't enough.
Transitions:
After ending her introduction with the statement that “civility isn’t enough,” Harley repeats “civility” at the beginning of the next paragraph: This shows readers how she is staying with the topic even as she now starts to explore it in more depth.
civility isn't enough.
In a book on the history of the idea of civility,
Style:
ENGAGEMENT. Harley opens her paper with an example she hopes will engage her readers so that they care about her topic.
My father can roast a chicken so perfectly is looks like a magazine ad. Every Sunday when he carries that to the table I picture us having a dinner like those in the old happy family movies my granddad watches on TCM. But our dinners always turn out awful. Everyone ends up screaming at each other about healthcare or unions. My stomach is in knots. I don't know why we keep doing this.
Style:
EMPHASIS. By setting this short sentence off by itself and asking it as a question, Harley hopes to get readers personally engaged with her argument.
Are your family dinners like this, too?
Structure of argument:
Here is Harley’s first step in her argument. She introduces her audience to her topic—civility in national discussions—at the same time she suggests her position on that topic, that civility is not enough.
For this paper I researched families and political arguments. I discovered that what happens at our table is a sign of something larger. many families have trouble with controversial topics, but so do we as a country. From my research I came to the conclusion, for now, that being able to talk about controversial topics-which requires being civil to each other-is necessary for having a democracy and its freedoms. I also learned from my research, however, that (as I will argue) civility isn't enough.
Structure of argument:
Harley’s next step is to give her readers a little background in the history of “civility”—but notice that she shapes this history to start showing her readers how civility and democracy connect.
Davetian writes about civility in its development as a concept in Europe starting approximately 800 years ago. He shows how the spread of civility helped societies move away from individuals believing that violence should be solve all problems; instead, the rise of belief in civility as a virtue parallels the rise of more democratic (and peaceful) forms of government.
Use of examples:
Harley starts her paper with an example, one grounded in personal experience. Do you think she has kept this example general enough to pull in her readers—or do you think it is too specific for readers to be able to connect?
My father can roast a chicken so perfectly is looks like a magazine ad. Every Sunday when he carries that to the table I picture us having a dinner like those in the old happy family movies my granddad watches on TCM. But our dinners always turn out awful. Everyone ends up screaming at each other about healthcare or unions. My stomach is in knots. I don't know why we keep doing this.
Are your family dinners like this, too?
Use of evidence:
Here is Harley’s first use of a source to offer evidence in support of her arguments. Has she introduced the source in a way likely to encourage readers to be persuaded by the evidence? Do you think Harley’s choice to quote the source rather than put it in her own words is appropriate?
sociology professor Benet Davetian writes that notions of civility were "born at a time when the Western would was overwhelmed by violence and in sore need of communal reconstruction and cooperative restraint" (8).
Transitions:
Notice that Harley carefully stays focused on “civility.” She lets readers know that she is now going to define “civility” (which she does by referencing the definition given by an academic source).
Davetian defines "civility"
Transitions:
This question helps Harley keep her readers focused on her argument as she builds it—but it also offers a transition. This question helps readers understand that Harley is moving from providing a definition to now thinking about why civility matters.
Why does showing such respect to others in discussions about difficult topics—being civil— matter in a democracy?
Transitions:
Notice again how Harley repeats a term from the end of one paragraph in the beginning of the next paragraph. This helps readers follow the ideas from one paragraph into the next.
democracies
Style:
CLARITY AND CONCISION. Harley concludes this paragraph with a complex sentence using subordination. This helps her convey the definition she wants with precision.
What all the definitions I read share is the importance of listening to others with respect, which means acting toward others’ words and ideas as though you trust them to have good reasons for their beliefs and opinions.
Style:
EMPHASIS AND CONCISION. Harley once again sets a questioning sentence off by itself so that it will stand out to readers and pull readers into thinking about the specific question she raises.
Why does showing such respect to others in discussions about difficult topics—being civil— matter in a democracy?
Structure of argument:
In this paragraph, Harley has moved from giving a history of “civility” to defining it. Notice how she draws on several different writers to define the term—but also notice how she ends with her own summary of what those writers said.
What all the definitions I read share is the importance of listening to others with respect, which means acting toward others’ words and ideas as though you trust them to have good reasons for their beliefs and opinions.
Use of examples:
Harley draws on one of her sources to provide this example of what it is to be civil. Does this example help her make the notion of civility more concrete and understandable to you?
“civil citizen exercises tolerance in the face of deep disagreement about the good. She respects the rights of others, refrains from violence, intimidation, harassment and coercion, does not show contempt for others’ life plans, and has a healthy respect for others’ privacy”
Use of evidence:
In between quoting two sources, Harley mentions that she has read other sources. Do you trust that those sources defined civility similarly—or would you rather Harley offered this evidence differently?
I found many other writers who defined civility similarly, with slightly different descriptions of the details.
Use of evidence:
This sentence may seem to you not to contain any evidence, but Harley is drawing on shared values here. If she is correct in assuming that her readers share these values concerning democracy, then she is using those shared values as evidence to move her argument forward.
We need to be informed voters and to let our representatives know where we stand on certain issues and why.
Use of evidence:
The evidence Harley offers in this paragraph depends on two writers who use analogies to make their arguments (one compares democracy to a marketplace; the other compares humans to individual neurons). Do these analogies help you better understand—and accept—why we should care about discussing difficult topics in a democracy?
Manuel Gómez, the former Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs at the University of California–Irvine, writes that our First Amendment—in which freedom of speech is protected for us—is based on “the concept of American democracy as a ‘marketplace of ideas,’ in which ideas compete for acceptance”; it depends on “the virtues of competition between, and the open interrogation of, ideas” (13). Psychologist Jonathan Haidt uses an analogy to describe why this matters when he compares each of us to a neuron:
incivility may be necessary to make a point effectively, to shake complacency, or to rouse“the people.” A burning flag, a well-aimed insult, a scream of protest may be just what thedoctor ordered to stir people to anger and awaken their consciences. As the Supreme Courthas said, our nation has made a “profound commitment to the principle that debate onpublic issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well includevehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks.”
Transitions:
Harley brings in a new perspective. With this sentence, she keeps readers with her by repeating the familiar “civility”—but now asks readers to consider when civility might not be appropriate.
Some of my sources pointed out that sometimes civility is inappropriate.
incivility may be necessary to make a point effectively, to shake complacency, or to rouse“the people.” A burning flag, a well-aimed insult, a scream of protest may be just what thedoctor ordered to stir people to anger and awaken their consciences. As the Supreme Courthas said, our nation has made a “profound commitment to the principle that debate onpublic issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well includevehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks.”
Style:
ACADEMIC SENTENCES. Notice that Harley has two simple sentences followed by a compound sentence. She is varying sentence patterns to keep readers engaged but also to help build from the simple to the more complicated in both structure and ideas.
Together—building upon a wide range of perspectives—we come up with the best solutions. This means that everyone needs to be able to participate. By being civil, we not only encourage everyone to participate; we ensure that the widest range of ideas can be considered and used to make the best decisions.
incivility may be necessary to make a point effectively, to shake complacency, or to rouse“the people.” A burning flag, a well-aimed insult, a scream of protest may be just what thedoctor ordered to stir people to anger and awaken their consciences. As the Supreme Courthas said, our nation has made a “profound commitment to the principle that debate onpublic issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well includevehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks.”
Structure of argument:
After having defined “civility,” Harley now again draws on several different writers to make the main point she wants in this paragraph. In this paragraph, she argues why being civil matters to democracies. (And notice how along the way she defined the kind of democracy we have in the United States.)
Together—building upon a wide range of perspectives—we come up with the best solutions. This means that everyone needs to be able to participate. By being civil, we not only encourage everyone to participate; we ensure that the widest range of ideas can be considered and used to make the best decisions.
incivility may be necessary to make a point effectively, to shake complacency, or to rouse“the people.” A burning flag, a well-aimed insult, a scream of protest may be just what thedoctor ordered to stir people to anger and awaken their consciences. As the Supreme Courthas said, our nation has made a “profound commitment to the principle that debate onpublic issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well includevehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks.”
Use of examples:
Here is another place where Harley draws on her sources to give an example. In this case, the example helps demonstrate when civility might not be appropriate. Has Harley used this example in a way that helps you better understand the objections to civility?
Law professor Geoffrey R. Stone, for example, writes that
incivility may be necessary to make a point effectively, to shake complacency, or to rouse “the people.” A burning flag, a well-aimed insult, a scream of protest may be just what the doctor ordered to stir people to anger and awaken their consciences. As the Supreme Court has said, our nation has made a “profound commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks.”
Use of evidence:
Harley uses a source to bring up objections to civility. Do you think Harley has used this source well? How has the way she has used this source’s evidence help her advance her argument?
Some of my sources pointed out that sometimes civility is inappropriate. Law professor Geoffrey R. Stone, for example, writes that
incivility may be necessary to make a point effectively, to shake complacency, or to rouse “the people.” A burning flag, a well-aimed insult, a scream of protest may be just what the doctor ordered to stir people to anger and awaken their consciences. As the Supreme Court has said, our nation has made a “profound commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks.”
I am inclined to weigh civility heavily in the scales because I find something odd, and oddlytroubling, about the great confidence one must have in one’s own judgment (and lack ofconfidence in others’) to be willing to be uncivil to others in the name of a higher moralcalling. (275)
I am inclined to weigh civility heavily in the scales because I find something odd, and oddlytroubling, about the great confidence one must have in one’s own judgment (and lack ofconfidence in others’) to be willing to be uncivil to others in the name of a higher moralcalling. (275)
Transitions:
This sentence concludes the paragraph by summarizing the main point Harley would like readers to take from it. But it also helps readers move into the next paragraph by indicating that Harley is now turning to address her overall question of whether civility is enough.
It is that question of one’s attitude towards one’s own ideas that leads me to question whether civility alone is enough as we seek for us all to be able to discuss difficult topics together.
Transitions:
Notice how, again, Harley helps readers transition from one paragraph to the next by repeating the terms that matter.
This concept is called “confirmation bias” or “selective exposure.”
“Confirmation bias” and “selective exposure” come from psychological research.
I am inclined to weigh civility heavily in the scales because I find something odd, and oddlytroubling, about the great confidence one must have in one’s own judgment (and lack ofconfidence in others’) to be willing to be uncivil to others in the name of a higher moralcalling. (275)
Style:
ACADEMIC SENTENCES. This is the longest sentence so far in Harley’s paper; it conveys a complicated logical “if-then” relationship. Notice that several other long sentences appear in the following paragraphs. Why might sentences of this length appear more toward the end of Harley’s paper and not at the beginning?
If the goal of civility is to support democracy and help us come to understand the broadest possible range of perspectives on difficult issues so that we can make the best decisions together as a country, the definitions and descriptions above show that we need to learn how to respect what other people believe, even if we disagree.
I am inclined to weigh civility heavily in the scales because I find something odd, and oddlytroubling, about the great confidence one must have in one’s own judgment (and lack ofconfidence in others’) to be willing to be uncivil to others in the name of a higher moralcalling. (275)
Structure of argument:
In this paragraph, Harley has raised (and addressed) objections other writers might have about civility. She uses their objections to help her move to the next step in her argument, questioning whether civility is enough.
It is that question of one’s attitude towards one’s own ideas that leads me to question whether civility alone is enough as we seek for us all to be able to discuss difficult topics together.
Structure of argument:
Harley uses this paragraph almost completely to help her readers make a transition to understanding why she thinks they need to learn about “confirmation bias.”
But the words I quoted above from Calhoun about confidence make me turn to some writing that came up almost by accident in my research, when I came across sections that described a psychological concept that should help us consider how much confidence we ought to have in our ideas when we talk with others. This concept is called “confirmation bias” or “selective exposure.”
I am inclined to weigh civility heavily in the scales because I find something odd, and oddlytroubling, about the great confidence one must have in one’s own judgment (and lack ofconfidence in others’) to be willing to be uncivil to others in the name of a higher moralcalling. (275)
Use of examples:
In this sentence Harley offers a quick example. She asks her readers to bring to mind family dinners, classes, television, and the internet in order to help them think about how we look when we listen. Do you think Harley has shaped this example well enough to move her argument forward at this point? Why or why not?
From what I’ve seen at our family dinner table— and in classrooms and on television and the Internet—this means really listening, and nodding, rather than telling others they don’t know what they’re talking about.
Transitions:
This sentence repeats terms from the preceding paragraph. At the same time, it tells readers that this new paragraph will discuss how cognitive bias affects thinking beyond politics.
Writers claim that cognitive bias affects all we believe, not just politics.
Transitions:
This transition sentence summarizes what Harley has discussed in the earlier sentences. It therefore helps Harley move readers into her final discussion.
What “confirmation bias” and “selective exposure” show us is that none of us is perfect.
Style:
SENTENCES THAT ARE EASY TO READ: Scan over these sentences, noting the verbs Harley uses: claim, is, go, turn up, demonstrate, prevents. Note that most of these are action verbs.
Writers claim that cognitive bias affects all we believe, not just politics. For example, three researchers in behavioral and political sciences from Stony Brook University claim that “cognitive biases influence a wide range of health-related attitudes, from broad, national decisions about health reform to individual decisions about caffeine consumption and smoking” (Strickland, Taber, and Lodge 1). For these writers, the result is that “Although fair-mindedness and objectivity are desirable qualities of thought, particularly for weighty issues such as gun control, health care reform, and affirmative action, evidence has shown that human information processing often does not operate in that manner” (6). In a different section, two of the writers I just cited also go on to note that “In the extreme, if one distorts new information so that it always supports [what one already believes], one cannot be rationally responsive to the environment; similarly, manipulating the information stream to avoid any threat to [what one already believes] is no more rational than the proverbial ostrich” (Tabor and Lodge 767). A quick library database search will turn up many similar sections describing experiments that demonstrate our confirmation bias and how this bias usually prevents us from truly having good reasons to believe what we do. (See, for example, Edwards and Smith; Balcetis & Dunning; or Nickerson).
Structure of argument:
In this paragraph, Harley has first used other writers to help her define “confirmation bias.” Once she has defined the term, she can then in this sentence point out why confirmation bias is a problem in discussions.
It sounds to me as though people who aren’t alert to consciously seeking a broad range of information will get caught in a vicious circle, only looking for and believing information that confirms what they already know.
Structure of argument:
In this paragraph, Harley expands the definition of confirmation bias, to show how it touches everything we believe.
For these writers, the result is that “Although fair-mindedness and objectivity are desirable qualities of thought, particularly for weighty issues such as gun control, health care reform, and affirmative action, evidence has shown that human information processing often does not operate in that manner” (6).
Structure of argument:
In this paragraph, Harley can now make her final point: Confirmation bias affects us all.
What “confirmation bias” and “selective exposure” show us is that none of us is perfect. Unless we have been very careful and purposefully sought out the broadest possible information on any topic (and paid it serious attention), our information will always be biased, narrow, and self-perpetuating.
Use of evidence:
In this paragraph—and throughout most of her paper—Harley is drawing on experts. Those experts are historians, philosophers, and psychologists, among others . Do you think Harley’s audience will be persuaded by the experts? Has Harley introduced the experts to her readers persuasively? (And how does Harley rely on her audience to check her sources in her works cited listing?)
(See, for example, Edwards and Smith; Balcetis & Dunning; or Nickerson).
Style:
EMPHASIS: In her conclusion (an appropriate place for bringing in more emotional ways of writing), Harley uses a form of parallelism when she repeats “we do need” three times. How might this repetition appeal to readers?
We do need to show others that we respect their opinions and beliefs, and we need to listen well.
Structure of argument:
Here is where Harley concludes her argument. Having defined civility, shown its place in democracies, and then questioned its limitations, she can use the notion of confirmation bias to claim that we need to be BOTH civil AND aware of our own biases if we are to have truly useful conversations with other citizens.
Bringing awareness of confirmation bias together with civility helps us be aware that our own ideas are rarely as well-informed as we think. If we are aware of that, then maybe we will listen more closely to others and really be able to figure out together how to solve our problems.
Conclusion:
In her conclusion, Harley repeats terms—civility, confirmation bias—she has defined earlier. She does not bring in new terms but instead summarizes her overall argument. Her final sentence is a call to people’s emotions to apply what she has argued in the paper. Do you think Harley could have been even more emotional in this conclusion? Do you have suggestions for how this conclusion might be even more moving and persuasive for her audience as they finish reading?
For the sake of dinner table conversations—and for all other conversations that involve difficult topics—we do need to be civil. We do need to show others that we respect their opinions and beliefs, and we need to listen well. But if that is all we do then we can still believe that our own ideas are better than anyone else’s. Bringing awareness of confirmation bias together with civility helps us be aware that our own ideas are rarely as well-informed as we think. If we are aware of that, then maybe we will listen more closely to others and really be able to figure out together how to solve our problems.
Works Cited
Balcetis, Emily and David Dunning. “See What You Want to See: Motivational Influences on Visual Perception.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 91.4 (2006). EBSCOHost. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. Calhoun, Cheshire. “The Virtue of Civility.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 29.3 (Summer, 2000): 251-75. JSTOR. Web. 14 Nov. 2012. Davetian, Benet. Civility: A Cultural History. Toronto: Toronto UP, 2009. Print. Edwards, Kari and Edward E. Smith. “A Disconfirmation Bias in the Evaluation of Arguments.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71. 1 (1996): 5-24. Westlaw. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. Ferree, Myra, William A. Gamson, Jürgen Gerhards, and Dieter Rucht. “Four Models of the Public Sphere in Modern Democracies.” Theory and Society 31 (2002): 289–324. JSTOR. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. Gómez, Manuel N. “Imagining the Future: Cultivating Civility in a Field of Discontent.” Change (March/April 2008). 11–17. Print. Haidt, Jonathan. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. New York: Pantheon, 2012. Kindle file. Nickerson, Raymond S. “Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises.” Review of General Psychology 2.2 (1998): 175-220. EBSCOHost. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. Schwind, Christina and Jürgen Buder, Ulrike Cress, Friedrich W. Hesse. “Preference-inconsistent recommendations: An effective approach for reducing confirmation bias and stimulating divergent thinking?” Computers & Education 58 (2012) 787–96. Elsevier. Web. 18 Nov. 2012.