Fluent Essays

Essay #2: A Deep Revision 5-6 pages, double-spaced We celebrate whistleblowers as heroes, and yet, we allow them to be treated in real-life as traitors. --Tom Mueller Links for paper: https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/edward-snowden-is-no-hero https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/what-police-departments-do-whistle-blowers/613687/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCJ1SBEMU1s Background: As Tom Mueller notes in his video Whistleblowing and Democracy, whistleblowing is a controversial topic that continues to be debated in America. On the one hand, advocates argue that whistleblowing is a noble act as a person exposes illegal or unethical activity or information about an organization. On the other hand, detractors attest that whistleblowing is a form of betrayal and synonymous with words like “rat,” “snitch,” or “traitor.” Over the next few weeks, we will explore specific instances of whistleblowing to learn more about its history in our country and see its impacts on people, organizations and society. In Essay #2, you will use this knowledge to build on your understanding of heroism and writing from the previous essay by weighing in on this debate. Task: For this assignment, you will answer the following question: Should whistleblowers be considered heroes or traitors? You goal is to inform your audience about whistleblowing and convince them of your argument’s validity. While you used description, reflection, and personal voice to discuss an experience in Essay #1, you will use critical reading strategies to analyze ideas about whistleblowing and incorporate evidence from one writer or speaker to support your argument in Essay #2. Your Essay Should: 1.Think about the rhetorical situation. A rhetorical situation is the circumstances that give writing meaning. Consider using the acronym GAP (genre, audience, and purpose) to think about rhetorical situation. Your genre is a college-level argumentative essay. What are the expectations of this genre? (e.g., addressing the counterpoints, calmer tone, citing evidence, use of logos, etc.) Your audience is an unknowing reader. You will need to provide context about the topic and the text you are citing. How will you define whistleblowing? What other information does your audience need to know about whistleblowing/whistleblowers? Your purpose is to have the reader recognize the validity of your argument about whistleblowing. 2.Introduce your topic and source. Since you cannot assume your audience has knowledge of your topic, you should define whistleblowing in your own words and briefly summarize the debate. When introducing a source, state the author’s first and last name and title, then explain its main point. For example, “In Whistleblowers and Democracy, Tom Mueller argues that whistleblowing is a fundamental principle to our democracy…” I recommend including this information in your introduction paragraph. 3.Present an argument. You should include a thesis statement that answers or relates to the question about whistleblowing. You may choose an argument that is straightforward (e.g., Whistleblowing is a heroic act because…) or nuanced (e.g., The ethics of whistleblowing is easier to enforce in the corporate sphere than in politics because…) As Steven D. Krause states, “A thesis advocates a specific and debatable position, is not a statement of fact nor a summary of events, and it answers the questions ‘what’s your point?’ and ‘why should I care?’” (143). You will experiment with thesis statement writing strategies in the Week 7 activity. 4.Support your argument. You should support your thesis statement with at least three reasons. You will also incorporate the voice of one writer or speaker by citing evidence from their work. Consider questions like: How does this reason support my argument that whistleblowers are _____? How does this writer or speaker’s point add to my argument? How can I refute this writer or speaker’s point to prove my argument? 5.Follow MLA guidelines. Any information that is summarized, paraphrased, or quoted requires an in-text MLA citation. We will discussion MLA citation in the Week 8 activity, but you can read about MLA guidelines for in-text citations and Works Cited entries at http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/01/. 6.Expand on your understanding of the course theme. Consider how the topic of whistleblowing and writing Essay #2 changes your understanding of heroism or being a bystander. This will be illustrated as you connect the topic of whistleblowing to concepts like heroism. However, you may want to conclude your essay by discussing this understanding more directly. Grading Criteria: A strong essay will… Address a specific audience, follow the conventions of the genre, and have a clear purpose Introduce the topic of whistleblowing and the source that will be consulted Include an engaging and thoughtful introduction and conclusion that move beyond rudimentary statements of argument and reiterations of main points Contain a clear, well-supported argument about your perspective or answers the question about whistleblowing. Progress logically and smoothly with appropriate transitions indicating connections between ideas Make appropriate use of sentence structure, word choice, grammar, spelling, and punctuation that enables rather than hinders clear and effective communication. Document and integrate source material correctly and effectively in the essay Show significant revision of ideas, language, and style from first to final draft Meet the minimum page requirement of 5 double-spaced pages Essay Format: double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font, standard 1-inch margins; your name, instructor’s name, the class (English 111), and the date should appear in the upper left corner of the first page; pages should be numbered. Example below: Name: Seyarra Beckles Professor Conroy ENG 111 October 19th, 2020   They Say, I Say: Responding to Authors In academic essays, you will often be required to include other opinions, views, or sources to enhance and further your argument. Last week, you learned about summarizing, paraphrasing, and quoting, which are three ways of incorporating another voice into your writing. Although identifying information that supports your claim tends to be easy, introducing the information clearly and convincingly can be challenging. You must also find a delicate balance between using outside voices (“They Say”) and your own (“I Say”). The inability to do so will result in two outcomes: your essay reading like a report or an opinion piece that doesn’t have much substance.  In this activity, you will practice using “They Say, I Say” statements to find a balance between incorporating information and opinion. Generally, a “They Say” statement should always be followed by an “I Say” statement. Although it seems straightforward, it can difficult to implement in one’s writing. As a result, templates can give a starting point to help you articulate your ideas. Since templates use generic phrases (e.g., On the one hand, __________. On the other hand, __________.) to provide an outline, it is not considered plagiarism because you are filling in the substance. However, you should alter the template’s phrasing and wording to fit your essay.    Part I: “They Say” – Introducing the Debate or Topic In an academic essay, you should always introduce the debate or topic early on—preferably in the introduction paragraph. Although your thesis statement will make an argument about one side of the debate, you should also outline the other side of the debate. By doing so, the reader learns about the essay’s focus, but also receives the necessary context about the debate and ideas that will be discussed in the body paragraphs. For example, imagine you were writing an essay about the greatest basketball player of all time (GOAT). If you only introduce and provide reasons why Michael Jordan is the GOAT, the reader will be left to assume a critic’s argument against this claim and the other players you are comparing Jordan to.  For Part I, fill in the blank spaces for  one  of the templates below to introduce the debate or topic of your essay. You may alter the wording of the template to fit the ideas in your essay. “Introducing the Debate” Templates: 1. On the one hand, supporters suggest __________. On the other hand, critics claim __________.  a. Tip # 1:  You should always use “On the one hand” before “On the other hand.” Logically, “On the other hand” depends on a preceding claim (and hand).  b. Tip # 2:  Instead of using generic words when referring to others (e.g., people – “some people argue __________, while other people believe __________”), ask yourself: Who am I referring to? Use the taxonomy technique from earlier in the semester to help you find specific words instead. Consider the following: academics, Americans, CEOs, critics, foreigners, naysayers, politicians, proponents, scholars, supporters, whistleblowers.  2. The standard way of thinking about whistleblowing is __________. However, the way whistleblowing should be thought about is __________. 3. In discussions about whistleblowing, one controversial issue has been __________. On the one hand, __________ argues __________. On the other hand, __________ contends __________. Others even maintain __________. My own view is __________.  Answer:  The standard way of thinking about whistleblowing is that they are traitors. However, the way whistleblowing should be thought about is that they are helping others know the truth.   Part II: “They Say” – General Views  Although you will primarily cite academics or authors in your writing, you may want to reference the views of a group or population from time to time. For example, advocates believe whistleblowers are heroes and patriots, while skeptics feel whistleblowers are snitches and traitors. By doing so, you illustrate a broader and wider range of thinking about a topic.  For Part II, fill in the blanks for  two  of the templates below. Consider using a point from Musa al-Gharbi’s “Police Punish the ‘Good Apples’” to avoid repeating ideas from Part I.  “They Say” Templates: 1. Many critics claim that __________. 2. Ethicist tend to believe that __________. 3. Politicians have suggested that whistleblowing has fundamental problems because __________. 4. It has become common today to dismiss whistleblowers because __________. “They Say” Assumed or Implied Templates:  5. Although none of them have ever said so directly, __________ have often given the impression that __________. 6. One implication of __________ is that __________. 7. While they rarely admit as much, __________ often take for granted that __________. “They Say” Avoiding Stereotypes Templates: 8. Although, not all __________ think alike, some of them will probably dispute the claim that __________. 9. __________ are so diverse in their views that it’s hard to generalize about them but some are likely to object because __________. Answers: 1. Many critics claim that one is better than the other. 2. Ethicist tend to believe that one if targeting their race. 3. Politicians have suggested that whistleblowing has fundamental problems because it tells sources about what is really behind the door. 4. It has become common today to dismiss whistleblowers because they tell on one’s wrongdoing. 2. Although, not all heroes think alike, some of them will probably dispute the claim that you have to help one to be called a hero. Whistleblowers are so diverse in their views that it’s hard to generalize about them, but some are likely to object because they have to speak up on one’s wrongdoing.    Part III: “They Say” – Introducing and Explaining Quotes As you learned in Kyle D. Stedman “Annoying Ways People Use Sources,” writers tend to cite quotes without properly explaining its relevance or significance to the argument. As a result, the reader is not convinced by the evidence and left wondering why the information is even included in the essay. To avoid this, you should summarize each quote in your own words.  Introducing and Explaining Quotes Template:  In his recent work, Jeffrey Tobin has offered harsh criticism of Edward Snowden for whistleblowing. Tobin writes, “Doing so was, as he more or less acknowledges, a crime. Any government employee or contractor is warned repeatedly that the unauthorized disclosure of classified information is a crime” (par 6). His point is that any employee and contractor is told multiple times that is speaking of inaccurate things is a crime. 1. Mueller states, “__________” (). Basically, he is warning __________. 2. As author Melanie McGrath puts it, “__________” (). In other words, McGrath believes __________. 3. According to Musa al-Gharbia, “__________” (). In making this comment, al-Gharbi urges us to __________. 4. In the article “The Banality of Heroism”, Zeno Franco and Philip Zimbardo maintain that a hero is one who speaks up about one’s wrongdoing. The essence of their argument is that heroes speak up and help others.  Note: The introductions (first sentence) and explanation (second sentence) are interchangeable, so you should choose the explanation that best fits your point. For example, if an author implies an idea in the quote, then you should not use: Basically, he is warning __________. Tip: Your verb choice is important in conveying the author’s intention and your purpose in quoting. Students often use the same verbs (e.g., “states” or “writes”) when introducing a quote, which leads to repetitiveness and information being misrepresented. Consider the following verbs: · Making a claim argues, asserts, believes, claims, emphasizes, insists, observes, reminds us, reports, suggests · Show agreement acknowledges, admires, agrees, corroborates, endorses, praises, reaffirms, verifies, supports · Show disagreement challenges, complains, contradicts, denies, refutes, rejects, renounces, questions  · Recommendations: advocates, calls for, demands, encourages, exhorts, implores, pleas, recommends, urges, warns For Part III, introduce and explain  two quotes from your essay using the templates above. You should use different verbs and templates for each example. · In the article “The Banality of Heroism”, Zeno Franco and Philip Zimbardo maintain that a hero is one who speaks up about one’s wrongdoing. The essence of their argument is that heroes speak up and help others.  · In his recent work, Jeffrey Tobin has offered harsh criticism of Edward Snowden for whistleblowing. Tobin writes, “Doing so was, as he more or less acknowledges, a crime. Any government employee or contractor is warned repeatedly that the unauthorized disclosure of classified information is a crime” (par 6). His point is that any employee and contractor is told multiple times that is speaking of inaccurate things is a crime.   Part IV: “I Say” – Agree But / Disagree And  After you have introduced and explained a quote in your own words, you should respond to the information in some way. This is often done by agreeing or disagreeing, and then elaborating further by providing new insights or explaining the reasoning behind your viewpoint. However, students tend to use general statements like “I agree with X’s point about __________” or “X is wrong about __________” before transitioning to their next idea. As a result, analysis and critical thinking in the essay are underdeveloped. Additionally, instead of being a participant in an academic conversation, the student merely comments on one.  To clarify my point, take the example from earlier; imagine you are debating the basketball GOAT with a friend. Your friend argues that Michael Jordan is the GOAT because he won six championships. If you were to respond by saying, “I agree with your point. Winning six championship is not easy,” you are not adding to the conversation. However, if you say, “I agree that six championships are an impressive feat, but Jordan never lost a Game 7 and was MVP five times,” you have posed new points that expand on the conversation. Here are a few ways you can respond: · Agreeing: Cite corroborating personal experience or situation, discuss new evidence or reasoning, simplify ideas in your own words for the reader · Disagreeing: Discuss and explain contradictory or overlooked issues, faulty or incomplete evidence, questionable assumptions, flawed logic For Part IV, fill in  two  templates (one for “Agree But” and one for “Disagree And”) below.  “Agree But” Templates: 1. Mueller is right about __________ because recent studies have shown that __________. 2. McGrath’s idea of __________ is important because it sheds light on __________. 3. If al-Gharbi is right about the police, then we need to reassess the popular assumption that __________.  “Disagree And” Templates: 1. Toobin is mistaken because __________ is overlooked. 2. __________’s view that __________ is incorrect because recent studies have shown __________.  3. __________’s claims that __________ rests upon the assumption that __________.  4. __________ contradicts itself. One the one hand, __________. On the other hand, __________. 5. By focusing on __________, __________ overlooks the deeper problem of __________.  Answers: Agree But: If al-Gharbia is right about the police, then we need to reassess the popular assumption that police officers target Blacks.  6. Disagree And: Toobin is mistaken because whistleblowing is overlooked.