76-101 By the People, For the People?

Spring 2015

Argument Analysis Assignment

76-101: Interpretation and Argument
Carnegie Mellon University
The Assignment
Analyze the argument for Carrolls Moderate Moralism. You may have had assignments in the past that
asked you to summarize, report back, or paraphrase an essays information, almost verbatim, to prove that
you had read the assigned book, book chapter, or essay.
What you are doing is a brief argument analysis, because an academic summary is really an argument
analysisit is the first step toward entering an academic conversation because it requires us to interpret
and articulate another authors point of view. What analysis means for this class is, (1) picking out the
authors major conclusion as well as the chain of premises, relevant implied premises, and subconclusions used to build to that conclusion, (2) describing your diagram of the authors argument in
your own words, (3) articulating what readers need to buy into in order to be persuaded by the
argument, and (4) explaining why Carrolls argument matters or whats at stake.
In other words, the key to this assignment is not trying to account for every point the author makes, but
rather to focus on isolating the major conclusion of their argument and to explain how he gets there. There
are several ways to read (or diagram) Carroll, but not an infinite amountso be careful and thoughtful
about your analysis of his argument. And remember, at the heart of your argument is your claim that you
are accurately representing Carrolls major argument. Avoid evaluating whether or not the author is
wrong, right, justified, applicable. (You get to do that in your final assignment, the Argument
Contribution).

The Procedure
Generating ideas (Invention)
What is the argument? First, you must select the most important parts of his argument so that
your readers can evaluate Carrolls contribution to the larger conversation or so that your
readers can critique your analysis, based upon their own understanding of their argument.
Diagramming the argument will help you make your selections.

How do the authors make their argument? Second, you must analyze and explain these
crucial parts in such a way as to demonstrate how each part fits together in the larger
framework of the argument. Its not enough to merely repeat what the authors say, changing
the words slightly. Your task is to explain the authors argument chain in order to account for
their choices and how their choices work to persuade their readers. Here you can look at
your argument diagram and ask: what do they set as the foundational premises? How do they
build up from them? What do they leave out and why?

Supporting your argument.

It is important to provide textual evidence from the article to support your argument. Use direct
quotations and paraphrases to support what you think the authors major argument sections are.
Remember to be selective about what evidence you use, and always ask yourself, Is this integral to their
main argumentative chain? In this sense, you should also be careful not to let your supporting material
take over your argument and subsume your own explanation of his essayif you were to do this, you
Rev. 6/28/2013

76-101 By the People, For the People?

Spring 2015

may as well hand in a copy of the text youre summarizing. And remember. . . you have only 1200-1500
words to make your argument.
Considering your audience.
Ofcourse,forthisessay,yourimmediateaudienceisyourinstructor.However, assume you are writing
to an academic audience that expects you to follow the conventions of academic writing, and who are
interested in the issue that Carroll addresses but may not have read it or perhaps have a different view of
the argument than you do. Youll need to describe for this audience how their argument matters for
contemporary society.
Common Misconceptions
It might be useful for you to know some of the popular misconceptions or pitfalls some students
have had in the past with this assignment.

Thinking the argument analysis is not an argument of your own interpretation. Your
interpretation enters the scene when you select the information that you consider to be central to
Carrolls argument. You also express your opinion when you explain how their argument hangs
together logically. Believe it or not, every student does not represent this argument in the same
way.

Writing an argument analysis about moderate moralism rather than about Carrolls text. In other
words, your bottom-line claim in this analysis should not be about citizen journalism and
breaking news, but about what Carroll says about citizen journalism and breaking news.

Organizing the argument analysis chronologically, according to the organizational structure in

Carrolls essay. Since part of your task is to select the most important claims in the authors
argument, its imperative to realize that you will order those claims according to importance
rather than chronology.

Important Dates and Details (unless noted, all work is due to Bb, by beginning of class)

Rough Draft due September 22

Peer Reviews due September 27

Final due October 6. Be sure to include your Acknowledgments and your Revision Report. Insert your
Revision Report at the end of your file, after your works cited list.

The Argument Analysis essay should be 1200-1500 words, typed, double-spaced, Times New Roman Font
in 12 pt font. For reference, this assignment sheet has 875 words in mostly 10pt font.

Please include a word count in the heading and a Works Cited page (you will be citing one author,
nevertheless, academic conventions require a work cited page whenever work is cited).

As the syllabus states, you must hand in your drafts (both rough and final) electronically. If you do not turn
in a rough draft, then you will receive a zero for the entire assignment. Late rough drafts as well as late
graded papers lose points. See syllabus for details.

Rev. 6/28/2013

76-101 By the People, For the People?

Spring 2015

Consult the rubric (separate file on Bb) for specific outline of the features you are expected to have in your
analysis.

Rev. 6/28/2013