OBJECTIVE: Using analytical, rhetorical, and digital skills, you will design a website argument based on your selected pop culture + social issue. Your website will digitally reimagine Classical (Aristotelian) Argument structure, which has 5 parts and a Works Cited:
- Grab the Audience’s Attention
- Use your argumentative claim/thesis as the title of your site. Grab your audience’s attention with your stance on the issue. They will be intrigued to learn more.
- Background Information
- Bring your audience up to speed. Provide any background that we may need in order to understand (and engage with) your argument.
- Prove it
- Using multimodal evidence (quotes, text, images, videos, research, graphs, etc.), prove that your claim is valid. Academic argument isn’t about right or wrong, it’s about having a theory and demonstrating that it’s valid. Remember: one piece of evidence could be a fluke. Two pieces of evidence could be a coincidence. Three+ pieces of evidence starts to establish a trend.
- Acknowledge the Opposition
- Give credit to valid opposition(s), alternate theories, different takes on the same idea (this is where your second article comes in). Acknowledge differing ideas, making sure to use neutral, non-judgmental language. Call this section something like “By the way,” “Other theories abound!” “You may also want to consider,” “Fun fact!” (or whatever make sense for your second article’s angle).
- Larger Significance
- This final section answers the questions “Why should we care?” and “What should we do about it?” This section drives home the larger social issue, and points to the future (how might this affect us in the future?) with a specific call to action.
- Works Cited (see below)
These requirements are reflective of basic Aristotelian argumentative structure—the structure you would use in essay writing. You’ll want to avoid logical fallacies, make sure you use a variety of credible sources, and write original material that provides analysis of your supporting evidence (because without analysis, you just have a list of sources).
SOURCES: In addition to your scholarly articles, you will need at least 5 more credible sources. More is fine!
Sources should be as credible as possible, and will range from articles to videos to photos to interviews (and beyond). Due to the nature of the project, you may not be able to exclusively use scholarly sources. Just make sure to investigate sources to ascertain their credibility. Signal phrases that build credibility are strongly encouraged (e.g., “According to The Washington Post”). There are two ways to handle Works Cited. You may either
- Add a traditional Works Cited at the end of your argument, or on a separate tab
- Add in-text citations throughout (i.e. post the original link to the photo under the photo, post the citation under the video or quote or graph, etc.).
BUILDING A WEBSITE
Your website/blog must have at least five “areas” that correspond to the five parts of Classical Aristotelian argument (plus a Works Cited). These “areas” can be pages (tabs), or sections clearly defined by headings (this could be done on one scrolling page). Your choice.
If you’ve never designed a website/blog, the best way to get going is to play around with it. Pick a theme, then add a post. See what happens. As you design your areas, try to maintain a consistent multimodal (videos, text, images, quotes, graphs, etc.) balance. Think about continuity, aesthetic appeal, and rhetorical purpose. Think about the way you use websites. Give your audience a logical composition and navigation system.
What to Look For:
- Aristotle: How does the author grab the audience’s attention? Is there a clear argumentative claim? Could this be more effective? How?
- Background Info: Is the background info enough to get us up to speed with the argument? Do you need more? Less?
- Evidence/Proof: Does the author provide at least five pieces of specific evidence to back the overarching claim? Is the proof easy to “read” (i.e. are visuals easy to understand)?
- Alternate/Opposing/Differing POV: Does the “By the way,” “Other theories to consider,” “You may also want to consider,” “Fun fact” (or whatever you want to call it) section, based on your second scholarly article, add to the overall argument by giving us a quick insight into another POV?
- Larger Significance: Is is clear why this is important, going forward (future tense)? Is the “What Should We Do About It” call-to-action specific and doable (i.e. avoid ‘We should all be aware of this” vagueness and opt for specific calls-to-action, specific ways we can help, starting today)
- Readability: How easy/hard is it to follow the arguments, transitions, ideas? Be specific, and point out areas where readability can be smoothed out.
