Assignment: Argument Blueprint Mapping By the end of this assignment, you will have a comprehensive argument map that both details your argument for the Week 9 debate and integrates your research from last week
Assignment: Argument Blueprint Mapping
By the end of this assignment, you will have a comprehensive argument map that both details your argument for the Week 9 debate and integrates your research from last week into the structure of your argument.
This assignment will serve as the foundation for your final debate. You will use your completed comprehensive argument map to engage in live argumentation with an AI tool next week. Therefore, you will want this Argument Blueprint to be as complete as possible, considering all aspects of the argument that may come up in your impromptu debate and using credible source material to support your claims.
- Use the Classical model of argument as outlined in this week’s lecture and on the assignment template.
- Use the provided template and map your argument with your sources from last week integrated. Show where each source will appear in detail.
- Your outline should demonstrate not only your position, but also how evidence and objections fit into your reasoning.
Submission: Upload the completed outline with sources and argument map to Canvas for Week 8.
Download this templateDownload Download this template to complete your work and submit it for this week’s assignment.
Rubric
Argument Blueprint Mapping Grading Rubric (75 points total) (1)
|
Argument Blueprint Mapping Grading Rubric (75 points
total) (1) |
||
|
Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction
- Background & Importance (10 points) |
10 to >9.0 ptsExcellentProvides a
thorough, clear background (at least 4 sentences) and detailed explanation of
importance (at least 3 sentences). Fully contextualizes the issue and
prepares the reader for the argument. 9 to >7.0 ptsProficientBackground and
importance included and mostly clear; may be missing 1–2 required sentences
total (e.g., 5–6 total sentences instead of 7). May have minor gaps in
detail. 7 to >5.0 ptsSatisfactoryBackground or
importance present but vague, incomplete, or significantly under length (4–5
total sentences). 5 to >3.0 ptsDevelopingBackground
and/or importance minimal, unclear, or brief (3 or fewer total sentences). 3 to >0 ptsMissingNo background or
importance provided. |
10 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePosition
Statement (10 points) |
10 to >9.0 ptsExcellentComplete,
concise, and well-formed Although+Claim+Because statement; clearly reflects
research; uses no "I"; directly states stance. 9 to >7.0 ptsProficientPosition
statement mostly correct, minor clarity or format issues; reflects research. 7 to >5.0 ptsSatisfactoryStatement
present but vague, missing part of the formula, or not fully grounded in
research. 5 to >3.0 ptsDevelopingStatement
unclear, incomplete, or does not follow formula. 3 to >0 ptsMissingNo position
statement provided. |
10 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTwo
Supporting Arguments - Evidence & Reasoning (20 points) |
20 to >18.0 ptsExcellentIncludes two
fully developed arguments. Each argument has 1 sentence for the main point
and at least 3 sentences of evidence (minimum 4 total per argument).
Reasoning is clear, logical, and well-supported by research. 18 to >15.0 ptsProficientTwo arguments
present, but one may fall short of sentence minimum (e.g., 2 sentences of
evidence). Reasoning mostly clear; minor depth issues. 15 to >11.0 ptsSatisfactoryOne or both
arguments underdeveloped or missing evidence (e.g., only 1–2 total sentences
per argument). 11 to >6.0 ptsDevelopingArguments
minimal or unclear; most sections fail to meet sentence requirements. 6 to >0 ptsMissingNo complete
arguments or evidence provided |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeObjections
and Refutation (15 points) |
15 to >14.0 ptsExcellentAddresses
objections in full with strong reasoning and evidence. Includes at least 3
sentences for the objection, 3 sentences of supporting evidence, and 3
sentences of refutation (9 total). Logical and persuasive refutation connects
back to main argument. 14 to >11.0 ptsProficientObjection,
evidence, and refutation present but one part may fall slightly short (e.g.,
2 sentences instead of 3 in one section). Mostly clear and supported. 11 to >8.0 ptsSatisfactoryAll three
sections included but 2 or more fall short of sentence minimums or reasoning
is vague. 8 to >4.0 ptsDevelopingObjection or
refutation minimal or unclear; fails to meet most sentence expectations. 4 to >0 ptsMissingNo objection or
refutation included. |
15 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion -
Summary, Compromise/Solution, and Call to Action (10 points) |
10 to >9.0 ptsExcellentConclusion
includes all three required components: summary (at least 3 sentences),
compromise/solution (at least 2 sentences), and call to action (at least 2
sentences). Persuasive and logically connected to the argument. 9 to >7.0 ptsProficientAll elements
included but one area may be slightly under length (e.g., 1 sentence short)
or lacks minor detail. 7 to >5.0 ptsSatisfactoryConclusion
present but missing one of the three parts or under length in multiple
sections. 5 to >3.0 ptsDevelopingConclusion
minimal or unclear; fails to meet sentence expectations for most elements. 3 to >0 ptsMissingNo conclusion
provided. |
10 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUse of
Research & Completeness (10 points) |
10 to >9.0 ptsExcellentIntegrates
research from Findings Log thoroughly across sections; all sections complete,
showing a comprehensive blueprint. 9 to >7.0 ptsProficientResearch
included in most sections; most sections complete. 7 to >5.0 ptsSatisfactorySome use of
research; several sections incomplete or partially developed. 5 to >3.0 ptsDevelopingMinimal
evidence of research; most sections incomplete. 3 to >0 ptsMissingNo evidence of
research; blueprint incomplete. |
10 pts |
Total Points: 75