Identify the task in the prompt. Pay attention to key words. 

Claim and Argument 

This point is reinforced by the explicit mention of "argument". Know what an argument is and know how to construct one.

Support, Refute, or Qualify 

These three words should signal to students that taking a position, even if a qualified one, is essential.

Evidence and Develop 

The word "evidence" is important. Know not only what constitutes evidence, but also the difference between evidence and example. The argument needs to move forward rather than simply make one little point and assume development by adding six redundant illustrations.

Problems that prevent students from earning a high score:

• Not taking a clear position or wavering between positions

• Substituting a thesis-oriented expository essay for an argumentative essay

• Being reluctant to engage in verbal combat because "everyone's entitled to his or her own opinion," so there's nothing to argue about

• Slipping out of focus by discussing imagery in general

• Trying to argue by using evidence drawn from a literary reading list (for example, Othello, The Scarlet Letter) and sliding off topic into the theme of appearance and reality <-- this is useful for AP Lit! Not AP Lang!

• Lacking clear connections between claims and the data, and the warrants needed to support them

• Trying to analyze rhetorical strategies or style instead of arguing a point 

1. Introduction 

2. Narration

3. Confirmation

4. Concession/Refutation

5. Conclusion

For an excellent example, see the 2012 RA Prompt, the J. F. Kennedy’s 1962 Speech to the Steel Companies. 

*************************

Helpful Terminology

• The Appeals:

  • Pathos (audience focus): Greek word for experience or suffering; an appeal to the audience via its sensibilities, its emotions. Think ASPCA commercials with Sarah McLaughlin that we discussed in class. 

  • Ethos (author focus): Greek work for character; an appeal to credibility via the sources and authorities and commonplaces to which the author refers. Ethos is about the speaker/author’s authority and trustworthiness.

  • Logos (content focus): Greek word for word; an appeal to reasons, which is demonstrated in the structure/organization and content of the message.

  • Kairos (setting focus): Greek word for opportunity or the “right time;” an appeal to setting/context (regarding time and place); proposing the right argument at an opportune moment.

  • Telos (purpose focus): an appeal to ones goals and the means by which one can attain them

• Exigence: the nexus of purpose and situation; an urgency that motivates a person to compose.

• Inductive Development: move form specific examples to a claim.

• Deductive Logic: move from claim to specific support.

While deductive has been prioritized in American culture, particularly in American high education, it is not privileged on the AP exam nor is it inherently better at conveying a purpose and moving an audience. This choice reflects on of many that an author has to make.

• Logical Fallacies: common reasoning errors that will undermine a writer’s position. For a visual representation of common reasoning errors, see Information is Beautiful Rhetological Fallacies.

Recommendations:

• Compose arguments that “name factors that decision makers should consider before making decisions” rather than arguments than “mandate a specific choice or position on an issue. [DON'T write a "claim of policy" thesis statement where you state a "should" or "should not" in your argument. 

• Spend a significant amount of time over several sessions unpacking previous AP argument prompts to understand what you are and are not being asked to do.

• Take a specific position. Or, compose a rough draft that expresses your initial position. Then redraft the paper with the opposite viewpoint and move it through the whole process.

• Gain exposure to multiple methods for composing arguments. You might find that you prefer the Toulmin, for example.

***************************************************************

The classical approach to argument is a model of argumentation invented by the famous Greek philosopher Aristotle. It is best used when the purpose of your argument is to persuade your audience to agree with your point of view, take your side on an issue, or make a decision in your favor. The classical approach/Aristotelian model relies heavily on the use of appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos.

The following is the typical organization pattern for this approach:

1. Introduction--where you urge your audience to consider the case that you are about to present. This is the time to capture the attention of your readers and introduce your issue.

2. State your case--Clarify your issue. Give any necessary background for understanding the issues. Define any important terms of conditions here.

3. Proposition--State your central proposition or thesis. Present the subtopics or supportive points to forecast your argument for your reader.

4. Refutation--Analyze the opposition's argument and summarize it; refute or address the points; point out faulty reasoning and inappropriate appeals.

5. Substantiation and Proof--Develop your own case. Use ethos, pathos, and logos appeals to make your case. Use good evidence such as examples.

6. Conclusion--The concluding paragraph(s) should summarize your most important points. In addition, you can make a final appeal to values and feelings that are likely to leave your audience favorably disposed to­ward your case

*******

Past AP Prompts...PRACTICE!

See pages 1200-127 in your Bedford text prior to perusing these brief notes*

*The following is useful in demonstrating the model, or format, for the Toulmin Model rather than the content specific to an argumentative mode of discourse. 

• • • • Claim (“an opinion that can be justified by further evidence and interpretation”): Oscar Wilde was an Irish writer.

      • Reason/Data: Wilde was born in Dublin, Ireland

      • Warrant (“a stated or unstated belief, rule or principle that underlies an argument”): A man born in Ireland is Irish.

The Toulmin model:

• • • • • • Claim: the position or claim being argued for; the conclusion of the argument. 

          • Grounds/Data: reasons or supporting evidence that bolster the claim. 

          • Warrant: the principle, provision or chain of reasoning that connects the grounds/reason to the claim.  

          • Backing: support, justification, reasons to back up the warrant. 

          • Rebuttal/Reservation: exceptions to the claim; description and rebuttal of counter-examples and counter-arguments. 

          • Qualification: specification of limits to claim, warrant and backing.  The degree of conditionality asserted.  

Rogerian 

In this model of argument, the goal is to reach a mutually agreeable understanding.

The Rogerian Approach

This is a model of argument named after the psychologist Carl Rogers, who believed that people could only resolve an issue or solve a problem once they found the "common ground." A group of rhetoricians, Young, Becker, and Pike, then developed a model of argument named the Rogerian argument, which advocates a way of argument that is less confrontational, less one-sided, and more compromising and deliberately consensus-building. 

The following are the usual elements of the Rogerian approach:

1. An introduction--that briefly and objectively defines the issue or problem

2. A summary of opposing views, presented within valid contexts, that demonstrates the writer clearly understands it

3. A statement of understanding or concession that there are situations in which these views are valid

4. A neutral statement and explanation of your position and the contexts in which it is valid

5. An analysis of what the two positions have in common and what goals and values they share

6. A statement of benefits of resolving the issue in a way that recognizes the interests of both parties, or a statement of how the opponent's position would benefit if he were to adopt elements of the writer's position

Additional Resources:

• Rogerian Argument: Definition and Examples