Hypothesis, Summary, & Essay
First, download the CQR report on “Reining in Big Tech” from the CQR module in Canvas if you haven’t already, then click Pro/Con in the table of contents to read the two arguments.
Write careful summary and analysis (at least 1250 words and 5 paragraphs) of the two Pro-Con essays in the CQR report, “Reigning in Big Tech,” which is located in the CQR Module. Do not discuss the entire report, just the short essays on p. 17.
Your essay should begin with a brief introduction giving the context and your hypothesis (first best guess) on the question, “Should Big Tech Be Broken Up?” as discussed in the two essays. Then give a brief and objective summary (only one paragraph) of the essay you disagree with, without arguing against it – you may not disagree with everything it says, but it should be the one counter to your hypothesis, your own position. Then write a careful analysis of the other essay – the one you agree with, evaluating the evidence and the rhetorical strategies which make it an effective and persuasive argument. Finally, conclude your essay with your response to the two arguments. What other related questions have been raised (such as those mentioned in the Overview section of the CQR report) that you want to research further?
Summary, Without Quotations: In the summary of the essay you disagree with, or find less persuasive, do not use quotes, or cite any other sources beyond what is considered common knowledge. Instead, use only summary. You must give the name of the author, but then restate the main points in your own words. To do this, read a part of the essay (at least a paragraph) until you have a good understanding of the content, and then write your summary of that passage without looking back at the text. This is the best way to avoid using the original wording of the essay and thereby committing the “sin” of plagiarism!
Your summary should include:
1. A brief restatement, in your own words, of the essay’s thesis (or major “claim”) and in what context it is presented. What does the way the claim is stated tell you about the strategy of the argument, and the audience?
2. The major reasons given which support the claim. Do the reasons appeal mostly to logic, values, or emotion?
3. A general indication of the type of supporting evidence given. The underlined words in blue are links to additional evidence. Is it “hard,” objective evidence, or relatively “soft” and subjective? Why do you think the author chose that kind of evidence?
4. Overall, do you think the argument is effective or not? Why?
Analysis, With Quotations: In the analysis of the essay you tend to agree with more, or find most effective, use summary again, but also short quotations from the essay (less than 3 lines each) integrated with your writing to support your claims. Do not quote from any other sources besides the essay you are analyzing. See examples in the EmpoWord textbook and in the module, as given below.
Identify, analyze, and evaluate the evidence presented, as well as the writer’s purpose and use of rhetorical strategies, as described in the Rhetorical Analysis lecture notes in the module. There should be some summary of the content (what is said), but most of the emphasis should be on analysis (how it is said) and why the argument is effective (not just because you agree with it).
Answer the following questions about the article to help write your analysis:
1. Who is the source? Assess the credibility and qualifications of the author.
2. What is the major claim in the article? Where is it most clearly stated or implied? What is the author’s purpose (to persuade, inform, etc.)?
3. How effective is the evidence presented, according to the STAR criteria? Explain. Does anything stand out as a strength in the evidence?
4. What are the predominant rhetorical strategies or appeals you see in the article? What they reveal about the intended audience – is the author trying to persuade a sympathetic audience or a more skeptical one?
Additional Reading: Read all documents and lecture notes in the Analysis module. Check back often, as some helpful documents may be added later. Also see the textbook, EmpoWord, Ch. 4 – Interpretation, Analysis, and Close Reading; Ch. 5 – Summary and Reader Response; Appendix B – Engaged Reading Strategies; Ch. 6 – Analysis and Synthesis. See Part Two, “Text Wrestling Analysis,” for additional examples.
For this essay, do not use any sources other than the article you are analyzing, or the CQR report (if needed for context). Use of any other sources will cause you to fail the assignment.
Organization: Your essay should be comprised of an introduction, a brief summary of the essay you find less persuasive, followed by a detailed analysis and evaluation of the evidence given in the essay you find more effective and persuasive, as shown in the use of rhetorical devices/strategies. Conclude by noting how you might use these points in your own research argument. Make sure to use clear transitions between paragraphs. Your thesis should state a claim about the overall effectiveness of the two essays, not your opinion on the issue. Your purpose must be to give an objective summary an analysis, not to present your own argument. That will come later in the Research essay.
Quotations, Citations, and Sources: You must interpret or explain any quotation/example or show how it helps to support the point you are making. Your essay must include proper in-text or parenthetical citations to indicate where you are using the source article. For examples, see the OWL MLA slides in the Writing Resources module. Also note how the author of the CQR report introduces, and then summarizes or quotes sources.
You can do the same. Note, however, that MLA does not use footnotes, as CQR does. Instead, if the source has not already been named in your sentence, put the last name of the author in parentheses, followed by a period to end your sentence, if needed.
Works Cited: You must include the following Works Cited entry for the CQR report at the end of your essay:
Karaim, Reed. “Reining in Big Tech.” CQ Researcher, 07 May 2021: 1-29. http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2021050700 (Links to an external site.)
You should not list the two authors of the essays, since both are included in this report. Just give their names as you discuss their arguments in your essay.
Format Requirements: Your essay must be typed following MLA format conventions (see the sample MLA paper in the OWL MLA 8th Edition presentation in the Textbook module, slide #10): double-spaced, one inch margins, headings, title, page numbering, etc. Please use 12-point Times New Roman (or something similar) for your font style and size. Submit your essay in MS Word (.doc or .docx) or Adobe Portable Document (.pdf). Other formats are NOT acceptable for submission.
Conventions: Do NOT refer to the writer by his or her first name only. Use an identifier and first and last name on first reference (President Biden, author Wendell Berry); use last name or identifier (the author, the President, Berry) on second and subsequent reference. Use present tense when discussing the writer’s argument: Addison says/Leonhardt writes/Wortham argues.
Plagiarism: Each essay assignment is submitted to Turn It In, a plagiarism checking service used by many colleges across the country. If a significant portion of your essay is a match to sources found online (other than the article you are analyzing) or to essays turned in previously to Turn It In, your essay will be tagged as possibly plagiarized. Your essay must be original work for this class, and cannot be work you have submitted previously for other classes! Please read the Plagiarism lecture in the module and be aware of these requirements.
The post Write careful summary and analysis (at least 1250 words and 5 paragraphs) of the two Pro-Con essays in the CQR report, “Reigning in Big Tech,” which is located in the CQR Module. appeared first on Essay Quoll.