Argumentative Essay Outline | Coursehero Helper

I’m working on a English exercise and need support.

In this assignment, you will show that you are achieving important learning outcomes:

1. Interpret information through close and critical reading.
2. Demonstrate effective use of the writing process.
3. Employ effective academic tone, style, mechanics, and citation method.
4. Integrate relevant source material effectively and ethically.
5. Support a position appropriate to the rhetorical situation.

You will submit a formal, alphanumeric, full-sentence outline formatted in proper APA style. The outline must organize your argument into an introduction, conclusion, and at least five body sections (approximately 550 words or more). The introduction section must include a working thesis statement, which is an arguable response to your research question. Each body section should contain a topic sentence and subordinate claims and evidence from at least five credible and scholarly sources. Paraphrases, summaries, and quotes must be cited accurately and used with integrity. This assignment requires a title page and a reference list.

Topic: Increase Internet Usage

Grading Rubric:

Argument Development

Total: 2.00

Distinguished – Claims are developed through logical reasoning and based on credible evidence from at least the minimum number of sources required. Argument is cohesive, complete, and answers the research question.

Proficient – Most claims are developed through logical reasoning and/or based on credible evidence from the minimum number of sources required. Argument is fairly cohesive, complete, and relevant to the research question.

Basic – Many claims are developed through logical reasoning and/or based on credible evidence from an adequate number of sources. Argument is somewhat cohesive but may not be complete or focused on the research question.

Below Expectations – Few or no claims are developed through logical reasoning and/or based on credible evidence from an adequate number of sources. Argument is not cohesive and may not be aligned to the research question.

Non-Performance – The argument development is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Rhetorical Development

Total: 2.00

Distinguished – Voice is appropriate for the situation. Argument is tailored to an academic audience.

Proficient – Academic voice is developing. Argument is appropriate for an academic audience.

Basic – Academic voice is emerging. Argument may be more appropriate for a non-academic audience.

Below Expectations – Academic voice is not apparent. Argument is not suited to an academic audience.

Non-Performance – The rhetorical development is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Structure and Organization

Total: 2.00

Distinguished – Outline is organized, well-structured, and meets length requirements.

Proficient – Outline shows some organization, is properly structured, and meets length requirements. Some revision may be required before moving on to the drafting stage.

Basic – Outline may have some organizational and structure issues but meets the length requirement. Revisions are suggested before moving on to the drafting stage.

Below Expectations – Outline is not well organized, lacks proper structure, and/or does not meet the length requirement. Revisions will be necessary before moving on to the drafting stage.

Non-Performance – The outline is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Academic Honesty & Source Integration

Total: 2.00

Distinguished – Written work appears to be original. Sources are expertly integrated and cited accurately.

Proficient – Written work appears to be original. Sources are properly integrated and cited appropriately. Minor errors in citations exist.

Basic – Written work appears to be original. Sources are integrated with attempt at accurate citation. Relevant errors in citations exist.

Below Expectations – Written work appears to contain some unoriginal writing. Sources may be used without proper integration and/or citation.

Non-Performance – The ethical integration of sources is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Writing Skills/Grammar/Mechanics

Total: 1.00

Distinguished – Writing is clear, correct, and easy to read. A reader will have no trouble understanding this document.

Proficient – Writing is mostly clear, correct, and easy to read. Minor errors in mechanics and/or grammar may concern the reader. Additional proofreading may help correct mistakes.

Basic – Writing is readable but with errors. Mechanical and/or grammatical errors may undermine the appeal to ethos. Additional editing and proofreading can help correct these issues.

Below Expectations – Writing is somewhat readable but may have some significant mechanical and/or grammatical errors. The audience may have trouble understanding some passages. Improvement in writing skill, editing, and proofreading is needed.

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Page Layout and Formatting

Total: 1.00

Distinguished – Font, margins, spacing, title block, headers, alphanumeric format, and other elements are consistent with the required style guide.

Proficient – Font, margins, spacing, title block, headers, alphanumeric format, and other elements are nearly consistent with the required style guide.

Basic – Font, margins, spacing, title block, headers, alphanumeric format, and other elements are not wholly consistent with the required style guide. Future improvement is needed.

Below Expectations – Font, margins, spacing, title block, headers, alphanumeric format, and other elements do not follow the required style guide. Significant improvement is needed.

Non-Performance – The page layout and formatting are nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.