Weaver,kevin CM220_U4_Assignment_Chart
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Purdue Global University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
220
Subject
English
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by DeanRiverGull19
1
Unit 4 Assignment
Weaver, Kevin
Purdue University Global
CM 220
Professor’s Wink, Sara
29 August 2023
2
Developing an Argument for Change CM 220 Unit 4 Assignment Part I: Thesis
Review the Unit 3 reading on thesis statements and identifying the underlying assumption and common ground. You may also want to review the Writing Center’s Writing a Thesis Statement
. What is your thesis statement (claim + reason)?
The Army should focus more on Retention versus Recruiting new people. This would help the military recruit more people by showing it is a people first organization and take care of those already in.
What is the underlying assumption (major premise) for your thesis? That the Army would maintain the required amount of people for military strength by focusing on retention, and improve its self image.
What common ground do you anticipate that you will share with your audience? That maintaining military strength is important either by recruiting new people to join or retaining more of the ones coming in. Part II: Rhetorical Situation Review the Unit 1 reading on the rhetorical situation. What is your purpose? How would you describe the problem and what are examples that illustrate the problem? I would like to use this argument and my research to addresses why the Army focus more on recruiting new people versus retaining those already in, and that by shifting its focus it will be able to improve morale and draw people to be part of an organization that is a people first model. Right now, The Army spends millions of dollars in funding for USAREC versus repurposing that money and strategy into its retention policies. Describe your audience. How does
the issue affect different community
stakeholders? Who would be underrepresented stakeholders? Who can implement your proposed solution? People in this community who would be able to make a change would be Army policy leaders, who could take this argument and change current Policies. Other people who in a position to make a change is the US citizens themselves by electing members who believe in making changes in
the military. As for unrepresented stake holders it would be the new recruits and is it more important to them that new employees are treated better then current and would it reflect positive to them knowing their future is better off.
3
How would you describe your setting? What are key elements of the setting that affect the problem? The Community I have in mind is the Army as a whole. This is a working-
class population made up of people all over the world. The key elements that affect the problem is people view of the Army and how they feel about remaining a part of the organization. Part III: The Appeals Review the “
Three Appeals of Argument
” podcast in the Unit 4 reading. Respond in full paragraphs for each of the appeals and include specific examples to illustrate how you will use those appeals. Reference at least one source that you can use to support your claims, and also be sure to identify a particular logical fallacy and how you will avoid it in the logos section. For more on fallacies, review How to Support an Argument and Avoid Logical Fallacies
. How will you use the ethos appeal? How will you ensure
your audience trusts
you? Who might be stakeholders that may have reservations or negative results from the proposed solution? What is at least one rival hypothesis you will need to address and
how can you overcome that challenge to your argument? I will use Ethos to prove that I can be trusted by presenting research from credible resources. The Army itself has done any studies on itself and providing the finding to the audience may sway them. Along with providing my own firsthand experience as a source will all help my ethos appeal. The stakeholders who may have negative results are the leader’s overing the recruitment efforts with more of a focus on retention this would pull funding from them to another part. I believe that a rival hypothesis that I will need to address is that military strength will be better maintained by recruiting new people and constantly rating people through leadership positions.
How will you use the pathos appeal? What are ways you can connect with your audience? What might be specific examples that you could use to illustrate the problem? Within my persuasion the pathos appeal will be a useful approach. I plan on appealing to my audiences assumed innate sense of patriotism to sway them to my arguments. Along with connecting with my audience by tying in the army values into people’s common values. A specific example I could use is using command climate surveys to demonstrate the morale of people who are better looked after for versus those that are not to show why proper retention is important.
How will you use the logos appeal? What evidence supports that this is I will be able to find logic, examples, and statistics in the form of studies and surveys done by the military, outside studies, and other organizations.
I plan on pulling data from command climate surveys to judge morale in companies with good retention factors and compare it to others. One such
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4
the best solution? What research will you need to conduct? What is one source you have
found that will help you support your claims? source is a article posted by Army times stating that the service when it focused on its “retention goals attained around 105% of its desired goal” (Army Times, 2023)
What is a specific logical fallacy (like a hasty generalization) that you will need to avoid and how do you plan to avoid that fallacy? One Specific logical fallacy I will need to avoid is Hasty generalization. For example, since the army is focusing on recruiting new people it doesn’t care at all about the ones already in. I plan on avoiding this fallacy but listing current programs in place to help retention and how they can be improved on.