Posted: July 3rd, 2024

Touchstone 3.1: Construct a Rogerian Argument Assignment

Writing Help: How to Write a Rogerian Argument

Persuasive writing often aims to win debates, but the Rogerian argument takes a different approach. This method emphasizes understanding and compromise between opposing viewpoints. The following guide explores the key elements of an effective Rogerian argument and provides practical tips for implementing this strategy in your writing.

Origins of the Rogerian Approach

Psychologist Carl Rogers developed the foundations of this argumentative style in the 1950s. His method centers on empathy and mutual respect, aiming to reduce hostility and foster productive dialogue. When applied to writing, the Rogerian argument follows a specific structure designed to build trust and encourage open-mindedness.

Key Components of a Rogerian Argument

Introduction The opening presents the issue objectively without taking sides or making judgments. It explains why the topic matters and why people hold differing opinions.

Opposing View This section summarizes the viewpoint that opposes the writer’s own. It presents this perspective fairly and accurately, demonstrating a thorough understanding of its merits. This step shows respect for alternative ideas and builds credibility with readers who may hold opposing views.

Context and Common Ground The writer identifies areas of agreement between the opposing viewpoint and their own position. This part highlights shared values, goals, or concerns, establishing common ground and helping readers see that the two sides are not entirely at odds.

Your Position The writer presents their own viewpoint, explaining how it addresses the issue while acknowledging the validity of some aspects of the opposing perspective. They frame their argument to show how it might satisfy both sides’ concerns.

Benefits of Your Approach This section explains how the proposed solution or viewpoint could benefit those who hold the opposing view. It emphasizes mutual advantages and potential compromises that could lead to a satisfactory resolution for all parties.

Conclusion The closing summarizes the main points of both perspectives and restates the areas of agreement. It proposes a course of action or further dialogue that takes into account the concerns of both sides.

Strategies for an Effective Rogerian Argument

To write a compelling Rogerian argument, consider these approaches:

Research Thoroughly

Gather information from reliable sources to ensure a deep understanding of both sides of the issue. This knowledge allows you to present each perspective accurately and find genuine areas of common ground.

Use Neutral Language

Avoid inflammatory or biased language that might alienate readers who hold opposing views. Opt for objective terms and phrases that demonstrate respect for all perspectives.

Acknowledge Validity

Recognize the strengths and valid points of the opposing argument. This shows intellectual honesty and openness to different ideas, which can make your own position more persuasive.

Focus on Shared Values

Identify and emphasize the underlying values or goals that both sides of the argument share. This creates a foundation for finding mutually beneficial solutions.

Provide Specific Examples

Support your points with concrete examples and evidence. Vague generalizations weaken your argument and reduce its credibility.

Address Potential Objections

Anticipate counterarguments to your position and address them preemptively. This demonstrates that you have considered multiple angles of the issue.

Propose Realistic Solutions

Offer practical compromises or solutions that take into account the concerns of both sides. Avoid idealistic proposals that ignore real-world constraints.

Maintain a Respectful Tone

Throughout your argument, maintain a tone of respect and consideration for those who may disagree with you. This approach encourages readers to remain open-minded and receptive to your ideas.

Benefits of the Rogerian Approach

The Rogerian method offers several advantages in persuasive writing:

Reduced Defensiveness: Acknowledging the merits of opposing views lowers the defensive barriers of those who disagree with you.

Increased Understanding: This approach promotes a deeper comprehension of complex issues by exploring multiple perspectives.

Constructive Dialogue: The emphasis on finding common ground encourages productive conversations rather than heated debates.

Long-term Solutions: Seeking compromises often leads to more sustainable resolutions that address the concerns of all parties involved.

Improved Relationships: This method can help preserve and strengthen relationships between individuals or groups with differing opinions.

Challenges and Limitations

While the Rogerian approach offers many benefits, it also presents certain challenges:

Time and Effort: Thoroughly researching and presenting multiple viewpoints requires significant time and effort.

Complexity: Some issues may be too polarized or complex to find meaningful common ground.

Resistance to Compromise: In certain situations, one or both sides may be unwilling to consider alternative perspectives or seek middle ground.

Potential for Misuse: The Rogerian method should not be used manipulatively to feign understanding while pushing a predetermined agenda.

Appropriate Situations for Rogerian Arguments

The Rogerian approach proves particularly effective when:

The goal is to find a mutually acceptable solution rather than to “win” an argument

The topic is highly controversial or emotionally charged

There is a need to preserve relationships or promote cooperation among disagreeing parties

The audience is likely to be hostile or resistant to your viewpoint

Suitable topics for Rogerian arguments include debates on social issues, policy proposals, or conflicts within organizations or communities.

The Rogerian argument offers a valuable tool for addressing contentious issues thoughtfully and constructively. This approach emphasizes empathy, mutual understanding, and the search for common ground, leading to more productive discussions and lasting solutions. Mastering the Rogerian technique can greatly enhance your persuasive writing skills and your ability to address complex debates effectively.

=======================

Assignment Sample:

Final
Ready

Submitted

Graded

You can submit this Touchstone when the previous Touchstone has been scored.

SUBMIT TOUCHSTONE

Currently, it takes about 2-4 business days for a Touchstone to be graded.

Touchstones are projects that illustrate your comprehension of the course material, help you refine skills, and demonstrate application of knowledge. You can work on a Touchstone anytime, but you can’t submit it until you have completed the unit’s Challenges. Once you’ve submitted a Touchstone, it will be graded and counted toward your final course score.

Touchstone 3.1: Construct a Rogerian Argument

ASSIGNMENT: As you learned in this unit, a Rogerian argument is one that presents two sides of a debate and argues for a solution that will satisfy both sides. Given the two articles linked below that present opposing sides of an issue (mandatory uniforms in schools vs. some kind of ‘dress code’), construct your own 2-3 page Rogerian argument essay in which you attempt to arrive at a concrete, workable solution or “middle ground.”

The essay should contain the following components:

❒ I) An introduction that accurately presents both sources (i.e., author, title, year of publication, and position in the debate) and your middle ground thesis statement.

❒ II) A body paragraph that summarizes the pro-uniform rationales.

❒ III) A body paragraph that summarizes the anti-uniform/pro-dress code rationales.

❒ IV) A body paragraph that critically compares and contrasts both sides of the debate.

❒ V) A conclusion that further develops your proposed middle ground solution and demonstrates how it satisfies both sides of the debate.

Article 1: “School Dress Codes and Uniform Policies”

Article 2: “Dressing Diversity: Politics of Difference and the Case of School Uniforms”

Sample Touchstone

In order to foster learning and growth, all essays you submit must be newly written specifically for this course. Any plagiarized or recycled work will result in a Plagiarism Detected alert. Review this tutorial for more about plagiarism and the Plagiarism Detected alert: Touchstones: Academic Integrity Guidelines.

A. Assignment Guidelines

DIRECTIONS: Refer to the list below throughout the writing process. Do not submit your Touchstone until it meets these guidelines.

1. Introduction

❒ Have you briefly and accurately introduced the author, title, and publication context (year, journal, etc.) of Article 1?

❒ Have you briefly and accurately introduced the author, title, and publication context (year, journal, etc.) of Article 2?

❒ Have you ended the introduction with a thesis statement/claim that presents a clear, workable solution that could be viewed as a “middle ground” between the two sides?

2. Body Paragraphs

❒ Have you included a summary of the stance presented in Article 1 in the first body paragraph (including accurate page-numbered citations)?

❒ Have you included a summary of the stance presented Article 2 in the second body paragraph (including accurate page-numbered citations)?

❒ When using direct quotations, have you supplemented them with your own explanation of their relevance?

❒ Have you adequately compared and contrasted both sides of the debate (with cited examples from the articles) in the third body paragraph?

3. Conclusion

❒ Does your expanded claim address both sides of the issue, including specific points raised in the articles?

❒ Have you backed up your claim using cited facts from both sides of the argument?

4. Reflection

❒ Have you answered all reflection questions thoughtfully and included insights, observations, and/or examples in all responses?

❒ Are your answers included on a separate page below the main assignment?

B. Reflection

DIRECTIONS: Below your assignment, include answers to all of the following reflection questions.

How does the Rogerian model of argument help you better understand the topic that’s being discussed? Why is it a good practice to acknowledge both sides of the argument? (3-4 sentences)

How might the Rogerian approach help you gain insight into your own argumentative essay? (2-3 sentences)

C. Rubric

Advanced (100%) Proficient (85%) Acceptable (75%) Needs Improvement (50%) Non-Performance (0%)

Summary of Positions (10 points)

Introduce the two sources and summarize each side of the argument.

Effectively and correctly introduces both authors/articles and provides a complete, accurate, and concise summary of both positions presented in the articles (including page-numbered citations). Correctly introduces both authors/articles and provides an accurate and concise summary of both positions presented in the articles (including page-numbered citations). Provides a correct introduction of the authors/articles and a brief overview of positions (including some page-numbered citations), but key details of the positions may be inaccurate or missing. Correctly introduces both authors/articles, but does not provide a complete or mostly-accurate summary of positions presented in the articles. A few accurate page-numbered citations are still included. Does not correctly introduce both authors/articles and/or provides a totally inaccurate summary of each position presented in the articles (including any page-numbered citations).

Thesis/Claim (20 points)

Present a thesis that advocates for a solution to satisfy both sides of the argument.

Provides a thesis in the introduction that clearly and effectively advocates for a concrete, detailed solution to satisfy both sides of the argument, and this stance is robustly developed in the concluding paragraph. Provides a thesis in the introduction that clearly advocates for a concrete solution to satisfy both sides of the argument, and this stance is developed further in the concluding paragraph. Provides a thesis; however, it is not located in the introduction OR it is not developed in a way which suggests a solution to satisfy both sides of the argument that is entirely clear or concrete. Provides a thesis; however, it is not located in the introduction AND it is not developed in a way which suggests a solution to satisfy both sides of the argument that is entirely clear or concrete. No clear thesis has been presented anywhere in the essay OR it is entirely generic, repetitive, and/or vague, lacking in any concrete detail.

Organization (5 points)

Exhibit competent organization and writing techniques.

Includes all of the required components of a Rogerian argument paper, including an engaging introduction with source summaries and a claim, body paragraphs with topic sentences, and a conclusion with a concluding statement. Includes all of the required components of a Rogerian argument paper, including an introduction with source summaries and a claim, body paragraphs with topic sentences, and a conclusion with a concluding statement. Includes nearly all of the required components of a Rogerian argument paper; however, one component is missing. Includes most of the required components of a Rogerian argument paper, but is lacking two components. Sequences ideas and paragraphs such that the connections between ideas (within and between paragraphs) are sometimes unclear and the reader may have difficulty following the progression of the argument. Lacks several or all of the components of a Rogerian argument paper. Sequences ideas and paragraphs such that the connections between ideas (within and between paragraphs) are often unclear and the reader has difficulty following the progression of the argument.

Style (5 points)

Establish a consistent, informative tone and make thoughtful stylistic choices.

Demonstrates thoughtful and effective word choices, avoids redundancy and imprecise language, and uses a wide variety of sentence structures. Demonstrates effective word choices, primarily avoids redundancy and imprecise language, and uses a variety of sentence structures. Demonstrates generally effective style choices, but may include occasional redundancies, imprecise language, poor word choice, and/or repetitive sentence structures. Frequently includes poor word choices, redundancies, imprecise language, and/or repetitive sentence structures. Consistently demonstrates poor word choices, redundancies, imprecise language, and/or repetitive sentence structures.

Conventions (5 points)

Follow conventions for standard English.

There are only a few, if any, negligible errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, formatting, and usage. There are occasional minor errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, formatting, and usage. There are some significant errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, formatting, and usage. There are frequent significant errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, formatting, and usage. There are consistent significant errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, formatting, and usage.

Reflection (5 points)

Reflect on progression and development throughout the course.

Demonstrates thoughtful reflection; consistently includes insights, observations, and/or examples in all responses, following or exceeding response length guidelines. Demonstrates thoughtful reflection; includes multiple insights, observations, and/or examples, following response length guidelines. Primarily demonstrates thoughtful reflection, but some responses are lacking in detail or insight; primarily follows response length guidelines. Shows limited reflection; the majority of responses are lacking in detail or insight, with some questions left unanswered or falling short of response length guidelines. No reflection responses are present.

D. Requirements

The following requirements must be met for your submission to be graded:

Composition must be 2-3 pages (approximately 500-750 words).

Double-space the composition and use one-inch margins.

Use a readable 12-point font.

All writing must be appropriate for an academic context.

Composition must be original and written for this assignment.

Use of generative chatbot artificial intelligence tools (ChatGPT, Bing Chat, Bard) in place of original writing is strictly prohibited for this assignment.

Plagiarism of any kind is strictly prohibited.

Submission must include your name, the name of the course, the date, and the title of your composition.

Include all of the assignment components in a single file.

Acceptable file formats include .doc and .docx.

E. Additional Resources

The following resources will be helpful to you as you work on this assignment:

Purdue Online Writing Lab’s APA Formatting and Style Guide

This site includes a comprehensive overview of APA style, as well as individual pages with guidelines for specific citation types.

Frequently Asked Questions About APA Style

This page on the official APA website addresses common questions related to APA formatting. The “References,” “Punctuation,” and “Grammar and Writing Style” sections will be the most useful to your work in this course.

APA Style: Quick Answers—References

This page on the official APA Style website provides numerous examples of reference list formatting for various source types.

=======================

Sample Paper

Rogerian Argumentation: A Cooperative Approach to Resolving Disputes

Rogerian argumentation offers a cooperative model for addressing contentious issues and finding mutually agreeable solutions. Unlike traditional debate formats that position two sides in direct opposition, the Rogerian approach seeks common ground and mutual understanding between conflicting viewpoints. This technique, developed by psychologist Carl Rogers, has gained traction in academic and professional settings as an effective method for de-escalating conflicts and fostering productive dialogue (Baumlin, 2018).
The core principles of Rogerian argumentation involve carefully considering opposing perspectives, identifying areas of agreement, and working towards a solution that addresses the concerns of all parties. This approach requires participants to temporarily set aside their own position and genuinely attempt to understand the reasoning and values underlying the other side’s stance. By doing so, interlocutors can build trust and create an environment conducive to collaborative problem-solving (Wolfe, 2020).
Critics argue that Rogerian argumentation may be less effective in situations with fundamental ideological differences or when one side is unwilling to engage in good faith. However, proponents maintain that even in challenging circumstances, the Rogerian model can help reveal shared values and open new avenues for compromise (Garrison and Hoskisson, 2022).
Recent studies have examined the efficacy of Rogerian argumentation in various contexts, including political discourse, environmental policy debates, and educational settings. Findings suggest that when properly implemented, this approach can lead to more satisfactory outcomes and improved relationships between opposing parties compared to adversarial debate formats (Thompson et al., 2023).
As societies grapple with increasingly complex and polarizing issues, the Rogerian model of argumentation offers a valuable framework for fostering constructive dialogue and finding creative solutions to seemingly intractable problems.
References:
Baumlin, J.S., 2018. Rogerian rhetoric: An alternative to traditional rhetoric. In Landmark essays on Rogerian rhetoric (pp. 1-16). Routledge.
Garrison, J.C. and Hoskisson, K., 2022. Beyond persuasion: The transformative potential of Rogerian argumentation. Journal of Rhetorical Studies, 37(2), pp.213-229.
Thompson, L.M., Ramirez, A.G. and Fontaine, J.J., 2023. Bridging divides: A quantitative analysis of Rogerian argumentation outcomes in environmental policy debates. Environmental Communication, 17(1), pp.78-95.
Wolfe, J., 2020. Rhetorical numbers: A case for quantitative writing in the composition classroom. College Composition and Communication, 71(3), pp.450-475

Order | Check Discount

Tags: How to Construct a Rogerian Argument, How to Write a Rogerian Argument, Rogerian Argument, Touchstone 3.1: Construct a Rogerian Argument Assignment