This are the Professor’s exact instructions:
Write an academic position paper that intervenes in the debate about metacognition you examined in Unit 2. To do so, youll need to take into account your own conclusions from your Debate Analysis Annotated Bibliography. Given your analysis, what kind of argument should you primarily make (e.g., conjecture, definition, quality, or policy), and for which particular audience should you make that argument? While the conclusion you produced for the Unit 2 Annotated Bibliography tells you where you need to begin, much of the work in writing this academic position paper will involve fleshing out that argument. To do so, youll need to do three things:
Define your audience. (See below!)
Invent or come up with a combination of persuasive appeals to logos, ethos, and pathos that are appropriate for your intended audience (see RC chapters 8 & 10). To do this, youll need to think carefully about your audiences values, beliefs, and assumptions and attempt to find common ground. What values, beliefs, and assumptions do you hold in common with your audience?
Find and cite evidence in support of your particular argument, and frame that evidence in ways that are appropriate for your rhetorical situation (see RC chapter 9).
Unlike our previous units, this academic position paper demands that you do some additional research. You will need to find at least three relevant and credible sources through your own library research and use them to support your argument. Youll include copies of these three sources when you turn in your final academic position paper.