Writing a Draft: Invention, Research, Planning, and Composing

The activities in this section will help you choose a topic and find sources; compose summaries and commentaries for an annotated bibliography; analyze and synthesize your sources; report on the topic; and write an analysis comparing two opposing argument essays. Your writing in response to many of these activities can be used in rough drafts that you will be able to improve after receiving feedback from your classmates and instructor. Do the activities in any order that makes sense to you (and your instructor), and return to them as needed as you revise.

Choose a controversial topic to write about.

When choosing a topic to write about, keep in mind that it must be

196

You may already have a controversial topic in mind. (Or perhaps your instructor has already assigned you a topic.) If so, complete the activity Test Your Choice: Choosing a Topic below. If you do not, you could

Here are a few additional controversial topics to get you thinking:

TEST YOUR CHOICE

Choosing a Topic

After you have made a provisional choice, ask yourself the following questions:

  • What do I already know and think about the topic? Do I find it important and interesting enough to justify spending the time necessary to do the research and writing required?

  • What are my readers likely to know about it? Will they have strong opinions, or will I need to show them why they should care about it? Will they be open to learning about different points of view on the topic?

Then get together with two or three other students to take turns trying out your topics with potential readers. Ask group members questions like the following:

  • What, if anything, do you already know about the topic? What do you think are the main opposing points of view on it? Do you have an opinion about it?

  • What basic values (such as freedom, equality, honesty, justice) seem to be involved in discussions of this topic?

  • 197

    What questions about the topic would you like answered? For example, would you like to know how it started or changed over time, who has been involved in discussions of the topic, and what interests they represent?

Conduct research to find sources.

For more about developing key terms and searching for sources, see Chapter 21; for more about evaluating sources, see Chapter 22; for help adding a commentary to a summary in an annotated bibliography, complete the Ways In activity “How do I draft a commentary?” later in this Guide to Writing. For citation models and detailed instructions on creating an entry for a works-cited or references list, see Chapter 24 (MLA style) or Chapter 25 (APA style).

Now that you have a tentative topic and a sense of your readers’ knowledge of it, along with their questions about it, use the research tips that follow to locate relevant sources:

For each potential source you find,

  1. add a citation to your working bibliography;

  2. save a copy of the source or a line for further reference;

  3. take notes or draft a summary as you read.

Summarize sources and annotate your working bibliography.

The following activities will be useful if you are writing a summary of a single source or compiling an annotated bibliography of several sources.

The length of the summary will depended on the length of your source, the reason you are writing the summary, and your readers’ expectations. Typically, one paragraph is sufficient to summarize a brief source for a stand-alone summary or an annotated bibliography, but consult your instructor if you are not sure.

WAYS IN

HOW DO I WRITE A SUMMARY?

  1. Highlight the THESIS and MAIN SUPPORTING IDEAS (REASONS) as you read the source. (You may have to reread it several times to distinguish the main points from the details.)

  2. Compose an OUTLINE of the main ideas—using your own words.

  3. Put the source away and draft the summary from your outline. (This can help you avoid inadvertent plagiarism and retain the order of your source’s ideas.)

    • Introduce the source in a SIGNAL PHRASE (author’s name plus a verb that captures the move the author is making, such as argues, supports, describes, and so on).For a summary, include publication information, like the title and date of publication, in the opening sentence.

      198

      • In his book/article/op-ed ______ [title] (date), X, a professor of ______at School A, asserts/reports ______ .

      EXAMPLE In his article “A Moral Market,” published by Slate in 2014, law professor Eric Posner proposes . . . (Gomez, “Summary”)

    • In a summary for an annotated bibliography, just include the author’s name and credentials; publication information will be included in the bibliographic citation:

      • In this book/article/op-ed, X, professor of _____ at School A, asserts/reports _______ .

      EXAMPLE In this article, law professor Eric Posner proposes a solution to the kidney shortage. (Gomez, “Annotated Bibliography”)

    • State the THESIS in your own words.

      • X argues that the best way to solve the problem is to ______ .

      • Professor X contradicts Dr. Y, explaining that _____ .

      EXAMPLE Economists Becker and Elías argue for a straightforward but highly controversial proposal to solve the kidney shortage problem by paying people to donate their extra kidney for transplantation. (“Annotated Bibliography”)

    • List the main supporting ideas (or reasons) in the same order in which they appear in the source.

      • X responds to such criticisms as ____ , _____ , and _______ .

      • X claims that ______ . He also argues that ______ .

      EXAMPLE [Becker and Elías] also refute objections that payment would not solve the problem, that it is immoral, that it would exploit the poor, and that it would reduce altruistic donations. (“Annotated Bibliography”)

    • Use TRANSITIONS (such as and, also, but, therefore) and other cues (such as repeating key terms or using synonyms to refer to key terms) to show readers how the ideas relate to one another.

      • Although/Whereas/Unlike Dr. A’s position, Dr. B’s contention is that _____ .

      EXAMPLE [Posner] argues that, unlike the unpopular proposal to sell kidneys, his proposal for an “altruism exchange” would be politically acceptable because it is based on altruism, not the profit motive. (“Summary”)

  4. Check your draft summary against the source to make sure you have

    • captured the author’s ideas accurately and succinctly.

    • avoided inserting your own ideas or opinions.

    • put key terms (such as “altruism exchange” in Gomez’s summary of Posner’s article) in quotation marks.

    • avoided borrowing other words or sentence patterns.

199

An annotated bibliography for a writing project not only includes a summary of each source, but also a commentary including

Use the following guidelines and sentence strategies as a jumping-off point for drafting the commentary for the sources you include in your annotated bibliography. You can make the sentences you generate your own later, as you revise.

WAYS IN

HOW DO I DRAFT A COMMENTARY FOR AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY?

  1. Explore how you could use the source in your project(s).

    • I plan to use [title of article/book] to show ____ , _____ , and _______ .

    EXAMPLE I could use [Becker and Elías’s] proposal as an example of a radical or extreme solution. . . . (Gomez, “Annotated Bibliography”)
    I think I will use the NKF position statement as the voice of the status quo. (“Annotated Bibliography”)

  2. Make connections among your sources.

    • X is like/unlike Y in that _____ .

    EXAMPLE [Becker and Elias’s] proposal . . . stands in sharp contrast to the NKF’s opposition to financial compensation and Eric Posner’s compromise. (“Annotated Bibliography,” citation 1, par. 2)

  3. Assess the credibility of your sources.

    • X is likely to carry authority with most people because ______ .

    200

    EXAMPLE     		Becker, a Nobel Prize–winning economist at the University of Chicago, and Elías, a professor of economics at a university in Argentina. Becker and Elías have the authority to carry off a proposal this bold. (“Annotated Bibliography,” citation 1, par. 2)

For citation models and detailed instructions on creating a bibliography citation for your annotated bibliography, see Chapter 24 (MLA style) or Chapter 25 (APA style).

Analyze your audience.

Once you have conducted research and added potential sources to your annotated bibliography, spend a few minutes thinking about your audience. Answering the questions that follow will help you decide on the best approach to take to your report or analysis.

WAYS IN

For more about brainstorming, freewriting, and other idea-generating strategies, see Chapter 11.

WHAT WILL INTEREST READERS OF MY REPORT OR ANALYSIS?

Analyze your AUDIENCE by brainstorming or freewriting answers to the following questions:

  • Who are your readers, and what are they likely to know about the topic? What opinions are they likely to hold? (Reconsider what you learned from the Test Your Choice activity earlier in this Guide to Writing.)

  • How would you answer your readers’ “So what?” question? Think of at least one aspect of the topic that will clarify its importance for your readers.

  • What is your relationship with your readers? What TONE is most appropriate for addressing this audience? How do you want your readers to perceive you? (For an academic audience, a rational, dispassionate tone is usually most appropriate.)

Since you are reporting or analyzing a controversial topic, rather than offering your own opinion, be sure to keep your tone impartial.

Brainstorm subtopics for a report.

If you have been asked to write a report, you will need to focus your attention on a few key subtopics that you can address thoroughly. A good way to come up with a list of subtopics to consider is by reviewing what you already know:

Then make a list of the subtopics that seem most relevant. Here’s an example from Maya Gomez’s report:

Topic: Solving the kidney-shortage problem

201

Possible Subtopics

Gomez ended up focusing on four of these topics that she knew she had enough information about from her sources to report on in depth.

Choose opposing argument essays to analyze.

If you have been asked to write a comparative analysis, you will need to select texts that

It may also be helpful to choose opposing arguments that refer explicitly to one other or that at least address the same aspect of the topic from different perspectives.

When compiling your annotated bibliography or writing your report, you may have come across two (or three) essays that looked promising. If you have one promising text but need to find a good opposing one, consider doing additional research on LexisNexis Academic or other databases accessible through your college library using the key words or sources referred to in the essay you’ve already chosen. Visiting sites like procon.org or the Room for Debate pages on the New York Times Web site (nytimes.com) may also be helpful.

Synthesize sources for a report or analysis.

One effective way to make sense of the information you have accumulated is to create a synthesis chart. Once you’ve devised a list of subtopics, go back to your annotated bibliography and source notes to synthesize the information and ideas you have accumulated.

Gomez selected four possible solutions to the kidney shortage to focus on in her report:

202

She organized the information she found on those subtopics into a synthesis chart. Here is a portion of her chart on one of her subtopics:

Subtopics Source My Notes Location
Offer Incentives Becker & Elías Only paying donors will “close the gap between the demand and supply of kidneys” par. 8
Delmonico open letter Like NKF, opposed to pilot studies, $ incentives “would violate global standards and will not work.” Favors paying costs for donors. Signed by over 300 national and international doctors, clergy, bioethicists, members of organ procurement organizations. pars. 1-12
Satel, “Case” Satel had kidney transplant. “It is easy to condemn the black market and the patients who patronize it. But you can’t fault people for trying to save their own lives.” par. 10; quote, par. 9
Sullivan 1983 proposal by Dr. Barry Jacobs: People in US who need kidneys should be able to buy them from healthy third-world donors. Led to NOTA rules about compensation. pars. 1-2, pars. 9-10
US Transplant open letter Calls on Congress/president for pilot study to find ways to motivate donors, to make more organs available. 300 signers; surgeons, bioethicists, clergy. open-letter text tab, signer’s tab

Notice that Gomez keeps track of where the information in her notes came from, so she can check later to make sure she has represented borrowed ideas fairly and cited her sources accurately.

Analyze and compare the opposing argument essays.

The following activities will help you analyze and compare the opposing argument essays. If you’ve composed a summary of one or both texts, you’ve begun your analysis already. You may have highlighted and outlined the essay to identify parts of the argument. Now probe more deeply, exploring the motivating factors—the values, concerns, and priorities—that help explain the fundamental disagreement underlying the opposing points of view. (Most writers will need to reread parts of the opposing argument essays more than once and may need to do some additional research in order to determine the factors motivating each author.) Completing the Comparative Analysis Chart can be very helpful in planning and drafting your analysis.

WAYS IN

HOW CAN I ANALYZE AND COMPARE THE OPOSING ARGUMENTS?

203

Reread each essay, noting in the margin where you find indications of the following:

Position: The writer’s main idea or THESIS STATEMENT, the writer’s opinion about the topic

Arguments: How the writer supports the position and responds to alternative points of view

Motivating Factors:

  • Values: Moral, ethical, or religious principles (for example, justice, equality, “do unto others”)

  • Worldviews and ideologies: Political or religious belief systems (such as libertarianism, progressivism, conservatism, orthodoxy)

  • Ideas and ideals (for example, democratic ideals, including the right to vote and freedom of speech)

  • Concerns and fears (for example, personal safety, abuse of power, protecting the environment)

  • Goals and priorities about what is most important or urgent (for example, whether obedience to authority is more important than independent thinking)

Fill in the Comparative Analysis Chart.

Enter your notes, useful quotations, and the page or paragraph numbers in which you found the borrowed information. Searching the text for evidence of underlying values and other motivating factors will deepen your analysis and help you go beyond summarizing what is said to explaining why each author holds her or his opinion. Creating this chart will also help you see points of comparison and contrast between the opposing arguments. (Remember that you may have to leave some sections of the chart blank because you may not find examples of all the features in each essay.)

Chart for Analyzing Opposing Arguments
TOPIC:
Source    
Position    
Arguments    
   
   
Values    
Worldviews & Ideologies    
Ideas & Ideals    
Concerns & Fears    
Goals & Priorities    

To see Maya Gomez’s completed Comparative Analysis Chart, see the “Writer at Work” section.

204

TEST YOUR CHOICE

Evaluating Your Analysis

Get together with two or three other students to test the underlying value (or other motivating factor) you think plays an important role in the argument between the texts you’re comparing:

Presenters. Briefly tell your listeners what the disagreement is about and what you think is an important motivating factor (such as a value, worldview, or special concern) driving the argument. Provide one or two examples to show where you see the factor you’ve identified in the opposing texts.

Listeners. Tell the presenter what the examples suggest to you about the motivating factor underlying the disagreement. Share any questions, comments, or insights with the presenter.

Draft a working thesis for your report or analysis.

The thesis statement announces the purpose and the focus or main idea in both a report and a comparative analysis.

Purpose

Focus/Main idea

Forecast of subtopics

REPORT This report will survey an array of ideas that have been proposed to encourage people to donate their kidneys, including changing to an opt-out system of organ donation after death, facilitating paired kidney exchanges, reducing financial disincentives, and offering incentives. (Gomez, par. 3)

Purpose

Focus/Main idea

Forecast of subtopics

ANALYSIS This essay compares the underlying values driving the arguments in the NKF position statement “Financial Incentives for Organ Donation” and Satel’s article “When Altruism Isn’t Moral.” Their views are diametrically opposed. . . . The basis of their disagreement is the proper role of altruism. The NKF emphatically endorses the current “altruistic system” (par. 5).[[par. 5]] Satel, in contrast, argues that current policy is failing precisely because it is an “altruism-only system” (par. 13). (Gomez, par. 4)

Juxtaposing the thesis statements from Gomez’s report and analysis makes clear the different purposes of these two genres. They both focus on the issue of how to encourage more kidney donation. But whereas the report provides an overview, or survey, of different approaches to the problem, the analysis compares two conflicting documents to zero in on the factor (or factors) underlying the disagreement.

Create an outline to organize your report or analysis effectively for your readers.

205

For help organizing a comparison/contrast, see Chapter 18.

Once you have drafted a working thesis, you may want to devise a tentative outline, drawing on your invention and research notes. An effective outline for a report typically divides the topic into subtopics. An effective outline for a comparative analysis typically offers a sequenced (or alternating) comparison centered on points of disagreement.

Below are simple outlines of Gomez’s report and analysis, which you may use as a starting point:

Outline: Gomez’s Report

  1. Introduction: Provides a brief history of kidney transplantation and demonstrates the seriousness of the kidney shortage. Thesis statement identifies the topic (proposals to increase the number of kidneys available for transplantation) and forecasts subtopics. (pars. 1–3)

  2. Change from Opt-in to Opt-out System (Subtopic 1). Explains current opt-in system, surveys reasons for and against changing to opt-out, and concludes that this change is not enough to increase the number of kidneys available significantly. (pars. 4–5)

  3. Facilitate Paired Kidney Exchanges (Subtopic 2). Provides history, explains current status, and concludes that paired kidney exchanges will not increase supply significantly. (pars. 6–8)

  4. Remove Disincentives (Subtopic 3). Explores current efforts and proposed changes. (pars. 9–10)

  5. Offer Incentives (Subtopic 4). Explores history, and positions for and against offering incentives. (pars. 11–13)

  6. Conclusion: Reiterates the problem, emphasizes significance of problem. (par. 14)

Outline: Gomez’s Analysis

  1. Introduction: Demonstrates the seriousness of the kidney shortage and provides background infor-mation; introduces the position of the National Kidney Foundation (NKF); introduces Satel, a key critic of the NKF, and her position. (pars. 1–3)

  2. Conflict: Thesis identifies differing attitudes toward altruism as the basis of the conflict underlying Satel’s and the NKF’s positions on offering incentives to increase the supply of kidneys available for transplantation. (pars. 4–5)

  3. Satel’s First Objection: Moral Absolutism. Reviews Satel’s argument that the NKF assumes unfairly that altruism is a shared value that trumps all others. (pars. 6–7)

  4. Satel’s Second Objection: Reviews Satel’s position that NKF unfairly assumes that all agree that commodification of the human body is wrong. (pars. 8–9)

  5. Satel’s Third Objection: Criticizes the NKF’s moral logic—claims it commits the false choice fallacy. (pars. 10–11)

  6. Conclusion: Summarizes basic conflict: NKF emphasizes purity of motive; Satel prioritizes importance of increasing the pool of organs available for donation. (par. 12)

Use your outline to guide your drafting, but do not feel tied to it. You may figure out a better way to organize your ideas as you draft.

Develop your report or analysis.

206

Once you have a working thesis statement and outline, review your notes, including the writing you may have done to analyze your audience, brainstorm possible subtopics, synthesize information and ideas from your sources, and complete the comparative analysis chart to determine how you can use the ideas and information you have to support your thesis.

The following Ways In activities provide some sentence strategies to help you analyze opposing arguments and develop supporting paragraphs using writing strategies like classification and comparison or contrast. Use the sentence strategies as a jumping-off point—you can always revise them later—or use language of your own from the start.

WAYS IN

HOW CAN I PRESENT MY ANALYSIS OF THE OPPOSING ARGUMENTS?

Analyze a quotation. Compose a few sentences explaining why you think a particular quotation (or group of quotations) suggests a BASIC VALUE or other MOTIVATING FACTOR that plays an important role in the arguments you are analyzing.

  • Use of the words/phrase “ ________ ” shows that factor A is central to X’s way of thinking about _________.

EXAMPLE Altruism, according to Satel, is “the guiding narrative of the transplant establishment,” its underlying ideology or value system. (Gomez, Analysis, par. 5)

SUMMARIZE or PARAPHRASE the disagreement.

  • X, a member of group A, argues that [describe approach] because . Y, a member of group B, disagrees, arguing that [describe approach] because ____ .

EXAMPLE One of the most vocal critics of NOTA’s prohibition against compensating donors . . . is Sally Satel, M.D., . . . a lecturer in psychiatry at the Yale University Medical School and a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank “committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity and strengthening free enterprise.” And she is a kidney transplant recipient. . . . Whereas the NKF defends the status quo and urges retention of the valuable consideration clause, Satel deplores the “woeful inadequacy of our nation’s transplant policy” and proposes “rewards” to “encourage more living and posthumous donation” (par. 5).[[pars. 3, 4, MSP 000]] The basis of their disagreement is the proper role of altruism. The NKF emphatically endorses the current “altruistic system” (par. 5).[[par. 5, MSP 000]] Satel, in contrast, argues that current policy is failing precisely because it is an “altruism-only system” (par. 13).[[par 13, MSP 000]] (Gomez, Analysis, pars. 4–5)

207

WAYS IN

WHAT EXPLANATORY STRATEGIES COULD I USE?

For more about classification, see Chapter 17; for more about narration, see Chapter 14; for more about comparison and contrast, see Chapter 18; for more about definition, see Chapter 16.

Consider which explanatory strategies would be most useful in reporting on a controversial topic or analyzing conflicting positions on that topic. Ask yourself questions like these:

How can I CLASSIFY aspects of the topic or different points of view?

  • Topic X can be broken down into such categories as ____ , ______ , and _____ .

  • Some of the reasons Professor X supports include ______ , _____ , and ____ .

EXAMPLE This report will survey an array of ideas that have been proposed to encourage people to donate their kidneys including changing to an opt-out system of organ donation after death, facilitating paired kidney exchanges, reducing financial disincentives, and offering incentives. (“Report,” Gomez, par. 3)

How can I use ANECDOTES to tell a story and make the topic less abstract for my readers?

  • Consider the story of Ms. X, who did ______ in 2015.

  • For example, in 2015, X and Y stated ______ .

EXAMPLES The “first successful kidney transplant” took place in 1954 when Ronald Herrick donated one of his kidneys to his identical twin Richard, who was dying of kidney disease (National Kidney Foundation, “Milestones”). (“Report,” par. 1)

How could I use COMPARISON AND CONTRAST to sharpen similarities and differences among the different points of view?

  • While/Whereas X believes/argues/claims _____ , Y claims _____ .

  • X is like Y in these ways: ____ , ____ , _____ .

EXAMPLE Whereas the NKF defends the status quo and urges retention of the valuable consideration clause, Satel deplores the “woeful inadequacy of our nation’s transplant policy” and proposes “rewards” to “encourage more living and posthumous donation” (pars. 5, 6). (“Analysis,” par. 4)

How do I DEFINE terms or concepts that may be unfamiliar to my readers?

  • X means _____ .

  • X, a type of ______ , is characterized by _____ , _____ , and ______ .

EXAMPLE A paired kidney exchange essentially trades a biologically incompatible kidney, usually donated by a family member, for a compatible one donated by a stranger. (“Report,” par. 7)

208

For more about cause and effect, see Chapter 9.

What CAUSES or EFFECTS are important to note?

  • The result of ___ is ____ .

  • Because of _____- , we no longer do ____ .

EXAMPLE Because of improvements in blood and tissue typing, . . . it is no longer necessary for an identical twin or even a relative to make the donation. (“Report,” par. 1)

Use visuals or multimedia illustrations to enhance your explanation.

Reports explaining a controversial topic may benefit from including visuals, such as timelines, graphs, or tables. Reports published online can include animated graphics and videos. Presentations can use presentation slides (such as PowerPoint or Prezi) with embedded graphics or videos.

When deciding whether to include illustrations, ask yourself questions like the following:

Write the opening sentences.

Review what you have already written to see if you have something that would help you start your report or analysis, or try out one of these opening strategies:

Cite statistics to impress on readers the importance of the topic:

According to the National Kidney Foundation (NKF), more than 100,000 people are on the U.S. transplant waiting list, with “nearly 3,000 new patients” joining the list every month and an estimated 12 patients dying every day while waiting for a kidney (“Organ”). (Analysis, par. 1)

209

Begin with an anecdote to humanize the topic:

The “first successful kidney transplant” took place in 1954 when Ronald Herrick donated one of his kidneys to his identical twin Richard, who was dying of kidney disease (National Kidney Foundation, “Milestones”). Richard and Ronald’s successful tandem surgery was an historic event ushering in the era of kidney transplantation. (Report, par. 1)

At this point, you simply want an opening sentence to launch your draft. Later, you may discover a better way to capture your readers’ attention.

Draft your report or analysis.

By this point, you have done a lot of writing to

Now stitch that material together to create a draft. The next two parts of the Guide to Writing will help you evaluate and improve it.