Looking forward to being mean

I don’t ever remember learning about argumentative essays. My high school didn’t offer AP classes of any kind, so I don’t think I had that option.

After doing some independent research and, of course, asking a few people for help, I have finally figured out what “Rogerian” and “Toulmin” mean. I am NOT the “vicious” Toulmin type of writer. I really don’t like tearing people down for any reason. Rogerian is more my style. I know that isn’t always very popular, but I have found it to be a very useful tool.

I’ve spent a great deal of time working to create teams to support the needs of my children. Most of the time, all of the people involved were happy to be there, and creating consensus and cooperation was easy. Other times, we had to work for a very long time to find some common ground. I like being able to see the big picture, to understand what it is that people really want. I like being able to help other people see it as well.

I would imagine I might have a few opportunities to write argumentative papers in my career as an elementary school educator. I actually look forward to it, since I haven’t had the chance before.

I think I use the Rogerian style of “argument” when I work as tutor. Sometimes I have to figure out what my tutees are saying, and why they are saying it. Then I need to find a “nice” way to say something they don’t want to hear: “This paper really needs a lot of work.” Even though I may feel like using the Toulmin style of arguing, I don’t think I could get my message across that way. I have to let the writers know I understand what they are trying to say, and then say what I need to. I often feel like I am looking for common ground when I work with them.

My OTHER job is another story. I share my Art Teacher responsibilities with another woman, and right now things are not going so well for her. She is not getting along with the principal, and I find myself in the middle. That is not my idea of “common ground.” It is more like “Ground Zero.” She’s so stressed right now she is even mad at me.

When would someone use Toulmin style? Since I don’t have experience writing argumentative papers, and I missed the discussion in class, I can’t really imagine using them. Dr. Rogers hinted that we might use argumentative styles of writing as we compose our bibliographic essays. Maybe I’ll get my “big chance” after all.

Professor Xavier can do it. I can't.

I think my earliest memory of writing argumentative papers comes from Ms. Robinson's ninth grade English. If I recall, we had to do persuasive/argumentative papers on a topic of our choice. I chose the benefits of natural medicine over over-the-counter drugs. I'm not sure where I came across that topic, actually, but it must have been a really good paper because I never saw it again after I turned it in, even though everyone else in my class got it back. Oh well. It's never good to dwell on the past--and it's often especially painful to dwell on past writing.

Over time, I've picked up bits and pieces of writing arguments from various professors, although I can really only remember Ms. Robinson's brief, watered down lesson. Oh, and I remember stuff from my English 2010 class last year. Especially the technique of pulling in and acknowledging the other side's opinions and views, only to systematically discredit and refute in the most brutal, but professional, means possible. I mean, I feel like I'm taking someone's beliefs and squashing them with a big fat stamp that says "FALSE." Or maybe that's just the way I was taught to view it. Either way, I'm glad at least one teacher pointed out that important element in writing argumentative papers--I know that I was subconsciously aware of it before, but it was nice to hear it laid out in actual words.

Yes. Anyway.

So, what's one thing I wish I had learned about writing arguments?

How to read minds.

It would make life so easy. In every class that I have taken that requires the constant construction of papers, my first writing assignment always ends up being the poor guinea pig. Sure, the professor tells you what he or she wants to see in the paper, but no one ever really knows until the stupid thing comes back--often times with a lower grade than expected. Granted, after that first paper, I can usually figure out what the professor is expecting and be better prepared for the next go around. But still it frustrates me immensely! Sometimes, professors might think that they've explained the requirements thoroughly enough to allow their students to do a good job, but oftentimes it ends up a guessing game where the students are required to read minds like a Professor Xavier. Othertimes, I think the professors just want to watch their sudents fail miserably that first time so they can use it as an example while simultaneously laughing their evil cackles behind the students' backs.

But that's just college for you.

All in all, I feel fairly comfortable about writing arugments. However, helping to tutor a student who is writing an argument without imposing my own views and ideas on him or her can be a huge challenge. Hey, I guess that's something else I wish I'd be taught--how to deal with flying evil fairies.

...yeah, now I've lost myself.

Arguments

I honestly cannot remember who taught me how to write an argumentative paper. I do distinctly remember, however, someone teaching me to include the oppositions side in my paper to lend it weight. This is why when picking an argument I always carefully chose one that had two equally valid sides. It is hard to argue for not wearing seat belts while driving, for example.
Yet, I also stayed away from extremely controversial topics like abortion which tend to be colored by things other than logical arguments. One's vision can become too clouded by other issues and then your paper is not really read. People see that you are against whatever that person is writing and immediately discredit your paper. Kind of like Fox News or the Utah State Legislature.
However, I must say that I do prefer a Toulminian style of argument over the Rogerian style. The Rogerian style feels to me like avoidance of the question. I see the point, but it seems that exploring both sides of an issue should lead to an opinion on that issue, not just an exploration of it. Unless of course your assignment is to explore it, like for this class.
Perhaps I have been arguing one side or another for too long to make the Rogerian style seem valid. I am used to being chastised for being too wishy-washy (Dr. Rogers is in part responsible for this). This means that the Rogerian style feels too weak.
I am also used to not only making judgements on social issues, but literary issues as well. Therefore I am used to arguing about things like the reason for Jean Toomer's Cane containing visual representations of arcs or why Cormac McCarthy uses a blend of humor and violence (see Bakhtin for this). Because Dr. Rogers hammered this style into my head for a semester of Academic College Writing, I now do this all of the time. This is also why I don't do the Rogerian method. Also we were publically humiliated if we did not do this. This makes one key to not screw up. I also learned way too much about crazy people in England (see Graham Swift's Waterland for this).
I think that I write arguments now without much thought. This is why the paper for this class is going to be such of a challenge. It goes against everything I've been taught for my entire English career (as I jokingly label it). This is going to be the biggest challenge. I will have to unthink everything I know and write something new.
I think the challenge is not writing an argumentative paper, but not writing an argumentative paper. Does anyone else feel me on this?
Anyway I have like fifty more words to reach five hundred, so I'll leave with the idea that I have been very lucky in my schooling that I was taught how to write an argument without remembering the source. Either that or every English teacher I've ever had is the source. In any case, I can now write one so automatically that not arguing becomes the new challenge. This is my dilemma.
Okay, now I've said my five hundred words so...I'm going to work on writing those papers.