chart about the effectiveness/ineffectiveness

Believing

Doubting

Impressive use of logic

Problematic use of logic and/or several fallacies.

Several of the author’s strategies (such as use of emotional appeal or compare-contrast) are persuasive and compelling.

Some aspects of the approach are problematic (its use of pathos, for example, feels manipulative). Flaws in the writing style work against the argument.

The design of the essay complements the argument and/or the style of the writing does.

The design/writing style could be improved. For example, it uses too much sarcasm or too casual of language for its audience.

The ethos helps the author make his/her case. (For example, the author has impressive credentials/the site/journal is reliable, the research is up to date, etc.)

Some aspects of its credibility are problematic, such as bias.

The statistics or studies are representative, come from reliable sources, and can be verified elsewhere (i.e., in the other sources in the casebook, in credible online sources, etc.).

The statistics/studies used aren’t representative/seem flawed. They don’t match the information on credible sites.

All points are well supported with evidence, and quotes are from reliable authorities.

There isn’t enough backing for some of the points in the argument.

The author takes the other side’s arguments and values into consideration, and even admits that they have points.

There is not enough consideration for the other side’s points/they are unfairly represented.

Reliable sources/quotes are used.

Biased sources/quotes are used.

It reaches out to its audience.

It risks alienating rather than persuading its audience.

Analogies, anecdotes, and comparisons are used effectively to reach the audience.

Analogies, anecdotes, and/or comparisons don’t quite work.

It seems to include all the content it should.

It is missing content (issues, concerns, points) it should include.