IMMIGRATION and IMMIGRANTS coming to the UNITED STATES

User Generated

ZbavpnEbzrerm

Writing

Description

For this assignment:

Write four rhetorical précis using the template provided below from 4 different credible and scholar sources from your own research about IMMIGRATION and IMMIGRANTS coming to the UNITED STATES (one of the sources must be a reputable journal).


Reading questions:

  1. Using the CRAAP test, how sound is this source and why? (How do you know that it is a credible source)?

What do you find strong or especially agree with based on your current understanding and why?

  1. What do you find weak, fallacious, or especially disagree with based on your current understanding and why?

Has your thinking about your chosen topic changed as a result of this source and why/why not?

How might you use this source in an essay you might write?


Unformatted Attachment Preview

Last Name 1 Name Instructor’s Name ENGL 124 Day Month Year Rhetorical Précis: Title of Source Begin by annotating your texts; then follow the format for your précis, here. Your précis can be singlespaced to make each entry more succinct on the page. Each précis should include a) in a single coherent sentence, the name of the author, author’s profession, and title of their work, a rhetorically accurate verb (e.g., assert, argue, deny, refute, prove, disprove, explain), and a “that” clause containing the main claim of the work; b) in a single coherent sentence, an explanation of how the author develops and supports the major claim with key subclaims that are specifically named, between commas or semi-colons, including a citation; c) in a single coherent sentence, the author's purpose, followed by an "in order to" phrase; and d) in a single coherent sentence, a description of the intended audience and/or the relationship the author establishes with the audience and/or perceived biases of the author. Following each précis, respond to the following questions, then upload this document and your annotated source texts to the submission site I’ll create for you each week. How sound is this source and why? Response What do you find strong or especially agree with based on your current understanding and why? Response What do you find weak, fallacious, or especially disagree with based on your current understanding and why? Response Has your thinking about your chosen topic changed as a result of this source and why/why not? Response How might this source relate to an essay you might write? Response Works Cited (examples) Dean, Cornelia. "Executive on a Mission: Saving the Planet." The New York Times, 22 May 2007, www.nytimes.com/2007/05/22/science/earth/22ander.html?_r=0. Accessed 12 May 2016. Ebert, Roger. Review of An Inconvenient Truth, directed by Davis Guggenheim. rogerebert.com, 1 June 2006, www.rogerebert.com/reviews/an-inconvenient-truth-2006. Accessed 15 June 2016. Nordhaus, William D. "After Kyoto: Alternative Mechanisms to Control Global Warming." American Economic Review, vol. 96, no. 2, 2006, pp. 31-34. 1 Last Name 2 Rhetorical Précis: Title of Source Begin by annotating your texts; then follow the format for your précis, here. Your précis can be singlespaced to make each entry more succinct on the page. Each précis should include a) in a single coherent sentence, the name of the author, author’s profession, and title of their work, a rhetorically accurate verb (e.g., assert, argue, deny, refute, prove, disprove, explain), and a “that” clause containing the main claim of the work; b) in a single coherent sentence, an explanation of how the author develops and supports the major claim with key subclaims that are specifically named, between commas or semi-colons, including a citation; c) in a single coherent sentence, the author's purpose, followed by an "in order to" phrase; and d) in a single coherent sentence, a description of the intended audience and/or the relationship the author establishes with the audience and/or perceived biases of the author. Following each précis, respond to the following questions, then upload this document and your annotated source texts to the submission site I’ll create for you each week. How sound is this source and why? Response What do you find strong or especially agree with based on your current understanding and why? Response What do you find weak, fallacious, or especially disagree with based on your current understanding and why? Response Has your thinking about your chosen topic changed as a result of this source and why/why not? Response How might this source relate to an essay you might write? Response Works Cited (examples) Dean, Cornelia. "Executive on a Mission: Saving the Planet." The New York Times, 22 May 2007, www.nytimes.com/2007/05/22/science/earth/22ander.html?_r=0. Accessed 12 May 2016. Ebert, Roger. Review of An Inconvenient Truth, directed by Davis Guggenheim. rogerebert.com, 1 June 2006, www.rogerebert.com/reviews/an-inconvenient-truth-2006. Accessed 15 June 2016. Nordhaus, William D. "After Kyoto: Alternative Mechanisms to Control Global Warming." American Economic Review, vol. 96, no. 2, 2006, pp. 31-34. 2 Last Name 1 Name Instructor’s Name ENGL 124 Day Month Year Rhetorical Précis: Title of Source Begin by annotating your texts; then follow the format for your précis, here. Your précis can be singlespaced to make each entry more succinct on the page. Each précis should include a) in a single coherent sentence, the name of the author, author’s profession, and title of their work, a rhetorically accurate verb (e.g., assert, argue, deny, refute, prove, disprove, explain), and a “that” clause containing the main claim of the work; b) in a single coherent sentence, an explanation of how the author develops and supports the major claim with key subclaims that are specifically named, between commas or semi-colons, including a citation; c) in a single coherent sentence, the author's purpose, followed by an "in order to" phrase; and d) in a single coherent sentence, a description of the intended audience and/or the relationship the author establishes with the audience and/or perceived biases of the author. Following each précis, respond to the following questions, then upload this document and your annotated source texts to the submission site I’ll create for you each week. How sound is this source and why? Response What do you find strong or especially agree with based on your current understanding and why? Response What do you find weak, fallacious, or especially disagree with based on your current understanding and why? Response Has your thinking about your chosen topic changed as a result of this source and why/why not? Response How might this source relate to an essay you might write? Response Works Cited (examples) Dean, Cornelia. "Executive on a Mission: Saving the Planet." The New York Times, 22 May 2007, www.nytimes.com/2007/05/22/science/earth/22ander.html?_r=0. Accessed 12 May 2016. Ebert, Roger. Review of An Inconvenient Truth, directed by Davis Guggenheim. rogerebert.com, 1 June 2006, www.rogerebert.com/reviews/an-inconvenient-truth-2006. Accessed 15 June 2016. Nordhaus, William D. "After Kyoto: Alternative Mechanisms to Control Global Warming." American Economic Review, vol. 96, no. 2, 2006, pp. 31-34. 1 Last Name 2 Rhetorical Précis: Title of Source Begin by annotating your texts; then follow the format for your précis, here. Your précis can be singlespaced to make each entry more succinct on the page. Each précis should include a) in a single coherent sentence, the name of the author, author’s profession, and title of their work, a rhetorically accurate verb (e.g., assert, argue, deny, refute, prove, disprove, explain), and a “that” clause containing the main claim of the work; b) in a single coherent sentence, an explanation of how the author develops and supports the major claim with key subclaims that are specifically named, between commas or semi-colons, including a citation; c) in a single coherent sentence, the author's purpose, followed by an "in order to" phrase; and d) in a single coherent sentence, a description of the intended audience and/or the relationship the author establishes with the audience and/or perceived biases of the author. Following each précis, respond to the following questions, then upload this document and your annotated source texts to the submission site I’ll create for you each week. How sound is this source and why? Response What do you find strong or especially agree with based on your current understanding and why? Response What do you find weak, fallacious, or especially disagree with based on your current understanding and why? Response Has your thinking about your chosen topic changed as a result of this source and why/why not? Response How might this source relate to an essay you might write? Response Works Cited (examples) Dean, Cornelia. "Executive on a Mission: Saving the Planet." The New York Times, 22 May 2007, www.nytimes.com/2007/05/22/science/earth/22ander.html?_r=0. Accessed 12 May 2016. Ebert, Roger. Review of An Inconvenient Truth, directed by Davis Guggenheim. rogerebert.com, 1 June 2006, www.rogerebert.com/reviews/an-inconvenient-truth-2006. Accessed 15 June 2016. Nordhaus, William D. "After Kyoto: Alternative Mechanisms to Control Global Warming." American Economic Review, vol. 96, no. 2, 2006, pp. 31-34. 2 Rhetorical Précis Introduction A rhetorical précis (pronounced “pray-see,” whether singular or plural) is a summary of the essential points of an academic source. It includes four sentences which allow us to academic texts closely, analyze them carefully, and produce a succinct summary of them. Preparing to Write a Rhetorical Précis To write a rhetorical précis, the first step is to understand a source text very well. This requires annotating each source text, highlighting, underlining, circling and making notes like “main claim,” “subclaim 1,” “evidence,” “counterargument,” “rebuttal,” “key term” in the margins, and noting questions. The Rhetorical Précis Format 1. In a single coherent sentence, write the following: a. the name of the author, author’s profession, and title of their work, b. a rhetorically accurate verb (e.g., assert, argue, deny, refute, prove, disprove, explain), c. a “that” clause containing the main claim of the work. 2. In a single coherent sentence, explain how the author develops and supports the major claim with key subclaims that are specifically named, between commas, including a citation. 3. In a single coherent sentence, state of the author's purpose, followed by an "in order to" phrase. 4. In a single coherent sentence give a description of the intended audience and/or the relationship the author establishes with the audience and/or perceived biases of the author. Rhetorical Précis Sample The following sample illustrates the précis format. (It also provides a useful theory about the ways we form beliefs. You can see that in this class, we favor the “method of science,” as does Pierce. Note that you do NOT need to use numbers  in your précis.)  In “The Fixation of Belief,” scientist and philosopher Charles S. Pierce asserts that we possess psychological and social mechanisms designed to protect and cement (or “fix”) our beliefs.  Pierce supports this claim with descriptions of four methods of fixing beliefs and their limitations, namely: the method of tenacity, or holding closely to what one already believes, which may be shaken in the presence of others’ beliefs; the method of authority, or holding to beliefs those in authority hold, which may limit what one may believe; the a priori method, or holding to what “sounds good”; which is a matter of personal taste or intuition; and the method of science, or relying on the following assumptions: there is a real world out there existing independently of what we think about it, the real world has certain real characteristics and operates according to real and regular laws, and that if we understood these ways we could discern the truth of the real world out there (2, 5, 7, 9).  Pierce’s purpose in writing this essay is to point out the ways that people commonly establish their belief systems in order to jolt the awareness of the reader into considering how their own belief system may be the product of such methods and to consider what Pierce calls “the method of science” as a progressive alternative to the other three.  Given the technical language used in the article, Pierce is writing to a well-educated audience with some knowledge of philosophy and history and a willingness to consider other ways of thinking. 1 Evaluative Questions to Follow Each Précis: Following each rhetorical précis, respond to the following questions to evaluate each source: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Using the CRAAP test, how sound is this source and why? What do you find strong or especially agree with based on your current understanding and why? What do you weak, fallacious, or especially disagree with based on your current understanding and why? Has your thinking about your chosen topic changed as a result of this source and why/why not? How might this source relate to an essay you could write? Videos About Rhetorical Précis: The Rhetorical Precis - Alice Myatt (4:40) Rhetorical Precis Sample - Cate Miller (4:39) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc9SzYuJJds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6bYoOWEGso Rhetorical Precis model adapted from Oregon State “Sample Rhetorical Precis” http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/rhetoricalprecis/sample/peirce_sample_precis_click.html and https://www.csuchico.edu/lins/handouts/eval_websites.pdf 2
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

See attached:)

Last Name 1
Name
Instructor’s Name
ENGL 124
Day Month Year
Immigration to the United States
Rhetorical Précis: The Effects of Immigration on the United States’ Economy
In the article “The Effects of Immigration on the United States’ Economy,” Penn Wharton
Budget Model initiative challenges the blames that policymakers create on immigration
including slow wage growth, and argues that immigration actually results in greater occupational
specialization, a more educated workforce, better job-skill match, more innovation and generally
economic productivity. The author of the article uses the a priori method to develop and support
their claims; they hold to what appeals to reason. The purpose of this article is to highlight the
benefits of immigration to the economy of the United States in order to challenge common
assumptions on immigration. The intended audience for this article is the lawmakers who blame
immigration for slowing the growth of wages.
This is a sound article since the claims are supported by data. From my understanding of
the impact of an educated workforce on a country’s economy, I agree with this article;
immigrants cannot be blamed for slowing wage growth since the immigrants increase the
educated workforce. However, the sources of some facts are not stated. I had similar thinking
about the issue of immigration, and therefore the article has not changed my thinking. However,
it has increased my knowledge on the topic, and I would use the data from the article to write a
data-supported essay.
Rhetorical Précis: The Political Impact of Immigration: Evidence from the United States
In their article “The Political Impact of Immigration: Evidence from the United States,”
Anna Maria Mayda who is an Associate Professor of Economics, Georgetown University and
Giovanni Peri who is a Professor ...


Anonymous
Great! Studypool always delivers quality work.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags