Requirement: Write effectively as defined by the Army standard - “understood by the reader in a single, rapid reading and is free of errors in substance, organization, style, and correctness in accordance with PL 111-274.”Choose ONE topic from the following to write a persuasive essay:1. Leadership Challenges: Read LTC Sam Fishburne, MAJ Joe Dumas, MAJ Benjamin Stegmann, and CPT Jim Burds "Field Manual 3-0 Doctrine Addressing Today's Fight," published by the Military Review, dtd. Jan-Feb 2019. Discuss 3 ramifications that the new FM 3-0, Operations (Oct 2017) and the shift to LSCO has on company level leadership in your branch.https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/military...2. Professional Integrity: Read Leonard Wong and Stephen Gerras’ “Lying to Ourselves: Dishonesty in the Army Profession,” published by the US Army War College Press, dtd. February 2015. Discuss 3 distinct aspects of U.S. Army professionalism in which leaders succeed and/or struggle to maintain their integrity. Then propose at least 1 concrete method of securing internal (within the Army) or external (with the civilian population) trust.https://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pdffiles/pub1250.pd...3. Subordinate Leader Development: Read Col. (Ret.) Frank Wenzel’s “Developing Leaders,” published in Military Review, dtd. July-August 2015. Discuss 1 area of weakness in U.S. Army subordinate leader development programs, and propose 3 recommended improvements to address that weakness.https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/military-review/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20150831_art010.pdf4.Read ADP 6-22, Army Leadership and the Profession, dtd July 2019, Chapters 2-7. Identify and justify one characteristic from the Army Leadership Requirements Model you think is the most important in building and leading company sized teams in today’s ever changing operational environment. Ensure your justification includes specific content (with citation) from Army Doctrine and why that characteristic is important to building and leading company sized teams. Shape your thoughts in a logical order that will persuade the audience that your characteristic is the most important.The paper must be two to three pages long.This assignment is worth 70 points.Write in accordance with the Army writing style following the guidance in AR 25-50, Preparing and Managing Correspondence (Oct 2020).Bibliography AND Endnotes are required. Minimum of 2 references. Title page, endnotes page, and bibliography page do not count towards the length of the paper. Title page, paper format, and references must be in Turabian Style (9th ed.). Substance and style will mirror the Army Writing Style per AR 25-50.Please see the TRADOC Writing Resources for references https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/instructor-wr... and https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/student-writi...

Length : 5-7 pages , 7-9 paragraphs , 1250-1600 words This writing project includes a comprehensive application of the elements of critical reasoning that we are studying in this course . The main objective is to use the critical thinking strategies described in the course to analyze and evaluate contrasting arguments . You can preview the requirements for the final paper in the Week 8 assignment below . This is not an opinion piece or persuasive essay . The goal is to present contrasting arguments using information from credible sources and to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these positions using content from the course . As you put this together , are you following the critical analysis process that we emphasize in critical reasoning ? This means fairly considering all research equally before reaching a conclusion . Your rough draft should include 1 - 2 paragraphs for each of the following elements :  1. Introduction : Identify the issue / topic . Provide the necessary background and important recent developments . Define key terms and concepts .  2. Arguments and Counterarguments : Summarize the best arguments on both sides of the issue . Include relevant research from credible sources used to support each conclusion . 3. Evaluation of Critical Thinking : Assess the strength of the arguments and the quality of thinking surrounding this issue . Identify weaknesses in critical thinking such as fallacies rhetorical devices , vague language , and cognitive biases Provide specific examples of how these weaknesses appear in arguments , using terminology and definitions from the course Evaluate the quality of scientific and anecdotal evidence using the standards of inductive and deductive reasoning described in the course . Consider the quality of causal relationship , analogies , generalizations , and / or moral reasoning .  4. Conclusion : Analyze the totality of research and offer a critical thinker's response to the issue Identify your own position and experience with the issue and explain how your thinking of the subject has evolved as a result of your analysis