By now, you should have a firm grasp of the existing conversation on your topic after having surveyed the field on your topic so as to narrow the who, what, where, when, and why/how, so that you can fully formulate your own ideas and develop an original complex claim with which to place yourself in the scholarly conversation on your topic.  Evaluating your working claim As you draft your working claim, evaluate its efficacy. A strong claim will be: • Contestable: Intentionally writing a claim that someone can disagree with may seem counterintuitive, but consider that if no one could possibly disagree with what you’re arguing, there’s little point in writing about it. Being able to acknowledge and refute counterarguments will strengthen your claim, not weaken it. o POOR: “Durham and Chapel Hill have much in common, although they are different in some ways.” Well, yeah, but who cares? o BETTER: “Although Durham’s industrial past has created a more deeply troubled economic caste system than found in Chapel Hill, it has also created greater cultural diversity that is now helping to guide the city’s economic renewal.” There is certainly room for disagreement in this claim; as a result, it provides a much more interesting basis for discussion. The author is likely to support it more passionately than the first claim. • Reasonable: While you want your claim to be contestable, you also want it to be reasonable. A claim can be radical, in the context of current dialogue on your topic, and still be reasonable if you have sufficient evidence to support it. Readers will recognize the difference between thoughtful, critical interpretations of evidence and contortions that twist evidence around to support an unreasonable claim. • Specific: Broad claims are more difficult to support effectively than focused claims. Specific claims also tend to provide readers with more useful information than broad claims. o POOR: “North Carolina apple farmers are responding to the current economic situation by finding new ways to generate income.” o BETTER: “With hurricanes causing significant crop losses over the past decade, North Carolina apple farmers are increasingly relying on agrotourism to generate reliable supplemental income.” • Significant: Consider the context of the course for which you are writing your paper. Is your claim adding anything meaningful to the current dialogue surrounding your topic? Note that as you become more familiar with the concerns of a given topic or discipline, you will be able to contribute more significantly to the discussion. • Interpretive: Does your claim offer an interpretation of evidence or does it simply describe a situation? If it describes a situation it is a claim of fact. o POOR: “The United States is a federal system that divides governmental powers between national and state authorities.” Rather than offering an interpretation, this sentence describes an incontestable fact. While it may have truth value, it makes a poor th.

1. By now, you should have a firm grasp of the existing
conversation on your topic after having surveyed the field on
your topic so as to narrow the who, what, where, when, and
why/how, so that you can fully formulate your own ideas and
develop an original complex claim with which to place yourself
in the scholarly conversation on your topic.
Evaluating your working claim
As you draft your working claim, evaluate its efficacy. A strong
claim will be:
• Contestable: Intentionally writing a claim that someone can
disagree with
may seem counterintuitive, but consider that if no one could
possibly disagree with what you’re arguing, there’s little point
in writing about it. Being able to acknowledge and refute
counterarguments will strengthen your claim, not weaken it.
o POOR: “Durham and Chapel Hill have much in common,
although they are different in some ways.” Well, yeah, but who
cares?
o BETTER: “Although Durham’s industrial past has created a
more deeply troubled economic caste system than found in
Chapel Hill, it has also created greater cultural diversity that is
now helping to guide the city’s economic renewal.” There is
certainly room for disagreement in this claim; as a result, it
provides a much more interesting basis for discussion. The
author is likely to support it more passionately than the first
claim.
• Reasonable: While you want your claim to be contestable, you
also want it to be reasonable. A claim can be radical, in the
context of current dialogue on your topic, and still be
reasonable if you have sufficient evidence to support it. Readers
will recognize the difference between thoughtful, critical
interpretations of evidence and contortions that twist evidence
around to support an unreasonable claim.
• Specific: Broad claims are more difficult to support
effectively than focused claims. Specific claims also tend to

2. provide readers with more useful information than broad claims.
o POOR: “North Carolina apple farmers are responding to the
current economic situation by finding new ways to generate
income.”
o BETTER: “With hurricanes causing significant crop losses
over the past decade, North Carolina apple farmers are
increasingly relying on agrotourism to generate reliable
supplemental income.”
• Significant: Consider the context of the course for which you
are writing
your paper. Is your claim adding anything meaningful to the
current dialogue surrounding your topic? Note that as you
become more familiar with the concerns of a given topic or
discipline, you will be able to contribute more significantly to
the discussion.
• Interpretive: Does your claim offer an interpretation of
evidence or does it simply describe a situation? If it describes a
situation it is a claim of fact.
o POOR: “The United States is a federal system that divides
governmental powers between national and state authorities.”
Rather than offering an interpretation, this sentence describes
an incontestable fact. While it may have truth value, it makes a
poor thesis statement.
o
BETTER:“ThedivisionofgovernmentalauthorityinherenttotheUni
tedStates’fe deralsystem produces unnecessary competition
between state and national jurisdictions. This division hinders
the effectiveness of public policies at both levels of
government.” These two sentences (note that a thesis statement
might be two sentences, not just one) offer readers an
interpretation. They propose a specific relationship between a
cause (i.e. the U.S. federal system) and its effects (i.e. less
effective public policies), as well as the rationale behind the
interpretation (i.e. competition between state and national
authorities).
Revising your claim

3. After finishing your rough draft, it’s time to revise. As you do
so, ask whether the evidence you discuss in the body of the
essay supports your working claim. Can you make your central
claim more specific and precise? Have you sufficiently
addressed (as opposed to ignored) counterarguments that might
undermine
Your thesis? Has your position changed or evolved? In the
process of revising, make sure your claim conveys precisely
what you wish to argue and that the evidence you present is
immediately relevant.
Requirements:
1. Introduction (1 page): In your current situation, or modified
Literature Review, state the background on your topic. Place
your research in the context of what is currently known and
thought about your topic and set up your claim. You should
show that you understand what others have already written
about your subject by pointing out a gap or conflict that your
research will fill or address—what will you add to this
discussion. Your argument can also enter the research
conversation on your topic by taking issue with the conclusions
of previous researchers. Please note, you should edit your
Literature review to a page, as this is an 8 page paper a longer
introduction is not appropriate.
2.
Arguable
Claim:
A clear argument/statement of your research question that
disrupts the current situation or the current understanding of
your topic. This is a statement of your research question that
states what isn’t known or fully understood about your subject.
This typically begins with a but, however, or other signal word,
and gives an answer or explanation.
3. Stakes: State the significance of your claim question/answer.
This answers the so what question and is crucial to motivating
reader interest. Show that you are addressing an issue that

4. matters, and establish that there is more to be said about it. You
can explain why your topic is important, how your approach to
the topic is unique, or show that the research addresses an
aspect of the issue still unresolved.
4. Counter argument: (1 page maximum) that acknowledges
major alternative views and criticism and responds to
anticipated questions and objections (also qualifying
assertions).
5. Conclusion: that either: points out a new significance, a
practical application, or new research. Or, conclude by setting
your discussion into a different, perhaps larger, context; or, by
considering the implications of your argument, or by redefining
one of the key terms of your argument. You can also explain
why this topic is timely or important, valuable or significant.
6. Adopt a Voice of Authority By writing in third person (and
first when it is appropriate) and by Writing Concisely. Another
way writers create an ethos of authority is by using a high
percentage of meaning-carrying words-- Use Academic and
Discipline-Specific Vocabulary.
• 8-9 double spaced pages, 12 pt. Times New Roman font
• Based on a narrow/specific, unique and complex stake-driven
claim of your own, clearly articulated and supported throughout
the text of the paper. A Complex claim is significant for the
field, feasible, does not repeat the work of others, and poses and
answers a research question
of relevance, interest, and significance.
Use of sources for this assignment:
-
5
scholarly sources
-any primary sources that will help prove your claim.
Remember: These are
contemporary accounts
of an event, written by someone who experienced or witnessed
the event in question. These

5. original documents
(i.e., they are not about another document or account) are often
diaries, letters, memoirs, journals, speeches, manuscripts,
interviews and other such unpublished works.
-An optional “I” paragraph, in which you assert your experience
as another form of
evidence (keep this to a paragraph--as the main paper must
follow the 3 academic uses of I besides this paragraph--using I
to distinguish between arguments).
• Original title that has a hook, your key terms, and Location (a
location is necessary only if you are analyzing a primary source,
if not, then a time period under discussion can replace location.
See our class title reading below for
• Proper use of formatting and citations. Works Cited page, also
in proper formatting (if you need help, please use Easy Bib);
MLA is fine, unless you want to branch out into the citation
style of your field. You must identify you citation style if not
MLA, so I know which one you are using and will use that
criteria to grade the citations.