AFTER READING THE ESSAYS, PLEASE RESPOND TO THE FOLLOWING TWO-PART PROMPT:
1) Both of these essays are models of scholarly research writing from peer-reviewed journals. In other words, they are considered by many (especially at the university level) to be the ultimate goal of all academic writers. However, these essays – like other scholarly articles you may have encountered – can be difficult to read and understand. So, describe your general strategy for getting through a reading like this: what makes the process easier? Is there anyway to make it easier, or do you just put up with the difficulty? What strategies or methods do you use to approach reading an article like this? Are those approaches different than what you do when you’re reading something that’s been published for a more conventional audience? Explain your answer.
2) Please summarize the main idea of both of these essays in your own words*. These are both argumentative essays, so how would you describe what it is the authors from both essay are trying to persuade the audience to accept or agree to? For each essay, please not only paraphrase the main argument, but briefly explain how or why you arrived at that conclusion. And finally: which essay did the better job of persuading you to accept their argument? Explain your answer.
TO FULL MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS THREAD:
1) Your Initial Post must be a minimum of 350 words, total.
2) Your initial post must address each set of questions directly and clearly.