CMP-125 (Kelley, Spring 2025)

SEMINAR IN WRITING & RESEARCH: RAP (RESEARCHED ARGUMENT PROJECT) GUIDELINES

Overview of the Finished Product

The “RAP” is your Researched Argument Project.  It helps you exercise essential collegiate writing and research skills over three linked essays prefaced by an initial topic proposal.

The basics: This is a series of three separate but related essays, each with its own central function.  Together, they form a series of three “articles” which outlines a problem or situation to solve, surveys possible solutions, and explains your argument for the best solution.  The structure here is quite particular, but the topic is up to you.

Remember: This is an argument supported with research, not research notes you supplement with an argument.  Your claims are the keys here.  Imagine a short series of research-based, opinionated articles you might see in a magazine or journal printed once a month — this project is much like that.  By the way, all three parts will have their own independent “Works Cited” page.  (A note on semantics: Throughout this project, I will refer to each “essay” as a “part” as well — the terms are synonymous here.)

Basic Procedure

First of all, you need to understand the project as a whole.  The basic question you are answering is effectively this: “How can we best solve the problem of _______?” or this: “What is the best way to do _______?”  Either think of a problem that needs to be solved or a situation/process that could be handled in a better manner than it is now.  In either case, there must be multiple solutions worth discussing (at least three).  The structure is as follows: 

Part A:    You outline a problem for which there are multiple solutions.  You explain its history, possible causes, and anything else relevant that your (general) audience needs to know.  Research allows you to provide accurate background information and demonstrate the relevance of the problem to readers.

Part B:    You explain the proposed, theoretically possible, and/or currently employed solutions to this problem.  You also evaluate the merits and flaws of each solution presented.  The bulk of your research is likely done here.  You don’t discuss your proposed solution here, however.

Part C:    You finally propose the solution you favor, be it one you waited to explain here or a hybrid solution featuring elements of several solutions discussed in Part B.  You argue for your favored solution with thorough reasoning and evidence, covering both potential flaws and finally the merits you think make it the optimal solution.

Second of all, you need a topic.  The key here: pick something you are interested in.  Why have an open topic and waste it on something boring?  Good topics usually fall in one or more of the following categories:

• You know something about the subject and thus have a starting point.
• You’d like to learn more about the subject, either for your own interest or for your major.
• Given your major, you should know more about the subject (but may not get to it in your years in college).

This is a detailed project, but not particularly long, so keep your topic narrow.  For example,  “gun control” is way too big; however, “What is the best way to enact tighter gun control legislation in Michigan?” is not.  For another example, “How do we improve U.S. schools?” is way too wide; however, “What’s the best way to incorporate music education into U.S. public school curricula?” would work very well.  Brainstorming Tip: Start general, then focus your thoughts.  For an example, consider this: Starting with “I’d like to write about the space program,” focusing on current NASA policies, then narrowing this focus to administrative matters, a student got this topic: “How can we revamp the leadership and administrative processes at NASA to better serve the aims of the space program?”  This specificity resulted in a sane amount of research and a well-focused end product. 

Notes on the RAP Topic Proposals

Before you turn in any of the RAP essays, you will turn in an RAP Topic Proposal outlining some possible topics you could use for the RAP.  This document should contain at least two different topic ideas.  (Three or more is fine and can only help — it’s insurance that you’ll generate at least one workable topic.)  Each of these topic ideas should do the following:

1. Name and explain what subject you’d like to talk about (not necessarily specific yet).

2. List a few notes on what you know about the subject already.

3. List a few possible info sources and discuss their potential in a few sentences after some preliminary research.

4. Briefly explain why you want to cover this area.

The equivalent of a few paragraphs in outline form or otherwise will suffice for this.  Remember, start with a basic topic concept fitting the problem-solution format: make sure you’re asking a “how should we do XYZ?” sort of question that can be answered with at least three potential solutions.  Note:  You definitely don’t have to know what solution you’d argue for yet.  This is one of the RAP’s strengths.  Many students change their opinions once they’ve done a lot of research, anyway.

Next, the following is a self-explanatory list concerning topic selections: 

Some Possible Prompts for the RAP: (A non-exhaustive selection.  Use for brainstorming: narrow down to a far more specific topic or use merely as examples.)

Consider approaches to some issue/concept/thing in: ● Research/Science               ● Ecology               ● Government               ● Technology                ● Psychology ● A Hobby or Sport                 ● Legality                ● Education                  ● History                       ● Music, Literature, Etc.

Notes on Part A: Problem Analysis

In this essay, you outline a problem to which there are multiple solutions.  Since you’re writing to a general audience, assume you’ll have to explain specifics, jargon, etc. on the topic.  Remember: start out fairly narrow to begin with.  For example, introducing a paper on a question like “how do we best use DNA evidence for death-row cases?” by summarizing all knowledge we have accrued on DNA thus far in history may not exactly work too well, considering the word limit!

Material in this part should include:

• A basic outline of the problem and its relevance and/or scope.
• The causes or probable causes behind this problem.
• Any history or background necessary to the understanding of your paper.
• Note: You can end this essay with something like this: “Now that I’ve outlined the problem of ____, in next essay I will discuss some possible solutions to it.”  Clearly, you don’t need this exact language (just something similar), and you want to build to that conclusion (not just abruptly end), but anything simple like this is fine.
• Include a “Works Cited” page (and, of course, the correlative in-text parenthetical citations).

Possible strategies for this part include:

• When using quotes/paraphrases to help outline the problem, cite experts and “primary” sources when possible. 
• Start with a present problem (or permutation of it) and trace its roots back, chronologically or causally.
• As a contrast to the above, develop your points in a past-to-present manner.
• Use first-hand cases or examples.  (Starting with a “typical”/“hypothetical” scenario can work well, for instance.)
• Remember, Part A sets the tone for your RAP: if you poorly define the problem, you’ll likely research and argue poorly, too. 

Notes on Part B: Possible Solutions

In this essay, you explain various possible solutions to this problem and then discuss the pros and cons of each solution you introduce.  People have likely approached the problem before, and thus there are likely going to be several proposed solutions.  Also, there may be a solution that is now standard or favored.  (It may or may not be one you’d argue for — probably not.)  Your goal is to explain and evaluate these solutions and their sources: who has argued for what, now and in the past, and how much sense do the ideas make?

Please note that many “solutions” are merely implied in the writing/ideas/policies/etc. of others — you won’t necessarily find loads of research with neatly highlighted “solution” paragraphs, obviously!  (Indeed, keep in mind the terms “problem” and “solution” are merely convenient tags — don’t be hobbled by them.)

Note: Remember to withhold all mention of the solution you favor until Part C!  And since there should be a minimum of three possible solutions for your problem (including the one you argue for in Part C), you should be covering a minimum of two possible solutions here in Part B (though it’s likely you’ll find more than that to discuss).

Material in this part should include:

• Summaries, paraphrases, quotes, illustrations, examples, and/or anything else that can help you convey the nature of each proposed solution you discuss.
• Research material that supports your evaluations of each possible solution. 
• Not just “data dump” summaries but real commentary.  What outcomes does each solution offer?
• Note: You can start this essay with an intro like this: “In the last essay I discussed the problem of ____.  Now I will discuss some possible solutions to ____.”  Again, you don’t need this exact language.
• Also: You can end this essay with a conclusion that looks like this: “In next essay I will discuss what I consider the best solution to ____.”  Obviously, you don’t need to exactly quote that, either (and again, don’t just abruptly tack it on).
• Include a “Works Cited” page (and, of course, the correlative in-text parenthetical citations).

Possible strategies for this part include:

• Don’t get overly critical here: bashing an idea will destroy your own credibility.  Be critical when necessary, but not vitriolic.  (On the other hand, blind and fanatical devotion will not help your case, either.)
• Consider the background and motivations of the people or institutions proposing various solutions.  What’s their agenda?  What do they stand to gain?  Are they credible?  Are they objective?  Tell us about this if needed.
• You should structure this so you explain and then evaluate each possible solution in turn: explanation, evaluation; explanation, evaluation, and so on.  It is highly recommended you avoid any other sort of structure for this essay, as they all are bound to be needlessly confusing. 

Notes on Part C: Argument for the Best Solution

In this essay, you make your argument for the solution you find the best.  This is the grand finale: you are either going to argue for a solution you waited to reveal until now, or argue for your own hybrid solution which incorporates ideas from several sources (including, obviously, you and at least some of the solutions you discussed in Part B). 

Material in this part should include:

• An explanation of your solution.  This should be like the explanations in Part B, only more detailed.
• An argument for your solution, obviously.  Much of your goal is to answer the question “Why this solution in particular?” (For impact, you may want to save some startling details/facts about your solution [or the others] until now.)  This argument will be similar to (though deeper than) your evaluations in Part B, since you should cover the upsides and downsides of your solution alike.  (When discussing the downsides, your argument should naturally explain how they do not outweigh the positive elements of your solution.)
• New evidence/examples, hypothetical/real-world scenarios, quotes, or other support for this argument.
• Note: You can start this essay with an intro like this: “In the last essay I discussed possible solutions to ____.  Now I will discuss the best solution to ____.”  As usual, don’t worry about exactly quoting that, but anything like this is fine.
• Include a “Works Cited” page (and, of course, the correlative in-text parenthetical citations). 

Possible strategies for this part include:

• Previously, you considered the motivations behind the proposals of others.  What about your own?
• If you found all other solutions to be only partially satisfactory, you may find yourself proposing a “hybrid” solution (as mentioned above) — a solution composed of elements from several of the proposals/ideas/ philosophies discussed in Part B.  That’s fine; treat this like any other sort of solution and evaluatively argue for it as outlined above.  Just be sure to acknowledge whose idea each bit of your solution is.  You will likely find yourself using phrases like “As previously mentioned by [so-and-so]” rather often here.
• It is highly recommended that you structure this such that you first explain your solution, then discuss possible downsides, and then “end on a high note” by discussing the upsides and why you think they make this the best solution.  Any other structure may emphasize the potential downsides (if they appear last) or be too complex.  

Technical Aspects

• Each part will be handed in as a separate essay with its own Works Cited Page.
• This entire project should not exceed 4,500 words (and may add up to rather less).  The individual length of each of the three essays will vary (perhaps greatly), so concentrate on the necessary content explained above more than the word count.  (Some subjects might take more space — talk to me about special cases if you’re not sure.)
• 1” margins all around.  Double-space the main body of the text, as always.  Page #s are optional but appreciated.
• Use a basic 10-12 point font (anything sensible is fine).  Include a title.  (You don’t need a title page.)
• Heading: name, course number and section, assignment name (“RAP Part __” is fine), due date, and word count.
• For each essay, your last page(s) will be your “Works Cited” page.  Guidelines for this are in the writing handbook, but here are the basics: Give it a heading (“Works Cited”), alphabetize it, include only work you actually parenthetically cite in the text of that particular essay, and use MLA documentation (see the handbook).  If you are missing a piece of citation info (date, city, etc.),  just write “no date” or “no city” and use the source.  Use common sense; missing lots of info is bad form, but don’t omit a great source on a single technicality!  In my experience, “A” papers feature at least 5-10 sources overall, sometimes several more.  No parenthetical citations or WC page = -1 letter grade in each case.
• Graphs, charts, etc. are welcome but not necessary.  Format anything like this as you see fit in the text or in an appendix.
• For a look at how each essay will be graded, the “grading rubric” of the course appears below.  Note: You are graded on the overall quality of the assignment, and the criteria below are the elements that demand the most attention during grading.  However, this rubric is a general guide and a timesaver, not an exhaustive list.  Thus, you cannot draw mathematically direct correlations between the criteria and the grade. 

Assessment Guide

Outstanding: A Range	Strong: B Range	Adequate: C Range	Limited: D Range	Seriously Limited: F Range	Deficient: Zero Range
An Outstanding paper skillfully argues a clear and specific position supported with relevant evidence and shows excellent control of writing elements.  A paper in this category exhibits all of the following:	A Strong paper competently argues a position, provides relevant supporting detail, and shows good control of writing elements.  A paper in this category exhibits at least all of the following:	An Adequate paper argues a position, provides supporting detail, and generally shows control of writing elements.  A paper in this category exhibits at least all of the following:	A Limited paper asserts a position that is sometimes unfocused and/or undeveloped or unsupported and shows uneven control of writing elements.  A paper in this category exhibits one or more of the following:	A Seriously Limited paper asserts a position which is largely unfocused, undeveloped and/or unsupported, and shows little control of writing elements.  A paper in this category exhibits one or more of the following:	A Deficient paper attempts to address the topic, but the language and style are inappropriate for the given audience, purpose and/or occasion.  A paper in this category exhibits one or more of the following:
Claim: Clear and debatable Focused and specific Compelling	Claim: Clear and debatable Focused and specific	Claim: Clear Not nec. debatable Not nec. specific	Claim: Vague Barely debatable Barely consistent	Claim: Unclear Undebatable Inconsistent	Claim: What claim?
Evidence/Support: Relevant Concrete evidence Multiple sources Fair assessment Ample	Evidence/Support: Relevant Concrete evidence Multiple sources Incomplete assessment	Evidence/Support: Mostly supported Passable sources Less critical assessment	Evidence/Support: Often unsupported Limited sources Little assessment	Evidence/Support: Almost unsupported Dodgy sources	Evidence/Support: Nothing effective
Organization: Clear Consistent Fully interrelated	Organization: Clear Consistent Partially interrelated	Organization: Passably Clear Usually consistent Basically interrelated	Organization: Occasionally unclear Inconsistent Poorly related	Organization: Unclear Totally uneven Unrelated	Organization: Rellya Zedogaridnis
Development: Cogent Logical Deft transitions	Development: Coherent Logical Clear transitions	Development: Passably coherent Usually logical Rough transitions	Development: Generally developed Dodgy logic Vague transitions	Development: Barely developed Highly illogical Few/no transitions	Development: Nothing effective
Language: Superior control Effective wording Sentence variety	Language: Strong control Appropriate wording Sentence variety	Language: Effective control Generally clear Passable sentencing	Language: Shaky control Vague wording Confused sentencing	Language: Poor control Repetitive wording Unclear sentencing	Language: Ugh!  Fire bad!
Usage/Mechanics: Superior facility Few/no minor errors	Usage/Mechanics: Strong facility Minor errors	Usage/Mechanics: Competence Some errors	Usage/Mechanics: Confused meanings Some major errors	Usage/Mechanics: Unclear meanings Many errors	Usage/Mechanics: A grammatical pothole