top phd argumentative essay help

top phd argumentative essay help

Top Strategies for Writing a Persuasive PhD Argumentative Essay

1. Introduction to PhD Argumentative Essays

This is a handout I use with my graduate students to help them understand the foundational level of a PhD argumentative essay. If you follow these ‘steps’, you will have a solid foundation for creating and shaping complex ideas in persuasive and critical writing aimed at readers with more than a beginning-level understanding of your topic. This doesn’t mean the only audience is grad students or professors; it does mean that you are writing for people who will need to make an effort to actively listen to what you are writing. Keep in mind that such a persuasive essay is a rhetorical act; so, the more you can empathize with your readers (in this case, your chosen academic audience), the more successful you will be in leading them to your own point of view.

PhD argumentative essays provide you with the opportunity to show other researchers and serious students in your field that you know what the “argumentative essay” is and you have the critical skills needed to write a well-developed persuasive essay. You are a serious writer and researcher capable of contributing to the conversation on your topic. As a PhD student, you should also be developing the advanced communicative, writing, and thinking skills you need to conduct powerful and responsible research. So, you should also take your time to explore the rhetorical strategies required in writing a top-notch PhD argumentative essay. You will need to use more than one of them—usually at least three strategies, but sometimes as many as five or six. I strongly recommend you use the strategies I suggest as well—at least two out of the four. Using all four is a good option—though you may not want to do that every time.

2. Developing a Strong Thesis Statement

Key Strategies: 1. Personal Opinion: finds that the statement that is reflected in our thesis statement has to be our individual outlook. Research on the phenomenon has to be there and only if the background literature supports our opinion, we should mould our essay accordingly. In contrast, it is very impactful when there is very little literature available and your research is adding zenith to the already available knowledge bank. Thus, the passion towards the individual view is very essential. Also, once our opinion is reflected in the thesis statement, the facts and the analysis have to revolve around that; absolute negativity cannot demonstrate how extensive you analyse the opponent school of thoughts. That is why presenting a balanced argument minimally to showcase we have analysed them and then proceeding with the judgment is beneficial as per.

A well-crafted PhD argumentative essay needs a distinctive approach. In these essays, students have to showcase their critical analysis. Since the whole argument is based upon the thesis statement, students have to make sure that their thesis statements are strong and compelling. Here are the top strategies that can be applied in generating a superior thesis statement in your essay.

3. Research and Evidence Gathering

You also have to make sure that the information you are using is “up to date”. A general rule of what to use is that relevant (for your situation) information from the last 5 or 10 years is mostly OK. Make the decision to use more current information – if it is relevant to your topic – on a case by case basis, checking with academic help if you are unsure. A good argument often has a range of “older” and “new” information.

A note on ‘V and R’. Remember, valid and reliable information is good scholarly information, not to be confused with ‘correct’ information. While scholarly work should always be ‘correct’ in terms of evidence following research principles, it does not always have to be so in terms of validity and reliability within a critical or theoretical argument where contexts and perspectives change thoughts and evidence about things. Always remember, however, that all evidence must be obtained ethically for use in an argument regarding a piece of learning for a degree so that is “valid and reliable” (and non-predatory).

Internet sources: These can be seen to be either not valid and reliable or useful, modern and accessible, depending upon your argument, context, and essay topic.

Books: These are the key sources of argument and research and come in normal and electronic formats from libraries and bookshops. They are big – they say a lot, contain a lot of information, and this also means they can be complex to read and use in an argument (if not well-written), especially for newer students.

Articles: These are in scientific and humanities journals and can provide up-to-date, concise/bite-size information. However, they can also be small in focus with limited possibility for synthesising larger discourses and contexts which are characteristic of broader scholarly books.

Remember the importance of conducting familiarisation and data gathering for the project in the first place. Always check for the presence of relevant articles, books, and other resources before making a decision for your project. Also, remember to spend the considerable time required to gather evidence or to carry out research to generate the necessary evidence for your project. A 15,000-word essay will need good sources of evidence to use in making the argument.

4. Structuring Your Argument

Developing a strategy for effective and persuasive argumentation requires further consideration of the way in which ideas, evidence, and reasoning are integrated into the structure of the argument. We propose four strategies for structuring an argument. The most common systematic models in academic thesis to structure an argument appropriately are divided into: Linear or Progressive Argumentation, Causal arguments, Multiple Arguments, and the Counter-Argument Structure. For the Proposal Format in Chapter, the most common format adopted is Linear or Progressive Argumentation. This form builds from weaker information to a more complex understanding of the issue and is the most commonly used format in PhD and Master’s theses.

Section four provides strategies for organizing your argument in a way that is persuasive. It is important to demonstrate a logical flow between different points in the argument, including evidence, reasoning, and key themes. The argument should have an overall coherence and fit together integrally. Subsections of the argument should also have internal coherence. In other words, each subsection should stand alone based on the evidence provided, follow a logical internal progression, and connect to other subsections. Here we argue that the structure of the argument depends not just on the content of the research, but also on the audiences that the argument is intended to persuade. It is, therefore, necessary to approach the writing process of structuring an argument with a complex hybrid formula combining generic and context-specific elements in order to persuade both the international academic audience and the East African academic where the research is conducted and/or to be implemented.

5. Refuting Counterarguments and Concluding Strongly

Concrete tip: Well-crafted conclusions that reference the larger context or speak to wider issues of concern work well. Including such issues in conclusions, along with a look ahead to what might ensue if steps suggested in the essay are followed, can enhance persuasiveness.

Key strategies: 1. Refuting counterarguments while acknowledging and addressing them 2. Refuting counterarguments while reinterpreting the problem in terms that restate the major thesis or subpoints 3. Using ethical or emotional appeals to end on an inspirational note 4. Recasting the argument.

The penultimate point to address in a PhD argumentative paper is problematizing counterarguments. Knowing the main criticism that will be made is essential to emphasize the value and relevance of an initial thesis. Anticipating the criticism of the audience, explicitly addressing the opposing opinions, counterproposals, or experiences of people mentioned in the setup can greatly increase the persuasive strength of the speech. While explicitly acknowledging and addressing the counterargument, strategies to discuss a position from a point different than the one about the topic, refer to a straw man – naive argument no reader would identify with, and to point out strengths before refuting the counterargument is also an effective strategy. Reinterpreting the problem in terms that restate the major thesis or subpoints will help the audience remember the heart of the speech, and such a strategy is referred to as recasting the argument. Distinguishing between major and minor points or positions will keep the audience’s attention on the critical issue and can radically change the attitude potential readers bring to the subject. After refuting the counterargument, reestablish the original thesis or problem.

Refuting Counterarguments and Concluding Strong