- Table View
- List View
Arguing for a Better World: How to talk about the issues that divide us
by Arianne Shahvisi'Brings cooling clarity to the heat of today's culture wars' Priyamvada Gopal, author of Insurgent Empire'Allows us to not only interrogate our own views, but to persuade others using reason and optimism. A must read' Aaron Bastani, author of Fully Automated Luxury CommunismCan white people be victims of racism?Is it sexist to say 'men are trash'?Should we worry about 'cancel culture'?Tired of having the same old arguments? Kicking yourself for not being able to justify your views? Wondering whether individuals can bring about meaningful change?Now imagine that instead of losing another hour of your life in a social media spat or knowing that the only way to make it through lunch was by biting your tongue, you could find a way to talk about injustice - and, just possibly, change someone's mind.Many of us know what we think about inequality, but flounder when asked for our reasoning, leading to a conversational stalemate - especially when faced with a political, generational, or cultural divide. But living in echo chambers blunts our thinking, and if we can't persuade others, we have little hope of collectively bringing about change.In Arguing for a Better World, philosopher Arianne Shahvisi draws on examples from everyday life to show us how to work through a set of thorny moral questions, equipping us to not only identify our positions but to carefully defend them.'Logical, readable, authoritative . . . An everyday manual on how oppression came about, how it works, why it persists, and how to defeat it' Danny Dorling, author of Injustice: Why Social Inequality Still Persists and A Better Politics
Arguing for a General Framework for Mass Media Scholarship
by Dr W. James Potter"Arguing for a General Framework for Mass Media Scholarship challenges scholars and students to consider and reconsider what we know about media and how we think about media. As such, the book provides an important framework for thinking about knowledge—regardless of the discipline… The text provides all of the necessary tools to move the field forward in a way that will increase the rigor of the work being done and augment the overall profile of the discipline." –Dana Mastro, University of Arizona In this groundbreaking book, W. James Potter presents an innovative perspective to media scholars and students who are frustrated with the fragmentation of research findings across so many journals, books, and fields. Arguing for a General Framework for Mass Media Scholarship presents a clear plan for a more efficient way to build knowledge about the mass media so that it can be better organized and made more useful. Key Features Conducts an in-depth analysis of mass media scholarship's four major facets of effects, content, audiences, and organizations Presents a significant shift in conceptualizing media effects and ways research can be conducted to generate more useful knowledge about media influence Develops "narrative line" as a tool to guide analyses about how content decisions are made by producersSynthesizes a system of explanation about why audiences attend to certain messages and how individuals construct meaning from those messagesIncorporates an analysis of mass media organizations to provide greater context of understanding messages and their effects on individuals and macro units in society"The book will play an important role in providing structure to a broad, fragmented discipline. I believe it will, at the very least, create important dialogues about what we now know/understand about areas of mass media, and where we should move as a discipline… This book is clearly a 'call to arms' for mass media scholars to ratchet up the quality of research (and what we know), to see the interconnections within and among strands of scholarship, and to move forward in a more efficient, organized manner. Professor Potter should be commended for this." —Roger Cooper, Ohio University "This book is...that call to action that comes forward every few years, to wake us up and challenge our ways of doing things, not by being radical, but via synthesis... I've been waiting for several years for a book like this." —Sahara Byrne, Cornell University
Arguing the Just War in Islam
by John KelsayJihad, with its many terrifying associations, is a term widely used today, though its meaning is poorly grasped. Few people understand the circumstances requiring a jihad, or "holy" war, or how Islamic militants justify their violent actions within the framework of the religious tradition of Islam. How Islam, with more than one billion followers, interprets jihad and establishes its precepts has become a critical issue for both the Muslim and the non-Muslim world. John Kelsay's timely and important work focuses on jihad of the sword in Islamic thought, history, and culture. Making use of original sources, Kelsay delves into the tradition of shari'a--Islamic jurisprudence and reasoning--and shows how it defines jihad as the Islamic analogue of the Western "just" war. He traces the arguments of thinkers over the centuries who have debated the legitimacy of war through appeals to shari'a reasoning. He brings us up to the present and demonstrates how contemporary Muslims across the political spectrum continue this quest for a realistic ethics of war within the Islamic tradition. Arguing the Just War in Islam provides a systematic account of how Islam's central texts interpret jihad, guiding us through the historical precedents and Qur'anic sources upon which today's claims to doctrinal truth and legitimate authority are made. In illuminating the broad spectrum of Islam's moral considerations of the just war, Kelsay helps Muslims and non-Muslims alike make sense of the possibilities for future war and peace.
Arguing the World
by Joseph DormanFrom cafeterias to cocktail parties to the pages of influential journals of opinion, few groups of friends have argued ideas so passionately and so publicly as the writers and critics known as the New York intellectuals. A brilliantly contentious circle of thinkers, they wielded enormous influence in the second half of the twentieth century through their championing of cultural modernism and their critique of Soviet totalitarianism. Arguing the World is a portrait of four of the leading members of the group in their own words, based on the extensive interviews that formed the basis for Joseph Dorman's acclaimed film of the same name, which New York magazine named in 1999 as the Best New York Documentary. The political essayist Irving Kristol, the literary critic Irving Howe, and the sociologists Daniel Bell and Nathan Glazer are brought into sharp focus in a vivid account of one of the century's great intellectual communities. In this wide-ranging oral history, Dorman documents the lifelong political arguments of these men, from their working-class beginnings to their rise to prominence in the years following World War II, particularly through their contributions to magazines and journals like Partisan Review and Com-mentary. From the advent of the Cold War and McCarthyism, to the rise of the New Left on college campuses in the sixties, to the emergence of neoconservatism in the seventies and eighties, the group's disagreements grew more heated and at times more personal. Driven apart by their responses to these historic events, in later life the four found themselves increasingly at odds with one another. Kristol became influential in America's resurgent conservative movement and Glazer made a name for himself as a forceful critic of liberal social policy, while Bell fought to defend a besieged liberalism. Until his death in 1993, Irving Howe remained an unapologetic voice of the radical left. Weaving personal reminiscences from these towering figures with those of their friends and foes, Arguing the World opens a new window on the social and intellectual history of twentieth-century America.
Arguing to Solve a Mystery
by Emily Gibson Tessaly Jen Meghan Comstock Andrew FalkNIMAC-sourced textbook
Arguing until Doomsday: Stephen Douglas, Jefferson Davis, and the Struggle for American Democracy (Civil War America)
by Michael E. WoodsAs the sectional crisis gripped the United States, the rancor increasingly spread to the halls of Congress. Preston Brooks's frenzied assault on Charles Sumner was perhaps the most notorious evidence of the dangerous divide between proslavery Democrats and the new antislavery Republican Party. But as disunion loomed, rifts within the majority Democratic Party were every bit as consequential. And nowhere was the fracture more apparent than in the raging debates between Illinois's Stephen Douglas and Mississippi's Jefferson Davis. As leaders of the Democrats' northern and southern factions before the Civil War, their passionate conflict of words and ideas has been overshadowed by their opposition to Abraham Lincoln. But here, weaving together biography and political history, Michael E. Woods restores Davis and Douglas's fatefully entwined lives and careers to the center of the Civil War era. Operating on personal, partisan, and national levels, Woods traces the deep roots of Democrats' internal strife, with fault lines drawn around fundamental questions of property rights and majority rule. Neither belief in white supremacy nor expansionist zeal could reconcile Douglas and Davis's factions as their constituents formed their own lines in the proverbial soil of westward expansion. The first major reinterpretation of the Democratic Party's internal schism in more than a generation, Arguing until Doomsday shows how two leading antebellum politicians ultimately shattered their party and hastened the coming of the Civil War.
Arguing with Angels: Enochian Magic and Modern Occulture (SUNY series in Western Esoteric Traditions)
by Egil AspremThis fascinating work explores John Dee's Enochian magic and the history of its reception. Dee (1527–1608/9), an accomplished natural philosopher and member of Queen Elizabeth I's court, was also an esoteric researcher whose diaries detail years of conversations with angels achieved with the aid of crystal-gazer Edward Kelley. His Enochian magic offers a method for contacting angels and demons based on secrets found in the apocryphal Book of Enoch.Examining this magical system from its Renaissance origins to present day occultism, Egil Asprem shows how the reception of Dee's magic is replete with struggles to construct and negotiate authoritative interpretational frameworks for doing magic. Arguing with Angels offers a novel, nuanced approach to questions about how ritual magic has survived the advent of modernity and demonstrates the ways in which modern culture has recreated magical discourse.
Arguing with God
by Bernd JanowskiThis is the first English translation of Bernd Janowski's incisive anthropological study of the Psalms, originally published in German in 2003 as Konfliktgespräche mit Gott. Eine Anthropologie der Psalmen (Neukirchener). Janowski begins with an introduction to Old Testament anthropology, concentrating on themes of being forsaken by God, enmity, legal difficulties, and sickness. Each chapter defines a problem and considers it in relation to anthropological insights from related fields of study and a thematically relevant example from the Psalms, including how a central aspect of this Psalm is explored in other Old Testament or Ancient Near Eastern texts. Each chapter concludes with an "Anthropological Keyword," which explores especially important words and phrases in the Psalms. The book also includes reflections on reading the Psalms from a New Testament perspective, focusing on themes of transience, praising God, salvation from death, and trust in God. Janowski's study demonstrates how the Psalms have important theological implications and ultimately help us to understand what it means to be human.
Arguing with Idiots
by Glenn Beck Kevin BalfeFUNNY. FRIGHTENING. TRUE. The #1 New York Times bestseller that gives you the right answers when idiots leave you speechless! It happens to all of us: You're minding your own business, when some idiot* informs you that guns are evil, the Prius will save the planet, or the rich have to finally start paying their fair share of taxes. Just go away! you think to yourself--but they only get more obnoxious. Your heart rate quickens. You start to sweat. But never fear, for Glenn Beck has stumbled upon the secret formula to winning arguments against people with big mouths and small minds: knowing the facts. And this book is full of them. The next time your Idiot Friends tell you how gun control prevents gun violence, you'll tell them all about England's handgun ban (see page 53). When they insist that we should copy the UK's health-care system, you'll recount the horrifying facts you read on page 244. And the next time you hear how produce prices will skyrocket without illegal workers, you'll have the perfect rebuttal (from page 139). Armed with the ultimate weapon--the truth--you can now tolerate (and who knows, maybe even enjoy?) your encounters with idiots everywhere! *Idiots can't be identified through voting records; look instead for people who hide behind stereotypes, embrace partisanship, and believe that bumper sticker slogans are a substitute for common sense.
Arguing with Numbers: The Intersections of Rhetoric and Mathematics (RSA Series in Transdisciplinary Rhetoric #16)
by James Wynn G. Mitchell ReyesAs discrete fields of inquiry, rhetoric and mathematics have long been considered antithetical to each other. That is, if mathematics explains or describes the phenomena it studies with certainty, persuasion is not needed. This volume calls into question the view that mathematics is free of rhetoric. Through nine studies of the intersections between these two disciplines, Arguing with Numbers shows that mathematics is in fact deeply rhetorical. Using rhetoric as a lens to analyze mathematically based arguments in public policy, political and economic theory, and even literature, the essays in this volume reveal how mathematics influences the values and beliefs with which we assess the world and make decisions and how our worldviews influence the kinds of mathematical instruments we construct and accept. In addition, contributors examine how concepts of rhetoric—such as analogy and visuality—have been employed in mathematical and scientific reasoning, including in the theorems of mathematical physicists and the geometrical diagramming of natural scientists. Challenging academic orthodoxy, these scholars reject a math-equals-truth reduction in favor of a more constructivist theory of mathematics as dynamic, evolving, and powerfully persuasive. By bringing these disparate lines of inquiry into conversation with one another, Arguing with Numbers provides inspiration to students, established scholars, and anyone inside or outside rhetorical studies who might be interested in exploring the intersections between the two disciplines.In addition to the editors, the contributors to this volume are Catherine Chaput, Crystal Broch Colombini, Nathan Crick, Michael Dreher, Jeanne Fahnestock, Andrew C. Jones, Joseph Little, and Edward Schiappa.
Arguing with Numbers: The Intersections of Rhetoric and Mathematics (RSA Series in Transdisciplinary Rhetoric)
by James Wynn G. Mitchell ReyesAs discrete fields of inquiry, rhetoric and mathematics have long been considered antithetical to each other. That is, if mathematics explains or describes the phenomena it studies with certainty, persuasion is not needed. This volume calls into question the view that mathematics is free of rhetoric. Through nine studies of the intersections between these two disciplines, Arguing with Numbers shows that mathematics is in fact deeply rhetorical. Using rhetoric as a lens to analyze mathematically based arguments in public policy, political and economic theory, and even literature, the essays in this volume reveal how mathematics influences the values and beliefs with which we assess the world and make decisions and how our worldviews influence the kinds of mathematical instruments we construct and accept. In addition, contributors examine how concepts of rhetoric—such as analogy and visuality—have been employed in mathematical and scientific reasoning, including in the theorems of mathematical physicists and the geometrical diagramming of natural scientists. Challenging academic orthodoxy, these scholars reject a math-equals-truth reduction in favor of a more constructivist theory of mathematics as dynamic, evolving, and powerfully persuasive. By bringing these disparate lines of inquiry into conversation with one another, Arguing with Numbers provides inspiration to students, established scholars, and anyone inside or outside rhetorical studies who might be interested in exploring the intersections between the two disciplines.In addition to the editors, the contributors to this volume are Catherine Chaput, Crystal Broch Colombini, Nathan Crick, Michael Dreher, Jeanne Fahnestock, Andrew C. Jones, Joseph Little, and Edward Schiappa.
Arguing with Socialists
by Glenn BeckIn Arguing With Socialists, New York Times bestselling author Glenn Beck arms readers to the teeth with information necessary to debunk the socialist arguments that have once again become popular, and proves that the free market is the only way to go. <P><P> With his trademark humor, Beck lampoons the resurgence of this bankrupt leftist philosophy with thousands of stories, facts, arguments and easy-to-understand graphics for anyone who is willing to ask the hard questions. He shows that this new shiny socialism is just the same as the old one: a costly and dangerous failure that leaves desperation, poverty, and bodies in its wake. <P><P><b>A New York Times Bestseller</b>
Arguing with Zombies: Economics, Politics, And The Fight For A Better America
by Paul KrugmanAn accessible, compelling introduction to today’s major policy issues from the New York Times columnist, best-selling author, and Nobel prize–winning economist Paul Krugman. <P><P>There is no better guide than Paul Krugman to basic economics, the ideas that animate much of our public policy. Likewise, there is no stronger foe of zombie economics, the misunderstandings that just won’t die. <P><P>In Arguing with Zombies, Krugman tackles many of these misunderstandings, taking stock of where the United States has come from and where it’s headed in a series of concise, digestible chapters. Drawn mainly from his popular New York Times column, they cover a wide range of issues, organized thematically and framed in the context of a wider debate. Explaining the complexities of health care, housing bubbles, tax reform, Social Security, and so much more with unrivaled clarity and precision, Arguing with Zombies is Krugman at the height of his powers. <P><P>Arguing with Zombies puts Krugman at the front of the debate in the 2020 election year and is an indispensable guide to two decades’ worth of political and economic discourse in the United States and around the globe. With quick, vivid sketches, Krugman turns his readers into intelligent consumers of the daily news and hands them the keys to unlock the concepts behind the greatest economic policy issues of our time. In doing so, he delivers an instant classic that can serve as a reference point for this and future generations. <P><P><b>A New York Times Bestseller</b>
Arguing, Obeying and Defying: A Rhetorical Perspective on Stanley Milgram's Obedience Experiments
by Stephen GibsonStanley Milgram's obedience experiments are among the most influential and controversial scientific studies ever conducted. The experiments are commonly understood to have shown how easily people can be led into harming another person, simply as a result of following orders. Recently, however, Milgram's studies have been subjected to a sustained critique and re-evaluation. This book draws on the vast stock of audio recordings from Milgram's experiments to reveal how these experiments can be understood as occasions for argumentation and rhetoric, rather than showing how passive subjects can be led into simply doing as they are told. In doing so, it reconsiders what we understand by 'obedience' and extends how social psychologists have understood rhetoric itself.
Arguing, Reasoning, and Thinking Well
by Robert Gass John SeiterArguing, Reasoning, and Thinking Well offers an engaging and accessible introduction to argumentation and critical thinking. With a pro-social focus, the volume encourages readers to value civility when engaged in arguing and reasoning. Authors Gass and Seiter, renowned for their friendly writing style, include real-world examples, hypothetical dialogues, and editorial cartoons to invite readers in. The text includes a full chapter devoted to the ethics of argument, as well as content on refutation and formal logic. It is designed for students in argumentation and critical thinking courses in communication, philosophy, and psychology departments, and is suitable for students and general education courses across the curriculum.
Arguing: Exchanging Reasons Face to Face (Routledge Communication Series)
by Dale HampleArguing: Exchanging Reasons Face to Face describes the process and products of face-to-face argument. Author Dale Hample presents arguing as a type of interpersonal interaction, rather than as a kind of text or a feature of a public speech. He focuses primarily on argument production, and explores the rhetorical and philosophical traditions of arguing, keeping as the volume's main focus the integration of arguing into the literatures on message production, conflict management, and interpersonal communication.Distinctive in its approach, this volume offers:*a synthesis of empirical research on situational and individual differences in arguing;*an exploration of argument frames--perceptions and expectations about arguing;*an examination of the conversational and rational natures of argument products;*a psychological description of inventional processes; and*a full chapter on the emotional experience of arguing.This unique work is appropriate for scholars and graduate students in argumentation, discourse, persuasion, conflict management, interpersonal communication, organizational communication, and message production.
Argument And Persuasion In Descartes' Meditations
by David CunningDescartes' Meditations on First Philosophy has proven to be not only one of the canonical texts of Western philosophy, but also the site of a great deal of interpretive activity in scholarship on the history of early modern philosophy over the last two decades. David Cunning's monograph proposes a new interpretation, which is that from beginning to end the reasoning of the Meditations is the first-person reasoning of a thinker who starts from a confused non-Cartesian paradigm and moves slowly and awkwardly toward a grasp of just a few of the central theses of Descartes' system. The meditator of the Meditations is not a full-blown Cartesian at the start or middle or even the end of inquiry, and accordingly the Meditations is riddled with confusions throughout. Cunning argues that Descartes is trying to capture the kind of reasoning that a non-Cartesian would have to engage in to make the relevant epistemic progress, and that the Meditations rhetorically models that reasoning. He proposes that Descartes is reflecting on what happens in philosophical inquiry: we are unclear about something, we roam about using our existing concepts and intuitions, we abandon or revise some of these, and then eventually we come to see a result as clear that we did not see as clear before. Thus Cunning's fundamental insight is that Descartes is a teacher, and the reader a student. With that reading in mind, a significant number of the interpretive problems that arise in the Descartes literature dissolve when we make a distinction between the Cartesian and non-Cartesian elements of the Meditations, and a better understanding of surrounding texts is achieved as well. This important volume will be of great interest to scholars of early modern philosophy.
Argument Dialectics: The Place of Reasons in Logic (Argumentation Library #45)
by Hubert MarraudThis book is a systematic exposition of Argument Dialectics (AD). Despite its name, argument dialectics is a logical approach to argumentation theory. AD stands out among theories of argument because of three unusual features: it is reasons-based, holistic and particularistic. This implies that AD conceives of logic as a theory of the dialectical construction of reasons, not as a theory of inferences. Consequently, contrary to other logical approaches, AD focuses on the study of inter-argumentative relations, especially those of opposition and weighing. The book makes an extensive use of the theory of reasons, a branch of metaethics that has been a very valuable quarry of intuitions and concepts for the elaboration of a reason-based theory of argument. The oppositions generalism-particularism and atomism-holism, proposed by Jonathan Dancy, which play a central role in the book and in the development of AD, have been adapted from the theory of reasons, and the same can be said of the distinction between different statuses of reasons that AD associates with different kinds of counterarguments. Conceiving of the theory of argument in terms of reasons has the effect of situating the paradigm of argumentation in practical argumentation/reasoning &“about what to do&” rather than in theoretical argumentation &“about what to believe&”, as inference-based theories do. Hence, this book is of interest to argumentation theorists, communication theorists, epistemologists, linguists, moral philosophers, and philosophers of law.
Argument Evaluation and Evidence (Law, Governance and Technology Series #23)
by Douglas WaltonThis monograph poses a series of key problems of evidential reasoning and argumentation. It then offers solutions achieved by applying recently developed computational models of argumentation made available in artificial intelligence. Each problem is posed in such a way that the solution is easily understood. The book progresses from confronting these problems and offering solutions to them, building a useful general method for evaluating arguments along the way. It provides a hands-on survey explaining to the reader how to use current argumentation methods and concepts that are increasingly being implemented in more precise ways for the application of software tools in computational argumentation systems. It shows how the use of these tools and methods requires a new approach to the concepts of knowledge and explanation suitable for diverse settings, such as issues of public safety and health, debate, legal argumentation, forensic evidence, science education, and the use of expert opinion evidence in personal and public deliberations.
Argument Mining: Linguistic Foundations
by Mathilde Janier Patrick Saint-DizierThis book is an introduction to the linguistic concepts of argumentation relevant for argument mining, an important research and development activity which can be viewed as a highly complex form of information retrieval, requiring high-level natural language processing technology. While the first four chapters develop the linguistic and conceptual aspects of argument expression, the last four are devoted to their application to argument mining. These chapters investigate the facets of argument annotation, as well as argument mining system architectures and evaluation. How annotations may be used to develop linguistic data and how to train learning algorithms is outlined. A simple implementation is then proposed. The book ends with an analysis of non-verbal argumentative discourse. Argument Mining is an introductory book for engineers or students of linguistics, artificial intelligence and natural language processing. Most, if not all, the concepts of argumentation crucial for argument mining are carefully introduced and illustrated in a simple manner.
Argument Structure: Representation and Theory (Argumentation Library #18)
by James B. FreemanThis monograph first presents a method of diagramming argument macrostructure, synthesizing the standard circle and arrow approach with the Toulmin model. A theoretical justification of this method through a dialectical understanding of argument, a critical examination of Toulmin on warrants, a thorough discussion of the linked-convergent distinction, and an account of the proper reconstruction of enthymemes follows.
Argument Today
by Richard Johnson-Sheehan Charles PainePersuasion (Rhetoric) -- Problems, exercises, etc. textbook for college students
Argument Types and Fallacies in Legal Argumentation (Law and Philosophy Library #112)
by Christian Dahlman Thomas BustamanteThis book provides theoretical tools for evaluating the soundness of arguments in the context of legal argumentation. It deals with a number of general argument types and their particular use in legal argumentation. It provides detailed analyses of argument from authority, argument ad hominem, argument from ignorance, slippery slope argument and other general argument types. Each of these argument types can be used to construct arguments that are sound as well as arguments that are unsound. To evaluate an argument correctly one must be able to distinguish the sound instances of a certain argument type from its unsound instances. This book promotes the development of theoretical tools for this task.
Argument Writing as a Supplemental Literacy Intervention for At-Risk Youth: Using Design Based Research to Develop a Knowledge Building Literacy Course (Routledge Research in Literacy Education)
by Margaret Sheehy Donna M. ScanlonThis volume details the development and initial evaluation of a supplemental literacy course intended to support at-risk high school students in the US. Developed using design based research (DBR), the course combines argument writing and knowledge building literacy routines to support academic literacy development. Acknowledging the demand for US students to meet academic literacy standards that emphasize explanatory and argumentative writing, the text foregrounds knowledge building as key to effective writing development. Chapters trace the development and implementation of course literacy routines designed using DBR and use whole-class and individual case studies to demonstrate how informational reading, discussion, and argument writing become an activity system to support literacy development. Ultimately, the text has important implications for literacy course design, and the use of knowledge building analysis and DBR in research. The text will benefit researchers, academics, and educators in higher education with an interest in academic literacy education, writing and composition, and secondary education more broadly. Those specifically interested in methodologies relating to classroom teaching and learning as well as argumentation and argument writing will also benefit from this book.
Argument Writing, Teacher Guide, Grades 9-12
by PCG EducationArgument Writing Paths to College and Career Jossey-Bass and Public Consulting Group, Inc. (PCG) are proud to bring the Paths to College and Career English Language Arts (ELA) curriculum and professional development resources for grades 6–12 to educators across the country. Originally developed for EngageNY and written with a focus on the shifts in instructional practice and student experiences the standards require, Paths to College and Career includes daily lesson plans, guiding questions, recommended texts, scaffolding strategies and other classroom resources. The Paths Writing Units, Argument Writing, Informative Writing, and Narrative Writing, complement the full instructional program and can also be used independently, providing in-depth writing instruction to support all students in grades 9–12 in meeting grade level standards. To emphasize the relationship between reading and writing, each Writing Unit includes accessible model texts that exemplify key elements of each text type, and source texts that provide a topic for the unit writing assignment. Individual lessons guide students through the writing process, providing instruction on grammar and conventions and highlighting collaboration and reflection as key elements of effective writing. Students' final essays are assessed using a checklist developed by the class over the course of the unit. The organization and distinctive content of the model and source texts in each unit afford teachers the flexibility to implement each unit independently of the others, and at any point during the curriculum. For example, a unit may be implemented to assess students' writing prior to implementation of the standard curriculum, to scaffold writing instruction leading into a writing assessment, or to support struggling writers by addressing gaps in skills as demonstrated in previous assessments. The Paths Writing Units provide teachers with invaluable opportunities to engage students as active participants in their own learning at every stage of the writing process, and to customize instruction to meet the varying needs of all students. ABOUT PUBLIC CONSULTING GROUP Public Consulting Group, works with schools, districts, and state education agencies to build their capacity for instructional and programmatic improvements. We provide curriculum development, coaching, professional development, and technical assistance services. Our work alongside educators and policy makers ensures effective implementation of both the Common Core State Standards and state-specific standards for college and career readiness. As the creators of the Paths ELA curriculum for grades 6–12, Public Consulting Group provides a professional learning program that ensures the success of the curriculum. The program includes: Nationally recognized professional development from an organization that has been immersed in the new standards since their inception. Blended learning experiences for teachers and leaders that enrich and extend the learning. A train-the-trainer program that builds capacity and provides resources and individual support for embedded leaders and coaches.