Week 4 Discussion — Does Every Essay Need a Side? — Traditional alternative (no AI)
Instructors: publish this instead of the adaptive version if you prefer, and unpublish or delete the adaptive one.
Hook
Every essay you read asks you to believe one thing, and the thesis is where it says so. This week you learned to test that sentence (arguable and specific), to spot the impostors that only look like a thesis, to narrow a big subject to a claim, and to build an essay around it with an essay map, an introduction, a conclusion, and a reverse outline. You watched the running draft's topic become a working thesis a committee could vote on.
Your discussion question — choose Option A or Option B; they carry the same weight and the same rubric, and you say which you picked.
Option A: Does every piece of writing need an arguable thesis? Pick a real kind of writing you read or write (a lab report, a news explainer, a how-to guide, a personal essay, a product review) and argue whether it needs a main claim that passes the two-part test, or whether its main point does a different job. Use this week's terms, including at least one of the thesis impostors, to make your case.
Option B: Is the habit of putting the thesis at the end of the introduction worth keeping? Pick a real piece of writing you read or wrote (a work memo, a cover letter, a blog post, a class essay) and argue where its main claim should go for its reader: up front, at the end of the introduction, or held back to the end. Use the introduction, the hook, the placement convention, and the conclusion's "so what?" to make your case.
There is no single right answer. A lab report and a personal essay both have a main point, but they may not need it to take a side in the same way; a claim placed up front can save a busy reader's time, and a claim held back can land harder. Argue the case you can actually support. Pick one you actually care about, and tell us about the writing you chose.
Expectations
Activity format: one initial post followed by two substantive peer replies. Plan on about 45 minutes across the two deadlines; your instructor sets both due dates in Canvas.
Your initial post — by the first due date (early in the module week):
- Say which option you chose.
- Name the real kind of writing or the real piece you chose, so a reader knows what you are looking at.
- Use at least two of this week's terms (thesis, working thesis, two-part test, arguable, specific, thesis impostor, announcement, essay map, introduction, hook, conclusion, "so what?", placement convention, reverse outline) correctly.
- Take a position and give a reason tied to what that writing's reader needs.
- Length: roughly 150–250 words if written. You may instead record your post as audio or video (about two minutes) and attach a transcript; both forms are scored by the same rubric.
Your replies — by the second due date (the end of the module week):
- Reply substantively to at least two classmates.
- A substantive reply does more than agree: run the two-part test on a sentence the poster calls a thesis, name a reader the poster has not considered, or point to a genre where their rule would not hold. "Nice point!" on its own does not count.
What a strong post looks like (illustrative, written for this course):
I chose Option B. In a work memo asking my supervisor to change the delivery schedule, the claim belongs in the first line, not at the end of an introduction, because my supervisor reads the opening on a phone between tasks. A memo that opens with a hook and context would bury the decision. The placement convention fits a short academic essay, where the reader needs context first, but it is a convention, and a memo's reader needs the claim before anything else.
Notice how it names a real kind of writing, states a position, ties it to that reader's habits, and treats the placement convention as a convention. That is the bar.
Participation rubric
This discussion is worth 10 points. The three criteria below look at your initial post and your peer replies.
| Criterion | Full credit | Partial credit | No credit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality of the initial post (4 pts) | A real kind of writing or a real piece is named, a clear position is taken, and the reasons point to what that writing's reader needs | A position is present, but it rests on a general preference rather than on the writing or its reader | Missing, off-topic, or no position on the question |
| Use of course concepts (3 pts) | Uses this week's terms precisely, keeping a thesis apart from a topic or a fact and treating the placement as a convention | Uses a term loosely or with a small error | No course terms, or used incorrectly |
| Engagement with peers (3 pts) | Two or more substantive replies that extend or challenge a classmate's reasoning | One substantive reply, or replies that only agree | No replies, or "I agree" with nothing added |
Post early if you can — the best threads happen when people have time to reply before the second due date.
Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com