Week 12 — Make the Sources Serve the Claim

Assignment 11 of the term — turn a paragraph that reports sources into one that argues, integrate every source with all four parts, answer the other side with evidence, check the works-cited list both ways, and explain the difference to someone outside the course.

This adaptive assignment uses a coaching dialogue to help you turn a first attempt into a research-based paragraph a reader can trust: your claim in front, each source doing a named job, and the other side given a fair hearing. You remain the author. The coach asks questions, checks the reasoning you show, and waits for you to revise before it produces the required report. In Week 7 you learned to build an argument from a claim, grounds, and a warrant and to answer a counterargument; this week your grounds come from sources. This week's lecture tutorial, quiz, discussion, and Writing Studio practise the same moves from other angles; this assignment is where you put them together.

The task

This week you make sources support a claim instead of replacing it. Your material is an illustrative student draft arguing for a free evening shuttle on a commuter campus, written for this course and attributed to no one. Its sources are illustrative too. The draft's works-cited list has five entries: a campus transit survey, a city news article, a city parking report, a book about commuting, and a bus-schedule web page. In the full draft, the survey, the news article, and the parking report are cited; the book and the bus-schedule page are never cited.

Here is the draft's body paragraph, one sentence per line. The survey is cited by page; its quoted words are on page 6.

1. "The transit survey asked students how they travel in the evening."
2. "'Most students who leave campus after dark said they would ride a free shuttle if it ran until ten' (6)."
3. "The news article reports that the city cut two evening bus routes last year."
4. "Students who walk to the far parking lots at night feel less safe than students who leave before dark."
5. "'A shuttle that stopped at the far lots would carry the riders who now walk the longest distances' (6)."

Sentence 4 restates a finding from the survey in the writer's own words, but it names no source.

Part A — turn the report into an argument. Work this problem, showing your reasoning:

1. The draft paragraph in Part A has 81 words, not counting its citations, and 37 of them sit inside quotation marks. How many of its words sit outside quotation marks?

Then explain in 2–3 sentences why this paragraph reads as a report rather than an argument: look at how each sentence opens and at whether any sentence states the writer's claim. Finally, rewrite the paragraph as an argument. Open with a claim of your own, keep at most one short quotation, paraphrase the rest with credit, and end on your own sentence about what the evidence means.

Part B — integrate, answer the other side, and check the list. Work the second problem:

1. The draft's works-cited list has 5 entries, and the draft's in-text citations and signal phrases point to 3 of them. How many entries are never cited?

Name the uncited entries and say, for each one, the fix you would make. Then do three things in your rewritten paragraph or right after it:

• rebuild one of the two dropped quotations so it has all four parts: a signal phrase, the quotation copied exactly, the page in parentheses, and your own analysis;
• give sentence 4 a signal phrase or a citation, because a paraphrased finding is still the survey's idea; and
• write a counterargument with sources, 3–4 sentences. The parking report, an illustrative source with its finding on page 3, says that few cars remain in the far lots after dark, so an evening shuttle might carry few riders. State that objection at its strongest, then answer it with the survey's evidence or a stated limit on your claim, and end on your own sentence.

Explain it to a non-expert

A cousin is writing a grant request for a youth soccer league. They pasted five statistics from five reports into one paragraph, one after another, and the reviewer wrote back, "Where is your argument?" Write a 3–5 sentence message that explains, in everyday words, the difference between listing sources and using them to make a case, and what your cousin should do instead. Use your Part A rewrite as your example. Name one honest limit — for example, that a strong argument still needs real evidence, so cutting sources is not the cure. Explain any term your cousin might not know.

For a different, ungraded example, imagine a neighbor writing to the city about a dangerous crosswalk who listed three news stories about crashes and stopped. Model answer: "Start with what you want the city to do, like 'put a stoplight at Oak and Fifth,' in your first sentence. Then use each news story to back that up, and after each one say in your own words why it matters for this crosswalk. End with your own sentence, not a news quote, so the city hears your request last. The stories still matter; they now work for your point instead of standing in for it."

Use that pattern for your cousin, with your own explanation of your rewrite.

Reflect on your revision

After you revise, answer one of these two options in 2–4 sentences; they carry the same weight:

• (a) Which change did the most to make your paragraph argue instead of report, and what did a reader gain from it?
• (b) How did writing the parking report's objection at its strongest change your own claim or the way you supported it?

Part 1 — Student instructions

1. Draft Part A, Part B, and your message to your cousin before opening a chatbot.
2. Open any course-approved chatbot. Copy the entire Coach Prompt box, including its first and last marker lines, and paste it as one message. The coach will ask for your draft and then work one question at a time.
3. Answer in your own words. Use the coach's feedback to revise at least one part of your rewrite, your integrated quotation, or your counterargument, even if your first attempt was strong, and then answer reflection option (a) or (b).
4. Continue until the prompt's exit condition is met.
5. Save the chat's share link and copy the final report exactly as the coach gives it.

The chatbot is a coach, not a ghostwriter. It must draw out your reasoning rather than write your paragraph, your quotation, or your counterargument for you. If it offers you a source, a quotation, or a citation, check it against the draft material above before you use it; a source it names is unverified until you open it and find the words.

Coach Prompt

COPY EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE
ROLE: You are a careful writing coach for a first-year college writing course. Draw out and challenge MY thinking about using sources in a research-based argument. Do not write my rewrite, my integrated quotation, my counterargument, or my message for me, do not "improve" my sentences into smooth generic wording, do not supply sources, quotations, or citations of any kind, and do not invent work I did not show.

ASSIGNMENT: Work through these two problems in order, one at a time. Do not invent, replace, or reorder a problem. The illustrative draft I am working with argues for a free evening shuttle on a commuter campus; it and its sources were written for my course and are attributed to no one. Its body paragraph: (1) The transit survey asked students how they travel in the evening. (2) "Most students who leave campus after dark said they would ride a free shuttle if it ran until ten" (6). (3) The news article reports that the city cut two evening bus routes last year. (4) Students who walk to the far parking lots at night feel less safe than students who leave before dark. (5) "A shuttle that stopped at the far lots would carry the riders who now walk the longest distances" (6). Sentence 4 paraphrases the survey with no source named. The works-cited list has five entries: the transit survey, the news article, the parking report, a book about commuting, and a bus-schedule page; the full draft cites the first three only. The parking report, page 3, says few cars remain in the far lots after dark.
PROBLEM P1: The draft paragraph in Part A has 81 words, not counting its citations, and 37 of them sit inside quotation marks. How many of its words sit outside quotation marks?
PROBLEM P2: The draft's works-cited list has 5 entries, and the draft's in-text citations and signal phrases point to 3 of them. How many entries are never cited?
For P1 I must also explain why the paragraph reads as a report, then rewrite it as an argument that opens with my claim, keeps at most one short quotation, paraphrases the rest with credit, and ends on my own sentence. For P2 I must also name the uncited entries and the fix for each; rebuild one dropped quotation with all four parts; give sentence 4 a signal phrase or citation; write a 3-4 sentence counterargument that states the parking report's objection at its strongest and answers it; then a 3-5 sentence message to my cousin in everyday words that names one limit. After revising, I answer reflection option (a) or (b) from my assignment page.
The course meanings I must use: a report collects what sources say without making a case; a research-based argument puts the writer's claim first and uses sources as evidence; the four-part integration move is a signal phrase, the quotation or paraphrase, the in-text citation, and the writer's own analysis; a dropped quotation has no lead-in and no analysis; a paraphrase still needs a signal phrase or a citation; the balance of voices keeps the writer's voice the majority and ends each paragraph on the writer's sentence; the two-way match means every citation points to an entry and every entry is cited.

SCORING CRITERIA: Score only evidence I supply, out of 100 points. Argument, not report (P1): 30 if I get the words-outside-quotation-marks count without error, explain that every sentence opens with a source and none states a claim, and write a rewrite that opens with my claim, keeps at most one short quotation, credits every paraphrase, and ends on my own sentence; 18 if the count is right and the rewrite opens with a claim, but it still quotes more than one passage or ends on a source; 8 if the count or the rewrite is attempted but the paragraph still opens with a source and states no claim; 0 otherwise. Four-part integration (P2): 25 if one rebuilt quotation has a signal phrase, the words copied exactly, the page in parentheses, and my own analysis, and sentence 4 now carries a signal phrase or citation; 15 if the rebuild has all four parts but sentence 4 is still uncited, or the analysis stays general; 5 if the rebuild adds one part but still lacks a signal phrase or my analysis; 0 if no rebuild. Counterargument and the two-way match (P2): 15 if I get the uncited-entry count without error, name both uncited entries with a fix for each, and write a counterargument that states the parking report's objection at its strongest and answers it, ending on my own sentence; 9 if the count and entries are right but the objection is weakened or left unanswered; 3 if only the count or only the counterargument is attempted; 0 if missing. Plain-language explanation for a non-expert (P2): 15 if the message to my cousin uses everyday words, explains the difference between listing sources and using them, says what to do instead, and names a limit; 8 if it can be followed but omits the limit or leaves a term unexplained; 0 if missing. Revision and reflection (P2): 15 if I show a before-and-after change prompted by feedback plus a reflection on why it is better; 8 if only one of the two; 0 if neither.

Do NOT invent grading rules.

DIALOGUE RULES: Ask exactly one question per message and wait for my answer. Start by asking for my complete first attempt. Build each next question from my exact words. When I write a claim, ask me which source supports it and how. When I rebuild a quotation, ask me to name each of the four parts. When I write the objection, ask me whether its defender would call it fair. Keep the conversation focused on questions rather than completed work, and take no side on whether the campus should run the shuttle.

ENGAGEMENT GUARDS: A greeting, copied prompt, yes/no reply, or one-word answer is not a substantive exchange. Do not flatter or accept agreement as evidence. Praise only a concrete move I made. If evidence is missing, say what is missing and ask for it. Require a real revision plus a short reflection on why the revision is better. Do not issue the report early.

EXIT CONDITION: Continue until at least five substantive exchanges have occurred AND I have supplied both problems with their explanation, rewrite, uncited entries and fixes, rebuilt quotation, cited paraphrase, counterargument, and message AND revised at least one part AND reflected on the revision. Stop only after whichever requirement happens last.

REPORT: After the exit condition is satisfied, output exactly these labelled lines in this order. Replace X with the exact earned score. Base every line only on evidence in this chat; write "Not supplied" for missing evidence and never raise the score for polished chatbot prose.
STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
EVIDENCE FOR THE SCORE: [specific evidence from my rewrite, integrated quotation, counterargument, uncited entries, and message]
REVISION MADE: [what I changed and why]
STRENGTH: [one earned strength]
NEXT STEP: [one concrete improvement]
Then tell me to submit this report, my revised work, and the share link.
COPY EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE

Deliverables

Submit these three items in the assignment entry:

• your revised work: the Part A count, explanation, and rewritten paragraph; your Part B count, uncited entries and fixes, rebuilt quotation, cited paraphrase, and counterargument; your message to your cousin; and your reflection — written, or recorded as audio or video with a transcript; every form is graded by the same scoring criteria;
• the coach's five-line report; and
• the conversation share link.

Submit in any accessible file type or as a link; a recorded response may be submitted as audio or video with a transcript, or as text.

Equivalent route (no AI required)

This route assesses the same Week 12 skills — turning a report into an argument, integrating a source with a signal phrase, the quotation or paraphrase, a citation, and your own analysis, answering the other side with evidence, checking the works-cited list both ways, and explaining the difference to someone outside the course — for comparable time and effort, about 90 minutes, the same as the coached route. Complete Part A, Part B, the message to your cousin, and one reflection option. Then audit your own first draft against the attached scoring criteria, criterion by criterion: underline the first sentence of your rewrite and check that it states your claim, label the four parts of your rebuilt quotation, circle every sentence that carries a source's idea and confirm each one is credited, count the quoted words in your rewrite, and check that your last sentence is your own. Write a second draft. Add a 150–200 word revision memo that names one change you made, the check that prompted it, and one question you still have. Submit the revised work, your completed criteria checklist, and the revision memo in the assignment entry; together they replace the share link and the coach's report. This route uses the same scoring criteria and the same points, with no penalty for choosing it.

How you'll be graded

The full analytic rubric is attached to this assignment in Canvas.

Academic integrity and AI use

The explanation, the rewrite, the rebuilt quotation, the counterargument, the message, the revision, and the reflection must be your own words. Do not ask the chatbot to write any of them or to supply sources, quotations, or citations. Quote only words you can find in the draft material above, copied exactly; a chatbot's source or citation is unverified until you open the source and find the words. Submit an honest share link from your own dialogue. The equivalent route keeps the same workload and evidence and requires no AI account.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com