Here's the quick version: I teach first-year writing, and I'm about to lead my students on a journey down the path of Rogerian argument--you know, where your audience vehemently disagrees with your main claim, and you have to strategize ways to build common ground and incrementally move them in your direction . . .
We've had a few brief heated discussions of the AZ immigration law, and I thought it would be a great topic to use as a sample issue. The problem: I need to provide them with intelligent, coherent representations of both sides (or all sides?) of the issue, and my stomach turns at the thought of wasting time poking through the conservative blogs and websites. So why not bleg for the answer? If I were on twitter, I'd twequest help . . . . . ok, I'll stop that. Anyway, who can direct me to the most thoughtful, analytical writing they've seen on this issue? Don't make me work for a living!
Ok, I'll make this more of a real diary . . .
I teach at a fairly liberal Jesuit university, in almost the most liberal of places: U of San Francisco. When my ROTC student from AZ gave a persuasive speech, convincing us that the SB 1070 was a good idea, he was hit pretty hard by classmates, touching off some intriguing discussion. But the nature of the persuasive speech segment of a course like this is one where you give your speech, discuss it for a few minutes, and move on. So our discussion never really got going. I filed away the issue, though, as a perfect one for the Rogerian argument/dialogic reasoning part of class.
Rogerian argument works like this: you start off with a claim on a controversial issue (say, SB 1070 should be repealed). You have now created your audience for the essay: anyone who believes it should not be repealed. Now, in a standard argument (a one-sided argument), you might just list the 5 reasons or so you believe what you believe, offer all the factual, historical, legal, moral support you can . . ., and be done with it. But the key to this kind of argument is reaching across the divide, reading your audience (your opposition) and their views empathically, asking what makes them tick, what motivates them, what values and beliefs are key to their conclusion, etc.
To do this, you need some good representative views of all sides of the issue. For students to be able to rhetorically analyze the arguments, and the ideology underneath, they need writing that goes deeper than stereotyping, straight presentation of facts, etc. They need writing that will help to reveal those feelings, attitudes, beliefs, etc that drive responses to this kind of issue.
Of course I have access to the same internet all of you have access to, and then some--lots of electronic databases in my university's library. But once I get myself engrossed in this issue, I will spend way way too much time finding the ideal readings for the students. Plus, for any of you more closely involved in the issue, you may have some excellent sources at your fingertips that I may never find, and that you may really want to be out there, gettin' read . .
A caveat: I'll share what I'm offered, along with the best stuff I find, and I'll report back on the experience. At the very least, it may provide some interesting strategies for any of you banging your heads against the wall trying to get through to conservative family members or co-workers.
Thanks,