I’m working on a writing exercise and need a sample draft to help me learn.
My topic is: How has the Covid-19 pandemic disturbed the American economy? How did the pandemic alter the lives of low-income workers? And how did it exacerbate the income inequality problem in the U.S.?
So I need some reseraches for my topic, but sources should be focusing on how to solve the problem that I mention in my topic.
The following is the what need to be done:
Record a minimum of EIGHT new sources you found for the topic in 8th edition MLA formatting,
Use the following questions to compose a 2-3 page source analysis of at least two sources that make advocacy arguments and a tentative abstract with an advocacy argument. Be sure you define and describe what the advocacy efforts are:
Contemporary approaches (first source analysis): In recent years, advocates of the First Amendment have worked tirelessly to protect free speech on campus. UCI Chancellor Howard Gillman and Dean of UC Berkeley’s Law School Erwin Chemerinsky, for example, wrote a book, Free Speech on Campus, for students and teachers that is intended to raise awareness about what they perceive to be a growing threat to free speech on college campuses that is mostly expressed in student-led demands for protections against hate speech. They contend that these efforts are misplaced and evolved, by and large, as a result of ignorance about the First Amendment. Students make demands that colleges and universities censor hate speech without understanding that, not only does the law forbid such censorship, it would be a terrible precedence to set even if the law allowed it. These authors and many others have made it somewhat of a crusade to revisit the history of First Amendment jurisprudence in speeches, in the classroom and in articles in order to show the younger generation that the First Amendment is not about protecting despicable speech (though that is, according to them, an unfortunate by-product), but about protecting historically marginalized groups from acts of censorship by the government, organizations and individuals who would try to silence them. They argue that all campuses should be committed to an environment of tolerance and “democratic deliberation,” where multiple conflicting points of view can exist and work to foster “intellectual innovation.”
Counterarguments (second source analysis): Some have argued that there is no free speech crisis on campus, there is only a hate speech crisis on campus and that students who expect and demand an inclusive environment that protects their educational opportunities and insures their physical and psychological well-being are neither demonstrating ignorance about the First Amendment nor intolerant of other perspectives. These other advocates do not regard the change as needing to come from students, but from the free speech absolutists themselves who, in a misguided attempt to solve the problem, have entirely missed the point of student activism around hate speech protections. Journalism Professor Jelani Cobb, for example, addresses the history of racial discrimination on many college campuses and argues that most students involved in demands for hate speech protections are themselves black and have been the targets of hate speech not only from individual students or student led organizations, but of administrations. The only way to solve this problem, he argues, is to subject these institutions to public scrutiny (which often comes in the form of student led protests).
My Argument: I agree with the free speech absolutists that campuses should foster an environment of “democratic deliberation” and that people should be able to engage multiple conflicting points of view. However, I find it disturbing that some University free speech advocates (with the exception of ACLU legal director David Cole) don’t encourage student protest. It is telling that UCI’s Chancellor discusses his own activist past, but only describes student activism today as misguided. I agree that those efforts are misguided where the students simply expect administrators to create policies that will solve every problem. But I am with Jelani Cobb on this: some administrations are the problem. It’s not that they aren’t doing enough to punish badly behaved students or faculty; it’s that they don’t want to do anything at all. Doing something would mean addressing a history, not simply a policy. Therefore, current student-led efforts (on the campuses of Yale, University of Missouri and elsewhere) to address institutional racism and its effects are the most profound and powerful way to express and maintain First Amendment protections on campuses. In this essay, I argue that these efforts show that the First Amendment on campuses is alive and well in all the right ways; it’s just a matter of getting administrators to believe it.
You should have sources that help you answer all of the following questions.
- Do your sources help establish a trend in the advocacy approaches? (For example, with campus hate speech the “trend” of past decades was administrative; but what is happening now?)
- Does the source help establish WHO are the advocates involved and what is the purpose of the advocacy?
- Does the source help establish WHO has a stake in blocking efforts to solve or mitigate the problem?
- Does the source show how the advocacy has been helped or hurt by public opinion? Or does it describe any common perception about the issue that determines the advocacy approach
- Does the source show how policy or law or other reform measures have failed?
- Does the source help define the root causes of failed advocacy?
- Does the source help establish HOW advocates have been successful in resolving or mitigating the problem?
- Does the source help establish an evaluation of cost to benefit?
- Does the source help establish the feasibility of your proposed solutions? (does it establish precedent? Show current action? Efforts at implementation?)
- Does the source offer a solution to the problem similar to the one you envision? (if so, has their been any action after the work was published? If so, what? If not, why do you suppose that is?)
- Does the source function as opposition to your proposed solution? Does it show, in other words, what might be problematic about your argument? (you will want real voices with real arguments here).
Include a list of ADDITIONAL key research terms: Good keywords are specific: they involve legislation, policy, court cases, organizations and government institutions, names of important figures. Keywords should always help you to find relevant, related sources. Also, keep a separate file for key terms, dates, policies, events, people, etc. that you find in the articles you read that will help you to develop a vocabulary for discussing the specific policies, legislation, and/or other key players and related issues.
Good key research terms: “Communications Decency Act of 1996” “The National Declassification Center” “Facebook v. Sullivan” “Abrams v. United States” “Freedom of Information Act”
Poor key research terms: “the first amendment” “free speech” “libel”
Include at least THREE NEW specific argument-based questions that you want for your research to answer for you.
Good argument-based questions (note that good claim-based questions assume the reader has already been provided in earlier parts of the essay with an account of the key terms at work in the question): How have the Espionage and Sedition Acts constrained press freedom? Why has originalist jurisprudence posed a problem for groups advocating against hate speech? How does the advocacy surrounding free speech campus legislation threaten academic freedom?
Poor questions (note that poor claim-based questions are inaccurate or overly vague): Why is hate speech illegal? (It isn’t.) Why does the government censor people? (Who? Far too vague.) Why is Trump trying to ruin the press? (He isn’t; he’s trying to shape public opinion about the press; some might argue that the press is already ruined!) Why do campuses censor their students? (As a general rule, they don’t.)
"Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you A results."