​Instead of peer reviewing today, we are going to look at our own work and do a little of revising and editing.

​

In your Online Folder, create a copy of your Op-Ed piece. This copy is where you will give yourself comments. Upload a link to this draft in the Blackboard Discussion forum: Op-Ed Revising & Editing Workshop. Respond to the following by at the very end of your draft, write your response to the following: 

​

1. First, read the writer’s argumentative outline in its entirety.  Many times, writers have all the elements of an argument in their first draft, but they might be out of order.

2. Copy and paste the writer’s CLAIM.  Next, analyze the claim.  Claims should be arguable, debatable claims the writer wishes to prove. 

   • So, “the opioid crisis is a big problem in the U.S.” is not a claim. 

   • Does the claim sound reasonable? 

   • Would reasonable people both agree and disagree with this claim? 

   • Is the claim too broad? 

3. Next, analyze the writer’s background. 

   • See if the writer answers the “journalist’s questions:” who, what, where, why, how when? 

   • What’s missing? 

   • What important context needs to be added?

4. Next, copy and paste and then critique the writer’s reasons.  Reasons, like claims, should be arguable, debatable statements the writer proves with evidence. 

   • So, if the writer’s claim is, “Johnson & Johnson and other big pharmaceutical companies were complicit in the opioid crisis, and should therefore compensate victims and state governments,” those reasons should support this claim. 

   • For example: “Reason 1:  Big pharma new that these new drugs were highly addictive, yet pushed for their use anyway.”  This is clearly an arguable statement that not everyone would agree with.

5. Next copy and paste the evidence the writer provided.  You must ensure the writer provides documented evidence to support her claims. 

   • For the above example, “Scholarly journal articles proved the addictive characteristics of new opioids long before the crisis ensued” would be a fact-based piece of evidence that supports the reason.

6. The writer should have a minimum of three reasons, and evidence to support each reason.  If something is missing, help them out and offer some suggestions.

7. The writer should next anticipate objections and rebut them.  Objections should also be arguable and debatable. 

   • For example, “Big pharma shouldn’t be held responsible for the opioid crisis; doctors should.  They are the ones who actually prescribed the drugs.”  Copy and paste the two objections in the outline.

8. So, the next step is for the writer to rebut (counter) the possible objection. 

   • For example, “Big pharma spent millions selling doctors on the safety and benefits of the new opioid drugs.  It’s not the doctors’ fault.” 

   • Copy and paste the evidence the writer uses to counter anticipated objections.  If there’s something missing, help them out and offer some suggestions.

9. There should be a minimum of two objections, and evidence to rebut each objection.

​

 For the remainder of class, work on your draft!