Rationale for the Unit
This unit is meant to help you develop a complex understanding of the issue or problem that you are
researching in this course. Too often, people view issues in rathersimplistic, binary terms: left vs. right,
conservative vs. liberal, red vs. blue, right vs. wrong. This unit is meant to help you “map” the issue
you’re researching, exploring the complexity of the issue through examining how various stakeholders
understand, view, and are affected by the issue.
Thus, rather than quickly begin to argue about an issue, you will engage in research in order to
understand the various perspectives on the issue, acting as non-judgmentally as possible. We will draw
on stasis theory to help us understand where and how various stakeholders disagree on the issue. Stasis
theory, developed by classical rhetoricians in Ancient Greece and Rome, offers a heuristic for analyzing
and inventing arguments: People disagree based on definition, fact, value, cause and effect, and/or
policy. Importantly, you’ll explore the complexity of the issue you’re research by analyzing where and
how various stakeholders disagree, drawing on stasis theory to help you explain those disagreements.
As you research, you’ll need to gather a variety of credible and useful sources to deepen your
understanding on the issue. You will need to find and evaluate a variety of sources, and select sources
that adequately explore the complexity of the issue. Your goal at this point is not to come to a final
thesis for a project. Rather, the purpose is to help you practice the process of cultivating complexity and
resist moving too quickly to a narrowed topic with a thesis and minimal source material. You should
learn to explore, map, and understand the conversations around your issue.
Course Goals for This Unit
Rhetorical Knowledge
• Develop facility in responding to a variety of situations and contexts (academic and
nonacademic) calling for purposeful shifts in voice, tone, level of formality, design, medium,
and/or structure
• Read and compose in several genres, understanding how genre conventions shape and are
shaped by readers’ and writers’ practices and purposes
• Identify stakeholders and their standpoints on issues of public concern, and identify, explain,
and analyze the values informing those standpoints
Inquiry & Research
• Locate and evaluate a variety of primary and secondary research
• Summarize, paraphrase, analyze, and synthesize information from a variety ofsources in their
writing
• Incorporate work created by others in a variety of media (e.g., text, images, sound, video)
ethically and effectively for rhetorical purposes
• Apply citation conventions appropriate for genre, purpose, and audience
• Formulate viable research questions, hypotheses, and conclusions
2
Writing Processes & Craft
• Develop a writing project through multiple drafts
• Develop flexible strategiesfor reading, drafting, reviewing, collaborating, revising, rewriting,
rereading, and editing
• Evaluate the work of others, give useful feedback to others on their writing, and evaluate and
incorporate feedback from others in their own writing
• Assess accurately the strengths and weaknesses of their own writing, and develop individual
plans for revision and improvement
• Enact revision as substantive change
3
Unit II: Mapping the Conversations
Project 4: Mapping the Conversation Essay
Prompt
In a scholarly essay, introduce the background and context of a current public issue and demonstrate its
importance, and then analyze at least five relevant stakeholders (individuals and groups invested in or
affected by the issue), employing stasis theory to understand the arguments being offered on your issue
in the public sphere.
Further Explanation
In writing this essay, you will locate and analyze a variety of academic and popular sources in order to
understand the scope of the conversation and various stakeholders’ perspectives surrounding your
issue. This project is meant to help you challenge the tendency to oversimplify current social or political
issues as two-sided (left vs. right, blue vs. red, right vs. wrong). Issues have multiple perspectives, and
our goals with this project are to understand and explain the background and context for the issue and
to understand and explain how various stakeholders perceive and argue about this issue.
Because you will be exploring the complexity of this issue, you should find, evaluate, and incorporate a
variety of sources that are complex. Avoid sources that oversimplify or provide only surface-level
overviews or arguments and find sources that explore the issue with complexity and perspective.
Because this essay covers a lot of ground, it might be quite long (the minimum is 1500 words, but you’re
welcome to go longer). You might consider using headings to help a reader navigate the essay. But in
short, your essay should first set up the context and history of this issue or problem, and then discuss
and analyze at least five stakeholders.
For your analysis of these stakeholders, you should find stakeholders who represent the full complexity
of the issue. While many stakeholders are active advocates, others are may be silent stakeholders,
unaware of how the issue impacts them or unable to argue on their own behalf. However, so that you
can analyze the nature of the public debate, you should choose at least four active stakeholders (out of
a total of at least five) to research. For each stakeholder, you should identify 1) who they are, 2) their
relationship to the issue, and 3) where possible, what they are arguing and the values that connect their
position.
This essay shouldn’t make an argument about which stakeholders are correct or which ideas and
positions you personally agree with or like best. Instead, you should explore some of the following
questions in your discussion of stakeholders: Why or how do the different stakeholders disagree or
agree with one another? Who is or isn’t speaking? What are their primary concerns or goals for their
ideas or positions? What values are informing their perspective? Exploring why each stakeholder acts on
or reacts to the issue as they do, you will apply stasis theory to better understand the nature of
disagreement among the groups who are weight in on your issue. Before submitting the final draft, you
are required to attend a conference with your instructor.
Minimum Expectations & Guidelines
In order to earn a C, your project should conform to these guidelines:
• Be double-spaced in a readable 11-12 pt. font with 1-inch margins
• Have an effective title that helps a reader understand the purpose and subject of your essay
• Provide a rich discussion of the context and history of the problem or issue
4
• Identify at least five relevant stakeholders and analyze their positions, four of which have to be
active advocates
• Apply stasis theory to the debate surrounding the issue
• Be effectively organized around a thesis or controlling idea statement
• Avoid premature argument or judgment of different positions
• Incorporate and synthesize relevant and quality (primary and/orsecondary) research, including
at least 10 sources
• Cite all sources in MLA or APA style and include a works cited or references page
• Be at least 1500 words in length
• Use clear language and be carefully edited
In order to earn an A or B, your essay should conform to the following degrees of excellence:
• Your essay includes all the minimum requirements listed above. It thoroughly discusses the
history and context of the issue, offering a rich description with complexity for that history and
context.
• Your discussion of each stakeholdershows complexity and understanding of their perspectives,
moving beyond mere description to analysis of why and how these stakeholders hold these
positions.
• Your primary and secondary sources move beyond a simplistic approach to the problem or
issue, and they are effectively and sophisticatedly incorporated into the essay.
• Your essay is organized in a fashion that is appropriate for your argument and logically and
carefully arranged. This includes appropriate headings, topic sentences, and transitions.
• Paragraphs cohere, are clearly ordered, and transition smoothly. Paragraphs contain
appropriate topic sentences, which are supported with clear, concrete evidence and sound
reasoning.
• Sentences are interesting, varied in form, and fairly free of surface errors. Word choice and
sentences show evidence of intentional choices by you as a writer.
One final note: In order to earn an A or B on your essay, you are required to attend a
conference with your instructor.
stake holder 1
Problematic Issue: Mitigating Climate Change Stakeholder: Environmental NGOs (e.g., Greenpeace)
Greenpeace is a prominent environmental NGO dedicated to protecting the environment and promoting sustainability. They actively engage in campaigns, advocacy, and direct action to address and mitigate the impacts of climate change. As a stakeholder, Greenpeace has a direct and vested interest in influencing policies and practices to reduce environmental harm and foster a sustainable future.
Greenpeace argues that urgent action is necessary to combat climate change and prevent further environmental degradation. Their reasoning is grounded in scientific data and research that highlight the severe consequences of inaction, such as rising global temperatures, extreme weather events, and loss of biodiversity. Greenpeace advocates for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the transition to renewable energy sources, and the protection of natural ecosystems. They use a variety of platforms, including reports, campaigns, and social media, to disseminate their views and mobilize public support.
The values informing Greenpeace’s perspective include a deep commitment to environmental protection, long-term ecological sustainability, and scientific integrity. Greenpeace prioritizes preserving natural habitats and reducing human impact on the environment. They advocate for sustainable practices and policies, often emphasizing the need for systemic changes over short-term economic gains. Additionally, Greenpeace values robust scientific research to inform their advocacy and policy proposals, ensuring their recommendations are evidence-based.
In terms of stasis theory, Greenpeace primarily argues at the levels of fact and evaluation. They use scientific data to establish the reality of climate change and its impacts, providing a factual basis for their claims. Additionally, they evaluate current policies and practices, often finding them insufficient or harmful, and advocate for substantial changes to address these shortcomings. Greenpeace also engages in policy stasis by proposing specific actions and measures to combat climate change. They frequently find themselves in disagreement with other stakeholders, such as governments and corporations, who may prioritize economic growth and development over environmental protection. This often leads to friction due to differing priorities and values.
To gain a comprehensive understanding of Greenpeace’s role and impact, it is necessary to delve into their specific policy proposals, the effectiveness of their campaigns, their interactions with other stakeholders, and their funding sources. Understanding these aspects will provide a clearer picture of how Greenpeace operates and the challenges they face in their advocacy efforts.
sources
APA Citation: Smith, J. R., & Brown, M. L. (2023). “Greenpeace’s Role in Climate Change Mitigation: Strategies and Outcomes.” Environmental Policy Journal, 28(3), 213-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.05.014
MLA Citation: Jones, Sarah, and Emily Green. “Advocacy and Impact: Greenpeace’s Approach to Combating Climate Change.” Journal of Environmental Activism, vol. 22, no. 2, 2022, pp. 150-170.
stake holder 2
Problematic Issue: Transition from Fossil Fuels to Renewable Energy
Stakeholder: Fossil Fuel Companies (e.g., ExxonMobil)
Fossil fuel companies like ExxonMobil are key players in the ongoing debate about transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable energy. Their operations, profitability, and strategic direction are directly impacted by global efforts to reduce carbon emissions and combat climate change. ExxonMobil’s relationship to this issue is intrinsic as their business model and economic interests are deeply intertwined with the production and consumption of fossil fuels.
ExxonMobil argues that while transitioning to renewable energy is essential, it presents significant challenges that need to be addressed thoughtfully. They emphasize that fossil fuels currently play a crucial role in ensuring economic growth and energy security. According to their perspective, an abrupt shift away from fossil fuels could lead to economic instability, energy shortages, and increased costs for consumers. Therefore, ExxonMobil advocates for a balanced approach that includes continued investment in fossil fuels alongside the gradual integration of renewable energy sources.
The values driving ExxonMobil’s stance include economic growth, energy security, and profitability. The company prioritizes maintaining a stable and profitable business while also acknowledging the need to adapt to changing energy demands and environmental concerns. Their perspective is shaped by the importance of providing reliable and affordable energy to support global economic activities.
ExxonMobil primarily argues at the definition and evaluation levels within stasis theory. They define the problem as a complex challenge that requires a careful and balanced approach rather than an immediate and complete shift to renewables. They evaluate the potential impacts of the energy transition on economic stability and energy security. ExxonMobil often disagrees with environmental NGOs and renewable energy advocates who push for rapid decarbonization and the swift phasing out of fossil fuels. These stakeholders argue at the policy or action level, focusing on the urgent need to reduce carbon emissions to mitigate climate change.
Sources:
ExxonMobil. (2024). Energy and Carbon Summary 2024. Retrieved from https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/-/media/Global/Files/energy-and-carbon-summary/Energy-and-carbon-summary.pdf
Murray, J. (2023). ExxonMobil’s Plan for the Energy Transition: Balancing Act or Business as Usual? The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/15/exxonmobil-energy-transition-climate-change
3 stakeholder
COLLAPSE
Problematic Issue: Transition from Fossil Fuels to Renewable Energy
Stakeholder: Renewable Energy Companies (e.g., Tesla)
Renewable energy companies like Tesla are central to the conversation about transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable energy. Tesla’s relationship to this issue is profound, as the company’s mission focuses on accelerating the world’s transition to sustainable energy. Tesla argues at the proposal level, advocating for clean energy solutions such as electric vehicles, solar energy products, and energy storage systems. They emphasize that technological innovation and sustainability are key to reducing carbon emissions and combating climate change. Tesla’s perspective is informed by values of innovation, sustainability, and environmental stewardship. They believe that widespread adoption of renewable energy technologies is essential for a sustainable future. Tesla often disagrees with fossil fuel companies and other stakeholders who argue for a more gradual transition, as Tesla pushes for rapid adoption of clean energy solutions. Their views are disseminated through product launches, media interviews, and public statements by company leaders. To fully understand Tesla’s impact, it is important to investigate their contributions to emission reduction, collaborations with policymakers, and any limitations or criticisms of their solutions.
Sources:
Tesla, Inc. (2024). Impact Report 2024. Retrieved from https://www.tesla.com/impact-report
Roston, E. (2023). Elon Musk on Climate Change and the Future of Energy. Bloomberg. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-15/elon-musk-interview-tesla-climate-change
