Outlining


The TITLE is THE OPENING DECLARATION OF YOUR ESSAY’S TOPIC, IN COMPLETE SENTENCE FORM.


Outlining can be used to plan writing assignments in a way that makes learning to write or, more specifically, learning to write and facilitate other people’s ability to zero in on the essential meaning of what you have written, more easily–if not most easily accomplished.


The reality, though, is that the type of writing that’s expected to be produced, I’ve figured out, is, maybe, not the most universally-applicable kind of writing. What it is is rhetorical and, essentially, Rhetorical communication is what one writes to an imagined (nonexistent) audience, as though the audience is actually existent.


It sort of seems, by virtue of that reality, that rhetoric should be relegated to Broadcasting, Communication and Theater departments, in institutions of higher learning.


The thing about rhetoric is the fact that, first of all, it has an inherent notion of redundancy connected to it; as well, the classical notion an example of rhetoric that is used to undergird its academic use, Platonic or Aristotelian Rhetoric, is either not very well-communicated by existent teachers of writing or is not holistically-applicable to the writing act or to the act of teaching writing.


What is used is Aristotle’s notion of rhetoric in the metaphoric communication of looking at shadows on the inner walls of a cave.


The shadows that are imagined to appear on the cave walls are supposed to be able to be imagined to be the unspoken, un-present audience, to whom the “RHETOR” is writing.


The funny thing is that, as far as I know, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, most often, were speaking their lessons to their students. As well, Plato and Aristotle, most-likely, if not definitely, “turned” all of their “responses in” in spoken form, too.


(From where would they have gotten a pencil? Much less, where would the sharpener have been located?) I never really thought of ancient Greece as having dead end streets, wherein shades and shadows would have been found, in caves, either.


To anyone who bothers to question me as to why learning disabled individuals are tortured in their earliest stages of undergraduate writing, I usually stare blankly at them, then say, “I don’t know; it’s all Greek to me…”


It’s been so long since I took English 101 that I had figured that I truly must have sleepwalking, like Mr. Magoo, through the one-semester duration of my English 101 experience, snoring away, as I proceeded to sleepwalk/pace upon the skyscraper, mid-construction, that was my English 101 experience.


For most any individual, much less, for learning disabled individuals, the customarily-used community college- and university-level English 101 curriculum can be incredibly difficult in which to succeed.


Personally, a trillion years before I entered grad school, where I wrote curricula that enable students to experience greater ease when they are required to perform writing acts, I, somehow, received an A in English 101, as an LD student.


In reality, Outlining was the vehicle I used as an alternative to communicate and teach students (especially learning disabled students) how, successfully, to create rhetorical, written communication.


The reason why Outlining works for this purpose is the fact that it enables a writer to maintain communicative balance in his or her communication, (almost) out of necessity.


The slightly tragic part about the entry-level writing curriculum at most schools is the fact it, when mastered by students, most-readily, equips them with rhetorical / dialogic communication abilities that can be applied to either speech writing or to teaching rhetoric.


What I came to hypothesize while tutoring writers, on the community college and university levels,  was that the assignments that comprised the entry-level curricula were, in reality, rhetorical  and, as well, were only a part of what writing, much less communication, was all about.


In reality, all one has to do is utilize an outlining system, similar to what I’m communicating, currently, and he or she should be able to do pretty well in the intro to composition class that is required is by most colleges and universities. In fact, a student could fare spectacularly.


This is your: “ROMAN NUMERAL ONE (I.) Introduction: this is where you declare what you are actually going to write about, in complete sentence form.


This is your: “FIRST CAPITAL LETTER ‘A.’ Thesis Statement: This is a statement you make about some aspect of the topic you’ve chosen, in complete sentence form.


Title: The title is where you provide an introduction and overview, in complete sentence format, to that about you are writing about.


I., This is an Introduction to the main focus of your paper, in accordance with the yourpaper’s stated thesis in complete sentence form. (USING VOICE RECOGNITION SOFTWARE, you can simply blurt out your opening thought and take on the topic about which you are writing and, magically, your wording flashes up onto your computer’s or tablet’s screen.)


II., This is more communication in complete sentence form that jibes with the proposed sentiment of your thesis.


III., However, followed by a complete sentence  that communicates the fact that another take or thesis, as to your topic is potentially true.


IV., This is more communication in complete sentence form that is diacritically opposed to the proposed sentiment of your thesis.


V., This is a sentence and declaration of which sentiment is determined to be correct, and why.


Now, if you hack off the “Benchmarks” (The Numbers and Letters), replacing each with an appropriate transition, you will, as you go along, be able to view your work, almost creating itself.


Too, by using complete sentences, you’ll not have need to, as an LD individual, return to fill in the nougat filling of your essay.


I can definitely remember how, in elementary school, middle school or both, being ferociously annoyed when a teacher would require a sentence outline be remitted. Boy, was I wrong.


The cues for the top level communication are transitional words and phrases, such as:

“First of all,”; “Secondly,”; “However,”; “Furthermore,”, and ” Finally,”.


A., this is where, using an appropriate rhetorical cue/ transition, in a completes sentence you provide evidence that   supports VI.


B., this is where you provide, in                 complete sentence form, you provide additional evidence that supports VI.


C., this is where you state, in com-plete sentence form, that there is a      possibility that VI. is incorrect.


D., here, you provide, in a comp-             lete sentence, evidence that               goes against the grain of VI.


E., this is where, in a complete sentence, you provideadditional evidencet that goes against the grain of VI.


1., This is where, using a complete sentence, you provide information that supports A. The number (1.) is replaced with an appropriate transition (Rhetorical/Dialogic cue) and is followed with a comma (,).


2. Here, you provide additional pro-A information, in complete sentence form.


3. The number 3, followed by a period, is replaced by a rhetorical/dialogic cue, or transition that communicates the sentiment of “However” and is followed, directly, with a comma.


(HERE) 4. The number 4, followed by a period, is replaced with a rhetor-ical/dialogic cue that is anti-A. and is followed by a complete sentence


5.,


a.,


b., c., d., e.,


In English 101, you can expect to have to write a series of assignments, pertinent to the same topic.


The title of your outline is a complete sentence that articulates your point of view on the topic and that touches, briefly, on the opposing point of view.


I. First of all, (Followed by a complete sentence that communicates your chosen take on the topic.)


A. Additionally,


1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


B. As well,


1.


2.


3. A rhetorical cue that communicates “Yet”, followed by a (,).


4.


5.


II. Secondly,


A. Also,


1.

2.


B. Too,


1.

2.


III. However,


A.


1.

2.


B.


1.

2.


IV. As well,


A.


1.

2.


B.


1.

2.


V. In conclusion,


VI. Wrap up


For most any individual, much less, for learning disabled individuals, the customarily-used community college- and university-level English 101 curriculum can be an incredibly difficult course in which to succeed.


Personally, a trillion years, before I entered grad school, where I wrote curricula that enable students great-er ease when they are required to perform writing acts, I received an A in English 101, as an LD student.


Knowing what I now know about the true nature of the rhetoric-driven English 101 programs that exist at most institutions of higher learning, I am utterly surprised.


This was while I was still finishing high school; I went, part-time, to the community college across the road, after I endured fourth period of my fifth year of high school courses. It was hoped that taking an extra year would give my brain more time to heal, prior to attempting undergrad school.


After four years of college prep, I had a 3.7 gpa; after a fifth, I graduated with a 3.68 gpa. (No, I never have considered what gpa I would have achieved, had I not had my giant stroke; yet, thank you for not asking. (wink-wink))


However, in my English 101 class I took at the community college, I received an A, as an individual who, about a year before, had approximately one half of his brain removed.


I know I did not use an outline for any of that course’s assignment that I wrote; however, somehow, I got an A from the stranger who taught the class.


This was, despite the fact that, unbeknownst to me, I had a shiny, brand newly-acquired short-term-memory deficit.


Apparently, the fact that I would hear something, one minute, and, 15 seconds later, I would not remember having heard it, did not thwart me from excelling in the curriculum.


Sometimes, I would hear a message that, prior to my STROKE, I would have had no problem handling all the components of, and, now, would need to receive several repetitions of the communication, before I would be able to carry out all the instructions. I was, sometimes, usually, about 50 percent accurate.


Sometimes, I was about 65 percent accurate…other times, I was only about 25 percent accurate. Having a stroke-created short-term-memory deficit is tragically miserable. It messes with many parts of all your interactions.


English 101, for me, was strangely easy. Why this was, I am not sure. Yet, the fact that I was able to get an A in the rhetoric-intensive class could be a sign that rhetoric is not the right thing to use for entry-level students.


In the several years that I tutored students, engaged in the curriculum, out of the blue, I became aware of the true nature of the course. It is a specific type of writing (rhetorical) that’s expected of a student writer; only, I’m not sure many English 101 profs are aware of it.


As a grad student, due to my having worked for multiple years as a writing tutor of students who were enrolled in English 101, poetry analysis and Junior level English courses, one semester, I decided to infuse my tutoring experience and methods into my coursework.


Outlining was the vehicle I used as an alternative to communicate and teach students (especially learning disabled students) how, successfully, to create rhetorical, written communication.


The reason why Outlining works for this purpose is the fact that it enables a writer to maintain communicative balance in his or her communication, (almost) out of necessity. The slightly tragic part about the entry-level writing curriculum at most schools is the fact it, when mastered by students, most-readily, equips them with rhetorical / dialogic communication abilities that can be applied to either speech writing or to teaching/writing rhetoric.


What I came to hypothesize while tutoring writers, on the community college and university levels, was that the assignments that comprised the entry-level curricula were, in reality, rhetorical, in nature and, as well, were only a part of what writing, much less communication, was all about.


The fact is that a Learning Disabled individual can easily bypass stress and confusion if he or she accepts the reality that, even if his or her professor and/or prof/TA is the most benevolent and well-meaning individual or duo on earth, there is a much easier way to succeed, as an entry-level collegiate writing student. Here is how to do just that.


The most efficient way to allow your audience to follow your writing’s intended meaning is for you to use rhetorical cues; these are what, in elementary and middle school, you learned to recognize as “TRANSITIONS”.


Transitions are what allow your reader(s) to determine where your communication’s meaning is going, before it actually goes there. It is my personal hypothesis that the effective use of transitions, in conjunction with one’s willingness to review what he or she has written and determine the nonexistence of any “careless” mistakes is the true key to doing well in, especially, English 101 class.


Transitions have varying types, such as:
First,: First of all,; Secondly,; However,; Lastly,; and In conclusion,


When one uses the outlining process to plan his or her composition process, these top-level transitions take the place of Roman numerals, (I., II., III., IV., V.) in your outline.


The next level (second-tier) representations, in your Outline, (A., B., C., D., E.), signify a different level of specificity of transitions (rhetorical/dialogic cues) They signify the provision of more detail of the topic about which you are writing. These stand for words, like: As well,; Additionally,; Too,.


The third tier rhetorical/dialogic cues (transitions) are used to communicate the specific details that correspond to the multiple aspects of the aspects of your topic. Accordingly, these are signified by the symbols, (1., 2., 3., 4., 5.).


If your communication of your topic goes into further detail, you continue your outline, using the appropriate numbering and/or lettering, as is required. With each consecutive detail that is connected to the same overarching concept, you simply use a term that matches up. If you’re communicating the first detail, you use “First,” or “First of all,”.


The second detail causes you to utilize “Second,”, “Secondly,”, “Next,” or whatever is the best wording for you to use. Then, when you get to the end of your information you’re writing about, you need, usually, to consider the same information you have been writing about, from a different perspective.


Now, the extremely incredible part about the act of using a sentence outline, as your go-to pre-writing task method for organizing your notes, is the fact that all you will have to do is replace each of the Roman numerals, letters and numbers with appropriate, prone rhetorical cues.


Overall, the great thing about using an outline to plan your essay is the fact that, as a pre-writing tactic, it is utterly foolproof by virtue of the fact that it allows you to know that your essay is well-balanced; it being true that, the specificity of your outline corresponds to the inherent specificity your essay and, if one uses a complete sentence outline, all he or she must do is use it, replacing all of the Numerals, numbers and letters, with prone, corresponding rhetorical/dialogic cues (transitions.)


The thing about the Outlining process that facilitates great ease is the fact that it is perfectly suited to establishing and maintaining perfect balance in your writing; this is incredibly useful for making it possible establishing and maintaining balance and coherence.


Viewing the Claude Monet Exhibit/Serau) led me to realize that things are not always what they appear to be; at one point in time, in Baltimore, Maryland, at the Baltimore Museum of Art, a massive collection of  Monet’s artwork was on display.


As I was making my way through the show, I came to the realization, with the assistance of my friend, the art history major, at another local university, that 99.9% of anybody in attendance, at the gallery, we’re going about viewing the works, “incorrectly”.


Now, on the opposite end of the spectrum, I think, is the works of Suerraut, who used tiny dots of paint, not giant, thick strokes of paint. If an onlooker is too close to these paintings, he or she misses out on what, supposedly, the artist intended to communicate, as well.


The fact is that Monet had painted his works of art from a bizarre perspective that made the most appropriate vantage from which to take in his paintings from quite far away. (at least far, in terms of a gallery’s space)


The majority of the attendants were reading every placard, posted at the bottom of each massive painting, stepping back two to three steps, and then gawking, straight away.


Basically, whether an English 101 professor is a fan of Monet’s or Seraut’s, using the outlining method for producing rhetoric can be amazingly effective.


As I was in the last throes of my BA, I had a chance to attend an exhibit of Claude Monet’s paintings that were on display at the Baltimore Museum of Art. These were gigantic works, produced on massive canvases.


Luckily, I had attended the exhibit with a friend who was, at the time, an Art History major.


Even though the rooms within the BMA where the paintings were hanged were pretty enormous, I had to be cued in to the reality that, when viewing these types of works, one can get a fairly mind-opening/mind-blowing vantage of the paintings, if he or she steps back as far away from where the artwork hangs and blurs his or her vision (I squinted).


I stashed this Experience away and, years later, I came to the realization that, in my opinion, the people I knew that were instructing individuals in the easiest and most prone way to create rhetoric, were doing so, in a very backwards way.


This was and is due to the fact that the artist was painting massive paintings on mammoth canvases that were, most definitely, unable to be viewed, successfully, unless the onlooker moved to witness the paintings from really far away or unless the onlooker squinted and blurred his or her vision, until the colors and shapes transformed visually, to open Monet’s intended paint box and can of worms.


Then, several years later, while in grad school, I had an epiphany as to the almost rigorously mechanical nature of the process by which amazingly easy-to-follow rhetoric was able to be, most-easily created…it was and is, still, through a process that necessitates balance in one’s communication of information  …(for every I., you need to have a II.; for every A., you have to have a B.; for every 1., you have to have  a 2., and so on.)


Every benchmark (I., A., 1., a., I., etc.) coincides with a set of different transitions or rhetorical/dialogic cues that guide your reader’s comprehension and let him or her know, even if just subliminally, in what direction the flow of information is going to be going.


Conceptually, at one point in time,  as I was working as a writing tutor who met with and helped zillions of students become un-entangled from what they experienced, wading through the first foundation course that the institution “offered”, something clicked and I realized that the curriculum that I, most usually, was expected to tutor/teach, “English 101”, was really rhetorical. Upon analyzing this epiphany, I realized that students could easily be assisted in achieving higher grades in the foundation class if they were provided a tweaked form of the instruction that they were being provided.


When I was in English 101, I was called upon to write a number of connected papers in the format of pro/con and what this meant was that I had to introduce a topic and talk about (write about) the subject, communicating, first, the positive aspects of a topic or situation. Then, I had to write about the existing negative aspects of the same topic or situation; then, I was called upon to analyze, in writing, which aspects (positive or negative) were more valid and, finally, communicate be airtight rationale for my final analysis.


After thinking about it, and realizing that students’ responses were being likely being graded upon the ease which their professors or TA’s experienced, while reviewing them, I thought about the most foolproof method for assisting students, especially learning-disabled students, with the act of not being graded down and, thereby, having their initial higher education writing experience cause them to adopt the belief that writing was beyond their potential acquisition.


I remember, prior to having written this essay, personally believing that the act of forcing a student to write a sentence outline, as opposed to a phrase outline, was just the act of a teacher’s malevolence; however, the sake of writing rhetoric or speech writing, the use of a sentence outline is amazingly useful.


The reason why I say this is the fact that an individual can easily convert his or her sentence outline into fluidly worded communication, with great ease. I do not believe that this is widely known, otherwise I feel as though teachers, beyond the elementary school level, would insist upon its usage.


Potentially, this is only applicable to teaching coherent writing skills to learning-disabled individuals; however, it’s my opinion that it is applicable to succinctly teaching rhetorical writing skills, assuredly, to all people. Instead of using Monet’s brushstrokes, sometimes, Seurat’s technique might need to be used.


Pro/Con:


If you use complete sentences, you can experience amazing, additional ease, due to the fact that the complete sentence outline, when the benchmarks are replaced with appropriate “rhetorical/dialogic cues”, i.e.: transitions, is 95-99 percent complete. The following communication illustrates how this is true.


I. (Top-level Rhetorical/Dialogic Cue):, Introduction to/Statement of the Topic, utilizing a coherent, balanced, complete sentence.


II. (Secondary-level rhetorical/dia-logic cue: Declaration of thesis)


A. Initial statement of your                        “personal” take on the subject,            utilizing a coherent, balanced,              complete sentence.


1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


B. Substantiation of thesis, utilizing a coherent, balanced, complete sentence.


1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


C. Provision of plausibility of                   alternate view of topic, utilizing a       coherent, balanced, complete               sentence.


1.
2.
3.
4.
D. Additional support of alternate view, utilizing a coherent, balanced, complete sentence.
1. Provision of support of the alternate view, in complete sentence form, starting with “First off,” or “First of all,”, for example.

(HERE)
2. This is where, in a complete sentence, additional support is  provided to support the alternative view.
3.
4.
E. Declaration of the Superior point of view, utilizing a coherent, balanced, complete sentence.
1. Supposition of the inferior point of view’s validity utilizing a balanced, complete sentence.
2. Statement of the conclusive superiority of the superior point of view, with a complete sentence.
3. Final concluding communication of the realization/findings
II.
A.
1.
2.
3.
4.
III. This is where you need to communicate the potential that the opposite or maybe just alternative point of
view might be valid. In order to provide your reader the knowledge that his or her mindset could be incor-
rect, you will need to use a transition or rhetorical cue that lets your reader know that his or her first
idea mind could be off or completely opposite to what the real facts are. These are: However,; Yet, etc.
IV.
V. Conclusion:

Pro/Pro:
Experience, Experience w/Evidence, Experience and other Evidence, The Other Side, Comprehensive Experience Paper. (In reality, the fact that the medium (rhetoric) is being utilized as a standard for “excellence”, it is able to be determined that, A. the curriculum does not provide writers usable writing skills, and, B. that the communicated instruction that is provided by “composition” professors who are grading for excellence in composition are, in reality, not doing so, by virtue of the rhetoric/dialogic communication goal being much more readily accomplished. LD students, easily, are left out in the cold, by virtue of this mismatch that is never addressed.)

For most any individual, much less, for learning disabled individuals, the customarily-used community college- and university-level English 101 curriculum can be incredibly difficult in which to succeed. Personally, a trillion years before I entered grad school, where I wrote curricula that enable students to experience greater ease when they are required to perform writing acts, I, somehow, received an A in English 101, as an LD student.
In reality, Outlining was the vehicle I used as an alternative to communicate and teach students (especially learning disabled students) how, successfully, to create rhetorical, written communication.
The reason why Outlining works for this purpose is the fact that it enables a writer to maintain communicative balance in his or her communication, (almost) out of necessity.
The slightly tragic part about the entry-level writing curriculum at most schools is the fact it, when mastered by students, most-readily, equips them with rhetorical / dialogic communication abilities that can be applied to speech writing, to delivering speeches or to teaching rhetoric.
What I came to hypothesize while tutoring writers, on the community college and university levels, was that the assignments that comprised the entry-level curricula were, in reality, rhetorical, in nature and, as well, were only a part of what writing, much less communication, was all about.
In reality, all one has to do is utilize an outlining system, similar to what I’m communicating, currently, and he or she should be able to do pretty well in the intro to composition class that is required is by most colleges and universities. In fact, a student could fare spectacularly.
Introduction: this segues into the body of your essay back allows your reader to know the overall topic about which you are writing.
1. First of all, Initially,
2. Secondly, As well,
3. However, Yet, On the other hand,
IV.
V.
A., B., C., D., E.
1., 2., 3., 4., 5.
a., b., c., d., e.
i., ii., iii., iv., v.
Thesis Statement
I., II., III., IV., V.
I. First of all,
A. Specifically,
1.
2.
B.
1.
2.
II. Secondly,
A.
1.
2.
B.
1.
2.
III. However,
A.
1.
2.
B.
1.
2.
IV. As well,
A.
1.
2.
B.
1.
2.
V. In conclusion,
VI. Wrap up
For most any individual, much less, for learning disabled individuals, the customarily-used community college- and university-level English 101 curriculum can be incredibly difficult in which to succeed. Personally, a trillion years before I entered grad school, where I wrote curricula that enable students to experience greater ease when they are required to perform writing acts, I, somehow, received an A in English 101, as an LD student.
In reality, Outlining was the vehicle I used as an alternative to communicate and teach students (especially learning disabled students) how, successfully, to create rhetorical, written communication.
The reason why Outlining works for this purpose is the fact that it enables a writer to maintain communicative balance in his or her communication, (almost) out of necessity.
The slightly tragic part about the entry-level writing curriculum at most schools is the fact it, when mastered by students, most-readily, equips them with rhetorical / dialogic communication abilities that can be applied to speech writing, to delivering speeches or to teaching rhetoric.
What I came to hypothesize while tutoring writers, on the community college and university levels, was that the assignments that comprised the entry-level curricula were, in reality, rhetorical, in nature and, as well, were only a part of what writing, much less communication, was all about.
In reality, all one has to do is utilize an outlining system, similar to what I’m communicating, currently, and he or she should be able to do pretty well in the intro to composition class that is required is by most colleges and universities. In fact, a student could fare spectacularly.
Introduction: this segues into the body of your essay back allows your reader to know the overall topic about which you are writing.
1. First of all, Initially,
2. Secondly, As well,
3. However, Yet, On the other hand,
IV.
V.
A., B., C., D., E.
1., 2., 3., 4., 5.
a., b., c., d., e.
i., ii., iii., iv., v.
Thesis Statement
I., II., III., IV., V.
I. First of all,
A.
1.
2.
B.
1.
2.
II. Secondly,
A.
1.
2.
B.
1.
2.
III. However,
A.
1.
2.
B.
1.
2.
IV. As well,
A.
1.
2.
B.
1.
2.
V. In conclusion,
VI. Wrap up

Outlining

On Jun 1, 2015 3:28 PM, Matt Ramsey <mattramzzz@comcast.net> wrote:

———- Forwarded message ———- From: Matt Ramsey <mattramzzz@comcast.net> Date: Jun 1, 2015 3:16 PM Subject: Re: this is the beginning of outlining To: Matt Ramsey <mattramzzz@comcast.net> Cc:

On Jun 1, 2015 3:05 PM, mattramzzz <mattramzzz@comcast.net> wrote:

Title: Introduction to the topic, in complete sentence form.

Training a dog can be easy or it can be hard to accomplish.

  1.   “First of all,” complete sentence,

introducing a take on the topic “First of all” takes the place of “I.”, leaving a

rhetorical/dialogic cue, “First of all,” followed by a complete sentence.

(When you connect the Transition or Rhetorical/Dialogic Cue to your complete sentence, a complete thought that leaves no room for questions or enigma is easily established)

[associated transitions:

Here,;

(I)A. a complete sentence that articulates more in depth information on the topic

(I)1. Specifically, ; followed by a complete sentence

Associated transitions

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2. As well, followed by a complete sentence

Associated transitions

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

[associated transitions:

As well,; (I)B. a complete sentence that articulates more in depth information on

the topic

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

  1.   “As well,” followed by a complete

sentence that adds to the

credence of “I.”

(II)A.

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(II)B.

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

III. “However,” followed by a

complete sentence that asserts

the reality that “I.” could be

flawed.

(III)A.

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(III)B.

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

  1. “Based on the fact that”, followed

by a statement that either

coincides with or that goes

against the grain of ” I.” It can be

reckoned that “I.” is or is not able

to be reckoned as viable.

(IV.)A.

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(IV.)B.

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

  1.   “Therefore,”, followed by the final

sentiment that been arrived at,

following the previous flow of

communicated information.

[(V.)A.]

[(V.)B.]

I.A.,

I.B.,

I.C.,

I.D.,

I.E.

II.A.,II.B., II.C., II.D.,II.E.

III.A., III.B., III.C., III.D., III.E.

IV.A.,IV.B.,IV.C.,IV.D.,IV.E.

V.A.,V.,B.,V.C.,V.D.,V.E.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

a.

b.

c.

d.

e.

i.

ii.

iii.

iv.

v.

Title: Introduction to the topic, in complete sentence form.

  1.   “First of all,” complete sentence,

introducing a take on the topic

(I)A.

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)B.

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

  1.   “As well,” followed by a complete

sentence that adds to the

credence

of “I.”

(II)A.

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(II)B.

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

III. “However,” followed by a

complete sentence that asserts

the reality that “I.” could be

flawed.

(III)A.

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(III)B.

(I)1.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

(I)2.

(1.)a.

(2.)b.

  1. “Based on the fact that”, followed

by a statement that either

coincides with or that goes

&n

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s