Developing Criteria and Match Arguments 1. Choose a specific controversial person, thing, or event to evaluate. To help you think of ideas try brainstorming controversial members of the following categories: people (athletes, political leaders, musicians); technology; government and world affairs; the arts; your college or university; the world of work; or any other categories of your choice.

2. Place your controversial person or thing within the smallest relevant class, thus providing a rhetorical context for your argument and showing what is at stake. Do you want to evaluate Harvey’s Hamburger Haven in the broad category of restaurants, in the narrow category of hamburger joints, or in a different narrow category such as late-night study places?

3. Make a list of the purpose or function of that class, and then list the criteria that a good member of that class would need to have in order to accomplish its purpose or function. (what is the purpose of the function of a hamburger joint versus a late-night study place? What criteria for excellence can you derive from these purposes or functions?)

4. If necessary, rank your criteria from most to least important. (For a late-night study place, what is most important: Good ambience, Wi-Fi availability, good coffee, or convenient location?)

5. Provide examples and other evidence to show how your contested something matches or does not match each of your criteria. (as a late-night study place, Carol’s Coffee Closet beats out Harvey’s Hamburger Haven. Although Harvey’s Hamburger Haven has the most convenient location, Carol’s Coffee Closet has Wi-fi, an ambience conducive to studying, and excellent coffee.)

Controversial topic (that you are against):

Relevant class:

Purpose or function RANKED:

Thesis statement: