rogerian essay parts

Essay Papers Writing Online

Master the art of writing a rogerian essay with these step-by-step guidelines.

Are you struggling to find common ground in an argumentative essay? A Rogerian essay might just be the solution you need. A Rogerian essay focuses on finding a middle ground and establishing rapport with the opposing viewpoint, rather than outright conflicting. This approach can lead to more constructive dialogue and understanding, making it a valuable tool in persuasive writing.

In this guide, we will explore the key elements of a Rogerian essay and provide you with tips on how to effectively structure and write one. Additionally, we will offer examples to illustrate the Rogerian approach in action, helping you to grasp the concept and apply it to your own writing.

Understanding the Rogerian Essay Approach

The Rogerian essay approach is a unique method of argumentation that aims to find common ground between conflicting viewpoints. Unlike traditional argumentative essays that focus on proving one side as the “right” side, Rogerian essays seek to understand and respect opposing perspectives. This approach emphasizes listening, empathy, and open-mindedness in order to foster constructive dialogue and resolution.

In a Rogerian essay, the writer acknowledges the validity of the opposing viewpoint before presenting their own position. This helps establish trust and credibility with the audience, creating a more receptive environment for discussion. By recognizing the merits of each perspective and finding areas of agreement, the Rogerian approach encourages cooperation and compromise rather than confrontation and conflict.

Overall, the Rogerian essay approach is effective in promoting understanding and collaboration between individuals with differing opinions. By approaching arguments with empathy and a willingness to engage in respectful dialogue, writers can create a more inclusive and productive discourse that promotes mutual understanding and consensus.

Overview of the Rogerian Essay Structure

A Rogerian essay is a form of argumentative essay that aims to find a middle ground between two conflicting perspectives. This type of essay is structured differently from traditional argumentative essays, focusing on finding common ground and understanding the opposing viewpoints. Below is an overview of the typical structure of a Rogerian essay:

Introduction: Begin by introducing the topic and providing background information on the issue. Clearly state the problem or controversy at hand.
Contextualization: Provide an overview of both sides of the argument, acknowledging the validity of each perspective without taking a definitive stance.
Thesis Statement: Present your thesis, which should express a willingness to understand and compromise with the opposing viewpoint.
Body Paragraphs: Develop your argument by exploring common ground and areas of agreement between the opposing perspectives. Use evidence and examples to support your points.
Counterarguments: Acknowledge the strengths of the opposing viewpoint and address potential objections or concerns. Refrain from using confrontational language.
Conclusion: Summarize the key points of your argument and reiterate the importance of finding common ground. End on a positive note, emphasizing the potential for cooperation and mutual understanding.

By following this structure, you can create a Rogerian essay that fosters constructive dialogue and promotes empathy and understanding between conflicting viewpoints.

Key Elements to Include in a Rogerian Essay

When writing a Rogerian essay, it is essential to include the following key elements:

How to Start Writing a Rogerian Essay

When starting a Rogerian essay, it is important to first choose a topic that is controversial yet has multiple viewpoints that can be explored. Consider issues that are debated in society but have no clear right or wrong answer.

Next, conduct thorough research on the chosen topic to understand different perspectives and arguments. This will help you present a well-rounded analysis in your essay.

Once you have gathered enough information, outline the main points of contention and areas of agreement between different viewpoints. This will serve as the basis for your argument and help you structure your essay effectively.

Remember that the goal of a Rogerian essay is to find common ground and establish mutual understanding. Approach the topic with an open mind and be willing to consider opposing viewpoints.

Lastly, start writing your essay by introducing the topic, presenting the different perspectives, and highlighting areas of agreement. Focus on building rapport with your audience and creating a respectful dialogue throughout the essay.

Examples of Rogerian Essays

Here are a few examples of Rogerian essays that showcase the principles of finding common ground and understanding different perspectives:

Tips for Writing a Successful Rogerian Essay

Writing a successful Rogerian essay involves careful planning and thoughtful consideration of your audience and argument. Here are some tips to help you craft a compelling and effective Rogerian essay:

How to master the art of writing expository essays and captivate your audience, convenient and reliable source to purchase college essays online, step-by-step guide to crafting a powerful literary analysis essay, tips and techniques for crafting compelling narrative essays.

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Rogerian Argument

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

The Rogerian argument (or Rogerian rhetoric) is a form of argumentative reasoning that aims to establish a middle ground between parties with opposing viewpoints or goals. Developed by psychotherapist Carl Rogers and adapted to rhetoric by writing scholars Young, Becker, and Pike, the speaker seeks compromise, acknowledging positive aspects of each party’s argument to arrive at a mutually-beneficial solution to an issue.

You may already use Rogerian argument in your everyday life to negotiate with your friends, family, and/or romantic partners. For example, if you wanted to watch a comedy and your friend wanted to watch a romance, you might compromise by offering to watch a rom-com, as this offers each of you a bit of what you are looking for in that particular moment. Note, however, that this style of argument is decidedly less common in academic settings, where various empirical or theoretical notions of truth are often prized above the practical advantages of the Rogerian method.

While Aristotelian styles of argument are often seen as eristic (concerned primarily with winning), the Rogerian argument can be viewed as more dialectic in nature (a conversation between two or more parties with the goal of arriving at some mutually-satisfying solution). Thus, practicing the Rogerian argument will enhance your ability to understand the complex relations of opposing viewpoints and provide tools for addressing such discrepancies sympathetically. It’s also great for day-to-day conflict resolution at home or in the workplace.

However, Rogerian argument does come with disadvantages. For example, because Rogerian argument relies on compromise between opposing parties, it may not work well when your opponents are unwilling or unable to compromise, or if they are arguing in bad faith (e.g., they care only about winning). It may also lead to sub-optimal solutions if your opponent’s position is demonstrably wrong, since in this case you may nevertheless be forced to sacrifice some of your (ostensibly superior) goals order to accommodate your opponent’s (inferior) ones.

In “Rhetoric: Discovery and Change” (1970), Young, Becker, and Pike describe the primary aims of the Rogerian argument as follows:

to convey to the reader that he is understood,
to delineate the area within which he believes the reader's position to be valid, and
to induce him to believe that he and the writer share similar moral qualities (honesty, integrity, and good will) and aspirations (the desire to discover a mutually acceptable solution).

The first aim shows the reader that you understand the complexities of the argument and that you have listened sympathetically to what it is they have to say. This is important, because the success of the Rogerian arguments relies on cooperation and collaboration. The second aim puts this understanding into practice by seeking a symbiotic solution. The third aim builds ethos and rapport between the parties. If audiences believe they share a value system with a speaker or writer, they are more likely to agree to the terms of whatever solution is presented.

While each of these aims is important, Young, Becker, and Pike stress that they are just that: aims, not steps. You should not necessarily view these aims as occurring in a linear, step-by-step process. The authors present a synthesized discussion of what a successful Rogerian argument should contain, but they eschew any formalized structure. The structure of the argument should instead be determined by the speaker, and it should be modified and adapted according to the rhetorical situation at hand.

Again, there is no formalized structure for the Rogerian argument, though the following example provides a foundation for considering how you might structure your own argument.

A successful Rogerian argument will likely include the following:

Introduction (addressing the topic to be discussed and/or the problem to be solved)
Opposing position (showing that you understand your opposition’s viewpoints/goals)
Context for opposing position (showing that you understand the situations in which their viewpoint is valid)
Your position (introducing/addressing your viewpoint as it differs from the reader’s)
Context for your position (objectively showing the reader the context(s) under which your position is valid)
Benefits (appeal to the opposition by showing how they would benefit by adopting elements of your position)

Below, we’ve provided an example Rogerian argument that follows the formula above. In this example, we will take the position that technology (e.g., laptops and tablets) should be allowed in writing classes while also considering the opinion of the opposition, who argue that such technology is more of a distraction than a helpful tool. In so doing, we should be able to arrive at a solution that considers both arguments and develops a solution that benefits both parties while still achieving our goal of allowing technology in the classroom.

Introduction

Here, we would introduce the topic and briefly discuss why it is a matter of contention. We would lay out the differing perspectives, briefly mention the merits of each argument, and discuss the implications closely considering all perspectives to arrive at a solution that works for everyone.

Opposing position

Here, we would introduce the opposing position that digital technology should not be allowed in the writing classroom. We would also list and discuss their objections to the proposition of technology in the classroom. These might include the notions that it’s distracting for the individual, the class, and the instructor, and is often used to avoid the lesson and instead play games or go on social media.

Context for opposing position

Here we might provide specific details that lend merit to their argument. We want to show that we are fully considering their claims and not just giving lip service, in the hope that that they will give similar value to our opinions. We could include statistics, testimony from instructors and students, or even examples from media that support their theory that digital technology can indeed be a distraction during instruction.

Your Position

Here, we would introduce our claim that digital technology should be allowed in the writing classroom. We would still want to speak as objectively as possible in order to establish our ethos as concerned but unbiased speaker. We might even qualify our position by acknowledging that there are, of course, situations in which technology should be put away, but reiterate that, generally speaking, the presence of digital technology is a positive.

Context for your position

Here, we can provide examples that run contrary to the ones we used for the context of our opposition’s position. For example, we could gather testimony from students who claim that using these technologies in class has been beneficial. We could include research and scholarship that supports our position and even quote instructors who have developed pedagogy around these technologies. We might even subtly demonstrate that our opposition has failed to account for all possibilities by choosing our examples carefully. For instance, we could easily include accounts of students with learning disabilities who might otherwise have a difficult time succeeding in class without the help of assistive technologies.

Here, we would use the points we’ve established throughout the argument to appeal to our opposition and find some productive middle ground that benefits both parties. We would acknowledge that some instructors do not want digital technologies present in the classroom, as they believe they distract from paying attention during lectures. We would maintain, however, that these technologies can indeed be productive tools for learning—in some cases, they can even be a virtual requirement for learning. We could then offer a solution: that these digital technologies should be kept aside during lecture portions of a lesson except in the case of students with documented disabilities. This way, students will likely be paying attention, taking notes by hand which they can transcribe later if they so wish. However, once a class moves from lecture to activity (whether group or individual), students should be allowed to access these technologies to more effectively engage with the activity, organize their thoughts, and access information. Now that the instructor is no longer lecturing, it should be easier to monitor student progress and engagement and the use of technology for these activities will lead to more developed and better organized results from the students.

The Rogerian Method: A Practical Guide to Effective Persuasion

People have studied and practiced the art of persuasion for centuries. As a result, they have developed various methods of conventional persuasive structures and techniques to present arguments. One such method is the Rogerian argument. A Rogerian way of argumentation aims to identify comparable perspectives between opposing viewpoints. This article will explore the Rogerian argument model and its application in essay writing, including its use in a rhetorical analysis essay.

The Rogerian argument is based on the principles of Rogerian communication, named after psychologist Carl Rogers. It seeks to understand the opposition of the audience. A Rogerian argument assumes that each party in a debate has similar moral qualities and can work together to find an acceptable solution. The Rogerian argument method is different from a traditional argument approach. The classical argument sets up a composition that aims to persuade the audience. In the case of the Rogerian argument, the author prioritizes shared interests and works towards finding a mutual solution. By acknowledging the validity of each point, the writer creates a productive dialogue.

In conclusion, the Rogerian argument method provides a unique and effective approach to writing essays. It prioritizes finding shared interests and shared priorities. By focusing on dialogue, cooperation, and compromise, the Rogerian strategy attempts to find overlapping interests. It does so by identifying mutually beneficial objectives and goals. With the right guidance from argumentative essay writers , you can use Rogerian argumentation in your essay. And also promote rhetoric discovery and change.

In the following sections, we will define the Rogerian argument model and explain its structure in detail. It offers tips on how to use it effectively in essay writing, including how to write a Rogerian essay in writing classes.

Definitions of the Rogerian Model

In this section, we will define Rogerian argument model. This method of argumentation seeks to establish mutual objectives between opinions. Psychologist Carl Rogers is the namesake of Rogerian rhetoric. The argument method involves three main parts: preface, body, and conclusion.

Emotionally charged topics need even more attention to audience analysis. You should approach such topics with sensitivity and respect. Take the time to understand the audience or reader’s perspective accurately. By doing so, writers can tailor their arguments to appeal to the reader’s values and beliefs. This can lead to a more productive and respectful dialogue, which will increase the likelihood of finding valid solutions.

The body of the argument paper is where the Rogerian approaches shine. By acknowledging the major barrier, the writer earns the trust of the audience. This approach helps to build a bridge between the two positions.

The conclusion of the Rogerian argument should highlight the two shared values and priorities. It should also propose an alternative solution that accommodates both viewpoints. Following the Rogerian argumentative essay outline can help writers effectively use this technique and promote constructive conflict resolution.

A Rogerian argument is a powerful tool for building bridges between the opposition. Additionally, rhetorical devices tend to be less aggressive than traditional or classical argument. In the next section, we will discuss the structure of the essay in more detail.

Finished papers

Customer reviews

Structure of Essay with Rogerian Method Argumentation

The structure of a Rogerian argument composition is distinct from that of a conventional argumentative essay. The argument begins with the foreword. Here the writer acknowledges the opposition to establish credibility. The conventional structure argumentative essay presents an opposing position, with the writer trying to persuade the audience to adopt their view. In contrast, a Rogerian essay aims to find similar perspectives between opposing viewpoints.

The structure has six main parts: Rogerian argument begins with an introduction. Then comes position 1, transition, position 2, reconciliation, and conclusion. This structure helps the writer to present the opposition fairly and objectively. In this type of writing, the writer also shows readiness to compromise in search of shared interests. In the next sections, we will explore each part of the Rogerian argument example.

Introduction

In a Rogerian argument, the intro is an important stage. The writer not only presents the topic but also acknowledges the other side to establish credibility. This section should also create a sense of goodwill and a willingness to find mutual objectives, setting the tone for the rest of the essay. The Rogerian approach in the introduction sets the stage for the writer’s intention to find a valid acceptable solution together, rather than merely winning an argument. This approach helps to avoid creating an adversarial relationship between the writer and the reader. It also leads to a more productive dialogue.

In the next section, Position 1 of the Rogerian argument, the writer presents the first opposing position or argument. This section should be presented fairly and objectively, without any bias. The writer should explain the opponent’s position thoroughly. For example, by providing supporting evidence for their point. This section is critical because it demonstrates that the writer has taken the time to understand the opposition accurately and can present it effectively to the reader. A Rogerian essay example can be helpful in understanding how to present an opposing view without bias.

In the Rogerian argument structure, the transition section plays a critical role in the essay. This section is where the writer moves from position 1 to position 2 while highlighting the common goals and goals that both viewpoints have in common, which can facilitate finding a valid solution and ultimately help to find the middle ground. By focusing on overlapping values, the writer makes it easier to bridge the gap between opposing positions and find the middle between them. The transition section is an essential part of the Rogerian argument, emphasizing the importance of identifying and acknowledging the overlapping interests and goals of both parties.

In the next section of the Rogerian argument composition, Position 2, the other side or argument is introduced. In this section, you write counterargument in essay. Present the opposing viewpoint fairly and objectively, just like position 1. The writer should explain the position in detail and provide supporting evidence for their argument. This approach ensures that the writer gives equal attention and consideration to both oppositions, which is key to creating a more productive dialogue and finding a valid solution. By acknowledging and addressing both sides of the issue, the writer can build trust and understanding of the reader’s perspective and promote a more collaborative approach to problem-solving.

Reconciliation

In the reconciliation section of a Rogerian essay, the writer aims to bring the two opposing viewpoints closer together. This section is where the writer identifies and highlights the overlapping interests, perspectives, and goals that both viewpoints have in common. By highlighting the mutual objectives between the two positions, the writer creates an atmosphere of goodwill and cooperation in the reconciliation section of the essay. In this paragraph, the writer presents an example of a solution that could be acceptable to both parties. This approach is critical because it shows that the writer is willing to work towards finding a mutual solution for both parties rather than trying to win an argument.

The conclusion should summarize the main points and emphasize the converging opinions and overlapping interests between the two positions. It should also underline the benefits of working towards a mutual solution and demonstrate that the writer is willing to compromise. Overall, The Rogerian argument method is an effective tool for finding solutions that satisfy both parties by prioritizing common goals and finding a middle ground.

The Rogerian argument method provides a unique and effective approach to writing essays. By focusing on finding overlapping perspectives and shared priorities, the writer can build a strong case that is both persuasive and respectful of opposing viewpoints. This approach encourages dialogue and cooperation between opposing parties, leading to a more productive and beneficial outcome for all involved. The Rogerian argument method can promote rhetoric discovery and change.

If you are struggling with writing an argumentative essay using the Rogerian approach, consider seeking help from a professional writer or tutor who can write your argumentative essay for you, or even buy argumentative essays online. To find appropriate topics for a Rogerian essay, consider one that you are passionate about.

Tips on How to Use Rogerian Argumentation in Essay

In the Rogerian essay example, it’s crucial to understand the method’s purpose and structure and know how to write a Rogerian argument effectively. Here are some tips on how to use Rogerian argumentation effectively in an essay:

Acknowledge the Opposition. While using the Rogerian argument method, acknowledge the opposition. This helps you to establish credibility with the audience. The Rogerian approach in the introduction sets the stage for the writer’s intention to find a mutually acceptable solution than merely winning an argument.
Find middle ground. The writer should focus on identifying and acknowledging the overlapping interests. This approach makes it easier to bridge the gap between opposing stances and find a shared point. The writer should suggest an example of a solution that could be acceptable to both parties. The author should also emphasize the importance of finding a mutual solution between the opposing views of the reader.
Be collaborative . Seek common ground and explore the context of the opposing position respectfully and constructively. The writer’s position should be accompanied by a differing opinion.
Consensus Building. Emphasizing consensual beliefs and goals is a crucial aspect of the Rogerian argument. Incorporating opponents’ positions and presenting them impartially support finding common ground. By highlighting an example of a solution, a willing writer shows they are not merely giving lip service to finding an acceptable solution.
Shared solutions. Understand the context in which the opposing viewpoints were formed. By doing so, you can better comprehend how to write a Rogerian argument essay example in your writing classroom. The goal is not to attack or belittle the reader’s position. Instead, you have to find common ground and propose acceptable solutions. Avoid using inflammatory language, as it may make it harder to establish goodwill. Instead, argue, and remain calm and respectful. And focus on the areas of agreement between the two positions. This approach will help build trust with the willing reader and foster productive dialogue.

In a Rogerian essay example, finding overlapping perspectives is the main goal. By considering the reader’s perspective, custom essay writers create a dialogue toward a solution. This way, they tailor their arguments to appeal to the reader’s values and beliefs. It resulted in a persuasive and respectful essay.

To conclude, the Rogerian argument method let essays prioritize shared points. The Rogerian style mostly focuses on finding a compromise and a common ground. As such, it can help resolve conflicts and find answers or alternative solutions. If you find the Rogerian method overwhelming, ask professionals to write your argumentative essay for you. With the right guidance, you can effectively use Rogerian argumentation in your essay. And also promote rhetoric discovery and change.

How To Write A Good Compare And Contrast Essay: Topics, Examples And Step-by-step Guide

How to Write a Scholarship Essay

How to Write the Methods Section for a Research Paper: Effective Writing Guide
Explaining Appeal to Ignorance Fallacy with Demonstrative Examples

Improve your writing with our guides

Definition Essay: The Complete Guide with Essay Topics and Examples

Critical Essay: The Complete Guide. Essay Topics, Examples and Outlines

Get 15% off your first order with edusson.

Connect with a professional writer within minutes by placing your first order. No matter the subject, difficulty, academic level or document type, our writers have the skills to complete it.

100% privacy. No spam ever.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

61 Rogerian Argument Model

Rogerian argument.

The Rogerian argument, inspired by the influential psychologist Carl Rogers, aims to find compromise or common ground about an issue. If, as stated in the beginning of the chapter, academic or rhetorical argument is not merely a two-sided debate that seeks a winner and a loser, the Rogerian argument model provides a structured way to move beyond the win-lose mindset. Indeed, the Rogerian model can be employed to deal effectively with controversial arguments that have been reduced to two opposing points of view by forcing the writer to confront opposing ideas and then work towards a common understanding with those who might disagree.

The following are the basic parts of a Rogerian Argument:

1. Introduction : Introduce the issue under scrutiny in a non-confrontational way. Be sure to outline the main sides in the debate. Though there are always more than two sides to a debate, Rogerian arguments put two in stark opposition to one another. Crucially, be sure to indicate the overall purpose of the essay: to come to a compromise about the issue at hand. If this intent is not stated up front, the reader may be confused or even suspect manipulation on the part of the writer, i.e., that the writer is massaging the audience just to win a fight. Be advised that the Rogerian essay uses an inductive reasoning structure, so do not include your thesis in your introduction. You will build toward the thesis and then include it in your conclusion. Once again, state the intent to compromise, but do not yet state what the compromise is.

2. Side A : Carefully map out the main claim and reasoning for the opposing side of the argument first. The writer’s view should never really come first because that would defeat the purpose of what Rogers called empathetic listening , which guides the overall approach to this type of argument. By allowing the opposing argument to come first, you communicate to the reader that you are willing to respectfully consider another’s view on the issue. Furthermore, you invite the reader to then give you the same respect and consideration when presenting your own view. Finally, presenting the opposition first can help those readers who would side against you to ease into the essay, keeping them invested in the project. If you present your own ideas first, you risk polarizing those readers from the start, which would then make them less amenable to considering a compromise by the end of the essay. You can listen to Carl Rogers himself discuss the importance of empathy on YouTube (https://youtu.be/2dLsgpHw5x0, transcript here ).

3. Side B : Carefully go over your side of the argument. When mapping out this side’s claim and support, be sure that it parallels that of Side A. In other words, make sure not to raise entirely new categories of support, or there can be no way to come to a compromise. Make sure to maintain a non-confrontational tone; for example, avoid appearing arrogant, sarcastic, or smug.

4. The Bridge : A solid Rogerian argument acknowledges the desires of each side and tries to accommodate both. In this part, point out the ways in which you agree or can find common ground between the two sides. There should be at least one point of agreement. This can be an acknowledgement of the one part of the opposition’s agreement that you also support or an admittance to a shared set of values even if the two sides come to different ideas when employing those values. This phase of the essay is crucial for two reasons: finding common ground (1) shows the audience the two views are not necessarily at complete odds, that they share more than they seem, and (2) sets up the compromise to come, making it easier to digest for all parties. Thus, this section builds a bridge from the two initial isolated and opposite views to a compromise that both sides can reasonably support.

5. The Compromise : Now is the time to finally announce your compromise, which is your thesis. The compromise is what the essay has been building towards all along, so explain it carefully and demonstrate the logic of it. For example, if debating about whether to use racial profiling, a compromise might be based on both sides’ desire for a safer society. That shared value can then lead to a new claim, one that disarms the original dispute or set of disputes. For the racial profiling example, perhaps a better solution would focus on more objective measures than race that would then promote safety in a less problematic way.

Rogerian Execise

Find a controversial topic, and begin building a Rogerian argument. Write up your responses to the following:

The topic or dilemma I will write about is…
My opposing audience is…
My audience’s view on the topic is…
My view on the topic is…
Our common ground–shared values or something that we both already agree on about the topic–is…
My compromise (the main claim or potential thesis) is…

Write What Matters Copyright © 2020 by Liza Long; Amy Minervini; and Joel Gladd is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

26 The Rogerian Argument

Kirsten DeVries

Figure 3.9 “Carl Ransom Rogers”

The following are the basic parts of a Rogerian Argument:

Figure 3.10 “Rogerian Argument”

Sample Writing Assignment 5

Find a controversial topic, and begin building a Rogerian argument. Write up your responses to the following:

The topic or dilemma I will write about is…
My opposing audience is…
My audience’s view on the topic is…
My view on the topic is…
Our common ground–shared values or something that we both already agree on about the topic–is…
My compromise (the main claim or potential thesis) is…

Share This Book

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

29 The Rogerian Argument

Kirsten DeVries and Christina Frasier

Learning Objectives

Understand the Rogerian structure of an argument.
Identify argumentation that emphasizes finding common ground among thinkers.

The following are the basic parts of a Rogerian Argument:

The Issue: You are pro-homeschooling
The Introduction: Indicate your intent to find a compromise. Outline both sides of the argument–what opponents argue and proponents argue
Side A: You show a deep understanding of the positions of those who are opposed to homeschooling
Side B: Present your side of the issue–the benefits of homeschooling
The Bridge: Build a bridge to compromise between both sides–what can both sides agree on? In this case, both sides want the best education possible for all students.
The Compromise: The states can ensure that parents who want to home-school can do so, while it also ensures that home-schooled students receive a high-quality education in a safe environment with information and access to standardized testing.

Adapted from Let’s Get Writing! by Elizabeth Browning; Kirsten DeVries; Kathy Boylan; Jenifer Kurtz; and Katelyn Burton, CC BY-SA 4.0

The Rogerian Argument Copyright © by Kirsten DeVries and Christina Frasier is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

6 The Rogerian Argument Model

The rogerian argument.

Figure 6.1 “Carl Ransom Rogers”

The following are the basic parts of a Rogerian Argument:

Figure 6.2 “Rogerian Argument”

Sample Writing Assignment

Find a controversial topic, and begin building a Rogerian argument. Write up your responses to the following:

The topic or dilemma I will write about is…
My opposing audience is…
My audience’s view on the topic is…
My view on the topic is…
Our common ground–shared values or something that we both already agree on about the topic–is…
My compromise (the main claim or potential thesis) is…

Reading Strategies for a Rogerian Argument

To create a Rogerian Argument, you need to understand your opponent’s ideas deeply, and it also helps to understand your own side of the issue in depth. You already learned important skills for reading an argument, understanding an argument, and summarizing an argument. In addition to those skills, here are two new strategies: reading as a Believer and reading as a Doubter. As you can imagine, the first strategy is most relevant for a Rogerian Argument.

Believing and Doubting Games in Reading

When one thinks of reading the first thing that pops into mind is a person holding a book sitting in an easy chair in front of a fire lost in the author’s world, sailing the sea with captain Ahab, roaming the south with Faulkner, floating down the Mississippi with Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer, reading as a kind of vacation from the real world. Reading is an escape into our imagination and the words and sentences of the writer. We are not tested on this reading or expected to argue about its literary merits. It is not work or pragmatic, it is pleasure, entertainment.

We read now from phones, computers, Nooks, wide screen color televisions, and movie screens as well as books and journals, and much of our reading in school is for a pragmatic purpose. For the purpose of this composition course we will use reading for inquiry (truth seeking) and persuasion (rhetoric).

Methods of Reading

Skimming is valuable when you are choosing your sources. It involves reading the abstract, the first paragraph, the last paragraph, and gliding or passing quickly through the body paragraphs.

Reading to find the truth about an issue

A good way of reading to explore and find the truth about an issue (inquiry) is by playing the believing and doubting game developed by Peter Elbow.

Believing Game

Close reading and summary writing as a way to play the believing game, doubting game.

The doubting game seeks truth by indirection – by seeking error. Doubting an assertion is the best way to find error in it. You must assume it is untrue if you want to find its weakness. The truer it seems, the harder you have to doubt it. Non credo ut intelligam: in order to understand what’s wrong, I must doubt. To doubt well, it helps if you make a special effort to extricate yourself from the assertions in question – especially those which you find self-evident. You must hold off to one side the self, its wishes, preconceptions, experiences, and commitments. (The machinery of symbolic logic helps people do this.) Also, it helps to run the assertion through logical transformations so as to reveal premises and necessary consequences and thereby flush out into the open any hidden errors. You can also doubt better by getting the assertions to battle each other and thus do some of the work: They are in a relationship of conflict, and getting them to wrestle each other, you can utilize some of their energy and cleverness for ferreting out weakness. Peter Elbow

Dialectic Thinking

Dialectic or dialectics (Greek: διαλεκτική, dialektikḗ), also known as the dialectical method, is a discourse between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject but wishing to establish the truth through reasoned arguments.

Because it’s so hard to let go of an idea we are holding (or more to the point, an idea that’s holding us), our best hope for leverage in learning to doubt such ideas is to take on different ideas. Peter Elbow

Key Takeaways

Questions to Ask

How do the two arguers disagree about the facts and interpretation of facts?
How are their beliefs, values, and assumptions different?
Do they have shared beliefs, values and assumptions?
How have my own beliefs, values, and assumptions changed? Have I been exposed to new ideas? How have my views changed?

Chapter Attribution

The material in this chapter is slightly modified (derivative) and includes material from the following sources:

“The Rogerian Argument” in Let’s Get Writing! by Kirsten DeVries is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

“Believing and Doubting Games in Reading” from Writing and Rhetoric by Heather Hopkins Bowers; Anthony Ruggiero; and Jason Saphara is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License .

Image Attributions from Let’s Get Writing!

Figure 6.1 “ Carl Ransom Rogers ,” by Didius, Wikimedia, CC-BY 2.5.

Figure 6.2 “Rogerian Argument,” by Kalyca Schultz, Virginia Western Community College, CC-0.

Upping Your Argument and Research Game Copyright © 2022 by Liona Burnham is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

EnglishComposition.Org

Be a Better Writer

Rogerian Argument: Explanation and Example

When most of us think of arguments, we think about winners and losers. And we think that the winners win because their arguments were strong and forceful. This common perception of argument aligns well with what is called an Aristotelian or classical argument: “ This is my assertion and here is the compelling evidence that shows why I am right ."

But that kind of argument doesn't work in all situations. When your audience is a difficult one in the sense that you know your audience isn’t going to completely agree with your side of the issue, it can be a good idea to search for a middle ground. A Rogerian argument helps you find that middle ground.

Based on the work of psychologist Carl Rogers, a Rogerian argument can be extremely persuasive and can help you, as a writer, understand your own biases and how you might work to solve problems by finding common ground with others. Here is a overview of the basic strategy for writing a Rogerian argument, followed by a Rogerian essay example:

10 Steps to Writing a Rogerian Argument

Find common ground — Because a Rogerian argument will help you find common ground with your audience, you should consider this style of argument when you have a difficult or controversial topic and want to use a connection with your audience as a part of your persuasive style. But what is common ground? Finding a common ground involves meeting your opposition in the middle.
Know your audience — Is your audience going to be reluctant to change on this issue? If so, a Rogerian argument can be persuasive. It is also going to be a wonderful exercise in helping you see things from your audience’s perspective, as your goal is to understand the other side of an issue and then meet your audience in the middle. Some brainstorming can help you as you think about how you are going to approach your audience and find the common ground you need.
Introduce the problem — When you begin your argumentative essay, you should introduce the problem or issue in a way that makes it clear to an opposing audience that you understand their position.
Acknowledge other side — Unlike some other argument structures, in a Rogerian argument, you should address the opposition in the very beginning of your essay. After your introduction, you should explain the contexts in which your opposition’s viewpoints make sense and are valid.
State your position — It’s now time to present your side. Your goal is to evenly and carefully make the case for your position in order to be as persuasive as possible to the other side. Explain the contexts in which your side of the issue makes sense.
Bring two sides together — After you present your position, your next step is to explain how the opposition would benefit from considering at least certain parts of your position. Focus on the value of your position while remembering the value of the other side.
Reach a conclusion — As you reach the end of your Rogerian essay, remember to remind your audience of your main points and try to leave your audience with something to consider, even if they are still not convinced by the balanced presentation on the issue you have presented.
Not finished yet — You now have your draft completed, but there is a world of work left to do in terms of revision and editing. Before you edit, you should revise the content of your work. To help with revision, it is a good idea to get feedback.
Hear from the other side — Get feedback from as many people as you can. It is helpful to participate in a peer review if your course offers one. But it is a good idea to go beyond that peer review as well. Try to get feedback from those who disagree with your position. Not everyone is going to agree with your argument, but the feedback helps you grow as a writer.
Edit and polish — Once your essay content has been revised, it is time to edit. Editing involves addressing things like grammar, spelling, and checking on your citation. A good editing process involves many passes. You can’t catch all of your errors in one pass. Remember that effective editing takes time!

Follow these steps and you will be well on your way to a strong Rogerian argument essay!

Rogerian Argument Example Essay

Now that you have had the chance to learn about Rogerian arguments, it’s time to see what a Rogerian argument might look like. Below, you’ll see a sample argumentative essay, written according to APA formatting guidelines, with a particular emphasis on Rogerian elements.

Click the image below to see the sample paper in a PDF format. Scroll over the purple dialog boxes to learn about the strategies and techniques the author used in this essay. In some browsers, you may need to download or save this file to be able to utilize all of its functionality.

Click here to see a sample Rogerian Essay

License and Attribution

Image Credit: Sketch of Carl Ransom Rogers by Didius .

Creating a Rogerian Argument Essay Structure

Shelia Odak
Categories : Help with writing assignments paragraphs, essays, outlines & more
Tags : Homework help & study guides

Definition of a Rogerian Argument

To understand the Rogerian argument essay structure, you need to understand what defines this type of argument. The psychologist Carl R. Rogers advocated communication based on compromise. He felt a person should listen to the point of view of his or her adversary and come to a conclusion that takes into account this other perspective. A Rogerian argument takes this idea and applies it to the essay format. A Rogerian essay structure acknowledges that a subject can be looked at from different standpoints.

When to Use This Type of Argument

A Rogerian argument works best when the essay subject is one where people have strong, opposing positions. Examples would include divisive subjects such as gun control or abortion. Because Rogerian arguments are based on listening to the opposition and giving consideration to those concerns, this structure works to calm an audience who may be opposed to your opinion.

How the Rogerian Structure Is Different

The structure of a Rogerian argument is different than that of a classical argument because the opinions of the opposition are presented earlier in the essay and given due consideration. Your thesis will appear after you have shown that you understand the arguments of those who have a different position.

Introduction

From the beginning of your essay, acknowledge that there is another side to the argument, and it is dissimilar from your own. Give a fair assessment of the opposition in your introduction.

Acknowledgment of the Opposition

This part of your essay builds trust because it shows that not only do you acknowledge the other side of the argument, but that you also find some value in it. State the parts of the opposition in which you find some merit.

State Your Thesis

Once you have shown that you are taking your opposition into consideration, you should state your own perspective. Your thesis is the position you are taking regarding the essay’s subject.

Support Your Thesis

Explain why your thesis is valid. The research you have done in support of your position should appear here. While stating your thesis can be done in one paragraph, supporting the thesis will probably need several paragraphs. This section builds support for your point of view and illustrates that you have delved deeply into your subject and found material to endorse the position you have chosen.

Concluding Your Rogerian Essay

The conclusion in a Rogerian argument essay structure should illustrate why your position in this argument would be beneficial and would resolve the problem. In other words, even though you have admitted that the other side of the argument has merit, you want to conclude by showing why your thesis is the better option. If your position cannot completely solve the problem, as is often the case when writing about a controversial issue, admit that. State that while your ideas will help, more work needs to be done.

Glenn, Cheryl, et al. The Writer’s Harbrace Handbook. 2nd ed. Boston: Heinle, 2004.

This post is part of the series: Writing a Rogerian Essay

Need to write a Rogerian essay but have no idea what the term means? This series defines a Rogerian argument, explains its structure, and tells how to create a successful Rogerian thesis.

Essay Structure for a Rogerian Argument
Writing a Successful Thesis Statement for a Rogerian Argument

Introduction

Background on the Course

CO300 as a University Core Course

Short Description of the Course

Course Objectives

General Overview

Alternative Approaches and Assignments

(Possible) Differences between COCC150 and CO300

What CO300 Students Are Like

And You Thought...

Beginning with Critical Reading

Opportunities for Innovation

Portfolio Grading as an Option

Teaching in the computer classroom

Finally. . .

Classroom materials

Audience awareness and rhetorical contexts

Critical thinking and reading

Focusing and narrowing topics

Mid-course, group, and supplemental evaluations

More detailed explanation of Rogerian argument and Toulmin analysis

Policy statements and syllabi

Portfolio explanations, checklists, and postscripts

Presenting evidence and organizing arguments/counter-arguments

Research and documentation

Writing assignment sheets

Assignments for portfolio 1

Assignments for portfolio 2

Assignments for portfolio 3

Workshopping and workshop sheets

On workshopping generally

Workshop sheets for portfolio 1

Workshop sheets for portfolio 2

Workshop sheets for portfolio 3

Workshop sheets for general purposes

Sample materials grouped by instructor

What is Rogerian Argument? (Kiefer)

school Campus Bookshelves
menu_book Bookshelves
perm_media Learning Objects
login Login
how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
hub Instructor Commons
Download Page (PDF)
Download Full Book (PDF)
Periodic Table
Physics Constants
Scientific Calculator
Reference & Cite
Tools expand_more
Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

6.10: Rogerian Argument

Last updated
Save as PDF
Page ID 219042

Terri Pantuso, Sarah LeMire, and Kathy Anders Ed.

Terri Pantuso
Texas A&M Univesrity

As discussed in the previous section, for Toulmin, argumentation is an attempt to justify a statement or a set of statements and focuses solely upon proving those statements. But what happens when you can concede that your opponent has a valid point? Because we are complex creatures, humans oftentimes find themselves strongly opposed to something that later changes for them once they are presented with different evidence. While many arguments can seemingly be based upon emotions alone, when presented with logical evidence to refute our position we may experience a crisis of conscience. Is it possible to hold firmly to one belief yet concede that the opposing side has merit? There is a way if you utilize the Rogerian method for argumentation.

Carl Rogers (1902-1987) was an American psychologist and clinical therapist who utilized a humanistic (client-centered) approach to psychology. When applied to argumentation, the Rogerian method makes use of examining counterarguments as enhancements, or concessions, rather than viewing them as completely oppositional. According to Lunsford et al., “Rogers argued that people involved in disputes should not respond to each other until they [can] fully, fairly, and even sympathetically state the other person’s position.” [1] Rogers’ non confrontational methods, when applied to argumentation in rhetoric, suggests that the most personal feelings are also the most common and, therefore, are the most likely to be understood.

One benefit to utilizing a Rogerian approach in composition studies is that it encourages the writer/arguer to build a bridge towards oppositional positions. This does not mean that you abandon your own position, and it does not mean that your position is weak. Rather, a Rogerian approach provides alternative perspectives for considering a given position as well as methods for responding to counterarguments that might seem to refute your major premise.

Much like the Toulmin method, the Rogerian method relies upon claims that can be supported with evidence (data). How the Rogerian method differs is in the concession where, if there is a strong, valid argument that refutes your claim, you concede that argument might be a valid point in a different context. Or, perhaps you concede that a portion of your opponent’s argument is valid for your position, yet point out how the circumstances differ, therefore making your position the most logical, strongest one for your given topic. While the goal remains to persuade your reader/audience to view your position as valid, when utilizing the Rogerian method you build common ground to other possibilities and demonstrate that counterviews are not entirely wrong.

When used in argumentation, the Rogerian method allows for a dialogue to occur surrounding an issue. By examining counterarguments to your claims, you are able to view your position/ thesis from a different point of view. Understanding all (or most) of the points surrounding your given topic will strengthen your own position as you will create a more fully informed essay.

Practice Activity

The original version of this chapter contained H5P content. You may want to remove or replace this element.

Andrea Lunsford, John J. Ruszkiewicz, and Keith Walters, Everything’s an Argument, 8th ed. (Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2018), 139. ↵

Rogerian Argument: Definition and Examples

An Introduction to Punctuation
Ph.D., Rhetoric and English, University of Georgia
M.A., Modern English and American Literature, University of Leicester
B.A., English, State University of New York

Rogerian argument is a negotiating strategy in which common goals are identified and opposing views are described as objectively as possible in an effort to establish common ground and reach an agreement. It is also known as Rogerian rhetoric , Rogerian argumentation , Rogerian persuasion , and empathic listening .

Whereas traditional argument focuses on winning , the Rogerian model seeks a mutually satisfactory solution.

The Rogerian model of argument was adapted from the work of American psychologist Carl Rogers by the composition scholars Richard Young, Alton Becker, and Kenneth Pike in their textbook "Rhetoric: Discovery and Change" (1970).

Aims of Rogerian Argument

The authors of "Rhetoric: Discovery and Change" explain the process this way:

"The writer who uses the Rogerian strategy attempts to do three things: (1) to convey to the reader that he is understood, (2) to delineate the area within which he believes the reader's position to be valid, and (3) to induce him to believe that he and the writer share similar moral qualities (honesty, integrity, and good will) and aspirations (the desire to discover a mutually acceptable solution). We stress here that these are only tasks, not stages of the argument. Rogerian argument has no conventional structure; in fact, users of the strategy deliberately avoid conventional persuasive structures and techniques because these devices tend to produce a sense of threat, precisely what the writer seeks to overcome....

"The goal of Rogerian argument is to create a situation conducive to cooperation; this may well involve changes in Format of Rogerian Argument.

When presenting your case and the case of the other side, the style is flexible with how you set up your information and how long you spend on each section. But you do want to be balanced—spending an inordinate amount of time on your position and only giving lip service to the other side, for example, defeats the purpose of using the Rogerian style. The ideal format of a written Rogerian persuasion looks something like this (Richard M. Coe, "Form and Substance: An Advanced Rhetoric." Wiley, 1981):

Introduction : Present the topic as a problem to solve together, rather than an issue.
Opposing position : State the opinion of your opposition in an objective manner that's fair and accurate, so the "other side" knows that you understand its position.
Context for the opposing position : Show the opposition that you understand under what circumstances its position is valid .
Your position : Present your position objectively. Yes, you want to be convincing, but you want the opposition to see it with clarity and fairly as well, just as you presented its position earlier.
Context for your position : Show the opposition contexts in which your position is also valid.
Benefits : Appeal to the opposition and show how elements of your position could work to benefit its interests.

You use one type of rhetoric when discussing your position with people who already agree with you. To discuss your position with the opposition, you need to tone that down and break it into objective elements, so the sides can more easily see areas of common ground. Taking the time to state the opposing side's arguments and contexts means the opposition has less reason to get defensive and stop listening to your ideas.

Feminist Responses to Rogerian Argument

In the 1970s and into the early 1990s, some debate existed about whether women should use this conflict-solving technique.

"Feminists are divided on the method: some see Rogerian argument as feminist and beneficial because it appears less antagonistic than traditional Aristotelian argument. Others argue that when used by women, this type of argument reinforces the 'feminine' stereotype, since historically women are viewed as nonconfrontational and understanding (see especially Catherine E. Lamb's 1991 article 'Beyond Argument in Freshman Composition' and Phyllis Lassner's 1990 article 'Feminist Responses to Rogerian Argument')." (Edith H. Babin and Kimberly Harrison, "Contemporary Composition Studies: A Guide to Theorists and Terms." Greenwood, 1999)

5 Steps to Writing a Position Paper
Tips on How to Write an Argumentative Essay
Argument (Rhetoric and Composition)
Preparing an Argument Essay: Exploring Both Sides of an Issue
How to Write a Persuasive Essay
Writing an Opinion Essay
Persuasion and Rhetorical Definition
AP English Exam: 101 Key Terms
Propositions in Debate Definition and Examples
How to Write and Structure a Persuasive Speech
Definition and Examples of Analysis in Composition
Use Social Media to Teach Ethos, Pathos and Logos
Quoting Out of Context Fallacy
Definition and Examples of Evidence in Argument
Socratic Dialogue (Argumentation)

EssayBasics.com
Pay For Essay
Write My Essay
Homework Writing Help
Essay Editing Service
Thesis Writing Help
Write My College Essay
Do My Essay
Term Paper Writing Service
Coursework Writing Service
Write My Research Paper
Assignment Writing Help
Essay Writing Help
Call Now! (USA) Login Order now
EssayBasics.com Call Now! (USA) Order now
Writing Guides

How To Write A Rogerian Essay

Table of Contents

What is a Rogerian essay?

Many students find it difficult to present a controversial topic using a neutral language. The Rogerian essay presents issues from a different perspective mostly of someone you disagree with. A Rogerian essay is meant to help students understand issues from two different perspectives to come up with an agreeable solution. According to Carl Roger’s effort in describing human traits, a Rogerian essay is based on the assumption that the writer needs to acknowledge other varied views by enabling readers to see some valid points about an opposing view.

Rogers believed that when we apply Rogerian tactic, we should listen with understanding, meaning that people should try and understand other people’s view but also try and get the logic of the differences of opinion about what the people is saying concerning the issue being discussed. Rogerian argument is more of a negotiation method whereby shared goals are identified, but the opposing views are presented in an objective point to develop a common understanding. In summary this kind of essay focus on getting a common ground of two perspectives to develop an agreeable conclusion.

How to start a Rogerian essay

A good introduction needs to be well organized with the first sentence being a hook that grabs the reader’s attention followed by the problem description. The following part is some background information about the issue to be discussed and a thesis statement to support the main essay theme. The essay hook should draw the reader and make them continue reading the article. A good hook sentence can be in the form of a quote, rhetorical question, surprising facts or an appropriate statement that can act as a good attention grabber. The issue being discussed needs to contain two varied views to enable the audience to understand these views from the beginning.

A good essay introduction requires the author to point out the impact of the issue being discussed, the varied points and acknowledge some of the strengths of various arguments. The introductory paragraph should not present a specific position that would divide the reader and the writer instead, it should use a balanced approach in the introductory paragraph.

How to write main part of a Rogerian essay

The body of a Rogerian essay describes the issues using neutral language. The writer needs to represent the reader’s perspective accurately. In this section, the writer should not manipulate the readers but express the reader’s perspective of the problem. The writer needs to be committed by acknowledging the circumstances and context whereby reader’s perspective is compelling.

The next section, the writer presents his fair and accurate perspective of the problem, in this section, the author should be neutral and use clear language. The major factor is to present evidence that supports and develop the argument. In the essay body, the author states the opposing views accurately without biases to show that the author is capable of making a balanced judgment.

The body should present a statement of validity, meaning that the author needs to show he understands that in certain situations some of the opposing views are valid. When writing a Rogerian essay, the author acknowledges specific parts of the opposing views he feels are valid. When writing an essay , it is important to acknowledge the other side of the argument and find some value in other people’s arguments.

After informing the reader about the view other than his view, the next step is to present the author’s fair view by stating his position. The author describes the situation hoping that his views will be accepted showing that his position has merit within certain contexts. It is important that the author recognize the fact that people might not agree with his view.

How to conclude a Rogerian essay

An essay conclusion present the author has proposed solution, a good conclusion should make a good transition from the last body paragraph. The conclusive paragraph needs to end with a closing statement about the benefits of both sides of the issue but not the author presenting his preferred solution to the problem discussed. The conclusion should not conclude by showing that the author thesis is the better option but state that the author’s idea combined with other ideas presented will help in solving the essay.

Outline example

1. Introduction

Explore the common ground
A brief background of the topic.
State the issue question set a neutral tone for further explanation

2. Essay body

First paragraph explaining key supporting points on the issue
Explain the supporting points for alternative position opposing the presented viewpoint.
explain a balanced view of the issue by reviewing valid points from two different sides

3. Conclusion

Describe a balanced and concise summary of the main points that represent the different sides of the argument
Present a middle ground position by daring element from each position presented
Reprise nature of the issues and present a shared position and the benefits of both sides.

An investment in knowledge pays the best interest

Junk Food Tax Persuasive Essay
What Is An Essay Template?
SAT Essay Sample Topics

rogerian essay parts

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS

Essay Papers Writing Online

Understanding the Rogerian Essay Approach

Overview of the Rogerian Essay Structure

Key Elements to Include in a Rogerian Essay

How to Start Writing a Rogerian Essay

Examples of Rogerian Essays

Tips for Writing a Successful Rogerian Essay

Related Post

Rogerian Argument

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

Introduction

Opposing position

Context for opposing position

Your Position

Context for your position

The Rogerian Method: A Practical Guide to Effective Persuasion

Definitions of the Rogerian Model

Structure of Essay with Rogerian Method Argumentation

Introduction

Reconciliation

Tips on How to Use Rogerian Argumentation in Essay

Related posts:

How to Write a Scholarship Essay

Improve your writing with our guides

Definition Essay: The Complete Guide with Essay Topics and Examples

Critical Essay: The Complete Guide. Essay Topics, Examples and Outlines

61 Rogerian Argument Model

Share This Book

26 The Rogerian Argument

Sample Writing Assignment 5

Share This Book

29 The Rogerian Argument

Share This Book

6 The Rogerian Argument Model

Sample Writing Assignment

Reading Strategies for a Rogerian Argument

Believing and Doubting Games in Reading

Methods of Reading

Reading to find the truth about an issue

Believing Game

Dialectic Thinking

Questions to Ask

Chapter Attribution

Image Attributions from Let’s Get Writing!

Share This Book

Rogerian Argument: Explanation and Example

10 Steps to Writing a Rogerian Argument

Rogerian Argument Example Essay

Creating a Rogerian Argument Essay Structure

Definition of a Rogerian Argument

When to Use This Type of Argument

How the Rogerian Structure Is Different

Introduction

Acknowledgment of the Opposition

State Your Thesis

Support Your Thesis

Concluding Your Rogerian Essay

This post is part of the series: Writing a Rogerian Essay

What is Rogerian Argument? (Kiefer)

6.10: Rogerian Argument

Practice Activity

Rogerian Argument: Definition and Examples

Aims of Rogerian Argument

Feminist Responses to Rogerian Argument

How To Write A Rogerian Essay

What is a Rogerian essay?

How to start a Rogerian essay

How to write main part of a Rogerian essay

How to conclude a Rogerian essay

Outline example

Recent Posts

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS