Draft(s)] Revised Evaluation Argument Claim

Draft(s)] Revised Evaluation Argument Claim


evaluate a problem that links back to the topic of Narrative Assignment. I upload my Narrative Assignment below.

Write an evaluative claim about a problem; this argument must be based on three reasons. For example, argue that something is harmful, unethical, failing, backfiring, etc. based on three reasons. Determine a set of criteria you will use to argue your claim. Your thesis statement will be tailored to establish that the topic is a problem.

  • X is (harmful/unjust/another adjective) because [insert three reasons based on your evaluation criteria: A, B, and C].

Be sure your topic is specific and debatable. For example, most people would agree that violence is harmful, but not everyone would agree that the death penalty is ethical. Claiming that violence is harmful to society is not only too broad a topic, but it is also not debatable. Thus, it would not make an effective claim. It would be much more manageable to argue that California’s (or another state’s) application of the death penalty is unjust or to argue that the appeals process for inmates on death row discriminates against (or disproportionately affects) a particular group. Because you will also need to introduce and respond to an opposing view in your essay, it’s especially important that you choose a topic about which there is at least some disagreement.


To identify a problem that links to your narrative argument topic and to learn how to create an evaluation claim that addresses a social issue. You will use ethos, pathos, and logos to persuade your audience.

Answer preview

The Covid-19 outbreak has been a problematic and new experience for many people considering its abruptness and the extent to which it has disrupted people’s lives. The most unsettling bit about the pandemic was the quick rate at which it spread and the terror it unleashed by causing extreme illness and deaths of many people. Therefore, it became vital to institute measures that would facilitate a greater degree of safety for members of society, considering that a pandemic falls squarely within the realm of public health. The severity of the pandemic served as sufficient motivation for different stakeholders to combine efforts and resources to back research into vaccines. However, poor reception of the vaccine has seen some establishments embrace a mandatory vaccine policy. This paper argues that the mandatory vaccination policy is harmful because it elicits skepticism, ignores valid concerns on the vaccine’s potential long-term effects, and overlooks the need to build trust in the government and healthcare bodies responsible for health.