Matthew'sArgument+Writing

matt

Draft Argument
Throughout this debate we will explore the reasons why we think that cannabis should be legalised. Advocates of legalisation argue amongst other things that cannabis is not only less harmful than legal substances like alcohol and Tobacco. But as a matter of fact medical researchers have discovered that cannabis possesses certain medical qualities that are beneficial. For instance, it is now acknowledges that the use, of cannabis helps to relieve the suffering or patience affected with multiple sclerosis.

4500-5000 people are being arrested off our streets each year for possession of cannabis. The legalising of cannabis will abolish this figure completely. This will allow more space in prisons for more serious crimes. Presently, cannabis is sold by dealers who have connections to the underworld. The legalisation of cannabis will help facilitate the sale of the drug in establishments like in Amsterdam’s coffee houses. This will shift the sale of cannabis away from the underworld the severance of this “criminal link” will ensure that the users of the drug will no-longer need to come into contact with organised crime. Also this will lower tax payers’ money and will help cannabis growers in the recession.

In recent years scientist and medical researchers have discovered that cannabis possesses certain medical qualities that are beneficial. For instance that the use of cannabis helps to relieve suffering of patients afflicted with multiple sclerosis. Individuals should be given freedom to lead their lives as they choose. Of course such freedom isn’t absolute and laws should intervene to limit this freedom. Presently cannabis is sold by dealers who have connections to the underworld. The legalisation of cannabis will help facilitate the scale of drugs in establishments like Amsterdam’s coffee houses. This will shift the sale of cannabis away from the underworld. The severance of this criminal link will insure that the users will no longer need to come into contact with organised crime. 

**ARGUMENT CRITERIA** Learning Intention: To write an argument, clearly expressing and explaining points of view for and against the topic.  || **1 ** || **2 ** || **3 ** || Introduction doesn’t state what the argument is OR introduction is confused and / or unclear. || Topic is introduced but is not detailed enough to give the reader an in depth understanding of the argument. || Topic is introduced with relevant background information explaining why it is controversial. || Reasons in support of the argument are not convincing, don't support it or are irrelevant. || Reasons are given in support of the argument but lack evidence / examples. || Clear and accurate reasons and evidence given in support of the argument || Reasons against the argument are not mentioned OR they are mentioned but are not convincing / irrelevant ... || Reasons against the argument are discussed but lack evidence or examples. || Reasons against the argument are discussed and supported by factual evidence / examples. || No conclusion. || Conclusion given but it is too brief to summarise the argument or give the writer’s point of view. || Well constructed conclusion. || || Writing is aimless and disorganised OR writing is organised but it is not set in the correct format. || Writing is logically sequenced. || The order and structure of the information is compelling and moves the reader through the text. || Writing is too formal or too informal. It sounds like the writer doesn’t like the topic or doesn't know anything about it (research not used). || Writer seems sincere but is not fully involved - it could have been written by anyone. Some attempt is made to influence / persuade the reader. || Writer speaks directly to the reader. The piece gives a strong sense of the reasons for & against the argument – a persuasive piece of writing. || Words used are often dull or uninspired. No attempt is made to use vocabulary consistent with expositions. || Routine word choices are made but includes some words which are consistent with exposition writing || Used a wide range of words /phrases (transitions) which are consistent with argument writing. || Sentences are incomplete, awkward or don’t make sense; they need work. Many sentences begin the same way. || Sentences are usually constructed correctly. Some variety is attempted with sentence beginnings. || Sentences are well constructed. Sentences vary in length and structure and purposeful and varied sentence beginnings have been used. || No paragraphing OR some attempt has been made to use paragraphs || Paragraphing is mostly correct. || Correct use of paragraphs || Frequent mistakes interfere with the message of the piece of writing. || There are more than a couple of minor errors. || Mainly error free work. || Work has been rushed / left until the last minute and is obviously not a ‘best effort’. || Effort is evident but more times need to be spent carefully editing / correcting the work. || Time has obviously been spent developing ideas into a quality piece of writing. || Self / Peer Comment:
 * Introduction ** ||
 * Introduction ** ||
 * Reasons in support of the claim ** ||
 * Reasons in support of the claim ** ||
 * Reasons against the claim ** ||
 * Reasons against the claim ** ||
 * Conclusion ** ||
 * Conclusion ** ||
 * Organisation **
 * Organisation **
 * Voice and Tone ** ||
 * Voice and Tone ** ||
 * Word Choice ** ||
 * Word Choice ** ||
 * Sentence Fluency ** ||
 * Sentence Fluency ** ||
 * Paragraphs ** ||
 * Paragraphs ** ||
 * Mechanics ** ||
 * Mechanics ** ||
 * Effort (Editing, Time Management) ** ||
 * Effort (Editing, Time Management) ** ||

Teacher Comment: