USING RESEARCH QUESTIONS FOR INVENTION—and for form, and for teaching (Part 2)

Q1:  Is the death penalty effective and moral?

    This is a twofold question which asks the writer to weigh in on whether the death penalty is A) Effective and B) Moral.  The structure of the question appears to be a simple yes or no response, but it is complicated by the combination of effective and moral.  This prompt allows for writers to respond to both questions individually.  A writer will most likely generate their own definitions of morality and effectiveness, which can be supported by various proofs.  Research would be useful for supporting a response to the effectiveness of the death penalty.  The analysis would also play heavily on logos and pathos.  The writers argument should rely heavily on knowing their intended audience and the sociopolitical environment they live in.  The form of the paper would most likely include a conclusion paragraph that synthesizes the arguments made regarding morality and effectiveness, though if the author responds positively to the effectiveness and negatively to the morality of the death penalty there is room for an neutral conclusion.

Q2:  Why are many colleges and employers reviewing a candidates blog as a part of the interview process?

     This is obviously a "Why" question, which prompts the reader to give their own opinion regarding the subject.  As stated in the example, a "Why" question requires the writer to respond with a specific proposition aided by a series of proofs.  This question is the foundation of a quality research paper, requiring the writer to synthesize researched information into a coherent well supported argument that will depend heavily on the intended audience and perspective of the author.  The form would most likely begin with a thesis statement responding directly to the question: Colleges and employers have begun to review blogs as part as the interview process, because... The introductory paragraph would be followed by a series of body paragraphs each focused around a specific rhetorical proof.  The conclusion would require a final summation of the proposed proofs and their connection to the original statement.