Description
Touchstone 4: Revise a Persuasive Proposal
ASSIGNMENT: Review the in-text comments and summary feedback you received on your Touchstone 3 draft. Then submit a revision of your Touchstone 3 draft that reflects the evaluator’s feedback, making all necessary changes to the idea development, organization, style, and conventions. Make sure to include a copy of your Touchstone 3 draft below the reflection questions for this unit.
As this assignment builds on Touchstone 3: Draft a Project Proposal, that Touchstone must be graded before you can submit your final research essay.
Sample Touchstone 4
In order to foster learning and growth, all work you submit must be newly written specifically for this course. Any plagiarized or recycled work will result in a Plagiarism Detected alert. Review Touchstones: Academic Integrity Guidelines for more about plagiarism and the Plagiarism Detected alert. For guidance on the use of generative AI technology, review Ethical Standards and Appropriate Use of AI.
A. Directions
STEP 1: REVISE PERSUASIVE PROPOSAL
When finalizing your persuasive essay, you will need to use prior feedback to edit and revise your draft. The final version should be cohesive and have sources integrated throughout. It is also important to proofread and check for grammar and spelling errors.
As you revise you persuasive proposal, you should consider the following components:
Revision Components Description
Editing and Revising
Significantly revise the essay by adjusting areas like organization, focus, and clarity.
Make comprehensive edits to word choice, sentence variety, and style.
Edits and revisions should address all the feedback provided by your evaluator.
Cohesion and Source Integration
Present information in a logical order that is easy for the reader to follow.
Include smooth transitions between sentences and paragraphs.
Introduce your sources clearly and in a way that demonstrates their validity to the reader.
Conventions and Proofreading
Double-check for correct formatting, grammar, punctuation, spelling, and capitalization.
Ensure that any cited material is represented accurately.
Cite all source material properly according to APA guidelines.
STEP 2: REFLECTION QUESTIONS
Below your assignment, include answers to all of the following reflection questions.
How much time did you spend revising your draft? What revision strategies did you use and which worked best for you? (2-3 sentences)
List three concrete revisions that you made and explain how you made them. What problem did you fix with each of these revisions? Issues may be unity, cohesion, rhetorical appeals, content, or any other areas on which you received constructive feedback. (4-5 sentences)
What did you learn about your writing process or yourself as a writer? How has your understanding of the research process changed as a result of taking this course? (2-3 sentences)
Refer to the checklist below throughout the writing process. Do not submit your Touchstone until it meets these guidelines.
Editing and Revising
❒ Have you revised your draft composition, including adjustments to organization, focus, clarity, and/or unity where needed or appropriate?
❒ Have you made comprehensive edits to the draft composition, including adjustments to word choice, sentence completeness, sentence variety, and/or style where needed or appropriate?
Cohesion and Source Integration
❒ Have you introduced sources smoothly and effectively through direct quotation, paraphrase, or summary?
❒ Have you used APA formatting for references?
❒ Did you sequence ideas and paragraphs logically and use smooth transitions (within and between paragraphs) such that the reader can easily follow the progression of ideas?
Conventions and Proofing
❒ Have you double-checked for correct grammar, punctuation, spelling, formatting, and capitalization?
❒ Have you proofread to find and correct typos?
Reflection
❒ Have you answered all reflection questions thoughtfully and included insights, observations, and/or examples in all responses?
❒ Are your answers included on a separate page below the composition?
Before You Submit
❒ Have you included your name, date, and course in the top left corner of the page?
❒ Is your essay between 1500 and 2000 words in length (6-8 pages)?
C. Requirements
The following requirements must be met for your submission to be graded:
Composition must be 6-8 pages (approximately 1500-2000 words).
Double-space the composition and use one-inch margins.
Indent the first line of each paragraph by ½ inch.
Use a readable 12-point font.
All writing must be appropriate for an academic context.
Composition must be original and written for this assignment.
Use of generative chatbot artificial intelligence tools (ChatGPT, Bing Chat, Bard) in place of original writing is strictly prohibited for this assignment.
Plagiarism of any kind is strictly prohibited.
Sources must be cited following APA guidelines. Refer to the Unit 3 Applying Evidence and Citing and Reference Techniques tutorials for instructions and examples of proper citations.
Submission must include your name, the name of the course, the date, and the title of your composition.
Submission must include your graded Touchstone 3 assignment.
Include all of the assignment components in a single file.
Acceptable file formats include .doc and .docx.
D. Additional Resources
The following resources will be helpful to you as you work on this assignment:
Purdue Online Writing Lab’s APA Formatting and Style Guide
This site includes a comprehensive overview of APA style, as well as individual pages with guidelines for specific citation types.
Frequently Asked Questions About APA Style
This page on the official APA website addresses common questions related to APA formatting. The “References,” “Punctuation,” and “Grammar and Writing Style” sections will be the most useful to your work in this course.
APA Style: Quick Answers—References
This page on the official APA Style website provides numerous examples of reference list formatting for various source types.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
1
Increasing Green Spaces in the Community: Enhancing Well-being and Quality of Life
Workplace Writing II
Touchstone 3
02/26/2024
2
Introduction
Green spaces, such as parks, gardens, and natural areas, give our cities vitality. These
crucial regions, which are more than lovely photos, increase residents’ health and happiness.
Modern cities are filled with concrete jungles, yet natural spaces offer a place to unwind and
recharge. Green spaces improve health and pleasure beyond their aesthetic appeal. Green spaces
improve physical and mental health, according to several research. Greenery reduces stress,
boosts pleasure, and improves cognition. Go running, walking, or doing other leisure activities in
parks and green spaces to work out and unwind. These activities improve physical health and
foster community via shared outdoor experiences. Besides boosting health, the community
benefits.
Parks and other green areas also protect biodiversity, ecological balance, and
environmental sustainability. In addition to conserving local flora, animals, and natural
resources, they provide homes for many plant and animal species. Parks reduce air pollution,
urban heat islands, and ecological resilience, helping battle climate change. Our towns must
prioritize expansion and revitalization to employ green spaces, which offer many advantages.
Studies show that green space benefits public health, social interactions, and environmental
preservation, among other areas. By investing green infrastructure and expanding parks and
trees, communities can improve health, happiness, and sustainability for future generations.
Health Benefits of Green Spaces
The widespread opinion is that green areas improve people’s mental and physical health
and community quality of life. Exeter University research indicated that areas with lots of green
space have lower obesity and chronic disease rates (Borrelli et al., 2023). Green areas improve
3
physical health, and this empirical research reveals that access to nature is essential for better
lives. From brisk walking to jogging and cycling, outdoor places make it simpler to exercise.
Access to outdoor recreation places promotes an active lifestyle and reduces the incidence of
cardiovascular disease and obesity-related comorbidities (Chen et al., 2021). By providing
exercise and movement, green spaces minimize sedentary behavior and its health risks and
stimulate regular physical activity.
There is strong scientific evidence that green areas improve mental health as well as
physical health. Natural environments reduce anxiety, depression, and stress, according to
several research. Green environments improve mood, cognition, and cortisol Gianfredi et al.,
2021). In parks and other green spaces, individuals may escape the strains of daily life and
recharge their batteries and brains. The research emphasizes the relevance of parks and other
green spaces in promoting physical and mental wellness. Green spaces provide nature, exercise,
and relaxation, improving community health. We must invest in natural spaces to establish
communities where people may thrive physically and emotionally.
Community Building
Green spaces are communal meeting areas where people may meet and establish
relationships, not merely places to rest and enjoy nature. Sharing experiences and building
community in these locations brings individuals from different backgrounds together. Picnics,
athletic events, and cooperative gardening bring people together in green spaces. These
gatherings assist neighbors build strong social bonds. In a rich location, communal gardens allow
neighbors to congregate, cultivate the soil, and make friendships. Neighborhoods strengthen
when neighbors work soil, raise seedlings, and reap the results of their effort. Gardening tips,
stories, laughter, and friendship are shared Lin et al, 2023).
4
Communities can also celebrate their cultural variety in parks and other green spaces with
music, dancing, and other traditional traditions. The vibrant art exhibitions and outdoor
performances in these places reflect cultural diversity and inventiveness. People from many
backgrounds commemorate their heritage and enjoy festivals and fairs under the stars. Variety
and inclusivity make green areas cultural exchange hubs. Blank slates for painting experiences
make people feel more connected to their communities. Parks and other green spaces not only
provide recreation but also nurture cultural appreciation and social connection. People converge
to enjoy communal living, making these locations lively and better for everyone. Long-term
investments like parks and green spaces benefit the environment and a community’s social and
cultural capital.
Environmental Sustainability
Green areas benefit communities’ environmental sustainability in numerous ways beyond
their health benefits. One of green areas’ environmental benefits is improving air quality. Trees
and plants absorb chemicals and release oxygen as they photosynthesize, filtering the air. Green
areas reduce air pollution, according to Jamalishahni et al. (2023). As natural filters, green spaces
lessen air pollution’s health risks. Green infrastructure helps reduce pollution-exacerbated
respiratory disorders including bronchitis and asthma. Green spaces protect biodiversity and
offer homes for many plant and animal species in cities. Animals and plants in urban parks and
other green places may relax, eat, and breed. Natural environments in cities are essential for
biological diversity (Nguyen et al., 2023). In the midst of urban growth, natural areas strengthen
local ecosystems. These areas facilitate species and genetic exchange. Additionally, parks and
other sites with many plant and animal species are ideal for conservation outreach and ecological
restoration.
5
Ecological care and conservation are another benefit of biodiversity-rich natural spaces.
By making outdoor places accessible, green spaces allow children to play and experience the
natural world. Education and guided tours in parks and other green spaces may inspire all ages to
save the environment (Jamalishahni et al.,2023). Locals can also plant trees and remove invasive
species in parks and other biodiversity hotspots to evaluate ecological restoration programs.
Because they care more about their surroundings, conservation-focused communities are more
inclined to support green space maintenance and improvement. Green spaces purify air,
safeguard biodiversity, and teach about the environment, beyond their aesthetic value. When
communities recognize the numerous ways parks and other green spaces contribute to urban
sustainability, they may prioritize their maintenance and development.
In addition to improving health and happiness, green areas help communities become
more environmentally sustainable. Parks and other green spaces increase air quality, which
benefits the environment. Trees and plants absorb contaminants and release oxygen during
photosynthesis, filtering the air. Green areas may lower air pollution, according to Nguyen et al.
(2023). As natural filters, green areas reduce air pollution’s health risks. Green infrastructure
helps alleviate asthma and bronchitis symptoms caused by pollution.
Green areas support urban biodiversity and offer homes for numerous animals and plants.
Wildlife and plants gain from refuge, food, and reproduction in parks and other green spaces.
Protecting natural ecosystems is crucial for biodiversity in highly populated areas (Nguyen et al.,
2023). Green spaces improve ecosystems in rapidly urbanizing regions. These areas are crucial
for species movement and genetic material transmission. Conservation activities and restoration
projects are also fantastic in parks and other natural areas.
6
Green places with abundant biodiversity promote environmental awareness and
conservation (Borrelli et al.,2023). Green spaces encourage kids to play and explore nature by
making outdoor places more accessible. Educational activities and guided tours in parks and
other green places may motivate all generations to safeguard the environment. Communities can
test ecological restoration initiatives by planting trees and removing invasive species in parks
and other biodiversity-rich areas. Community engagement in conservation activities improves
the possibility that such communities will support green space preservation and enhancement
programs since they feel more connected to their surrounding environment. Community
involvement in conservation initiatives increases support for green space preservation and
improvement. Conservation activities increase people’s connection to their environment by
making them feel more responsible and involved. Locals strive harder to protect and improve
parks and other green spaces due to this stronger affinity. Volunteering for conservation
programs fosters environmental awareness, which boosts support for park and green space
maintenance activities.
Conclusion
In conclusion, expanding green spaces in our communities improves health, strengthens
social relationships, and ensures the planet’s long-term survival. Due to their many benefits,
including improved physical and mental health and biodiversity preservation, green areas are
vital to building healthy and resilient communities. City planners, lawmakers, and community
leaders should promote additional parks and green infrastructure. Bettering residents’ well-being
requires expanding green spaces (Chen et al.,2021). Green spaces lower obesity, cardiovascular
disease, and chronic illness, according to several studies. Research also shows that green
7
environments reduce stress, anxiety, and depression and promote mental health. Green spaces let
city inhabitants unwind and reconnect with nature.
Parks and other green spaces can foster community involvement and social relationships.
These areas attract people from various backgrounds, fostering social interaction and community
relationships. Green spaces encourage picnics, sports, and gardening, which develop community
relationships and friendships (Gianfredi et al.,2021). Parks and other green spaces host
community celebrations, festivals, and other cultural activities that bring people together and
promote cultural understanding and respect. Green spaces boost biodiversity and ecological
equilibrium, helping settlements survive. These places preserve ecosystems and increase urban
biodiversity by housing a range of plants and animals. Due to their ecological and biological
benefits, protected green spaces help save numerous species. When lush refuges help species
migrate and spread, ecosystems gain genetic diversity and resilience. Parks and other green areas
improve health and happiness as well as the environment. These green spaces minimize pollution
by absorbing air pollutants and releasing oxygen. This purification improves air quality and
reduces respiratory diseases, enhancing local respiratory health. Due to its stress-reduction and
mental refreshment, green spaces benefit the environment and humans. Without green spaces,
communities can’t increase health, happiness, and sustainability. Weaving greenery into urban
spaces may retain natural variety, improve social connections, physical and mental health, and
recognize its importance. Our leaders, lawmakers, and urban planners must preserve parks and
other green places for future generations.
8
References
Borrelli, I., Rossi, M. F., Melcore, G., Perrotta, A., Santoro, P. E., Gualano, M. R., & Moscato,
U. (2023). Workplace Ethical Climate and Workers’ Burnout: a systematic review.
Clinical Neuropsychiatry, 20(5), 405
Chen, K., Zhang, T., Liu, F., Zhang, Y., & Song, Y. (2021). How does urban green space impact
residents’ mental health: A literature review of mediators. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(22), 11746
Gianfredi, V., Buffoli, M., Rebecchi, A., Croci, R., Oradini-Alacreu, A., Stirparo, G., … &
Signorelli, C. (2021). Association between urban greenspace and health: a systematic
review of literature. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,
18(10), 5137
Lin, B. B., Chang, C. C., Andersson, E., Astell-Burt, T., Gardner, J., & Feng, X. (2023). Visiting
Urban Green Space and Orientation to Nature Is Associated with Better Wellbeing during
COVID-19. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(4),
3559
Jamalishahni, T., Turrell, G., Foster, S., Davern, M., & Villanueva, K. (2023). Neighbourhood
socio-economic disadvantage and loneliness: the contribution of green space quantity and
quality. BMC public health, 23(1), 1-17
Nguyen, P. Y., Astell-Burt, T., Rahimi-Ardabili, H., & Feng, X. (2021). Green space quality and
health: a systematic review. International journal of environmental research and public
health, 18(21), 11028
9
Rojas-Rueda, D., Vaught, E., & Buss, D. (2021). Why a New Research Agenda on Green Spaces
and Health Is Needed in Latin America: Results of a Systematic Review. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(11), 5839
Lee Simmons
Sophia Pathways ENG1020
July 23, 2021
Where’s the Beef?: Ethics and the Beef Industry
Americans love their beef. According to a 2005 study on beef consumption,
between 1994 and 1998, Americans consumed an average of 67 pounds of beef per
year, the equivalent of approximately three ounces of beef per day (Davis & Lin, 2005).
Despite this high rate of consumption, in recent years people in the United States have
grown increasingly concerned about where their food comes from, how it is produced,
and what environmental and health impacts result from its production. These concerns
can be distilled into two ethical questions: is the treatment of cattle humane and is there
a negative environmental impact of beef production? For many, the current methods of
industrial beef production and consumption do not meet personal ethical or
environmental standards. Therefore, for ethical and environmental reasons, people
should limit their beef consumption, and the beef that they do eat should be humanely
raised, locally sourced, and grass-fed.
The first ethical question to consider is the humane treatment of domesticated
cattle. It has been demonstrated in multiple scientific studies that animals feel physical
pain as well as emotional states such as fear (Grandin & Smith, 2004, para. 2). In
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), better known as “factory farms” due
to their industrialized attitude toward cattle production, cattle are often confined to
unnaturally small areas; fed a fattening, grain-based diet; and given a constant stream
of antibiotics to help combat disease and infection. In his essay, “An Animal’s Place,”
© 2021 Sophia Learning, LLC.
Michael Pollan (2002) states that beef cattle often live “standing ankle deep in their own
waste eating a diet that makes them sick” (para. 40). Pollan not only describes
Americans’ discomfort with this aspect of meat production. He also notes that they are
removed from and uncomfortable with the physical and psychological aspects of killing
animals for food as well. He simplifies the actions chosen by many Americans: “we
either look away—or stop eating animals” (para. 32). This decision to look away has
enabled companies to treat and slaughter their animals in ways that cause true suffering
for the animals. If Americans want to continue to eat beef, alternative, ethical methods
of cattle production must be considered.
In addition to the inhumane treatment of animals, CAFOs also raise ethical
questions in terms of the environmental impacts of industrial agriculture. Because cattle
raised on factory farms are primarily “grain-fed,” meaning that their diet largely consists
of corn and/or soy rather than grass or other forage, huge amounts of grain are required
to provide the necessary feed. This grain comes primarily from “monocropping,” an
agricultural practice that involves planting the same crop year after year in the same
field. Although rotating crops to different fields each season helps to retain the natural
balance of nutrients in the soil, mono-cropping is considered to be more efficient on an
industrial scale, providing larger yields of grain even though it also requires the use of
more chemical fertilizers to provide adequate nutrients for the plants. According to
Palmer (2010), these chemicals can leach into the groundwater, polluting both the
surrounding land and the water supply.
The emphasis on a grain-based diet, and therefore a reliance on mono-cropping,
also contributes to the inefficient use of available land. The vast majority of grain
© 2021 Sophia Learning, LLC.
production (75-90% depending on whether corn or soy) goes to feeding animals rather
than humans, and cattle alone account for a significant share. As a result, a majority of
land available for agriculture also goes to producing livestock, whether actually housing
the animals or growing grain to feed them (Lappé, 2010, p. 22). This inefficiency means
that a disproportionate amount of agricultural, food, and monetary resources are poured
into a type of cattle production which has been demonstrated to be inhumane and to
have negative environmental consequences.
Other environmental issues include the amount of manure produced by factory
farmed cattle. Traditionally, cattle graze a large area and distribute their waste
accordingly. In contained situations such as CAFOs, however, animal waste builds up in
a relatively small area and the runoff from rainstorms can potentially contaminate the
groundwater (Sager, 2008, para. 7). Furthermore, because closely contained animals
are more prone to disease, factory-farmed cattle are routinely treated with antibiotics,
which can also leach into the local ground and water, potentially affecting humans.
According to Brian Palmer, a man who has done extensive research on the topic (2010),
“Based on some estimates, we spend more than $4 billion annually trying to clean up
CAFO manure runoff. In addition, the long-term, low-dose antibiotics CAFOs give
livestock can lead to antibiotic-resistant bacteria, further undermining our dwindling
supply of useful medicines” (para. 12). The negative impacts of antibiotic runoff, manure
contamination, fossil fuel use, and mono-cropping indicate that sourcing beef from
CAFOs is neither an ethically responsible nor an environmentally sustainable decision.
An alternative to the grain-fed cattle raised in CAFOs is cattle which are allowed
to range and forage for grass and other greenery as their primary form of nourishment.
© 2021 Sophia Learning, LLC.
This “grass-fed” beef is, almost by definition, more humane than grain-fed beef because
the animals are allowed to move freely and eat a more natural diet. There is also some
evidence that grass-fed beef is healthier than grain-fed beef for the humans who
consume it: it is higher in cancer fighting, vitamin-A producing beta-carotene; it is much
lower in fat, including having half the saturated fat as grain-fed beef; and it contains
many more omega-3 fatty acids, conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), which prevents cancer
growth, and vitamin E, which prevents cancer as well as heart disease (Ruechel, 2006,
p. 235). Due to the benefits of a grass-based diet, as well as the benefits of being raised
in pastures rather than feedlots, grass-fed cattle themselves tend to be healthier. Taken
altogether, grass-fed cattle production is better physically for both the cows and
humans.
It is important to note that grass-fed does not inherently mean organic, which is a
separate, legal category with its own requirements. It is possible to find grain-fed beef
from cattle raised or slaughtered in inhumane conditions that is labeled “organic”
because the cattle were fed organic grain, whereas grass-fed beef may come from
cattle that have been raised on land that does not meet the requirements for organic
labeling (Sager, 2008, paras.10-15). However, in a guide to raising grass-fed cattle,
Julius Ruechel (2006), notes that “Raising [cattle] in a pasture reduces or even
eliminates the use of toxic pharmaceutical pesticides to control parasites and all but
eliminates residues of high doses of antibiotics used on cattle in feedlot conditions” (p.
236). Even though it may not always be organic, choosing grass-fed beef reduces or
eliminates many of the environmental and ethical concerns raised by factory farming.
© 2021 Sophia Learning, LLC.
Grass-fed beef also comes with some benefits to the environment. As noted
earlier, most grain-fed beef relies on environmentally damaging mono-cropping. This
problem is not an issue with grass-fed beef, which relies primarily on forage and does
not require the same crop to be planted year after year. Further, if the grass-fed beef
that one eats comes from local farms and ranches, it lessens the environmental impact,
whereas the long-distance shipping required by factory farming practices consumes
fossil fuels, which contribute to global warming. Lappé (2010) explains the massive
effects that industrial food production has on the environment, noting that throughout
the life cycle of production, processing, distribution, consumption, and waste, our food
chain may be responsible for as much as a third of the factors causing global climate
change (p. 11). However, as Pollan (2002) argues by the end of his essay, farms which
focus on traditional agricultural practices are both more humane and more
environmentally friendly than CAFOs. Ultimately, food decisions should be made with an
eye to sustainability and humane treatment, ethical stances that are both supported by
local farms focused on sustainable diversity.
Despite grass-fed beef scoring better on an environmental impact level than
grain-fed beef, it is still not perfect, a fact that highlights the problems of eating beef at
all if one is concerned with environmental ethics. Most notably, to assuage Americans’
rapacious appetites for beef, landowners in South America often clear cut rainforest in
order to create grazing land. “The realities of the global market are a great temptation to
many: Where land is cheap and the demand for grass-fed cattle is on the rise, the local
economy may respond by cutting down a forest to create pasture or by planting grass
where millet or rice has been grown” (Sager, 2008, para. 21). This practice has negative
© 2021 Sophia Learning, LLC.
environmental impacts on the local landscape and the planet as a whole, since losing
vast swathes of rainforest increases the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere,
contributing to ozone depletion. In their article for Science magazine, scholars Molly
Brown and Christopher Funk (2008) examine how climate change will affect food
security and find that people in the developing world are at particular risk for a lack of
food due to climate change. Mono-cropping and mono-grazing practices, designed to
snag American dollars in the short term and not to sustain the local population in the
long term, will only exacerbate these effects (p. 580–81). Furthermore, the rise in the
market for grass-fed beef has meant that much grass-fed beef is shipped to the U.S.
from South America and Australia. Even if these animals are raised in a humane and
sustainable manner, the long distances they travel to reach American bellies has
significant, negative environmental impact, again due to the use of fossil fuels (Sager,
2008, para. 21). This reinforces the importance of buying beef which has been locally
produced, reducing the impact of long-distance shipping and potential mono-grazing in
other countries.
No matter how ethically sourced, one can still identify some serious ethical
problems with the raising and slaughter of beef, and those ethical quandaries are
passed on to consumers. While grass-fed beef is clearly an ethical improvement over
grain-fed beef in terms of humane treatment and potentially in terms of environmental
impact, “No matter how you slice it, eating beef will never be the greenest thing you do
in a day. Scientists at Japan’s National Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science
estimate that producing 1 kilogram of beef emits more greenhouse gas than driving 155
miles” (Palmer, 2010, para. 2). A kilogram of beef is about the equivalent of two
© 2021 Sophia Learning, LLC.
generously sized rib-eye steaks. Multiply this by the amount of beef consumed by
Americans in a year and the impact of these greenhouse gasses cannot be ignored.
However, as compelling as this argument is, it is not reasonable to expect that
Americans will stop eating beef altogether. In the short term, it is more practical to
encourage Americans to eat humanely raised, locally sourced, grass-fed beef, which
will ultimately lessen the ethical and environmental consequences.
If consumers are truly concerned about the ethical treatment of animals and the
environmental impact of agricultural production, then the logical action is to stop eating
meat altogether. If Americans are not willing to do this, then the next best action is to
focus on humanely raised, locally sourced, grass-fed beef, while acknowledging that
this may affect our beef consumption at many levels. Pollan (2002) concludes his essay
by acknowledging that more humane treatment of animals would likely cause higher
prices and lower consumption. However, he states, “maybe when we did eat animals,
we’d eat them with the consciousness, ceremony and respect they deserve” (para. 82).
This emphasis on the respect for and well-being of the animals cultivated for food
benefits both the animals and the consumer, acknowledging the desire to be true
omnivores while satisfying our need for ethical clarity.
© 2021 Sophia Learning, LLC.
References
Brown, M., & Funk, C. (2008). Food security under climate change. Science, 319
(5863), 580-581. doi: 10.1126/science.1154102
Cook, C. (2004). Diet for a dead planet: How the food industry is killing us. New York,
NY: New Press.
Davis, C., & Lin, B.H. (2005). Factors affecting U.S. beef consumption. Retrieved from
https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details/?pubid=37389.
Grandin, T. & Smith. G. (2004). Animal welfare and humane slaughter. Grandin.com.
Retrieved from http://www.grandin.com/references/humane.slaughter.html
Lappé, A. (2010). Diet for a hot planet: The climate crisis at the end of your fork. New
York, NY: Bloomsbury.
Palmer, B. (2010, December 21). Pass on grass: Is grass-fed beef better for the
environment? Slate. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_
science/the_green_lantern/2010/12/pa ss_ on_grass.html
Pollan, M. (2002, November 10). An animal’s place. The New York Times. Retrieved
from http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/10/magazine/an-animal-s-place.html
Ruechel, J. (2006). Grass-fed Cattle: How to produce and market natural beef. North
Adams, MA. Storey Publishing.
Sager, G. (2008). Where’s your beef from?: Grass-fed Beef: Is it green, humane and
healthful? Natural Life Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.naturallifemagazine.
com/0812/grass-fed_beef_green_humane_healthful.html
© 2021 Sophia Learning, LLC.
Reflection Questions
1. How much time did you spend revising your draft? What revision strategies did
you use and which worked best for you? (2-3 sentences)
I spent about an hour and a half revising my draft. I spent a lot of time going over each
of the critiques I was given, and thinking about how I can implement those in a way that
will truly make my essay better. Creating unity and coherence was the most satisfying to
me, because it allowed me to put everything together in a way that made me proud.
2. List three concrete revisions that you made and explain how you made them.
What problem did you fix with each of these revisions? Issues may be unity,
cohesion, rhetorical appeals, content, or any other areas on which you received
constructive feedback. (4-5 sentences)
One I came up with was moving the paragraph on how the production of meat can raise
questions in terms of environmental impacts. This helped increase the flow and
effectiveness of how the information was being presented. Another critique I made was
including a more focused thesis statement. This helped include all of the points I made.
Another revision I made was adding more appeals to my claim that chemicals can leach
into the groundwater, polluting both the surrounding land and the water supply. This
helped add legitimacy to my argument.
3. What did you learn about your writing process or yourself as a writer? How has
your understanding of the research process changed as a result of taking this
course? (2-3 sentences)
I learned that writing a truly good Argumentative Essay is way more than just writing
and research. You need to dig deep into your sources, and really learn about both sides
© 2021 Sophia Learning, LLC.
of the arguments are you taking on. The entire process is important to make your
argument a solid and supported one.
© 2021 Sophia Learning, LLC.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
