General Structure of the paper:
    Introduction: Provide substantive background information on the issue, and why it is controversial. Identify the players or interests on the competing sides of the issue that you will be presenting in the paper.
    Explain Competing Positions: Provide the detailed substantive arguments for both sides of the issue. For example, you could provide industrys arguments for why fracking is safe in residential areas, and then present the health concerns local community groups opposed to fracking. In support of each position, provide substantive information including environmental, public health and economic impacts based on your research.   
    Analyze the arguments: Based on the available data and policy considerations, which elements of each sides position did you find most persuasive? Were there arguments that you found unpersuasive? Why? Did your research find flaws in the data or science or legal arguments for one or both sides of the issue?
    Conclusion: Briefly explain which argument you found most persuasive, and why. In the alternative, your conclusion could offer a workable compromise between the opposing positions or a new alternative way to address the issue.
    The majority of this paper should be your original writing explaining the different sides of the issue and NOT block quotes from other sources. You will not earn full points for the argument sections of the rubric if your advocacy sections for each side is overly reliant on quotes, but should be grounded in reliable sources with appropriate internal citation. Using headings for each section of the paper, for example, Introduction Industry Arguments In Favor of Fracking, and Homeowner Arguments Opposing Fracking will help to organize your paper and be more likely to achieve points per the grading rubric.
    All references and in-text citations in written assignments must follow the Turabian Author-Date Style guidelines outlined in Chapters 18 and 19 of the text.