A Step 1: Use a chronological sequence: describe a review of picnic table shapes, then a student completing a scholarship form near a recreation center, then the concern that parks should not become places where people only stare at screens, and finally the claim that internet access in public spaces can help students and job seekers; the order delays the argument until the evidence has no clear purpose; Step 2: the other perspective is mentioned without a response; Step 3: the sequence ends without tying the reasoning back to the thesis; Step 4: the sequence ends without tying the reasoning back to the thesis.
B Step 1: Begin with a balanced overview of every side, treat the main claim and the opposing concern as equally final conclusions, use a student completing a scholarship form near a recreation center as atmosphere, and end without deciding how the thesis should govern the reasoning; Step 2: the other perspective is mentioned without a response; Step 3: the sequence ends without tying the reasoning back to the thesis; Step 4: the sequence ends without tying the reasoning back to the thesis.
C Step 1: Begin by defining the problem in the terms of the thesis; Step 2: move to a causal claim that internet access in public spaces can help students and job seekers; Step 3: use a student completing a scholarship form near a recreation center to test the claim; Step 4: weigh the perspective that parks should not become places where people only stare at screens, and synthesize the argument by showing that limited zones and community programming can balance digital access with outdoor life.
D Step 1: Open by narrating an example involving a student completing a scholarship form near a recreation center, interpret it as proof of several different goals, pivot to a review of picnic table shapes, and then introduce the objection that parks should not become places where people only stare at screens as though it were a new thesis; Step 2: the other perspective is mentioned without a response; Step 3: the sequence ends without tying the reasoning back to the thesis; Step 4: the sequence ends without tying the reasoning back to the thesis.
