To critically evaluate the sample written argument paper on distance education and its impact on economic needs, let's go through the elements you've mentioned one by one:

Claim and Reasons:

• The claim of the paper is that distance education can potentially close the economic gap by producing more graduates and meeting workforce demands, despite concerns over education standards.
• The reasons supporting this claim include the accessibility and flexibility of distance education, its capacity to meet workforce needs, and the evolution of employer perception towards online degrees.

Logical Reasoning and Fallacies:

• The reasoning throughout the paper is generally logical, though some points could be seen as presumptive. For example, the assumption that all employers will eventually view online degrees equally to traditional degrees might overlook existing biases and specific industry standards.
• The argument could be strengthened by addressing potential counterarguments more robustly, such as present challenges in online education quality assurance.

Support for Each Reason:

• Each reason has some support, primarily through statistics and expert opinions cited from various sources. However, there may be an over-reliance on authority without enough critical analysis of these sources.
• Providing more case studies or empirical data showing successful outcomes from online graduates would bolster the argument.

Use of Sources:

• The student uses sources ethically, and they appear to support the ethos of the paper by including reputable authors and organizations.
• Most, if not all, sources mentioned in the paper are cross-referenced in the Works Cited section, ensuring credibility and reliability.

Type of Argument:

• This argument seems more traditional or adversarial as it primarily defends distance education against criticisms of its quality and impact on standards.

Treatment of Opposing Position:

• The opposing positionthat distance education could dilute standardsis acknowledged but not deeply explored. Further engaging with criticisms could provide a more balanced perspective.

Conclusion:

• The conclusion is presented as a call to reform rather than mere criticism, which is generally satisfying. However, it could be more specific in suggesting exactly what reforms would be necessary.

Reader's Perspective:

• Personally, as an evaluator of this paper, I might be considered a skeptical reader. There is merit in the argument, but more nuanced evidence could make it more convincing.

Convincing Argumentation:

• The argument is somewhat convincing due to the variety of sources and the logical structure, though it can be improved by engaging deeper with empirical research and real-world examples.

Successful Elements:

• The paper provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of distance education and draws from multiple scholarly sources to support its stance. It highlights the evolving employer perspective well.

Areas for Improvement:

• The argument would benefit from additional engagement with counterarguments and empirical evidence.
• Clarifying the reform suggestions in more precise terms would strengthen the paper.

In conclusion, the paper provides a solid foundation for arguing the benefits of distance education. However, enhancing engagement with opposing viewpoints and offering more comprehensive evidence would make the argument stronger and more persuasive.

Please humanize this assignment and not make it AI generated