Rogerian Method for

Argument/Synthesis
Writing
Breaking out of the five paragraph
mold…
 Trying on a New Goal and
Structure
OLD GOAL TO ILLUSTRATE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND
3 ASPECTS OF A TOPIC OR CAN PROVIDE 3
REASONS WHY A CLAIM IS TRUE WHILE ALSO
REFUTING COUNTERCLAIMS
OLD STRUCTURE 5-6 PARAGRAPH ESSAY

● INTRODUCTION
● THESIS IS IN 1ST PARAGRAPH
● 2-3 POINTS THAT DEVELOP THESIS
● ISOLATED PARAGRAPH TO ADDRESS
COUNTERCLAIM
● CONCLUSION
 New Goal and Structure—Inspired by Carl Rogers, a 1950s
psychologist who stressed the importance of finding common
ground and compromise in argument.
NEW GOAL TO CONVINCE THE AUDIENCE THAT YOUR POSITION IS NOT ONLY VALID BUT IN
THEIR BEST INTEREST BY ILLUSTRATING THAT YOU REALLY UNDERSTAND THE
OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS AND COMPROMISING

NEW
STRUCTURE 1. Write a brief objective statement to define the issue.
2. Analyze and state the other's position in a neutral, objective way.
Demonstrate that you understand the other's position and their reasons
for holding it. Avoid moralizing or judging the other's position or reasons.
3. Bridge to your thesis with a statement of understanding.
4. Analyze and state your own position in a neutral, objective
way. Avoid moralizing about your own position or reasons.
5. Support your argument with sufficient reasoning and evidence.
6. Analyze what the two positions have in common; find commonly
shared goals and values.
Propose a resolution to the issue that recognizes and incorporates
the interests of both positions.
 Why should we try something new?
OLD—CLASSICAL MODEL
● Formulaic (AKA..boring and)
● No real middle ground with
audience’s perspective
● Acknowledges and refutes
opposition but does not spend
too much time validating
opposing viewpoints; basically,
the speaker’s acknowledgement
is an opportunity to tell the
opposition why they are wrong.
Does not allow for you create your own style
and voice
NEW—ROGERIAN MODEL
● Less rigid
● Explicitly allows the speaker to
develop TRUST by stating
common ground, mutual interest,
compromises, and negotiations
● Allows speaker to soften a hostile
audience
● Points out common ground and
mutual interest that the audience
had never considered before
● Makes the claim seem in
everyone’s best interest
 The challenge is to
understand what is
going on in the
conversation, then to
add your own
perspective without
offending.
Let’s try it with a sample
argument…
■ Problem – You want to go to
prom this year, but your parents
are not allowing you to go
because your grades have been
poor. How would you structure
your argument if you want to
use the “Rogerian Method”
(everyone gets to YES!)?
Write a brief objective statement
(can be multiple sentences) to
define the issue

■ How would you introduce the

issues to a skeptical audience
(your parents)?
■ First, lay out the question and/or
problem you’re both facing.
Analyze and state the other's
position in a neutral, objective
way.
■ Demonstrate that you
understand the other's position
and their reasons for holding it.
Avoid moralizing or judging the
other's position or reasons.
MAKE THEM COMFORTABLE.
Boost your ETHOS!
Bridge and Thesis

■ At this point you would bridge

from addressing the
counterclaim to your claim by
stating how you understand the
ways the other side’s argument
works and then the ways it does
not.

■ Provide your thesis.

Analyze and develop your own
position in a neutral, objective
way.
■ Avoid moralizing (being
preachy) about your own
position or reasons.
Analyze what the two
positions have in common
■ Find commonly shared goals
and values. Can’t we all just get
along?
Propose a resolution

■ Propose a resolution to the

issue that recognizes and
incorporates the interests of
both positions.

■ EVERYONE GETS TO YES! Or

we at least try
Plan Of Attack For This
Debate
Step One: State the problem to
be solved or question to be
answered as your team
understands it.

Step Two: Look through your

audience analysis and other
notes to come up with a
summary of your opponent’s
views.
Plan Of Attack For This
Debate
Step Three: Provide a statement
of understanding that serves as
a bridge to your thesis.

Step Four: State your position

(thesis).
Plan Of Attack For This
Debate
Step Five: Describe the context
in which your position works
well. AKA provide reasoning and
evidence to support your
argument.

Step Six: Propose a solution that

appeal to your opposition’s
interests. AKA demonstrate how
your position benefits them.
Timeline

1. Split debate portions between

your group members. Everyone
must have a part.
2. Determine your thesis together
so all members are working
toward the same goal.
3. Each person/group will
complete their debate portion.
4. Review and Revise as a team.