Neutrality In The Government's Argument Against Welfare
Article selection The scholarly criteria for this paper includes neutrality throughout the paper, sources/studies to back up claims and vast knowledge of the subject which becomes obvious with the complex words and explanations. Neutrality is important so you do not allow your own biases to skew the results of your study or you paper. Without neutrality, you might overlook details that could potentially counter your ideas. Sources and studies are very important to prove that your ideas are wrong or right with direct numbers. Since numbers can't lie they will always give you the truth if the calculations are right. A vast knowledge of your subject is also very important especially with writing an article to teach other people. You can't teach
…show more content…
Instead I found an article describing two different types of welfare systems that the government put in place and their effectiveness. Although it was not what I was looking for, it still gave me an idea about welfare reform. It also gave me a slight history lesson and some data to back up some of my ideas about welfare. However most of the ideas in the paper counter my original argument against welfare.
Rhetorical The purpose of this article was to inform the readers and was probably done as a research project to give factual evidence for TANF/AFDC. The target audience were colleagues interested in welfare research as well as anybody else that is interested in welfare. I was in fact interested in welfare and the possibility of reforming so began reading. I found the article to be non-biased which further proves it was written for research and not to persuade. The medium was kept simple so nothing stuck out very much. Although there were boxes that highlighted the the important stuff such as variables and assumptions. The Authors are apart of the department of Health Policy and Management at Columbia university so they may been so what biased on the health effects of welfare. It can also be assumed that they are probably pretty intelligent and hard working to be at
Instead I found an article describing two different types of welfare systems that the government put in place and their effectiveness. Although it was not what I was looking for, it still gave me an idea about welfare reform. It also gave me a slight history lesson and some data to back up some of my ideas about welfare. However most of the ideas in the paper counter my original argument against welfare.
Rhetorical The purpose of this article was to inform the readers and was probably done as a research project to give factual evidence for TANF/AFDC. The target audience were colleagues interested in welfare research as well as anybody else that is interested in welfare. I was in fact interested in welfare and the possibility of reforming so began reading. I found the article to be non-biased which further proves it was written for research and not to persuade. The medium was kept simple so nothing stuck out very much. Although there were boxes that highlighted the the important stuff such as variables and assumptions. The Authors are apart of the department of Health Policy and Management at Columbia university so they may been so what biased on the health effects of welfare. It can also be assumed that they are probably pretty intelligent and hard working to be at