Outcome 2 Argumentative Analysis

As my intended major is in the scientific field, it is vital that I am proficient in all aspects of Outcome 2. Outcome 2 deals with a writer’s ability to read, analyze, and synthesize complex texts, and the writer’s ability to purposely incorporate evidence from the texts in a way that effectively supports not only the authors writing, but their overall complex claim. A writer’s claim is only as good as the evidence that supports it, so it is vital for the author to incorporate scholarly and peer reviewed evidence that advance the writers purpose, and help to achieve the overall goal of the literary work. A writer cannot make an effective argument without having reliable sources of evidence to support the literary work as a whole.

To fully demonstrate my advancement in all the writing aspects of Outcome 2, I will be using my annotated bibliography, titled “The Distinction Between Robotics and Human Workers in the Industrial Workplace”. My annotated bibliography was focused on the automotive shift in the mechanical industry. I incorporated four scholarly sources, each having a different opinion and
The purpose of the essay is to argue whether the shift to automation in the mechanical industry is more beneficial to companies than traditional human workers, and I utilized this source, and numerous other scholarly sources, to strategically support my complex claim in my augmentative research paper. Where one source may be in support for the automotive shift in the mechanical industry, in my annotated bibliography, I incorporated four different opinionated sources that each provide a different outlook on the situation, therefore allowing me to utilize both sides of the argument to develop a complex claim that effectively develops ideas from both sides of the