Argument Peer Review - Rory

In Rory’s introduction of the argumentative essay, Rory has caught and compelled the attentions and interests of the readers by listing the few common stereotypes that people have when they think about college athletes. Then, he introduces his argument: whether college athletes should get paid to play their games. As a college athlete in Virginia Tech, Rory argues that the college athletes should not get paid to play their games, but rather should be given adequate time to focus on academics and sufficient stipend beyond tuition and dorm. He provides the necessary background and contextual information using his experiences as a college athlete. To break down the boiler plates of the image of the college athletes, Rory build his argument logically and lead to his thesis smoothly and directly with his supporting experiences. He mentions the controversial, opposing viewpoints and the problems that surround the issue; however, they are not fully described or explained in his main essay. The possible solution or suggestion of the issue given by Rory is that adopting the stipend allowance policy that NCAA has authorized could help college athletes to reduce their pressure and to manage their time more wisely. This issue is very fresh, interesting, and contestable. The main body of Rory’s essay fleshes out the main points with justifiable and fair logic. Although Rory’s experiences as a college athlete is not common, Rory has effectively support his main points with his experiences. Overall for his conclusion, Rory has reiterated his thesis and his main points without directly copying from the introduction, and the relativity of the supporting experiences were shown clear. Rory has used distinct number of word and phrases were used and has used smooth and logical transition overall in the essay.