Lisa Heffernan's Argumentative Analysis

On the topic of participation awards, Lisa Heffernan and Vivian Diller have both published articles advocating either for, or against rewarding children at a young age, regardless if they’ve won a game or not. In terms of making a strong argument, both writers used celebrity testimonies, life experience, and quotes from reputable sources, some tactics more effective than others. In Lisa Heffernan’s article favoring participation trophies, “In Defense of Participation Trophies: Why They Really do Teach the Right Values,” she often pulls from her most powerful and relevant source to her topic- her son. Statements such as “When my son was around eight years old … he scoffed at the very idea that such an award existed.” would play a critical role in setting up a counter argument, but much like her other quotations in her article, it was followed by a statement from Hillary L. Friedman, a sociologist, that initially seems to back up her son’s opinion. Quite often in Heffernan’s piece, she would pull rather lengthy quotes that argue against participation awards in order to follow it with something to support her claim, however, that …show more content…
Setting Kids up to Fail: The Debate over handing out trophies for just showing up,” in which she openly spoke against participation awards with factual evidence to back her up. Unlike Heffernan’s article, Diller was able to use quotes far more sparingly, they were aligned with her views, and they were concise in contrast to the seemingly endless rambling from the opposing article. Her article also appeared to follow a simple, yet practical formula. She would state an opinion, provide evidence that supported it, and move on to her next point. She also toward the end states how she’s even qualified to be saying what she is, citing her age, profession, and retirement status. These facts further frame her argument in a better light, giving them more