Topic 6.5 Choosing and Combining Methods: select the methods of development that best fit an argument, and combine them so each does a distinct job.

What this topic is asking

Topic 6.5 (skill REO-1.H) brings Unit 6's methods together. It asks you to choose the method of development that fits a given argumentative job and to combine methods so each does distinct work within one text. Real arguments rarely use a single method; they move from narration to causal analysis to problem-solution as the argument requires. The skill is matching method to job and reading the choice as the rhetorical decision it is.

Method as a rhetorical choice

There is no neutral method. A writer who explains a problem through causal analysis frames it differently from one who tells a story about it. The choice of method shapes how the audience understands the issue, which is why it counts as a rhetorical decision.

Matching method to job

Each method has a job it does best:

• Description makes an abstraction concrete and felt.
• Exemplification grounds a general claim in cases.
• Causal analysis explains why something happens.
• Classification organizes many items so an audience can weigh them.
• Definition fixes the meaning of a contested term.
• Comparison clarifies by setting one thing against another.

Combining without clutter

Combining methods is not piling them on. Each method should do a distinct job; repeating the same move under different names adds nothing. The test is whether removing a method would leave a gap in the argument. If not, it is clutter.

Why this matters for the exam

Passages set for rhetorical analysis (Question 2) almost always combine methods, and the upper band rewards explaining how the combination works, not labelling each method. On the argument and synthesis essays, choosing methods to fit each job, rather than defaulting to listing examples, makes for a richer, better-organized argument. The multiple choice section asks you to identify why a writer chose a method and what it contributes.

Try this

Q1. Why is the choice of a method of development a rhetorical decision rather than a neutral one? [Recall]

• Cue. Because each method frames the subject differently, explaining a problem causally, describing it vividly, or telling a story about it leads the audience to understand it in different ways, so choosing a method shapes the audience's response and is therefore a rhetorical choice.

Q2. You are arguing that a town should restore its derelict library. Sketch a sequence of three methods of development and the job each does. [Short explanation]

• Cue. Open with description, rendering the boarded-up building and empty shelves so the audience feels the loss; then use causal analysis to explain how closure followed funding cuts and what its effects on the town have been; then move to problem-solution, proposing restoration and showing how it would work. Each method does a distinct job, engage, explain, propose, and the sequence builds from feeling to understanding to action, which is a stronger argument than any single method alone.