Subject: Have you stayed on the subject throughout?  In a dialogic argument, this means two things.  First, it means being sure that you have represented the real opposing sides of an issue, and you have developed a real compromise or higher resolution--arguments that seem logical not just to you, but also to your readers.  Second, staying on the subject means that within each body section, you have given strong, logical reasons and supporting details that show why the argument in that section is considered true by those who believe it.  In other words, each body section must be like a well developed mini-thesis paper.  
   

First Writing: Have you carefully chosen what to keep and what to delete from your first-draft writing, and fully organized all that you decided to keep?  In a dialogic argument, this means keeping/developing two or three clearly opposing beliefs and a compromise for (or higher resolution of) them.  You should delete or rearrange ideas that do not sufficiently oppose each other or present a reasonable compromise.  In addition, how much explanation do you have?  If you have a lot, then you may need to cut some of it.  At the least, you need to be sure that you have plenty of detail--quotations, story examples, facts, etc.--to support your explanations.  These details should take up as much or more space in your paper as do your explanations.  However, if all you have is details, then you need to develop more sentences of explanation introducing each set of details and then explaining, before or after it, what the details mean or how they tie in with the section.  In addition, you will need to get rid of quotations or other materials from other sources that you have heard secondhand, unless you can find the source and add it to your bibliography.
   

Style/Tone: Have you converted all parts of your writing to the appropriate style and tone?  A dialogic argument should have an academic writing style, which means sentences and words of some length and complexity (but nothing you cannot easily understand yourself!) and paragraphs that often are medium to long, though a mixing of lengths and an occasional short paragraph are desirable.  To create a more academic style, set your grammar check in recent MS Word programs to "Grammar & Style" (go to "Tools," "Options," "Grammar," and "Writing Style").  The tone or voice in a dialogic argument should be one of balance, fairness, and logic.  As part of your style, refer to the "believer" of each argument frequently in the argument so that readers know you are not speaking of your own beliefs, but rather of a particular group's.  In other words, write phrases every paragraph or two like "Some people believe," "this group argues that," "This argument suggests that," and " "Those who support this belief think that."  For tone or voice, try reading your dialogic argument aloud--or have a friend read it aloud to you--so you can hear whether your sentences sound as you want them to.
   

Organization: Have you finished all parts of the organizational pattern, placing all first-draft writing and later additions into the best place possible?  A dialogic argument should have good transitions to help move readers between the several main arguments you use, and in each section, from each supporting reason to explanation of it and to its supporting details.  Good transitions become especially important because of the complex interweaving of all these different types of thought: the transitions act as road maps through the byways of your essay.  A dialogic argument may have a brief background section; however, such a section should be just a few paragraphs at most and should not be a substitute for strong, thorough development of each section.  Often it is possible to place most background information in individual paragraphs or body sections as needed.  Also, consider the length of your introduction ad conclusion: their length should not be excessive.  In short papers, usually a paragraph is enough.  If you find your introduction continues on at great length, you are writing your body sections in the introduction.  Simply move large parts of this material into the appropriate body sections.  
   

Supporting Details: Do you have sufficient details?  The typical dialogic argument often has, depending on your assignment, several supporting details per page: e.g., quotations, paraphrases, and/or well developed story examples.  Are your details specific and concrete?  If they are quotations or paraphrases, their content should clearly go to the heart of what you are saying, and you should, if necessary, help the reader after each one by explaining what it means and how it fits with what you are saying.  If you are writing story examples, they should be detailed, using the five W's of journalism and the five senses of storytelling.  You also should, if possible, place your very best two quotations and/or stories--those that define the overall subject or question, not just one argument in it--into the introduction and conclusion.  For reader appeal, your first section--your first opposing argument--preferably will be the one with the most compelling details or those that present the reader with the most compelling problem or sense of tension.  And your final body section will, in its very nature as a compromise or higher resolution, have some of your strongest details, as well.  If research is required, see the "Research" section.
   

Audience: Have you developed a visual image of your audience?  For a dialogic argument, your primary audience is your instructor.  However, you also can imagine your class--or a class at the next higher level--as your audience, and develop a visual image of the entire class or of one intelligent member in the group.  As a dialogic argument is a written version of a debate, you can imagine you are viewing a debate as you write it or that you are one person in a two- or three-way debate, or you can imagine playing all three roles before your audience.  It also is helpful if you can find an opportunity to read your paper aloud to a student who is a member of your imaginary audience.  As you do so, ask yourself, "What wording, organization, or details sound like they should be changed?"    
         

Problem Solving (Critical Thinking): Most papers represent all or part of what is called a "problem-solving process."  In its simplest form, it involves (1) a problem, (2) one or more solutions, and (3) a method of reaching the solution.  Which of these three does your paper exemplify?  Which could you add to improve the paper?  A dialogic essay is, by its very nature, a problem (a question) with three or four possible answers.  What is the main problem or question represented in your paper?  Have you stated this clearly in the introduction and the conclusion?  Does each of your answers really offer a typical or publicly acceptable or reasonable answer to the problem? Do your supporting reasons for each argument help show in more detail how that argument is a solution?  
    

Authenticity: Is there some way in which you can make your paper more authentic--more real and original to yourself, your content, or your audience?  In a dialogic argument, you can establish personal authenticity by adding story examples from your own experience or by quoting someone you have personally interviewed who is an expert by virtue of their experience, education, or training.  You can establish authenticity toward your audience by making every effort to be as fair, balanced, and respectful of each argument you present, and to make it constantly clear to your audience that you are not speaking of your own beliefs, but rather of a group's beliefs (e.g., "Some people believe that," as described above).  You can establish authenticity of content by finding the very heart of each argument as it is made by those who deeply believe it, and by then writing simply, directly, and clearly about that heart.