What would make an excellent and sophisticated approach to talking about the issue of immigration and paths to citizenship is to move away from generalities and partisanship and focus in depth on some particular group of immigrants or some particular aspect of the issue.
For example, you might use as a thesis a statement "Before we talk about a path to citizenship in very general terms, we should try to look at how such a path might affect [your home town]." Next, you should research actual statistics about immigration and its effect on your town. You might start by looking at when the town was founded. Unless you live on a Native American reservation, your ancestors themselves were once immigrants to the United States, as were those of everyone else in your town without a tribal affiliation.
After discussing how various waves of immigration resulted in the foundation and growth of your town, you might discuss current statistics concerning more recent immigrants, legal and illegal. Next, you might try to analyze how different patterns of paths to citizenship would actually affect your town. In some towns, paths to citizenship might mean that a few dozen children of long-time residents would become full citizens, where in other areas the numbers might be far greater.
What would make such an analysis sophisticated is that it would be based on detailed and nuanced local data rather than campaign rhetoric.