Justified True Belief is one analysis of Knowledge; discuss two opposing arguments.

The JTB account of Knowledge is a basic and foundational claim that has been argued against quite stringently within the field of Epistemology. The most pressing arguments are Gettier Style cases, which can be used in a adaptive manner to any real solution that mimics the JTB and another condition response. This includes Causal Chain responses, Defeater responses, and other less famous responses. The realistic problem that is faced in all of these responses is that "luck" seems to be involved in every case of the subject knowing the proposition, even although mores stringent conditions are put upon the concession of knowledge.
To do well against you may argue that a form of response is stronger than others in certain ways. For instance, the defeater style case captures a certain aspect of knowledge that may be that it is not-justified to belief otherwise, or for the causal chain style case in which it analyses seemingly-objective truths to support the belief. Most of these, however, are based around bringing forth the justification condition to a higher format than the JTB account originally suggests. Whatever position one finds themselves as falling under, strict argument style and good writing methods are paramount in obtaining a good mark.