rhetorical analysis assignment pkt

Zobel Rhetorical Analysis Fall 2008WP #2 CR due M 10/6; HSU due T 10/7

Rhetorical AnalysisTotal of Four Pages: This means you have one four page/1,000 word RA, or you can have two, two page/500 word RAs. You may do one or two—the choice is up to youFormat: Double-spaced, Times New Roman font in 12-pt, 1-inch margins, MLA citation format.

BackgroundRhetorical means “the art of using language effectively and persuasively,” while analysis

means “the separation of an intellectual or substantial whole into its constituent parts for individual study.” Thus, the Rhetorical Analysis assignment asks you to carefully read a selected piece of writing, examining it not only for WHAT it says, but for HOW it says it. You should aim for “critical distance” in your reading of the text, which means that you’ll want to be wary of whatever assumptions you bring with you to the text. For your analysis, you may choose from among the following texts we have already read for class. I suggest that you review each of them before you decide upon one to analyze.

Tattooed by Bell; Pagan by Woodward; Ehrenreich on Bodies; Dove article on Beauty; Flesch on being Bamboozled; Credibility chapter; Fear Chapter; “Trolls”In class we’ve been discussing how writers use certain techniques to make their writing

more persuasive. For instance, writers might emphasize their own authority or credibility (ethos); they might appeal to an audience’s values, emotions, or experiences (pathos); or they might base their argument on careful reasoning (logos). Other methods of persuasion are discussed by Flesch. Plus there are the techniques of fear and credibility. These techniques are part of what is known as rhetoric—the effective use of language. Analyzing the rhetorical choices writers make allows us to evaluate their arguments more effectively and respond appropriately. This assignment asks you to conduct such a rhetorical analysis of a text.

Read the text at least four times, each time making notes about what the author is doing to make his or her argument more persuasive. Then compose one essay of 1,000 words or two essays of 500 words each in which you analyze the rhetorical techniques the author(s) uses in the text(s).

To accomplish a Rhetorical Analysis: You must ask: What goes on in this writing? What is its purpose? How does it persuade? How does it attempt to convince the reader? What rhetorical (linguistic) methods does the author use?

So… when you write a rhetorical analysis, you are dissecting the language of the piece. Since you’re looking closely at the WAY this author uses language, you’ll want to use quotations from the text as evidence to convince your reader of the truth of your observations. To insert this kind of evidence into your paper, make a “quotation sandwich.” That is, introduce the idea that the quotation will illustrate, give the quotation, and then follow up by explaining why you chose that quotation.1. Make a point. 2. Illustrate the point with a quotation from the text. 3. Explain how your example anchors your point.In your analysis, be sure to consider the rhetorical appeals and other rhetorical elements, such as:The Author (the author's voice or persona) ethos: How does the author present himself or herself? Is the author familiar with the subject? How can you tell? How does the author show good judgment or a broad perspective? Is the author reasonable? How can you tell? Where and when was this published? What does that say about this work? The Audience (the reader) pathos: What are the characteristics of the audience? How can you

Some of these materials are taken from: http://webs.lander.edu/sbarnette/english102/102assignments/research.html;http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/cmartin/UWPENC1102/rhetoricalanalysis.htm;And the Stanford Writing Program’s website

http://webs.lander.edu/sbarnette/english102/102assignments/research.html

Zobel Rhetorical Analysis Fall 2008WP #2 CR due M 10/6; HSU due T 10/7tell? Is the reader/audience encouraged to have an emotional response to this writing? How can you tell? Is the reader encouraged to examine or question the opposition's motives? What reader needs, values, or beliefs are presented here? How can you tell?The Argument (the work) logos: How is this work organized? What are the cues to this organization? Does the organization work? What claims are made? Are these claims strong, obvious? What evidence is used to support the claims? Style: Imagery, Repetition, Rhythm, Coherence, Emphasis, Figurative language (analogy, metaphor, simile)Diction: Word choice, Word orderTone: formal/informal, playful/solemn, happy/sad, etc.Appearance: Does this author use the visual appeal of the text on the page in a unique way?

Phrased another way, by another author:Here are some points to keep in mind as you write your essay:

Ethos: What perspective and biases does the author bring to this text? What authority does he or she have to produce this text? What does the author do within the text to establish credibility with the audience?

Pathos: Whom is the author of this text writing to? What is the audience's attitude towards the subject matter? How does this attitude affect the way the author presents his or her message? What does the author do to appeal to the audience's emotions, values, or experiences? What reasons and evidence does he or she provide to prove the claim(s)?

Logos: What basic claim(s) is the author making? How appropriate and convincing is the author’s reasoning and evidence?

Make sure your essay has a clear, focused thesis. You can’t simply hand in a list of rhetorical appeals you found in the text; instead, you should look at the notes you’ve made and determine whether there is an overall pattern of rhetorical appeals that makes the text effective or ineffective.

You should, of course, support your analysis with plentiful examples from the text, but remember that your essay should be an analysis, not a summary. Do not waste time telling your reader what the text says; focus on how the text says it.

Your analysis should be just that—yours—in that you’re presenting and defending your own understanding of what the author is doing in the text. There’s no need, however, to mention yourself at any point in the essay. Phrases like “I think” or “in my opinion” tend to weaken this sort of essay, so avoid them.

Likewise, your own opinion of the subject matter of the text is irrelevant. This assignment does not ask you to agree or disagree with the author, only to analyze how he or she is making a point.

For this assignment, only use the sources that we have used in class. Do not go outside of these

resources. When you quote the sources, be sure you cite it in this manner with the author’s last name and the page number where the materials is located (Zobel 14). You do NOT need a Works

Cited page for this assignment; you DO need to cite your quotes and summaries.Regarding the handouts and peer feedback forms: the forms must be filled out and completed in a thorough manner—brief and/or shallow

answers will NOT earn you credit.Some of these materials are taken from: http://webs.lander.edu/sbarnette/english102/102assignments/research.html;http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/cmartin/UWPENC1102/rhetoricalanalysis.htm;And the Stanford Writing Program’s website



Handout #1The Audience (the reader) pathos: What are the characteristics of the audience?

How can you tell?

Is the reader/audience encouraged to have an emotional response to this writing?

How can you tell?

Is the reader encouraged to examine or question the opposition's motives?

What reader needs, values, or beliefs are presented here?

How can you tell?

The Argument (the work) logos: How is this work organized?

What are the cues to this organization?

Does the organization work?

What claims are made?

Are these claims strong, obvious?

What evidence is used to support the claims?




Handout #2Ethos: What perspective and biases does the author bring to this text?

What authority does he or she have to produce this text?

What does the author do within the text to establish credibility with the audience?

Pathos: Whom is the author of this text writing to?

What is the audience's attitude towards the subject matter?

How does this attitude affect the way the author presents his or her message?

What does the author do to appeal to the audience's emotions, values, or experiences?

Flesch:Do you find any of the seven persuasive techniques Flesch discusses? Which ones?

Which are the strongest?

Does the author play on fear? How?

Does the author attempt to be likable? How?




HANDOUT #3SELF-EVALUATION FORM

Group Names:

Answer the questions briefly but specifically. When you have finished filling out the form as a group, make sure that you hand it in with WP #2.

1. Without looking at the assignment sheet, paraphrase the assignment for this essay.

2. Quote or (if your thesis is implied) paraphrase the thesis of your paper.

3. Discuss briefly why you chose the text or texts you analyzed.

4. Place a checkmark in the margin beside one of your best paragraphs. Explain its strengths here.

5. Place an X in the margin beside a paragraph you find weak or troublesome. Try to explain what the problem is.

6. Perform a very brief rhetorical analysis of your own paper. What are the dominant rhetorical strategies and appeals that you used to make your argument persuasive to your audience?




Peer Feedback #1

Name of paper authors: Name of Peer reviewers:Paper title:

1. Thesis. Quote or paraphrase the thesis of the paper. Is it a clear thesis? How could it be improved in terms of argument or writing? Where is it in the paper ... at the beginning? … at the end? Is that an effective choice?

2. Introduction: strategies. Does the introduction make you want to keep reading? Why or why not? Is it a fairly traditional opening? How would you characterize the writing strategies used in the introduction?

3. Introduction: Follow-through. Having read the rest of the paper, did you find that the introduction gave you a good idea of what the author actually did address in the rest of the paper? If not, what is the main point that the author really makes?

4. Introduction & Conclusion. Think about the relationship between the introduction and conclusion. Does the conclusion work simply as a summary or a reiteration/rephrasing of the introduction? Does the author use other writing strategies in his/her conclusion? Is it a successful conclusion in that it offers closure to the paper while emphasizing the main thesis strongly one last time?




Peer Feedback #2Name of paper author: Name of Peer reviewer:Paper title:

Development of Ideas. Are the main points of the paper sufficiently developed? Does the paper bring up any interesting points that you would like to see developed further? Do you find any spots where the paper goes off on a tangent or addresses peripheral/irrelevant material? Are there any spots where the author relies too heavily on generalization?

Organization of Argument. Is the argument organized effectively? Do the ideas follow each other in a logical, understandable way? Are there any places that are confusing?

Transitions. How are the transitions between paragraphs? Mark with * on the paper one transition that worked really well and write out below why you thought it was successful. Mark with an x on the paper one transition that is less polished and write out below why it doesn't work as well.

*

X

Paragraphing. Think about the paragraphs themselves for a moment. Does the author use topic sentences? Is that a successful decision? Are the paragraphs more or less cohesive -- i.e. do they focus on/develop one idea? Are any paragraphs too long or too short for easy reading?




Group Work LetterEach individual must write their own group work letter. A group work letter is NOT

collaborative.

To reap the most benefit from the collaborative writing process you’ve just completed, you should take some time now and reflect on the experience. Write a letter that is at least 300 words long, in full block format, addressing some of the following questions as well as any other insights or concerns you have about this experience:

In what ways does the paper you’ve just handed in reflect successful collaboration? In what ways does your paper reflect the limits of collaboration? (How does you essay

demonstrate the challenges writers face when they collaborate?) What did you learn from this process about your own strengths and weaknesses as a writer

and as a collaborator? Which of your own contributions to the paper do you consider most successful? Which of your partner’s contributions do you consider most successful? What advice would you give to a team of students facing their first collaborative paper?

Remember that your reflection should read as a letter, not simply a list of answers, so you’ll need to think about the best way to organize this reflection. In other words, you should address these questions in whatever order you believe is most appropriate. (In fact, the order they’re listed here is almost certainly not the best order to answer them in.) Also keep in mind that good writing requires you to explain and prove any claim you make, so you should support your reflections with specific examples from your collaborative essay and from the process of writing it.



rhetorical analysis assignment pkt

Documents