DWRL Lesson Plans - Cultural Context

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Writing Process

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This class activity came out of several grading sessions, wherein I realized my students were having a hard time subordinating an author's points during a summary. They seemed to give each of the author's statements equal weight, without differentiating between which ideas were primary and which were more supporting details. So while this activity is meant to reinforce the skills of summary and syntehsis, it's foremost an thought-exercise, which I hoped would help them give themselves permission to fairly emphasize certain statements over others.

Media Requirements:

Media Console/Projector

Required Materials:

This activity will go more smoothly if each student can efficiently take notes. I allow them to take digital notes on a laptop or tablet, but this isn't strictly necessary. The project does require that the instructor have a media console and projector.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

Ask students to sit in groups of three. These groups will be informal, and they shouldn't get too hung up on them. Most of their work will be individual, but asking them to share with a tiny group before discussing with the entire class can make them feel more confident.

Screen a clip from a popular comedian's standup special. I chose Louis CK, Aziz Ansari, and Bill Burr, to get a range of comedic styles. Each clip should last no more than 3-4 minutes, although the length will of course be based on the amount of time devoted to a single topic within the special. I also chose clips that I felt addressed primary controversies circulating in the news, and ones I felt my students would probably be familiar with.

Ask students to take notes on the clip and to identify the comedian's main point. Then ask them to fill in the supporting details.

Students should share their breakdown of the clip with their miniature group.

Once they have had a chance to discuss (this should only take two minutes or so), get a class consensus about what the comedian is "really" talking about, and what lines are there for effect or support. This is an opportunity to point out which points may seem like they're geting a lot of focus but are actually in the clip for a laugh or for emphasis.

Students should be able to summarize the clip in one statement. Encourage them to write an informal thesis as a class. For example, "In this bit, Aziz Ansari pokes fun at gender conventions by highlighting the arbitrariness of marriage rituals." This statement bridges a summary understanding of the text and an introduction to basic analysis. The extent to which the dicussion veers toward how the comedian's performance and language are affecting the humor is flexible; depending on how far the instructor would like to introduce or foreshadow Unit 2, this activity could stick to summary, or it could invite students to begin considering ethos, logos, pathos, and so on.

Repeat the exercise two or three times, time permitting, and debrief with students. They should feel more confident identifying primary and secondary points, especially with such a flexible genre.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

I recommend converting the YouTube videos to an MP4 file that can be embedded in a Prezi or PowerPoint. This avoids the mid-class confusion of watching ads, finding the right clips, and so on.

Instructions For Students:

1. Watch the following comedy clip.

2. Take notes on what is being said.

3. When the clip is finished, re-read your notes and organize the bit based on its primary argument and its supporting subpoints.

4. Discuss with your group: compare your own breakdown of the primary and secondary claims with the others. Be prepared to report your organization to the class.

Repeat with three different clips, time allowing.

Homework:

1. Find your own clip.

2. Take notes on the content and revise your notes into some kind of outline that separates the main ideas from the subpoints.

3. Write up a short paragraph summarizing and synthesizing the comedian's argument.

4. Post both the paragraph and a link to the clip on the Canvas discussion board.

Evaluation Suggestions:

I ask students to share their choice/phrasing of the comedian's main argument and subpoints with the class. This is an informal evaluation, but it allows me to both determine their comfort with pulling out the major threads of an argument and to encourage them to make those distinctions between which ideas are emphasized and which are supplemental.

I also ask students to do one more summary/synthesis on a Canvas discussion board. They find their own set of clips, summarize them and synthesize their relationship to one another, and post their writing with the clip link on Canvas. I grade it for completion, but it can be a good, efficient way to guage whether students can differentiate between main ideas and subpoints.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My PowerPoint didn't actually work, but I did have the separate downloaded clips, so it went relatively smoothly. Despite the technical glitch, I got a lot of positive feedback on this assignment. I think my students liked the project simply for content--it made a nice vacation from reading arguments about marijuana legalization--but they did also seemed to really enjoy applying their summary skills to less-conventional media. After we discussed the major/minor points, they enjoyed very briefly discussing how the rhetorical turns worked, which was what made me think this assignment worked well as a pseudo-bridge between Unit 1 (research/summary) and Unit 2 (analysis).

Course Type:

Course Description:

Rhetoric 306 is a course designed to introduce students to the fundamentals of research and argumentation. They are asked to research a controversy, summarize and analyze the arguments of the major stakeholders in that controversy, and then develop their own arguments.

Tags:

Performance

Bridging Summary and Analysis with Standup Clips

Plourde — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 18:51:15 +0000

Author:

Aubrey Plourde

Image Credit:

Image Credit: Cory Schmitz

Brief Assignment Overview:

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Writing Process

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Media Requirements:

Media Console/Projector

Required Materials:

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

Ask students to take notes on the clip and to identify the comedian's main point. Then ask them to fill in the supporting details.

Students should share their breakdown of the clip with their miniature group.

Repeat the exercise two or three times, time permitting, and debrief with students. They should feel more confident identifying primary and secondary points, especially with such a flexible genre.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

I recommend converting the YouTube videos to an MP4 file that can be embedded in a Prezi or PowerPoint. This avoids the mid-class confusion of watching ads, finding the right clips, and so on.

Instructions For Students:

1. Watch the following comedy clip.

2. Take notes on what is being said.

3. When the clip is finished, re-read your notes and organize the bit based on its primary argument and its supporting subpoints.

4. Discuss with your group: compare your own breakdown of the primary and secondary claims with the others. Be prepared to report your organization to the class.

Repeat with three different clips, time allowing.

Homework:

1. Find your own clip.

2. Take notes on the content and revise your notes into some kind of outline that separates the main ideas from the subpoints.

3. Write up a short paragraph summarizing and synthesizing the comedian's argument.

4. Post both the paragraph and a link to the clip on the Canvas discussion board.

Evaluation Suggestions:

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Course Type:

Course Description:

Tags:

Performance

Digital/Physical Library Scavenger Hunt

Meredith Coffey — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 19:05:09 +0000

Author:

Meredith Coffey

Image Credit:

Sweetaholic

Brief Assignment Overview:

For the first time in my admittedly short teaching career, I created and oversaw a library scavenger hunt for my class this semester. As critics of the activity have argued, the library scavenger hunt is at risk of purposelessness, particularly if it’s not designed with clear pedagogical or research goals in mind. I really wanted my students to familiarize themselves with the physical space of the library and practice the digital research skills we’d engaged in previous classes—so despite my concerns, I proceeded with the controversial exercise. Overall, it was a success, but it’s certainly an activity whose contours you’d want to tailor to your particular class.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

One-Two Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Literary Criticism

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Scavenger hunt worksheets, enough for each student (should be created by the instructor prior to the class; see "Suggestions for Instructor Preparation")
Computers for student research (since the exercise takes place in the library, using the library computers works just fine or even better)

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

There are a variety of ways an instructor could set up for this activity, but here's what I did (and found successful):

We met in our regular classroom, where I distributed my twenty-question worksheet and broke them into teams (see "Suggestions for Instructor Preparation"). After everyone had a chance to read over the sheet, we walked over to the PCL together, whereupon I showed them where I’d be waiting on the ground floor in case they had any questions or when they were ready to submit their worksheets. I emphasized that they needed to submit their worksheets by the end of the class period, whether or not they were finished. Thanks to our 75-minute class period, they all had plenty of time to complete their work.

I did not require my students to stay with their team members at all times. I said they could remain together, or they could split up if they found it more efficient to do so, as long as they each turned into me a worksheet with answers that matched those of their teammates, to prove that they'd discussed their findings with one another.

For the first portion of the following class period, we reviewed their findings and discussed the commonly missed answers.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

First, I would strongly recommend having discussed digital research strategies and research goals for the class prior to this activity. We had already done these things, which was helpful because the digital research components of the exercise were much-needed practice but not first-time efforts (which undoubtedly saved time), and because they had a better understanding of why exactly I'd be encouraging them to find resources about Nigerian history, for example, when we were discussing a coming-of-age novel set primarily in Lagos (Chris Abani's GraceLand).

More immediately prior to the library scavenger hunt day, the instructor should create the scavenger hunt sheet. Because my own questions were so tailored to our specific class, I don't want to lay out our exact set of questions here, but here are some of the types of questions I found most productive:

Questions about relevant library resources. For example, I asked them how they'd obtain a copy of a certain book of which I knew UT didn't have a copy. Some of them already knew about Interlibrary Services, others decided to ask someone at the Help desk, etc.
Questions for which the answers could be found either digitally or physically. For example, I asked them to decide which chapter of a particular history book seemed like it would offer the most relevant context for a story we'd been analyzing in class. I chose this book purposely both because it was pertinent and because I knew it was available both via Google Books and in hard copy at the library. In our subsequent class discussion, we compared/contrasted strategies for tracking down digital vs. physical resources.
Questions that require students to consider the library's physical layout. That is, I asked them to find a particular book (the collection of short stories from which we had read) and then identify two others on nearby shelves that seemed relevant and interesting. A lot of them later indicated that even if they'd tracked down a book at the library before, they'd never thought to look around for pertinent titles in the area.
Questions that require just one extra step of Googling and/or that are solveable by using a series of different research strategies. For example, I asked them to find an article in Research in African Literatures about the novel we were reading. (I knew the journal had published several articles on the novel over the last ten years or so.) Most of them didn't know what Research in African Literatures was, but they all came up with an appropriate article, some because they'd Googled the journal title, others because they used library databases, and so forth. The various strategies they deployed to answer this question led us to an especially fruitful conversation later.

Ideally, the instructor should also assign teams in advance of the scavenger hunt. What worked well for me was to create an even distribution of English/Rhetoric majors, students with different class standings, etc., among the teams.

The instructor should also take into account questions of student mobility, disability, etc. I conferred with my students beforehand to make sure that the walk from the classroom to the library and the movement around the library was not at all burdensome for them.

Instructions For Students:

You have until the end of the class meeting to complete the library scavenger hunt worksheet. If you have any questions over the course of the scavenger hunt, you are welcome to come find me, but of course I can't give much away. You do not have to remain physically with your team members, but if you choose to split up research tasks, you must reconvene at the end to discuss your answers with one another. When you submit your worksheets, I will check to make sure that your sheets all have matching answers, to confirm that you've gone over everything with each other.

Evaluation Suggestions:

I scored their worksheets after class. The teams earned between 16.5 and 19 points out of a possible 20 points, so I was pretty happy with that result.

We also had a follow-up class discussion during our next meeting, which was a good opportunity to compare/contrast their various research strategies and to review the answers to commonly missed questions.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My students seemed to enjoy and learn from the activity. Among the gains they later mentioned were that they had mostly never thought about looking around the shelves for similar titles, that they got a better sense of the library's layout, that they were less anxious to ask for help from a librarian, and that they learned from each other's research strategies (ex. brainstorming different search terms). It also didn't hurt that getting out of the classroom for a day seemed like a novel experience for many of them.

Course Type:

Course Description:

Violence, social inequality, anarchy, authoritarianism, poverty, disease, natural disaster, manmade disaster: what makes a place truly dangerous, and for which people? And how can books that merely depict dangerous places seem so threatening that they themselves are deemed too risky for certain audiences? With a broad understanding of what might constitute “danger,” we will investigate these and other questions through reading banned fiction set in dangerous places around the world.

The primary aim of this course is to help students develop and improve the critical reading, writing, and thinking skills needed for success in upper-division courses in English and other disciplines. They will also gain practice in using the Oxford English Dictionary and other online research tools and print resources that support studies in the humanities. Students will learn basic information literacy skills and models for approaching literature with various historical, generic, and cultural contexts in mind.

This course contains a writing flag. The writing assignments in this course are arranged procedurally with a focus on invention, development through instructor and peer feedback, and revision; they will comprise a major part of the final grade.

Tags:

Kairos and Ideology Analysis: American Values and Contexts

Sloan — Mon, 27 Oct 2014 21:05:23 +0000

Image Credit:

W_Minshull

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment asks students to fill out a worksheet for analyzing the ideological presuppositions of two arguments that rely on a popular superhero, Captain America, to make their respective arguments. This assignment can be used to solidify student understanding of kairos and presuppositions.

Type of Assignment:

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

For students:

-Pen or pencil

-Worksheet (can be filled out on a computer through an LMS like Canvas or Blackboard, or in hard copy provided by instructor)

-The image and article to be analyze (either through a computer or in hard copy provided by instructor)

For instructor:

-Without classroom technology

-Hard copies of worksheet, comic book cover, and article for each student

-With classroom technology

-Projector to show image and article

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

The Captain America comic book cover published in April, 1942 features a larger-than-life Captain America physically subduing a stereotyped caricature of Japanese Emperor Hirohito. This cover appeared shortly after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, a historical event depicted on the cover itself. Students will analyze the kairos (Pearl Harbor and WWII) and the presuppositions about American values (victory through martial power, strength, an in-group mentality, patriotism, etc.) for this comic book cover.

They will compare the American values lauded in the comic book cover with the American values mobilized by the Sikh artist Vishavjit Singh. In 2013, Singh dressed up as Captain America and walked through New York City. He catalogues his experiences in the Salon.com article "Captain America in a Turban." Students will analyze the kairos (the Twin Towers terrorist attacks, discrimination against Sikhs in America) and the presuppositions about American values (diversity, inclusivity, etc.) for this article/ performance.

After filling out the worksheet on kairos and ideology, either for homework or in class, students should be encouraged to share their answers in a group discussion.

This assignment allows students to clearly see the connection between kairos and ideology by demonstrating how the same fictional character (Captain America) can be used to mobilize very different presuppositions and beliefs.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Instructors should decide whether students will be given hard copies of the worksheet, the comic book cover and the article. Instructors should also be prepared to answer student questions about the publication dates of each source, the relevant historical context and the larger performance project of Singh.

Students should also have alread been introduced to kairos and ideology.

Students should first be given preliminary information about the comic book cover and the article. They should be provided with the publication dates for each and told about the medium in which each appeared.

Instructions For Students:

I have pasted the instructions from the worksheet below. Before filling out the worksheet, students will need to know the publication dates of each source. The worksheet is also provided below in Additional Resources. The two sources are also linked below. My students took about twenty minutes to fill out the worksheet. We spent the remainder of the class discussing their answers.

Kairos and Ideology Critique: Captain America and American Values Worksheet

Name:

Rhetorical Analysis defines kairos as “both the occasion for discourse and the surrounding conditions that present the rhetor with opportunities and constraints: opportunities or openings to say certain things in certain ways; and constraints that limit what can be said and how” (9-10). We can think about kairos partially as the historical context for a controversy.

According to Rhetorical Analysis, ideology is “a set of presuppositions that influences most everything—people’s family lives, their political choices, their intimate and professional relationships. These presuppositions must be held by an entire social class, culture, or community” (185-86). Ideological analysis allows us to identify key beliefs and values held by a group of people.

Examine the Captain America comic cover from 1942 and the Salon article about the Captain America performance piece by Vishavjit Singh in 2013. Both sources are using the ethos of Captain America to make very different arguments. Answer the following questions:

What is the kairos for each source?

Are the sources “timely,” or, do they respond intelligently to their respective kairos? How so?

What does each source presuppose about American values? What values does the comic book cover ask you to share? What values does the performance piece ask you to share?

How do the values/beliefs about American culture in each piece match or mismatch the piece’s kairos?

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

This exercise seemed to make kairos and ideology readily accessible to some struggling students. The widely-known historical events of World War II and 9/11 helped clarify not only kairos, but audience as well. We talked about how the recent attack on Pearl Harbor helped create the audience for the comic cover and how an awareness of 9/11 made Singh's performance all the more relevant and powerful.

I did find it important to emphasize early on that the WWII comic cover uses racist imagery to make its argument. We had a very productive discussion about how the dehumanizing of Hirohito effectively concealed certain American ideological values like diversity while emphasizing others like exceptionalism and martial power.

Additional Resources:

April 1942 Captain America War Propaganda Comic Book Cover (Captain America punches a Monstrous Emperor Hirohito while Pearl Harbor Unfolds at their Feet)

Sept. 2013 Salon.com "Captain America in a Turban" (Sikh artist Vishavjit Singh describes his experience dressing up as Captain America and walking the streets of New York City)

Worksheet for Students:

Kairos and Ideology Critique: Captain America and American Values Worksheet

Name:

What is the kairos for each source?

Are the sources “timely,” or, do they respond intelligently to their respective kairos? How so?

What does each source presuppose about American values? What values does the comic book cover ask you to share? What values does the performance piece ask you to share?

How do the values/beliefs about American culture in each piece match or mismatch the piece’s kairos?

Course Type:

Course Description:

I used this lesson plan in RHE 309k: The Rhetoric of Superheroes, an intermediate writing course with special topics chosen each semester by the instructors. Students are taught writing, research, rhetorical analysis, and invention.

Tags:

Introducing Rhetorical Analysis with Contemporary Advertisements

sariddick — Thu, 02 Oct 2014 23:01:21 +0000

Author:

Sarah Riddick

Image Credit:

Mozart, Mike. "Smellcome to Manhood." JeepersMedia. Flickr. 2 Oct 2014. Web. <https://www.flickr.com/photos/jeepersmedia/12462069883/sizes/m/>.

Brief Assignment Overview:

The aim of this lesson is to provide students with an accessible and engaging introduction to rhetorical analysis. Students will view four brief texts—three thirty-second videos and one print advertisement—and try to identify the audience, the speaker, and the argument contained in each.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Introduce rhetorical analysis to students
Offer a broad illustration of the scope of rhetoric and rhetorical analysis
Familiarize students with initial components of rhetorical analysis (audience, speaker, argument)
Help students feel comfortable offering their own analyses

Media Requirements:

Media Console/Projector

Required Materials:

Media console with overhead projector
Class computer with internet connection
Preferable, but not essential: personal computers for brief individual research activity.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

This lesson is intended to provide a light, engaging, and accessible introduction to rhetorical analysis. Students will survey several contemporary advertisements that vary in a number of ways yet share some broad themes. The order of the texts is intended to subtly help the students progress from basic to more nuanced analyses.

The first moments of this class are open to suit the needs of the instructor. If this is the first day that students will be performing rhetorical analysis, it may be helpful to provide a brief overview of what is to come.

To begin the analytical portion of the class, play the first text—an Old Spice commercial from the 2010 "Smell Like a Man, Man" campaign. The commercial is both fun and funny, thus students should respond well to it. Moreover, its fast pace and quirky tone will likely get students laughing, which will hopefully loosen them up for analysis.

Once you have played the video, ask the following questions:

Who is the speaker?

Who is the audience?

What is the situation?

What is the argument?

What does the text want you to feel?

What does the text want you to believe?

What does the text want you to do?

How is the text making that argument?

Be sure to draw out detailed responses from the students. Play the video again, as needed. One reason this ad is great for an initial analysis is because it has two different speakers (i.e., the spokesman and the company), two different audiences (i.e., implicit and explicit), and plenty of components that students can draw on to support their answers to the argument questions.

Next, play the second and third videos. Each of these are 2008 advertisements from the Corn Refiner Association's "Sweet Surprise" campaign about high fructose corn syrup. Ask students the same series of questions, and encourage them to pay even closer attention to the details that help create this argument.

Once you feel that your students have adequately analyzed the argument in these two texts, have students go to the website featured at the end of the videos. If students don't have computers, do this together as a class. By this point, hopefully students will have mentioned that the text wants you to go to this website, so this can be a way of getting them to further test the text. Once there, have students try to identify any bias on the website and ask them to list specific examples. This is meant to encourage students to closely examine sources and to consider how word choice and other stylistic choices shape an argument.

If time permits, have students look at one more text—a 2014 print ad from the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. In the ad, one woman remarks about new public transportation changes and another woman responds, "Can't we just talk about shoes?" There are several broad parallels between this text and the former texts, so students should feel comfortable by now analyzing this form of visual rhetoric.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Given the brevity of both these texts and the follow-up questions, it would be a good idea to thoroughly familiarize yourself with each text before presenting them to the class. With this being an introduction to rhetorical analysis, students may feel shy about offering responses, so being prepared with many different ways to prompt their analyses can be helpful.

Instructions For Students:

For the group analysis portion of the class:

Answer the following the questions. Cite evidence to support your response.

Who is the speaker?

Who is the audience?

What is the situation?

What is the argument?

What does the text want you to feel?

What does the text want you to believe?

What does the text want you to do?

How is the text making that argument?

For the individual research portion of the class:

Go to http://www.sweetsurprise.com
Can you identify any bias?
Cite specific examples to support your response.

Evaluation Suggestions:

There is no evaluative component to this activity.

Course Type:

Course Description:

This lesson plan was designed for "Rhetoric and Writing", an introductory course.

Tags:

Using Comment Walls to Practice Rebuttal

Sloan — Fri, 18 Apr 2014 16:11:14 +0000

Author:

Casey Sloan

Image Credit:

Pixabay

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment asks students to think through the rhetorical practice of contributing to a discussion on a website's comment wall. After finding a video on YouTube, a blog entry, or an opinion article on an online news source, students will read through the comments section, locate effective and ineffective comments, and ultimately draft a possible contribution to the wall based on their understanding of any manifested disagreements. This exercise will highlight the importance of refutation, concession and rebuttal.

Type of Assignment:

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Rebuttal

Stasis

Style

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Social Media

Media Requirements:

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Late in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

Students will be asked to think critically about ways to effectively make an argument in a small amount of space, the "venue" of forum comment walls, the genre of the comment post, and the importance of fair, balanced rebuttals. This exercise also helps students understand the impace that rhetorical skills can have in real-world situation. Students will find an online argument that takes a position in their controversy (YouTube videos work well here), read through the comments section, identify a disagreement, evaluate various users' use of rebuttal, and, ultimately, insert theirown opinion. This assignment works in-class for rooms with computers with internet access. It can also be assigned as homework.

Before this lesson, define refutation, concession, and rebuttal for your students. Ask students to surf the web (a simple Google search worked well for my class) for a position within their controversy. Ask them to examine the argument, then read through the comments section. Ask them to find some examples of effective and ineffective responses to the argument. Ask them to think about why particular comments are convincing and why others are not. Are some responses simply offensive? Do they give faulty evidence? Do they give a fair summary of the argument or misrepresent it?

After your students have looking through the comment walls, have them report to the class or to small groups on their findings. The ensuing discussion should solidify the importance of a fair summary, concession, and refutation.

Ultimately, ask them to write less than 100 words offering a rebuttal to either the argument or to a comment they found particularly intriguing. Instruct them to focus on fairly representing their opponent's position and finding common ground before persuasively using refutation.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

This assignment requires computers with internet access. Decide beforehand whether this assignment will be performed in-class or as homework.

Instructions For Students:

Before this assignment, students should be introduced to the concepts of refutation, concession, and rebuttal. This is a great way to emphasize the importance of brief, fair summaries and of finding common ground, or points of stasis, with opposing positions.

1) Locate an argument online that participates in your controversy. Try using some key words in the Google search engine. Make sure the blog post, opinion news article, YouTube video, etc. has a comments section that you can access. Read through the argument, then read through the comments wall. What do people disagree with in the article? Where are commenters disagreeing with each other?

2) Pick two comments that you think are particularly effective in convincing the reader. Pick two that are particularly ineffective. How do these comments differ from each other? Which comments fairly represent the main argument? Which comments use concession? Which comments use refutation? How does each comment go about rebutting the main argument (or another comment)? Do any of the comments make faulty claims?

3) Write up your own comment that will contribute to the conversation on this forum. It must rebut either the main argument or another comment on the wall. Your rebuttal must be less than 100 words, offer a fair summary of your oppositon's position, and offer some point of concession.

Course Type:

Course Description:

I used this lession in an introductory rhetoric course.

Tags:

Using Flag Burning to Teach Icons, Symbols, and Speech Acts

Wiedner — Thu, 10 Apr 2014 19:09:40 +0000

Author:

James B. Wiedner

Image Credit:

"Plus" by Andre, "Fire" by Nick Abrams, "Equal" by Edward Boatman, and "Light Bulb" by Chris Brunskill, all from The Noun Project; (Flag Icon Is in Public Domain)

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students come to class having read read an analysis focused upon the importance of the seemingly minor distinctions between "icons" and "symbols" in the context of Texas v Johnson, the definitive Supreme Court case regarding the extent to which an American flag and/or the burning thereof is “speech,” and therefore protected by the First Amendment.

The class then explores the definitions of- and distinctions between- icons and symbols, analyzing the assigned reading’s contention that the majority and dissent opinions of the sharply divided court actually comes down to whether a flag in this context constitutes an icon or a symbol. Students then logon to classroom computers in pairs to find an example of one symbol and one icon. Students post their examples onto our Canvas discussion board with brief explanations as to why their choices do, in fact, constitute icons or symbols.

As time allows, the instructor puts the Canvas discussion page on the projector, and student postings are analyzed together as a class. The instructor assigns a brief follow-up reading.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Performance

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Vergobbi, David J. "Texas v. Johnson." Free Speech on Trial: Communication Perspectives on Landmark Supreme Court Decisions. Ed. Richard A. Parker. Tuscaloosa, Ala.: University of Alabama, 2003. 281-97. Print.

Classroom with enough computers to accommodate all students at two students per computer.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Full Assignment Description:

Speaking as generally as possible, this lesson plan seeks to help students think about the many different forms of rhetoric that exist aside from the written and spoken word. More specifically, the plan seeks to establish the ways in which actions, objects and images can constitute rhetoric. The definitions and uses of icons, symbols, and what the Supreme Court calls “speech acts” as rhetoric are then explored in the specific context of the definitive Supreme Court decision on the issue of flag burning, Texas v. Johnson (1989).

“Free Speech on Trial: Communication Perspectives on Landmark Supreme Court Decisions” is exactly what the title suggests. It is organized by chapters, with each chapter authored by a different attorney, judge, or legal scholar of note. Each chapter consists of a communications-based analysis of a different Supreme Court case, the vast majority of which revolve around First Amendment issues. A copy of the chapter entitled “Texas v. Johnson” from the collection is posted on Canvas several days before class, with instructions to read and make note of any questions they have while reading.

After a general class discussion on the reading, we focus our attention upon the primary contention of the article’s author. Specifically, that the conflicting opinions among the Supreme Court justices in this case came down to whether a particular justice viewed the burning flag as an icon or as a symbol, even though the justices were not aware that this is where their disagreement was founded.

The class discussion is directed in a quasi-Socratic method of instruction, with the instructor seeking to elicit contradictions among student responses to questions pertaining what it is that makes this case so nuanced and multi-layered. The instructor asks a question outright: “If a person just douses something in kerosene and lights it on fire without saying or writing a word, are they “speaking?” Again, a Socratic method is useful: asking students questions such as the above and challenging their answers with further questions and new contingencies lends itself to students rethinking their visceral responses to the original question, resulting in the class as a whole coming up with a more inclusive yet refined working definition of “speech.” We look at explicit and implicit reasoning in the Supreme Court’s analysis of the same question(s). Students are reminded that they’re allowed to disagree with the reasoning of a Supreme Court justice and that they shouldn’t be shy about challenging any of their statements and/or assumptions.

As we continue thinking about non-verbal rhetoric, the instructor directs the class to the portion of the assigned reading where the author begins elaborating upon his claim that whether the justices thought flag burning was speech or not came down to whether they treated the flag as an icon or a symbol. Given that even the Supreme Court wasn’t able to make sense of this icon/symbol distinction (or so says the article’s author), it should come as no surprise that students struggle with the nuance as well. Rhetoricians, linguists and the like disagree amongst themselves as to the precise definitions of these terms, but I tried to make the broad explanation that both icons and symbols are types of signs.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

There is no need to read the actual Supreme Court opinion in Texas v. Johnson. The instructor should, of course, have a firm grasp of the analysis of the case that the class has been assigned to read.

I also found it very helpful to spend time refining my own understanding of icons, symbols, signs and the like. There is much grey area and a fair amount of disagreement on some aspects of these concepts.

Instructions For Students:

Before class: Read the article posted on Canvas, making note of questions they have as they arise.

During class: Following class discussion, logon to the classroom computers in pairs, and find one example of an icon, and one example of a symbol, and to post both to the Canvas discussion board, along with brief explanations of their choices.

After class: Read a short “article” (in comic form) that will be available on Canvas after class. Create a short posting as to whether this follow-up reading helped clarify the symbol/icon distinction, and the way in which it did so.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

This lesson went over better than I ever expected. Although looking at these issues in the context of a Supreme Court decision might seem uniquely befitting a Rhetoric of Law course (which is what I teach), the issues discussed are of broad interest, and students don’t have to actually read any judicial decisions.

I would recommend pulling up the Canvas discussion page on the projector, and going through a few of student postings for as long as time allows (approximately 10 minutes).

Additional Resources:

The Noun Project- An excellent site full of simple icons and symbols to peruse. The images at the top of this lesson plan are all from the Noun Project.

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

http://nypost.com/2014/02/09/sugar-daddy-website-has-coeds-rationalizing...

Rhetorical Analysis of "Sugar Dating" Ads and Audience(s)

Wiedner — Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:59:46 +0000

Author:

James B. Wiedner

Image Credit:

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students work on argumentation techniques, rhetorical fallacies, and other concepts via reading a heavily-biased article from the New York Post discussing the relatively new but quickly growing phenomenon known as "sugar dating," which consists of web sites that pair older men (sugar daddies) who are willing to pay money for the company of young girls ("sugar babies"). The amount that any potential sugar daddy can range from several hundred to several thousand dollars.

While sugar dating sites seem to be happy to recruit young girls of all stripes, they are clearly most interested in attracting students, as evidenced in part by the fact that membership fees are waived for any potential sugar baby who registers with a .edu email address. The banner ad above is illustrative of most common underlying technique found on these sites. That is appealing to the fact that the typical undergraduate student is cash-strapped, and that being a sugar baby is an easy way to solve the problem. The titillating subject matter and the fact that half of the classroom are part of the demographic being so narrowly marketed towards caught everyone's attention from the get-go.

After they finish reading the article, displaying and bouncing through one of the sites on a projetor is great in a classroom that is equipped to do so, but it is by no means necessary.

The class is divided into two groups who assemble their respective arguments as to the propriety of selling such a product using the rhetorical appeals employed and the audience to which they are marketing (primary and otherwise); a loosely-moderated class debate/discussion ensues.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

One-Two Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Social Media

Visualization

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Increasing Classroom Participation, Building Rapport Between Students, Building Rapport Between Instructor and Individual Students, Building Rapport Between Instructor and Class as a Whole

Media Requirements:

No Classroom Technology Required

Required Materials:

Nothing other than copies of the article distributed by the instructor at the beginning of class.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

The instructor distributes copies of an article taken from the web site of what is generally regarded as a reputable source for news. The class has no access to the article beforehand. The instructor asks the class if any of them are familiar with “Sugar Dating;” calling on student(s) with raised hands to explain what sugar dating generally refers to. The instructor then elaborates on the definition provided, paraphrasing points that might have been lost in the student’s explanation, adding any aspects of the concept that were not mentioned in the process. (5 minutes)

Students read the article individually. (5-10 minutes) phenomenon

The class then divides into two equally-sized groups, and discuss positive and negative aspects of the concept of sugar dating in general, along with the article’s presentation of the concept. One group is identified as the “pro” group, with the other identified as the “con.” However, the instructor does not articulate a specific question upon which they are taking sides. The two groups each work to flush out and organize what they believe to be their most salient points. (10-15 minutes)

An open discussion in a point/counterpoint format is the conducted, with the instructor keeping the discussion from straying to far afield, while casually interjecting to emphasize and elaborate upon the concepts that are relevant to rhetoric and/or law as they arise during the discussion. It is important that the instructor is as unobtrusive as possible throughout the ensuing discussing, to the extent that the collective “personality” of a particular class will allow. (30 minutes for a class meeting twice a week)

The instructor wraps up the debate and the class by highlighting some of the most important substantive points and the most effective argumentation techniques from each side of the discussion. Students are informed that there is a discussion prompt related to the day’s discussion; each student must submit one original posting, along with at least one response to another student’s original posting before the next class meeting. (5-10 minutes)

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

To prepare for the class, the instructor should spend time analyzing the specific article to be distributed to the class, composing a rough outline of considerations such as (1) the arguments (and counterarguments) most likely to be made by students, (2) the rhetorical concepts the instructor is most interested in covering, (3) questions that the class discussion might not touch upon.

The instructor should also do their due diligence in researching the subject in general. Visiting the actual sugar dating web sites is especially important. Students will have varying degrees of knowledge on the subject. Given the fact that these sites specifically target female college students, there is a strong likelihood that at least a couple of students will be well-versed on the subject; the instructor does not want to be learning about nuances of the sugar dating process, etc. from one of their students.

Instructions For Students:

As indicated above, instructions to be given to students are minimal (intentionally so). They're instructed to take about 10 minutes reading the article being contemporaneously distributed, with particular attention to tone, word choice, authorial bias, context, and visual rhetoric. They are then divided into two groups with opposing viewpoints, and are instructed to construct the most persuasive argument that they can, taking rough notes (to be submitted at the end of class) outlining the same.

They're reminded to consider likely arguments from the other side, and the best way to address/respond to them. Students then partake in a debate wherein the instructor guides them back on track if they are getting off-topic, overly emotional, or missing each other entirely (from a stasis theory standpoint).

At the end of the class, the students are given instructions to make a substanive blog posting responding to an instructor-provided prompt; the will seek to continue aspect(s) of the in-class discussion. Along with one original blog posting, students are instructed to post at least one response to the original posting of a classmate.

There is not any reading students are instructed to do in preparation for the class.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

The article’s author has a clear bias from the title onward, so I ask for a show of hands as to who agrees with the author’s…unflattering…representation of sugar dating and their advertisement and recruitment techniques. To my surprise, about 18 of my 22 students said that they agreed with the author. To keep the group numbers equal, I (somewhat lightheartedly) pointed out that the pinnacle of achievement for any rhetorician is to be able to effectively argue a point with which they wholly disagree. As my class is entitled “Rhetoric of Law,” I pointed out that this skill is of particular importance to attorneys, given that they take an oath to be “zealous advocates” for their clients in court, even if those clients are individuals whom they might find repugnant on a personal level. I then split the class roughly in half, based only upon where they happened to be sitting (or standing) at that moment, and then moving individual students towards one of two camps in order to arrive at numerical parity. I did not give consideration as to what side any particular student chose during our initial show of hands.

This lesson plan is well-suited for developing familiarity between students, increasing student participation, and establishing rapport between the instructor and his students- both individually and as a class. For these reasons, the lesson plan might be particularly useful at the beginning of the semester, or later on if class participation begins lagging.

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

Tags:

Reading Text in Context

Laura Thain — Tue, 10 Dec 2013 06:00:42 +0000

Author:

Laura Thain

Image Credit:

NY Times

Brief Assignment Overview:

This in-class exercise encourages students to explore context for texts they are analyzing (rather than receiving such context from direct instruction) and then use visualization software in order to present their findings to their classmates.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Arrangement

Audience

Delivery

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Genre

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pre-Writing

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This exercise aims to empower students to define textual context that seems important to them at any stage of their encounter with a text.

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

Students need to have at least briefly encountered the textual object they are trying to contextualize. I usually conduct this exercise after their first section of reading.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Late in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

The purpose of this exercise is to empower student to explore useful historial context by giving them clear guidelines by which to conduct preliminary research and to introduce visualization tools to implement in presenting that research to their peers. This exercise works best if the instructor has already provided context for class readings on several occassions, giving students an idea of what such a presentation looks like.

I begin by passing out a handout that describes different types of context that students may explore. I then randomly assign students to one of five groups in order to explore and assemble that context into a presentation. Pasted below is a version of this context handout created for Ian Fleming's From Russia With Love:

Context-Building Exercise

GROUP 1 Historical Context

As a group, situate From Russia With Love (1957) within its historical context. What is important to our reading of the novel in the world of politics, science, culture, social movements, or national identity? Is gender important? Is race important? Is sexuality important?

You may use dipity (www.dipity.com) to make a historical timeline that includes pictures or other visuals to present to the class.

Useful Resources: Gale Virtual Reference Library, Wikipedia, scholarly websites/blogs

GROUP 2 Genre/History of Genre

The Bond canon belongs to the genre of the spy novel—but also, arguably, to the history of pulp fiction, thrillers, and adventure novels. How do you see this novel fitting into a genre history?

Useful Resources: Wikipedia, Gale Virtual Reference Library, Johns Hopkins Guide to Lit Theory and Criticism (http://litguide.press.jhu.edu/cgi-bin/search.cgi), scholarly websites/blogs

GROUP 3 Adaptations

The Bond canon has been adapted into many media, including radio, television, film, and comic books. Explore different adaptations of From Russia with Love or other Bond novels and report to the class your findings.

Useful Resources: Wikipedia, YouTube, Google

GROUP 4 Consumer Culture

James Bond is a popular character in consumer culture (that is, culture revolving around things we buy). From video games to artwork to memorabilia, Bond is alive and well in the marketplace. Find objects of consumer culture throughout the history of Fleming’s novels to present to the class, especially objects related to From Russia With Love.

Useful resources:

Google image search, Ebay, Amazon, Etsy

GROUP 5 Reception and Publication History

How was From Russia With Love received? Did it remain in print? How do different printings differ (for instance, how does the cover art change)? Did audience attitudes toward the novel change over time? Find some original reviews and later commentary that tells you something about the reception history of the text.

Useful Resources: Use the Newspaper/Reviews tab here to find original reviews: http://www.lib.utexas.edu/subject/english/index.html

Amazon, Google, Goodreads

I then briefly present Dipity and Prezi to the class and encourage them to use these tools to create an informal presentation in the latter half of class. I also suggeted that Google Docs might be a useful tool in collaborating on the materials they researched to better ease the translation of that material into a final product. I then divide them into five groups--with a full class, this means three or four students per group. Be sure to instruct the class on how long you will give them to complete their presentation and give warnings as that time elapses. Our class is 70 minutes, and so I allowed 35 minute for assembly and 35 minutes for presentations.

In a shorter class, you may ask students to prepare presentations in class one day and present them during the next class period. In a classroom where each student does not have a lab computer, you may ask them to bring their own laptops or give this assignment out in advance, asking students to compile their materials as homework (over Google Docs and/or Prezi, a web-based collaborative presentation software) and present them to each other in class.

As they worked on their presentations, I walked around and checked their progress, answering questions or offering suggestions. When 35 minutes elapsed, I invited groups to the main proctoring station to access their projects and present them to their classmates.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

You may want to have some materials ready to suggest for each category in case your students get stuck--but letting students express their own contextual interests in their presentation is crucial to this exercise.

Instructions For Students:

Students need only be familiar with the text they are contextualizing, although you might ask students to familiarize themselves with the visualization softwares above before class.

Evaluation Suggestions:

Because empowering student research and presentation is central to this exercise, be cautious to criticize what students find; rather, praising innovative or clearly relevant material helps demonstrate to them that the details they present are appropriate.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

If students feel rushed, emphasize that the exercise is informal and encourage quality collaboration over quantity of information.

Course Type:

Literary Studies Course

Course Description:

I teach a ninety-minute class period of Literature and Popular culture, which is a varient of Literature Across the Disciplines (E314J). The course seeks to explore the intersections of literature and popular culture from the point of view of mass readership and other forms of mass media. The course requires students to consider mediation through the lens of culture, history, and media theory as they engage in close reading and analysis.

Tags:

Teach Pathos through Politics -- the French Revolution

Moench — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 03:18:59 +0000

Author:

B.D. Moench

Image Credit:

Prise de la Bastille, by Jean-Pierre-Louis-Laurent Houel

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment connects the rhetorical concepts pathos and logos with the critique of Enlightenment rationalism by classical conservative philosopher Edmund Burke.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Partial Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Kairos

Logos

Pathos

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Multimedia

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

No specific materials required

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

Begin by reviewing the concepts pathos, logos, and kairos. After this review, provide a brief introduction to Burke's conservative philosophy, making sure to address that his most famous ideas were written in reaction to the French Revolution. Explain that in order for the class to truly understand Burke's philosophy they need to understand a little something about the events of the French Revolution. Today they will do something a little new--they will collaboratively learn history through their own online research. Together they are going to inform themselves, and each other, of the events and social movements Burke found so repugnant.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Instructors should come prepared to discuss Burke's philosophy, his history, as well as the ideas and the basic history surrounding the French Revolution, as well as, a brief timeline of key events.

Instructions For Students:

Organize your students in teams of three or four. Depending on class size, you should end up with four or five teams. Have each team member log-in to their nearest computer terminal. Assign team one the phrase "the Reign of Terror." Assign team two the name "Robespierre." Assign team three the term "Jacobin" (and, if you are feeling adventurous, the term "Girondin" as well). Assign team four the phrase "the Storming of the Bastille." Assign team five the term "guillotine." Give teams seven or eight minutes to research their respective terms online. After this initial period, ask groups to convene and elect a group member to present what they've discovered. Usually each team comes back with unique information but, also, a great many congruencies. Between all the information presented, after roughly ten or fifteen minutes of discussion, an approximate picture of the excesses of the French revolutionaries will begin to take shape.

Now, with the students feeling more ownership over these historical events, proceed to explain how Burke believed Enlightenment rationalism--overestimated the role of logic, or logos, in human decision-making; underplayed the role of emotion, or pathos, in human affairs; entirely misunderstood the time and opportunity costs, or kairos, involved in any rearrangement of culture or political governance. Making these rhetorical connections can sometimes be difficult, and, for this reason, I only suggest tackling this lesson mid semester once your students' understanding of these rhetorical concepts is solid and deeply rooted.

Evaluation Suggestions:

No evaluation necessary.

Additional Resources:

In order for your students to truly understand how rhetorical concepts relate to Burke's ideas, I suggest pairing this assignment with a short selection from Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France. I recommend a chapter entitled "Society, Reverence, and the 'True Natural Aristocracy'" and another entitled "Appeal From the New to the Old Whigs."

Course Type: