DWRL Lesson Plans - Rhetorical Analysis

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

Enthy/memes: Making Memes to Teach Logos

regina.mills — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 02:16:34 +0000

Author:

Regina Marie Mills

Image Credit:

Traquan Minor, created on imgflip.com

Brief Assignment Overview:

To pratice creating and breaking down enthymemes, I had students create memes (about anything), break down the stated and unstated premises and ultimately, come to a conclusion as to the meme's argument.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Multimedia

Visualization

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

If not in a technology-based classroom, then having students bring laptops to class or having them do this at home (after modeling it and providing examples) would also work.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Intermediate Writing Course

Full Assignment Description:

I usually take about 30 minutes for this, including time for us to break down enthy/memes (ex. Hipster Little Mermaid) together. You should have gone over enthymemes in a previous lesson and reviewed them before doing the assignment. I used this assignment in a unit focusing on rhetorical analysis, allowing students to both create and break down enthy/memes. You could also just let students break down the enthy/memes. After we break down the examples, I give students suggested memes and meme-generating websites to use (memegenerator.net or imgur.com/memegen but you can google "meme generator" and find many others). Then they are given about 20 minutes to make the meme, break down its stated and unstated premises and then post it to Discussion Board or some other class forum for student and instructor feedback.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Find a few memes that you think are current enough to use as "enthy/meme" examples. You can use joke ones that are steeped more in cultural knowledge rather than direct argument (ex. All Your Base) to begin with but also be sure to use ones that are making more nuanced arguments. Create exemplars for them to view which show what kind of structure you want them to use when breaking down their enthymeme. Have these available on a class website or other source. Be sure to scout out some meme generator sites and give them to students so that they don't waste time trying to pick one out.

Instructions For Students:

Students wil break down your example "enthy/memes" as a whole group exercise, and if desired (though this would make the activity longer), in small group settings. Once they have seen a few exemplars, they will go to a meme-generator site, create their own meme and then break down the premises (stated and unstated) in their meme along with the main argument of the meme. They will then post this to an on-line class forum for feedback. I usually give students 20 minutes to do this and if some students are very creative, I encourage them to do more than one. I have also done this in pairs, in case students are afraid that they can't come up with something good enough on their own in the time given.

Evaluation Suggestions:

I often grade this as a participation grade or as a grade for homework. This should not be a major grade and can even be just an informal assessment. However, I highly suggest having students view and comment on other classmates' work and also for the instructor to leave feedback which focuses on how well they broke down the premises of the enthy/meme.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Overall, this has been a popular lesson and one that some of my colleagues have taken up in their classes as well. It's important to let students know that you aren't grading them on cleverness but rather on the ability to make and break down an argument by enthymeme. Some students feel flustered and think there isn't enough time, or get bogged down in making a "great" enthymeme, so you can choose to give more time or to give students who do not have a polished product in class a chance to turn it in by a certain time in the evening as homework as to alleviate that stress. However, students have loved the chance to be creative and that they get to play with something that they are very familiar with. I think it helps them re-think the meme as something a bit more complex. As a teacher who finds teaching logos so hard, it helped me feel more comfortable as well as it helped to make the enthymeme more tangible.

Additional Resources:

Here is another exemplar meme created by my students. As you can see, this can allow for deeper analysis of issues like race, sex, class, sexuality, disability, etc. You could even use this as an exemplar in class and break down the stated and unstated premises (and how it works to subvery them) as a class to see how memes can be thought-provoking as well.

Successful Black Man.jpg

Course Type:

Course Description:

I assigned this in a RHE 309K class, which is a class just a step above the introductory writing course. Many students who tested out of the introductory RHE 306 take this class as well as others who are required to take it by the school or major they are pursuing. This class is still focused on writing but centers around a particular topic/controversy in order to teach those skills.

Tags:

Enthymeme

Logos

Rhetorical analysis

Introducing Rhetorical Analysis with the 1491s

Grewe — Fri, 03 Oct 2014 16:45:11 +0000

Author:

Lauren Grewe

Image Credit:

Image from the 1491s, "I'm An Indian Too," youtube video.

Brief Assignment Overview:

This lesson plan uses the 1491s' youtube videos "I'm an Indian Too" and "Lincoln Was a Douche" to introduce students to rhetorical analysis.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Rhetorical Analysis

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Historical Context

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Learning how to research on computers for contextual, historical and biographical information.

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Preferably a computer for each student group. However, if students bring in tablets or laptops, this lesson plan could be adapted to classrooms without computers for each student.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

Recently, the 1491s appeared on Jon Stewart's The Daily Show to address the controversy over the name of the Washington football team. I have based this lesson plan on the assumption that students perhaps saw The Daily Show episode, but probably do not know who the 1491s are. I want to use this assignment to introduce them to the 1491s and to rhetorical analysis at the same time. After reviewing the chapter on rhetorical analysis and upcoming assignments, I would have the students watch the 1491s' "I'm an Indian Too" on youtube. As a class, we would discuss questions about speaker, audience, situation, and argument. For example, who is the audience for this youtube video? Are they explicit or implicit? Who are the speakers in this video (which doesn't have any obvious speakers, aside from the singer). Next, I would have them get into groups and watch the 1491s' "Lincoln Was a Douche" youtube video. Then, in their groups, I would have them answer the questions on the 1491s worksheet about audience, speaker and text. After they've completed that task, we would discuss their groups' answers. Then I would ask them to think about how researching the 1491s and the historical context of Lincoln's hanging of the Indians would change how they view the video. They would then get on their individual computers and try looking for contextual, historical and biographical information about the 1491s and the historical event they reference in the "Lincoln Was a Douche" video. After giving them some time to research, we would discuss as a class their findings.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Familiarize yourself with the 1491s through their youtube channel and appearance on The Daily Show. Also review questions about audience, speaker, and text.

Instructions For Students:

Once you have watched the 1491s' "I'm an Indian Too" on youtube as a class, engage in a discussion about the speaker, audience, situation, and the text's argument. Next, get into groups to watch the 1491s' "Lincoln Was a Douche" and answer the questions on the worksheet about audience, speaker, and text. Finally, get on computers, and try looking for contextual and biographical information about the 1491s.

Evaluation Suggestions:

Go around to the different groups and check in during the group work about how they're doing and if they're understanding the breakdown of rhetorical analysis. When the students are working individually researching on the computers, again go around the class checking in with the students and suggesting key terms to look up about the 1491s and the hanging.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

I think the students were challenged by the 1491s, but in a productive way. Thinking about the audience, speaker and text and possible arguments the 1491s might have been making with these videos led to interesting discussions about representations of Native Americans in the media.

Additional Resources:

The 1491s: “Lincoln Was a Douche” Exercise

After watching the 1491s’ sketch “Lincoln Was a Douche,” answer the following questions in your group about speaker, audience, situation and text.

Who is the speaker?

Is it a single person? A company? An ad firm?

Is there a difference between the “ostensible” speaker, the “real” speaker, and the “implied” speaker?

Who is the audience?

Is it implicit? Explicit? Ideal? Real?

What values does this audience have?

What concerns them?

What is the situation?

What contextual evidence? In which venue does this source appear?

What is the history behind this text?

What is the exigency?

What is the text arguing?

The text argues that____________________________________________.

Is this argument implicit or explicit?

What reasons does the author give for this argument?

What evidence does the author provide in support of this argument?

Course Type:

Course Description:

This lesson plan was designed for a Rhetoric 306 course.

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:

Annotation and Analysis with Genius.com (Formerly Rapgenius)

Emily Lederman — Tue, 30 Sep 2014 22:02:18 +0000

Author:

Emily Lederman

Image Credit:

Genius.com

Brief Assignment Overview:

This lesson plan builds on Andrew Uzendoski's lesson on teaching close reading using Rap Genius (now called Genius), focusing on teaching students the process of annotation, as well as how to articulate the building blocks of their close reading practice. Students receive feedback from the instructor on a close reading assignment in the form of annotations. They work both individually and in groups to close read and then annotate excerpts from a text using the interactive online knowledge project, Genius.com.

Type of Assignment:

Oxford English Dictionary (OED)

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

One-Two Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Rhetorical Analysis

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Close Reading

Historical Context

Literary Criticism

Poetry

Structure and Form

Textual Analysis

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Annotation

Writing Process

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Software

Visualization

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

-Computer for each students

-Projector to present

-Texts

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

Prior to the Genius lesson, I assigned students a close reading activity for homework. They had produced one-paragraph close readings from selected short lines of poetry--their first fully independent close reading work. They were asked to make an argument about the meaning and importance of the lines that included both the how and why of literary analysis. In other words, students needed to identify something they found important about word choice, structure, etc. (this was the what) and then explain how they knew this was true (finding evidence), and finally articulate why the author made this choice. (These pieces of writing were used as building blocks for full close reading--skills we had been working on in class; I had previously given them several examples of complete analytical thoughts). I then annotated their written paragraphs to identify the "hows" and "whys" or to point out the missing evidence and explanation. We went over several examples using the projector. As we discussed my comments and ways to improve their close readings, I introduced the term "annotation" and we talked about how annotating can be used to improve their reading comprehension. This mini-lesson was useful in making sure that students both understood my feedback and began to learn the skills of active reading.

At the end of this class I had students make accounts with Genius, read their introductory page, and explore the website. Genius allows students to see a public community of annotators at work and in conversation, as well as understand how the annotations can enhance meaning. I was glad that the text we were reading, Junot Diaz's Drown, was not up on the site and annotated, as I wanted my students to engage their own critical thinking skills before they read other people's criticism.

During the next class I assigned students to five small groups (4-5 students) and asked each student to login to Genius. Each group had a different short excerpt (1-2 paragraphs) from the previous night's reading to annotate. Students were asked to look up words in the OED or by using other resources (as they were often looking up Spanish and Dominican slang) and explain these, as well as provide succinct close reading paragraphs that made an argument about the meaning and importance of certain words, phrases, sentences (building on the previous assignment). They began by doing the work individually, but enjoyed seeing one another's comments appear on the page, and I encouraged them to engage in conversation as they annotated, as well as afterward.

The groups presented their annotations to the class. Each group member was required to present at least one annotation. As a class, we discussed methods for strengthening each of the close readings and I explained how these paragraphs might be incorporated into their upcoming papers on the text. Because of the genius of Genius, students were able to comment on or revise one another's annotations. They are also aware that their work exists in the public sphere and may be edited by any member.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

-Introduce the building blocks or steps of close reading over the course of several classes

-Grade a close reading assignment using annotations that identify different aspects of the student's close reading (evidence and explanation, or "hows and whys")

-Prepare several examples of this completed assignment to show to the class (ask students for permission if projecting their work)

-Prepare students for the activity in a previous class by having them join Genius, read the introductory material, and explore the website

-Upload 5-6 excerpts from the next reading assignment to Genius (feel free to contact Jeremy Dean, Education Czar and alum, for help or advice: jeremy@genius.com)

-Split the class into groups

Instructions For Students:

HW Assignment (close reading building blocks--I provide an example of each of the following steps. I also provide them with a packet on close reading that we review as a class prior to this assignment):

1. Choose 2 lines from "Howl." Follow the steps below to produce a well-supported argument about the meaning of these lines.

2. Paraphrase. First you will need to make sure that you understand all the words in these lines (use the OED). Next, state what is said and/or what happens in your own words.

3. Make a list of observations about these lines. What's important? Refer only to details from these two lines. This will be your evidence.

4. Analyze. Now you need to consider the meaning of these observations. In at least two seperate complete sentences, describe how and why two of the above observations/details contribute to the meaning of this selection.

5. Argue. Produce a one-paragraph argument about the meaning of this selection. Each of your explanatory claims must be supported by evidence from these two lines.

Genius Group Activity

-Read over my feedback on your close reading hw assignment

-Find your assigned excerpt in Drown and reread this section to familiarize yourself

-Sign-in to Genius.com and search for the excerpt

-Begin by looking up any words you do not immediately understand, using the OED or other databases

-Next, annonate these words, explaining their meaning and situating them within the passage

-To Annotate: highlight the selection and click the "annotate" button that pops up, then enter your text into the textbox. Note: if someone has already annoated this selection, you may add your own text by highlighting the selection from right to left.

-Now, begin to close read the passage, adding annotations that provide context or further explanation

-Finally, choose a phrase or sentence that you find integral to the excerpt's meaning. Using the close reading steps, produce a one paragraph annotation of this material

-Discuss your annotations as a group and prepare to report back to the rest of the class

Evaluation Suggestions:

I did not grade this assignment (except as a contributing factor to students' participation grades) but students will soon submit a short paper on the text that will showcase their active reading and close reading skills--skills that hopefully further developed through their use of Genius. We did evaluate almost every annotation as a class, considering ways to improve students' articulations.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Students seemed excited about this assignment and were generally very positive about the results of their work. Several of them told me they loved using Genius (and most were learning about it for the first time). Next time, I think I would annotate an excerpt as an entire class (to go over process and discuss best practices) and maybe spend more time introducing the website rather than letting students explore individually, as it took a while for some students to start their annotations. I would also prefer smaller groups and more excerpts, so that each student had the opportunity to provide a substantial close reading, rather than one or two students from each group dominating the annotating!

Course Type:

Literary Studies Course

Course Description:

The banning of books continues today in the United States, speaking both to the fear of certain ideas and the power of the written word. In this course, students will read banned novels, short stories, and poems across cultural and temporal contexts, pursuing the following questions: What causes a text to be labeled “indecent” or “dangerous”? How is literature connected to political and social movements? How do these texts contribute to our understanding of what constitutes American literature?

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

Tags:

Advertising Agency

Cowan — Mon, 29 Sep 2014 20:13:29 +0000

Author:

Jake Cowan

Image Credit:

Imaginary Forces

Brief Assignment Overview:

Help your students realize when they're being advertised to by helping them turn the tables on the Don Drapers of the Internet.

Type of Assignment:

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

One-Two Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Open Access Software

Visualization

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

As part of their preliminary research outside of the classroom, students doing this assignment will need to participate on at least one social media platform, such as Facebook or Twitter. While the actual assignment is designed so that every student has access to a computer in the classroom (laptops would suffice), it could easily be adapted to only use pen and paper.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Intermediate Writing Course

Full Assignment Description:

From the minute we wake up to when we fall asleep — and probably while we dream — we are the objects of advertisements. Even if we have long gone without a TV, we are advertised to constantly through the social networking sites we use daily. Ads are on our Facebook pages, in our Twitter feeds, alongside our Google searches — and not only are they impossible to escape, but they seem to hauntingly follow us around like the eyes of the Mona Lisa. In the era of big data, advertising agencies know just about everything there is to know about you: Your age, your gender, your relationship status, your likes and dislikes; and increasingly websites curate your experience based on those statistics. This assignment aims to help students recognize those rhetorical structures telling them to buy buy buy by helping them flip the tables and write their own ads.

This assignment consists of two parts:

A brief homework assignment to be completed the night before. In a one-page paper, students will need to make note of various personalized ads directed at/to them on either Facebook or Twitter. Each student must catalogue at least 4 of these, with at least one screenshot included in the text itself for clarity. The should summarize, in just a few words, what product each ad is for, the visual content of the advertisement, and the overall message. They should then try to identify trends between the ads and any rhetorical strategies these miniature texts might be employing to convince you to click on them. Finally, the students should spend a paragraph reflecting on what the ads suggest about the object's specific ethos, at least in the eyes of the companies mining your data and selecting these ads. Speculatively, what might someone assume about the viewer of these ads having never met him or her before? Who do these admen think the student really is? Are they right? What did they miss and what did they hit on the head?
An in-class exercise that utilizes classroom technology to create personalized ads. At the beginning of class, students should pair up and share their one-page papers, taking a few minutes to discuss the details of the ads, what they missed, and what their partner liked (or didn't) about these particular posts. After the brief one-on-one meeting, the students should again break up, moving to computers in order to create a new ad for their partner as would appear on a Facebook or Twitter page. The new ad should be highly visual, so the students should use a site like PicMonkey or Canva to design the perfect piece of content; should there be no computers or too few, pen and paper would be sufficient. Based on their discussions, each student should decide on what product their partner would likely want to buy, how it can be presented in order to make it more enticing, and which social media site it would make most sense to appear on. Once they are finished, the students should somehow share their work with their partners, discussing what they had in mind and why they made the choices they did; the partner should likewise talk about whether or not they find this particular ad engaging — if it were on Facebook, would they click 'Like'?

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Other than preparing for the above, which would include familiarizing oneself with sites like Canva or PicMonkey, instructors should prepare a short introductory lecture on the rhetorical principles behind advertising campaigns. Rhetorical analyzing ads can be highly instructive, since their message always boils down to the same injunction: buy this product. Of course, there are a number of strategies that ads utilize to make that argument — humor, nostalgia, subconcious familiarity (i.e., Coke making ads so that people think of their product first to quench their thirst). A short video clip like this clip from Buzzfeed might help, or show a few famous ads and discuss those with your students.

Instructions For Students:

The closer that students pay attention to the ads that show up on their social networking sites, and the more they consider what might have prompted this particular content, the more interesting this assignment will be. Did she search for anything recently that would suggest she like watching horror movies? Did he click 'Like' on anything or follow anyone new that would suggest that he likes eating at Chili's? What ads do you like, and what about them makes those ads memorable? Additionally, when it comes to creating ads, students shouldn't worry about whether or not their partner needs an item — trust me, agencies don't worry about that at all — but how to make what you're selling appear indispensable and interesting. For additional and helpful reading, students might find this recent NYTimes article on Facebook ads worthwhile.

Evaluation Suggestions:

As with most in-class assignments, I pay attention more to participation than to the success of the assignment — whether or not someone would actually be convinced to buy a product based off of one of these ads shouldn't factor in to the grading rubric. Creativity and critical insight matter more than the productive part of the assignment.

Course Type:

Course Description:

This assignment was originally designed for a class on the rhetoric of the digital divide, which included a unit on what has been called the "filter bubble."

Teaching Credibility with Twitter

Schultz — Sun, 28 Sep 2014 23:48:25 +0000

Author:

Patrick Shulz

Image Credit:

Twitter

Brief Assignment Overview:

Introducing the concept of credibility by analyzing tweets.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Assignment Length:

Partial Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Ethos

Rhetorical Analysis

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Close Reading

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Multimedia

Social Media

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Twitter

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

This in-class exercise/discussion gets students to think about author credibility. It familiarizes them with concepts and terminology they will need 1) when researching and writing papers and 2) for rhetorical analysis.This lesson plan is based on a paper studying the credibility of Twitter users ("Tweeting is believing?", available online: http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/155374/tweet_credibility_cscw2012.pdf). In this study, participants rate the credibility of tweets such as the following:

First step: To start things off, students rate the credibility of these tweets (or bring your own). They then come up with criteria that influenced their ratings.

In the study, among the most important indicators of credibility are:
1) "verified author topic expertise", "author often tweets on topic",
2) "personal photo as user image", "credible user name"
3) "non-standard grammar/punctuation".
4) "is a RT [retweet] from someone you trust"

The students will come up with similar criteria. To illustrate, teachers can then show made-up tweets such as:

@SillyKitty95
There is life on Mars.
v.
@NASA
There is life on Mars.
v.
@SillyKitty95
RT @NASA: There is life on Mars.
v.
@NASA
There is life on Mars ;).
v.
@NASA
Their's life on Mars.

For each example, students discuss which feature affects the tweet's credibility in what way.
Second step: The point, obviously, is then to point out how these criteria apply to TV news, newspaper editorials, books, research articles, and other publications that students work with every day. Since a lot of students work with newspaper editorials in RHE 306, I try to make it explicit for that genre: What is the equivalent to a credible user name? How do we assess "verified author topic expertise" in this context? Can we find out whether the author often "tweets" about this topic? What is the newspaper equivalent to a retweet? A short discussion of differences (edited content v. social media) could/should/might follow.
As a third step, students should try to apply these ideas to their own writing. Some, such as "non-standard grammar", will be obvious. But what are other ways of improving credibility? They might discuss how to signal author expertise (e.g. by citing external research), how to present a "personal photo" in writing (e.g. discussing personal experience and background) and how the use of non-standard grammar/punctuation will affect their credibility.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Read the paper. Bring some tweets to class, made-up or real. Any part of the paper may be used in class: "Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copiesbear this notice and the full citation on the first page."

Instructions For Students:

See above.

Evaluation Suggestions:

No evaluation.

Course Type:

Course Description:

RHE 306. Rhetoric and Writing
An introductory writing course that includes instruction in practical reasoning and the principles of rhetoric.

Villains versus Villains: Writing Persuasive Dramatic Monologues

lazhu — Fri, 18 Apr 2014 06:09:01 +0000

Author:

Lily Zhu

Image Credit:

Movies and Candy

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students work in groups to compose persuasive, dramatic monologues from the perspectives of famous, fictional villains.

Their goal is to convince the audience that the fictional, villainous actions committed were justified or, at the very least, sympathetic. This assignment focuses on voice, audience, and ethos.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Partial Class Period

No Classroom Technology Required

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Invention

Style

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Multimedia

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

In preparation for their final paper (in which students choose a particular written form and publication venue – with very specific styles – to “publish” their argumentative essay), students will practice developing a consistent persona, recognizing the importance of context and audience. Writing from the perspective of an “unlikable” or unsympathetic figure will force students to exercise more awareness when modulating tone and more precision when structuring their syllogisms.

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

No technology is required although the availibility of desktops/laptops would make this assignment easier for the students.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Late in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

Have your students watch or read an excerpt of a villainous speech you’ve found commendable or seductive. In my case, I showed a YouTube clip of Zorg’s (Gary Oldman’s) speech from The Fifth Element.
(As an added bonus, I later showed a clip of Al Pacino’s irreverent speech as John Milton from The Devil’s Advocate)

I also gave them a printed version of the monologue so that they could follow along

Priest Vito Cornelius: I try to serve life. But you only seem to want to destroy it.

Zorg: Oh, Father. You're so wrong. Let me explain.

[Puts an empty water glass on his desk]

Zorg: Life, which you so nobly serve, comes from destruction, disorder, and chaos. Now take this empty glass. Here it is: peaceful, serene, boring. But if it is destroyed -

[Pushes the glass off the table. It shatters on the floor, and several small machines come out to clean it up]

Zorg: Look at all these little things! So busy now! Notice how each one is useful. Why a lovely ballet ensues, so full of form and color. Now, think about all those people that created them. Technicians, engineers, hundreds of people, who will be able to feed their children tonight, so those children can grow up big and strong and have little teeny weeny children of their own, and so on and so forth. Thus, adding to the great chain of life. You see, father, by causing a little destruction, I am in fact encouraging life. In reality, you and I are in the same business.

Students are told to engage in a detailed analysis, breaking down rhetorical elements of the chosen monologue. How does the speaker twist his/her morally reprehensible actions/behaviors into positive ones?

Because Zorg’s speech was based on an 1850 essay by Frédéric Bastiat, I had my students read a portion of that text (That Which is Seen and That Which is Unseen) – “the parable of the broken window” - and discuss how Bastiat essentially deconstructs and points out the flaws of Zorg’s argument (and any like his).

Students are then divided into groups of threes. They must pick a tv show, film, book, comic, game, etc. with a clear villain/antagonist everyone in the group is familiar with (this ensures equal contribution).

Depending on the amount of time the instructor plans to spend on this assignment, the requirements can be adjusted. I told my students to

“Write a dramatic monologue of at least 2 paragraphs from that character’s perspective, justifying a major villainous action or story arc. Be sure to make use of ethos and pathos (e.g. The Tragic Back Story or The Misunderstood Misfit).

Be as serious as possible. You may use humor, satire, irony, etc. when appropriate, but that is no excuse for weak argumentation and sloppy writing. Style and voice matter! Stay in character.”

Students then posted their completed monologues to a discussion board and had the option of presenting their speeches in front of their classmates. I had a class of 14 and the major villains were: Lotso from Toy Story 3, Captain Hook from Peter Pan, Magneto from X-Men, and Scar from The Lion King.

Though we ran out of time, the final bonus round involved a villains versus villains debate. The groups were to compose brief arguments as to why each was the most ethically sound, or least morally problematic antagonist.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Find an interesting sample speech, and if possible, a complementing one that serves as a foil or rebuttal.

Instructions For Students:

1. Contribute to class discussion

2. Contribute to group work (analyzing and writing)

3. See assignment description

Evaluation Suggestions:

The interactive, creative component of this assignment – and making sure that the groups were small – helped motivate every student to go all in. This is more of a participation grade than anything else.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Many of the students were very excited about their final product and enjoyed looking at ethos and voice from this perspective.

Course Type:

Course Description:

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:

Cultural Context

Historical Context

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

Intermediate Writing Course