DWRL Lesson Plans - Rhetorical Fallacies

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Rhetorical Fallacies

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Remix

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Preferably, each student or at least each student group would have their own computer on which to read the Amazon reviews. Alternatively, a few students could bring in laptops or tablets to share with their groups.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

Go over the Rhetoric 306 chapter that discusses concession, refutation and rebuttal. Then, introduce the students to the "sexy" women's PhD costume on Amazon. Have them get into groups and read the customer reviews for the costume. They should identify which reviews use concession, refutation or rebuttal. In the case of refutation, they should identify the flawed rhetorical argument. After they complete this task, discuss their results as a class. Then, have them work individually to write their own reviews of whatever product they want, using either concession, refutation, or rebuttal in their counter arguments.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Prepare a powerpoint of the chapter discussing concession, refutation and rebuttal.

Instructions For Students:

Have the students get on their computers and look up the "sexy" women's PhD Halloween costume on Amazon. Then, get into groups and identify concession, refutation and rebuttal in the reviews of this product. After you've done that you will discuss your findings as a class. Next, you will be writing your own Amazon reviews of whatever product you'd like, using elements of concession, refutation, and rebuttal.

Evaluation Suggestions:

No evaluation necessary.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My students really enjoyed reading the witty Amazon reviews of the costume. Some were inspired by the sarcastic concessions and rebuttals and modeled their own reviews after those they had read.

Additional Resources:

See this article on women PhDs' responses to the costume.

Course Type:

Course Description:

This is for use in the Rhetoric 306 class.

Tags:

Halloween

Concession

Refutation and Rebuttal

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:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

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:

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:

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.

"Creating" Visual Rhetoric Through Student-Designed Flash Games

lazhu — Sat, 09 Nov 2013 08:07:39 +0000

Author:

Lily Zhu

Image Credit:

Mars Cafe

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment gives students a chance to make their own (very elementary) argumentative, flash game. By actively engaging in the process of game design, students will have to think through their intentions and the process of piecing together visual, aural, and verbal rhetoric.

Type of Assignment:

Major Course Project

Semester-long Project

Assignment Length:

Semester-long Project

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Video Games

Visualization

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This is meant to be a long-term group project (at least a month), ideally assigned as a final media presentation which sums up elements of effective argumentation in an entertaining, yet carefully thought out, fashion. It follows a previous assignment in which students analyze a flash game by PETA for various forms of rhetorical appeals/fallacies (http://lessonplans.dwrl.utexas.edu/content/flash-games-and-visual-rhetoric).

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

Projector
Internet
Computer/media console for the instructor
Optional: computer for every student

Timeline for Optimal Use:

1. http://www.sploder.com/games/members/geoff/play/arcade-tutorial-links/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wh22sYhJjKk

Full Assignment Description:

Though there are many sites of varying difficulties from which instructors can choose, www.sploder.com is both easy and flexible to work with. It’s intended to inspire elementary school students (around the ages of twelve) to become interested in coding and game design; as a result, this lesson plan does not require extensive tutorials or a large amount of in-class time set aside for instructional purposes.

www.Sploder.com allows the user to “design” his/her own game through preset conditions. There are five different game types – among which include “retro arcade” and “classic shooter” – with protagonist options, movements, and attacks already installed. The user, then, is left to “make”: the environment for each level, tools, weapons, text boxes, non-playable characters, bonuses, bosses, and music. For my class, I placed particular emphasis on in-game text/dialogue and atmosphere/visual cohesiveness as ways for the groups to make whatever persuasive points they intended. As an additional hurdle, I required that my students include “switch” events within the game (linked events in which the player cannot progress unless another task is accomplished first. For example, the big boss cannot appear until a specific minion is destroyed or, a “barrier” in the path will not disappear until a token is collected).

Completed games will be played through on the last day of class using a projector and the instructor’s computer.

Below, I’ve posted the prompt I handed out and a general rubric. I also offer my students three comprehensive tutorials for specific game types available to Sploder.

Goals: You and your group will be presenting your own persuasive video game designed on http://www.sploder.com/. In addition, you will turn in a 500-word group essay discussing this project.

The purpose of this assignment is for you to take what you have learned from PETA’s Pokemon Black and Blue (or the McDonald’s one http://www.mcvideogame.com/index-eng.html) and apply it to your own platform game. Questions to think about: what rhetorical strategies does the parody engage with? What visual strategies? How does it convey its message, and how explicit or implicit are its arguments? What are potential weaknesses of this media form that you must avoid in your own creation? What are potential strengths that you should focus on?

How to begin:

1. Make an account on www.sploder.com (one for your group) and let your instructor (me) know what your group account name is.

2. Go through video tutorials (if you google or search on youtube, you will find plenty of fine tutorials. Do not ask your instructor for search help; at this point in the semester, you should be proficient on your own)

3. Experiment with as many components as you can.

To earn a C+

Your game must have:

1. At least 2 complete levels to your game.

2. An observable and understandable message

3. Text (whether that be on signs and/or dialogue boxes)

4. At least 2 Switch events (for example: the player can only deactivate a barrier if (s)he kills a particular monster; or, the boss monster will only spawn if the player presses a particular object)

5. An environment (minor characters, decorations, etc.) which contributes to the persuasive argument and overall atmosphere.

6. At least 60% of the game must involve some type of action (rhetorical, visual, textual, etc.) and not just walking around like a derp.

Your 500-word essay must have:

1. One section discussing the argument your game is meant to present and what the game’s position is.

2. One section discussing the visual and rhetorical strategies your group employed in the game to convey the opinion in #1 to the player. Be detailed as to what various elements are meant to specifically accomplish.

3. One section covering how group work was divided.

4. One optional section discussing how you think this assignment could be improved to teach you more about digital rhetoric, or, alternately, what you thought was the best part of this assignment.

Hints:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hf72Ybtg7DA

2. “Retro arcade” seems to be the easiest and most popular form. If your group is having difficulties, I suggest starting out with this. Be aware, though, that because this is the one with the most tutorials available, I will expect a more complex game should you choose this style.

Student samples from Fall 2013:

1. Anti-bullying and methods of conflict resolution:
http://www.sploder.com/games/members/tomasdamico/play/final-project-rhe3...

2. Saving the world from pollution:
http://www.sploder.com/games/members/hsieh0422/play/save-the-world/

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Spend maybe an hour or two on the website just experimenting with the different game types and design options. Students, for the most part, have more technical questions such as “how do I save?”. When students present, you'll be moderating - asking questions about the narrative, devices used, etc. I asked one student from another group to play, and as this student played, the group would explain their intentions and techniques.

Instructions For Students:

That entire prompt posted above.
1. Make the game in groups, fulfilling instructor requirements.
2. Write a 500-word essay detailing intention, process, rhetorical devices, and workload.

Evaluation Suggestions:

Students will play each other’s games. As a student plays through another group's game, that group will be in charge of explaining and presenting on their game at the same time (it's basically an interactive powerpoint presentation). The instructor will grade based on a preset rubric. The general hope is that students will incorporate the rhetorical skills they have developed all semester into the game.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

I tried to put students into groups of 4, with each group containing someone familiar with video games of any sort (the earlier PETA’s Pokemon Black and Blue exercise helped me see who in my class was proficient and who was uncomfortable with this type of media).

To my surprise, I found that the next time we met (after I’d first introduced the project), half of the groups had already started the project without any prompting from me. I’d anticipated having to devote a class or two to work-shopping the groups’ games, but this turned out to be unnecessary as they were all fine and highly motivated on their own. This may have to do with the nature of the 500-word essay (in which students must discuss the division of labor).

Students really will go above and beyond for this project. They'll make complicated and involved projects that will constantly surprise you!.

Course Type:

Course Description:

Flash Games and Visual Rhetoric

lazhu — Sun, 29 Sep 2013 08:38:13 +0000

Author:

Lily Zhu

Image Credit:

Though the game itself is available on PETA's website, this still-image is pulled from a Forbes article: http://blogs-images.forbes.com/erikkain/files/2012/10/Pokemon-PETA-600x3...

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment pushes students to recognize the layers of rhetoric and propaganda embedded in something as visual and auditory as a flash game. By playing and analyzing PETA's Pokemon Black and Blue, and comparing it to the original source, they will hopefully gain a more robust understanding of the relationship between classical rhetoric and an increasingly digitized world.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Course Unit

Semester-long Project

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Multimedia

Video Games

Visualization

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This is an activity meant to follow a lesson on rhetorical fallacies and/or methods of argumentation that aren't necessarily fallacious. It will reinforce these terms and definitions while providing a vivid, visual example of them in action.

It also serves as the basis for a later presentation project in which students will design their own flash games in groups using http://www.sploder.com (as a last-day-of-class assignment).

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

Projector
Internet
Computer/media console for the instructor
Optional: computer for every student

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Intermediate Writing Course

Full Assignment Description:

Though this could be a shorter assignment - as short as showing a commercial advertisement on the projector and asking students to discuss it in groups - I believe it would be a more enriching process if at least half of a one-and-a-half-hour session were devoted to it.

This assignment fits best after a comprehensive lecture on logos, ethos, and pathos as well as rhetorical fallacies in written texts. The instructor has two options: he/she can use the overhead projector to show the contents of his/her screen or students can be paired into groups of three and sent to their own desktops.

Though it is up to the instructor what game will be the subject of analysis, I have a few suggestions: PETA's parody of Pokemon Black and Pokemon White (http://features.peta.org/pokemon-black-and-white-parody/) or a Flash game critique of McDonald's and the fastfood industry in general (http://www.mcvideogame.com/index-eng.html). PETA actually has quite a few different parodies on the linked website.

Students are asked to play through the game (or watch the instructor go through it) and note what types of strategies the creators use to present the controversy, persuade the audience, and/or attack the opponent. They must find at least three fallacies and give detailed examples of how these were used, and under which modes of persuasion they might fall under (logo, pathos, or ethos). To bring Units I and II of RHE 306 together, I ask the students to also "map" this situation: who are the stakeholders? Who or what do these respond to? What are the potential biases?

Students must be specific and stay as close to the language of the course as possible when analyzing the game. At the end of this assignment, students will present their findings to each other.

(If the instructor is concerned about participation, students could take turns playing the game in their groups. One student plays, two take notes, switch, repeat.)

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Play through the game beforehand and make a note of the images and events that are most important to the course content.

If particularly motivated, the instructor could make a handout of the list of fallacies students should be applying to the game.

Instructions For Students:

Play the game with group members, dividing work/play evenly.

Take notes on as many devices and strategies as possible, with references to specific moments in the game.

Be ready to present findings in front of classmates.

Evaluation Suggestions:

The presentation is proof of participation though the instructor can do walkarounds during the activity to check that it isn't one student doing all of the work.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Given the increasing popularity and importance of electronic sports (Esports), I find it unsurprising that my students seem particularly receptive to videos and other digital media formats, and are often able to express rhetoric-related ideas more clearly in these contexts. Many of my students have also chosen to do their controversies over some form of media. It can be time consuming though and there might be bumps with plugin malfunctions; however, putting students into groups lessens the amount of slower starts.

Course Type:

Course Description:

RHE 306 is an introductory course in writing and argumentation.

Tags:

Rhetorical Fallacy Bingo

Delacroix — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 18:42:21 +0000

Author:

Julia Delacroix

Image Credit:

SG Bailey

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment is designed to check student comprehension of rhetorical fallacies. It can also be used to begin to discuss rhetorical analysis of images.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Rhetorical Analysis

Rhetorical Fallacies

Visual Rhetoric

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This is a quick activity that can follow a lecture on rhetorical fallacies. Students learn to recognize fallacies and discuss how they are operating. Some of the images themselves are useful for analysis which is a nice transition into visual rhetoric.

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Some sort of projector & slideshow.

Copies of bingo card (attached)

Slideshow (attached as a powerpoint, but easy to print out & use with a standard projector or doc cam)

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

This is an assignment that can expand or contract -- it might be as short as ten minutes or could go an entire class period (though that seems a lot of time to practice recognizing rhetorical fallacies). I included it immediately after my lecture on rhetorical fallacies and used it to transition to visual rhetorical analysis as well. Reviewing their notes, students were asked to copy the names of the rhetorical fallacies covered in lecture onto their bingo cards. (I used Scare Tactics, Either/Or, Slippery Slope, Sentimental Appeal, Bandwagon, False Authority, Dogmatism, Moral Equivalence, Ad Homenim, Hasty Generalization, Faulty Causality, Begging the Question, Straw Man, Equivocation, Non Sequitur, & Faulty Analogy). They could choose any layout they liked, and repeated two or three terms if they chose to.

As a class, we then went through the rhetorical fallacy slide show. Students were asked to identfy the fallacy at work in the image -- some contain more than one -- and then justify their choice. This led to some useful class discussion and clarification as students advocated for an image falling into one category or another. Once we decided what fallacy each image represented, students marked it off of their cards and we moved on to the next slide. We stopped when someone hit bingo (it took us about ten slides).

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Print & copy cards. The slideshow is easy to modify depending on which fallacies you want to address.

I did made sure that my lecture contained written examples of fallacies, so students could see how fallacies work in both text and image.

Instructions For Students:

Please fill in the squares with the names of rhetorical fallacies.

Call it when you have bingo.

Evaluation Suggestions:

This activity itself functions as a check for understanding, so there's no real evaluation necessary (other than calling on quieter students to bring them into the conversation).

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

This went great for me -- I've found that students generally like doing fallacies anyway, but once it was a competition they got pretty serious about it. They made some great points about why an image should qualify as a particular fallacy, and there was good back & forth as they defended their calls.

Additional Resources:

Course Type:

Course Description:

Tags:

Analyzing Ethos Using Twitter and Storify

Cate Blouke — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 15:43:38 +0000

Author:

Cate Blouke

Image Credit:

Storify Twitter Mash-up by Cate Blouke

Brief Assignment Overview:

Using the multimedia curation program, Storify, students compose a short writing assignment analyzing an "author's" ethos based on his or her Twitter feed. This demonstrates the ways in which ethos is cultivated over time and in a variety of different ways.

Type of Assignment:

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Annotation

Organization

Synthesis

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Ethos, visual analysis, digital literacy,

Media Requirements:

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Required Materials:

Students only need a computer with Internet access and to sign up for a free Storify account.

While a media console with projector would be helpful to demonstrate the online programs in class, this is not strictly necessary for students to complete the assignment.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Early in the Semester

Intermediate Writing Course

Full Assignment Description:

This assignment is designed to encourage students to think about the ways in which "ethos" is cultivated over time and in a variety of sometimes subtle, sometimes overt ways. Instead of analyzing the ethos presented by an author, journalist, or other professional writer in a long-form piece of writing, students examine the ways in which ethos emerges from the short-form, long-term writing of a person's Twitter feed.

This helps students to recognize that ethos is not something that is "only" cultivated by politicians or authors, but something that we all present in one way or anther - particularly in online environments. As such, this may be another avenue for initiating a conversation about online identity and the ways in which we present ourselves on in the Internet.

Storify offers a unique platform for this short writing assignment as it allows students to literally pull pieces of multimedia into a single platform and comment on each piece of evidence. This allows for a more visually interesting analysis of very short pieces of writing and for a visual analysis of the person's profile image or twitpics.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Familiarize yourself with the Storify platform and demonstrate how to use it. I would also encourage showing the students an example, and I've included a student example in the "Additional Resources" section below.

Instructions For Students:

In this assignment, you'll be analyzing the ethos of a stand up comedian based on his or her Twitter feed. You'll compose your analysis using Storify and pull evidence for your assessment directly into the Storify piece.

Essentially, this assignment asks that you make an argument about what kind of comedian this person is, basing your argument on their presentation of ethos.

The following are the kinds of questions you'll want to consider, though you will need to find ways to synthesize your answers into a coherent narrative. These are meant as brainstorming questions and are typed in no particular order - so for your narrative, it will be up to you to order your answers to these questions in a manner that flows/coheres.

What kind of message does his or her profile picture send?
What is he doing in the picture? (looking at the camera? smiling? laughing? holding anything?)
What is he wearing in the picture?
How does your comedian address his audience (as in is he nice? mean? aggressive? stand-offish? jovial?)?
What kinds of jokes does he make? (insults? snarky comments? word-play?)
What subjects does he most often joke about?
How does he address his audience/followers?
Are Tweets written to/directly addressing his audience or are they just observations thrown out to the Twitterverse?
Does he insult people?
Does he respond to his followers' Tweets?
Does he "re-Tweet" his followers Tweets?
How does he seem to use Twitter primarily (for promotion or to Tweet jokes)?
Who is his audience and how big is his following? (You may want to browse through his followers or make a case for who his audience might be based on what he tweets about)
thinking back to the first reading for the course - is this comedian a "negative exemplar" or a "spokesperson"
What attitudes/values do his Tweets reflect?
Do you have a sense of his political beliefs?
What aspects of society/life does he critique?
How does he describe himself in his tag line?
Does he Tweet about personal things or major events?
Does he Tweet about celebrities?
Does he Tweet about current events?
Given the things he Tweets about, do you think he has the credibility or authority to do so? Why or why not?
Can you identify some ways in which your comedian builds goodwill or demonstrates that he is "trustworthy?"
Why would you want to listen to this comedian?

Directions for turning in a Storify piece:

1. Create a wiki page in your student folder titled "lastname-date-RS3-Storify"

2. On the page, provide a link to the piece on Storify or insert the embed code onto the page

3. (Optional) Post a link to your project on the class blog

Explicit instructions on how to post your link:

1. make sure your project is "published" before you try to share the link

2. make a page in your wiki folder titled: "lastname-date-RS3"

3. on your published Storify project, there are options to "share," "email," and "embed" - click on the "embed" link and copy the code

4. on your wiki page (when you're in the "edit" screen), click on the "insert" drop-down menu in the formatting toolbar

5. select "HTML/JavaScript" and paste the embed code into the pop-up screen that comes up, then hit "next," and then agree to "insert plugin"

6. save the changes to the wiki page, then test the link

Evaluation Suggestions:

I created a standard rubric and then offered comments in paragraph form. I posted my feedback to the student's wiki page (where they submitted the assignment). There was no grade given, since I was evaluating based on the Learning Record.

[ ] Makes a clear assertion about the comedian’s ethos

[ ] Makes an assertion about the comedian’s audience/followers

[ ] Addresses the content/type of comedian’s tweets

[ ] Identifies (some of) the comedian’s values represented in tweets

[ ] Offers visual analysis of profile picture

[ ] Offers explanation and analysis of tweets (doesn't just let them “speak for themselves”)

[ ] Tweets are framed/introduced effectively (not just dropped in between analyses)

[ ] Project is effectively organized and information synthesized (conceptually vs. chronologically)

[ ] Sufficiently robust assessment (meets length/thoroughness expectations)

[ ] Writing relatively free of grammatical error

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My students seemed to enjoy the exercise, though several of them encountered problems with the technological aspects. It's important to point out to them the various toolbars/functions of the Storify interface and to make your own expectations clear in terms of how you want the information presented/overall goal of the assignment.

Additional Resources:

A student example of this assignment, analyzing Ralphie May's Twitter feed.

My gratitude to Megan Varelmann Gianfagna for her lesson plan on Tracing Memes in Storify, which served as inspiration for this assignment.

Course Type:

Course Description:

I implemented this assignment in my intermediate rhetoric course, RHE 309K Rhetoric of Stand Up Comedy, though it is easily adaptable to a number of other topics. For my course students analyzed the Twitter feed of a comedian of their choosing, but this same approach could be used for any public figure/author. I'm including my abbreviated course description.

Beginning in the 1950s and 60s, pioneers of comedy such as Lenny Bruce and Dick Gregory tackled issues of civil rights and liberties, opening the door for future generations of comics to criticize society and oppressive government policies. By the 1970s, George Carlin and Richard Pryor turned stand-up comedy into one of the most subversive forms of popular rhetoric. Now, late night monologues and “fake” news shows increasingly shape public understanding of world events and political figures.

This course examines how comedians use humor to advocate positions in public controversies, to construct notions of group identity, and to criticize public figures – essentially, how they use humor to persuade. If laughter is a sign of persuasion (a question we will explore together), we will think through why audiences do or don’t laugh, are or are not persuaded by a text. We will think and write critically about what makes comic performances compelling, focusing closely on the relationship between performers and their audiences. We will track how the purpose and message of texts changes as jokes move across media and venue in the digital age, looking at a wide range of sources - from comedy albums to HBO specials, from YouTube to Twitter. Fundamentally, we’ll be asking whether these performances encourage audiences to re-think their ideological and political values, or if humor simply reinforces the beliefs that audiences already hold: when are we laughing with, and when are we laughing at, and, most importantly, (how) can we know the difference?

Tags:

Agonistic Debate on a Course Blog

coulson — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 18:01:44 +0000

Author:

Doug Coulson

Image Credit:

Wikipedia Commons

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students break up into two groups to engage in agonistic debate regarding an issue in an assigned reading in the course. One group offers a critique of the ideas in the text in a brief written critique posted on a course blog, then the second group formulates a response also posted on the blog, followed by a reply by the first group and an oral debate to finish the assignment and debrief.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Assignment Length:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

The goals of the assignment are to practice written agonistic debate for purposes of discussing forensic debate, particularly the form most commonly found in legal disputes. The assignment is also designed to teach principles of online writing in dispute resolution contexts.

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

In-class computers with internet access and a course blog.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Full Assignment Description:

The assignment requires students to engage in agonistic debate regarding an issue in an assigned reading in the course through both written and oral forms of debate. This facilitates discussion of rhetorical strategies for each for of discourse as well as how they often intersect, while also furthering critical discussion of an assigned text. The assignment is particularly useful for helping students understand the time management and emotional considerations involved in agonistic dispute resolution, particularly the form most commonly found in legal disputes.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

This assignment is best used after the text in question has already been discussed in at least one class period or at least after the students have been given a general introduction to the text in class. To begin the assignment, discuss the purposes of the assignment and the instructions with students. Have students log in to the classroom computers and to the course blog. After the students discuss and submit their blog posts, moderate the discussion in the order of the posts and discuss the challenges and tactics involved in written forensic debate as well as how the students experienced the debate, including a discussion of the emotional component typically involved in taking sides in a dispute. The assignment should ideally be completed in a single class period.

Instructions For Students:

After breaking into groups, Group 1 will have 15 minutes to prepare 3-4 points of criticism of the ideas advanced in the text and post a brief description of the criticisms on the course blog. These may include rebuttals of the arguments advanced or important issues neglected or unanswered by the text. During this time, Group 2 should begin discussing potential points of criticism in an effort to anticipate Group 1's arguments and prepare possible responses. Once Group 1 submits its criticisms on the blog, the roles of the groups will be reversed as Group 2 prepares written responses to Group 1's cricitisms and Group 1 discusses potential points of rebuttal in an effort to anticipate them and prepare a reply. Group 2 will have 15 minutes to prepare its response and post it to the blog. After Group 2 submits its response, the roles will again switch and Group 1 will have 10 minutes to submit any desired reply. At the conclusion of this initial 40 minutes, the groups will orally debate the arguments posted to the blog and discuss how they experienced the debate.

Evaluation Suggestions:

I've never graded this assignment. It's primarily designed to engage students in questions considered during the course and facilitate class discussion.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Students have enjoyed the assignment and it has led to critical and engaged discussion regarding key readings in the course.

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

Course Description:

In his book On the Contrary, rhetoric scholar Thomas Sloane writes, ”Rhetorical thought is—let us admit it—highly perverse and lawyerly in nature.” In this statement, Sloane not only alludes to the closely intertwined history of rhetoric and law from the earliest days of Western thought to the modern era, but highlights the shared promotion by both of these fields of an agonistic “art of controversy” which seeks to facilitate controversy through the practice of arguing both sides of a case, a practice classical rhetoricians called in utramque partem (“on either side”). The principal theorists of classical Greek and Roman rhetoric promoted agonistic contests in which speakers argued opposite sides of disputed issues, often with specifically judicial contexts in mind, and the American legal system’s adversarial system of justice is founded on a contest of accusation and defense between parties in which each seeks to persuade a judge or jury of disputed issues on opposite sides of a case.

Despite the close relationship between rhetoric and law, however, and the fact that the lawyer remains, in the words of legal scholar James Boyd White, “the modern rhetorician in its purest form,” the modern professionalization of law has frequently attempted to deny or repress the rhetorical aspects of legal discourse and the agonistic conflict on which the adversarial system of justice is founded. Instead, modern law has promoted a view of legal discourse as a value-neutral “science” based on logical deduction and immune to social and political influence. This paradoxical relationship between law and rhetoric in modern legal discourse has produced a recent revival of questions about modern law’s denial of rhetoric, including important questions about the role of character and emotion in legal argument, the role of narrative in the analysis of legal evidence, the effect of the adversarial system of justice on social cohesion and division, and the relationship of legal rhetoric to democracy, coercion, and violence.

We’ll study these questions by first examining the forms of argument used in the legal profession today, focusing on arguments regarding the interpretation of circumstantial evidence in legal cases and the analogical, or case-based, form of legal argument known as “legal reasoning” which is used to argue for or against the application of judicial precedent to new cases. Specifically, we’ll study arguments regarding the evidence in controversial trials such as the 1935 Richard Hauptmann (“Lindbergh Kidnapping”) trial, the 1982 Lindy Chamberlain (“Dingo”) trial, and the 1992 Randy Weaver (“Ruby Ridge”) trial, as well as arguments and judicial opinions in U.S. Supreme Court cases regarding the Fourth Amendment’s search and seizure clause and the minimum standards of effective legal advocacy found in the Sixth Amendment’s right to assistance of counsel. After examining the forms and purposes of legal rhetoric as it is actually employed in the legal profession, we’ll then consider contemporary critiques of the adversary system and the agonistic rhetoric on which it depends, including critiques implicit in public perceptions of the legal system and cultural representations of lawyers.

Tags:

Refutation and Rebuttal

Rebuttal Sparring

Bohmann — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 01:05:20 +0000

Author:

Axel Bohmann

Image Credit:

GodWiki

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students pair up to practice rebuttal. Partners present their position on their chosen controversy and have to fend off arguments for other positions that their partner comes up with. Partners change frequently and in quick succession.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Peer Review

Pre-Writing

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Presentations

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

refine students' position in their chosen controversy
become aware of and address potential arguments opposed students' own positions
increase awareness of different audiences
develop effective rebuttal strategies

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Space (good for a session outdoors)

Writing equipment (digital or oldschool) for reflection.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

Use this lesson plan fairly early in Unit 3 of your RHE 306. Ideally students will have read about and discussed the basics of rebuttal (refutation, counterargument, possibly concession) in a previous session and have started to think about their own position in their chosen controversy. This exercise should both get them to think more carefully about their position and potentially qualify it, as well as raise their awareness for opposing positions, their arguments, and how to rebut them. I have my student continuously do little free writing exercises in which they reflect on their position and this exercise culminates in one of those, too.

This is an exercise that needs a bit of space, so if you are in a computer classroom it might be a good chance for you and your students to see some sunlight for a change. Mine definitely appreciate that. Divide the class up into two groups of equal size. The first forms a circle, facing outwards, and the second an additional circle around that one, so two students always face each other. If there is an uneven number of students I get into one of the circles as well to even it out. Tell them that this is their chance to do 'intellectual sparring,' to practice their punches, jabs, and defense with actual partners to strengthen their essay 3 and presentation performance. There, other positions are implicit and it can be a difficult task to consider all of them and their potential arguments. But the more fully they can be addressed, the better essay 3 is going to be.

Tell students they will have three minutes to do the following:

partners in the outer circle present their controversy and their position with regards to it
partners in the inner circle give an argument for a different position
partners in the outer circle must find a way to rebut/refute/discredit said argument, thus strenghtening their own position

After three minutes, the outer circle moves on clockwise (or counter-clockwise if you wanna be a gangster :) ) and the same routine starts again. Half-way through you should switch roles, having the students in the inner circle present and defend their positions. Alternatively, you can leave a little more time between moving circles and have partners switch roles in that interval. Emphasize to your students that this is an exercise where they should really push each other. Of course, you want them to treat each other with respect but it will not do any good if they give in to each other's points too easily. In general, etiquette has not been a problem in my class so far, so I try to get them to really get at each other's arguments.

How long you keep this exercise going depends a bit on your time constraints and the way the students react to it. My experience has been that they enjoy the dynamic dimension of rapidly moving from partner to partner and also feel more comfortable talking when everybody else is too and they know the instructor is not listening. So I don't seem to have any trouble letting it go on for about 30 minutes. You want to give them a chance to listen and respond to a range of opposing viewpoints, so I would not go much shorter than that. Longer potentially, but there is a danger of repetition and information overload as this is quite an intense exercise for the students.

When you feel everybody has had enough chances to listen and respond to different arguments, bring your students back together and let them take 10-15 minutes to compose a written reflection on the exercise, including the following questions: What were the different positions opposed to your own? Were they associated with any particular stakeholders? Give at least two arguments you heard that run counter to your position. Can you find ways to construct refutations or counterarguments to those arguments? You can assign a written homework to your students where they come up with a mire elaborated version of this reflection, including fully developed rebuttals.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Before Class:

Very little preparation needed
Make sure students have a good idea of rebuttal in general and a sense of their own position in their chosen controversy prior to doing this exercise
Make sure there is enough space for students to move around comfortably

In Class:

Keep an eye on the time, while also getting a sense for how long it takes students to go through the cycle
Be prepared to 'stand in' as a sparring partner if there is an uneven number of students
total class time taken: 45 - 50 minutes (30-35 circle exercise; 10-15 written reflection)

Instructions For Students:

Circle Exercise:

Students divvy up into 2 groups of equal size
Stand in two circles, facing each other
Students in the outer circle present their controversy and their position with regards to it
Students in the inner circle give an argument for a different position
Students in the outer circle must find a way to rebut/refute/discredit said argument, thus strenghtening their own position
You have three minutes for this; when I give the signal, the outer circle moves on clockwise

Reflection:

Write a brief reflection answering the following questions:

What were the different positions opposed to your own? Were they associated with any particular stakeholders? Give at least two arguments you heard that run counter to your position. Can you find ways to construct refutations or counterarguments to those arguments?

Evaluation Suggestions:

I would not evaluate students on the exercise itself. The written reflection (especially if you assign an elaboration for homework) can certainly be used for feedback, but I would not attach a grade to it. The exercise is designed to allow students to play around and get comfortable with their own position.

Course Type:

Course Description:

I am teaching RHE 306 with Eli Pariser's The Filter Bubble. The content does not matter for this exercise, though.

Tags:

Refutation and Rebuttal

Audience Appeal - Making Commercials with Animoto

Cate Blouke — Sun, 24 Jun 2012 16:07:55 +0000

Author:

Cate Blouke

Image Credit:

"Blank Billboard" by mediaboytodd

Brief Assignment Overview:

Using the extremely user-friendly online video creation tool, Animoto, students create short commercials pitching (potentially) odd combinations of products to target audiences (pianos to businessmen, running shoes to retirees, etc.)

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Organization

Synthesis

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

The primary goal for this assignment is to encourage students to think about audience - how to construct appeals catered to particular audiences. However, it is also useful for thinking through visual rhetorical choices (which images and pre-set video themes to use), audio choices (which song to accompany the video), and arrangement (how to structure the appeals/advertisement).

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

To do this in-class, your students would need computer access (either a technology-based classroom, or a number of students could bring in their personal laptops) and access to an Animoto account. For one month of service, Animoto only charges $5 (a relatively minor investment for a really fun classroom activity) and your students could all work in the same account. The DWRL has a yearly subscription ($30), and lab instructors should contact Will Burdette or one of the ADs for the login information.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Intermediate Writing Course

Full Assignment Description:

As an in-class exercise, students select a generic product from a set of options either provided by the instructor or generated by the students themselves and then re-distributed at random. Some example products might be: running shoes, sports cars, toothpaste, laptops, etc. Students then select a target audience (or "market") for thier product - also at random from a pre-determined set of options. With their basic product and target audience, students are then asked to produce a short commercial advertising their product using Animoto.

Students are required to make a number of rhetorical choices linking their product to their audience - selecting an appropriate brand name, generating a catchy slogan slogan, creating a short sales pitch, and choosing appropriate images and music to accompany their appeals.

Animoto allows users to insert small amounts of text in between images and/or video clips, constructing a short "commercial" or video trailer with predetermined "themes" and a limited selection of music. Unlike iMovie or Windows Movie Maker, Animoto does not offer a large amount of user-agency (in terms of timing, transitions, etc), but, as such, it also requires little (or no) instruction. Students are generally able to sort out how to use the tool in under five minutes and can easily complete their commercial with time to show the final product to the class and discuss it. The class discussion, then, provides an opportunity to discuss the freedoms afforded by more complicated editing programs. So, Animoto is an excellent "baby-step" towards more sophisticated video creations - particularly for students who are wary of technology.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

The assignment is made particularly exciting through the element of chance - so I bring a number of generic products (sporting goods, frozen dinners, tupperware, etc.) written out on slips of paper, and a set of audiences (parents, the elderly, businessmen, etc.) written out on separate slips. Students are divided into groups (usually of 3-4) and each group draws a product and an audience from the slips. The incongruity that tends to result from this random selection makes the exercise both challenging and engaging. I've also let my students come up with the product options, though this did result in the rather silly pairing of selling "underwear" to "mothers." So, you may want to come up with your own options if you feel this might disrupt the classroom.

Instructions For Students:

As we've discussed, making effective rhetorical appeals is all about discerning the relationship between an author and his or her audience. This exercise is designed to get you thinking about how to cater your appeals to a particular audience - which can be especially challenging if you are confronted with a potentially hostile or disinterested audience. How will you approach them (i.e. effectively cultivate your ethos) if your audience isn't necessarily receptive to what you're pitching? How would you sell a given product to an audience that (normally) might not be inclined to buy it?

You will use a simple on-line video creation tool (Animoto) to generate short "commercials" for your product. You'll select a generic product from the options generated by your classmates. You'll then select a target audience from options that I've compiled, and it will be your job to create a product and commercial aimed at that audience. This will entail a number of rhetorical choices - from brand name, catch-phrase/slogan, specific appeals, visual rhetoric (the images you choose to employ), and the music that will accompany the commercial. For each one of these, you will want to consider your company's ethos (why this audience should buy your product), pathos (what emotions or values might convince them to buy it), and logos (do your appeals make sense).

While I'm hoping that the random selections will result in odd combinations, be sure to take this 'seriously.' It might be tempting to use humor, but be careful not to alienate your audience by making light of them or their interest in the product. You'll present your finished product at the end of class, and as a group we'll discuss what makes the commercials rhetorically effective.

Here are the requirements for your commercial:

You need to select a brand name for your product
You need to come up with a slogan/sales pitch for your target audience (e.g. "Beef: It's what's for dinner" or "Milk: does a body good" or "Just Do It," etc.)
You need at least three images connected to the product you're pitching, and three images connected to the audience (though you're welcome to add more than this)
Select music that seems appropriate for your audience, product, and sales pitch
The commercial should be "real" - as in, take it seriously and avoid egregious rhetorical fallacies (no scare tactics or ridiculous promises)

Evaluation Suggestions:

I typically give my students 20 minutes or so to put together their commercials, then we watch them as a class. I ask them to consider what makes the commercial effective, and to point out the qualities they see as particularly appealing (to that given audience). Then we try to think through some possible objections that the audience might have, and we discuss how the commercial might have been more effective. This usually revolves around questions of ethos (product reputation and reliability) and the logos of the commercial (is it making unsubstantiated claims; does it make sense). Adittionally, we talk about what the groups hoped to accomplish and the challenges they faced.

Students will often express frustration at the textual limitations of Animoto (it only allows for lines of 20-30 characters), and/or the limited amount of agency in terms of timing and transitions. This opens up a space to talk about these aspects of video editing/composition, which is especially useful if future video editing projects are on the syllabus.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My students love this exercise. It's a low-stakes and fun way to introduce the concept of audience, and it inevitably produces a range of high quality of work. After I tried this exercise the first time, it was quite helpful to show my next set of students an example before turning them loose.

Course Type:

Course Description:

I've used this exercise in both my introductory writing course (RHE 306) and my intermediate course (RHE 309K) with similar, positive results.

RHE 306 – Rhetoric & Writing is a course in argumentation that situates rhetoric as an art of civic discourse. It is designed to enhance your ability to analyze the various positions held in any public debate and to advocate your own position effectively. Your work in this course will help you advance the critical writing and reading skills you will need to succeed in courses for your major and university degree.

Tags:

Introducing Analysis with "Texts From Last Night"

Cate Blouke — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:17:55 +0000

Image Credit:

Screen shot of Texts From Last Night website

Brief Assignment Overview:

Using samples pulled from the popular website, Texts From Last Night, this exercise introduces students to textual analysis in a fun and (most likely) funny way. Students are asked how much and what kinds of information they can glean from a very small piece of text.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Social Media

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

To introduce students to textual analysis - either close reading or rhetorical analysis - using a very small piece of text.

Media Requirements:

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology