DWRL Lesson Plans - Enthymemes

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Assignment Length:

Partial Class Period

Single Class Period

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:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

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

Facilitating Multimedia Composition

RMazique — Sat, 05 Apr 2014 06:33:14 +0000

Author:

Rachel Mazique

Image Credit:

Rachel Mazique's "Disability in Pop Culture" Class YouTube Channel

Brief Assignment Overview:

This lesson helped students begin composing their final rhetoric assignment: a Multimedia Argument Project (MAP). I encouraged students to work with each other during the planning process and to collaborate with one another as they developed their digital literacy skills.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Multiple Class Periods

Course Unit

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

In addition to the goals above, students were to:

-become familiar with the range of digital resources available for multimedia composition projects

-practice composing in multiple modes (visual, aural, alphanumeric)

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

--Please Note: all of the links below were organized onto appropriately titled pages in a folder titled "Final Project Help" on our class wiki--

1. samples of student-authored multimedia projects:

either from The Journal for Undergraduate Multimedia Projects (TheJUMP) or past student work from my class YouTube channel,

2. KeepVid website (best run on Safari),

3. a Google Doc for class brainstorming on “Beginning the Final Project,” (stored on a class PBworks wiki page)

4. Internet Archives,

5. Creative Commons for songs,

6. Disability song list,

7. Animoto website, instructions for Animoto video production, More Animoto Help,

(beneficial, though not required):

8. Digital Writing and Research Lab (DWRL) rental equipment,

9. our class PBworks wiki Homework page

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Dr. Rodrigue's Digital Writing Resource Page

Late in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

Adapted from Justin Hodgson’s Multimedia Research-Argument Creation

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Multimodal Argument Project Prompt:

Using your prior knowledge, that of your peers’, and the skills you will gain during this unit, you will create a multimodal researched-based argumentative "document." These multimodal arguments should demonstrate a significant research effort as well as showcase your abilities to write, think, and express yourselves via the integration of multiple media. This research will include the time you spend with “how-to” guides/tutorials with the aim of improving your digital literacy skills. But, unlike the common approach to this type of "writing," where students/researchers write a traditional paper and then try to remediate that into multimedia forms, these projects will be "born digital." Composing digitally requires you to think, draft, design, and revise in multimedia, not engage in a text-to-multimedia practice.

The multimodal project is fairly open, but its breadth is necessary as each project will be different and take a different shape depending on the intent, skills, and risk-taking strategies of each student-author. I am open to your creative input and ideas!

Your controversy or the pop culture source that you’ve analyzed should shape your creations and the varying rhetorical strategies that you employ. For example, if you’ve analyzed a cartoon or comic in Paper 2.1, you may want to create your own. If you analyzed a documentary, consider creating your own documentary. We will more fully discuss the flexibility of this project in-class, both on the day this project is assigned and throughout the unit, to ensure that you have a solid grasp of how to navigate these guidelines.

That said, here are some concrete guidelines.

Minimum Requirements:

Must take a stance with relation to your controversy and attempt to persuade readers/viewers;

Must clearly be framed as an argument of conjecture, definition, ethics, value, or policy

Must engage your analyses of representations in pop culture by either supporting certain representations, subverting stereotypical representations and/or transforming an argument made in pop culture.
Must integrate and/or utilize multiple media (both the visual and alphanumeric modes are required) for rhetorical purpose (audio is encouraged, but optional—depending on your medium);

The video is not the only medium open to you; you can also compose a comic, be creative and innovative with PowerPoint, create a website, a video game, etc.
Feel free to run an original project idea by me for approval.

Must rebut/refute at least one counterargument/position with the presentation or production of counter-images, words, and/or voices.
Must include at least 5 quality sources and "Works Cited" details (in MLA format) within the MAP--not in a separate document:

At least 2 must come from scholarly resources (you should use the research you gathered for your Annotated Bibliography; you may also use the scholarly class readings)
If your project is nearing the maximum length, you may go over the limit (if you need more time/space to add in the Works Cited and make it readable). Note, this exception to the length requirement applies only for the Works Cited. If you want to discuss another exception, please see me. See the length requirement below.

Length requirement:

Create a 2-3 minute video if you’re working alone.

If you’re working with a partner or two, the video's length requirement increases based on the number of people involved: 4-6 minutes, or 6-9 minutes, respectively.
Group size max: 3 people
If you’re not composing a video, the length requirement still applies with relation to an in-class final presentation of your project. So, if you’re using PowerPoint, it should run 2-3 minutes long in a presentation.
If you’re making a comic strip, the strip should be about 2 pages long--or however long you need to make your argument and be able to present it to the class in 2-3 minutes.

Accessibility requirement:

Make your project accessible to a deaf audience (captions/a transcript)

I can work with you on captioning your video in the Open Lab (PAR 102) on Wednesdays from 5pm-8pm.
I can also point you to some guidelines I created and work with you during class.
Fyi: if your submission to TheJUMP is accepted for publication, you will also need to make your project accessible to a blind audience (descriptions of visual features). If you did this work in advance of publication in TheJUMP, I would consider this evidence of going above and beyond in the argumentation/digital literacy course strands.

For a variety of digital resources, see the link below:

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Plan for at least five weeks of in-class time to work on this multimedia argument project. Students need in-class time to familiarize themselves with the various technologies available to them and to learn how to compose in a digital medium besides the alphanumeric programs they are used to composing in (i.e. Microsoft Word).

If feasible within your department, sign up for at least a "plus" account with Animoto. Here in the Digital Writing and Research Lab (DWRL), instructors are fortunate that the lab will renew or subscribe to digital services like Animoto--as long as they serve a pedagogical function. I communicated with the supervisor in the DWRL, who renewed our plus account so students could create a video up to nine minutes long, which was what I required if a group had three students working together.

Below are the major steps I used for this day's lesson plan on "Facilitating Multimedia Composition":

Review vocabulary important to beginning students' composing process: topic, controversy, position and stakeholder. Ask students: what do these terms mean? What is the difference between a topic and a controversy? Explain how students should organize their arguments.
Have students review what their classmates are doing (on a Google Doc students filled in at the start of today's class: “Beginning the Final Project”) and consider who they may want to collaborate with in a co-authorship of this final project.
Introduce students to KeepVid as a way to export videos from YouTube.
Discuss Copyright laws.
Introduce the Internet Archives and Creative Commons.
Point students to “Disability Songs” list.
Have students use the rest of class time to talk over ideas with classmates they want to work with, review samples of student-authored multimedia projects on TheJUMP/previous work from our class YouTube channel, plan their final project with a rough outline, and look for images, videos and/or songs they may want to use.
Remind students to not only look for images, videos and songs that they agree with or those that could support their argument but also images, videos, and/or songs that they disagree with and will refute/rebut in their final project.
Review the definitions of refutations and rebuttals.
Point students to instructions for Animoto (on the wiki) but also mention that I can help students with this program.

Instructions For Students:

As a starting point to today's class, I had students go to the “in-class activities” folder on our class PBworks wiki.

From there, they went to the Google Doc folder and clicked on the “Beginning the Final Project” page.

Here's what they needed to write out as a starting point to the composing process. (The page also functioned as a class resource that would allow students to determine who they might want to co-author a project with.)

Please write:

1. Your topic;

2. Your controversy;

3. The pop culture source you will remediate

4. At least three positions that stakeholders take with regards to your controversy

5. The position that you saw your pop culture source taking

6. The position that you yourself take. (I explained that for this final unit, students were invited to share their viewpoint and to tell us where they stood with regards to their controversy.)

7. Possible multimedia project ideas you are considering (website, comic, documentary, photoessay, stop motion animation, etc).

Evaluation Suggestions:

For information on how I assessed students' final projects, please see my blog post on the topic: "Multimodal Writing: How do we Assess New Media?" at the Digital Writing and Research Lab's Blogging Pedagogy website

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Students had the choice to author a project alone or to work in groups of two or three. The number of students involved in a project affected the length requirement. Longer projects were expected of group-authored multimedia arguments.

Most students felt that their controversy was unique and would not merge well with fellow classmates' controversies or topics. (These final projects were the result of a semester-long process researching a single controversy). Those who did choose to co-author a project chose to work with only one partner rather than two (for logistical reasons apparently). One group started with three members, but one member eventually decided she wanted to work on her own due to creative differences. She had a specific argument she knew she wanted to pursue.

Students who were interested in co-authoring a project needed extra guidance from me on how to coherently weave together an argument on two distinct controversies. With these students, I encouraged the student groups to start from a broader standpoint--to work from our class topic "Disability in Pop Culture"--and to use research from their specific controversies to determine an argument they wanted to make about their particular topics within our class's "umbrella."

Several students were anxious about multimedia composition.

Several others were excited about this change of pace.

In the end, through in-class guidance and collaboration amongst peers, students who were anxious about composing in iMovie for the first time (for example) were eventually proud of their final product and the new digital literacy skills they gained throughout this composition process. Several students creatively went above and beyond the requirements to create a project they would be glad to publish in a public forum such as our class YouTube channel.

One student even composed an entirely original music video; another student drew and created an original stop-motion animated video; several others drew their own comics (either by hand on paper, or online with digital drawing tools/comic software).

Additional Resources:

Recommendations from Justin Hodgson:

Bump Halbritter's recent book Mics, Cameras, and Symbolic Action: Audio-Visual Rhetoric for Writing Teachers talks about audio and video work,

Sean Morey recently had his textbook The New Media Writer come out with Fountainhead Press,

and Kristin Arola, Jennifer Shepard, and Cheryl Ball recently published their Writer/Designer: A Guide to Making Multimodal Projects.

According to Professor Hodgson, those three texts provide a nice (but not comprehensive) avenue into conversations about multimedia composition and some particular strategies for writing (with) media.

Beyond that, he recommends that instructors peruse the Computers and Composition (and Computers and Composition Online) journals for works that might resonate with your class's particular focus.

And, as always, the Blogging Pedagogy site and TheJUMP are useful resources!

Course Type:

Course Description:

In this course, students focus on analyzing the relationship between pop culture and rhetoric. Their analyses examine public disagreements about various issues such as: How do popular (mis)representations of "the supercrip" convince us to make political decisions regarding accessibility, advocacy, education, and/or social policy? How can we evaluate arguments that not only depict (dis)abled people as "heroic" but also those that portray the converse: the "grotesque unfortunate" deserving of "pity" and "help"? How do these arguments address questions of basic human rights, needs, drives and "eugenics rhetoric"? Will children (and adults) make political decisions based on recurrent thematic representations of "disability" in pop culture, and, is that a good or bad influence?

Tags:

Logically Looking for the Perfect Beat

Cowan — Fri, 07 Mar 2014 19:41:36 +0000

Author:

Jake Cowan

Image Credit:

Puding Jahodovy

Brief Assignment Overview:

In this assignment, students learn to identify the objective musical elements that make up their favorite songs — and then become personal Pandoras for their peers.

Type of Assignment:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Audience

Enthymemes

Logos

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Audio

Collaboration

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Instructors should ask each student to bring a pair of headphones or earbuds to class in order to listen to music without disturbing their neighbors. Each student should also come to class with a favorite piece of music already in mind.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Full Assignment Description:

For most students, music is a major part of daily life: They listen to it in the car, when they do homework, as they walk to class (but hopefully not during). Very few students, however, actually play music, and very rarely do students consider why they might prefer one song over another. This exercise aims to help students articulate their preferences a little more clearly by encouraging students to think about a favorite song in terms of its objective qualities and the ways in which those components create an underlying logical structure. Additionally, this will help illustrate for students how the rhetorical term logos does not merely point to stastistics or facts, but refers to the ways in which those individual elements tie together to create a line of reasoning.

As a way of introduction, I like to show my students this video from TIME Magazine, which discusses how Pandora — the music streaming website — selects new songs for users to listen to. Later on in the project, students will be asked to act like mini-Pandoras for their classmates, so the video should help them to start thinking along those lines early. Once they have a picture of the overall exercise, I provide my students with general and simple definitions of the most basic components of any piece of music: Instrumentation, tempo, timbre, tone and form; we then discuss how those elements join together in particular ways to establish a genre. It's instructive to note that many styles of music share qualities — heavy metal and reggae, for example, both tend to have songs written in the sonata form (AABA) and played by simple rock instrumentation (guitar, bass, drumset, vocal) — but it's how those elements are strung together that define a song's genre.

Once the basic definitions are out of the way, the students should keep those terms in mind and note those elements as they listen to an example piece of music selected by the instructor. In my own classes, and based on my own preferences, I like to play upbeat dance music like "Treasure" by Bruno Mars — students have most likely heard the song before, and can generally think of a number of similar post-disco songs right off the bat. But the key is for the instructor to pick a piece that he or she really does enjoy, and one that is not too esoteric, in order for students then to be able to suggest other similar songs. As outlined in the Instructions for Students subsection, the individual objective elements should be identified as the students listen to the music; they can then offer their own ideas on what pieces might be a close match.

Having thus provided an example as a class, the instructor should then partner up the students and have the pairs each take to individual computers. Again, as outlined in the Instructions for Students subsection, each student will tell his or her partner of a favorite song, and then help them locate a version online. Repeating the same sort of exercise as they did with the instructor, the students will identify the objective components that make up the genre of their partner's song, and then suggest what they think is a similar song (and, again, locating a version online for their partner to hear). When all the pairings have finished the exercise, the instructor should ask them to share the results of the exercise — what song their partner gave them; what song they suggested in return and why; whether the partner liked the new song — with the rest of the class.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Before class, instructors should select their example carefully. There is often a generational divide between the instructor and her students, so they may not know many of the same songs. The instructor should thus try to play a more contemporary artist, and one that is relatively generic, in order to make the example easier to understand. Furthermore, having similar songs already in mind would help illustrate the ideas and stoke discussion. When I have done this exercise, I have played "Treasure" by Bruno Mars for my students, comparing the style and instrumentation to "Baby I'm Yours" by Breakbot (as well as this mashup by The White Panda).

Instructions For Students:

Whenever listening to a piece of music during this exercise — whether it's one that the instructor is playing, or a song shared by their peers — students should write down the objective musical elements that they hear. These include, but are not necessarily limited to:

Instrumentation (e.g., acoustic guitar, synthesizer, female lead vocals, drumset)
Song form (e.g., Verse-Chorus-Verse-Chorus-Bridge-Chorus)
Tempo and time signature
Timbre and tone (i.e., does it sound distorted and angry? slow and low?)
Finally: What genre do these elements suggest?

In the second half of class, the students will break into pairs. Each one will tell his or her partner one of their favorite pieces of music, and help the partner to locate a version to listen to on YouTube or Spotify (or possibly using their own iPod). After listening to the partner's piece of music once or twice and writing down the above components, each student should try to think of other songs they have heard before that have similar qualities. The students will then suggest those new comparable songs to their partners, assisting them in finding a version on YouTube or Spotify. Once they are both finished and have listened to the suggestions, the students should discuss with one another what they liked (and what they might not have liked) about the second songs, then share those results with the class.

Evaluation Suggestions:

This assignment is ungraded — all that matters is participation.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Students have generally enjoyed this exercise, and are better prepared for later lessons on syllogisms, enthymemes and fallacies. Furthermore, once they have finished the assignment, I have noticed a few students logging on to Facebook to friend their partners, which helps to build a healthy class atmosphere for the rest of the semester.

Course Type:

Tags:

Using Debates to Teach Rhetorical Analysis

Sloan — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 16:19:55 +0000

Author:

Casey Sloan

Image Credit:

Image Credit: Short Excursions Into Allyson's Mind

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment asks students to watch a debate and evaluate the participants' use of ethos, pathos and logos given their goals and their audience. It then asks students to select a debate “winner,” construct an argument justifying their position, and debate the issue with other students, incorporating concession, refutation and rebuttal.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Media Requirements:

Media Console/Projector

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Late in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

This assignment has students evaluate speakers' use of ethos, logos and pathos, perform a rhetorical analysis on the effectiveness of that use, and debate their own conclusions with their classmates by relying on concession, refutation and rebuttal. Ideally, this assignment will help students solidify their understanding of rhetorical appeals and allow them to practice calling upon argumentative strategies to persuade a skeptical audience. The debate chosen can be a fantastic hook to catch student interest in rhetorical analysis. Presidential debates or heated public debates could be introduced for a class that seems particularly politically conscious, but I personally used a semi-humorous debate between comedian Jon Stewart and Bill O'Reilly, television host and social commentator. The debating then required of students should help them develop their own use of persuasive strategies.

Students will first watch a debate in class. A classroom equipped with a computer and screen is necessary for this assignment. While viewing the debate, students should take notes on both (or one, if you want to divide your students neatly into two camps) speakers' use of ethos, logos and pathos. Ask them also to think about the audience for this debate and whether or not the rhetorical moves made by the speakers would be received well by that audience. This should take up one class period.

For homework, have your students write up a brief report arguing why one speaker “won” the debate. They should use the notes taken during the debate and focus on the use and effectiveness of rhetorical appeals.

During the next class period, ask students to share their arguments. Go back and forth between the two camps, asking students to use various combinations of concession, refutation and rebuttal to answer one another.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Be sure to pick a debate video that will fit neatly in with your available class time. Decide whether you want to assign students to a single debater or offer them the option of picking their own side. If you assign students to a single speaker, you can ask them to focus solely on her while watching the debate video.

Instructions For Students:

Ideally, before performing this exercise students should already be familiar with rhetorical analysis and refutation, concession and rebuttal. I used this assignment as an end-of-semester wrap-up to synthesize various ideas and skills.

1) For the first class period, students should closely watch this debate video. They should focus on both speakers' (or a single speaker's) use of ethos, pathos and logos. Instruct them to take detailed notes, citing specific examples. Ask them to pay special attention to these questions: what kind of ethos do the speakers establish? How? When do they use pathos and why? When do they use logos and why? Also, define the audience for this debate.

2) For homework, students should write up a 1-2 page argument about why one debater "won" the argument by more effectively using rhetorical appeals to convince her audience.

3) For the next class period, ask a volunteer on each side summarize why her debater won. Then, ask opposing sides to use various combinatinos of refutation, rebuttal and concession to argue against one another.

Course Type:

Course Description:

I used this assignment for Rhetoric 306, an introductory course.

Tags:

Drawing Logos

Laura Thain — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 06:08:02 +0000

Author:

Laura Thain

Image Credit:

Flatrock

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment asks students to map out logos with the aid of visualized arguments and, ultimately, to create and explain their own vizualization of a textual argument that helps highlight the elements of logos within that textual argument.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Organization

Synthesis

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Presentations

Remediation

Visualization

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This assignments is designed to help students identify and employ logos through visual rhetoric. By the end of the activity, which may take up an entire class period or multiple class periods, students should be able to effectively identify logos in a formal argument and replicate what they've identified in an informal visual argument.

Media Requirements:

Media Console/Projector

Required Materials:

If conducted in a classroom that is not enabled with technology for each student, instructors should provide basic drawing materials, such as crayons and butcher paper or markers and posterboard.

Students should also bring in or have access to a copy of a research summary or short writing assignment that asks them to anaylze a textual argument or source.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Intermediate Writing Course

Full Assignment Description:

First, the instructor should review or introduce the concept of logos to the class, emphasizing the reliance of a chain of reasoning on the enthymeme. It may be helpful to outline a few simple examples, like the ones Lunsford and Ruszkiewicz use in Everything's an Argument (5th ed.):

“We’d better cancel the picnic because it’s going to rain.” This statement assumes...

Picnics are normally held outdoors.
When the weather is bad, it’s best to cancel picnics.
Rain is bad weather for picnics.
A 70% chance of rain means that rain is more likely to occur than not.
When rain is more likely to occur than not, it makes sense to cancel picnics.
The weather bureau’s predictions are reliable enough to warrant action.

Once the class is comfortable attempting to identify both the chain of reasoning (explicit logos) and the enthymeme (implied premises), choose one of the excellent RSAnimate videos from the Royal Society's Youtube Channel. These talks address a broad variety of topics, many of which may be applicable to the course content. Most of these talks are about 10 minutes in length.

Before you start the video, emphasize that logos provides reasons for an argument, and thus always appears in claim and evidence format. Tell the students you would like them to identify logos appeals within the clip. You may choose to have them record their work on a worksheet. I used a simple worksheet like the one below:

I.Hard Evidence

facts and statistics (claim paired with quantitative evidence)

personal testimony/experience

II. Soft Evidence

reason (claim paired with qualitative evidence)

common sense (claims that require no evidence, "self-evident" claims)

If you choose this format, it may be helpful to include empty spaces for CLAIM and EVIDENCE below each header so that the student can practice pairing the two.

Show the video, stopping as often as you feel necessary to allow students to write and process the argument they are witnessing. I find it helpful to encourage thes students to recap the bare-bones summary of the argument at two to three minute intervals.

When the segment concludes, break students up into groups of three or four and have them choose several logos appeals they would like to present to the class. Keep the final "panaroma" illustration on the projector and allow students to identify and describe the logos claims they have chosen, tying those claims to the part of the illustration to which they correspond.

Once the students have shared their findings, ask them, in groups, to refer to a short analytical writing assignment that one of them has already completed. (In my class, we use Research Summary 4.) Instruct them to, as a group, create their own visual representation of the logos appeals in the original text using Photoshop. Students may find it useful to separate out the illustration into panels so that each member can work independently on one piece of the puzzle.

Once students have created an illustration, have each group present and explain the logos appeal they have illustrated, as well as its context, to the class.

Below is a sample project created from this Perez Hilton article on Jennifer Aniston's upcoming nuptials:

bride wars.jpg

This activity typically takes 2 class periods, although portions (image manipulation) could be assigned for homework.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Usually, at least a quarter of the classroom is proficient in Photoshop, so it can be helpful to put at least one proficient user in each group. The pedagogical payoff of teaching photoshop for a single exercise is slim, so other, easier image manipuation tools may be substituted if students are on the whole unfamiliar with the software. Blingee, Draw Something, Online Flash-based sketch applications, or good ol' fashion art supplies may all be substituted.

Instructions For Students:

Students should come to class having read logos material from the instructor's preferred rhetoric textbook.

Evaluation Suggestions:

Students commonly confuse identifying a chain of reasoning with summary, so in evaluating presentations, it can be helpful to ask them to identify enthymemes in logos appeals they choose to discuss to keep them thinking analytically, as opposed to descriptively.

Course Type:

Course Description:

I teach the Rhetoric of Celebrity, which I break down into three units. Unit 1 deals with descriptive writing; Unit 2 deals with analytical writing; Unit 3 deals with evaluative or critical writing. The activity above is most useful for analytical writing, although it might also be useful in a discussion on critical writing when teaching students how to counter a logos appeal by means of definition, evidence, quality, or policy.

Tags:

Using Mind-Maps to Make Modular Arguments, MASS EFFECT Style

OyP — Thu, 06 Sep 2012 17:28:36 +0000

Author:

Chris Ortiz y Prentice

Image Credit:

Chris Ortiz y Prentice

Brief Assignment Overview:

This lesson is best used in conjunction with “Using Mass Effect 1 to teach critical situations," which can be found under that title on this site. One of the primary purposes of the Mass Effect lesson is to get students to think about how persuasive essays are “modular:” decisions a rhetor makes early on in an argument afford other rhetorical options later but at the same time take some options out of play. This lesson plan uses NovaMind Pro to help students create modular arguments of their own.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Presentations

Software

Visualization

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

To develop in students an understanding of persuasive speech and writing as rhetorical decision making.

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

NovaMind Pro. (Note that Mac and PC versions of this software differ significantly. The concurrence seems to be that the Mac version is more user-friendly.)

Other mind-mapping technologies should work as well.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

In preparation for the class, students read three persuasive essays. The student’s task is to read each essay and break it down into its rhetorical steps: i.e. the author starts by doing x, then she makes y claim, then she makes z claim, and concludes with w. The class begins with discussion of the steps, until we’re all settled on how each argument proceeds. Then the instructor brings up a NovaMind map that visualizes each argument as its own “arm.” While it would be possible to have students make their own maps of the arguments, I recommend completing this preparation work for the students, to save time. You may ask students to make changes to the map depending on what came out of our discussion of the articles. You should also devote a little time to familiarizing the students with the software.

The instructor asks the students to get into small groups and then collaborate to combine the three arms of the map. They should do so by, 1) finding nodes in each arm that are similar, 2) taking the arm that follows from such a node and attaching it to the similar node on another arm. These steps are intended to be performed recursively, and while it is not necessary to end up with one big argument, arms should lead off of arms that lead of off other arms. (See instructor preparation below on how to facilitate the rather complex cognitive work this lesson requires.)

I ask students to think about what they come up with as a sort of “potential” argument. It could be navigated, from beginning to end, in a linear fashion. I ask students to traverse the map, making decisions at “crossroads” nodes that put you on a new track, which in turn brings further options “down the line.” Depending on decisions you make, the persuasive purpose of the argument may change.

In my class, students present a mind-mapped modular version of their persuasive essays as their final presentation. Instead of giving a persuasive speech, they tell us what options were available for them as they wrote their final essay, and why they chose to go one way as opposed to another.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

This is a heavy preparation lesson because the instructor must first make a map that contains lots of possible connection points. When students pull up the main map, they can click over to the connection points map, which I color code to emphasize possible connections. I do this because NovaMind can be a bit cumbersome to work with, and I want my students thinking about rhetorical decisions rather than how to untangle one arm from another (a common occurrence, once maps get bigger. I recommend using the auto-arrange feature liberally: “Command =” in the Mac version.)

Instructions For Students:

Instructions for reading homework:

Read the following each of the following articles.
After reading each, make a bullet-point list that enumerates each “step” in the article:

How does the author start? What does the author claim next? What’s the following move, etc.? How does the article conclude?

3. Bring your list with you to class. You’ll use it to construct a mind map in class.

Instructions for in-class NovaMind exercise:

Use the possible connections point map to find nodes that are similar on two different arms. Notice that arms are color-coded to emphasize similarity, but do not feel constrained to connect where suggested only. I recommend that you start by filling out one of the original argument arms, and then developing other arms if you have time.
Connect arms from similar nodes, wherever possible. Select the node from the connection points map from which the arm you want to connect begins. Push Command/Control C. Then select the node on the modular argument map, from which you want to attach the copied arm. Push Command/Control V.
If the arms get tangled, push Command/Control = sign. Remember that you can always push undo if something undesired occurs. Be patient and deliberate.
Follow argument paths and eliminate redundancies while preserving the greatest possible number of options.

Evaluation Suggestions:

I use this assignment to prepare my students for their final presentations. I encouraged experimentation and thus wanted to create a low-stakes environment; so I didn't grade the in-class exercise.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My students seemed to really enjoy making larger argument structures, but I found one class doesn't provide enough time to get to the second part of the assignment, in which you step back and consider how you might traverse the map from start to finish. I'd recommend you use two classes for this lesson, and I'd also recommend you provide the starting materials for the students. The materials I provide below could be improved upon: as one of my students pointed out, the exercise works best if you break the articles down into the rhetorical decisions that went behind the progression of each argument. In the materials below, I do the much easier task of listing the steps in each argument. There's a fine but real distinction there

Additional Resources:

Course Type:

Course Description:

RHE306, a course in argumentation that situates rhetoric as an art of civic discourse. It is designed to enhance students’ ability to analyze the various positions held in any public debate and to advocate their own position effectively. Students’ work in this course will help them advance the critical writing and reading skills they will need to succeed in courses for their major and university degree.

Tags:

Teaching the Enthymeme with Restaurants

detweiler — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 01:02:16 +0000

Author:

Eric Detweiler

Image Credit:

Screenshot of Torchy's Tacos Website

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment requires students to think about how the enthymeme might function in practical argument—specifically, in convincing a group of out-of-town visitors to Austin to try one of the local restaurants. It serves as the tail end section of a two-day lesson on logical proofs, providing students a chance to apply and revisit some of the terminology we’ve covered.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Assignment Length:

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Teaching students to utilize rhetorical logic—specifically enthymemes—in constructing an argument. The assignment also highlights the importance of considering audience, and revisits the notion of commonplaces.

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Access to online restaurant reviews or restaurant websites. Though I like having students research restaurants in small groups during class, this could work in a classroom without computers if the teacher were to either (1) bring printouts of reviews/websites to class, or (2) provide students with time outside of class to research.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

As a fan of classical rhetorical theory, I like to cover ethos, pathos, and logos fairly extensively in my 306 sections. I generally find logos the most difficult to teach. Not only is the set of terminology surrounding it (e.g. "enthymeme") tough; the entire epistemological frame required to think about "logic" in the nonscientific, probability-oriented way it's construed in classical rhetoric is often a new and tricky thing for students. I've found students tend to think "logic" must mean things like statistics and scientific facts. All this may be a story for another day, however.

So after introducing the concept of logos, I narrow to enthymemes. I start by writing a few examples of syllogisms—the relatively airtight chains of reasoning that enthymemes are not—on the whiteboard or document viewer. Since logos can be dry, I try for at least mildly interesting examples:

Premise #1: All sharks can detect the electromagnetic fields generated by their prey.
Premise #2: Genevieve is a tiger shark.
Conclusion: Genevieve can detect the electromagnetic fields generated by her prey.

Or, more germane to 2011-12's first-year forum topic:

Premise #1: All public schools receive government funding.
Premise #2: Lee High School is a public school.
Conclusion: Lee High School receives government funding.

I then shift into examples of enthymemes; examples that are based less on hard logic and more on probability and the commonplace beliefs of the audiences for whom their constructed:

Premise #1: Bigger bears are better.
Premise #2: Brown bears are bigger than black bears.
Conclusion: Brown bears are better.

Premise #1: Urban school disctricts in America are struggling.
Premise #2: Charter schools are the best way to reform struggling school districts.
Conclusion: We need more charter schools in America's urban areas.

(N.B.: As a way of reinforcing the ties between logic, ethos, and emotion—as well as the probabilistic nature of enthymemes in rhetoric, I like to show a clip from "The Promotion," the third episode of the sixth season of NBC's The Office. In the clip, one character—Jim—is attempting to construct a pro-con list as a way of making an important business decision. Another character, Michael, chides his logical approach, and Jim indeed ends up failing in presenting his eventual decision because of some presumed emotional baggage that undermines his ethos. The clip begins about 9 minutes into the episode, and I show it via Netflix. Jim's pro-con list can provide some additional examples of enthymemes that I've found students are often good at identifying.)

Once I've covered enthymemes, the activity unfolds as follows:

I put students into small groups—two or three students per. I then set out two bowls. One contains slips of paper, and on each slip is printed the name of a local Austin restaurant (obviously this is flexible, but I use Bite Mi, Torchy's Tacos, Madam Mam's, Trudy's, Homeslice Pizza, Wheatsville Coop, Kerbey Lane Cafe, Fran's Hamburgers, G'Raj Mahal, and Franklin Barbeque). The other bowl contains slips with the names of relatively well-known national chains (Chili's, Taco Bell, Five Guys Burgers & Fries, Wendy's, The Melting Pot, Olive Garden, Cracker Barrel, IHOP, Texas Roadhouse, Red Lobster, and Ruth's Chris Steak House). The locals are printed in italics and the chains in bold for easy differentiation.

Each student group picks one slip out of each bowl. I then present them with the following rhetorical situation: You are serving as a tour guide for a prospective UT student, who's coming to visit Austin and the campus with his/her guardians. The bold name indicates your tour group's favorite restaurant. The italicized restaurant is a local spot you're responsible for convincing the group to eat at during their visit. In order to think through this situation, construct at least one enthymeme you think would likely convince the group to eat at the local restaurant. Also think of at least one enthymeme the group might use to challenge your suggestion. In both cases, your first premise is likely to be a commonplace attitude towards food indicated by your group's favorite restaurant. The second premise is likely to be either a potential affinity or disconnect between that commonplace and an aspect of the local restaurant. Use the computers to research these restaurants and figure out what persuasive options might be available to you.

I don't provide examples at this point in introducing the activity to students, as I like the groups to puzzle things out on their own. But the persuasive enthymemes they construct—I hope—look something like the following (first with a Wendy's/Fran's combo, then with IHOP/Kerbey Lane):

Premise #1: Your favorite restauant, Wendy's, is known for their hamburgers.
Premise #2: Fran's is known for having excellent hamburgers.
Conclusion: While in Austin, you should try Fran's burgers.

Premise #1: Since IHOP is your favorite restaurant, you probably like breakfast food.
Premise #2: Kerbey Lane Cafe serves breakfast food 24 hours a day.
Conclusion: You should stop by Kerbey Lane Cafe this evening and try their breakfast menu.

I've had students draw on price, ambience, convenience—all sorts of interesting variables. The enthymemes I ask students to anticipate their tour group responding with might look like the following:

Premise #1: Red Lobster's menu consists mainly of seafood.
Premise #2: Franklin Barbeque does not have seafood options.
Conclusion: We don't want to try Franklin because they've got no seafood.

These response enthymemes can be thought of as concessions, elements in a larger rebuttal or refutation, or simply ways of considering one's audience carefully.

I give students 10-15 minutes to construct these enthymemes, and then have them share both their restaurants and their enthymemes with the whole class. They are myriad discussions that can emerge here. I might point out, for example, the mini-entyhmeme already present in the first premise of the IHOP/Kerbey example above, or challenge students to come up with a way of responding to their tour group's challenge enthymemes. Students often end up visiting various restaurant review websites (Trip Advisor, Urban Spoon), so a credibility-of-research-sources conversation can also take place here.

As a bonus, I like to think of this activity as one teacher's small way of keeping Austin weird.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

The most difficult part of this activity for me is keeping the definitions and limits of such rhetorical terms as "logos" and "enthymeme" straight. Students often have very good questions about what does or doesn't qualify as an enthymeme, and the more clear definitions and examples I'm ready with, the better.

More practically, you just need to have the slips and the bowls ready.

Instructions For Students:

You can divide students into groups yourself, or have them form pairs and/or trios. My speech, mostly quoted from above:

"Once you're in your groups, have one member come up and get one slip of paper out of each of these two bowls."

Wait for this to occur.

"Here's your rhetorical situation: You are serving as a tour guide for a prospective UT student, who's coming to visit Austin and the campus with his/her guardians. The bold name on one of your slips of paper indicates your tour group's favorite restaurant. The italicized name is a local restaurant you're responsible for convincing the group to eat at during their visit. In order to think through this situation, construct at least one enthymeme you think would likely convince the group to eat at the local restaurant. Also think of at least one enthymeme the group might use to challenge your suggestion. In both cases, your first premise is likely to be a commonplace attitude towards food indicated by your group's favorite restaurant. The second premise is likely to be either a potential affinity or disconnect between that commonplace and an aspect of the local restaurant. Use the computers to research these restaurants and figure out what persuasive options might be available to you. You have about 10 minutes, at which point your group will share your enthymemes with the class."

Evaluation Suggestions:

I don't formally evaluate this one, though I do try to keep it in mind as a way of providing examples to students who struggle with logical proofs and enthymemes in their major 306 papers.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Students seem to get excited and like learning about Austin culture. Maybe not good if you have particularly hungry students and you want them to stay focused on enthymemes.

Additional Resources:

Explanation of enthymeme via Silva Rhetoricae

Urbanspoon website (for Austin)

Course Type:

Course Description:

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:

Using Inform7 to Make Procedural Arguments

King — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:03:01 +0000

Author:

Matt King

Image Credit:

Screen shot of Inform7 interface by Matt King

Brief Assignment Overview:

My students had been studying communities of their choice all semester. For the last unit, I asked them to contribute their perspective on their communities in two ways: first, in a more traditional editorial-length argument, and then through an interactive, procedural text using Inform7. This software is commonly used for interactive fiction. It allows the author to set up different rooms/spaces with various people and objects. The author in turn defines the parameters and rules through which a "reader" can engage with these people and objects. Following Ian Bogost's understanding of procedural rhetoric, creating a system like this allows students to make arguments about their communities through the rules of the system.

Type of Assignment:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Assignment Length:

Multiple Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Audience

Enthymemes

Procedural Rhetoric

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Open Access Software

Video Games

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Invention, delivery, procedural authorship

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Inform7 is the main software, and you can download various versions of it here. (The DWRL has Inform in the applications folder.) This is the main software for creating the interactive text. You might also want students to have access to interpreters, software that can read Inform files and allow people to "play" a text but not change the code. Zoom worked well for me.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Full Assignment Description:

You can find the full assignment on my instructor site.

This assignment will include three components: an editorial style argument about your community, the code for an Inform7 procedural argument, and a reflection/comparison section. Your purpose in the first part (2-2.5 pages) is to advocate for a position that you take toward your community. Your argument can take a number of forms, but it should take into account the knowledge and understanding you have gained from studying this community all semester long. The third section of your paper (2-4 pages) will allow you to reflect on your procedural argument and compare the similarities and differences between the two approaches to argumentation. You are welcome to draw on your research and incorporate outside texts in any way that helps you advance your argument.

Specifics

Part One

You should conceive of this section of the paper as an editorial for The Daily Texan. (If you would rather have a different publication in mind as you consider your argument and your audience, perhaps one that you feel is more appropriate for your community, you should identify a specific alternative and inform me before submitting your peer review draft of Paper 3.) There are no specific requirements in terms of arrangement, style, rhetorical appeals, or incorporating sources, but you should draw substantially on the understanding of your community that you have been developing throughout the semester. In other words, this isn’t an opportunity for you to simply share your opinion about the community; rather, it is an opportunity to address some aspect of the conversation around your community and to contribute a perspective that members of the community will find relevant, thoughtful, and well supported. We will discuss different approaches to argumentation and persuasion in class, and you should chose an approach appropriate for your given audience. This section should be 2-2.5 pages.

Part Two

Your work in Inform7 will result in code that can be played as an interactive text. In your paper, after you complete Part One, move to the next page and paste the code for your procedural argument. Your interactive text should be inspired by your community in some way. You might incorporate people, places, social practices, or objects relevant to your community; you might use the text as an opportunity to comment on the community positively or negatively; you might use the text as a means for revealing some aspect of the community’s attitudes, values, and beliefs. There is not a specific length requirement for Part Two, but the code should work and it should be playable.

Part Three

This 2-4 page section should address four prompts: 1) Explain how your procedural argument draws on your community. What did you use as inspiration? 2) Explain how you engage Bogost’s notion of procedurality and how your project embodies a procedural rhetoric. 3) Explain how you incorporated feedback that you received during the testing phase. 4) Compare the similarities and differences between your arguments in Parts One and Two and between the two approaches to argumentation generally.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

I introduced students to the notion of procedural rhetoric through Ian Bogost's article "The Rhetoric of Video Games." The next challenge was to introduce them to the software, and here's where things can get tricky. Inform7 can be a difficult and frustrating environment to work in, since you have to follow it's particular coding language. While this language will be familiar to students (it's in English and involves basic sentence patterns; for example, to create a room, the code would be "DWRL Lab is a room"), Inform can be very particular about some things, especially verbs. So, the challenge is figuring out what exact code you have to use to get the result you want. Some students picked this up quickly, but some did not. To help students prepare, I set up a help page with links to resources, videos, manuals (both the Writing with Inform and The Recipe Book manuals), and examples. While I generally encouraged students to figure out the software on their own, I tried to help them trouble-shoot any specific challenges they faced, and I helped them share what they were doing and even the code they created as much as possible.

Instructions For Students:

You can find the full assignment on my instructor site.

Specifics

Part One

Part Two

Part Three

Evaluation Suggestions:

Grading

You will submit three versions of this paper: a peer review draft, 3.1, and 3.2. The peer review draft is mandatory, but it will not be graded. The next two submissions will be graded according to the following criteria. (As you read the criteria, keep the following in mind: “argument” will refer to Part One, and “reflection” will refer to Part Three. For Part Two, you will receive credit for making a good faith effort, although an exceedingly limited or extensive effort can lower or raise your grade.)

“C” paper:

Fulfills the assignment, though there may be some flaws or limitations in terms of general conception, persuasiveness, or thoroughness of your argument and reflection. Is written in a mostly clear and readable style, though the style may have minor flaws (in terms of grammatical correctness, clarity, or appropriateness) that do not significantly impede readability.

“B” paper:

Fulfills the assignment well, with few flaws or limitations. Presents an insightful and persuasive argument and a thorough reflection. Is written in a clear, effective, and appropriate style, with few to no errors.

“A” paper:

Fulfills the assignment with distinction. Presents a detailed, nuanced, and sophisticated argument and reflection. Is written in a style that is vivid, voiced, and distinctive, with few to no errors.

“D” paper:

Makes a good-faith effort but falls short of the assignment. Lacks a clear or adequately developed argument or reflection. Style is significantly flawed (in terms of grammatical correctness, clarity, or appropriateness) in ways that impede readability. Fails to meet the length requirement; or is not properly formatted.

“F” paper:

Fails to address the assignment, or, severely violates basic norms of civility or decency.

Additional Resources:

This assignment was modeled on a similar assignment designed by Jim Brown. You can find his original assignment description on his website.

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

Intermediate Writing Course

Literary Studies Course

Course Description:

For twentieth-century rhetorician Kenneth Burke, the act of persuasion was bound up with identification, that is, with our capacity to identify with one another's attitudes and orientations toward the world and to negotiate this sharing through symbols. Our processes of and possibilities for identification are made available and constrained to some extent by the various communities that shape and inform our attitudes and orientations. From this perspective, our understanding of the available means of persuasion in any given situation can benefit from careful attention to the communities invested in it. The attitudes and orientations circulating in particular communities call forth certain modes of argument and lines of reasoning, and our awareness of these possible channels of identification better prepares us to engage and respond to specific contexts and audiences. This class aims to introduce students to rhetoric as an art of civic discourse by attending to various communities that help constitute the public sphere.

Tags:

Inform7

Procedural rhetoric

Procedural authorship

Argumentation

Procedural Enthymeme with Inform7

OyP — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 23:30:58 +0000

Author:

Chris Ortiz y Prentice

Image Credit:

Screenshot of Inform7 Interface

Brief Assignment Overview:

Even though we use enthymemes in our everyday speech, teaching the concept presents difficulties. By making enthymemes in the interactive fiction design system Inform7, students develop a deep understanding of implied reasoning. They also learn procedural reasoning, or how the authorship of rules that constrain action might also make claims.

Type of Assignment: