DWRL Lesson Plans - Commonplaces

Introducing Ideology with HSBC Advertisements

Cate Blouke — Sun, 03 Aug 2014 02:16:11 +0000

Author:

Image Credit:

HSBC advertisement

Brief Assignment Overview:

This in-class activity uses the popular HSBC ad campaign (a tryptich of the same image with different value labels) to introduce students to visual rhetoric and ideology. After discussing the ads, students create their own version.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

In-class Exercise

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Visualization

Media Requirements:

No Classroom Technology Required

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Media Console/Projector

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

A computer-enabled classroom will allow for the full activity, in which students create their own version of the ad campaign. This could easily be adapted to an activity without technology.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

First Day/Week

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

A relatively straightforward exercise, this in-class activity serves as a fruitful introduction to talk about commonplaces, ideology, and visual rhetoric. The ads themselves address the issue of values through their captions, such as "The more you look at the world the more you realize that people value the same things but in different ways."

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

If adapting for use wihtout technology, you might make up some handouts with three unlabeled images and ask students to come up with labels. Similarly, if you don't want to take up the full class period, you could pre-select images to provide students.

Instructions For Students:

As your reading from Picturing Texts discussed, we learn how to se the world in particular ways. As the authors argue, "we construct our realities as we learn to see."

While this has certainly been a theme throughout the course, today's exercise addresses how the way that we see/read texts tends to reflect our own values or ideology. Ho we interpret an image can sometimes say more about us than the image itself.

The international banking firm, HSBC, has an ad campaign that reflects this multi-faceted approach to people and reality.

The triptych above labels the same image with three very different value judgments, illustrating quite explicitly how the same object can retain radically different meanings depending on the viewer.

One of the goals of this course (and an essential element of visual analysis) is for you to learn to consider multiple readings of the same image. As such, and as a handy segue into our unit on advertising, for today's exercise you'll create your own version of the HSBC ads.

With a partner (or two), find an image/object that you can label with at least three different meanings - being careful to use an image that is licensed for adaptive reuse. You can find these images by either using the google advanced image search functions or the filters in a Flickr search (both of which I will demonstrate in class). We'll be talking more about Fair Use and Creative Commons as we move into our final unit, so this is good practice to get you started.

After finding an appropriate image, using either photoshop or an image editing platform of your choice, compile the three images into a tryptich and label them with your different value readings (just as in the HSBC ads).

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My students had a great time with this exercise and came up with some nice examples. During the discussion, we also talked about design and parallellism.

Course Type:

Intermediate Writing Course

Introductory Writing Course

Course Description:

In this course we will explore the ways in which images can be read, analyzed, constructed, and manipulated. We will interrogate how images inform our reading of historical and political events, of personal identity, of public and private spaces. We will think through issues of self-presentation: how our stylistic choices convey messages to the world around us, and how we interpret the choices of others. We will look at the spaces we frequent and consider the rhetorical effects of everything from the architecture to the furniture to lighting. In short, we will investigate how the visual (non-linguistic, non-textual) world conveys its messages.

Tags:

Ethos and Online Dating 2.0 - Incorporating Visuals

Cate Blouke — Fri, 21 Mar 2014 15:54:10 +0000

Author:

Cate Blouke

Image Credit:

Image from The Dating Game scene in Mallrats. Found on The Baltimore Chop website.

Brief Assignment Overview:

A remix of a previous lesson plan, this exercise asks students to analyze the ethos of an online dating profile and then pair it with an appropriate image - drawing on the relationship between written and visual rhetoric.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Social Media

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This works as a great introduction to the concepts of ethos, audience, and/or visual rhetoric.

Media Requirements:

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Media Console/Projector

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

In theory, you could do this assignment without classroom technology, though an internet connection and projector would be ideal.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Early in the Semester

Mid-Semester

Full Assignment Description:

This is an update on a previous lesson plan: Teaching Ethos Using Online Dating Profiles, which relies strictly on textual analysis. As I explain in that plan, "Perhaps more so than any other piece of writing, and even more so than my students' facebook pages, the self-summaries presented in online dating profiles are fundamentally arguments of ethos. Regardless of specific rhetorical aim (a casual hook up, a future spouse, or something in between), at heart, each of these texts is saying to readers, 'this is who I am, accept me.' So they seemed like a great source text to get my students really thinking about how and why they evaluate people: what sort of snap judgements they make, how they read into things without even realizing it."

In this version (re-designed for my Introduction to Visual Rhetoric course this semester), I ask students to draw connections between written ethos/self-presentation and pieces of visual rhetoric. I offer them a written profile alongside a series of pictures of eligible "bachelors" to choose from. They then had to make the case for why they thought a particular image fit the written profile.

For this specific class, we had just begun a unit on style, and my students had been reading excerpts from Barry Brummett's A Rhetoric of Style and Stuart Ewan's All Consuming Images. Our discussion, therefore, focused a lot on the stylistic choices in the images and how those might be read as reflections of particular values indicated in the written profile. While those readings and that framework aren't necessary for this exercise, they did help to get my students grounded in the way they read people's visual style. Without this kind of foregrounding, you may end up having to do a fair bit of extra wrangling to get students to articulate why they draw the conclusions they do (i.e. how they connect mustaches with driving a Vespa). But that can be a great discussion - forcing them to confront/explain the assumptions they make.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

I spent a fair bit of time compiling a set of "bachelor" photos from creative commons liscenced images that I found on the web, rather than using people's actual OKCupid profile pictures. I'd recommend just using the ones I've put together (see below), though you're welcome to make your own. The idea of using actual images from OKCupid profiles didn't sit well with me, even if they are publicly available. It seems like an invasion of privacy (in a way), or at least a kind of appropriation that I'm not comfortable with. The written profile I excerpted was previously a public page but has since been taken down/made private - which means if you have students do this as a homework assignment or on computers, they can't just google some key phrases to find the actual profile (one of the downfalls of the previous lesson plan).

I tried to compile a diversity of styles that nevertheless might fit with the written profile, as well as some that I thought clearly didn't fit. However, I was surprised by my students' responses. There were multiple votes for five of the seven images - a much wider range than I anticipated.

Instructions For Students:

In our introduction to the concept of style, we also talked about the idea of "ethos" - the character, or sense of authority, that one presents to the world, either through writing (as you may have addressed in previous rhetoric courses) or (for our purposes) through style.

This unit is all about thinking through the assumptions we make about, or (more kindly) ways in which we read, both the styles of others and our own styles. What we think of a particular style or clothing item isn't necessarily the same as how others view it.

There is, perhaps, no clearer instance of an argument based on character (and style) than online dating profiles. Each person's profile essentially makes the argument that "you should date me because of who I am." These arguments are paired with a selection of images, presumably chosen to cast the author in his or her most favorable light. On the free online dating site OkCupid, users combine images of themselves with written self-summaries in order to convince potential matches to give them a chance.

For this exercise, read over the written dating profile below, and then review the potential images. Your task will be to pair the written profile with one of the possible images. We'll assume that all elements of the image were carefully crafted/selected for this particular purpose/venue.

Questions to consider in making your choice: What kind of person does this profile describe? What does he value/care about? Which image do you think best reflects those values or that style?

Write a few sentences explaining your choice. Be sure to offer evidence for your analysis. Why does this image/person seem most fitting to you? What kinds of things about the man's style do you infer from the image? How, specifically, does that connect with the written description? You might also include your rationale for eliminating other potential options.

Keep in mind that you want to think about the "big picture" of this profile. While one or two aspects of the written part might point toward a particular image, is that image wholly congruent with the rest of the profile?

The Written Profile:

I have a yearning to explore different territory. To frolic in a refreshing mist atop the Yellow Mountains of Mainland China. To play with other great musicians. To watch shows in the opera house of Lyon, with an intermission of French kids break dancing outside the hall. To cook my own recipe in a Paul Bocuse culinary. These are things that most of my homies won't touch. Lest we forget, I am an abnormal guy; and I am looking for an extraordinary girl.

I want a girl who can be fun and adventurous. The kind of girl who isn't too afraid to suddenly break out of a three-day isolation and take a road trip across the country on a 1987 Vespa which I am convinced can take at least another hundred thousand miles.

Interestingly, my most passionate relationships involved completely contradictory personalities. Speaking of character--unfortunately, not all of us can be satisfied with pixellated photos and interview format autobiographies. Call me old-school, but coffee and a heated intellectual conversation beats the hell out of a 9 day back and forth email chat marathon. If you want to get to know me, call me. Tell me about yourself. Talk to me about politics. What is really important to you? I never get tired of meeting new and inherently good people.

The Potential Bachelors:

Bachelors.jpg

Image Credits:

#A - twocentsworth. "Studious." Flickr.com. 3 June 2008.

#B - Mosborne01. "Ashs-student-playing-guitar." Wikimedia Commons. 1 July 2010.

#C - torbakhopper. "Cool Dude." Wikimedia Commons. 10 Nov 2011.

#D - Chris Hunkeler. "Running with Music." Flickr.com. 5 May 2013.

#E - siuhonglo. "Singapore Flyer." Flickr.com. Aug 27 2011.

#F - connerdowney. "7 - Meditation." Flickr.com. 08 Jan 2009.

#G - sadly, I have lost the citation information for this one. I know it was CC licensed, though. I will post citation if I can find it again.

Evaluation Suggestions:

This was in in-class exercise, so it wasn't evaluated.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My students really enjoyed the exercise, and I was surprised by the arguments they made for one image over another. It fostered a lively conversation about stereotypes and assumptions (particularly the way they read the image of bachelor #C).

Course Type:

Intermediate Writing Course

Introductory Writing Course

Course Description:

RHE 315 - Introduction to Visual Rhetoric

With the rise of new media and network television, Americans are exposed to thousands upon thousands of images on a daily basis. From our facebook streams to our television viewing choices to our personal email accounts, we are bombarded with images: of celebrities, of politicians, of consumer goods, of natural disasters, of… cats. And we must filter through it all in order to make sense of our world.

Tags:

Using Music To Teach Sound Citation

Cowan — Mon, 28 Oct 2013 18:40:09 +0000

Author:

Jake Cowan

Image Credit:

Dave Hogan/Hulton Archive

Brief Assignment Overview:

During a discussion of proper citation guidelines, I play for my class a collection of rather infamous examples of musical plagiarism, illustrating for the students the nuances of knowing when to attribute to a source and when not.

Type of Assignment:

In-class Exercise

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Commonplaces

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Historical Context

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Citation

Plagiarism

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Media Requirements:

Media Console/Projector

Required Materials:

A set of speakers loud enough for the whole class to hear the examples easily and a device for playing music. Options for the latter include: a CD; a personal iPod; a list of YouTube videos; a Spotify playlist; a flash drive with individual files.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

While most students can tell you that plagiarism is wrong, few can tell you what it is. Ask them in class for examples and invariably they will tell you that “submitting someone else’s work as your own” is plagiarism. Instances more nuanced, and so more likely, rarely if ever get attention. Yet certainly college students have been taught the subject before in high school, and so would usually find a lesson on intellectual property theft dry, boring and repetitive. By presenting my students with new, engaging examples from a medium — popular music — from their daily lives, some of the more troublesome and subtle patterns can be addressed without sacrificing their attention.

The pieces I have used in class are organized to indicate varying levels of artistic culpability, intent and innocence regarding artistic theft; I begin with the most clear cut cuts — songs that lost a plagiarism lawsuit — then move into less obvious territory. The songs most helpful to my students, with relevant links and the concepts they mean to exemplify, are as follows:

• Queen & David Bowie, “Under Pressure” vs. Vanilla Ice, “Ice Ice Baby”

My first example highlights explicit, premeditated, egregious plagiarism. While sampling was (and remains) a common practice in hip-hop, what makes Vanilla Ice stand out from, say, MC Hammer’s use of Rick James, is how Ice failed (and even denied) crediting Queen/Bowie. (This clip really drives the point home: http://youtu.be/1s0hEi8zhmg?t=1m40s)

• George Harrison, “My Sweet Lord” vs. The Chiffons, “He’s So Fine”

In contrast to the previous pair, this example spotlights — in the words of the infamous court case — “subconscious plagiarism”; namely, how Harrison (an artist at the peak of his career) accidentally copied a much older song. While most students likely will not blatantly steal from another author, this reference shows that intent or even awareness does not always matter.

• Willie Dixon, “Hoochie Coochie Man” (performed by Muddy Waters) vs. Bo Diddley, “I’m A Man”

This case, on the other hand, calls attention to what I call “conventional knowledge”: elements of a genre that are so widespread and frequent that any attribution would be distracting and ridiculous. In terms of the blues, that would involve a riff like both Diddley and Dixon use; within US political discourse, it would be “conventional knowledge” that Republicans are conservative, needing no extra citation.

• Marvin Gaye, “Got To Give It Up (Part 1)” vs. Robin Thicke, “Blurred Lines”

Probably the illustration that gets the most engaged reaction from students, these songs, much like the previous example, show how pathos and logos (the dance-party feeling and the instrumentation, respectively) can be shared while the individuality remains intact.

• The Rolling Stones, “Lady Jane” vs. Neil Young, “Borrowed Tune”

What might have been the most flagrant case of theft is here spared of any charge of plagiarism not only because Young gave songwriting credit to Jagger/Richards, but because within the lyrics themselves, Young acknowledges that he is “singing a borrowed tune / [he] stole from the Rolling Stones.” If timed well, students can get a real kick out of this example.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Formulate a list of examples, noting specifically what sections of each track you want to play. For instance, you may only want to play the second and third verses of Neil Young’s “Borrowed Tune” (as mentioned above), in which case you’ll want to start the track around the 1:20 mark. A certain familiarity with music theory, in order to communicate exactly how the pieces are similar, might also be helpful for some instructors. Furthermore, knowing the history behind whatever examples you choose — such as whether or not a lawsuit was brought against an artist, and if so, who won — is highly illustrative; asking students whether or not they think George Harrison, for instance, lost his case also improves engagement.

Instructions For Students:

As with any class that primarily involves media examples, students should pay close attention to the music, taking note of whatever objective elements they hear. These could include: genre, instruments, speed, lyrics, time or key signature, etc. All of these elements play into what makes a record unique or derivative.

Evaluation Suggestions:

As an in-class group assignment, I graded my students on participation.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Typically, students enjoy breaks from the routine of reading, and can become very engaged when the material under observation is something that is a part of their daily life, like pop music is. Generally speaking, they are often surprised by the outcomes of certain cases (like the George Harrison or Robin Thicke instances above), which broadens their understanding of exactly what counts as theft and what may not. As it is, few of my students who have participated in this lesson have had any issue with properly citing their sources.

Course Type:

Introductory Writing Course

Tags:

Evaluating & Complicating Audience on the Web

Wall — Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:05:28 +0000

Author:

Amanda Wall

Image Credit:

"The Calm After the Show" by Thomas Hawk via Flickr

Brief Assignment Overview:

This lesson plan is designed to get students thinking about the real and intended audiences of web texts by analyzing publication venues and comment replies. It also highlights that a text's audiences are not (always) simply people who agree with the author(s) or people who disagree and need persuading.

Type of Assignment:

In-class Exercise

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

One-Two Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Peer Review

Revision

Style

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Open Access Software

Social Media

Media Requirements:

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Media Console/Projector

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

I used this lesson in a computer classroom where each group of students had access to a computer, but that's not necessary. In a non-networked classroom, you could print out articles with comments attached for students to analyze. Or you could project one article at a time using an overhead or a digital projector as a full group exercise.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

When presented with texts published on the web, students often have difficulty identifying an audience more specific than "everyone with an internet connection." Not all texts are viewed by everyone everywhere, and access to texts is decided not just on the basis of physical access to the material. This lesson plan is to get them thinking about the real and intended audiences of web texts by analyzing publication venues and comment replies. This lesson is additionally meant to point out that a text's real and even intended audiences are not (always) simply people who agree with the author(s) or people who disagree and need persuading. Web audiences, in other words, are (often) neither hopelessly heterogenous nor simplistically homogenous, and when we construct audiences through rhetorical interpreation, we ought to be as clear as possible about our logic. Students work in groups to analyze webtexts with different audiences and then come together as a group to compare their findings.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Before this lesson, we had already covered the basics of rhetorical ethos and had some discussion of audience as it affects and is affected by authors' ethos. I had also quickly shown them a couple of ways to find demographic data for websites, through advertiser information or through in-site analytics such as YouTube's statistics.

First, I distributed the set of analysis prompts/questions to every student. (See below under Student Instructions.)

We first analyzed a sample text together using the questions. I used a projector, but you could also print it out for everyone.

I then broke students into groups of 4-5 and assigned each group a web text to analyze using the analysis questions I had given them. Although the questions ask students to use comments to reflect on their initial discussion of the audience, I do not assume that comment posts provide clear indications of an audience's makeup. Instead, the my intention is to ask students to triangulate their data, to allow the comments and the publication venue and the content of the article to complicate each other when it comes to constructing an audience. (You can find the web articles that I assigned under Resources.)

After 30-40 minutes, we came together to share our findings and compare the audiences of the different texts. We were able to discuss the ways in which audiences are difficult to determine, or rather, construct, and the importance of interpretation when it comes to arguing that a particular audience is indeed what we say it is.

I did this in one 75 minute class period, but I could easily see this exercise spread over two such class periods, perhaps with a take-home writing exercise between them to have them further reflect on their interpretation of the data.

Instructions For Students:

Looking at the Original Post: the article, video, blog post, etc.

First, what kind of website is this? If you don't know much about them, search in Wikipedia for some basic information. Do they put out certain kinds of content? What are they known for? What kinds of things do people say about them?
What is their purpose in publishing this particular article or blog post or text, do you think?
Can you tell who wrote it? What can you find out about them? If no author is listed, why do you think that is? How does that affect our interpretation of the audience?
Skim or view the article/video/post. Based on a very quick read-through, who is their intended audience?
Is there any particular information to tell anything about who reads this article (like YouTube statistics) or this website (like advertiser demographics)?
Now that you've written all this stuff down, ask, "Who is their audience?" (Both real and intended). Who do they expect their audience to be? What kind of people do they expect when they write these articles? What kind of people read these articles? Be clear about how you're coming to these conclusions. Draw arrows or write down which piece of evidence you're using for each of these generalizations.

Looking at the comment posts.

Read the first 5-10 comment made on the article/blog/video. How do these comments confirm or complicate your initial thoughts about the audience? Give three specific examples of how these comments do so.
Pick one comment. What kinds of things can you guess about the person who wrote it? Explain your reasoning next to each thing you guess. How does this person's ethos compare to your initial thoughts about the article's audience? What does the purpose of this comment seem to be?
Sum up your group's thoughts about the article's audience. What can be said about the audience at this point, how sure are you about those things, and what evidence do you have to back them up? What kinds of statements are the most of the audience likely to agree on, if anything? What kinds of things CAN'T you determine at this point, and what pieces of evidence or lack of evidence makes it too complicated to do so?

Evaluation Suggestions:

This lesson was not evaluated, the first time I did it, but I believe I will do so in the future. Students are doing a substantial bit of prompted writing in this exercise, and I will probably count it as a credit/no-credit minor writing assignment next semester.

Additional Resources:

These are the sources I had students analyze:

Austin American Statesman - Judge strikes down key provisions of sonogram law

YouTube - Alamo Drafthouse Takes on Texters

Human Events - Carrying A Gun Responsibly Isn't Simple

Cracked - The 6 Most Frequently Quoted Brain Facts

Course Type:

Intermediate Writing Course

Course Description:

This lesson was created for my class RHE 309K: The Rhetoric of Flame Wars, in which we take a rhetorical approach to understanding the public discussions, arguments, and yes, flame wars, that happen in online spaces. Here's the course description:

Rhetoric classes are fundamentally about argument—how to make an argument—and this one is no different. The pervasiveness of electronic communication, particularly on the internet, means that we encounter new (and old) challenges in making arguments and having dialogues. Some have suggested that all arguments on the internet are fated to end up flame wars: vicious bouts of namecalling and mudslinging. I don’t think that’s the case, and I’m not even sure that flame wars don’t serve some purpose in our culture. But it is the case that lots of people are worried about how we talk to each other and how we argue with each other online. Issues like privacy settings and moderation and screen names and anonymity and character limits all affect how we debate. This class examines those issues and more. Ultimately, we ask, how might it be possible to have or design or produce a deliberative, democratic debate in a public internet space?

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:

One-Two Class Periods

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

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

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:

Mid-Semester

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:

Intermediate Writing Course

Introductory Writing Course

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 Music Videos to Explore Historiography

Laura Thain — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 23:08:36 +0000

Author:

Laura Thain

Image Credit:

Reality by Rach

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment encourges students to think about how they can read and piece together primary sources to create a descriptive narrative. Students are asked to pair together Steven Horowitz's useful Billboard article "The Boys! Are Back in Town," (Billboard 124.11 (2012): 24-29) and three music videos: 'N Sync's "Bye Bye Bye," One Direction's "What Makes You Beautiful," and The Wanted's "Glad You Came" in order to construct a history of "the boy band" as a class.

Type of Assignment:

In-class Exercise

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Multimedia

Video

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This lesson plan should help students practice

observing characteristics of historical narrative in the example article.
employing primary sources in order to construct their own historical narratives.
visual analysis. This helps prepare students for more rigorous analysis later in the semester.
genre analysis. This helps students understand how to describe boundaries for celebrity groups and construct their own definitions of key terms in the realm of celebrity.

Media Requirements:

Media Console/Projector

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

This activity is discussion-based, though students may opt to take notes for reference during the larger discussion.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Early in the Semester

Mid-Semester

Full Assignment Description:

In Unit 1 of my class, The Rhetoric of Celebrity, I require my students to construct a historical account of a specific area of celebrity of interest to them. Throughout this unit, we practice descriptive modes of discourse oriented around the conventions of historiography. The goal of Unit 1 is to encourage students to recognize how different sources construct histories of people, places, and events by employing several key historiographical conventions: designating points of origin; describing the composition of groups, genres, or movements; tracing historical trajectory/historical narrative; addressing concerns of taste and cultural register; and positing possible future trajectories.

I begin class by handing out Horowitz's article and asking the students to read it. After students finish reading, we spend a few minutes summing up Horowitz's main argument. I ask them to identify elements of the article that they think make it "historical" in terms of the rhetoric it employs. If the students struggle to accomplish this, I bring up the Essay 1 prompt and remind them of the requirements of their own history writing project--Where do boy bands begin? What are some examples of boy bands? What constitutes a boy band? How do media and technology influence the development of the genre? What trajectories can we identify? How can we fit boy bands into high or low culture? What is the future of boy bands? Then we discuss how Horowitz has answered these questions, and how we might use primary sources to substantiate, contest, or expand Horowitz's claims.

I then show, in chronological order, three music videos: 'N Sync's "Bye Bye Bye," One Direction's "What Makes You Beautiful," and The Wanted's "Glad You Came". I ask the students to address the genre of boy band celebrity and identify commonalities and differences between the three pieces. We start with commonalities:

How can we define a boy band using these three sources?
What elements do all the "boys" share? (clothing style, hair style, choreography, distinct personalities, indistinct personalities?)
Who else could we add to our list of boy bands?
Who wouldn't fit under the heading of boy band?
What can audience reception lend to our definition?

Then, we move on to differences.

How are the three bands different?
How have the image of the boy band changed over time?
What influence does cultural register/taste have on boy bands' presentation over time?
How might boy bands exist in the future?

Finally, I ask students to construct their own abbreviated "history" of boy bands in groups to share with the class, using one additional video source to substantiate their claims. The additional source could be omitted for non-technology-enabled classrooms.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Instructors might read the article, watch the videos, and think of leading questions to propel discussion if student should have trouble getting started. Once a student articulates a few ideas, in my experience, the discussion is generally lively.

Instructions For Students:

Students should take notes on the historical elements of the article, as well as on some formal elements of the music videos, to help them generate specific points of reference during in-class discussion.

Evaluation Suggestions:

In general, student presentations at the end of class indicate how well students can both identify and employ the historical elements we are examining in Unit 1. I like to walk around during group work in order to informally evaluate brainstorming/invention at this level, as well.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Although it embarrasses students a little to watch Boy Band videos, this lesson plan has in the past been a fairly foolproof way to engage them in both descriptive rhetorical practice and analysis of descriptive rhetoric. Almost everyone participates in the larger discussion, and the informal student presentations at the end of class are generally of good quality considering the amount of time devoted to them.

Additional Resources:

This lesson plan can easily be applied to any descriptive unit that wants to tackle the rhetoric of a particular historiography by merely swapping out the sources. If the sources are from the realm of popular culture, students seem particularly able to grasp somewhat complex rhetorical concepts and apply them to other spheres.

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

Intermediate Writing Course

Introductory Writing Course

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 useful for Unit 1, although I try to introduce skills in each unit that will ease students' transitions between these three modes.

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:

Partial Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Annotation

Organization

Synthesis

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Ethos, visual analysis, digital literacy,

Media Requirements:

No Classroom Technology Required

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Media Console/Projector

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

Mid-Semester

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:

Intermediate Writing Course

Introductory Writing Course

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:

Teaching Audience and Stakes With the Colbert Report

Mercier — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 20:30:01 +0000

Author:

Aaron Mercier

Image Credit:

David Shankbone

Brief Assignment Overview:

This exercise asks students to work in groups to move past a working summary of a text's rhetoric to consider the goals of an author and their strategic approach to audiences. It uses PBworks' collaborative potentials to bridge the gap between two connected class discussions.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

In-class Exercise

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

One-Two Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Cultural Context

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Software

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Encourage students to think flexibly about the stakes of any given argument and the various goals an author might pursue.

Get students thinking about the relationship between rhetorical goals and persuasive strategies.

Continue to emphasize the central role of research in developing sound rhetorical analyses.

Begin thinking about transitions and their rhetorical function as a critical reader (anticipates later lesson on transitions considered as authors).

Media Requirements:

Media Console/Projector

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

One clip of the Colbert Report, digital projector, computer classroom, PBWorks or some other collaborative website to which all students have access.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Mid-Semester

Full Assignment Description:

This exercise incorporates elements of full-group discussion, small-group work, collaborative writing, and oral presentation.

I used the 10/2/2012 episode of the Colbert Report as the assigned reading for the first of these class periods. I asked my students to watch the opening segment, paying particular attention to the way Colbert set up for his interview using punchlines as transition sentences to string together several topics having to do with the presidential election, campaign finance, special interest advocacy, and religion. This episode is a particularly rich one, but you can use any more current episode that features a "hostile" or oppositional-type guest.

At the beginning of class, I led a brief discussion of the clip, asking: what is Colbert's argument? What is Garlow's argument? What were they trying to acheive with their audiences? Were they addressing the same audience? Once we had agreed upon some very basic answers to these questions, I replayed the segment. I then started asking about transitions. How did Colbert's monologue prepare the audience to react to Garlow? How does Colbert link Garlow and his Pulpit Freedom Sunday movement to other political operatives like the Koch brothers, and what are the implications of such a connection?

Once we've got these questions resolved at a fairly basic level, I break the class down into 5 groups of four and ask them to

Use internet research to get context on Garlow, his movement, and the argument that he and Colbert have. The references to political figures, laws, the constitution, and the US tax code fly thick and fast in this segment, both before and during the interview, so there's plenty for them to pick out and focus on.

Come up with a coherent summary of Colbert's argument and Garlow's argument, each considered as separate texts. Use direct quotation to support the summary.

Getting to this point takes most of a 75 minute class. For homework, I ask each group to post a page of text to the PBworks website. In this page they must make a claim about both Garlow and Colbert with regards to what audiences they are addressing, what they want those audiences to do/think/take away from the interview,and support their claims with both direct reference to the Colbert segment as well as secondary information. On the following class day, each group presented their work to the class in a two minute prepared talk, outlined collaborative via pbworks.

The students seem to get quite a lot out of Colbert's humor, and are consistent in surprising themselves by discovering additional nuance in his argument. Four out of the five groups concluded that Garlow "wanted to convince more people that preachers should be able to talk politics from the pulpit" and supported their claim with direct quotation from Garlow on the issue of free speech. These groups invariably concluded that the appearance was unsuccesful for Garlow because Colbert won the argument, capitalizing on his friendly audience and attacking the obvious gaps in Garlow's logic and evidence.

One group, however, found that Garlow's organization had edited his appearance and put up a clip of just the interview portion of the segment, with none of Colbert's introductory monologue. This editing, together with the caption beneath the embedded video, led the fifth group to conclude that Garlow's goal in appearing on the Colbert Report was simply to gain exposure for his upcoming protest event by any means necessary. They point out that Garlow's whole intention, as he states on the Colbert Report, is to antagonize the IRS by preaching politics from the pulpit in unison with other preachers on one Sunday in October. This antagonism is meant to force the IRS into a legal showdoqwn with the Pastors in which the Pastors can show the government attempting to limit free speech and challenge the conditions of tax code's religious exemptions in the Supreme Court. The fifth group, then, concluded that Garlow was just as successful as Colbert in this segment, because his goal was never to win the argument, but to win more attention for himself. This idea led to a full class discussion about the various possible payoffs of "exposure for exposure's sake" in today's news environment.

This in turn led back to Colbert's transitions/punclines in the opening monologue. Using the quotations and summarized evidence transcribed by the various groups, we spent the rest of the second class period creating an outline of Colbert's argument from opening joke to introduction of Garlow, placing particular emphasis on how Colbert's jokes stimulate a process of association in the audience's mind that links Garlow to superPACs and wealthy conservative donors like the Koch Brothers. One student proposed we think of Colbert as attempting to undercut Garlow's "rhetoric of victimhood" and re-construct the preacher-activist as a plutocrat.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

This is a fairly low-prep lesson. You'll need to select and take notes on a Colbert segment, follow through on a couple of the research opportunities before class, and that's about it.

Instructions For Students:

For watching the video as assigned reading before the first clas period:

watch the opening segment, paying particular attention to the way Colbert set up for his interview using punchlines as transition sentences to string together several topics having to do with the presidential election, campaign finance, special interest advocacy, and religion.

For small group work:

Follow up on as many references and "factual" claims made by Garlow and Colbert as you can. Give yourself context and check to see how and to what purpose each speaker is deploying evidence. Evaluate what kinds of evidence are being used, and try to locate gaps or assumptions in the logic of each speaker. Generate a summary of each speaker's argument that accounts for how they deal with problematic evidence or cover over holes or assumptions in their reasoning.

For homework

Based on what you have now found out about Garlow, Colbert, and the issues they discuss, make an argument about what each speaker is trying to accomplish with the segment, amongst which audiences, and how they go about accomplishing it.

Evaluation Suggestions:

No portion of this assignment is graded, it is meant to stimulate conversation about a complex text and to provide low-stakes practice in invention, research, and the organization of an argument.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

This exercise generated some of the best conversation we'd had so far in the term, and a lot of students seemed to turn a corner in their struggles with "analytical vs. topical argument" when they ran up agains the idea that rhetorical goals can be specific, narrow, and complex.

Course Type:

Intermediate Writing Course

Course Description:

Rhetoric 309k: Rhetorics of Truthiness takes most of its material from the news cycle as it emerges week to week. Using core theoretical readings assigned early in the term and selections from a writing textbook, students are asked to develop expertise on a timely, compelling, controversial topic through independent research and several interconnected writing assignments that move from summary to synthesis to rhetorical analysis. Much of the focus of the course is on teaching students to develop a tolerance for and facility with conceptual complexity, and to explore complex issues without attempting to generate a reductive, totalizing "answer" to questions of rhetoric and policy.

Tags:

Using Facebook to Review Local & Global Argument Types & Rhetorical Appeals

Delacroix — Tue, 23 Oct 2012 07:03:54 +0000

Author:

Julia Delacroix

Image Credit:

facebook

Brief Assignment Overview:

In this lesson students review the basics of argument types & rhetorical appeals. Working in groups, they look for examples of several argument types in facebook status updates. As a class we review the examples, evaluate their classifications, and discuss the rhetorical appeals at play.

This lesson is particularly useful for articulating arguments that may be implied by the text but not directly stated and for differentiating between local and global arguments (since nearly all of the pages in question share the same global proposal argument – that viewers should support their institution or product – it’s useful for students to see how different types of local arguments work together to support that claim).

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

In-class Exercise

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pre-Writing

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Open Access Software

Social Media

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Reinforcement of the idea that “everything’s an argument”

Review of argument types

Review of rhetorical appeals

Review of audience

Practice identifying local vs. global arguments

Media Requirements:

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Media Console/Projector

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

Outside of a technology classroom, this exercise could be used with printouts of the pages, or it could be adapted to be a whole-class activity.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

After a brief review of the various types of arguments & rhetorical appeals, students are asked to go to the UT rhetoric facebook page. Together we read through the first few status updates and discuss what arguments are being made, to whom they’re being made, what types of arguments they are, and what rhetorical appeals are being employed. Then students are asked to divide into groups of three or four, and read through the facebook page of a national figure, television show, corporation, or governmental department. They're asked to find in the status updates examples of various types of local arguments: definition, evaluation, causal, rebuttal, and proposal. When they find an example, they make a note of the status update and raise their hand. Once three or four groups have found examples of a particular argument type, we come together as a class to analyze one or two of them. We identify the audience, decide what type of argument each represents and how it might work to support the global argument, and discuss the rhetorical appeals being made. Then students return to their groupmates to identify the next argument type.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Because these pages change daily, it’s worth checking them a day or so before the assignment & possibly altering the list. I decided on a list of nine or ten sites, including this year’s presidential candidates, some sites for television shows (The Apprentice, The View, and Deadliest Catch) several commercial sites (Starbucks, Home Depot, Taco Bell) and a few others (City of Austin, NASA).

Instructions For Students:

[The following instructions are communicated aloud]

Today we’ll be testing the idea that “everything’s an argument.” We’ll look at Facebook status updates to find examples of different types of arguments. We'll begin by looking at the UT rhetoric facebook page.

[have students access page on their computer, and in group discussion identify the global argument and the audience. Then read through a few status updates and discuss the local argument types, how they support the global argument, and what rhetorical appeals they use to do so]

Please divide into groups of three or four and choose one of the facebook pages on the board. Call up the page and read through it for a few minutes to decide what you think the global argument is, and who the audience is.

[allow students five minutes or so to read and then discuss]

Now we'll turn to local arguments. Read through the status updates on the page. When you find an example of a [definition, or causal, or proposal] argument, please make a note and raise your hand.

[The assignment proceeds as outlined above.]

Evaluation Suggestions:

There is no formal evaluation, but the exercise itself will allow instructors see who may be having trouble identifying argument types, and to check for understanding with these students during the larger class discussion and analysis.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

This is a revision of a lesson I taught using the biography section of five or six different celebrity websites rather than facebook profile pages. That lesson generally went well; students were engaged and having them pick the arguments was useful practice for rhetorical analysis. I’ve revised this lesson to use facebook pages rather than celebrity websites because I hope that this exercise will produce a more interesting discussion about the role of audience. I also think that this will be more difficult for students than it may seem; the arguments implied by status updates are frequently pretty buried, and taking the time in class to model and practice how we might draw such arguments out will be useful preparation for students moving toward rhetorical analysis. I’ll be sure to update this section after I teach the revised version.

Course Type:

Introductory Writing Course

Course Description:

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

Tags:

Facebook

Local arguments

Argument types

Reviewing rhetorical appeals

Pre-Writing: Surveying Expectations on the First Day of Class

RMazique — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 00:18:32 +0000

Author:

Rachel Mazique

Image Credit:

Gallaudet University Tutorial & Instructional Programs: http://www.gallaudet.edu/tip/english_works/writing/pre-writing_writing_a...

Brief Assignment Overview:

On the first day of class, students think about the course topic and document their personal definitions of and understandings of the topic. In our case, students had to think and write about "Disability in Pop Culture." This type of writing serves multiple functions; it allows the instructor to glimpse the students' thinking and writing processes. It allows students to express or face any anxieties they have about writing/the course topic. It serves as an ice-breaker, and it serves as evidence of student development as this piece of writing can be referred to after students have developed a critical framework for understanding the course topic.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Semester-long Project

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Invention

Pre-Writing

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

1. To have students examine their personal conceptions of "disability" and think about examples of "disability" in pop culture.

2. To have students demonstrate their writing skills in a low-stakes, in-class writing exercise, in which they must write in complete sentences.

3. To document a "starting point," which can serve as evidence of the development of critical thinking after students have read about and discussed the critical frameworks for the class. (In our case: rhetoric and disability theory.)

4. To have students become familiar with our class wiki and develop their digital literacy skills from the first day of class.

5. To expose students to the ways in which one activity may apply to multiple course strands and dimensions of learning under The Learning Record assessment system.

Media Requirements:

No Classroom Technology Required

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

I planned this exercise for a classroom with computers as well as a media console and projector as our class work is primarily documented and stored in a PBworks wiki. However, it could be adapted for a classroom without computers as students may write on paper rather than on a computer or in a classroom wiki.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

First Day/Week

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

I designed this as an in-class writing exercise so I could address student concerns or challenges with writing in an online environment (as most students had not yet joined the class wiki that I invited them to prior to our first meeting). After introducing the class and reading through the course description, I invited students to free-write on the topic of the course. I indicated that there was no right or wrong answer, as I wanted this to be a low-stakes writing exercise. I gave students about fifteen minutes to set up their wiki page and write their thoughts before hitting "save." I also explained that this would serve as evidence of their thinking and writing processes from the first day of class and that we would refer back to their thoughts during class discussions as well as in a Unit Two short reflection paper--when they would revisit these concepts--after having developed a critical framework for thinking about and through rhetoric and about disability theory. Because the "firstness" of this exercise--first time using the wiki, first time writing for the class, "first day" evidence of thoughts about the course topic--was very important to the pedagogical goals, I assigned this as homework to those who did not complete writing their thoughts out to their satisfaction. I also assigned this as homework to students who added the class later and asked that they write their thoughts before they delved into the course readings on disability theory and disability studies. I also indicated the exercise's relevance to our course goals and the dimensions of learning by emphasizing the goals in bold and underlining the dimensions, so students would realize how each activity was relevant to mutiple course goals and relied upon several dimensions of learning as their progress is measured not by traditional methods of grading, but by The Learning Record.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Prepare your list of questions to prompt student thinking about the course topic.

If having students post their work online, create the webpage or wiki page with the writing prompt.

Or, make copies of the writing prompt for students to write on (for classes without technology).

Instructions For Students:

In your student folder, create a page titled "1st Day Pre-Writing Exercise" (with your preferred name, major & year in school in the top right-hand corner of the page). [Digital Literacy & confidence and independence or prior and emerging experience]
Free-write, or write a brief, one paragraph reflection (full sentences) on how you think pop culture has influenced your perception of (dis)ability & what (dis)ability means to you. [Presentation & prior and emerging experience]

Here are some writing prompts to get you thinking (answer as much as you can/feel free to add to this anything you think is relevant to the discussion) [Writing Process & creativity, originality, and imagination]

What does "disability" mean to you? What does "ability" mean to you?
How might pop culture have influenced your perception or understanding of these terms?
What kinds of images come to mind when you think of (dis)ability?
What kinds of pop culture have you seen or heard--relating to (dis)ability?
How do these images or sounds persuade you to think a certain way about (dis)ability?

Evaluation Suggestions:

In a class with traditional grading systems, this piece of writing may only receive "completion" points as it is designed to be a low-stakes writing assignment. However, in courses that use The Learning Record assessment method, this piece of writing becomes an essential piece of evidence that documents the thinking and writing skills of students on the very first day of class. It allows students to better analyze their development when they have a concrete example of the ways in which the course may or may not have transformed their writing and thinking skills when they can contrast writing from the first day of class with writing and thinking at the midterm as well as at the end of the course.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Students were anxious when I mentioned they would have a writing exercise to do in class and that they would create a page on the wiki to do so. Some students mentioned after class that they do not write well within time constraints and were concerned about whether they would be allowed to finish their writing at home. I assured them that they could as the point was not to test their speed. And, for those students who were anxious about writing and using the wiki, writing on the first day allows students to face their inhibitions about their writing and it allows me to glimpse their writing skills as well as their prior experiences on the course topic. With The Learning Record system of assessment, challenges, frustrations, fears, and problems (as well as successes) writing in digital environments are documented in weekly (or daily) observations that students make about their learning processes. So, encouraging students to experience these dilemmas and to strategize ways to confront their concerns gives them an opportunity to develop their skills as well as their confidence and indepenence (two dimensions of learning). Students who wrote observations about this "First Day Pre-Writing Exercise," noted that their initial anxieities faded away once they were actual in the digitial environment and saw that they were not alone in their concerns--as their peers around them were also encountering similar experiences. Students are also able to build a rapport with one another as students ask a peer for help on creating a wiki page or with navigating the wiki.

With regards to content, some students had very sophisticated thoughts on "disability" and extensive experience with or examples of "disability" in pop culture. Most had common, stereotypical answers to give when defining "disability." These answers were touched on during class discussions on readings by "disabled" writers or during discussions of disability theory. Students will also refer to their thoughts from the first day when we begin Unit Two and they write a reflection on "disability" in pop culture given their new knowledge and critical analyses of (dis)ability in pop culture.

Additional Resources:

1. The Learning Record

2. To access my syllabus with more information on how I use The Learning Record, click "View" under the column, "Syllabus."

3. PBWorks

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

Intermediate Writing Course

Introductory Writing Course

Literary Studies Course

Course Description:

This course is an intermediate writing course, but the activity could apply to any course with a specific topic that instructors want their students to interrogate. Here's my course description:

RHE 309K – Disability in Pop Culture is a rhetoric and writing 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.

In this course, you will focus on analyzing the relationship between pop culture and rhetoric. Your analyses will 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?

Beginning with a selection of readings that introduce disability theory, you will conduct research to explore a controversy of your choice on (dis)ability in pop culture. Throughout, you will engage with your controversy, analyzing editorials, print and video advertisements, and other contemporary portrayals of “the supercrip” in pop culture to analyze rhetorical appeals. The last unit will focus on multimodal arguments; you will create a multimodal composition that takes a position on the representations of bodies and abilities.

Tags: