First Draft Due: Monday, October 1st

Peer Review: Monday, October 1st

Second Draft Due: Monday, October 8th

Conferences: NONE. Dr. Andersen will be away 10/4-10/13, and will comment on all drafts in writing.

*Please note: Dr. Andersen will be on campus Sunday, October 14th from 12pm until 5pm. If you would like to meet with her that day to discuss Assignment #2, and/or any questions you have about rhetorical analysis or the materials posted online over the past week, please stop by her office (Brotherton 213).

Final Draft Due: Monday, October 15th

How do others talk about the topics we care about? What rhetorical choices do we find effective as we read about these topics? And how can we begin to think about our own possible rhetorical choices as we work towards our final projects this semester? In your Personal Narrative you established your authority or credibility by showing your audience that you have a close relationship with your topic – that you’re a type of “expert.” For your second major assignment, the Rhetorical Analysis, you’ll need to choose an online article, resource, or piece of media from a mainstream source (not a scholarly source) that discusses the larger conversations connected to your topic. (Think back to our in-class discussions of “extended meaning.) You’ll rhetorically analyze that text in order to better acquaint yourself with the conversations surrounding your topic. We’ll be using the terminology we discussed in class, as well as the concepts addressed in our readings from Losh and Alexander, and Carroll. Clearly identify the topic you’re focusing on, and provide some context for your readers. What rhetorical choices are being made in the article that clearly reflect the exigence (or context)? How is the author conveying their message? Why make those particular rhetorical moves? In your paper, point to specific examples from the text, backing up every claim you make with evidence. Provide a link to the website or article, and feel free to include images, videos, sound clips, etc. to supplement your analysis.

As you choose your online resource:

• You do not have to use a scholarly article. (In fact, I would prefer it if you chose something mainstream.)
• Try to choose something that refers to the larger conversations surrounding your topic – the “extended meaning” or the exigence. (For instance, rather than choosing an article on a local sports team, think about the point you’d like to make about the sport itself, rather than the specific team, and choose an article that addresses those same concerns, even if the article refers to a totally different team.)
• Choose a substantial piece that gives you enough to work with in this paper. (Choosing an extremely short piece could work, but might be limiting. Aim for articles that are around 1200 words long, give or take.)
• If you think it would be helpful, you may use more than one article in order to establish a comparison of rhetoric surrounding your topic. (This is not mandatory, however.)

In your essay:

• Choose a main idea or concept to address in your analysis (rather than creating a generalized reading of the text).
  • Your argument should sound something like, “In the article, the author emphasizes the devastating impact of a lack of federal funding by focusing on the personal experiences of Puerto Rican interviewees.” (If this were your argument, your paper would then go on to analyze and explain why pathos plays an important role in the author’s article.)
• Offer a brief (very brief) summary of the explicit details in the article.
• Discuss the central purpose(s) of the article, and explain who the intended audience is.
• Analyze the rhetorical choices, describing the genre, media, and style/tone.
• Explain what appeals are being made, and how the author is making them.
• Make connections to any larger conversations you see the text addressing (again: the extended meaning or exigence).
• Consider how the text is similar to, or different from, other texts that focus on your topic. (Why bring this particular article to our attention?)

Make sure you include a reference list and in-text citations for any outside sources – MLA or APA format  – including the article you’re discussing. (We will discuss this more in class when I return from my trip. For now, make use of the Purdue OWL online resources, and be sure to ask Writing Collaboratory peer tutors to help with this.)

As I’ve mentioned before: I am not overly concerned with the length of your projects. (Quality is, I feel, much more important.) That being said, a good length to aim for in your first draft is at least three pages. That should give your peer reviewers enough text to work with, and will give you a decent head start as you revise for your future drafts.

Here is an example of a rhetorical analysis, and here’s another one. (And here’s one more!) Please keep in mind that these are NOT examples of the exact assignment we are working on in this class; I’m just providing you with these in order to show you what a rhetorical analysis can look like.

As always, if you have any questions – ask away!