Directions
For this assignment, you will develop a 1000-1200 word rhetorical analysis of a published article.
Step One Choose an article that interests you. It is important to choose an article that makes a substantial argument for you to analyze. My suggestion is to go to the website of journals that specialize in longer persuasive essays, such as The New YorkerLinks to an external site. or SlateLinks to an external site.. You can also submit your article to me if you have any questions prior to writing your essay.
Please choose an understandable article that interests you, but also be aware of your audience. As my professor once told me: "If you do not know your audience, keep it in your diary since you will be the only person reading it." Crass but poignant. If you are not writing diary entries, then you have an audience. Period. Understanding the rhetorical situationLinks to an external site., as well as the exigency Links to an external site.and kairosLinks to an external site. of the piece, will help you develop your tone, persuasive appeals, rhetorical strategies, as well as general mechanics.
OR
Choose one of these famous speeches that make substantial arguments using many of the persuasive techniques studied in class. If you choose a speech, listen to the speech as you read along with the text.
- " I Have a Dream"-Martin Luther KingLinks to an external site.. This is one of the powerful speeches ever given.
- Inaugural Address-John F. Kennedy. Links to an external site.
- Pearl Harbor Address to the Nation-Franklin D. Roosevelt.Links to an external site.
- Women's Rights are Human Rights-Hillary Clinton.Links to an external site.
The American RhetoricLinks to an external site. website has many other possibilities.
Step Two Review the "Template for the Rhetorical Analysis" and sample paper. Use your online writing resources like "Brainfuse 24/7 Homework Help" link in Canvas to help you with this if you need it.
Step Three Carefully read the article/speech and determine the subject matter and goals of the author. What is the author's purpose? Who is the author's audience? Where and when was the article published? You will need to do some research here as you establish the rhetorical situation, especially for your introductory paragraph.
Step Four Analyze the rhetorical elements of the author's writing style. Writers and speakers use words in language in different ways to achieve different effects. Rhetoric recognizes that a speaker or writer persuades their audience with different tools and techniques. Aristotle categorized rhetoric into three categories: logos, ethos, and pathos. Logos uses reason and rationality to persuade the reader. Ethos seeks to persuade the reader by appealing tothe credibility of the writer or another expert. The expert's authority, rather than the evidence itself, convinces the reader. Pathos attempts to make the case by appealing to the reader at an emotional level. Pathos may appeal to the reader's sympathy or compassion, sadness or anger, love or hatred and so forth. Read the text and take notes about the different rhetorical styles used.
Step Five Write an outline for the rhetorical analysis. The analysis should have three parts: an introduction, a main body and a conclusion. Divide the main body of the analysis into sections. The sections may be devoted to the different rhetorical elements used in the text. You can devote the first section to examining the context of the argument, another to the author’s attitude and tone, another to the rhetorical strategies (analyzing the author’s tone), and another to the persuasive appeals.
Structure Introduction: In the introduction, break down the rhetorical situation for your reader. You can begin this process by introducing the article you will be analyzing. Give the name of the article and the author. Also, state where the article was published and what the main points were. This should be written in such a way that leads the reader to a strong thesis sentence that clearly states the main points of the analysis. Please underline or highlight your thesis statement.
Body: Present the different elements of your analysis (context, author’s attitude and tone, modes of persuasion, and rhetorical strategies) in the main body of the paper. Cite examples from the text as evidence for your analysis. Keep in mind that any of the four sections may be more than one paragraph. It depends on your analysis. For example, if you feel that the modes of persuasion are crucial to understanding the article, then you may decide to devote more than one paragraph to that section. This may be true for any of the four sections of the essay. Write as many paragraphs as needed, but make sure that each paragraph has proper structure (eg, topic sentence, supporting detail, explications, transitional expressions, etc).
Conclusion: Write a one paragraph conclusion that synthesizes the central points of the analysis while providing an insight into the topic. Do not make any new claims nor provide any new evidence. Please keep in mind that an effective conclusion is often the most challenging paragraph to write. It's the last thing the reader will read, so make it count!
Review this template as one way to set up your essay.
Essay Checklist:
- 1000-1200 words
- Proper essay structure (Explanation can be found within the Essay Resources Module).
- Proper MLA formatting and documentation. Some of the guidelines are mentioned above (double-spaced, etc.). The information in Module 3 will be a helpful review of MLA guidelines. If you need additional help with MLA, please let me know or go to one of the FSW Writing Centers.
- You need at least five textual references (quotes) from the primary source (i.e., from the article) supporting your analysis.
- Use an effective variation of quotation integration techniquesLinks to an external site..
- If you use outside sources, cite them on a works cited page, as well as within the text. These are not required, though. Also, please be careful not to defer authority to your references if you choose this method. After all, this is your analysis, not someone else's.
- Do not refer to the author by their first name.
- Careful editing and revising.
- Careful reading and viewing of all assignment resources.
- Use your online writing resources like "Brainfuse Online Tutoring" link in Canvas for help.
Rubric
Rhetorical Analysis Rubric (1)
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
|---|---|---|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe writer's introduction identifies and discusses the rhetorical situation that leads the reader to a well-articulated thesis (The writer's thesis is highlight or underlined). | 20 to >17.0 ptsAchieves ExcellenceComprehensive rhetorical situation, insightful introduction, well-articulated analytical thesis, thesis correctly identified, strong context and audience awareness.17 to >15.0 ptsExceeds ExpectationsClear rhetorical situation and thesis with good development; minor omissions or limited depth, but assignment is fully satisfied. 15 to >11.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsBasic rhetorical situation established and thesis present, but development is general, uneven, or incomplete.11 to >5.0 ptsNeeds WorkWeak or incomplete rhetorical situation, unclear thesis, missing required elements, or limited introduction.5 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsMissing introduction, missing thesis, or fundamentally fails to establish the rhetorical situation. | 20 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe writer analyzes all the various rhetorical elements (context, author’s attitude and tone, modes of persuasion, and rhetorical strategies), as well as the author's evidence and reasons. | 30 to >27.0 ptsAchieves ExcellenceConsistently insightful analysis that explains what, how, and why rhetorical strategies function within the rhetorical situation. Analysis is sustained, perceptive, and supported throughout.27 to >22.0 ptsExceeds ExpectationsStrong analysis with clear explanations of rhetorical strategies and audience effects. Some opportunities remain for deeper interpretation or synthesis. 22 to >17.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsAdequate rhetorical analysis, but relies too heavily on summary or explanation of what/how rather than why. Development is uneven or lacks depth.17 to >8.0 ptsNeeds WorkLimited, superficial, or inconsistent analysis. Discussion is largely descriptive, generalized, or summary-based with little sustained rhetorical interpretation.8 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsMinimal or no rhetorical analysis; substantially incomplete, off-topic, or largely summary without meaningful interpretation. | 30 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe author effectively uses a variety of quotation integration techniques (eg, summary, paraphrase, and direct quotation) from the article as support for his or her claims. | 15 ptsAchieves ExcellenceUses a purposeful variety of quotation integration techniques (summary, paraphrase, and direct quotation). Quotations are smoothly integrated, well contextualized, and consistently followed by thoughtful analysis. Evidence supports the writer's own analysis rather than replacing it.13 ptsExceeds ExpectationsQuotations are generally well integrated with good variety. Minor mechanical or stylistic issues may occur, but evidence consistently supports the analysis. 11 ptsMeets ExpectationsMeets the minimum quotation requirement and generally integrates evidence correctly, but relies on repetitive techniques, mechanical integration, or limited explanation following quotations.8 ptsNeeds WorkQuotations are frequently dropped, poorly integrated, repetitive, insufficiently explained, or do not consistently support the writer's analysis.3 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsFails to meet the quotation requirement, demonstrates little or no effective quotation integration, or evidence is largely disconnected from the analysis. | 15 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe essay adheres to MLA guidelines for formatting, in-text citations, and the Works Cited page. | 15 to >11.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe essay substantially adheres to MLA guidelines for formatting, in-text citations, and the Work(s) Cited page. Minor formatting or documentation errors may be present (e.g., spacing, indentation, URL formatting, access dates, or citation mechanics), but they do not significantly affect readability, professionalism, or source verification.11 to >5.0 ptsNeeds WorkThe essay contains multiple or recurring MLA errors that detract from the presentation of the paper. Problems may include incorrect document formatting, paragraph indentation, in-text citations, Work(s) Cited formatting, hanging indents, URL formatting, documentation inconsistencies, or other citation errors that require substantial revision but do not completely prevent source verification. 5 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsMLA formatting and documentation fail to meet minimum assignment requirements. Major or pervasive errors, missing or incorrect citations, absent or substantially deficient Work(s) Cited documentation, or documentation problems that prevent reliable source verification significantly compromise the assignment. | 15 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiction and Mechanics: Terms and word choice provided are formal, effective, and efficient. The writing flows smoothly and logically. The writer's claims are supported with sufficient grounds and provides warrants effectively and explicitly. There are no errors in grammar. | 20 to >17.0 ptsAchieves ExcellenceWriting is polished, coherent, and engaging. Organization is logical, claims are well developed and supported with effective warrants, transitions are purposeful, diction is precise, and grammar or mechanical errors are minimal or nonexistent.17 to >14.0 ptsExceeds ExpectationsWriting is clear, organized, and generally effective. Claims are supported appropriately, with only minor weaknesses in development, style, transitions, diction, or mechanics. 14 to >11.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsWriting demonstrates basic competency but lacks consistency in organization, development, clarity, or style. Some grammatical or mechanical errors are present but generally do not impede understanding.11 to >5.0 ptsNeeds WorkWriting is frequently unclear, repetitive, disorganized, or underdeveloped. Weak transitions, vague language, unsupported assertions, or recurring grammatical and mechanical errors interfere with effectiveness.5 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsWriting fails to demonstrate minimum college-level competency. Significant problems with organization, coherence, grammar, mechanics, or academic writing conventions substantially impede communication. | 20 pts |
Total Points: 100