The reflective piece serves as an analysis of your learning in English 360 this term. It is also the fourth graded essay for the course. In this piece, you have a chance to point out your strengths, to synthesize your learning for the term, and to try to identify the most important of those learnings, as well as discuss how you produced them. Note: This is not to become an argument for a grade. Instead, it is a chance for you to (a) discuss the highlights of your work in the course and (b) show, on a metacognitive level, what you know about what you have done.
At the least, there are several questions you want to address in the reflective piece:
How do the essays you have written and the thinking you have done about class readings and discussions demonstrate or exemplify your strengths as a learner and as a communicator? How do you see your essays as connected with your strengths? How did those opportunities help your develop your strengths?
What are your strengths as a writer? What tools have you acquired or improved upon this term? When you look at our rubric, which dimensions do you see as your strongest?
How did you manage to use those essays and your blog entries to develop your strengths? How did you manage all the input from your peers? What did you learn that you found particularly useful? What process(es) did you use in developing your essays, blog entries, and other class knowledge to their current state? What did you learn about yourself as you did that? This is an opportunity for self-evaluation—a self-assessment that, if done well, will surely demonstrate your effectiveness as a learner in this course.
Basically, again, you want to point out the highlights in your work and to demonstrate that you understand how you achieved those strengths. I’d expect these essays to be 4-5 pages in length, but as with any other assignment, a piece of writing should be as long as it needs to be.
This essay is due on the final day of class.
The details:
If you want to use one of your course essays for the Jr. Writing Portfolio, hand it in with this essay and include the cover sheet with that essay. Feel free to include more than one essay and cover sheet. You can only use one essay from this class in your Jr. Portfolio, but you can have me sign off on more than one and make your choice later. Or you can do things the hard way and find me for a signature when you are scrambling to get your Junior Writing Portfolio finished. Your choice.
Tuesday, December 1, 2015
Tuesday, November 10, 2015
Essay Three, Modern texts
Essay Three Assignment
First, choose a modern text on which to perform a rhetorical analysis--a text from the 20th or 21st century. The text may be written, oral, electronic, or a hybrid. That is, it may have been intended for a reader--a written text, intended to be read; or it may be a written text intended for oral delivery or an oral text subsequently written down. Or it may be a multimedia or multimodal text--a video presentation, a web-delivered text, a YouTube video, a TED talk, a podcast, etc.
Next, think about the rhetorical effectiveness of the text. How does it engage the rhetorical devices you’ve read about, from the Sophists forward? How, specifically, does it use tropes, figures, schema, etc, from ancient rhetoric--and how does it adapt those devices for modern audiences and media? How does it participate in the more recent adaptations of the ancients: Locke, Vico, Campbell, Whately, etc? And, especially, how and how well does it exemplify what you'd call modern rhetoric? Make notes here, getting down to a granular level as you try to understand the text, as well as the rhetorical knowledge that went into it.
Finally, write a 5-ish page essay in which you argue, from your own point of view, how this text exemplifies modern rhetoric--or not--and what rhetorical knowledge contributes to the ability to understand a modern text. In other words, analyze the text in order to develop an observation about rhetoric in the modern era.
Bring a draft to class on Tuesday, November 16. The final essay is due in class on Tuesday, December 1.
Enjoy!
First, choose a modern text on which to perform a rhetorical analysis--a text from the 20th or 21st century. The text may be written, oral, electronic, or a hybrid. That is, it may have been intended for a reader--a written text, intended to be read; or it may be a written text intended for oral delivery or an oral text subsequently written down. Or it may be a multimedia or multimodal text--a video presentation, a web-delivered text, a YouTube video, a TED talk, a podcast, etc.
Next, think about the rhetorical effectiveness of the text. How does it engage the rhetorical devices you’ve read about, from the Sophists forward? How, specifically, does it use tropes, figures, schema, etc, from ancient rhetoric--and how does it adapt those devices for modern audiences and media? How does it participate in the more recent adaptations of the ancients: Locke, Vico, Campbell, Whately, etc? And, especially, how and how well does it exemplify what you'd call modern rhetoric? Make notes here, getting down to a granular level as you try to understand the text, as well as the rhetorical knowledge that went into it.
Finally, write a 5-ish page essay in which you argue, from your own point of view, how this text exemplifies modern rhetoric--or not--and what rhetorical knowledge contributes to the ability to understand a modern text. In other words, analyze the text in order to develop an observation about rhetoric in the modern era.
Bring a draft to class on Tuesday, November 16. The final essay is due in class on Tuesday, December 1.
Enjoy!
Tuesday, October 13, 2015
Essay Two Assignment
NOTE: The due dates have changed. See the new syllabus or the blog post below for details.
Our second essay focuses on the research question, "How does writing and/or print change rhetoric?" Any topic that responds to that question and focuses on a text from the medieval, renaissance, or enlightenment eras is fair game.
Here are several possibilities:
1. An analysis of the question itself--an essay that provides an overview and analysis of the ways writing and/or print has changed rhetoric.
2. An analysis of a single text, discussing how that text demonstrates the changes that print has wrought on rhetoric.
3. An examination of the phenomenon of print itself, probably starting with Elizabeth Eisenstein's The Printing Press as an Agent of Change and considering print as a historical/cultural phenomenon.
4. "How to read a speech," exploring the necessity of teaching people to read print texts expressively (to supply, in other words, part of the text's meaning in delivering it). There is a relationship to reader-response theory involved in this topic, as well.
5. The canon of Delivery, with a particular focus on print vs oral delivery.
6. An analysis of how a person's relationship to a text changes between oral and print texts.
These topics are not the only ones you might explore. Again, any topic that engages the research question and uses text(s) from this section of the course is fine.
Step One:
Develop a draft of your essay and bring it to class for peer review on Thursday, October 22.
Step Two:
Use the feedback from class to revise your draft. Final draft due in class on Tuesday, October 27. Post it, as well, on your blog and post the link to it as a comment to this blog entry.
Our second essay focuses on the research question, "How does writing and/or print change rhetoric?" Any topic that responds to that question and focuses on a text from the medieval, renaissance, or enlightenment eras is fair game.
Here are several possibilities:
1. An analysis of the question itself--an essay that provides an overview and analysis of the ways writing and/or print has changed rhetoric.
2. An analysis of a single text, discussing how that text demonstrates the changes that print has wrought on rhetoric.
3. An examination of the phenomenon of print itself, probably starting with Elizabeth Eisenstein's The Printing Press as an Agent of Change and considering print as a historical/cultural phenomenon.
4. "How to read a speech," exploring the necessity of teaching people to read print texts expressively (to supply, in other words, part of the text's meaning in delivering it). There is a relationship to reader-response theory involved in this topic, as well.
5. The canon of Delivery, with a particular focus on print vs oral delivery.
6. An analysis of how a person's relationship to a text changes between oral and print texts.
These topics are not the only ones you might explore. Again, any topic that engages the research question and uses text(s) from this section of the course is fine.
Step One:
Develop a draft of your essay and bring it to class for peer review on Thursday, October 22.
Step Two:
Use the feedback from class to revise your draft. Final draft due in class on Tuesday, October 27. Post it, as well, on your blog and post the link to it as a comment to this blog entry.
Changes in class readings and Essay Two due dates!
Note the changes. I'll hand these out in class, too.
Week of October 12
T: RT, Renaissance Rhetoric, Introduction, pp.553-580; Peter Ramus, pp. 674-697.
Th: ARCS, Chapter 8. RT, Margaret Fell, pp. 748-760. RT, Thomas Wilson, pp.698-735.
Week of October 19
T: ARCS, Chapter 9, RT, Madeleine de Scudery, pp.761-772; Erasmus, pp. 581-627.
Th: Draft of Essay Two (argument) due in class. Peer review.
Week of October 26 T: Essay Two (argument) due in class. Sharing and discussion from essays.
Th: RT, Enlightenment Rhetoric, Introduction, pp.789-813. Locke, pp.814-827; Mary Astell, pp.841-861.
Week of October 12
T: RT, Renaissance Rhetoric, Introduction, pp.553-580; Peter Ramus, pp. 674-697.
Th: ARCS, Chapter 8. RT, Margaret Fell, pp. 748-760. RT, Thomas Wilson, pp.698-735.
Week of October 19
T: ARCS, Chapter 9, RT, Madeleine de Scudery, pp.761-772; Erasmus, pp. 581-627.
Th: Draft of Essay Two (argument) due in class. Peer review.
Week of October 26 T: Essay Two (argument) due in class. Sharing and discussion from essays.
Th: RT, Enlightenment Rhetoric, Introduction, pp.789-813. Locke, pp.814-827; Mary Astell, pp.841-861.
Thursday, September 10, 2015
How does this quotation apply to rhetoric?
"A morality of results doesn't demand that we succeed every time or else be judged by bad people. It does tell us to put the well-being of others at the center of our judgments about right and wrong. Before I pronounce myself good, I have to point to something more than what I wanted to happen--I have to point to what I have done in the world."
--Eric Greitens, Resilience
--Eric Greitens, Resilience
Sunday, August 23, 2015
Assignment One: Imitatio speech and essay
Your first essay begins with two speeches: one from an ancient rhetor (Greek or Roman) and one by you--an Imitatio of the ancient rhetor's speech. Ultimately, you'll write an essay that reflects on what you learned from studying the ancient speech and from working up your imitatio.
Step One
First, by September 7, find a short speech or excerpt of a speech (not more than two pages, if possible) by a pre-Dark Ages rhetor (anyone from the Sophists through Augustine and Boethius) and become very familiar with that speech. The speech can be from literature (In Homer's Iliad, for example, the envoys plead with Achilles) or from actual rhetors such as Pericles, Socrates, Xenophon, Gorgias, Cicero, Isocrates, or any of the rhetors listed in ARCS or RT. You may need to look ahead in your texts a bit in order to finish this step, which involves performing a close, critical reading of the speech you choose. Really get inside it. Understand it as if you wrote it yourself. Pay special attention to the rhetorical devices the speaker uses, from the global (logos, pathos, ethos, arrangement, style, delivery, etc.) to the local (figures of speech, rhetorical tropes, etc). You can find a good summary of the local features on the Web at Rhetorica.net. For an edgier version, try Homer Simpson's rhetorical tropes. At any rate, analyze the heck out of it. Really take it apart in order to understand how it works. Research the speech and the rhetor to find out as much as possible about the occasion, the rhetor's purpose, the overall context.
Step Two
Develop your own short speech as an imitatio of the ancient rhetor. Pick a contemporary topic that is consistent with the ancient speech. If it focused on values, then choose a modern issue that centers on values. If it is a speech of praise (epideictic), then choose something or someone to praise. Et Cetera. Develop your speech using the same appeals, schema, arrangement, delivery, style, etc, as the original. You will deliver this speech in class, so pay attention to sound as well as sense. Speeches will be delivered in class on Thurs, Sept. 24 or Tues, Sept 29. The text of your speech should be no more than two pages; at two minutes per page, the speech will take no more than four minutes. You will perform the speech, not read it. So learn it well. Practice your delivery so that you exploit all the nuances you have built into it.
Step Three
Write a reflection (about three pages) about steps one and two. Discuss the challenges you faced in analyzing the original and in developing your imitation. Tell us about what you discovered in the experience of Step Two, in particular about what you learned about ancient rhetoric and about to what extent the ways of ancient rhetors translate into modern times. Step Three is due in class, in draft, on Tuesday, Oct. 1. On that day, we'll do a peer review. The revised essay is due Thursday, October 8. Hand in a paper version to me, and post your final version on your blog. The final version should include a copy of the ancient speech, along with the text of your imitatio and your reflection (the latter two should total about five pages).
Basically, the goals here are to learn about ancient rhetoric by doing it and to share what you've learned with the rest of us. I expect we'll find out a great deal about the effectiveness and the limitations of the ancient rhetors. And I hope you'll find the process interesting and fun.
Enjoy!
Step One
First, by September 7, find a short speech or excerpt of a speech (not more than two pages, if possible) by a pre-Dark Ages rhetor (anyone from the Sophists through Augustine and Boethius) and become very familiar with that speech. The speech can be from literature (In Homer's Iliad, for example, the envoys plead with Achilles) or from actual rhetors such as Pericles, Socrates, Xenophon, Gorgias, Cicero, Isocrates, or any of the rhetors listed in ARCS or RT. You may need to look ahead in your texts a bit in order to finish this step, which involves performing a close, critical reading of the speech you choose. Really get inside it. Understand it as if you wrote it yourself. Pay special attention to the rhetorical devices the speaker uses, from the global (logos, pathos, ethos, arrangement, style, delivery, etc.) to the local (figures of speech, rhetorical tropes, etc). You can find a good summary of the local features on the Web at Rhetorica.net. For an edgier version, try Homer Simpson's rhetorical tropes. At any rate, analyze the heck out of it. Really take it apart in order to understand how it works. Research the speech and the rhetor to find out as much as possible about the occasion, the rhetor's purpose, the overall context.
Step Two
Develop your own short speech as an imitatio of the ancient rhetor. Pick a contemporary topic that is consistent with the ancient speech. If it focused on values, then choose a modern issue that centers on values. If it is a speech of praise (epideictic), then choose something or someone to praise. Et Cetera. Develop your speech using the same appeals, schema, arrangement, delivery, style, etc, as the original. You will deliver this speech in class, so pay attention to sound as well as sense. Speeches will be delivered in class on Thurs, Sept. 24 or Tues, Sept 29. The text of your speech should be no more than two pages; at two minutes per page, the speech will take no more than four minutes. You will perform the speech, not read it. So learn it well. Practice your delivery so that you exploit all the nuances you have built into it.
Step Three
Write a reflection (about three pages) about steps one and two. Discuss the challenges you faced in analyzing the original and in developing your imitation. Tell us about what you discovered in the experience of Step Two, in particular about what you learned about ancient rhetoric and about to what extent the ways of ancient rhetors translate into modern times. Step Three is due in class, in draft, on Tuesday, Oct. 1. On that day, we'll do a peer review. The revised essay is due Thursday, October 8. Hand in a paper version to me, and post your final version on your blog. The final version should include a copy of the ancient speech, along with the text of your imitatio and your reflection (the latter two should total about five pages).
Basically, the goals here are to learn about ancient rhetoric by doing it and to share what you've learned with the rest of us. I expect we'll find out a great deal about the effectiveness and the limitations of the ancient rhetors. And I hope you'll find the process interesting and fun.
Enjoy!
Blog Entries and Class Blog
The syllabus is the starting point for information about the course. As the semester progresses, regular announcements and further information about class will be posted on this class blog.
In addition to being a source of information about the class, the class blog is also the place where class members can access each others’ blogs. As soon as you set up your own blog, email the URL to me (bcondon@wsu.edu) so that I can enter it on the right-hand side of this page.
Regular blog posts
Each class member will post one blog entry each day there are assigned readings.
• For assigned readings, each class member will post a blog entry of at least one page (400 words) that responds to the readings for that day’s class.
• Responses do not have to encompass the entire reading assignment or presentation. Instead, pick an issue, develop an insight, add your own knowledge, or frame a question about the day’s reading or presentation and post that as your blog entry.
• Each week, I will choose some your entries and link them to the course blog for general response. You will earn points for each blog entry, each entry selected for the class blog, and responses to entries chosen for the class blog.
Points are awarded for all entries that are on time and done in good faith (see syllabus).
In addition to being a source of information about the class, the class blog is also the place where class members can access each others’ blogs. As soon as you set up your own blog, email the URL to me (bcondon@wsu.edu) so that I can enter it on the right-hand side of this page.
Regular blog posts
Each class member will post one blog entry each day there are assigned readings.
• For assigned readings, each class member will post a blog entry of at least one page (400 words) that responds to the readings for that day’s class.
• Responses do not have to encompass the entire reading assignment or presentation. Instead, pick an issue, develop an insight, add your own knowledge, or frame a question about the day’s reading or presentation and post that as your blog entry.
• Each week, I will choose some your entries and link them to the course blog for general response. You will earn points for each blog entry, each entry selected for the class blog, and responses to entries chosen for the class blog.
Points are awarded for all entries that are on time and done in good faith (see syllabus).
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)