Luedtke 1
RHETORICAL CRITICISM
Program for Writing and Rhetoric, Fall 2010
WRTG 1150-089, T/R 3:30-4:45, STAD 135
Instructor: Dalyn Luedtke Office: Temporary Building #1, Room 204
Phone: 303.492.6011 Email:
Office Hours: W 4-6:00pm (and by appointment*)
*If my scheduled office hours do not work with your schedule, I’m happy to set up an alternative time to meet with you to discuss coursework. I am also available via email and I strive to answer emails in a timely manner. It is the most effective and efficient way to contact me.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
First and foremost, this is a writing class.
The focus of this class is to help you develop rhetorical sophistication, which will enable you to write in effectively in a variety of situations—especially in an academic setting.
We will do so by studying human communication in the form of sound, graphics, speech, writing, and even the built spaces around us. Rhetorical criticism is a special field that explores and evaluates human communication as process and event. At the beginning of the semester, you will pick one rhetorical event or artifact (including signs, texts, speeches, objects, architecture, advertising, websites, and so forth) to study. Then, throughout the rest of the semester, you will study your artifact through a variety of rhetorical lenses. You will acquire not only a general knowledge of rhetoric, but also develop knowledge of specific rhetorical traditions. Basically, you will engage in a systematic, prolonged inquiry into one rhetorical artifact and to gain an understanding of the different rhetorical options available to a rhetor, how they function together, and how they produce specific meanings.
As a way of accomplishing this goal, you will apply rhetorical methods to one “artifact”
of your choosing. Each week, we’ll read a text that explains a rhetorical theory and method. We will also read a few articles that use that theory and method. Every third week, you’ll apply one of those lenses to your artifact and write a short 3-5 page paper on what you discover. As a class, we’ll workshop your writing and give you feedback on the strengths of the piece and what needs to be done when you revise it. By the end of the semester, you will have applied at least 3 different lenses to your artifact and written at least three short papers. For your final paper in the class, you’ll pick one of those short papers and develop it into a larger research paper. On days when you are not writing your own arguments, you’ll be giving feedback to others.
We will explore two specific questions in this class:
· How does language persuade us and shape our realities?
· How do new lenses reveal new information about texts?
Your grade will be based on a three short rhetorical analysis papers, a longer research paper, class participation, and peer review.
COURSE GOALS: Meant for students in the College of Arts and Sciences, this course will help you:
§ write with fluency, and, in the process, acquire an understanding of the writing process;
§ develop rhetorical sensitivity, allowing you to adapt your writing skillfully to the needs of your readers and to the exigencies of specific situations;
§ become an interactive and critical reader, able to identify elements of writing craft and expression and their contribution to a text’s meaning and effect;
§ adopt an inquisitive attitude toward your and others’ beliefs and practices;
§ hone your research skills, empowering you to readily investigate questions of importance as they arise in your academic careers and your lives;
§ understand and apply conventions of standard linguistic usage, including proper grammar, syntax, and punctuation, as you compose, revise, and edit your writing across a range of rhetorical tasks and genres.
TEXTS: The required texts for this course are as follows:
· Rhetorical Criticism 4th edition by Sonja Foss (handouts)
· Knowing Words 7th edition (available in the bookstore)
· Purdue Online Writing Lab (http://owl.english.purdue.edu/)
· A pocket folder for turning in work.
GRADING:
Participation (via Twitter) 10% or 10 points
Annotated Bibliography 10% or 10 points
Workshop Responses 15% or 15 points
Short Rhetorical Analyses 30% or 30 points
Researched Rhetorical Analysis 35% or 35 points
In short, you will write three short papers of at least 3-5 double-spaced, typewritten pages. Turning these papers in on time, and revising them extensively, will constitute 30% of your grade. You will also write a 8-10 page double-spaced, typewritten paper that expands one of the shorter papers for a rhetoric audience, which will constitute the largest portion of your grade: 35%. You will also be graded on workshop responses, and annotated bibliography, and your participation in online writing and class discussion.
MAJOR ASSIGNMENTS:
In the following section, I have outlined the major writing assignments you will have throughout the semester. I will supply you with a more detailed assignment sheet for each major assignment as we near the beginning of the project.
Twitter. In this class, we will be using to Twitter to document our responses to class readings, discuss interesting ideas, and keep each other up-to-date on the rhetoric of everyday life. This is a perfect forum for asking questions and raising relevant issues. I expect your tweets to be thoughtful, respectful, and engaged. I will ask you to join our class group on twitter and walk you through the technical details of the website. While text/chat speak is very common on Twitter due to the character limit (140 characters per tweet!), I want you to avoid using it. This is an opportunity to work on making your writing concise. In order to do so, you will have to pay close attention to diction and word choice. The highest participation grades will be reserved for those students who actively participate in this forum and complete the requirements in a timely manner.
Short Papers. You will be regularly writing short rhetorical analyses. You will write three short papers total; each should be at least 3-5 pages (double-spaced, typewritten, MLA formatted). All essays must be turned in on time for workshops; late papers will receive neither credit nor feedback. Your goal will be to apply one of the tools of analysis discussed in class to your artifact. Because these papers will be short, devote all of the writing to the analysis itself. These papers will constitute about one third of your grade. You will always receive feedback from me and members of the class.
Long paper. The revision of one of your short papers should place your rhetorical analysis into conversation within the field. Therefore, you will need to conduct a literature review to find out what has been written about your subject. While it will not be necessary to include all of this review in your paper, it should be clear what kind of relationship your project has with others on the same subject (e.g., Does your project extend work done by others? Does your project break new ground? Does your project refute the work of others?). The goal of this analysis is to shed new light on your artifact. In addition, be sure to make reference to the theoretical or methodological model(s) for your analysis (e.g., If a study of metaphor, what theory of metaphor are you using?) This "apparatus" for your analysis paper should not comprise more than 25% of the total paper (at least 5-6 separate secondary sources). Please use the most up-to-date MLA style. The draft of this paper will be at least 8 pages in length and must be a complete draft (that is, it will have an introduction, a body, and a conclusion). The final draft of this paper should be 8-10 double-spaced pages, with 1" margins all around.
Choosing an Artifact. You will choose an artifact to analyze for the entire semester. The artifact should be complex, allowing for a variety of ways ‘into’ the text, and hold your interest for the entire semester. Your artifact must include significant textual material. Be aware that if you pick a pop culture text, like a television show, you must be able to explain why such a text is worth studying in depth. That said, the more complex the artifact, the easier it will be for you to approach it from a variety of perspectives. Whatever you choose, stick with it so that you have the advantage of looking at something from many angles. Here are some examples:
Web sites: Controversial or timely websites such as PETA or Change.gov
Organizations and the rhetoric surrounding them: the Promise Keepers, Focus on the Family, NRA
Advertising campaigns: Nike ads targeting women and minorities or Dove’s Campaign for Real Beauty
National events and the rhetoric surrounding them: 9/11 and aftermath
Museum installations: "A Democracy of Photographs" (9/11 exhibit at the Corcoran Gallery in DC)
Legal cases/documents: the government's antitrust case against Microsoft or the Patriot Act
Objects, technologies, and their advertising: iPods, online gaming, Facebook
Destinations: famous roads (Route 66), famous towns (Celebration, FL)
Diaries, journals, letters: family archives can be rich sources
Transcripts: interview others on a single topic and analyze what they say
Popular Culture: Books, TV shows, and movies all make good resources but choose wisely.
PEER REVIEW:
You MUST participate as a reviewer (note: I did not say editor) and fellow scholar in the drafting process. In order to give you credit for your insightful feedback and effort, I will ask you to write up a 1-2 page peer response for each person in your group Writing is a collaborative process and we will work in groups as much as possible. The goal of peer review is to make revision easier. You will get feedback from me and from several members of your class for each of the papers. Having an abundance of feedback to work with will vastly improve the quality of your work and the strength of your revision. But, effective peer review is a two-way street. You must put a substantial amount of effort into the responses you produce and hopefully you’ll get the same in return. Workshops are only as good as their participants. Because peer review is an important responsibility, if you are absent on workshopping days (unless you have documentation), you will receive a one-letter-grade reduction in your workshop grade.
ATTENDANCE: This course will be taught as a workshop; your participation is essential to the success of the course. Therefore, you are expected to attend class regularly and to be on time. Each absence in excess of two will diminish your final grade by one grading increment, after four absences we need to discuss your options for the class (such as an incomplete, withdrawal, or failure), and after six absences you will automatically fail the course. The deadline to drop this class without petitioning the dean’s office is October 06, 2010 (for those whose only college is arts and sciences, the deadline is October 29th). It is your responsibility to drop the course if you are having difficulty meeting the attendance or work requirements. Please keep these dates in mind.
For the record, I do not differentiate between excused and unexcused absences. If you miss a class for any reason*, it is an absence. So, DO NOT schedule doctors’ appointments, appointments with other faculty members, or job interviews during class time. I suggest you save your absences for any emergencies—a death in the family, illness, and so forth—that may arise during the course of the semester. In the event that you do miss class, you are responsible for getting any missed material. I suggest you exchange contact information with a classmate.
* Campus policy regarding religious observances requires that faculty make every effort to reasonably and fairly deal with all students who, because of religious obligations, have conflicts with scheduled exams, assignments or required attendance. In this class, please consult the class schedule and let me know one week ahead of time if you will be missing class for religious reasons. You are still responsible for any work missed. See full details at http://www.colorado.edu/policies/fac_relig.html
EMAIL POLICY: You should think carefully about when, how, and why you send email to me. When you email me, you should avoid asking questions that should be raised either in class or in individual consultation with me. A good rule of thumb: if your question cannot be answered in a couple sentences or less, or if it is a question that you should solve on your own, then it is not appropriate for email, and you should consider coming to my office hours or making an appointment with me instead. Lastly, I do check my email frequently, but you shouldn’t expect an answer from me immediately. You should give me at least 24 hours to respond to your email during the workweek. I cannot guarantee that I will check my email over the weekends.
TECHNOLOGY: We rely heavily on technology in this class, but you shouldn’t assume that it will always work. Problems with your computer, the Internet, your iPod, or any other technological device are NOT an excuse for missing deadlines. Be prepared by doing your work early. Excuses of this nature will not be tolerated.
WRITING CENTER:
As a CU student, you have access to free help with your writing. The Writing Center has experienced, knowledgeable consultants who can help you at any stage of the writing process and with all types of writing. Appointments in person at Norlin E111 or online: http://www.colorado.edu/pwr/writingcenter.html.