Rhetorical Analysis Essay
Kindly ADD to CART and Purchase the ANSWER at $5.99 ONLY
Rhetorical Analysis
Explication/Expectation (OR: Assignment/Rubric)
DRAFT FOR PEER REVIEW WILL BE DUE WEDNESDAY, APRIL 15. REFLECTION AND REVISION PLANS WILL BE DUE FRIDAY, APRIL 17. FINAL DRAFT WILL BE DUE BY 11:59 PM SUNDAY, APRIL 19.
OBJECTIVE: Students will analyze the data that they collected and compiled from “Reporting Information” assignment.
ASSIGNMENT: Due to the Coronavirus messing up our class time, you may analyze whatever you want, from something you love to something you hate to something you researched for our class.
LENGTH: 4-5 Pages
FORMAT: MLA, double-spaced, 12-point font (Times New Roman or Calibri)
BASIC FEATURES AND QUESTIONS THAT MAY HELP (within the Rhetorical Situation):
- Context: What happened that made it possible for this artifact to be changed (or remain the same)?
- Audience*: Who was this intended to persuade to action? Did the audience change throughout the time span you chose to research?
- Purpose*: What action did the creators desire? Did this change or remain the same?
- Stance: What/Whose perspective was given? Were there other perspectives?
- Media: How was this particular artifact delivered? Did this change, and if so, why?
- Design: How did the design effect the audience? How did this change through the years? (Were the creators successful? Were they more successful in one time frame than others? How do you know?)
*This may also be your thesis.
DRAFT FOR PEER REVIEW WILL BE DUE WEDNESDAY, APRIL 15. REFLECTION AND REVISION PLANS WILL BE DUE FRIDAY, APRIL 17. FINAL DRAFT WILL BE DUE BY 11:59 PM SUNDAY, APRIL 19.
Rhetorical Analysis Rubric** (see pp 2-4)
| Criteria | Exemplary 20-15 | Approaching Exemplary 15-10 | Meets Expectations 10-5 | Minimum Score 5-0 | Score | |
| Introduction (Significance) Author will use research to construct an argument based on information given—this may about targeted audience, or the success or failure of artifact | The introduction is engaging and interesting (I HAVE to keep reading!), and the thesis statement is clear. | The introduction may be awkward, but still has a solid thesis. | While I understand the paper and its topic, I have no idea what the claim or argument is, or how it will be supported | |||
| Organization How it’s put together | The essay employs a clear topical pattern to present information about the subject, with each paragraph of the section in question clearly unified around a particular subtopic and with natural, effective transitions from point to point. | Follows a somewhat organized pattern but may not follow a logical progression or may lack skillful transitions from point to point. As a result, points may not feel organic or natural to the argument, and may instead feel “forced in” or formulaically presented | Makes no discernible use of a logical organization. The essay may be entirely narrative (and thus well-organized but not following instructions) or it may be haphazard, reading more like notes than like a structured presentation. | |||
| Appeals in Context Author will use research to argue which appeal (logos, pathos, ethos) was strongest in the rhetorical context of argument (what appeal is strongest for its intended audience?) | Author explains how the speaker uses all three appeals, makes a claim which one is used the most, and supports each claim with examples and sources, and explains them within the context of their actions | Author explains all three appeals with supporting evidence, but may not support one (omission or inclusion) | Author may define them all, but does not explain how artifact (creator) uses them, or may only give support for one appeal | Author may only mention one, or does not explain any | ||
| Audience Author will identify intended audience and implied audience | Author explains both audiences in all three artifacts | Author explains them, but may not support both | One audience is explained, or only one artifact is discussed | You don’t have this in your paper | ||
| Visual Place (where), surroundings, people, colors, etc. | Author addresses at least three aspects of visual rhetoric | Author addresses at least two visual rhetoric choices | Author addresses one, or makes a claim and does not support the others | Author may not address this, or addresses one part | ||
| Purpose Author gives speaker’s purpose or goal, and supports this with evidence and quotes (or even results from research) Author discusses both obvious goal and more subtle, underlying societal norm | Author gives artifact’s (or creator’s) purpose or goal, and supports this with evidence or results from research | Author may dismiss two artifacts | Author may only discuss one purpose of creator (artifact), or discusses the three but does not support this | I have no idea, because you did not tell me. | ||
| Media (method of delivery) Author will explain how message was delivered effectively (social media, radio, any other way we can be informed about something) | Author explains how all three artifacts were delivered effectively. | Author explains this for two artifacts, or only gives supporting evidence for two artifacts | Author explains this for one artifact, or only gives supporting evidence for one artifact | Author omits this part | ||
| Design (How it stimulates senses) Author will discuss aspects of visual rhetoric (colors, fonts, setting, any other visuals) | Author explains how all three artifacts were delivered effectively. | Author explains this for two artifacts, or only gives supporting evidence for two artifacts | Author explains this for one artifact, or only gives supporting evidence for one artifact | Author omits this part | ||
| Personal Responsibility Author will use sources that academically support claim, correctly cite sources, use MLA format properly | Argument is clearly supported by accurate evidence considered credible by the audience; sufficient detail to support the main points of the document | Many details support argument, but some are not fully elaborated or sufficiently specific; some evidence not Relevant | Some evidence is provided, but data is not fully explained, relevant to the argument, or credible; important pieces of evidence have not been included; some data inaccurate | Little or no data to support the main ideas of the argument; much of the data is inaccurate | ||
| Being Verbs Is, Am, Are, Was, Were, Be, Been, Being | 1-10 | 11-15 | 16-20 | 21 or more (this means you did not revise) | ||
**Do not freak out over the length of this rubric. This is a starting place to help you decide on your writing strategy. We can always change it as we go. J
Related products
-
visual culture
$5.99
