Rhetorical Analysis

Description

Notes from faculty meeting about Rhetorical Analysis

How much is enough analysis? This issue has been the subject of every calibration and many brown bags over the years for good reason. Re-examining how we define analysis and what we expect students to accomplish is productive for our own course development (and revision), even if we don’t develop consensus for portfolio evaluation. This year we tried to really establish this line using an example from a rhetorical analysis. Passing portfolios generally have analysis papers that make important gestures toward analysis.

A) They include an analytic thesis: “While being logically weak in some ways, this is overall a rhetorically effective essay in which the author does a good job of using narrative, metaphors…. The author also… ”

B) They include topic sentences that follow logically from the established thesis: “The author’s use of citation lends much weight to her argument because she uses the voice of … and the citations are also … ”

C) They illustrate the point of the paragraph using specific evidence from the text: “For instance, when … she quotes …. whose ideas help to challenge the common assumption about … ”

D) They don’t slip into summary: “The writer goes on to say that…”

E) They don’t simply state/discuss opinion about the content/technique but instead take a more substantiated position about the techniques in particular: Not “In my opinion, the author is right…” but instead “…I was ultimately left unconvinced because the author took an overall one-sided view of a complex issue…”

F) Whenever they use “summary,” it is highly condensed and serves to achieve a clearly stated analytical purpose: “In order to … the author reminds us not to…”