English 102.

Major Writing Assignment #2: The Rhetorical Analysis

First Draft D e: !nstr ctional Assistant Re"ie#: Final Draft D e:

Rhetorical $it ation: A few days after submitting your Research Paper (MWA #1), your
boss came to you with another assignment. our boss has shared your MWA #1 with her super!isor, and the firm is now committed to in!estigating the prob"em you identified further. #he firm now wants to "earn about pub"ic perception and$or discourse about your prob"em so that it can better understand how to proceed with a product, program, or campaign about the prob"em. %t has as&ed you to find an artifact or e'amp"e of pub"ic discourse about your prob"em (such as in socia" media, ad!ertising, or other pub"ic media) and to perform a rhetorica" ana"ysis of that artifact. our boss has mentioned that the firm p"ans to present this Rhetorica" Ana"ysis at the ne't ma(or meeting. As such, the firm wou"d "i&e you to create a mu"timoda" composition for this assignment.

M ltimo%al Assignment: )or this second Ma(or Writing Assignment, you are being as to
create a mu"timoda" Rhetorica" Ana"ysis. ou wi"" begin by identifying an artifact from pub"ic discourse. our artifact can come from any medium* newspapers, b"ogs, websites, b"ogs, !ideos, te"e!ision, radio shows, ad!ertisements, etc. #he on"y re+uirement is that it must somehow be representati!e of pub"ic discourse about the prob"em you identified in MWA #1. After identifying your artifact, you wi"" create a mu"timoda" ana"ysis of your artifact. Mu"timoda" compositions combine te't, images, and sound to offer a coherent message to an audience. #his means that you cannot submit a traditiona" word,processed paper in response to the assignment. %nstead, you must create a uni+ue mu"timoda" composition, such as a !ideo, a photograph s"ideshow that combines narrated or written te't, an audio fi"e, or infographic to ana"y-e your chosen artifact. .!er the ne't few wee&s, we wi"" discuss different strategies, methods, and too"s you can use in creating different types of mu"timoda" composition. A"though there is no minimum "ength re+uirement, % suggest that any !ideo, s"ideshow, audiofi"e, or other presentation you create run no longer than & min tes. P"ease a"so re"y upon at least fo r %ifferent information so rces in your composition. Remember to cite your sources according to the common"y accepted con!entions in your medium or fie"d. Important: %n addition to your mu"timoda" composition, you must a"so write a one to two

paragraph ref"ection for /A01 of the 0ourse .utcomes. %n this ref"ection, you shou"d discuss the choices you made whi"e composing the assignment and e'p"ain how this compositiona" process he"ped you "earn about the 0ourse .utcomes. Remember to incorporate +uotes and e'amp"es from your pro(ect in your ref"ection to he"p i""ustrate what you "earned.

'el(f l 'ints: Rhetorica" Ana"yses are used by academics and organi-ations to

understanding the effecti!eness of !arious rhetorica" artifacts. 2y ana"y-ing the different e"ements of the artifact, the author of a Rhetorica" Ana"ysis e'p"ains both what the artifacts means or says, as we"" as ho# con!eys that meaning or message. #hus, your ana"ysis must go beyond the e'p"oration of meaning to a discussion of how the different e"ements of the artifact contribute to that meaning. Rhetorica" Ana"ysis often contain the fo""owing e"ements* An intro% ction which identifies the artifact and e'p"ains your o!era"" thesis. our thesis shou"d e'p"ore both the under"ying message of the artifact, as we"" as how the different e"ements of the artifact inf"uence that message. A discussion of the historical) social) (olitical) or other conte*t surrounding your artifact. our reader must understand the conte't surrounding your artifact to understand what it means. #hin& of your artifact as contributing to a "arger 3con!ersation4 about your prob"em. 1ow does your artifact contribute to or 3fit in4 with that con!ersation5 An e'p"anation of your theoretical (ers(ecti"e or ru"es go!erning your ana"ysis. %dentify which rhetorica" concepts wi"" guide your ana"ysis of the artifact. 2e sure to e'p"ain why you ha!e chosen to use these rhetorica" concepts (e.g. why these concepts are usefu" to your ana"ysis). An analysis of the artifact under that theoretica" perspecti!e. 6uide your audience through your process of thin&ing about the artifact. 7how how this reasoning supports your thesis. %""ustrate your reasoning with specific e'amp"es and i""ustrations. A concl sion which summari-es your paper and e'p"ains how your ana"ysis might he"p your audience. #a&e this opportunity to ma&e suggestions to your audience about your prob"em. 7how how this artifact can inf"uence the direction your audience p"ans to ta&e.

+ra%ing R ,ric: #his assignment is worth 189 of your grade. )i!e percent (89) wi"" be
based on time"y submission of your )irst :raft and acti!e participation in the Peer Re!iew and %nstructiona" Assistant Re!iew process. #he remaining 1;9 wi"" be a""ocated to your )ina" :raft, which wi"" be e!a"uated according to the fo""owing rubric* Rhetorica" 7ituation 40-30 points 29-20 points 19-0 points #he composition responds #he composition responds #he composition does effecti!e"y to the rhetorica" to the rhetorica" situation, not respond to the situation by identifying and but the ana"ysis needs rhetorica" situation.

performing an insightfu" and further de!e"opment. detai"ed ana"ysis of a re"e!ant artifact. 0oherence 25-20 points 19-10 points 9-0 points %deas are presented c"ear"y %deas are presented #he composition "ac&s and effecti!e"y so that the c"ear"y, but the c"arity due to f"aws in reader can easi"y fo""ow the composition4s structure and writer4s reasoning. A"" the organi-ation needs organi-ation. %t is different modes of the de!e"opment. 7ome of unc"ear how the different composition are presented as the modes of the modes of the a coherent who"e. composition seem out of composition wor& p"ace. together. /thos 25-20 points 19-10 points 9-0 points #he composition strong"y #he composition supports #he composition does supports the author4s ethos the author4s ethos or not seem credib"e and or credibi"ity. Ethos credibi"ity, but needs needs substantia" re!ision inc"udes such e"ements as an further de!e"opment. to support the author4s effecti!e tone and sty"e, ethos. carefu" editing, and citing sources according to accepted con!entions. Ref"ection 10-5 points 5-1 points 0 points #he author has genuine"y #he author has inc"uded a #he author has not ref"ected on his or her ref"ection with which inc"uded a ref"ection with choices and has e'p"ained discusses his or her his or her composition how those choices he"ped the choices, but the ideas in and$or the ref"ection does author "earn about the the ref"ection need further not discuss the author4s 0ourse .utcomes. de!e"opment. choices in "ight of the 0ourse .utcomes. #ota" (out of 1;;)*