Thursday, March 11, 2010

Peer Review for March 11

Evaluation II: Major Persuasive Project

I. Make a case to Dean David V. Powers for keeping the Communication and Journalism Department autonomous, but be willing to allow cuts in some places; what would you compromise? (e.g., programs, faculty, classes, divisions within the major); what impact (effect) does the Communication and Journalism Department have on campus and in the community?

A. College of Arts and Sciences:
B. Communication Department:
C. Mission of the University:

II. There will be four sections to this peer review with a series of questions in each section: (1) face-to-face interaction, (2) audience analysis, genre, and publication venue, (3) introduction, use of appeals: logos, ethos, and pathos, and arrangement, and (4) ethics, stylistic devices, and conclusion.

A. The first section is face-to-face interaction: take the cover letter bullet points as a way to talk through what you want to accomplish in this project; what are your goals and how well do you think you accomplish these goals through your writing? For the listener, first provide a hearing of what the author/rhetor wants to achieve and then provide constructive feedback; think about asking questions for clarification and then probing for more detail where necessary.

B. The second section is written analysis of audience, genre, and publication.

1. Audience: (1) Who are potential audiences for this issue (consider the types on page 296); (2) Has my peer effectively addressed audience interests, needs, and understanding? (3) Justification for discussion: why is there a need to discuss this issue; in other words, for whom are these discussions salient?

a. Facebook page:

b. Angelo’s full color pamphlet:

2. Genre and Publication: (1) Describe how you think the genre chosen for the message will work or not work for the intended audience (e.g., genre is the type of persuasive writing: writing to convince, to evaluate, to explain causes and effects, to solve problems, and writing about creative work; and (2) Do some research on the publication venue to discover the demographic (age, education, and cultural background).

C. The third section works with the structure of your argument and use of appeals.

1. Introduction and Definition of issue: Has my peer effectively defined and framed the issue?

a. Think of questions to find stasis or the “heart of the argument” (1) Conjecture: what is the issue discussed, (2) Definition: how is the issue defined? (3) Quality: what are the values at work in relation to this issue, and (4) Policy: what should be done?

b. Is the summary adequate to understand the issue? Is the summary balanced in relation to the stated thesis—objectives for the paper?

c. Graff and Birkenstein talk about the “art of summarizing”; “as a general rule, a good summary requires balancing what the original author is saying with the writer’s own focus” (29).

2. Has my peer effectively described and analyzed (1) his/her line of reasoning of the problem, (2) his/her line of reasoning regarding the solution, (3) his/her use of concessions and rebuttals (what arguments are anticipated), and (4) his/her appeals to certain values and emotions? (5) How does my peer establish credibility—situated and invented credibility--using “voice” through first, second, or third person narrative?

3. Arrangement: are the arguments arranged effectively?

D. Section four: ethics, style, and conclusion

1. How are stylistic devices used to provide vivid detail for an issue, form common ground with the audience, and guide understanding?

2. How is visual imagery used to evoke a tone, set a mood, and create lived connections with the issue?

3. Overall aesthetic: is there balance between imagery and verbal description of problem; in other words, is there sufficient evidence for defining the problem and making this problem relevant for the audience?

4. Ethics: Is there anything in the argumentation, visual imagery, citation of sources, and/or connection to the audience that might mislead the audience?

a. Is there information that is missing?
b. How do the visuals work? Are the visuals misleading, too graphic, or not honest in their portrayal?

5. Ethics involve two key elements: how we handle the information that we’re working with (being clear, up front and honest through thorough critique, and citing sources thoroughly so one can consult them); second, ethics deals with audience-author relationship (taking the audience into consideration—what will benefit everyone involved).

6. Conclusion: What do you want from your audience: think, feel, believe, act?

a. Page 314 topics for perorations:
b. Remind audience what you want them to do or think or believe; paint a vivid picture.

No comments: