Fueling the First Amendment (Freedom of Choice)
Remember that your job in this paper is to accurately and objectively analyze an article/essay. You are free to say whether or not you agree with the article, but the primary goal of a rhetorical analysis is to first discuss “how” something is said before you comment on “what” is said. What this paper is NOT asking you to write, is an essay about free speech in general or even an essay that only expresses your agreement or disagreement with the article you selected. Doing either one of these will surely result in a low grade! A rhetorical analysis essay sticks close to the essay towards which it responds—point by point.
Steps for Essay
Find an OPINIONATED Article or Essay on Free Speech
Article – Medium length
accurately and objectively analyze an article/essay
free to say whether or not you agree with the article
primary goal of a rhetorical analysis is to first discuss “how” something is said before you comment on “what” is said
The Basics:
• 2-3 Pages (“Works Cited” page required, but not included in the count)
•2 Strong Sources (as opposed to “weak” sources)
• MLA: Paper Format and Source Citations (Failure to cite properly will result in a letter grade deduction)
• Clear evidence of the “writing process” —INFORMAL—(prewriting, drafting, revising, editing)
• Clear evidence of the “research journey”—INFORMAL—(handwritten notes of initial source leads,
source summaries, your questions about sources, your answers to questions about sources, etc.)
• Claim-driven argument
• Use the persuasive appeals of emotional
The Details:
In this essay, you are asked to write an argument of your own issue you have selected. The focus of your paper will be driven by your own unique claim (thesis) statement that either defends or refutes the issue you have chosen to provide a specific position on. This means you will write to either support or oppose the issue and the views/interpretation of the perimeters as it applies to institutions of higher education in America and or the world.
Using Sources . . .
By “STRONG SOURCES,” I mean those sources that represent the highest qualities of academic research! This means sources that are high in “ethos” appeal, as they should be written by people with solid academic credentials in the particular areas in which they write! This means finding articles from academic and/or professional journals primarily, which can only be obtained through library databases.
In terms of using sources directly from the open web (as opposed to web-based platforms/databases from which to obtain filtered material), DO NOT use “.com” or “.net” domains. Rather, use “.gov”, “.edu”, or “.org” domains. Even these three domains are not exempt from biases and agendas. I believe the order in which I placed them reflects their general level of credibility, with “.gov” being the most likely sites for the highest degrees of ethos, simply because of the transparent nature of government agencies in a free democracy. With “.edu” domains, credibility varies depending upon whether the page reflects the institution itself (higher level of ethos) or faculty/students within the institution (higher potential for flaws in ethos for various reasons); thirdly, the “.org” category is perhaps the most difficult to navigate in terms of determining credibility, since it is so vast. For example, on the one hand you have an organization like the American Cancer Society that resides in a .org domain, which is entirely credible, yet you also have the “Area 51” group who also use the same domain—an organization devoted to “proving” that aliens exist, have been captured by the government, and are being kept in the Nevada desert!
Sources I DO NOT allow in a paper:
First, I do not allow the following three quasi-news and biased websites or television broadcasts: CNN, NBC, or FOX. By extension, I also do not allow a particular non-objective resource you are likely to see on the library website called “NBC Learn.” This so-called “academic” source is merely partisan politics disguised as academically credible material. Generally speaking, and beyond these specific sources that lack objective credibility, you should try to avoid using ANY strongly partisan or political resource, such as “Slate” or “Rush Limbaugh,” for example. Using websites or publications like these reflects poorly on your credibility as a writer.
What this paper is NOT asking you to write, is an essay about free speech in general or even an essay that only expresses your agreement or disagreement with the article you selected. Doing either one of these will surely result in a low grade! A rhetorical analysis essay sticks close to the essay towards which it responds—point by point.
Color Code:
Social Issue
Claim/Thesis Statement
Source 1 + Evidence
Source 2 + Evidence
Your opinion
Conclusion
The Assignment Details:
In this essay, you are asked to write an argument of your own issue you have selected. The focus of your paper will be driven by your own unique claim (thesis) statement that either defends or refutes the issue you have chosen to provide a specific position on. This means you will write to either support or oppose the issue and the views/interpretation of the perimeters as it applies to institutions of higher education in America and or the world.
The Basics:
• 3-4 Pages (“Works Cited” page required, but not included in the count)
•2 Strong Sources (as opposed to “weak” sources)
• MLA: Paper Format and Source Citations (Failure to cite properly will result in a letter grade deduction)
• Clear evidence of the “writing process” —INFORMAL—(prewriting, drafting, revising, editing)
• Clear evidence of the “research journey”—INFORMAL—(handwritten notes of initial source leads,
source summaries, your questions about sources, your answers to questions about sources, etc.)
• Claim-driven argument
• Use the persuasive appeals of emotional
Using Sources . . .
By “STRONG SOURCES,” I mean those sources that represent the highest qualities of academic research! This means sources that are high in “ethos” appeal, as they should be written by people with solid academic credentials in the particular areas in which they write! This means finding articles from academic and/or professional journals primarily, which can only be obtained through library databases.
In terms of using sources directly from the open web (as opposed to web-based platforms/databases from which to obtain filtered material), DO NOT use “.com” or “.net” domains. Rather, use “.gov”, “.edu”, or “.org” domains. Even these three domains are not exempt from biases and agendas. I believe the order in which I placed them reflects their general level of credibility, with “.gov” being the most likely sites for the highest degrees of ethos, simply because of the transparent nature of government agencies in a free democracy. With “.edu” domains, credibility varies depending upon whether the page reflects the institution itself (higher level of ethos) or faculty/students within the institution (higher potential for flaws in ethos for various reasons); thirdly, the “.org” category is perhaps the most difficult to navigate in terms of determining credibility, since it is so vast. For example, on the one hand you have an organization like the American Cancer Society that resides in a .org domain, which is entirely credible, yet you also have the “Area 51” group who also use the same domain—an organization devoted to “proving” that aliens exist, have been captured by the government, and are being kept in the Nevada desert!
Sources I DO NOT allow in a paper:
First, I do not allow the following three quasi-news and biased websites or television broadcasts: CNN, NBC, or FOX. By extension, I also do not allow a particular non-objective resource you are likely to see on the library website called “NBC Learn.” This so-called “academic” source is merely partisan politics disguised as academically credible material. Generally speaking, and beyond these specific sources that lack objective credibility, you should try to avoid using ANY strongly partisan or political resource, such as “Slate” or “Rush Limbaugh,” for example. Using websites or publications like these reflects poorly on your credibility as a writer.
