COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication: Module 2 Rhetoric and the Logic of Persuasion PDF

COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication Module 2 Rhetoric and the Logic of Persuasion Image source: https://www.shutterstock.com/discover/10-free-stock-images Introduction Last week, we...

COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication Module 2 Rhetoric and the Logic of Persuasion Image source: https://www.shutterstock.com/discover/10-free-stock-images Introduction Last week, we traced the evolution of communication and media, discussed the role and power of communication in shaping culture and society, and applied the dialogic perspective on communication and media in our role as shapers of culture and influencers of society. This module will help you understand the importance of rhetoric in effective communication. Rhetoric is the art of persuasion. It involves the deliberate use of language to effect change in thoughts, feelings, and actions. While you may often encounter the term “rhetoric” in political discourses, rhetorical concepts are applied in various other fields of communication such as media studies, identity politics, power relations, and intercultural communication. The ability to properly argue one’s stand on various issues is invaluable to any communicator. This first section will allow us to understand what rhetoric is and when rhetorical discourse can take place. In the second section, we will look into political rhetoric, specifically how political communicators can sway audiences through different persuasive strategies. The last section is on digital rhetoric, focusing on how new technologies influence the practice of rhetoric today. 13 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication Through the discussion, you will hopefully become familiar with the process of discovering and approaching situations that invite rhetorical discourse. If you are interested to learn more about rhetoric beyond the introduction presented here, feel free to look up and study the additional readings listed at the end of this module. In order to maximize your learning, please read and accomplish the activities in the assigned section before you come to class. This will help you ask critical questions and participate in class discussions, which will further enrich your understanding of this frame of engagement. Enjoy! Learning Outcomes After studying this module, you should be able to 1. explain the importance of rhetoric in communication, 2. discuss persuasive elements of rhetoric, and 3. examine the use of rhetoric in the discourse around social issues. _________________________________________________________________________ Quick Activity To jumpstart our discussion, answer this question: What does it mean to become rhetorical? Jot down as many adjectives you think go along with being rhetorical. _________________________________________________________________________ 1.0. Rhetoric as Persuasion You might have heard the term rhetoric used in a pejorative manner. It is not uncommon to read news describing a politician’s speech as “mere rhetoric,” that is, all talk and no walk. You probably also have encountered the term being used to refer to the use of ornate language, or the use of big words which, on the surface, might sound pleasing to the ears but does not really translate to anything else. Worse, the term rhetoric is also being used to mean deceptive speech. But is rhetoric really that bad? Rhetoric has a far deeper meaning than these negative associations. In fact, it is a field of study that started some 2,500 years ago, or even earlier according to some accounts. The 14 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication Greeks were among the first to study rhetoric systematically and create treatises about the subject. As the ancient Greek city-states, especially Athens, transitioned to a democratic form of government, it became imperative to be skilled in oratory or public speaking since legislative and judicial decisions were made by assemblies of citizens where eloquence was key to influence. The Greek philosopher Aristotle is arguably the most influential figure in the study of rhetoric. His work Ῥητορική (Rhetoric) is often regarded as “the most important single work on persuasion ever written” (Golden, Berquist, Coleman, Golden, & Sproule, 2007, p. 67) and continues to influence contemporary rhetorical theories today. Aristotle defines rhetoric as “the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion” (2013, p. 7). This definition can be broken down into three parts: rhetoric is (1) the capacity of an individual to find out (2) the rhetorical modes of persuasion available to them (3) depending on the particular context. While many popular discussions of Aristotle’s theory of rhetoric would equate rhetoric with persuasion, it is not accurate at all. A closer examination of Aristotle’s definition would in fact reveal that “actually effecting persuasion … is not required of the art” (Fortenbaugh, 2007, p. 107). In other words, Aristotle was more concerned with the means to attain persuasion more than persuasion itself. Learning Activity 1 A. Read mini-chapters 1 to 5 of Aristotle's Rhetoric (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) and answer the following questions: 1. What are your main take-aways from the article? 2. What best definition of rhetoric can you come up with after reading the article? *A copy of the above-mentioned chapters is included in the learning materials in case you have no internet access. The copy is for educational purposes only. B. For enrichment, you may view the following videos: 15 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication 1. How to use rhetoric to get what you want - Camille A. Langston (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3klMM9BkW5o) 2. Aristotle,The Art of Rhetoric, Book 1, Reading and Analysis (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=114&v=oPlLxgQ13is&feature=em b_logo) For Aristotle, persuasion may be effected through rhetorical or non-rhetorical means. The non-rhetorical means of persuasion are those “not supplied by the speaker but are there at the outset--witnesses, evidence given under torture, written contracts, and so on” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 8). While these means can be used by the speaker, they do not, in Aristotle’s words, “invent” them. For persuasion to be rhetorical, it must use means that are “invented” by the speaker. The rhetorical means, or modes, of persuasion are the ones referred to in Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric and are the subject of Books I and II of his treatise. These rhetorical modes are of three kinds: ethos, pathos, and logos. 1.1. Ethos What popular discussions call credibility, intelligence, or competence, Aristotle calls “personal character.” The Greek word ethos broadly describes an individual’s guiding principles that is usually characteristic of a common cultural ideology. “We believe good men more fully and more readily than others; this is true generally whatever the question is, and absolutely true where exact certainty is impossible and opinions are divided” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 8). Since rhetoric is concerned with issues of uncertainty, rhetoric allows us to form informed opinions on matters that elude the certain truths such as the rising and the setting of the sun, or the pull of gravity. Borchers argues that “[r]hetoric establishes what is probably true” (2006, p. 9). Rhetoric then is concerned with issues such as the drug war, death penalty, or the reopening of the economy in the middle of a pandemic. It is in issues like these when ethos plays a crucial role in persuasion. “[A speaker’s] character may almost be called the most effective means of persuasion [they possess]” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 8). Ethos is established through three things: good sense, good moral character, and goodwill. Good sense is often translated as good judgment, rationality, even intelligence but the Greek word phronesis, from which good sense is based, more accurately means practical 16 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication wisdom. A person who has wisdom is not just intelligent; they are able to apply knowledge in particular situations based on experiences. Good moral character, on the other hand, refers to an individual’s inner values. A person is of good moral character if they act with uncompromising integrity. Finally, ethos is established through goodwill. For a speaker to fully inspire trust from their audience, they must develop goodwill between them and their audience. Having your audience’s best interest in mind is one way to establish goodwill. If good moral character is about integrity, then good sense is about empathy. 1.2. Pathos Aside from the speaker’s personal character, they may effect persuasion by the use of pathos. While you probably know pathos as “appeals to emotions,” this simplistic definition does not quite capture Aristotle’s view that a speaker should “put [their] hearers in the right frame of mind” (2013, p. 69). Pathos is a Greek word which literally means suffering but is also used to mean feelings of strong emotion. Appeals to emotion often carry negative connotations. Many would argue these appeals are tacky, deceptive, and manipulative; persuasion tactics inferior to logic and argumentation and seem to only work on, as Plato said in Gorgias, the multitude or the ignorant. However, as Richard Weaver pointed out in Language is Sermonic, rhetoric argues with our rational part but also acknowledges our nature as a “pathetic being” or a “being of feeling and suffering.” Aristotle provides a rationale for the utility of pathos as a rhetorical mode of persuasion: “Our judgments when we are pleased and friendly are not the same as when we are pained and hostile” (2013, p. 8). It is therefore vital for a speaker to stir in them certain emotions – be it anger or pity, disgust or happiness – to make them better disposed into acting on an issue, adopting a proposal, or changing a behavior. 1.3. Logos Lastly, Aristotle argues that “persuasion is effected through the speech itself when we have proved a truth or an apparent truth by means of the persuasive arguments suitable to the case in question” (2013, p. 8-9). Simply put, to prove something, one must reason logically. 17 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication There are two ways by which we can use logos: using example or enthymeme. These are rhetorical equivalents of induction and deduction in dialectic, which you might be more familiar with. To argue using example is to prove a proposition using a number of similar cases. So if you prove the proposition “UP students call for an academic freeze” by enumerating instances when a particular student or groups of UP-affiliated students have called for an academic freeze, then you argue by example. Far superior than the argument by example, Aristotle argues, is the argument by enthymeme. From the Greek word enthumēma which means “held in the mind,” this kind of argument is akin to deductive reasoning. What sets it apart from the latter is that in an enthymeme, one proposition is suppressed. Consider this example: (Major premise) UPLB students take COMM 10. (Minor premise) Jose is a UPLB student. (Conclusion) Jose will take COMM 10. The example above is a complete syllogism. According to Aristotle, however, this is not how we argue rhetorically. Propositions are not always explicitly stated, and some of them are, in fact, “held in the mind” of our audience. Consider this excerpt from an August 2019 tweet from Pasig Mayor Vico Sotto: “[W]e should stop treating our government officials like showbiz personalities.” In this example, Sotto is arguing using an enthymeme. Using what his audience know about him (an elected public official) and Philippine show business, Sotto was able to implicitly argue that the media should stop treating him like a showbiz personality by writing about his love life. If we are to supply the “suppressed” parts of the argument, it might go something like this: (Major premise) We should stop treating our government officials like showbiz personalities. (Minor premise, suppressed) I am a government official. (Conclusion, suppressed) Stop treating me like a showbiz personality. 18 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication We have to note though that enthymemes are generally based on probabilities and works best when the audience can fill in the gaps using their own knowledge, feelings, and experiences on the topic. Synthesis “There are, then, these three means of effecting persuasion. The man who is to be in command of them must, it is clear, be able (1) to reason logically, (2) to understand human character and goodness in their various forms, and (3) to understand the emotions—that is, to name them and describe them, to know their causes and the ways in which they are excited” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 9). While Aristotle talked about a lot of other things in his work including the types of oratory, a comprehensive discussion of the different types of emotions, as well as effective delivery, these three rhetorical modes of persuasion remain at the heart of his theory. Employing these three modes requires a knowledge of the human soul, something Plato, Aristotle’s mentor, required from anyone who wants to be skilled in the art of rhetoric. 2.0. Political Rhetoric In the previous section, we talked about what rhetoric is and its persuasive function. While some contemporary theories of rhetoric broaden the scope of rhetoric as a field of study beyond its traditional persuasive function, the association between the two remains strong today. Persuasion remains to be one of the first concepts we think about when we hear rhetoric. As you already learned in the previous section, the ancient Greeks used rhetoric to discuss legislative matters such as passing laws, settling disputes, making legal decisions, among others. Political issues were popular topics then – Aristotle, in fact, identified political speaking as one of the three kinds of oratory along with the forensic and the ceremonial, though their notion of “political” is quite limited to legislation. The word “politics” is multifaceted. It may mean governance or the study of governance. It may also mean beliefs or principles, especially in the context of power. For this 19 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication module, however, we will consider politics in the context of individuals having or hoping to gain power and zero in on how these individuals use rhetoric. Have you ever exercised your right to vote during national elections? If so, then you might have listened to a number of debates and speeches during the campaign period. Major television networks in the country waste no time in bringing candidates together for a debate in order for them to pit their ideas against those of their opponents. You are probably familiar with the format of these debates. Each candidate is given time to state his/her plan of action before the other candidates deliver their rebuttals. During these instances, were you conscious of the means by which the candidates attempted to persuade the audience? According to Condor et al. (2013), political rhetoric is mostly concerned with strategies used in constructing persuasive messages in debates and disputes. This is not surprising because from its earliest stages, rhetoric has been used to expose ineffective policies and advance necessary changes in democratic societies. We do not have to think too far back to remember the last time we heard a political speech. Every year, student government elections are held in the University of the Philippines. From classroom campaigns to the meeting de avance, there are plenty of opportunities for you to be exposed to political rhetoric. ___________________________________________________________________________ Learning Activity 2 Understanding Political Rhetoric Before we proceed, please read pages 276-282 of Condor et al.’s (2013) chapter on political rhetoric and answer the following questions: 1. What were the different persuasive strategies mentioned in the chapter? 2. Of these strategies, which have you encountered during political campaigns? 3. How are these strategies reflective of Aristotle’s three modes of persuasion? 4. Were these strategies effective for you? Why or why not? ___________________________________________________________________________ As you already learned in the first part of this module, Aristotle mentioned three rhetorical means of persuasion, namely, ethos or the speaker’s character, pathos or putting the audience in the right frame of mind, and logos or proving a truth or an apparent truth. Of these, 20 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication Aristotle noted ethos as the most important and called it “the most effective means of persuasion he possesses” (2013, p. 8). You may notice that Condor et al.’s (2013) examples are derived from this idea of inspiring confidence in the audience (ethos) and putting them in the right frame of mind (pathos). Before we elaborate on what you just read in their chapter, let us recall Aristotle’s concept of the rhetor’s ethos. Aristotle placed great importance on the concept of ethos, or the character of the speaker. While Aristotle noted that ethos “should be achieved by what the speaker says, not by what people think of his character before he begins to speak” (2013, p. 8), contemporary interpretations of ethos vary. For some, ethos is about the attitude of a perceiver toward a source of information at a given time. To put it simply, it is an audience member’s evaluation of the speaker’s character. Since ethos is based on the perceiver and not on the source, it can vary in as many ways as there are perceivers. One person in the audience might think that the speaker is somewhat credible, another might agree to a greater extent than some, while the rest may not agree at all. The aim of ethos is to show the sincerity and the trustworthiness of the speaker. What are concrete ways to achieve this? Let us turn to the strategies posed by Condor et al. (2013). 2.1. Taking and Avoiding Sides Political communicators often deal with audience members who subscribe to a wide range of beliefs. In order to address this problem of diversity, a politician may want to forge advantageous allegiances with certain groups during a speech. According to Condor et al. (2013), it is in the best interest of these politicians to appeal to as many groups as possible without sacrificing loyalty. For example, a group of candidates may want to explicitly distance themselves from political parties known to advance the interests of the elite. By doing this, the candidates can associate themselves with parties catering to the “ordinary people”, thus potentially cementing their influence on a broader audience. 2.2. Explicit Appeals to Common In-group Membership Yet another way by which political communicators may appeal to diverse audiences is by finding or establishing a commonality among them. Condor et al. (2013) referred to this as a “single rhetorical identity” (p. 279) — a group bound by an overarching characteristic. They added that three requirements must be met in order to be an effective political leader. First, diverse communities must be regrouped into a single identity category. Second, the leader’s 21 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication propositions must fulfill the needs of this category. And third, the leader must present him/herself as a prototypical in-group member. For example, if a candidate appeals to a national identity by claiming to be a “typical” Filipino, then his/her goals, appearance, language, and demeanor must reflect this identification. 2.3. Constructing Aspirational Identities In attempting to advance changes in the status quo, an aspiring candidate may want audience members to envision a future which is markedly different from the present. By constructing future identities of audience members as more empowered and privileged members of society, the speaker aims to rally the public toward an achievable change. According to Condor et al., this can be done by advocating for a group that is “currently positioned outside, or on the margins of, a particular political community” (p. 280). For example, a candidate may want to inspire members of the LGBT community by telling them of a future wherein people of different genders will be treated with equal respect. 2.4. Implicit Displays of Rhetorical Alignment There are also indirect means of influencing the thoughts of audience members. Through mere clothing, a speaker may present him/herself as a representative of certain groups. Body posture, paralanguage, and gestures may also contribute to the establishment of a particular identity. Subtle yet effective use of language is also beneficial in this regard. The simple use of inclusive pronouns such as “we”, “us”, and “our” can serve to endear the speaker to the audience and facilitate a benevolent atmosphere, making it easier to establish and maintain rapport. ___________________________________________________________________________ Graded Learning Activity 1 Watch any of the following videos and answer the following questions. Your answers should be in a 750-word essay form. More than just emphasis on the number of words, your answers should contain substantial information. A transcript of Sen. Pangilinan’s speech is included in the course pack in case you have no internet access. Why Grace Poe is Running for President (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCdCKw0ZFD8) 22 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication Rep. Neri Colmenares' Keynote Speech at 2nd Nat'l Peasant-Lawyers Conference (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KZ1X0IHzZE) Privilege Speech of Kiko Pangilinan on Rice Tariffication Law and the State of our Rice Farmers (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38rDhGqfS3g) 1. How did the speaker exhibit each of the following? a. Taking and avoiding sides b. Explicit appeals to common in-group membership c. Constructing aspirational identities d. Implicit displays of rhetorical alignment 2. Which of these strategies do you think was well employed? Why do you think so? 3. Overall, would you say that the speech was enough to persuade you? Why or why not? Synthesis In summary, the political sphere is invariably tied with rhetorical discourse. In attempting to influence public opinion, political communicators apply specific persuasive strategies. By presenting themselves as trustworthy, sincere, and amiable, modern day rhetors may strengthen their bid for leadership positions within the government. However, we must remember that a critical understanding of the context and content of political discourse is needed to effectively implement programs and propose necessary changes. In addition, a public speech is not the only way to exercise political rhetoric and mere knowledge of persuasive devices is not enough to guarantee an advantage. Various other factors may affect the potency of rhetorical messages. One such factor is technology. In the last section, we will discuss its influence on the practice and utility of rhetoric. 3.0. Digital Rhetoric How does the digital age affect the way we communicate? This is a question many scholars are trying to answer today. Zappen (2005) provides an overview of studies on how traditional rhetorical strategies work in digital spaces. He points out that traditional rhetorical strategies are reconfigured in digital spaces as computers and associated software mediate communication online. ___________________________________________________________________________ 23 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication Graded Learning Activity 2 Read Zappen’s (2005) article on digital rhetoric and answer the following questions. Again, your answers should be in a 750-word essay. 1. How does persuasion work in online communication? How are the rhetorical strategies of persuasion deployed in online spaces? 2. How do computer programs function as persuasive technology? 3. How do the processes of identity and community formation on social media affect rhetorical practice online? _________________________________________________________________________ In the article, Zappen (2005) cites Gurak’s discussion of the basic characteristics of communication in digital spaces such as speed and reach. Let us consider speed. In social media platforms, it is easy to share ideas and emotions on a whim. Twitter, for example, provides a convenient venue for sharing one’s thoughts with an online social circle. However, it imposes a 280-character limit on what one can say. How does a character limit affect the persuasive impact of a post? More interestingly, how is persuasion done using short posts? Another example of how speed can influence the rhetorical message is through repetitive posting or sharing. Think about the last time you shared an article on Facebook. What happens to the credibility (ethos) of the article when it is shared a thousand times? Does it make the article more, or less, persuasive? The persuasive quality of a piece of information is also affected by reach. According to Gurak (2001), the concept of reach is further divided into aspects such as multiplicity and lack of gatekeeping. Multiplicity refers to the number of people who can access the information at any given time. Lloyd Bitzer, in his work “The Rhetorical Situation” defined the rhetorical audience as only those people who are capable of being transformed by a rhetorical message. How does digital reach influence this dynamic? Does a wide reach equate to a big rhetorical audience? Consider viral videos as a concrete example. With a viral video, an overwhelming number of people can engage with the rhetorical content within minutes of it being posted online. Is a viral video more persuasive than a video with limited circulation? 24 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication Another aspect of reach is lack of gatekeeping. Anyone can post anything online. In fact, the technology also allows for the deliberate exercise of anonymity on the part of online authors, and we are often not entirely sure who the authors really are for much of the content online. How does this impact the credibility of online content? In traditional media, authorship is a key aspect of the persuasive power of text. Does authorship matter in social media? If not, where does the persuasive power of online messages come from? How does ethos as a means of persuasion work – or not – in social media? Synthesis The digital age has changed the practice of rhetoric in a number of ways. For rhetors, digital technologies afford speed of communication and a much wider reach. For the audience, digital technologies afford rapid access to multiple perspectives on any given exigence, as well as the opportunity to participate directly in discourse and contribute to or undermine their rhetorical effectiveness. We are of course at one time or another rhetor or audience and, in online contexts, usually both. We need to develop a critical understanding of how communication in digital spaces works and, ultimately, how such spaces can be utilized for effecting positive change through communication. _________________________________________________________________________ Summative Activity Analyzing Online Rhetorical Discourses Look for and analyze a commentary or post on an issue on Facebook or Twitter. Write down your answers to the following questions in essay form of about 1,200 to 1,500 words. 1. How are the Aristotelian concepts evident in the discourse you chose? 2. How are the political strategies enhanced, diminished, or modified by the digital mode? 3. Does the number of likes/shares/retweets make the commentary or post more credible? If so, in what way? If not, why do you say so? 4. If the article was published only in offline media (newspapers, magazines etc.), would its persuasive quality change? How and why? 25 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication In case you have no internet access, follow the instructions below: Look for and analyze a commentary on a recent/controversial issue in a newspaper, television, or radio. Write down your answers to the following questions. 1. How are the Aristotelian concepts evident in the discourse you chose? 2. How are the political strategies enhanced, diminished, or modified by the digital mode? 3. Does the number of feedback (in the form of text messages or comments on the ongoing discourse as acknowledged by the author or host) make the commentary or more credible? If so, in what way? If not, why do you say so? (This is in the light that most radio, TV and newspaper discourses have online counterparts where immediate/real time feedback are sent) 4. If the commentary was published only in offline media (newspapers, magazines etc.), would its persuasive quality change? How and why? _________________________________________________________________________ Conclusion In this module, we have taken steps to understand the persuasive nature of rhetoric. We should now be aware of how the interplay of ethos, pathos, and logos determine the effectiveness of different persuasive devices. We have examined specific examples of rhetorical strategies in political communication and we have also considered issues in rhetorical practice online. Although the field of rhetoric has progressed considerably over the past decades, the concepts elaborated by Aristotle maintain their relevance to this day. As communication students, we have a duty to be sensitive to rhetorical situations and analyze them. Our aim in doing so is not just to become effective communicators ourselves but ultimately to promote use of rhetoric to bring about positive transformations in society. 26 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication Required Readings Condor, S., Tileaga, C., & Billig, M. (2013). Political Rhetoric. In L. Huddy, D. Sears, & J. Levy (Eds), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology (pp. 262-297). England: Ox- ford University Press. Rapp, Christof, "Aristotle's Rhetoric", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =. Zappen. J. (2005). Digital Rhetoric: Toward an Integrated Theory. Technical Communication Quarterly, 14(3), 319-325. Further Reading Bizzell, P., & Herzberg, B. (1990). Francis Bacon. In P. Bizzel (Ed.), The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present (pp. 622-633). Boston: Bedford Books. Foss, S., Foss, K., and Trapp, R. (2002). Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric. Long Grove: Waveland Press. Gurak, L. (2001). Cyberliteracy: Navigating the Internet with Awareness. New Haven: Yale. Mckerrow, R. (1989). Critical Rhetoric: Theory and Praxis. Communication Monographs, 56, 91- 111. Tolentino, R., Santos, J. (2014). Media at Lipunan. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press. Wallace, K. (1971). The Fundamentals of Rhetoric. In L. F. Bitzer (Ed.), The Prospect of Rhetoric (pp. 3-20). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Williams, J. (2009). Introduction to Greek Rhetoric. In J. Williams (Ed.), An Introduction to Classical Rhetoric (pp. 7-36). MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Williams, J. (2009). Aristotle and the Systematization of Rhetoric. In J. Williams (Ed.), An Introduction to Classical Rhetoric (pp. 222-270). MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Williams, J. (2009). Introduction to Roman Rhetoric and Oratory. In J. Williams (Ed.), An Introduction to Classical Rhetoric (pp. 273-315) MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Yunis, H. (2007). Plato’s Rhetoric. In I. Worthington (Ed.), A Companion to Greek Rhetoric (pp. 75-89). MA: Blackwell Publishing. 27 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication Rubrics for Graded Learning Activities (Short Essays 750 words) Needs Category Excellent Very Good Satisfactory Poor Improvement 20 16 12 8 0 Clear and well- Thesis statement is Thesis Thesis Essay has Thesis explained thesis- stated and explained statement is statement is no thesis Stateme statement. Thesis and is somehow stated but vague or statement. nt (20) statement is consistent throughout cursorily unclear and is consistent the paper. developed not supported throughout the throughout by background paper. the essay. details. 40 32 24 16 8 Essay or Essay or presentation Essay or Main ideas are Essay or presentation contains main and presentation unsatisfactorily presentation contains main and supporting ideas that contains main developed. contains Content supporting ideas that support the thesis ideas that ideas and (40) adequately support statement. Original support the information the thesis statement. insights are thesis that are Original insights are substantiated. statement but random and well-substantiated. lacks irrelevant to development the topic. and support. 20 16 12 8 4 Essay or Overall logically Progression Arrangement of Unreadable presentation has a developed and of ideas in the essay or essay or logical and progression of ideas essay or presentation is incoherent compelling make sense. presentation unclear and presentation progression of ideas. Transitions are strong. is not that illogical.. Organiza The structure is masterful yet Writing/present tion (20) clear, enhances the moves the ation lacks a thesis statement, and reader or clear sense of moves reader or audience direction and audience through the through the ideas do not text or presentation. text without seem strung Excellent too much together. transitions. confusion. Difficult to Transitions follow line of are sporadic. thought. 20 16 12 8 4 Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Writing is Writing skillful writing reasonable writing average minimal not fluent Fluency fluency, commits fluency, commits few writing writing fluency and paper is and few or no grammar grammar and fluency and and commits unreadable. Mechani and mechanical mechanical errors, and commits numerous Does not cs (20) errors, and follows follows the APA more than grammar and follow the the APA format. format. few grammar mechanical APA and errors, format. mechanical 28 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication errors, including the including APA format. errors in APA format. Rubrics for Summative Assessment Needs Category Excellent Very Good Satisfactory Poor Improvement 10 8 6 4 0 Clear and well- Thesis statement Thesis Thesis Essay has explained thesis- is stated and statement is statement is no thesis statement. Thesis explained and is stated but vague or statement. Thesis statement is somehow cursorily unclear and is Statement (10) consistent consistent developed not supported throughout the throughout the throughout the by paper. paper. essay. background details. 30 24 18 12 6 The rhetorical The rhetorical The rhetorical The No relevant artifact and its artifact and its artifact and its explanation analysis and meaning were meaning were meaning were of the insightful proficiently explained quite generally rhetorical arguments Analysis and explained, competently, explained, but artifact and made. Interpretation effectively making the case the analysis is its meaning (30) making the case for the rather were for the conclusion. underdeveloped explained but conclusion.. in an unrelated or confusing manner. 25 20 15 10 5 The judgments The judgments The judgments The No relevant made about the made about the made about the judgments evaluations rhetorical artifact rhetorical artifact rhetorical made about made. were well- were artifact were the rhetorical substantiated. substantiated. somehow artifact lacks The evaluation The evaluation substantiated. insight. Evaluation (25) enriches the generally The evaluation understanding enriches the was rather and appreciation understanding general or of both the and appreciation underdeveloped artifact and the of both the. theoretical lens. artifact and the theoretical lens. 25 20 15 10 5 Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Writing is skillful writing reasonable average writing minimal not fluent Writing fluency and writing fluency fluency and writing and paper is Fluency (25) exhibits few or and exhibits few exhibits fluency and unreadable. no grammar and grammar and grammar and exhibits numerous 29 COMM 10 - Critical Perspectives in Communication mechanical mechanical mechanical grammar and errors. errors. errors. mechanical errors. 10 8 6 4 0 Sources are cited Sources are Sources are Some of the Sources are correctly in the cited, but there cited, but there sources are not cited at essay and on the are few errors in are several not cited all. APA Format works cited page. the format. There errors in the and/or the and Research Research effort is was research format. format is not Effort (10) apparent with the effort but relied Research effort correct. No use of sources mostly on was minimal. effort to do outside those sources used in extra used in class. class. research. (nothing follows) 30