syllabus
calendar
blackboard
student.email resources

last.updated 5.05.09

 

WikiRhet


Purpose

Throughout the semester the instructor has provided you with readings that cover the issues of rhetoric. As you become immersed in these discussions, you will want to pursue other perspectives or focus on specific issues.

The WikiRhet gives you the opportunity to expand yours and your peers' knowledge of these fields. First you will define a rhetorical concept for you and your peers. Then you will contribute to other's defintions. Throughout the semester, you will want to use these sources to both enrich your contribution to class discussions and to support the documents that you draft for this class.


Concept Entry

Instructions–Invention

As part of the Proposal you will request and be assigned a rhetorical concept. After you learn what your concept is, you will want to do some research to learn how this concept has been defined throughout history and how it is currently discussed in writing studies. To do this research you will want to review any credible source. You will be required to support your entry with at least three secondary sources about rhetoric (i.e., academic articles). Consult the resource page for a list of rhetoric journals; additonally consult various edited collections.

Concept Student
Audience Cynthia
Ethos Ralynn
Pathos Meg
Logos Sarah
Arrangement Laurie
Invention Laura
Style Mary Ellen
Memory Rachel
Delivery Joel
Kairos Brittany

Instructions–Writing

Go to WikiRhet on WetPaint and compose a 500-750 word entry about your assigned rhetorical concept. In this entry, you will...
  • define the concept; this defintion should have some historical perspective to explain how the concept has or has not changed
  • discuss how current writing studies scholars (1960 and later) discuss the application of this concept
  • begin a reference list for the concept by including a bibliography for the sources you reference; choose APA or MLA

Revisions

Instructions–Invention

For your revisions, you will want to find five academic, refereed articles or chapters about a subject related to rhetoric. These texts

  • should be based upon issues that you are interested in learning more about
  • should be based upon positions/philosophies that you want to both support and refute
  • do not have to be related to your assigned concept for the initial entry submission
  • cannot be text assigned for the class
  • cannot be texts your peers have already discussed on WikiRhet.

Refereed scholarship has been judged worthy of publication by other experts in fields related to their respective fields. Consult the resource page for a list of rhetoric journals; additonally consult various edited collections.

Other texts that qualify include...

  • academic journal articles, including online journals
  • chapters from an edited collection
  • chapters from an academic book (no more than two chapters per book)

Texts that do not qualify include...

  • most popular publications, such as certain magazines and web pages (consult instructor)
  • newsletters
  • book reviews
  • academics' websites

These list, of course, are not exhaustive. If you have any questions whether an article or chapter qualifies, consult the instructor. Entries for texts that do not qualify will not get credit.

Variations from these parameters are acceptable, but consult the instructor first.

Instructions-Writing

For each revision, you will want to...

  • Choose the appropriate concept that the scholarship you read corresponds with. In some instances, your choice will be an argument that you will have to make
  • Using the scholarship you read as the foundation for your 200-300 word revision, add text to the initial entry. For this revision, you should...
    • make any necessary revisions to the existing text
    • explain the argument presented in the scholarship you read
    • breifly explain how the author arrives at this argument; highlight the most important details
    • explain the value of this scholarship to the overall conversation about this concept
    • add to the reference list with a citation for the text; use the citation format that the author of the initial entry used

While the three middle points need to be addressed, this list does not define the order in which these points need to be presented.

 


Criteria–Concept Entry

Logistics:

  • 500-750 w0rds
  • single-spaced
  • This document is due on May 27, 2008 posted on WetPaint

  • 50 points

In addition to the general evaluation criteria, the instructor will be looking for evidence of...

  • a sense of audience–do you present the material in a way that your audience can use it as a resource for their projects? are you reasonably thorough? do you make the information accessible?
  • an informed understanding of rhetoric. Does your entry engage the much larger conversation about the concept? Do you demonstrate a nuanced understanding of the concept?
  • appropriate use of conventions, including MLA or APA citation formatting

Criteria–Revisions

Logistic:

  • no more than 300 words per entry; this is an exercise in writing brief, yet detailed texts
  • single spaced

  • There will be three submission deadlines for the annotated bibliography entries:

  • The WikiRhet Revisions will cumulatively be worth 50 points. All students will start with 40 points and your grade will be adjusted according to the evaluation of each of the five entries. Each entry will be graded using the following scale...

    check (or 0) = You did the work satisfactorily and on time. If it is an earlier entry, use the instructor's comments to guide how you compose future entries

    +1, +2= You demonstrated various degrees of engagement with the ideas and you turned it in on time. Use features that the instructor liked as a model for future entries

    –1, -2= Your work demonstrates a misunderstanding of the assignment or minimal effort, shows that you do not understand what an academic text entails, or was not turned in on time.

    - 4 = No submission

In addition to the general evaluation criteria, the instructor will be looking for evidence of...

  • a sense of audience–do you provide enough information and detail about the article that your audience of peers gets a clear sense of the article's content? Likewise do you only highlight important information?
  • an informed understanding and discussion of rhetroic and writing studies, as well as other topics the text covers
  • do you demonstrate the value of the text to the conversation?
  • appropriate use of conventions, including MLA or APA citation format based upon precedent