Department of Rhetoric & Writing
Department of Rhetoric & Writing

RHE 306 • Rhetoric And Writing

43210 • Wilson, Emma
Meets MWF 10:00AM-11:00AM GAR 3.116
show description

Multiple meeting times and sections. Please consult the Course Schedule for unique numbers.

This does NOT meet the Writing Flag requirement.

This composition course provides instruction in the gathering and evaluation of information and its presentation in well-organized expository prose. Students ordinarily write and revise four papers. The course includes instruction in invention, arrangement, logic, style, revision, and strategies of research.

Course centered around the First-Year Forum (FYF) selected readings. Students focus on the foundational knowledge and skills needed for college writing. In addition, they are introduced to basic rhetoric terms and learn to rhetorically analyze positions within controversies surrounding the FYF readings.

RHE 306 is required of all UT students. Contact Student Testing Services at (512)-232-2662 to petition for RHE 306 credit.


RHE 309K • Arguing The Digital Divide

43380 • Cowan, Jake
Meets MW 2:30PM-4:00PM FAC 7
show description

As students, we research course descriptions and register for classes online. As social individuals, we send Tweets and Snapchats to connect with friends near and far. As contributors to a globalized economy, we apply for jobs using email and make purchases on Amazon. Yet within Austin, within America, and across the globe, diverse populations are still not included in this contemporary digital world. Over the past decade, the controversy over this disparity—commonly called the digital divide—has widened beyond its political and economic origins. Questions of a production gap between the vast majority of consumers and the few content owners have arisen, as have tensions about fair infrastructural access under the banner of net neutrality. With more people plugging in for the first time, digital literacy and the ability to interact as informed, critical subjects within this new media environment have become increasingly important rhetorical skills too often overlooked.

Within this course, students will closely exam these and other divisions online: Their root causes, broad implications, and differing responses. The class will work to construct a vocabulary and a conceptual framework through which we can discuss differing digital divides. Informative, critical and influential articles will introduce students to a variety of controversies within the larger topic, positions within those controversies, and stakeholders who hold those positions. To this end, we will follow the origins of the term digital divide through its historical development, beginning with geographical, economic, and political examples of technological inequality on both a micro and macro (local and global) level. With a basic background established, we will then trace the term as it has been used to describe consumerist dynamics on the Internet, gaps in how new media literacy is (not) taught, and demographic divisions that have developed within Web 2.0. Three longer essays will be augmented throughout the semester by short writing assignments and a creative multimedia project that will ask students to engage the problems of the general controversy firsthand.

Assignments and Grading

  • Paper 1.1: Advisory grade
  • Paper 1.2: 10%
  • Paper 2.1: 15%
  • Paper 2.2: 15%
  • Paper 3.1: 15%
  • Paper 3.2: 15%
  • Research summaries (5): 25%
  • Social media assignment: 5%

Required texts and Course Readings

  • Rhetorical Analysis. Longaker & Walker. Pearson, 2010.
  • Easy Writer: A Pocket Reference. Fourth Edition. Lunsford. Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2009.
  • Various readings provided digitally, including articles by Straubhaar, boyd, McChesney, et. al.

RHE 309K • Rhet Of Fantastical Beasts

43330 • Cline, Nina
Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM FAC 7
show description

What is it about animals that makes them such a compelling symbolic trope in fantastic narratives and public discourse? In 2001, celebrated author and cultural icon J.K. Rowling published Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, a fictional textbook used in the study of magical creatures at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. In 2016 Rowling made her screenwriting debut with a fantasy film of the same name that grossed approximately $814 million worldwide. Beginning with Rowling’s Fantastic Beasts, we will study the animals of fantasy narratives in the context of their cultural and political history to understand the popularity and success of these stories across the ages. Additionally, we will address problematic manifestations of the trope as a tactic to dehumanize women, people of color, queer folks, and those on the margins of mainstream society. In class, we’ll begin with a definition of “animal,” which we will complicate throughout the semester as we learn more about the tradition of the beast fable. Next, we will define “human” to explore how these stories have contributed to human exceptionalism, the idea that we are special among (or essentially different from) other living things. For example, we may compare how our relationship to animals changes from Chaucer’s The Nun’s Priest’s Tale to the Disney film Zootopia.

As this course carries a Writing Flag, students should be prepared to write regularly and provide classmates with constructive feedback throughout the semester. In addition to major writing assignments, students will complete short blog posts and revise their writing based on feedback from the instructor and their peers. In this way, each student will refine their writing practice and improve writing skills according to their own strengths and preferences.  Together, we will explore fantastical beasts as vehicles for the discussion of the body, power, and public good. Under what circumstances is it empowering to be an animal, or be like an animal, and when is it an insult? What do fantastic beasts reveal about the way we view ourselves? For their final projects, students will write their own beast fable as a response to a contemporary controversy of their choosing.

Required Texts

  • Rewriting: How To Do Things with Texts, Joseph Harris (Available as an eBook on the UT Libraries website)
  • The Little Longhorn Handbook. Norton, 2014.
  • Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, J.K. Rowling. (The 2001 and 2017 editions are both fine)

Supplementary reading selections will be provided via Canvas as PDFs (viewings of films or clips will be made available to students as necessary).

 

Course Assignments

All major assignments will be submitted through Canvas, while shorter assignments and class reading annotation will be done on a course website. 

Unit 1: Coming to Terms with the “Beast”

  • Blog Post 1
  • Blog Post 2
  • Blog Post 3
  • Project 1 (+ Conference feedback)

Unit 2: Political Beasts – the Body, Power, and the Public Good

  • Blog Post 4
  • Blog Post 5
  • Project 2.1(+ Peer Review)  
  • Project 2.2 (Revision)

Unit 3—Writing the Beast: From Analysis to Authorship

  • Blog Post 6
  • Blog Post 7
  • Project 3.1 (+Conference Feedback)
  • Project 3.2 (Final Draft + Peer Review)
  • Project 4

I will use the Learning Record in this course. After each assignment, students will receive a detailed copy of the assignment rubric with substantive comments and/or suggestions for improvement. There will be 3 conferences throughout the semester with the instructor to discuss the student’s overall semester grade, the first two as “Progress Reports” and the last as a final grade meeting.


RHE 309K • Rhet Of Freaks And Geeks

43390 • Riddick, Sarah
Meets TTH 3:30PM-5:00PM PAR 104
show description

 “We are the nobodies. / Wanna be somebodies.” – Marilyn Manson

What makes the garage-band burnouts portrayed by Seth Rogen, Jason Segel, and James Franco on Freaks and Geeks (1999) so freaky? Why are the Bill Haverchuks of the world historically picked last? Using Paul Feig and Judd Apatow’s critically acclaimed television series Freaks and Geeks as a broad framework for the course, you will select a cultural freak or geek—human or nonhuman, fictional or nonfictional, singular or plural—to research and rhetorically analyze for the semester. To support your research, we will survey in class an array of well-known outsiders in popular culture, and we will explore how rhetoric contributes to their positions as outsiders. 

From the X-Men to The Breakfast Club, from Macklemore to Muggles, from Disney’s classic cartoon villains to their live-action, reimagined portrayals today and many more—we will rhetorically analyze a variety of cultural freaks and geeks in order to examine the relationship between stereotypes, stigmatization, and rhetoric. Over the course of the semester, you will research and write about your freak or geek in several short assignments and three longer essays, and you will deliver two succinct presentations. In keeping with the progressive spirit of this course, revision and peer review will be a major component of your work. By the semester’s end, you will thus be well-prepared to argue on behalf of your freak or geek for a social upgrade from “nobody” to “somebody.”

 

Major Projects:

  • Mapping Essay (revision and peer review are mandatory)
  • Rhetorical Analysis Essay (revision is encouraged, and peer review is mandatory)
  • Persuasive Essay (revision is encouraged, and peer review is mandatory)

Other Assignments:

  • Annotated Bibliography
  • Blog Posts
  • Timeline Presentation
  • Persuasive Presentation

Grading:

Although students will regularly receive detailed feedback on their coursework, they will not receive traditional letter grades for these assignments. Instead, assessment will be based around the Learning Record portfolio system. In addition to completing the course assignments, students will submit a midterm and final portfolio that demonstrates growth across six dimensions of learning: confidence and independence; skills and strategies; knowledge and understanding; use of prior and emerging experience; reflection; and creativity and imagination.

Required Texts:

  • Kidd, Dustin. Pop Culture Freaks: Identity, Mass Media, and Society.
  • Nicotra, Jodie. Becoming Rhetorical: Analyzing and Composing in a Multimedia World.
  • Additional readings will be supplied by instructor.

RHE 309K • Rhet Of Late Night Comedy

43345 • Scott, Maclain
Meets MW 10:00AM-11:30AM FAC 7
show description

Before its current use in public discourse, the phrase “fake news” was used to describe The Daily Show with Jon Stewart—a late-night political satire TV show that featured a variety of comedians (such as Stephen Colbert, John Oliver, Larry Wilmore, and Samantha Bee) who have since gone on to host similar shows of their own. By providing comedic takes on current events and political actors, these shows led to questions concerning the role and effects of satire in our society. While The Daily Show may have eventually outgrown (or shied away from) the “fake news” label, the tension between late-night comedy, political commentary, and the news continues to provoke passionate debate.

In this course, students will examine a variety of arguments about, for, and against late-night political comedy, including the (in)effectiveness of satire, political bias and/or responsibility, and the diversity (or lack thereof) of TV show hosts and writing staffs. Students will also learn about the various rhetorical strategies used within these shows, such as irony, imitation, hyperbole, metaphor, and self-deprecation, as well as the affordances and limitations of the multimodal format by which hosts address their audiences. Students will ultimately put forth their own arguments concerning the place, potential, and/or problem of late-night comedy in the contemporary political and cultural landscape.

Assignments

  • Paper 1: Annotated Bibliography (10%)
  • Paper 2.1: Rhetorical Analysis (“A Closer Look”) (10%)
  • Paper 2.2: Revision (15%)
  • Paper 3.1: Argument (10%)
  • Paper 3.2: Revision (20%)
  • Paper 4: Video Presentation (10%)
  • 5 Short Writing Assignments (25%)
  • Peer Reviews (Mandatory)
  • Participation (Required) 

Required Texts

  • Everything’s an Argument, Lunsford and Ruszkiewicz, 7th edition (without readings)
  • Little Longhorn Handbook

RHE 309K • Rhet Of Politics In The 60s

43365 • Dieter, Eric
Meets TTH 12:30PM-2:00PM PAR 304
show description

In America, 1968 was a turbulent year, to say the least. This course is designed to explore the ways that rhetoric shaped and was shaped by that turbulence. How did citizens try to use public talk—sometimes successfully, often less so—to campaign, educate, govern, protest, etc.?  What did they learn about each other, about themselves, about the United States? But also, what lessons did they refuse, were they unable, to learn? In asking the latter question, this course is a study of misunderstanding. What are the perils of misunderstanding in public spheres? Are there any prizes? How do various communities navigate being misunderstood? Can misunderstanding be reduced? Can it lead to understanding? How?

1968’s year of turbulence culminated in a fractious presidential election, and that event is the primary focus of the course. Students will read a range of secondary sources mapping the broad, wild landscape of 1968’s political rhetoric. Then, students will narrow their focus to survey specific plots of that larger rhetorical landscape through guided inquiries of verbal and visual primary sources. Scholars like Wayne C. Booth provide theoretic language for conducting rhetorical analyses. Students will work towards identifying and developing an original research question that piques their curiosity. 

This course will benefit students interested in the discipline of rhetoric and rhetorical pedagogy, mid-twentieth-century social history (especially black power, environmentalism, feminism, popular culture, and modern conservatism), civil rights advocacy, presidential scholarship, and political campaigning. It is an added benefit if course conversations help make sense of the current rhetorical and political moment, and productive contemporary connections, while not the purpose, will not be avoided. The course’s main argument echoes that of Aeschylus, as quoted by Robert Kennedy during his speech in the wake of Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination, through awful grace comes wisdom.

 

Requirements & Grading: Students will write three (3) two-page essays throughout the semester, and one (1) ten-page essay to conclude the semester. Short essays help students articulate cogent analyses of arguments encountered in the course’s primary sources and critical readings. Any short essay may be revised and resubmitted before the next essay is due. All previous submissions must be included with each revision. Students are expected to schedule writing conferences with the professor outside of class before undertaking each revision. A conference and rewrite is required for the first short essay. One short essay may be expanded into the longer essay. Longer essays will include original research. Students will conduct in-class writing workshops to scaffold the longer essay. Grades are based on attendance and participation (15%), short essays (45%), long essay (25%), in-class workshops (15%). 

Texts: The following are examples of readings from which students will read selections. This course reading list is subject to change. Students are asked to purchase the following:

  • Booth, Wayne C., The Rhetoric of Rhetoric: The Quest for Effective Communication
  • A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr.
  • Buckley vs. Vidal: The Historic 1968 ABC News Debates

But most readings will be made available via the Canvas course site. Readings may include, but are not limited to:

  • Aristotle, On Rhetoric
  • Austin, J.L., How to Do Things with Words
  • Booth, Wayne C., Modern Dogma and the Rhetoric of Assent
  • Branch, Taylor, At Canaan's Edge: America in the King Years, 1965-68
  • Chester, Lewis, et al, An American Melodrama: The Presidential Campaign of 1968
  • Clarke, Thurston, The Last Campaign: Robert F. Kennedy and 82 Days That Inspired America
  • Cohen, Michael, American Maelstrom: The 1968 Election and the Politics of Division
  • Gitlin, Todd, The Sixties: Years of Hope, Days of Rage
  • Gaddis, John Lewis, The Cold War: A New History
  • Gillon, Steven, Separate and Unequal: The Kerner Commission and the Unraveling of American Liberalism
  • Gould, Lewis, 1968: The Election That Changed America
  • Jasinski, James, Sourcebook on Rhetoric
  • Joseph, Peniel, Waiting ‘Til the Midnight Hour: A Narrative History of Black Power in America
  • Mailer, Norman, Miami and the Siege of Chicago
  • Mann, Robert, Daisy Petals and Mushroom Clouds: LBJ, Barry Goldwater, and the Ad That Changed American Politics
  • McGinniss, Joe, The Selling of the President, 1968
  • Perelman, Chaim, The Realm of Rhetoric
  • Phillips, Kevin, The Emerging Republican Majority
  • Richards, I.A., The Philosophy of Rhetoric
  • Richardson, Elaine, et al, ed., African American Rhetoric(s): Interdisciplinary Perspectives
  • Risen, Clay, A Nation on Fire: American in the Wake of the King Assassination
  • Schlesinger, Robert, White House Ghosts: Presidents and Their Speechwriters
  • Wainstock, Dennis, Election Year 1968: The Turning Point
  • White, Theodore H., The Making of the President 1968

As well as contemporary newspaper and magazine sources, television sources (e.g., Vanderbilt Television News Archive, the Gore/Buckley debates), documentaries and movies (e.g., Medium Cool, The Black Power Mixtape, Won’t You Be My Neighbor), political commercials (e.g., The Living Room Candidate), government reports (e.g., The Kerner Commission Report, ),proceedings from 1968 Republican and Democratic national conventions, and speeches and memoirs (e.g., Shirley Chisholm, Fannie Lou Hamer, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., Robert McNamara).


RHE 309K • Rhetoric Of Ambiguity

43375 • Moura De Oliveir, Claudio
Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM FAC 9
show description

Clear writing is usually defined as easily understandable, coherent and intelligible. But understanding  a message depends on interpretation, and there is no right way of interpreting. Or is there? What does it mean to comprehend? Is there something inherently factual to be unraveled in a message or must we, as receivers, come up with it? What challenges does misinterpretation force us to face? Is clarity always the best choice? Or is there a use for ambiguity?

In this course, we will examine what it means to be clear, when it is beneficial and when it might not be. We will read philosophical texts and discuss what are and what leads to (mis)understandings. Persuasion and argumentation will be thought in the paradigm of clarity/ambiguity and we will explore the advantages and disadvantages of adhering to each side into the writing process. Students will read and respond to a public apology made by a public figure of their choice, investigating the factors that lead to them; write short analyses, summaries, recaps, digested reads, and other forms of accounts of an understanding of a text. Students will also explore what strategies can afford clarity to a text and how to avoid confusion, as well as analyze and compare different interpretations of a same text. Ultimately, students will put forth either an encyclopedia entry or an instructional text (in any media) considering the mechanisms that lead to precision and simplicity in writing. The final goal will be to provide students with the tools to produce clear writing, understand the uses of ambiguity, and make students able to apply coherence and transparency to a text.

Assignments

  • Paper 1: Open Letter (15%)
  • Paper 2.1: Analysis and Comparison (10%)
  • Paper 2.2: Revision (15%)
  • Paper 3.1: Encyclopedia Article / Instructional Text (10%)
  • Paper 3.2: Revision (15%)
  • In Class Presentation (10%)
  • Short Writing Assignments (25%)
  • Peer Reviews (Mandatory)
  • Participation (Required)

Required texts:

  • Williams, Joseph M, and Joseph Bizup., Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace, 2017.
  • The Little Longhorn Handbook. Norton, 2014. 
  • Eco, Umberto,  Metaphor, Dictionary, and Encyclopedia (provided by the instructor)
  • Plato, The Apology of Socrates (provided by the instructor)
  • John Locke, "Of Words", from An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (provided by the instructor)
  • Additional readings as provided by the instructor

RHE 309K • Rhetoric Of Animals

43325 • Piekarski, Krzysztof
Meets TTH 11:00AM-12:30PM PAR 104
show description

We share this planet with many different kinds of beings we call animals, often forgetting that we are animals ourselves. But the kinds of creatures we call “animals” are different from us in a fundamental way: they have an extremely difficult time writing about and representing themselves. Maybe they lack the opposable thumbs? Maybe they never learned to speak? Maybe they would prefer to keep silent?

Regardless of the reason, homo sapiens have made it their job to speak for animals: sometimes on their behalf, sometimes not so much. Our semester-long exploration will focus on the different ways humans represent animals and all the ethical, political, philosophical, scientific and artistic reasons and repercussions for doing so. We will venture forth across different genres––movies, books, essays, philosophical treatises, documentaries, and poetry––to understand how the way we represent animals affects what we think of them and, as Sacha Baron Cohen once asked, to better understand “What is animals for?” In doing so, we will learn how arguments are structured, to what effect, and, more profoundly, to better understand ourselves.

Assignments and Grading Policy: 

  • Daily Upkeep of learning record based on observations and reflections Midterm self-reflection evaluation
  • Final self-reflection evaluation
  • Class Participation
  • Quizzes
  • Rhetorical analysis mini papers (500 words in length)
  • Argument Paper, ongoing edits and publication ~5,000 words

Grades in this course are determined on the basis of the Learning Record, which accompanies a portfolio of work presented at the midterm and at the end of the course. Please see http://www.learningrecord.org. These portfolios present a selection of student work, both formal and informal, completed during the semester, ongoing observations about student learning, and analysis of student work and interpretations with respect to the student's development across five dimensions of learning: confidence and independence, knowledge and understanding, skills and strategies, use of prior and emerging experience, creativity and reflectiveness. This development centers around the major strands of work in the course: rhetoric and composition, research, technology, and collaboration. The criteria for grades are posted at the Learning Record web site. Please also notice the RHE policy on absences, which can affect your grade. Three unexcused absences will lower your final grade, four unexcused absences results in automatic failure of the course.

 

Texts 

  • A More Beautiful Question ~Warren Berger
  • Several Short Sentences About Writing ~Verlyn Klinkenborg Selected Essays of E.B. White
  • Other Minds: The Octopus, The Sea, and the Deep Origins of Consciousness ~Peter Godfrey-Smith
  • How to Be a Good Creature: A memoir in Thirteen Animals ~Sy Montgomery
  • A Plea for The Animals: The Moral, Philosophical and Evolutionary Imperative to Treat All Beings with Compassion ~Matthieu Ricard
  • Eating Animals ~Jonathan Safran Foer
  • Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions ~ Sunstein and Nussbaum
  • The Gospel of Kindness: Animal Welfare and the Making of Modern America ~Janet Davis
  • Becoming Animal: An Earthly Cosmology ~ David Abram
  • The Bonobo and the Atheist: In search of Humanism Among the Primates ~Frans de Waal
  • Dog Songs ~Mary Oliver
  • H is for Hawk ~Helen Macdonald
  • Koko ~ Barbet Schroeder
  • Bambi ~David Hand
  • Buck ~ Cindy Meehl
  • Jane ~Brett Morgen
  • Grizzly Man ~ Werner Herzog
  • Ashes and Snow ~ Gregory Colbert

 


RHE 309K • Rhetoric Of Creativity

43355 • Holland, Cindy-Lou
Meets TTH 11:00AM-12:30PM FAC 7
show description

What IS creativity? Is it a character trait? Is it a process we engage in? Is it a mysterious muse that descends from on high? What are the implications of each of these ideas? Does it matter how we conceive of creativity? These questions will guide our study as we examine various popular and scientific theories of creativity and work to understand how these ideas might have influenced our thoughts about own creativity.

Over the semester we will explore methods of creative problem solving, including the Design Thinking model and divergent thinking activities. Students will keep a class journal to chronicle both their performance in each problem-scenario and their responses to the creative process. Then students will attempt to put these new and creative “ways of being” to use as they gather and track information (i.e. do research) about a creative person, event, act, or object of their choice. Thus, creativity will become both our subject matter and our approach to research. Students should expect to encounter moments of ambiguity and uncertainty in class every week, and should learn to recognize these as important aspects of both the writing (and the creative!) process.

Assignments

  • Journal Entries and Collaborative Paragraphing (3-4 per week)
  • Rhetorical Analysis (4-7 pages)
  • Research Project (written or multimodal) 

Grading

Students will receive instructor feedback on their written assignments, and then will evaluate their own writing and learning through a Learning Record. This means students will argue for a final grade and provide evidence to support their claim to that grade. The instructor will make the final decision of what grade to assign, honoring self-evaluations as much as possible.

 

Required Texts

  • They Say, I Say: The Moves that Matter in Academic Writing. Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein.
  • The Storm of Creativity. Kyna Leski.

Additional readings provided via Canvas.

 


RHE 309K • Rhetoric Of Soccer

43370 • Khoshnood, Alfredo
Meets MWF 1:00PM-2:00PM MEZ 1.216
show description

“The ball turns, the world turns.”

-Eduardo Galeano, Soccer in Sun and Shadow

The globe’s most popular sport is a nexus for rhetoric: people argue about it, through it, and using it. In this course we will consider how soccer functions as a rhetorical entity. We will begin by considering the sport’s inextricable connection to the progression of globalization in the latter half of the twentieth century. We will then survery various genres of soccer related media in order to understand how the public discourse surrounding soccer reflects rhetorical trends and concepts. Through this consideration, we will come to understand how soccer functions as both an individual and collective athletic performance and as a complex cultural, political, and rhetorical spectacle. In addition to furthering our understanding of soccer’s role in global discourse, we will also develop skills in persuasive and analytic composition across various media formats.

Assignment Breakdown:

  • Moments in Soccer Timeline: 20%
  • Rhetorical Analysis First Draft: 15%
  • Rhetorical Analysis Revision: 20%
  • Soccer in the Shadows Debate: 35%
  • Viewing Journals: 5%
  • Participation: 5%

Note on participation: participation grades in this class will be determined by active engagement in class discussions and activities, and occasional reading quizzes.

Required texts:

  • They Say/I Say: The Moves that Matter in Academic Writing, 3rd edition.
  • The Little Longhorn Handbook
  • Additional readings to be supplied on Canvas by instructor

RHE 309K • Rhetoric Of The 1960s

43350 • Hatch, Justin
Meets MW 11:30AM-1:00PM FAC 7
show description

America loves the 1960s. “The Sixties” in the U.S. connotes romantic ideals of freedom, rebellion, exploration, civil rights, and political and social radicalism—also, The Beatles. Most pertinent to this course, however, the 1960s were a time when much of the youth of the United States found the injustices of their time too gross to tolerate quietly. During the Birmingham Campaign, the Occupation of Alcatraz, the Greensboro sit-ins, on the Freedom Rides, in protesting the War in Vietnam, and during the Free Speech Movement, young people, against all odds, spoke truth to power. They gathered, marched, picketed, rode, sat-in, sang, spoke, and, of course, wrote in response to a world they had discovered was badly flawed. This course offers students the opportunity to investigate the rhetorical strategies that people about their age employed in redressing seemingly insurmountable social, political, and economic national and global ailments, before encouraging them to ask if their own time doesn’t warrant rhetorical engagement of similar magnitude.

This class, however, will not be an uncritical or romantic celebration of student and youth movements of the time, and our mission will not simply be to learn and apply the rhetorical strategies used in The Sixties. We will identify and learn from the mistakes of movements that were too often misogynistic, and that sometimes degenerated into violence. The course also investigates the extent to which the massive social wrongs inspiring redress in the 1960s are still with us today, and the extent to which new problems parallel, extend, or, in some cases eclipse, those of the past.

 

Assignments and Grading 

  • 1.1 Annotated Bibliography 1 (5%)
  • 2.1 Rhetorical Analysis (10%)
  • 2.2 Rhetorical Analysis Revision (10%)
  • 3.1 Annotated Bibliography 2 (5%)
  • 4.1 Intervention and Speech (10%)
  • 4.2 Intervention and Speech Revision (15%)
  • Short Writing Assignments (20%)
  • Presentation (15%)
  • Participation (10%)

Required Textbooks and Handbooks

  • Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students, Sharon Crowley and Debra Hawhee
  • The Little Longhorn Handbook, Bullock et al.

 


RHE 309K • Rhetoric Of The Dinosaur

43320 • Hall, Kirsten
Meets TTH 9:30AM-11:00AM JES A209A
show description

The last of the dinosaurs went extinct about 65 million years ago. Yet, these vanished, forgotten creatures somehow still persist in our imaginations as the ultimate case of obsolescence. Is our obsession with obsolete things caused by nostalgia? Or are they a reminder of our own mortality? Perhaps it’s that the process of extinction or the reality of falling of fashion, even if it is something as small as replacing our old phones with a newer model or taking our trash to the curb, strikes to the heart of life’s basic cycle of birth, death, and resurrection. This course will examine the phenomenon of “going the way of the dinosaur,” exploring what it means for things, ideas, people, and places to become obsolete. Junk and castoffs has taken a central place in the modern world and in the modern imagination. Ever since the Industrial Revolution, we have lived in an increasingly disposable world. Songs like Macklemore’s “Thrift Shop” and shows like Pawn Stars and Antiques Road Show suggest that this state of affairs fascinates us—even approaching to religious reverence as Austin’s “Cathedral of Junk” attests. After all, one person’s trash is another’s treasure. But the fad for “KonMari” philosophies of minimalism and decluttering as well as our culture’s increasing consciousness about landfills and recycling suggests we have reason to fear.

This class will explore how authors and texts draw attention to and find meaning in forgotten, obsolete things. We will begin the semester by constructing a definition of obsolescence, learning more generally about how to understand a complex idea and apprehend its shape, dimensions and limits. Students will then turn their attention to the world around them, analyzing how what we discard and what we reuse tells us about our own shifting values and desires. Finally, in an argumentative paper and digital project, students will consider how the treasures of today become the fossils of tomorrow.     

 

COURSE ASSIGNMENTS:

  • 1.1 Definitional Paper (10%)
  • 2.1 Rhetorical Analysis (10%)
  • 2.2 Rhetorical Analysis Revision (15%)
  • 3.1 Argumentative Essay (15%)
  • 3.2 Argumentative Essay Revision (15%)
  • 4.1 Digital Archive (10%)
  • Oral Presentations (5%)
  • Short Papers (10%)
  • Participation (10%)
  • Peer Reviews (Mandatory)

 

COURSE READINGS

Required Textbooks and Handbooks

  • Everything’s an Argument, Lunsford and Ruszkiewicz
  • The Little Longhorn Handbook. Norton, 2014.

RHE 309K • Rhetoric Of Travel

43360 • Rubin, Jessica
Meets MW 11:30AM-1:00PM FAC 9
show description

Taking on the identity a traveler changes the way we see everything, including ourselves and the places most familiar to us. In this course, writers will develop skills and dispositions as observers, researchers, and writers, skills that will support the creation of insightful and meaningful writing about journeys of any distance. When we travel, we do more than go somewhere new; and when we write of our travels, we do more than tell what happened. As people who travel and people who write, we must think carefully about the purposes and potential of both. 

Sharing tales of travel and adventure is a tradition that stretches back to the beginnings of storytelling, and many of the stories we consider essential to relating the human experience are about actual or symbolic journey across new lands. As a contemporary theme, writing about travel encompasses many ways of composing texts about places and experiences, from guidebooks and reviews to poetry and photographs. In this course, we will examine how some writers have employed different styles and forms of writing about travel, and we will produce two well-researched original pieces of travel writing: a local travel article and a full-length travel essay. In addition, we will use academic analytical writing to explore the conventions of several genres and variations in style across texts that we read together, and texts that each writer chooses as stylistic exemplars.

 

Major assignments:

  • Local Travel Article (including draft, peer review, process reflection) 15%
  • Rhetorical Analysis of a Mentor Text (draft, peer review, revision) 15%
  • Annotated Bibliography (draft, peer review, revision) 15%
  • Long-form Travel Essay (draft, instructor conference, revision) 20%
  • Final Reflection Paper 10%
  • Supporting assignments (class work and homework) 15%
  • Writer’s notebook and class participation 10% 

COURSE TEXTBOOKS

  • Graff, G., & Birkenstein, C. (2014). “They Say / I Say”: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
  • The Brief Penguin Handbook. Faigley, 2014/2011. 
  • Additional readings as provided by the instructor

RHE 309K • Rhetoric Of Witchcraft

43340 • Butler, Tia
Meets TTH 9:30AM-11:00AM PAR 101
show description

Witchcraft, witches, and magic are components of the supernatural which have become a part of contemporary culture and are represented throughout Western history and popular culture. Accusations of sorcery and witchcraft, moreover, have also historically been employed to rob others of power. Witchcraft and magic are implicated in social, economic, and political histories, and are heavily tied into gender construction and the history of women, along with questions of race and religion in other social minorities. In this course, we will investigate the rhetoric surrounding the Witch Hysteria of the early 15th and 16th centuries to understand how this early form of prejudice against those who are different can still be traced to rhetoric used today to either demonize those considered to be heretical or social minorities, or simply as rhetoric used to delegitimize political probes, as in the case of the Mueller probe or other conservative and reactionary causes.

 

Grading/ Assessment –

  • Short Writing Assignments-20%
  • Participation-10%
  • 1.1 Archival Assignment-10%
  • 2.1 Rhetorical Analysis Paper-10%
  • 2.2 RA Revision-15%
  • 3.1 Proposal Paper-15%
  • 3.2 Proposal Revision-20%
  • Peer Review-Invaluable

Required Texts

  • Becoming Rhetorical: Analyzing and Composing in a Multimedia World, Jodie Nicotra
  • The Little Longhorn Handbook, 2nd Edition
  • I, Tituba, Black Witch of Salem, Maryse Conde
  • Other materials will be available on Canvas

RHE 309K • Rhetoric Of Women's Work

43335 • Echternach, Julia
Meets MW 8:30AM-10:00AM PAR 104
show description

In 2015, white women were paid only 82 cents for each dollar that white men were paid at their jobs. In the same year, Black women took home 65 cents and Latina women took home 58 cents for every dollar paid to white men. Yet just the year before, in 2014, a study of economics professors found that women with two children were the most productive workers in their field. During the same period, a coalition of Black women began putting in hours of unpaid labor to organize a social movement called Black Lives Matter, and Central American mothers in immigrant detention centers started organizing hunger strikes to protest their ongoing incarceration. And in early 2017, millions of people – thousands of them protesting for the first time - participated in a national Women’s March, sparking an ongoing debate about whose work had made the march possible and whose work it supported.

In this course, we will engage in critical discussions about the work that women are actually doing, the work that is classified as “women’s work,” and the long history of women’s work being devalued and ignored. We will use rhetorical tools to analyze a variety of arguments about how women’s work should be defined and compensated, and we will consider how these arguments open some possibilities and place limitations on others. Topics covered will include work inside the home, work outside the home, and the work of surviving, resisting, and organizing. We will pay close attention to how definitions of women’s work affect women of color, poor and working-class women, queer and trans women, and Indigenous women worldwide. Students will use the tools of rhetorical analysis to write response papers to the articles, artwork, and film that we engage in the class, and will also conduct an individual research project, culminating in a persuasive piece advocating for a change in the valuation of women’s work. Students who enroll in the class should be prepared to read and write extensively, to actively engage in discussion with their classmates, to reflect continuously on their own experiences and assumptions, and to evaluate their own learning.

Writing Assignments

Students will receive instructor feedback on their written assignments, and then evaluate their own writing and learning through a Learning Record. Students will argue for a final grade. The instructor will make the final decision of what grade to assign, honoring self-evaluations as much as possible.

  • Weekly Journal Entries (2 pages)
  • Rhetorical Analysis (4-6 pages)
  • Annotated Bibliography (5 pages)
  • Literature Review (4-6 pages)
  • Argument for Women’s Work (4-6 pages)
  • Connecting Women’s Work to Knowledge and Experience (4-6 pages)

Required Texts

  • Faigley and Selzer, A Little Argument (2012)
  • Little Longhorn Handbook

Selected articles on Canvas


RHE 309K • Rhetoric Of Wrestling

43385 • Hooker, Tristin
Meets TTH 3:30PM-5:00PM FAC 7
show description

Professional wrestling isn’t just about bodyslams. It’s about narrative, audience, feedback, and persuasion: all the things that make up Rhetoric. In this course, we will begin by analyzing how those strategies play out in the small scale (within the ring and also in televised/digitally shared promos), and extend through the entire constructed wrestling world. We will examine how what happens in the ring bleeds into public personas outside of the ring, especially on social media. We will look at aspects of performance, gender, sexuality, ethnicity and cultural representation, as they appear within the wrestling world. We will also examine rhetorical strategies and how both fans and wrestling companies have seized on the growth of social media to interact with and/or direct their fanbase (and the way the fans have used those same strategies to talk back). Ultimately, the course will also help students produce texts that solidify the critical ideas we are looking at. We will also look at the way the language and tropes of wrestling have crept into broader public discourse, from journalism to politics.

In this class, we will watch a lot of footage, read some critical texts and some tweets. We will learn important terminology and principles from classical rhetoric and apply them to what we see. We will learn to recognize major tropes and subgenres within wrestling, but also to recognize rhetorical choices made in performing and producing sports entertainment. We will get into the rhetorical ring, ourselves, creating personas and commentary and defending the rhetorical moves we make. We will consider the audience’s role in production and persuasion, and evaluate the relationship between rhetorical performance, suspension of disbelief, and reality.

 

List of Assignments:

Major Writing Assignments: 45%

  • Project One: Rhetorical analysis of a wrestler or storyline. (15%)
  • Project Two: Rhetorical analysis of culture in wrestling (15%)
  • Project Three: Researched argument on a rhetorical strategy in wrestling (15%)
  • Project Four:  Build a rhetorical wrestler (20%) 

6 Blog Posts 10%

2 Course Dictionary Entries (minimum) 5%

3 Project Drafts and Peer Review 15%

Participation 5%

TEXTBOOK/READINGS

Required Texts

  • Jodie Nicotra, Becoming Rhetorical: Analyzing and Composing in a Multimedia World
  • The Little Longhorn Handbook, Norton

Additional Readings

Additional texts will be assigned during the course, and either the text/materials themselves or guidelines for searching will be distributed electronically.


RHE 309S • Crit Read/Persuasive Writ-Hon

43395 • Garner, James
Meets MWF 9:00AM-10:00AM RLP 1.102
show description

The aim in this course is to develop a better understanding and mastery of rhetoric--the art of persuasion--an art that's essential not only for your college work, but also for your participation as a citizen in a democracy. You already know this art instinctively: every day, all day, you're immersed in rhetoric. But our goal in this course is to become more consciously and effectively rhetorical.

To accomplish this goal, we'll study a discourse that is inherently related both to the rhetorical tradition and modern politics: tolerance. Tolerance has been a major part of political discussions at least since the 16th century, and it persists as a buzzword in the media. We describe people who hold certain attitudes as being tolerant or intolerant. Stories of intolerance on college campuses flood the 24-hour news cycle. Tolerance becomes tricky as we try to define the limits of what we’re willing to tolerate. But as we’ll find in this class, tolerance as a philosophical, political, and—most importantly for our purposes—rhetorical stance is a lot more complicated than popular media presents it. These tensions make tolerance a robust and important discourse worth studying. 

This course—and its assignments—will challenge you to think differently, to question age-old assumptions, and to engage in argument as part of a larger community. You’ll complete assignments analyzing rhetoric (why are particular arguments persuasive to some audiences and not others, for instance?), as well as write persuasive arguments geared toward specific audiences. We’ll complete a number of peer reviews and workshops to help you grow as writers and thinkers. This course isn't for the faint of heart—we’ll occasionally discuss controversial topics in this class, but always in the service of intellectual growth. If you're a hard worker, you like to share your thoughts, and you're interested in what rhetoric and politics have to do with one another, then this is the class for you.

Assignments:

  • Paper 1.1 – 5%
  • Paper 1.2 – 10%
  • Paper 2 – 10%
  • Paper 2.1 – 15%
  • Paper 3 – 25%
  • Short Assignments – 20%
  • Even Shorter Assignments – 15%

Readings:

  • Mark G. Longaker and Jeffrey Walker. Rhetorical Analysis: A Brief Guide for Writers. Pearson, 2010.
  • EasyWriter with 2016 MLA Update by Andrea A. Lunsford

Other readings will be provided to you by your instructor online and in PDF form.


RHE 309S • Crit Read/Persuasive Writ-Nsds

43400 • Buckley, Tom
Meets TTH 9:30AM-11:00AM PAR 103
show description

THIS COURSE IS RESTRICTED TO NATURAL SCIENCES DEAN'S SCHOLARS

The aim in this course is to develop a better understanding and mastery of rhetoric-the art of persuasion-an art that's essential not only for your college work, but also for your participation as a citizen in a democracy. You already know this art instinctively: every day, all day, you're immersed in rhetoric. But our goal in this course is to become more consciously and effectively rhetorical.

To accomplish this goal, we'll use a number of approaches. We'll complete a number of assignments addressed to specific audiences for specific purposes; we'll engage ourselves in additional assignments involving analysis and evaluation; we'll read rhetorically, with a critical awareness of the techniques and strategies adopted by writers; and we'll involve ourselves in discussions about what we read.

The course-and its assignments-will challenge you to think differently, to question age-old assumptions, and to engage in argument as part of a larger community. This course isn't for the faint of heart. If you're not prepared to be challenged in your thinking, or if you're not comfortable participating in conversations with others, you best not sign up. But if you're a hard worker, you like to share your thoughts, and you're open to a slightly different approach to learning, then this is the place for you.


RHE 312 • Writing In Digtl Environments

43405 • Tuttle, Amy
Meets TTH 12:30PM-2:00PM PAR 104
show description

Artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed society over the past 50 years.  It has enabled increased human productivity, a broad array of news, entertainment, and communication options, and technological advances in almost every branch of science and engineering.  At the same time, AI has contributed to threats to privacy, new categories of crime, disruptions in the workforce, and a societal focus on systems capable of catastrophic failure. Scientific approaches to AI foreground its practical application through established bodies of knowledge, often encouraging an authority-based view of “truth.” By contrast, rhetorical approaches to AI encourage discussion and dissent, equipping students to reason about situations that have no single correct answer. In this course, we will consider all of this and more, with the goal of better understanding how to shape AI in ways that maximize the benefits and minimize the costs.

This course will provide a broad overview and introduction to the field of AI, focusing on the impacts it has made on society during the past 50 years. The intended audience for this course is that of the general student. No computational background is required. The course will begin by providing a broad overview of what AI is and what it is not. The course will also take up applications of AI that have made their ways into our everyday lives, ultimately attending to the ethical implications of the continued impact of AI on society. The aim of this course is to prepare students to recognize ethical problems in their present and future work in digital environments, focusing on methods of applied ethical reasoning (for the future), as well as on particular current problems. We will read and discuss both scientific and philosophical articles, as well as fiction and non-fiction texts that explore these ideas.


RHE 315 • Intro To Visual Rhetoric

43410 • Goad, Rhiannon
Meets TTH 11:00AM-12:30PM FAC 9
show description

Handsome Squidward. Pussyhats. MAGA hats. Mona Lisa. Kim Kardashian Breaks the Internet. Glossier pink. Obama HOPE poster. Visual artifacts shape who we are, what we stand for, and how we do things. That is to say, images persuade. But how? In this course, students consider the rhetorical dimension of our visual culture and refine their writing skills. With expository writing assignments, students expand their vocabularies for disseminating visual culture. In analytic essays, students adopt a series of interdisciplinary frameworks to evaluate visual artifacts. Through in-class workshops, students learn the basics of designing infographics, editing videos, building websites, and manipulating photos. For a capstone project, students pull from all three skills (expository, analytical, and digital) to create a multimedia essay. 

Grade Breakdown

  • Analytic essays: 30%
  • Capstone project: 30%
  • Expository writing exercises: 25%
  • In-class workshops: 15%

Textbooks

  • They Say, I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing 3rd Edition by Cathy Birkenstein and‎ Gerald Graff
  • Visual Rhetoric: A Reader in Communication and American Culture  by Lester C. Olson,‎ Cara A. Finnegan, and‎ Diane S. Hope

RHE 321 • Principles Of Rhetoric

43425 • Ferreira-Buckley, Linda
Meets TTH 5:00PM-6:30PM PAR 101
show description

The study of rhetoric, one of the original seven Liberal Arts (along with logic, grammar, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music), has a  long and proud history, stretching back to the 5th century BCE and up to the present day.  Both a productive and interpretive art, it is decidedly cross-disciplinary: the principles of rhetoric (audience, context, kairos, exigency, ethospathoslogos, and so forth) are consistently employed, for example, not only in literary analysis but in law, politics, education, science, and religion.

This course introduces students to common rhetorical principles and to the disciplinary history of rhetoric and writing studies.  Assignments in the class will offer students the chance to identify and apply these rhetorical principles while composing, interpreting, and presenting “texts”—oral, print, and/or electronic.   The course will meet all necessary requirements to qualify as an writing flag course.

At the end of the term, students should be able to:

(1) Write an effective rhetorical analysis.

(2) Write a responsible argument relevant to a contested issue.

(3) Discourse about some of the major issues in the field (such as: What is the relationship between truth and language? How do technologies of communication affect discourse? What is "good" public argument? What constitutes a quality rhetorical education? and so on.)

(4) Situate the significance of some of the canonical figures in rhetorical studies.

(5) Apply the basic principles of rhetorical study, as mentioned above, to contemporary situations.


RHE 321 • Principles Of Rhetoric

43415 • Charney, Davida
Meets MW 1:00PM-2:30PM FAC 7
show description

The study of rhetoric, one of the original seven Liberal Arts (along with logic, grammar, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music), has a  long and proud history, stretching back to the 5th century BCE and up to the present day.  Both a productive and interpretive art, it is decidedly cross-disciplinary: the principles of rhetoric (audience, context, kairos, exigency, ethospathoslogos, and so forth) are consistently employed, for example, not only in literary analysis but in law, politics, education, science, and religion.

This course introduces students to common rhetorical principles and to the disciplinary history of rhetoric and writing studies.  Assignments in the class will offer students the chance to identify and apply these rhetorical principles while composing, interpreting, and presenting “texts”—oral, print, and/or electronic.   The course will meet all necessary requirements to qualify as an writing flag course.

At the end of the term, students should be able to:

(1) Write an effective rhetorical analysis.

(2) Write a responsible argument relevant to a contested issue.

(3) Discourse about some of the major issues in the field (such as: What is the relationship between truth and language? How do technologies of communication affect discourse? What is "good" public argument? What constitutes a quality rhetorical education? and so on.)

(4) Situate the significance of some of the canonical figures in rhetorical studies.

(5) Apply the basic principles of rhetorical study, as mentioned above, to contemporary situations.


RHE 321 • Principles Of Rhetoric

43420 • Smith, Daniel
Meets MWF 11:00AM-12:00PM PAR 204
show description

The study of rhetoric, one of the original seven Liberal Arts (along with logic, grammar, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music), has a  long and proud history, stretching back to the 5th century BCE and up to the present day.  Both a productive and interpretive art, it is decidedly cross-disciplinary: the principles of rhetoric (audience, context, kairos, exigency, ethospathoslogos, and so forth) are consistently employed, for example, not only in literary analysis but in law, politics, education, science, and religion.

This course introduces students to common rhetorical principles and to the disciplinary history of rhetoric and writing studies.  Assignments in the class will offer students the chance to identify and apply these rhetorical principles while composing, interpreting, and presenting “texts”—oral, print, and/or electronic.   The course will meet all necessary requirements to qualify as an writing flag course.

At the end of the term, students should be able to:

(1) Write an effective rhetorical analysis.

(2) Write a responsible argument relevant to a contested issue.

(3) Discourse about some of the major issues in the field (such as: What is the relationship between truth and language? How do technologies of communication affect discourse? What is "good" public argument? What constitutes a quality rhetorical education? and so on.)

(4) Situate the significance of some of the canonical figures in rhetorical studies.

(5) Apply the basic principles of rhetorical study, as mentioned above, to contemporary situations.


RHE 328 • Magazine Writing/Publishing

43435 • Buckley, Tom
Meets W 5:00PM-8:00PM PAR 101
show description

This course is designed to give students an understanding of the magazine field from the perspective of both writers and editors. The course offers a broad core of practical knowledge while also exploring issues related to the field. In the first part of the course, students will learn how to generate story ideas; research appropriate magazine markets to pursue; conduct interviews; sell their ideas (and themselves) in query letters; develop the best format for presenting their information; and, finally, organize the materials, write, and revise the article itself, and send it off for publication.

In the second half of the course, students will publish an issue of a magazine, acting as writers, editors, and designers responsible for its content – and beholden to a publisher. They'll identify a niche audience, formulate an editorial vision, and write, revise, edit, fact-check, and generally take part in all aspects of the publication. In short, they'll perform all the editorial functions of a magazine staff. They'll work individually and in teams, devising departments, assigning stories, gathering art, selling ads. They'll write headlines and captions, crop pictures, fit copy, and design layouts. And they'll engage in discussions about issues of advertising, media ethics, and publisher control.

No previous journalistic experience is necessary.

 

Course Requirements

Three articles during the first half of the course (profile, issue of conflict, feature); various tasks associated with publishing a magazine in the second half of the course. During the second half, students will also continue to revise the three articles from the first half of the course.

 

Grading Policy

  • Three articles, with revisions: 25% each
  • Shorter exercises: 15%
  • Participation in second half of the course: 10%

 

Required Texts

  • Writer's Market 2010, Robert Lee Brewer (Editor)
  • Writing for Magazines: A Beginner's Guide, Cheryl Sloan Wray

RHE 328 • Tech Comm & Wicked Problems

43430 • Graham, Samuel
Meets MW 11:30AM-1:00PM PAR 104
show description

Learn Tech Comm. Save the world.

Urban food deserts, opioid abuse, chronic drought, obesity epidemics, global climate change—the stuff of everyday headlines. We are increasingly confronted with vastly complex problems that offer no easy solution. These "wicked problems," as they have become known, are so difficult to address that they require the coordinated efforts of scientists, politicians, community leaders, and industry partners. However, bringing such a diverse array of people together to tackle a specific problem is no easy task. Success will require "the formation of new professional roles: translators, mediators, facilitators of debates and negotiations, and political organizers" (Callon, Lascoumes, and Barthe).

Subsequently, the Spring 2019 edition of RHE 328 is devoted to preparing aspiring technical communicators for these new professional roles. Specific course units will focus on: 1) the nature of wicked problems and the roles for technical communicators, 2) practical approaches to translating scientific and technical information for diverse audiences, 3) effective strategies for engaging public audiences around wicked problems, and 4) best practices for facilitating productive stakeholder dialogue.

 

Course Requirements and Grades

This course has six major assignments:

  • Socio-Technical Network Analysis: Students will identify a wicked problem of interest and prepare a report detailing and analyzing the social, environmental, and/or technical causes of that problem. (20%)
  • Artifact Analysis Packet: Students will identify and analyze three communication artifacts designed to inform or engage public audiences about the chosen wicked problem. (20%)
  • Public Engagement Project: Using their analysis of preexisting public engagement materials as a guide, students will create a custom public engagement project designed to catalyze stakeholder engagement with the identified wicked problem. (30%)
  • Facilitation Plan and Briefing Books: Students will propose an event designed to catalyze a coordinated scientific and community response to an identified wicked problem. The plan will detail specific events designed to foster dialogue among diverse stakeholders and will include appropriate briefing books for included audiences.  (30%)

 

Required Texts

  • Tackling Wicked Problems, Brown, Harris & Russell
  • Acting in an Uncertain World, Callon, Lascoumes & Barthe
  • A packet of readings provided on Canvas

RHE 328 • Writing For Entrepreneurs

43440 • Spinuzzi, Clay
Meets TTH 9:30AM-11:00AM PAR 208
show description

Peter Drucker once said, “the entrepreneur always searches for change, responds to it, and exploits it as an opportunity.” Entrepreneurs discover and conceptualize problems, then look for opportunities to solve those problems with innovative solutions—solutions that could involve new products, services, processes, or principles. Such innovations can range from household gadgets to industrial processes to viral phone apps.

To be successful in achieving her or his vision, an entrepreneur must develop, extend, and hone complex arguments to interest stakeholders in the vision (and to adapt that vision to the needs of the stakeholders). From developing an idea to researching the market, from sketching out the business model to describing the value proposition, from gathering customer feedback to pitching a product, entrepreneurs must perform many small arguments that form a larger coherent argument.

How do they do that? In this class, we will learn, analyze, and practice some of the many types of arguments that entrepreneurs use. We will apply basic rhetorical concepts to these arguments to better analyze and construct them, and we will read articles from rhetoric, marketing, management, and related fields to better understand their context.

Students do not need an entrepreneurship background, nor do they need to have a winning idea. Our focus won't be on creating the next big thing (although you might!) but on figuring out how successful entrepreneurs argue and what texts they use to make those arguments successful.

Projects

Project 1. Developing a claim for value: The value proposition (20%)

Project 2. Structuring an argument around the claim: The Business Model Canvas (30%)

Project 3. Developing the argument with your audience: Customer validation (25%)

Project 4. Telling a convincing story: The pitch presentation (25%)

Texts 

  • Baehr, E., & Loomis, E. (2015). Get Backed: Craft Your Story, Build the Perfect Pitch Deck, and Launch the Venture of Your Dreams. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press.

  • Moore, G. A. Crossing the chasm: Marketing and selling high-tech products to mainstream customers (Any edition). New York: HarperBusiness.

  • Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

  • Course pack in Canvas


RHE 330C • Access Designed

43446 • Boyle, Casey
Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM PAR 104
show description

This course will examine, explore, and exercise techniques for designing accessibility in digital writing and with physical computing devices. To accomplish these tasks, students will examine texts that foreground communication media as mediating bodies and technologies, which will include topics such as accessibility, universal design, disability studies, and media theory. We will explore these meditations by locating accessibility in how online communication circulates with and against bodies (digital documents and online sites) as well as how digital devices (i.e. arduino-based sensor projects) can assist how bodies circulate in space. In addition to course readings, case studies, and class discussions, the class will exercise accessible concepts by working together to design, develop, and deploy accessibility devices with accompanying documentation (e.g. user guides and project websites) that rhetorically respond to a site of contested access. 

Note: While no prior technological experience is necessary, a willingness to engage new technologies and a commitment to practicing those technologies is.

 

Required Course Texts and Materials 

 

Assignments

Participation - 10%

  • Since this course will involve many workshops and group projects, regular attendance and active participation will be required and factored into the final grade.

Reading Responses - 10%

  • 6 written responses to required readings posted to our course site (300-500 words posted in Canvas). Responses will be opportunities to critically and creatively engage course readings and case studies as well as provide the starting point for much our class discussion. In the first week, I will provide a more detailed assignment sheet for how to organize the responses.

Accessibility Audit - 15%

  • Students will examine an online site to determine its accessibility and will report on that examination.

Captioning Assignment - 15%

  • This assignment will give students an opportunity to practice techniques for captioning images and video.

Accessibility Device and Documentation - 50%

  • In this semester long project, student will work in groups to design, develop, and deploy an accessibility device (using Arduino-based components) that responds to a particular situation of access. This project will include a proposal, progress reports, the device, project site, user documentation, and a final presentation.

RHE 330C • Designing Text Ecologies

43455 • Spinuzzi, Clay
Meets TTH 11:00AM-12:30PM PAR 6
show description

How do people use texts to communicate and solve problems in organizations - and how can we help them improve? In this class, you'll learn how to answer that question. You'll design and conduct a field study of an organization, watching actual people communicate and solve actual problems. You'll analyze the results, generating a model of how they communicate and where their solutions do and don't work. Finally, you'll design a text that will help them fix their problems.

RHE 330C involves four major projects:

Project 1: Designing a study of an organization (20%). In Project 1, you will identify a research site, gain permission to do research there, and design a research study. You'll follow this design as you conduct the study in Project 2 and analyze the results in Project 3. At the end of Project 12, you’ll turn in a research proposal, consent form, and interview script.

Project 2: Conducting the study of the organization (30%). In Project 2, you’ll put your research design into action, observing people, interviewing them, and looking at their texts. At the end of Project 2, you’ll turn in your data and an interim report of your findings.

Project 3: Analyzing the study results (35%). In Project 3, you’ll carefully analyze your data by using several models, which will help you see patterns in how people work and in the problems they encounter and will help you recommend changes. At the end of Project 3, you’ll turn in a recommendation report and the models.

Project 4: Testing a solution (15%). Now that you have diagnosed issues at the research site and generated recommendations for addressing them, it's time to turn those abstract recommendations into concrete solutions. Your group will use one or more participatory design techniques to develop and test an early-stage solution implementing one of your recommendations. At the end of Project 4, you’ll turn in the solution along with a report describing how well the solution worked.

 

Course Requirements

  • Project 1: Designing a study of an organization (6pp. proposal, consent form, interview questions).
  • Project 2: Conducting the study of the organization (6pp interim report plus collateral materials). 
  • Project 3: Analyzing the study results (6pp recommendation report plus collateral materials).
  • Project 4: Testing a solution (4pp recommendation report plus collateral materials). 

 

Grading

  • Project 1: 20%
  • Project 2: 30%
  • Project 3: 35%
  • Project 4: 15%

Texts

  • Spinuzzi, Tracing Genres Through Organizations
  • Online readings at the course site

RHE 330C • Information Design

43447 • Sackey, Donnie
Meets MW 2:30PM-4:00PM PAR 104
show description

This course covers fundamental principles of document and information design. Over the course of the semester students will learn practical and theoretical skills related to desktop publishing, visual communication, and publication production.
 Using industry-standard software applications, you will learn to create, from scratch, visually attractive and functional documents that are used in corporate and non-profit environments. By the end of the course, you can expect to understand:
 (1) How culturally-specific design principles affect readability, functionality, interpretation, and communication of information; (2)How software applications from the Adobe Creative Suite, including Photoshop, InDesign, and Illustrator work together; (3) How to create professional-quality, user-centered designs, including logos, brochures, pamphlets, and infographics; and (4)How to use design and technology terminology to communicate effectively with design professionals. 

No prior design experience is required. This will be a project-based workshop that emphasizes project management and collaboration. 



Required Materials

Students will be asked to subscribe to Adobe’s Creative Cloud for the duration of the class (The Campus Computer Store sells $75.00 yearly subscriptions). It is recommended that you have a digital camera or smartphone for capturing high-quality photos. You will need a means of electronic backup and file storage (e.g., Dropbox, portable external hard-drive). Finally, you’ll need to reserve $50 for personal printing costs. No texts are required for this course.

 

Assignments and Grading

  • Presentation: What is Good/Bad Design - 10%
  • Participation: Design Collection - 5% 
  • Participation: Ideas & Contributions to Class - 5%
  • Project One: Visual Rhetorical Analysis - 15%
  • Project Two: Designing Symbols - 15%
  • Project Three: Designing Data - 15%
  • Project Four: Designing Type - 15%
  • Project Five: (Re)designing Voting - 20%

RHE 330C • Mobile Environments

43450 • Sackey, Donnie
Meets MW 1:00PM-2:30PM PAR 104
show description

Mobile computing devices have become ubiquitous in our communities. From cooking to navigation, their presence has improved the quality of our daily lives. According to the Pew Research Center, 64% of adults own a smartphone, and that number increases to about 80% when we consider 18-35 year olds. At a rate of 69% per year, we’re spending more time on our phones that ever before. Such a trend emphasizes the need to consider how we design mobile environments, especially as they interface with physical environments. This course focuses on principles of user experience (UX) design. Specifically, it focuses on the creation of low-fidelity mobile application solutions, which are designed to help users explore and create meaningful and personally relevant experiences within their environments. While this is not a graphic design, programming, or human-computer interaction course, we will cover techniques from those disciplines to guide our work. Our goal will be to engage with design as a rhetorical form that can transform how users understand and communicate in their environments.

No prior design experience is required. This will be a project-based workshop that emphasizes project management and collaboration. 



Texts and Materials

  • Students will be asked to subscribe to Adobe’s Creative Cloud for the duration of the class (The Campus Computer Store sells $75.00 yearly subscriptions).
  • Jessie James Garrett, The Elements of User Experience ISBN: 978-0321683687
  • Don Norman, Living with Complexity ISBN: 978-0262528948
  • Safiya Umoja Noble, Algorithms of Oppression ISBN: 9781479837243 

  • Additional texts will be made available on our Canvas course site.

Assignments and Grading

  • Reading Responses - 10%

Multiple written responses to required readings posted to our course site (300-500 words posted in Canvas). Responses will be opportunities to critically and creatively engage course readings and case studies as well as provide the starting point for much our class discussion.

  • What is user experience design? - 25%

This project will help students to become more acquainted with the field of UX by researching the skills, experience, background, and education of UX designers and organizations and institutions that employ people in user experience..

  • Augmenting Reality - 25%

In this individual project, students will blend ethnography, psychogeography, and low-fidelity prototyping, in order to design a hypothetical interface that facilitates a new experience within an identified space (e.g. Austin, a park, campus, etc.) 

  • Designing for Social Change - 25%

This team project places students in a scenario where they are asked to design a mobile solution that can help disrupt social injustice. 

  • Participation - 15%

In addition to course projects and response, students will be evaluated on completion of daily activities and participation in discussion.


RHE 330D • Arguing With Liberals

43474 • Longaker, Mark
Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM PAR 308
show description

What do Rand Paul, Hillary Clinton, and Marco Rubio have in common? They are all liberals. They may not all represent the Democratic party (which claims to represent political liberals in the present-day United States), but when they make arguments, they appeal to principles that have been associated with liberal political theory for over 300 years: Every person has an inalienable right to free expression; unrestricted commerce offers the surest path to individual prosperity and economic growth; political progress must increase the individual’s ability to freely pursue her own particular happiness; laws should keep people from imposing on one another’s rights and liberties. In this sense, “liberalism” is a classical set of values and principles that many--and often opposing--parties have adopted. In this class, we will explore the arguments about liberalism as well as the arguments that rely on liberal principles. Finally, we will discuss the particularly liberal forms of argumentation. We will do so by addressing three kinds of liberalism and a range of liberal thinkers/writers both contemporary and classical: (1) Utilitarian (e.g. John Stuart Mill, John Dewey); Principled (e.g. John Locke, Ayn Rand); Virtue-Ethicist (e.g. Deirdre McCloskey, Anthony Ashley Cooper Third Earl of Shaftesbury). 

You will complete three major projects for the term: (1) Two opinion articles written in the style of contemporary online news media, each commenting on a recent controversy by applying the principles and the works (and by adopting the writing style) of one author whom we will study in class. Each of these articles will be posted on a class blog/news magazine that we will collectively maintain throughout the semester. (2) A series of posts relating specific passages and concepts from the class readings to recent political events. These posts will all belong to a common Twitter feed that will be embedded on the class blog. (3) A long (7-10 page) paper that articulates: one writer’s version of liberalism; how that version differs from other versions of liberalism, which we will study in class; what argumentative principles arise from this version of liberalism; and why this author would endorse a particular argument made recently in contemporary news media. You will submit the last assignment for instructor feedback, and you will revise to address these concerns and suggestions. You will get your peers’ feedback on your two opinion articles, and you will revise according to their suggestions. Finally, you will contribute daily discussion forum posts based on the readings assigned for each class.

Assignments and Grading:

  • Opinion articles for Class Blog: 25%
  • Twitter Posts: 20%
  • Long Paper (including revision): 35%
  • Daily Discussion-Forum Posts: 20% 

Texts:

  • John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty
  • John Dewey’s The Public and its Problems
  • John Locke’s Letter Concerning Toleration
  • Ayn Rand’s The Virtue of Selfishness
  • Deirdre McCloskey’s Bourgeois Equality (selections)
  • Harriet Martineau’s A Manchester Strike
  • Anthony Ashley Cooper, Third Earl of Shaftesbury’s The Moralists

RHE 330D • Cicero, Rhet & Ancient Rome

43460 • Longaker, Mark
Meets TTH 12:30PM-2:00PM PAR 308
show description

For centuries, Marcus Tullius Cicero’s name has been synonymous with rhetoric and associated with the Roman Revolution. In this class, we will study Cicero’s practice of rhetoric, his theory of oratory, and his efforts at persuasion. Additionally, we will examine Cicero’s political circumstances in order to see what role he played in two well-documented events: the Catilinarian conspiracy and fallout of Julius Caesar’s assassination. Finally, we will apply Cicero’s ideas and his theories of oratory to contemporary public address. Did Cicero contribute to or valiantly fight against the demise of the Roman republic? Was he an honorable statesman or a conservative demagogue? Did Cicero appeal to classical democracy and virtue, or did he pander to Roman prejudices and fears? These questions can only be answered if we learn about his oratory and his circumstances. Additionally, we will ask if present-day politicians and public speakers embody the noble oratory that Cicero (arguably) defended. Or do they continue to practice the cheap asides and the tawdry innuendos that excite the crowd but degrade our culture? If Cicero offered us an ideal of virtuous public discourse, can we improve our own rancorous political climate by taking some of his advice? If Cicero’s rhetoric was not noble, will our own practice of classical rhetorical tricks lead to the collapse of American democracy as it may have contributed to the fall of the Roman republic? 

Reading List:

  • Cicero’s De Inventione, De Oratore (book 1), De Officiis (selections), Pro Quinctio, In Catilinam (all four orations), and Philippicae (the first two orations)
  • Sallust’s Bellum Catilinae
  • Plutarch’s Antony
  • Selected audio lectures and other contextual sources, 

NB: All classical sources will be read in the Loeb translations, available electronically through the UT Library portal: http://guides.lib.utexas.edu/db/919; all contemporary sources will be available through the Canvas site.

 

Major Assignments:

  • Either a technical analysis of a Ciceronian oration that the student chooses or a contextual analysis of one oration among the Orationes in Catilinam or Philippicae: 15% of the final grade
  • Ethical analysis of a contemporary argument: 15% of the final grade
  • Revision of either the technical/contextual or the ethical analysis paper (student’s choice): 30% of the final grade
  • 10-minute “Ciceronian” oration on a contemporary topic to be delivered in class: 15% of the final grade
  • Infographic summary of a scholarly source about Cicero, rhetoric, and/or ancient Rome: 15% of the final grade
  • 1 discussion leader post: 10% of the final grade

RHE 330D • Women's Rhet Traditions

43465 • Ferreira-Buckley, Linda
Meets TTH 3:30PM-5:00PM PAR 103
show description

This course examines women’s rhetorical traditions in 19th and early 20th century America. We will focus on the diverse ways that rhetoric was studied and practiced. Our aim will not be to map out a comprehensive history but rather to investigate the range of rhetorical sites:  debating societies, literary circles and salons, speaking societies, libraries, writing groups, letter writing manuals, and classrooms. We will always consider how these grew out of particular social, cultural, and historical contexts to meet the needs and desires of African-American and white women. Finally, we will examine and evaluate the bases for the work that historians present.

Students will work with the instructor to design and complete a project that investigates a topic of their choice. Sequenced exercises and writing assignments will help participants develop and complete their project.

Assignments

  • 15% book review         
  • 15% short essay (3-4 pages)
  • 35% longer essay (7-10 pages)
  • 05% annotated bibliography
  • 10% homework
  • 20% quizzes

Readings

Excerpts from the following:

  • 19th and early 20th-century speeches, short essays, and letters by women
  • Rhetoric, elocutionary, and letter manuals for girls or women
  • McHenry, Forgotten Readers: Recovering the Lost History of African American Literary Societies (2002)
  • Miller et al,  Rhetorical Women: Roles and Representations (2006)
  • Ronald and  Ritchie, Teaching Rhetorica: Theory, Pedagogy, Practice (2006)
  • Royster and Kirsch, “Re-visioning History, Theory, and Practice” & “Conclusion,” Feminist Rhetorical Practices: New Horizons for Rhetoric, Composition, and Literacy Studies (2012)
  • Royster, Traces Of A Stream: Literacy and Social Change Among African American Women (2002)
  • 19th and early 20th-century speeches, short essays, and letters by women
  • Rhetoric, elocutionary, and letter manuals for girls or women

RHE 330E • Nonargumntatv Rhet In Zen

43490 • Piekarski, Krzysztof
Meets TTH 9:30AM-11:00AM PAR 104
show description

“Don’t go searching for the Truth. Just let go of your opinion.” ~ Hsin Shin Ming

American rhetoric is strongly grounded in argument and persuasion, and infused with judgments of good and bad, right and wrong. This is true not only for public discourse in the media, academic discourse in schools, and professional writing and speaking, it is also true in everyday conversation. We are constantly trying to convince someone of our judgments, or that something or someone is good or bad, right or wrong—a restaurant, a movie, a car, a teacher. Everything is evaluated and every conversation is full of assertions of value. But what if there were a different, equally “real” way to talk about the world and each other that didn’t create antagonistic relationships? What if we believed that each person is capable of waking up to the reality around her, and responding appropriately, without being converted to some position or belief? What kind of language would we use, and how would we use it?

Zen training begins by kicking the props out of our customary ways of understanding and talking. It subverts value distinctions, challenges our habitual ways of expressing ourselves, and denies the superiority of rationalist, linear logic. It does not do this merely to "deconstruct" language, or to tear down all meaning. It has a radical project of waking us up out of the trance we create for ourselves and others through our habitual uses of language. This class will explore how contradiction, negation, story, surprise, gesture, and silence are used in Zen training as resources for awakening to reality, rather than as assertions or arguments about it. The cryptic pronouncements of Zen masters seem impenetrable. They appear to defy our western rhetorical traditions that depend on logic and formal reasoning as the key to building knowledge. Zen teachers complicate the issue by insisting that language is only "the finger pointing at the moon, not the moon itself." If you have ever tried to write about a meaningful experience, you will recognize the problematic relationship between language and reality. This course engages students in exploring the surprising uses of language and image to create meaning in Zen tradition and practice. 

Students do not need any prior experience or knowledge of Zen rhetoric or Zen practices. The first part of the class will provide background on Zen concepts including ethical precepts and koans, then consider the emergence of the American Zen rhetorical tradition. This class is not an introduction to Zen practice, but rather an exploration of an alternative rhetoric, a different method of using language to construct meaning and shape relationships that help foster care and respect rather than antagonism and aggression.

Grading Policy: Grades in this course are determined on the basis of the Learning Record, which accompanies a portfolio of work presented at the midterm and at the end of the course. These portfolios present a selection of student work, both formal and informal, completed during the semester, ongoing observations about student learning, and analysis of student work and interpretations with respect to the student's development across five dimensions of learning: confidence and independence, knowledge and understanding, skills and strategies, use of prior and emerging experience, and reflectiveness. This development centers around the major strands of work in the course: rhetoric and composition, research, technology, and collaboration. The criteria for grades are posted at the Learning Record web site. Please also notice the RHE policy on absences, which can affect your grade. Three unexcused absences will lower your final grade, four unexcused absences results in automatic failure of the course.

Texts

Joko Beck, Everyday Zen; Perle Besserman and Manfred Steger, Zen Radicals, Rebels, and Reformers; Norman Fischer and Susan moon, What is Zen?; Mu Soeng, Trust in Mind; Shunryu Suzuki, Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind; John Tarrant, Bring be the Rhinoceros; Brad Warner, Hardcore Zen: Punk Rock, Monster Movies, & the Truth about Reality; Dale Wright, Philosophical Meditation on Zen Buddhism; 


RHE 330E • Peacemaking Rhetoric

43475 • Diab, Rasha
Meets MWF 12:00PM-1:00PM PAR 308
show description

Very often we invoke peace as a desirable state of being and of the world. But, what is peace? What does it take to be peaceful? To what extent does our criticism of violence help us get closer to peace? What does peace have to do with rhetoric? We will use these questions to begin our explorations of the rhetoric of peacemaking. The discipline of rhetoric has an enduring investment in countering injustice and pursuing justice and peace.

In this course, we will explore this enduring investment. In specific terms, we will study the (1) relation between rhetoric, violence, and peacemaking, (2) ways in which our rhetorical practices can cause/exacerbate conflict or guide us to peacemaking, and (3) rhetorical choices, practices and stances that are consistent with developing peaceful communication styles.

As we reflect on the rhetoric of peacemaking, we will read scholarship on the rhetoric of nonviolence, reconciliation, and (human) rights. We will also read/read about illustrative speeches, texts, and rhetorical practices that critique injustice and advocate for justice and peace.

 

Major Assignments and Grading

  • Two researched and substantially revised papers: 60% (30% each)
  • Two presentations: summarizing research undertaken and major findings: 10% (5% each)
  • Participation & Short Writing Assignments: class participation/leading class discussions, responses to freewriting prompts, and/or short writing assignments: 20%
  • Portfolio: comprises a revised research paper and another short writing 10%

Required Texts

A packet of readings,which will include:

  • Chapters/Articles written like Erik Doxtader’s “Reconciliation—A Rhetorical Conception” or With Faith in the Works of Words: The Beginnings of Reconciliation in South Africa 1985-1995; Ellen Gorsevski’s Peaceful Persuasion: The Geopolitics of Nonviolent Communication; John P. Lederach’s The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace; and James J. Kimble “John F. Kennedy, the Construction of Peace, and the Pitfalls of Androgynous Rhetoric.”
  • Speeches/Texts written by politicians like John F. Kennedy’s “The Strategy of Peace,” national leaders like Mahatma Gandhi’s speech on the eve of the last fast and Martin L. King’s “I have a Dream”, and recognized activists like Rigoberta Menchú’s I, Rigoberta Menchú

RHE 330E • Persuasion Bible Time/Place

43480 • Charney, Davida
Meets MW 4:00PM-5:30PM PAR 103
(also listed as J S 363, MES 342)
show description

Strategies for persuading audiences were distilled into the art of rhetoric in ancient Athens, where critical thinking and civic oratory became key parts of democratic governance.  This course employs the concepts of rhetorical theory to examine the distinctive persuasive strategies used around the same time in the cultures of the ancient Near East and in the Hebrew Bible in particular.

Like other ancient Near Eastern texts, the Hebrew Bible contains many examples of human speakers trying to persuade God or trying to persuade other people on God's behalf.  What seems distinctive about the Hebrew Bible is the willingness of Israelites to argue with and challenge God. The assumption that God is open to argument raises fascinating questions: how can one pull off rhetorical tactics with a divine being who is all-powerful and all-knowing? Why should God engage in arguments with humans? How did Israelites discern God's response?

The course is structured around three types of discourses: face-to-face interaction, prayer, and prophecy.  Students will analyze the rhetorical strategies of Biblical passages of each type, consider how these discourses differed across cultures in the ancient Near East, and relate them to versions of these discourses in the U.S. today. 

 

Grades:

  • 15% Participation (posting on discussion boards and peer reviews)
  • 25% Quizzes
  • 15% Rhetorical Analysis Project: 2-3 page rhetorical analysis of each type of text (5% each)
  • 25% Cultural Comparison Paper: 6-8 page comparative analysis across ancient discourses/cultures
  • 25% Rhetorical Implications Paper: 6-8 page paper developing an argument about implicatons of these early texts to religious rhetoric today.

Global Cultures Flag:

This course carries the Global Cultures flag. Global Cultures courses are designed to increase your familiarity with cultural groups outside the United States. You should therefore expect a substantial portion of your grade to come from assignments covering the practices, beliefs, and histories of at least one non-U.S. cultural group, past or present.

Required Texts:

  • George Kennedy, Comparative Rhetoric: An Historical and Cross-Cultural Introduction, Oxford University Press, 1998.
  • John H. Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible, 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2018.
  • Adele Berlin, Marc Zvi Brettler, Michael Fishbane, The Jewish Study Bible: Featuring The Jewish Publication Society Tanakh Translation College Edition, 2003

RHE 330E • Rhetoric And The Law

43485 • Hill, Angela
Meets TTH 12:30PM-2:00PM FAC 7
show description

The image of Justice, represented as a blindfolded woman holding a scale and double-edged sword, is ubiquitous. How does this figure function rhetorically and what relation does it have to the actual creation and practice of law? We often hear about law doing justice, but how is justice done, seen, and understood? And what happens when we view law as neither blind nor balanced, especially in relation to social differences, such as gender, race, class, ability, and nationality? To address these questions, the course specifically examines the historical and enduring relationship between women, as gendered subjects (and objects), and law, as a man-made system. Drawing on court cases, social movements, awareness campaigns, film, and legal theory and history, we will analyze the multiple connections linking representations of justice, claims of democracy, and ongoing tensions within the law. In other words, throughout the semester, we will study legal rhetoric and practice as well as gender, race, class, ability, and nationality, in constituting the law and subjects before the law.

The course is also designed to enhance your reading and writing skills. Reading might appear to be a straightforward activity requiring no special training, but the analytical reading expected in academic contexts is a skill that must be learned and cultivated. Likewise, writing analytically is an advanced skill that requires instruction and exercise. These scholarly activities – close reading and analytical writing – are interconnected: to write well, students must be able to analyze the substance and structure of other people’s arguments. This course will develop and test skills in these two vital academic areas.

This course will expand students’ knowledge of law, rhetoric, and American history by:

  • Providing multiple theoretical approaches for thinking about the law
  • Probing the social foundations and effects of legal decision-making
  • Analyzing the nature, form, and content of American jurisprudence
  • Enhancing students’ understanding of diversity, differential treatment of social groups, and the response to subsequent social inequities by these groups
  • Exploring diversity through the multi-layered operation of power, prestige, and privilege
  • Developing students’ critical thinking, close reading, and analytical writing skills

Assignments and Grading

  • Two researched, peer reviewed, and substantially revised papers (60%)

  • Short writing assignments (20%)
  • Participation (15%)
  • Attendance (policy detailed at the beginning of the semester) (5%)

 

Required Texts and Course Readings 

The course reader will include:

  • Selections from Martha Chamallas,Introduction to Feminist Legal Theory; Lawrence Friedman, Crime and Punishment in American History; Margot Canaday, The Straight State: Sexuality and Citizenship in Twentieth-Century America;Amy Brandzel, Against Citizenship; and Isaac West, Transforming Citizenships: Transgender Articulations of the Law
  • Articles/Chapters such as Austin Sarat and Thomas Kearns, “Introduction: Rhetoric of Law”; Marouf Hasian Jr. and Geoffrey Klinger, “Sarah Roberts and the Early History of the ‘Separate but Equal’ Doctrine: A Study in Rhetoric, Law, and Social Change”; James Boyd White, “Law as Rhetoric, Rhetoric as Law: The Arts of Cultural and Communal Life”; Gerald Wetlaufer, “Rhetoric and its Denial in Legal Discourse”; Robert Cover, “Violence and the Word”; Sharmila Rudrappa, “Madness, Diasporic Difference, and State Violence: Explaining Filicide in American Courts”; and Kimberle Crenshaw, “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory, and Antiracist Politics”  

RHE 360M • Rhet/Writ For Teachers Of Eng

43495 • Buckley, Tom
Meets TTH 8:00AM-9:30AM PAR 103
show description

Designed for students planning a career teaching English, this course will introduce you to scholarship in composition that informs the teaching of writing today. Theories will be examined in terms of their assumptions about the nature of language and learning. Among the topics we'll discuss are the writing process; the rhetorical situation; the relationship between language and identity; the place of grammar and usage; curriculum for basic and developmental writers; collaborative learning; and creating and evaluating assignments.

Although this isn't a methods course, it will have a practical orientation: we'll discuss the implications of each approach for designing courses and for evaluating writing. In addition to reading about writing, you'll write about writing. You'll compose a number of writing assignments, each to be revised after receiving written critiques both from me and from your peers. You'll also write critiques of your peers' work as a way to sharpen your own analytical abilities and to develop the ability to offer writers detailed, pointed, tactful advice. Additionally, you'll keep a reading journal; do writing, style, and grading exercises; and investigate a contemporary educational debate on the issue of your choice. A mid-term exam will allow you to demonstrate your understanding of the information studied.

This class is not for the timid or narrow-minded. Participation is a must as we try to hash out in a conversational setting important questions about contemporary education.


RHE 366 • Internship In Rhetoric & Writ

43500
show description

This course provides an academic foundation and practical support for upper-division students working in DRW-approved internships.

It is designed to help students 1) recognize how rhetoric is applied in the workplace environments, and 2) apply their training and skills in rhetoric and writing professionally.

To meet these objectives, students will participate in a variety of activities: assigned readings, class discussions (in class and online), journal reflections on their workplace experience, university-sponsored workshops about job searching and workplace protocol, and in-class workshops and peer critique sessions designed to further develop their writing skills.

Students will produce 20 pages of writing (which may include Discussion Board assignments and journal entries at an instructor’s discretion) by the end of the semester. Because the amount of on-the-job writing students do will vary per internship, students will consult with the instructor at the beginning of the semester to determine the types of writing they will produce.

This course is offered on a pass/fail basis. It does not count toward the rhetoric major.

It may be repeated once for credit when the internships vary.

Prerequisites

Consent of supervising instructor must be obtained. Upper-division standing and twelve semester hours of work in Rhetoric & Writing are required.

Texts

A course packet

Others TBA


RHE 367R • Conf Crs In Rhetoric/Writing

43505
show description

Prerequisites

Upper-division standing; one of the following: English 603A, Rhetoric and Writing 306, 306Q, or Tutorial Course 603A; and approval of written application by the supervising instructor.

Course Description

This is course does NOT meet the Writing Flag requirement.
Hours to be arranged.
May be repeated for credit.


RHE 368C • Writing Center Internship

43510 • Batt, Alice
Meets TTH 11:00AM-12:30PM PCL 2.340
show description

RHE368C is a course designed to prepare you to serve as a peer tutor in the University Writing Center (UWC). During the first part of the term, you will study issues related to writing center theory and practice. You will analyze the goals and practices of writing centers, examine elements of contemporary rhetorical and composition theory, survey syllabi and assignments from various courses, learn and apply research methods, and review grammar, mechanics, and usage. During the final weeks of the term, you will work under supervision for six hours per week as a consultant in the University Writing Center. The class meets twice during that internship period to critically reflect upon your consulting experiences and support each other’s continued learning.

 

COURSE WORK:

  • Blog Entries
  • Discussion Board Posts
  • UWC Observation Reports
  • Grammar Assignments/Quizzes
  • Research Project
  • Presentation
  • Letter to the Next Class of UWC Interns

 

BOOKS (Do not buy until after first class)

  • Gillespie, Paula and Neal Lerner. The Longman Guide to Peer Tutoring, 2e
  • Murphy, Christina and Steve Sherwood. The St. Martin’s Sourcebook for Writing Tutors, 4e
  • Ryan, Leigh. The Bedford Guide for Writing Tutors.
  • Rafoth, Ben. Multilingual Writers and Writing Centers
  • Praxis: A Writing Center Journal