I peer reviewed Rachel's and Addie's rhetorical analyses and they reviewed mine. This experience was very helpful, as I got to give advice and suggestions to another classmate, and received help and insight into my own paper.
"Revision" Questions
- Do you have an identifiable thesis? Does it point to the specific rhetorical strategies you analyze in your essay, or are you merely using vague terms like ethos, pathos, and logos?
- My thesis is identifiable, and I know this because my reviewers echoed this back to me. However, I did not list any specific strategies, or even these three broad terms. I simply left it at "the author used rhetorical strategies." I did this because I did not want to give off the standard three-prong feel, but I do not want to come off as vague or unclear. My current thesis may not be as compelling as I want it to be, and I will definitely consider revising and/or fixing this.
- How have you decided to organize your essay? Does each paragraph have a central point that is supported with evidence from the text and in-depth analysis?
- I have organized my essay by topic. I discuss the writer's tone and style of writing, then I analyze the statistics he uses and why he might include them. In the third paragraph, I discuss the author's credibility, and in the last body paragraph, I mention the audience of the editorial. I tried to stick to a main point in each body paragraph, however I think the way I organized the paper as a whole, with the order of the topics, can be switched around a little, to create better transitions.
 |
| James Marvin Phelps. "Blazing Reflection." 01/19/2014 via Flickr. Attribution Non-Commercial 2.0 Generic License. |
- Did you clearly identify and analyze several important elements of the text's rhetorical situation and/or structure?
- Yes, I did identify these things. The way I went about identifying and analyzing them can be revised a little. To be more specific, I need to organize my thoughts in a better and clearer way, and reword a few sentences. Also, I need to summarize less and focus more on the rhetorical situation. While revising, I need to make sure that I am answering the prompt that I have been given.
- Did you explain how and why certain rhetorical strategies were employed? Did you discuss what effects these strategies have on the intended audience and overall effectiveness of the text?
- I answer "how" more than "why," because I find it easier to present evidence to my argument, but not analyze it further. I definitely need to work on this, and go deeper into my analysis of each point or illustration I present. I tried to explain the overall effectiveness, but I need to add more to this, in each of my body paragraphs.
- Are you thoughtfully using evidence in each paragraph? Do you mention specific examples from the text and explain why they are relevant?
- I can positively say that I included a lot of textual evidence in my analysis. Of course, I can always include more, but I am proud of the amount that I have already included in my first draft. The evidence that I chose to include in my analysis serves as strong additions and illustrations to each of my argument. I feel strong in this particular area of my paper.
- Do you leave your reader wanting more? Do you answer the "so what" question in your conclusion?
- My conclusion right now is not very strong, or inspiring. I need to go back and start all over again, perhaps adopting some key phrases or sentences, but mainly scrapping the whole thing. Reading it over, it feels more like a summary than anything. It does not answer any "so what" question, or even reflect back to anything bigger than this article. I need to be able to answer this question, which will end up leaving my reader wanting more. Even my peer reviewers questioned my conclusion, and asked how it relates back to a bigger situation or topic.
--Jenny Bello
No comments:
Post a Comment