recognize and use elements of argumentation such as premises, conclusions, evidence, values, assumptions, etc.;
recognize how values and worldview affect response to arguments;
evaluate non-fiction texts for quality, credibility, and validity;
create, analyze, and evaluate written work collaboratively;
recognize and avoid rhetorical abuses in writing, including common logical fallacies;
incorporate academic-quality research and resources into writing;
use college-level writing skills to summarize, evaluate, analyze, and persuade;
appropriately cite all sources used in the preparation of course work.
Week 17 Introduction & Task Descriptions
Introduction
There are some relatively common rhetorical strategies that we haven't yet discussed. We need to discuss them because they are influential, easy to misinterpret, and often mistakenly used as if they were all referring to the same thing. These terms and working definitions are...
17a - Discussion: Satire & Parody
Satire - This usually defined as "a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn." Example: "A Modest Proposal" by Jonathan Swift.
Here's a bit of contemporary satire by Stephen Colbert:
Parody - This is "a feeble or ridiculous imitation" done "for comic effect or in ridicule." Example: "Rubiayat" of Omar Khayyam
Saturday Night Live does a lot of skits that are parodies of current events. Here's one of the classics:
Task: Learn what you can about satire and parody, then we will discuss A Modest Proposal, the Rubiayat parody, and the video examples above in the 17a discussion thread.
Try to find a satirical piece related to the subject you've been researching. A Google search for satire and the name of your subject may bring surprising results. If you find one, post a link to it, and we'll discuss how satire is used to guide an argument or present a position.
17b - Discussion: Irony & Sarcasm
Irony - This is frequently described as "the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning," though this is not the only definition. Example: Stephen Hawking
This clip is from The View, and Stephen Colbert is a guest. The segment with Colbert has some instances of irony. Can you spot them?
Sarcasm - This is a tool of tone, as much as it is words. The most frequently used definition is "a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain."
Wish I knew what program this came from. It looks a bit like SNL -- what with Will Farrell and others from the cast. Anyway, this skit with Matthew Perry does a good job of demonstrating the snarky attitude that is part of sarcasm.
Task: Learn what you can about irony and sarcasm, then we will discuss the examples above in the 16a discussion thread.
Try to find an ironic or sarcastic comment related to the subject you've been researching. If you find one, post a link to it, and we'll discuss how these rhetorical techniques affect arguments.
As with other complex writing strategies, these four are often used together or overlapped, so drawing distinct lines among them is pretty difficult and not totally necessary. Understanding how they work together is important, and understanding these concepts can prevent you from being swayed by an ill-conceived notion.
Week 17 Assessment Rubric
This is the assessment rubric I will use to evaluate the discussions this week.
GD (Graded Discussion)
Assessment Rubric
Possible
Earned
17a
17b
Timing
First post no later than Thursday
1
1
2
Frequency
At least 3 well-developed posts in each discussion.
3
3
6
Quality
* 5-7 pts per high-quality post
* 3-4 pts per medium-quality post
* 0-2 pts per low-quality post
21
21
42
Total Earned
50
Comments:
For grading quality I choose the 3 best posts made in a discussion. The more posts you make, the more chances you have of crafting 3 that are excellent.
Each post should be at least one well-crafted paragraph and add value to the discussion. This can be done in a variety of ways:
* provide evidence of understanding assigned materials;
* engage with the ideas of others in the class;
* integrate ideas from experts (yes, research);
* include well supported interpretations;
* demonstrate a clear understanding of the facts; etc.
* All posts should be clearly written and carefully edited to eliminate grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Quality criteria
*High quality (5-7 pts.) = Purposeful development; clear evidence of understanding reading assignments; extends the boundaries of the discussion but remains focused on topic; may demonstrate synthesis of ideas from multiple sources; there are few or no grammar, word use, punctuation or other errors.
*Medium quality (3-4 pts.) = Moderate development; shows evidence of reading assignments; may lack depth or show some lack of comprehension; there may be grammar, word use, punctuation or other errors, but they do not interfere with the meaning in the post.
*Low quality (0-2 pts.) = Limited in scope, development, and correctness; may simply agree or disagree with another in the class; little if any evidence of having read the assignments; may be numerous grammar, word use, punctuation or other errors. Note: posts that simply agree or disagree will earn little, if any, credit.
