Creative

Nonfiction RE-Vision

WRTG 1150: First-Year Writing and Rhetoric, D. Singer

************************************************************************************

STUDENT-WRITTEN PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

"This project is a smorgasbord of writing and rhetoric. We will attempt to take a theme
found within our personal narratives, and ask a question about it. We will then use
various forms of research--both demonstrative and testimonial--to develop a
sophisticated answer to our questions as the basis of a new piece of Creative Nonfiction
in which we will attempt to write not about what we know but what we wish to
discover.
We will then form our arguments based on our research. We then need to outline our
pieces in a couple different forms: an outline of argument, an outline of narrative, and
an outline of sources. We then need to arrange our narrative, argumentative, and
research materials, and draft our CNF pieces to be persuasive to a specific audience (if
you didn't already, you would need to thoroughly analyze the target audience in the
rhetorical situation you're working in at this point).
We will then workshop the shit out of those drafts with our groups until we have a solid
understanding of our own and other people's opinions of/reactions to/etc. the piece.
Then edit and proofread for small mistakes, diction, grammar, punctuation, and 'sound'
before turning it into the big man. At the end of the assignment, we will all more than
likely have a CNF piece completed to submit it to our audience, a greater agency as
writers, and a great swelling of pride."

************************************************************************************

COLLABORATIVELY WRITTEN GRADING RUBRIC:

ARGUMENT 40%

Your project makes a clear argument (even if it doesnt use a thesis-
statement as a persuasive device, its clear what youre piece is intended to
persuade your audience of).

The argument your project makes is sophisticated (the argument youre
making seems unlikely be obvious to someone with a similar background/set
of personal experiences and a few minutes to think about thingssuch an
audience would probably not immediately agree completely and confidently
with your argument without having read your piece).

RESEARCH 40%

Your project is clearly based in research and demonstrates the ability to

treat BOTH personal/experiential and information-literate source selections
as the basis of an argument (your personal/experiential narrative AND
rhetorically appropriate sources youve selected from library and web-based
research clearly help develop and prove the argument youre trying to make)

Your project cites sources rhetorically/appropriately, both in-text and at

the end of the document (youve cited your research clearly throughout, used
either MLA or APA to format your citations in text and at the end of the
document, and used signal phrases to introduce quotations from researched
sources so that quoted materials dont seem to suddenly appear out of
nowhere in your textwhich, in combination, means youve used citation
practices to aid your reader and bolster your own ethos, as well as protected
yourself from a charge of plagiarism.

_______________________________ (Student-Selected Learning/Writing Goal) 20%

_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

(Fill in the above with a VERY CLEAR and CONCRETE description of your OWN
personal learning/writing goal that you used this project to achieveand tell
me what I should LOOK for as PROOF to SEE how well youve met that goal).

Scholarly Essay

WRTG 1150: First-Year Writing and Rhetoric, D. Singer

************************************************************************************

STUDENT-WRITTEN PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

What we are trying to do with this scholarly article is to demonstrate to a specific discourse
community that the arguments we have developed are valid and are being presented by
scholar-authors with expertise.

We will do this by using testimony, demonstration, and linkage to other scholarly resources
and discussions in the discourse community we are attempting to join as scholar-authors.

To find appropriate scholarly resources, we must filter through numerous sources from the
discourse community and determine what aspects of our research prove our argument.

************************************************************************************

COLLABORATIVELY WRITTEN GRADING RUBRIC:

ARGUMENT 40%
Your project makes a clear argument that is relevant to a specific discourse
community that you clearly identify (even if it doesnt use a thesis-statement as a
persuasive device, its clear what youre piece is intended to persuade your scholarly
audience of, which scholarly audience you intend to persuade, and why that
argument should be considered relevant and valuable to that audience).

The argument your project makes is sophisticated enough to call for attention
by readers in your scholarly discourse community (the argument youre making
seems unlikely be obvious to someone with a similar background in your discourse-
community and a few minutes to think about thingssuch an audience would
probably not immediately agree completely and confidently with your
argument without having read your piece).

RESEARCH 40%
Your project is clearly based in research and demonstrates the ability to carefully
SELECT and USE a range of sources as the basis of an argument (your carefully
selected testimony and demonstrations clearly help develop and prove the
argument youre trying to make).

Your project introduces, links, and cites sources rhetorically/appropriately,

both in-text and at the end of the document (youve used signal phrases effectively
throughout, made it clear how the testimony you present helps your argument and
how the demonstrations you present actually prove that argument to be
true/right/logical, and youve cited your research clearly throughout, using either
MLA, APA, or another discourse-community-specific styleguide to format your
citations in text and at the end of the documentwhich, in combination, means

youve used a complex set of research and citation skills to aid your reader and
bolster your own ethos, as well as protected yourself from a charge of plagiarism).

STUDENT-SELECTED CRITERION 20%
Pick ONE of the following as something you really got better at/figured out more
about in your work on this project (remember, you were specifically directed to focus
on one of these three items in this unit in the written feedback you received at the
end of the CNF RE-Vision in the grades section on D2L):

FOCUS: In this piece, I tried to REALLY concentrate on producing a very clear sense
of FOCUS in my piecewhich we typically can achieve through four basic
techniques: a) Framing (how I frame or contextualize a thing I want to talk about
as part of my argument), b) Introductory Forecasting (how I give my reader a
sense of where Im headed in my argument/in a section/etc. so he or she knows
what to expect), c) Transitional Phrases that clearly CONNECT different
PARAGRAPHS or PARTS of paragraphs in an argument as its progressing (like
Although some scholars disagree with the position Ive just outlined,) or
Transitional Sentences/Paragraphs that do so in longer form in order to make a
smooth transition between one SECTION of an argument and another SECTION (Of
course, Bitzers argument provides only the structuralist sense of Rhetorical
Situation. If we want to arrive at a clear sense of the factors that have led
Contemporary Composition Studies to conceive of rhetorical situations as we now
appear to do, we have to also consider the post-structural argument. [Followed by
the next section of the paper],) and d) reducing the Scope of what I discuss in a
piece of writing so that I ONLY discuss things that contribute to my ARGUMENT and
conscientiously OMIT the many, many things that are TOPICALLY related to what
Im talking about but dont actually help me develop and prove the ARGUMENT Im
trying to make for the specific discourse community Im trying to join as a scholar-
author.

ORGANIZATIONIn this piece, I tried to REALLY concentrate on the ORDER of

what I discuss and do. For example, if Im using an ethos appeal to make my
audience more likely to be persuaded by my argument, it matters WHEN I do that
(think of the difference between being really impressed by someones credentials
before you hear that person give his or her opinion on a topic related to his or her
expertise vs. afterward). Likewise, the logical organization of my argument is
CRUCIAL to its effectI really worked on figuring out what I needed to PROVE is
true FIRST, what can THEN be proven BASED on that, and so on down the line to the
end of my argument.

DEPTHIn this piece, I tried to REALLY concentrate on going much DEEPER into
my argument. I worked on seeing more of the COMPLEXITY in what Im arguing and
the FULL RANGE of issues, counter-arguments, and potential pitfalls I really needed
to address to make my piece seem in-depth and comprehensively thought-
through to a reader and to more fully develop and prove my argument.

Heres the one I picked, heres how I got better at that item, and heres what to
look at as evidence that I actually did get a great deal better at it: _________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________

Final Project: Collaborative Instructional Video

WRTG 1150: First-Year Writing and Rhetoric, D. Singer

************************************************************************************

Description & Purpose

By the final exam period on Monday, May 4, 2015, please submit, through the
Discussion Forum in D2L, a LINK to a 4-8 minute, collaboratively developed
instructional video published online that is designed to TEACH a targeted audience
something specific about writing and rhetoric.

Youll begin by forming group of 3-5 and setting up the, TOPIC, AUDIENCE,
ARGUMENT and PURPOSE your group is going to pursue in the video youll
develop and post online.

Then, youll do a bit of RESEARCH and ANALYSIS to understand the
rhetorical situation at hand (including the writer, reader, text/genre, context
and purpose) in order to direct the choices you make in your process and
product.

Then, youll USE the PROCESSES youve learned about developing,
researching, drafting, workshopping, and revising complex writing for
specific target audiences throughout the semester to produce and publish a
highly effective instructional video online for your target audience to find.

Our purpose is three-fold. First, to test your ability to use the writing and rhetoric
expertise youve developed throughout the semester. Second, to help you develop a
great final product that you can immediately use to teach others about writing and
rhetoric. Third, to help you transfer what youve learned about writing and rhetoric
so far effectively produce and utilize a collaborative authorial self (a co-
authorial self) in a multimodal composition.

************************************************************************************

COLLABORATIVELY WRITTEN GRADING RUBRIC:

PEGAGOGICAL ARGUMENT 40%
Your groups project makes a clear TEACHING argument that is relevant to a
SPECIFIC target audience that you clearly identify (even if it doesnt use a thesis-
statement as a persuasive device, its clear what your video is intended to persuade
and teach your target audience, which exact audience you intend to persuade and
teach, and why that argument and what youre teaching should be considered
relevant and valuable to that audience).

The argument and the lesson your groups project offers is sophisticated
enough to call for attention by viewers in the discourse community of your target

audience (the argument and lesson youre offering seems unlikely seem obvious to
someone with a the kind of background your audience likely has and a few minutes
to think about things on his or her ownand such an audience would probably
not immediately agree completely and confidently with your argument and/or know
exactly how to do what youre trying to teach without having watched your video).

RESEARCH 40%
Your groups project is clearly based in research and demonstrates the ability to
carefully SELECT and USE a range of sources as the basis of an argument and your
lesson (youve carefully selected testimony and demonstrations that clearly help
develop and prove the argument youre trying to make and that effectively help
teach the audience what youre trying to teach them).

Your groups project introduces, links, and cites sources rhetorically/

appropriately, both in the body of the video and at the end of the video in the
credits (youve used signal phrases effectively throughout, made it clear how the
testimony you present helps your argument/lesson and how the demonstrations
you present actually prove that argument to be true/right/logical and show the
audience what youre talking about, and youve cited your research clearly
throughout (whether youre using MLA, APA, or another discourse-community-
specific styleguide to format your citations in text and at the end of the video
which, in combination, means youve used a complex set of research and citation
skills to aid your reader and bolster your own ethos, as well as protected yourself
from a charge of plagiarism).

STUDENT-SELECTED CRITERION I 10%
With your group, pick ONE of the following as something you really got better
at/figured out more about in your work on this project:

1. FOCUS: In this piece, we tried to REALLY concentrate on producing a very clear
sense of FOCUS in our piecewhich we typically can achieve through four basic
techniques: a) Framing (how we frame or contextualize a thing we want to talk
about as part of my argument), b) Introductory Forecasting (how we give our
reader a sense of where were headed in the piece/in a section/etc. so he or she
knows what to expect), c) Transitional Phrases that clearly CONNECT different
PARTS or SEGMENTS of an argument or lesson as its progressing (like Although
some scholars disagree with the position weve just outlined,) or Transitional
Sentences/Paragraphs that do so in longer form in order to make a smooth
transition between one SECTION of an argument or lesson and another SECTION
(Of course, Bitzers argument provides only the structuralist sense of Rhetorical
Situation. If we want to arrive at a clear sense of the factors that have led
Contemporary Composition Studies to conceive of rhetorical situations as we now
appear to do, we have to also consider the post-structural argument. [Followed by
the next section of the paper],) and d) reducing the Scope of what we discuss in a
piece so that we ONLY discuss things that contribute to the ARGUMENT or LESSON
and conscientiously OMIT the many, many things that are TOPICALLY related to
what were talking about but dont actually help us develop and prove the
ARGUMENT or teach the LESSON were trying to make for the specific audience
were trying to serve as co-authors.


2. ORGANIZATIONIn this piece, we tried to REALLY concentrate on the ORDER of
what we discuss and do. For example, if were using an ethos appeal to make our
audience more likely to be persuaded by our argument and to take seriously what
were trying to teach them, it matters WHEN we do that (think of the difference
between being really impressed by someones credentials before you hear that
person give his or her opinion on a topic related to his or her expertise vs.
afterward). Likewise, the logical organization of our argument and lesson is
CRUCIAL to its effectwe really worked on figuring out what we needed to PROVE
is true and SHOW how to do FIRST, what can THEN be proven and shown BASED on
that, and so on down the line to the end of our argument/lesson.

3. DEPTHIn this piece, we tried to REALLY concentrate on going much DEEPER into
our argument/lesson. We worked on seeing more of the COMPLEXITY in what were
arguing and trying to teach and the FULL RANGE of issues, counter-arguments, and
potential pitfalls we really needed to address to make our piece seem in-depth and
comprehensively thought-through to a viewer and to more fully develop and
prove our argument/more fully develop and teach our lesson.

STUDENT-SELECTED CRITERION II 10%

With your group, pick ONE of the following as something you really got better
at/figured out more about in your work on this project:

4. VISUAL RHETORICIn this piece, we tried to REALLY concentrate on making sure

that the video looks professionally produced and edited in terms of the visual
transitions, camera angles, multiple cuts of film [i.e., its not just one shot that
continues for the whole video], lighting, composites/overlays, and making sure that
the general look of the video is clean and professional.

5. BODILY RHETORICIn this piece, we tried to REALLY concentrate on making sure
the people featured in the video are wearing rhetorically/persuasively deliberate
and appropriate attire, make effective eye contact with audience/camera [where
appropriate], and use rhetorically effective body language and facial expressions
throughout.

6. AUDITORY RHETORICIn this piece, we tried to REALLY concentrate on making
sure the voices heard in the video sound natural and animatednot just read from
a scriptand are loud enough to hear easily and clearly but not so loud that the
volume itself is noticeable or distracting, effectively using background or transitional
music and/or other sound effects, and including no distracting extraneous noises
like microphone feedback or other seemingly random noises.