Rhetoric and Audiences Discussion Essay Paper

Rhetoric and Audiences Discussion Essay Paper

Order ID:89JHGSJE83839

Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago

Pages:5-10

Instructions:

Rhetoric and Audiences Discussion Essay Paper

Writer’s Journal #13

Background

Reflecting on the distinction between audience addressed and audience invoked is a great conceptual starting point as you begin to think about the complexities of audience.

Purpose

In this journal entry, you will have the opportunity to reflect on a recent act of communication where you invoked an audience that did not match up with the audience addressed in that particular situation, and you will be able to consider how you might have acted otherwise given your developing understanding of audience.

Skills and Outcomes

Interpreting a past rhetorical situation (Rhetorical Knowledge; Critical Thinking, Reading and Composing)

Differentiating audience invoked and audience addressed in a past rhetorical situation (Rhetorical Knowledge; Critical Thinking, Reading and Composing)

Producing an alternative communicative plan for a past rhetorical situation (Rhetorical Knowledge; Critical Thinking, Reading and Composing)

Habits of Mind Practiced

Openness

Creativity

Responsibility

Flexibility

Metacognition

Tasks

Your journal entry should describe a past act of communication where your audience invoked did not match up with the audience addressed. How did they differ? Where do you think this difference came from (how did you come to invoke an audience that differed from the audience addressed)?

Your entry should consider how you might invoke an audience in that rhetorical situation that more closely aligned with the audience addressed? What sort of rhetorical choices could you have made in your address that would have more accurately captured who the audience really was?

Note: there are many different ways to approach these tasks, but you should aim to be as thorough as possible in your response (approximately 500 words is a good target length).

Criteria for Success

In each Writer’s Journal, you should:

clearly address each question or task;

employ many details, examples, and explanations in answering each question or task; and,

create an internally-organized text, employing sentences (or notes where applicable) that clearly relate to one another.

Be sure to follow all the submission instructions carefully and to assess your journal immediately after you submit it.

Writer’s Journal #14

Background

We have been learning about how context creates and constrains certain possibilities when addressing and invoking audiences. Understanding this relationship is an important step in learning how to meaningfully communicate with audiences in one’s writing.

Purpose

In this journal, you will have the opportunity to reflect on a context within which you regularly communicate and how this context affects which audiences are invoked therein.

Skills and Outcomes

Explaining how a particular context invokes a particular audience (Rhetorical Knowledge; Critical Thinking, Reading and Composing)

Producing and explaining an imagined revision to the context which expands the invoked audience (Rhetorical Knowledge; Critical Thinking, Reading and Composing)

Habits of Mind Practiced

Openness

Creativity

Flexibility

Metacognition

Tasks

Pick one context within which you communicate regularly and describe how that context invokes a particular kind of audience. This context can be a social media platform, e-mail communication, message boards, voice phone calls, etc. Remember that the ways the context creates constraints and affordances will contribute to which audience is invoked.

This next task requires some imagination: how might the context expand the invoked audience? Put another way, what changes could you make to the context to expand the invoked audience? How would those changes work?

Note: there are many different ways to approach these tasks, but you should aim to be as thorough as possible in your response (approximately 500 words is a good target length).

Writer’s Journal #15

Background

In our course, we have begun to consider both audience and stakeholders. Many students are surprised and sometimes intimidated when they first think about their writing in relation to both audience and stakeholders, but such considerations are necessary components of good writing.

Purpose

In this journal, you will have the opportunity to consider the ethical responsibilities that writers have to their readers.

Skills and Outcomes

Explaining the ethical relationships among writers and readers (Rhetorical Knowledge; Critical Thinking, Reading and Composing)

Explaining how the writer might attend to these ethical dimensions (Rhetorical Knowledge; Critical Thinking, Reading and Composing)

Habits of Mind Practiced

Openness

Engagement

Responsibility

Flexibility

Tasks

First, try to make a list of the different ethical obligations writers might have in relation to their readers. What actions might writers be responsible for in different contexts?

Second, consider how writers should address their ethical obligations to stakeholders.

Note: there are many different ways to approach these tasks, but you should aim to be as thorough as possible in your response (approximately 500 words is a good target length).

RUBRIC
Excellent Quality 95-100%	Introduction   45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.	Literature Support 91-84  points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.	Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score 50-85%	40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.	83-76  points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.	52-49  points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality 0-45%	37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.	75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.	48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow   Rhetoric and Audiences Discussion Essay Paper

Rhetoric and Audiences Discussion Essay Paper

 

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!