Rhetorical Theory
Communication 450 George N.
Dionisopoulos
Fall 2015
Office: COM 241
20986 W 4:00-6:40 Office hours MW 12:30
– 1:50
Com 206 dionisop@mail.sdsu.edu
" The unexamined life is not worth living ." -- Socrates
Theories of speech communication found their earliest expression in the writings of the ancient
Greeks. This course will examine theories of rhetoric and deal with their possible applicability to contemporary speech communication. The purpose of this course is to present rhetoric as the foundation for a practical philosophy that prepares one for public life.
We will explore the relationship between persuasive communication and a number of social and ethical issues, including: How should people make personal, social, and political decisions?
What are good ways of and reasons for changing my mind or the minds of others? Is there anything we can know for sure? This exploration will focus on the "rhetorical dimensions" of several important and practical subject matters, such as politics, religion, history, economics, and science.
Student Learning Outcome goals:
To comprehend the role and purpose of rhetorical theory as a theoretical and practical conversation within the field of rhetoric and communication.
To recognize the function and scope of rhetoric within civic and political life.
Describe and explain the concepts, tenets, and theories that span the breadth of rhetorical studies.
To be able to employ rhetorical concepts in the critical analysis of events within civic and political contexts
TEXTS
Available in the Aztec Bookstore
Herrick, J. A. (2013). The history and theory of rhetoric: An introduction 5 th
edition, New York,
Pearson.
Other readings posted on Blackboard
GRADING and ASSIGNMENTS :
1

I will use the following scale for assigning grades:
A = 90% (book critique required) B = 80%
A- = 88.5 (book critique required) C or Pass = 70%
B+ = 87 D = 60%
Exams (100 points each):
This class is structured around three units. Each unit will examine concerns about the strategic use of rhetoric to structure reality and how rhetorical theories were developed in relationship to perceived needs within the culture. Students are responsible for the reading and for ideas discussed in class
.
Mastery/understanding of this material will be assessed by three examinations during the course of the semester. Each exam will take two hours and will be cover reading and lecture material using objective questions. Questions are designed to allow you to demonstrate that you have read the material thoroughly, attended lectures, and thought carefully and critically about the issues discussed. In short, I am looking for KNOWLEDGE and ANALYSIS of the material. You will need a Scantron Form 882 and a #2 pencil for the objective portion of each exam. There will also be periodic quizzes given during the semester. A quiz cannot be made up or taken early.
Book Critique ( 50 points)
If you want to get a grade of either A or A- in this class you will have to read one of the books from the list below and write a critique of it. These books have not been ordered though the bookstore so it will be up to you to secure the one you select. One important key to this assignment is to pick a book that you think will interest you.
Your essay should include some sort of systematic summary of the book. This can be a chapter by chapter review or a detailed précis of the overall contents of the work. Be careful not to just tell me what it says, you need to illustrate the book’s important concepts, propositions and insights by citing from the text.
Your written critique should discuss the book by relating it to the material in the course. DO
NOT write the kind of “book report” that you could have written before taking this course.
Use this assignment as an opportunity to demonstrate that you have thought carefully and critically about the book and how it relates to the concepts and readings from the course. Cite liberally from the class readings as well as other material to illustrate your analysis, but DO NOT CITE
CLASS LECTURE NOTES.
You should also offer some sort of assessment concerning the worth -- or lack thereof -- of the book. Is it worth reading or not? Should it be read in part or in whole? Don't hesitate to be critical, but don't just be critical for the sake of being critical; and recognize that a statement like
“I did not like it,” or “it was really hard (boring/involved/repetitive)” speaks more about you than it does the book. Your critique should speak to the contributions of the book, not to how you felt about reading it. These books have all been reviewed in various media and these reviews can help you to gain critical insight into your selection.
2

The text for your review (not including reference notes and title page) should be 5-8 double-spaced pages with 12 point font and one inch margins and follow the APA style format.
You will need to cite a minimum of four outside sources in your review – not including the reviewed book. DO NOT CITE class lecture notes, dictionaries or encyclopedias. Be certain to paginate your work. The mechanics of the paper are important. Extensive grammatical, formal, and/or typographical errors will affect your grade so it is important that you PROOFREAD
YOUR WORK.
All reviews are due to Turnitin at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, December 2, 2015. No late papers will be accepted for this assignment.
Select and critique one of the following:
Burke, K., Counter-Statement Stone, I. F., The Trial of Socrates
Heinrichs, Thank You for Arguing Toulmin, S., The Uses of Argument
Jamieson, K. Eloquence in the Electronic Age Wills, G., Lincoln at Gettysburg
Lackoff & Johnson, Metaphors We Live By
PROCEDURAL MATTERS:
Failure to discuss some readings in class does not alleviate your responsibility for comprehending the material -- if you have questions bring them up in class or in my office.
Getting to Know Each Other: Please make a Blog post about yourself under the Student Profile
Tab on Blackboard. This profile should include: (a) a photo of you, (b) and some information you wish to share in order for us to get to know you better. Please post a photo in which your face is clearly visible – as opposed to a crowd-shot of the audience at an all-day music festival with the explanation that you are in section 53, seat 12. This will help me to learn names.
Follow the example that I posted under “Professor' Profile” (tab on left side of Blackboard).
Deadline Date: September 9, 2015 (by 5:00 p.m.,
PST).
There is a file is the course documents section of BlackBoard entitled and concerning “Tips for
Submitting Profiles.” It has a link to an instructional video that can help walk you through the process.
It is expected that students will conduct themselves in a manner appropriate to the classroom.
No class November 11, 2015 due to Veteran’s Day. No class November 18, due to the convention of the National Communication Association.
3

If you are a student with a disability and believe you will need accommodations for this class, it is your responsibility to contact Student Disability Services at (619) 594-6473 . To avoid any delay in the receipt of your accommodations, you should contact Student Disability Services as soon as possible. Please note that accommodations are not retroactive, and that accommodations based upon disability cannot be provided until you have presented your instructor with an accommodation letter from Student Disability Services. Your cooperation is appreciated.
According to the policy of the San Diego State Faculty Senate, the instructor is not considered bound by the specific policies laid out in this syllabus and the instructor retains the right to adjust the course design as needed during the semester.
The website of the School of Communication can be found at: http://communication.sdsu.edu/
The Academic Dishonesty Policy of the School of Communication is attached at the end of this document.
Tentative Schedule
Week Reading
1 - Aug 26 Introductory Remarks
2 – Sept 2 Herrick – Chapter 1
Foss, Foss & Trapp – Chapter 1
3 – Sept 9 Herrick – Chapter 2
Bitzer, “The Rhetorical Situation”
Vatz, “The Myth of the Rhetorical Situation”
4 – Sept 16 Herrick – Chapter 3
Perkins, “Isocrates and Plato: Relativism vs
“Idealism”
5 – Sept 23 Herrick – Chapter 4
Condit “The Functions of
Epideictic”
6 – Sept 30 Test One
7 – Oct 7 Herrick – Chapter 5
8 – Oct 14 Herrick – Chapter 6
9 – Oct 21 Herrick – Chapter 7
4

10 – Oct 28 Herrick – Chapter 8
11 – Nov 4 Test Two
12 – Nov 11 Holiday – Veterans Day
Herrick – Chapter 9
Foss, Foss, & Trapp, Chapter 5
13 – Nov 18 No Class – National Communication
Association
Herrick – Chapter 10
Foss, Foss, & Trapp Chapter 7
14 – Nov 25 Holiday – Thanksgiving
15 – Dec 2 Herrick – Chapter 11
Book reviews due at 7:00 to
Turnitin
16 – Dec 9 Complete and Review
Third Exam
December 16, 2015: 4:00 – 6:00
THE ACADEMIC DISHONESTY POLICY OF
THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION
In any case in which an instructor identifies evidence for charging a student with violation of academic conduct standards or plagiarism, the presumption will be with that instructor’s determination. The instructor(s) will confer with the School Director to confirm the evidence.
Once confirmed, the student will be informed and presented with the evidence. Some conditions and terms below clarify the School policy and procedure.
Proper source attribution : Proper attribution occurs by specifying the source of content or ideas.
This is done by (a) providing quotation marks around text, when directly quoted, and (b) clearly designating the source of the text or information relied upon in an assignment.
Intellectual contents : Intellectual contents include all forms of ‘text’ produced by another person or persons. It includes: writings, course syllabi, course lectures and recordings of lectures, visual information such as models, videos, lyrics, software, etc.
Secondary citations : Secondary citation is not strictly a form of plagiarism, but in blatant forms, it can present similar ethical challenges. A secondary citation is citing source A, which in turn cites source B, but it is source B’s ideas or content that provide the basis for the claims the student
5

intends to make in the assignment. For example, assume that there is an article by Jones (2006) in the student’s hands, in which there is a discussion or quotation of an article by Smith (1998).
Assume further that what Smith seems to be saying is very important to the student’s analysis. In such a situation, the student should always try to locate the original Smith source. In general, if an idea is important enough to discuss in an assignment, it is important enough to locate and cite the original source for that idea. There are several reasons for these policies: (a) Authors sometimes commit citation errors, which might be replicated without knowing it; (b) Authors sometimes make interpretation errors, which might be ignorantly reinforced (c) Therefore, reliability of scholarly activity is made more difficult to assure and enforce; (d) By relying on only a few sources of review, the learning process is short-circuited, and the student’s own research competencies are diminished, which are integral to any liberal education; (e) By masking the actual sources of ideas, readers must second guess which sources come from which citations, making the readers’ own research more difficult; (f) By masking the origin of the information, the actual source of ideas is misrepresented. Some suggestions that assist with this principle:

When the ideas Jones discusses are clearly attributed to, or unique to, Smith, then find the
Smith source and citation.

When the ideas Jones is discussing are historically associated more with Smith than with
Jones, then find the Smith source and citation.

In contrast, Jones is sometimes merely using Smith to back up what Jones is saying and believes, and is independently qualified to claim, whether or not Smith would have also said it; in such a case, citing Jones is sufficient.

Never simply copy a series of citations at the end of a statement by Jones, and reproduce the reference list without actually going to look up what those references report—the only guarantee that claims are valid is for a student to read the original sources of those claims.
Self-plagiarism
: Students often practice some form of ‘double-dipping,’ in which they write on a given topic across more than one course assignment. In general, there is nothing wrong with double-dipping topics or sources , but there is a problem with double-dipping exact and redundant text . It is common for scholars to write on the same topic across many publication outlets; this is part of developing expertise and the reputation of being a scholar on a topic. Scholars, however, are not permitted to repeat exact text across papers or publications except when noted and attributed, as this wastes precious intellectual space with repetition and does a disservice to the particular source of original presentation by ‘diluting’ the value of the original presentation. Any time that a writer simply ‘cuts-and-pastes’ exact text from former papers into a new paper without proper attribution, it is a form of self-plagiarism . Consequently, a given paper should never be turned in to multiple classes. Entire paragraphs, or even sentences, should not be repeated word-for-word across course assignments. Each new writing assignment is precisely that, a new writing assignment, requiring new composition on the student’s part.
Specific exemplary infractions and consequences:

Course failure: Reproducing a whole paper, paragraph, or large portions of unattributed materials without proper attribution, whether represented by: (a) multiple sentences, images, or portions of images; or (b) by percentage of assignment length, will result in
6

assignment of an “F” in the course in which the infraction occurred, and a report to the
Center for Student Rights and Responsibilities (CSRR
2
).

Assignment failure: Reproducing a sentence or sentence fragment with no quotation marks, but with source citation, or subsets of visual images without source attribution, will minimally result in an “F” on the assignment, and may result in greater penalty, including a report to the CSRR, depending factors noted below.

Exacerbating conditions--Amount: Evidence of infraction, even if fragmentary, is increased with a greater: (a) number of infractions; (b) distribution of infractions across an assignment; or (c) proportion of the assignment consisting of infractions.

Exacerbating conditions--Intent: Evidence of foreknowledge and intent to deceive magnifies the seriousness of the offense and the grounds for official response. Plagiarism, whether ‘by accident’ or ‘by ignorance,’ still qualifies as plagiarism—it is all students’ responsibility to make sure their assignments are not committing the offense.

Exceptions: Any exceptions to these policies will be considered on a case-by-case basis, and only under exceptional circumstances.
Additional Stipulations for Graduate Students & GTAs: If, following a review with a
Communication graduate student, a faculty member and School Director determine academic dishonesty has occurred, the evidence will be submitted to the Center of Student Rights and
Responsibilities (CSRR). The report “identifies the student who was found responsible, the general nature of the offense, the action taken, and a recommendation as to whether or not additional action should be considered by the campus judicial affairs office” (CSRR Website1).
The student will be permitted to continue as a student in the Communication graduate program and as a Teaching Associate (if so assigned), until such time as CSRR due process has taken its course. If CSRR rules in favor of the student, the student’s status in the program will continue. If due process rules against the student, then the student will immediately be dropped from all classes in the Communication graduate program and any Teaching Associate position in the
School will be terminated. Graduate students may voluntarily withdraw from classes and
Teaching Associate duties when charges are brought forward. The School’s Director must be notified in writing. Students who voluntarily withdraw, notify the director in a timely manner, and who are subsequently found not guilty of plagiarism may be reinstated without prejudice at the start of the next semester.
1 http://csrr.sdsu.edu/academics1.html
7