Assignment: Score each response using the Rhetorical Analysis Rubric. Answer the questions in complete
statements. The questions in blue are all present in essays that score 7 and above. Hint, hint, if you cannot
find good example in the response it is probably 6 or below.
1. What rhetorical devices does the writer identify directly?
2. What rhetorical devices does the writer identify indirectly?
3. Write at least two examples of where the writer explained the function of the rhetorical devices?
4. Which idea/paragraph is not thoroughly developed?
5. What did the writer identify as the author’s message?
6. I highlighted errors, in yellow, in the essay response; rewrite the sentences with errors correctly.
7. Copy a sentence from the response where the writer demonstrates insight.
8. Identify all of the sophisticated terminology that the writer used?
9. Copy a sentence from the response where the writer employs a rhetorical device.
10. Copy a different sentence from the response where the writer employs a rhetorical device.
Read the following passage from “America Needs Its Nerds” by Leonid Fridman. Then write an essay in which
you analyze how Fridman develops his argument.
______________________________________________________________________________________
These are the directions for writing the response to this essay.

Read the essay then the sample student responses and then score Student Response 2A then
answer all of the questions.

Read the essay then the sample student responses and then score Student Response 2B then
answer all of the questions.
There is something very wrong with the system
students are ashamed to admit, even to their
of values in a society that has only derogatory
friends, how much they study. Although most
terms like nerd and geek for the intellectually
students try to keep up their grades, there is a
curious and academically serious.
minority of undergraduates for whom pursuing
A geek, according to Webster’s New World
knowledge is the top priority during their years at
Dictionary, is a street performer who shocks the
Harvard. Nerds are ostracized while athletes are
public by biting off heads of live chickens. It is a
idolized.
telling fact about our language and our culture that
The same thing happens in U.S. elementary and
someone dedicated to pursuit of knowledge is
high schools. Children who prefer to read books
compared to a freak biting the head off a live
rather than play football, prefer to build model
chicken.
airplanes rather than get wasted at parties with
Even at a prestigious academic institution like
Harvard, anti-intellectualism is rampant: Many
their classmates, become social outcasts.
Ostracized for their intelligence and refusal to
conform to society’s anti-intellectual values, many
are deprived of a chance to learn adequate social
where average professional ballplayers are much
skills and acquire good communication tools.
more respected and better paid than faculty
Enough is enough.
members of the best universities.
Nerds and geeks must stop being ashamed of
How can a country where typical parents are
who they are. It is high time to face the persecutors
ashamed of their daughter studying mathematics
who haunt the bright kid with thick glasses from
instead of going dancing, or of their son reading
kindergarten to the grave. For America’s sake,
Weber* while his friends play baseball, be expected
the anti-intellectual values that pervade our society
to compete in the technology race with Japan or
must be fought.
remain a leading political and cultural force in
There are very few countries in the world where
anti-intellectualism runs as high in popular culture
Europe?
How long can America remain a world-class
as it does in the U.S. In most industrialized nations,
power if we constantly emphasize social skills and
not least of all our economic rivals in East Asia, a
physical prowess over academic achievement and
kid who studies hard is lauded and held up as an
intellectual ability?
example to other students.
In many parts of the world, university
professorships are the most prestigious and
materially rewarding positions. But not in America,
Copyright © 1990 by the New York Times.
Reprinted by permission.
* Maximilian Weber (1864 –1920), German political economist and
sociologist.
Responses
Student Response 2A
When reading Friedman’s article the reader is truly convinced that “America Needs Its Nerds”. The way in
which Fridman structures his argument, uses descriptive examples and employs rhetorical strategies all
contribute to the strength of his argument.
Fridman first introduces his argument by making a profound statement that reflects his strong opinion. In
his first sentence Fridman states, “There is…academically serious” which gives him an authoritative tone, so
that his argument becomes more assertive. To back up his claim that there is “something very wrong with the
system” of America’s he defines the definition of geek which has been relentlessly used on those dedicated to
the pursuit of knowledge. While a geek in dictionary terms-is a chicken head-biting freak, geeks in modern
day terms are not and he wants to clarify the difference between these two in order to make the reader
realize how insulting it is to label academically motivated people as “geeks”.
Fridman then gives more specific example as to why American society has such strong anti-intellectualism:
fear of being ostracized by society’s elites, which consists of athletes and popular students. Fridman makes a
sharp contrast between students who party/play football and students who build airplanes/read. He makes
this contrast to allow the reader to see the injustice “nerds” and “geeks” face in society. While nerds concern
themselves with useful time-productive, intellectually stimulating, activities, party people and football players
waste their time; yet, nerds and geeks are still oppressed by others. To illustrate his intolerant attitude of this
situation “nerds” face, he states a telegraphic sentence in line 28, when he states “Enough is enough.”
Fridman is standing up for these wrongly oppressed nerds and is demanding that they no longer be oppressed
by society. He has had all he can take with American society. This telegraphic sentence reinforces his
authoritative tone and creates a shift in attitude from one that was feeling wrongly oppressed to one that is
more forceful and determined to receive justice.
The following paragraph displays his authoritative tone and it sounds as if Fridman is uniting all nerds
throughout America to rally against their oppressors. It is the climax or the heart of the essay where he states
his long hoped-for desire of “facing the persecutors who haunt the bright kid.” He believes that antiintellectualism must be fought for America’s sake and the following statement gives an explanation as to why
the bottle must be fought.
While other parts of the world highly respect intellectuals, and educators, America does not; rather
America esteems their baseball players over university professors and this failure to respect the intellectually
motivated will lead to America’s downfall.
In order to make the reader realize the drastic change in attitude that needs to be taken, Fridman asks a
series of rhetorical questions. The questions serve as thought provokers, which help the reader understand
that more “nerd” and “geeks” are needed in America, if America is to retain their influence throughout the
world. Both questions also use anaphora as a means to emphasize the need for “academic achievement and
intellectual ability” in America.
Fridman’s argument is highly convincing in the way that he structurally organizes his essay, by stating his
opinion, using factual evidence and reinforcing his argument with a conclusion consisting of rhetorical
questions. His use of rhetorical strategies consisting of questions, contrasts, anaphora, and diction (presented
in lines 30-32) enhance his argument making it more convincing so that the reader understands America’s
Need for Nerds.
Student Response 2B
In the end it will not be the basketball player or wrestler that allows America to maintain its position of
technological and scholarly achievement in the world, but as Freidman tells us, the nerd. Indeed, the great
society which allows for the tremendous fame of athletes and other pop-culture icons to be perpetuated is
built on the backs of nerds. How would we see a game without television? How would we listen to the new
hit-single without radio? We would not; and now, because of the achievements of the geek, they are being
discriminated against: the term “geek” in itself is derogatory as we now equate a drive and determination to
learn with an outcast street-performer. “Enough is enough” Freidman develops his argument for the return to
the geek through description and general examples making a very persuasive argument against antiintellectualism.
Starting with a definition of the term “geek”, Freidman exemplifies his opening statement of discrimination
against intellectuals and a passion for academics. He conveys the message further by taking Harvard, among
the most prominent intellectual institutions in the world as a prime example of anti-intellectualism. Freidman
uses a paradox as he illustrates that even at an institution at the forefront of education and advancement, the
athlete is still held in higher esteem than the academic, creating a striking example of juxtaposition for the
reader. It is also of interest, that the first ever football team was erected at Harvard. Fridmanthen expands his
example to social experiences of childhood of ostracizing of information that many of my fellow test takers
can relate to to some degree.
The author, after presenting examples to make the anti-intellectual sentiment in society understood, rallies
to his point, “Enough is enough”. From here, Freidman’s his strongly-worded argument against the pervading
feeling in society, an argument to restore the nerd, the geek, the ostracized academic to their rightful place in
society. Taking the fight to the global level, the author references our economic rivals in East Asia, “where
intellectualism is celebrated, by the society as a whole” a thought that many Americans who are concerned
with America’s outsourcing of jobs can relate to. These sentiments carry Fridmanto his next thought –the
wage gap between educators and athletes and researchers that is currently omnipresent in America. Finally,
the author makes his last point; the prominence of the nation itself is at jeopardy on a global scale because of
the anti-intellectualism in society, which shocks the reader into taking another look at how they themselves
view intellectualism—who could promote anti-intellectualism if it threatens the well being of a nation?
Society has turned its back on intellectuals—reaping their produce and leaving them behind. Against social
and public feeling these academics have continued their drive for scholarly glory. Indeed, it is the same
reward for achievement that satiates the intellectual as the massive paycheck to a layperson, talented with
hitting a ball with a stick. Freidman tells us that our technological lead is finite and the possibility of falling
behind globally, both economically and socially, a very real one. Fridmanthrough his broad examples and
concise, effective argument, resonates but one idea in the reader’s head…bring back the geek.
Rhetorical Analysis Scoring Guide
1
2
3
4
5
6
Incorrect assertions are made about the passage. The student made errors in interpreting the question or
assertion. The ideas are off task and/or unfocused. The student may have summarized the passage. The writer
offers little or no evidence as a basis for their ideas. No position is stated. The student incorrectly identifies the
author’s message. The writer did not address the entire question. The student did not address the rhetorical
devices at all. Stylistically the paper may show consistent grammatical and/or organizational problems that
interfere with meaning. The sentence structure is usually simple and unimaginative. 60%
Students made generalizations instead of using specific information/details to support /analyze the
hypothesis/topic. The essay is weak and demonstrates minimal understanding of the topic. The student
demonstrates a general knowledge of the topic, but uses unimportant / insignificant/unrelated quotes/examples to
prove their point. The student does not address the entire question. The student identifies insignificant messages
present in the work. The student correctly identified some rhetorical devices, but incorrectly identified others. The
student merely mentions the devices and does not attempt to analyze or connect them to the text. The writer did
not address the entire question. Stylistically the paper may show consistent grammatical problems, and /or
organizational issues that interfere with meaning. The sentence structure is usually simple and unimaginative.
65%
This paper misses important information about the topic. This paper summarizes instead of analyzes; it makes
assertions without supporting them with evidence. The student did not clearly explain his/her position. The writer
does not demonstrate a thorough understanding of the topic; or he or she only identifies or defines their position.
The writer may not have addressed the entire question. The student identified insignificant messages present in
the work. The student correctly identified some rhetorical devices, but may have incorrectly identified others. The
student restates the definition of the term as an attempt to connect to the author’s message/purpose. The student
does not have enough evidence or examples to support his/her claim. The quotes are weak. This paper may have
organizational problems that distract the reader. 70%
This paper addresses some of the important information/ideas about the topic, but the writer’s
perspective/viewpoint is obviously limited. This paper has good ideas that are not well developed. There is not
enough evidence to completely illustrate the position. The student demonstrates a general knowledge of the topic,
but uses some unimportant/unrelated quotes/examples to prove his/her point. The student correctly identified
obvious messages present in the work, but misses some of the important ideas. The student correctly identified
author’s message or purpose and rhetorical devices. The writer may not have addressed the entire question As
the student attempts to connect the device to the message he/she simply explains how/why the quote is an
example of the identified device The student’s analysis is rudimentary and does not offer any real insight. This
paper may have organizational problems that distract the reader. 75%
This medium score paper completes the essay, but with no special insights; the analysis lacks depth, and it merely
states the obvious. Because of these weaknesses, the ideas are predictable and the paragraphs are weak. The
student correctly identifies obvious messages present in the work. The student correctly identifies author’s
message(s) and rhetorical devices, however, the analysis is predictable and does not offer any real insight. The
connection between the author’s message and the rhetorical devices is not fully developed. The language in the
medium-score essay is usually acceptable, but fairly simple, and sentences are usually the same length and pattern.
This paper may have organizational problems, but they do not create a major distraction for the reader. 80%
This essay completes the task of the essay topic assertion—it shows some insights, but usually with less precision
and clarity than the high-score papers. Some of the observations may not be fully substantiated or developed. The
student correctly identifies author’s message(s) and connects it to rhetorical devices. The student may make crosstextual, or social, or personal connections to support his/her position. Most connections between the author’s
message and the rhetorical devices are insightful and some are fully developed. There may be lapses in correct
grammar, but the essay is generally well written. 85%
7
8
9
This essay completes the task of the essay topic assertion well—The student’s response uses insight to combine
and connect most if not all of the important ideas and concepts, and relevant, powerful quotes to support the
position. The student analyzes how the author uses rhetorical devices to construct complex messages. The student
correctly identifies rhetorical devices present in the work and completely develops the connection between them
and the author’s more complex message(s). The student makes strong cross-textual, or social, or personal
connections to support his/her position. Some of the observations, however, may be obvious instead of deeply
insightful. There may be a few lapses in grammar, but the student uses a variety of sentence patterns, the
transitions are fluid, and the language intelligent. 90%
This essay clearly demonstrates a significant understanding of the passage. The writer shows a significant
comprehension of how the language in a passage creates an effect. The student analyzes how the author utilizes
the rhetorical devices to promote complex message(s). The student draws from a variety of resources and makes
cross-textual, societal, and personal connections, to create a scaffold(s) of evidence to support his/her position.
The argument is compelling and cogent. The language illustrates sophistication by using a variety of sentence style
patterns. This essay has intelligent ideas that are thoroughly developed, sound organization, strong examples as
evidence and articulate diction. There should only be a few minor grammatical errors. 95%
WOW! This essay demonstrates an outstanding comprehension of the assertion/question. The writer’s examples
and evidence are deeply insightful and creatively presented. All of the ideas are relevant, connected and powerful.
The writer’s voice and organization is clear and strong. The student analyzes how the author utilizes the rhetorical
devices to promote complex message(s). The student draws from a variety of resources and makes cross-textual,
societal, and personal connections, to create a scaffold(s) of evidence to support his/her position. The argument is
compelling and cogent. The student’s language employs a variety of sentence style patterns as well as literary and
rhetorical devices. This writer has complete command of the language and any grammatical flaws, if any, are minor
and infrequent. Not only can you understand Toni Morrison, you should ask her the name of her agent!!!!!!!!!!!!
100%