This semester we have analyzed the rhetorical methods of different speakers and authors, examining things such as credibility, argumentation and style. For this essay, you will choose one of the listed nonfiction works and write an essay that explains how the author uses specific rhetorical tools and devices to build a reasoned and appropriate appeal to a specific audience.
Texts:
“Today’s Kids Are, Like Killing the English Language,” Kirk Johnson
“The Ritual of Fast Food,” Margaret Visser
“People Like Us,” David Brooks [posted online]
“Stalking the Vegetannual,” Barbara Kingsolver
“I Was an Anchor Baby,” Marie Myung-Ok Lee [posted online]
Consider the following:

Specific tools that usually align to a rhetorical appeal
 The author’s purpose

Diction, imagery, details, figurative language, and syntax tools

Context

Organization style
Be sure to —
 clearly state your thesis

 organize and develop your ideas effectively choose your words carefully
 edit your writing for grammar, mechanics, and spelling
For this essay, you will complete the following steps:
Before writing the essay:

Review your last essay. Based on the comments you received set a specific goal for this essay. Your successful improvement on this goal will count for 10% of your grade.
Due: Friday, Nov. 14 th
Thesis must be complete before any scheduled conferences.
Complete a rough draft and submit it to TurnItIn.com by Nov 18 th for revision. You MUST revise your essay for editing Friday, Nov 15 th . Your draft must be as final as you can make it or you will not be allowed to edit.
Final draft due : TurnItIn.com, Tuesday Nov. 24 th before 8:30 AM.
After completing the essay:

Reflection and review sheet about comments received

Rewrite , if applicable: o Below 75: MUST rewrite o 75-85: MAY rewrite o 85 or above: Cannot receive a higher grade; any rewrites will be reviewed without grading
Requirements for rewriting:

Goal-setting conference with teacher

Highlight changes on the rewrite

Submit rewrite to TurnItIn.com; submit conference form to teacher

70-74
Content is inaccurate in terms of analysis and/or references to the text.
Disorganized.
Topic sentences unrelated to paragraphs, no chunks evident, or paragraphs are unfocused.
No introduction or conclusion and/or thesis is unclear or non-existent. No attempt to structure the paper around organizing pieces.
There is no evidence, paraphrased or quoted.
75-79
There is no commentary, or it is impossible to distinguish commentary from assertions.
Many grammatical and spelling errors interfere with meaning.
Sentences are inadequately structures. Paper includes many accidental run-ons, fragments, etc.
Language is misused and paper is difficult to understand. No understanding of applications of language.
Many grammatical and spelling errors that show carelessness and lack of understanding of rules of punctuation, usage, etc.
Sentences show little variation. Monotonous or formulaic and sentences show little consideration of context (i.e. all simple or start with subject).
Word choice vague or unclear. Little evidence of varied vocabulary; repetitive and shallow. Repeated use of informal language/ contractions
Assertions and content may be accurate, but the prompt may not fully be addressed.
Argument is unclear or unfocused.
There is an attempt to organize, but topic sentences may assert plot events, or sentence chunks may be incomplete or unclear.
Thesis is incorrectly structured, introduction and conclusion are too short. Structure negatively impacts the argument.
Attempts to add evidence, but may be too general or vague, or inappropriate to the argument. No context and quotes are dropped.
The author attempts to add commentary, but it does not support the arguments being made.
80-89
Asserts a reasonable argument that is adequately analyzed and present in the text.
Addresses the prompt fully and clearly.
Topic sentences describe the paragraphs, there are adequate sentence chunks with transitions, though they may be awkward.
Introduction and conclusion of sufficient length, though may be vague or underdeveloped. Thesis ends the intro; outlines argument generally.
Evidence connects to assertions and thesis.
Quotes may still be dropped, but some attempt is made to give context.
Commentary addresses the assertions and thesis, though it may still need more development.
90-94
Clear, correct, innovative argument; analyzes the prompt successfully. Does not have the insight in a 5 paper, but clearly articulates ideas.
Paragraphs are organized with clear chunking and transitions, though they may be formulaic or constrained by format.
Introduction and conclusion add value to the paper. The thesis offers some specific idea of the argument.
Evidence clearly supports assertions and thesis and is connected through context and embedding. Good choice of evidence.
Commentary clearly explains the assertions and thesis and addresses the evidence directly.
Few grammatical and spelling errors. They do not detract from the overall meaning of the text. Author shows generally adequate competence.
Author varies sentence beginnings to maintain interest and create a variable rhythm. Author shows awareness of sentence type and purpose.
Language is used appropriately, without contractions or other informal language.
Author shows care of word choice and arrangement.
Grammatical errors limited primarily to typos. Author shows strong understanding of grammatical rules and applications.
Author varies sentences with purpose and understanding.
Word choice is purposeful and appropriate, though it may still be unsophisticated.
95-100
Paper asserts an insightful, original idea that is clearly articulated in analysis.
Paragraphs clearly organized, with varied topic sentence, elegant use of sentence chunks and transitions or word chains that connect ideas fluidly.
Intro and conclusion develop and explain important ideas and clearly outline the argument. The thesis is eloquent, specific, and well-formed.
Best choice of evidence clearly and fully supports assertions. All quotes elegantly embedded; abundant evidence to prove all claims.
Fully and eloquently explains assertions and thesis while addressing specific evidence. It is clear, concise, and thorough.
Uses grammar rules and applications subtly/ purposefully to show specific degrees of meaning through punctuation or other applications.
Purposely varies sentences, taking compositional risks and adding meaning through juxtaposition of sentence types or specific structures.
Word choice is varied and specific.
Language is used to carefully craft arguments and communicate subtle points.