RWS 100: The Rhetoric of Written Argument.
Fall 2012.
Instructor: Bert Dill.
Sections: 5 (9am MWF); 12 (10 am
MWF); 67 (11am 2 pm MWF); 26
(1pm MWF); 30 (2pm MW)
office: AH 3156
email: bdill@mail.sdsu.edu
bdillrhetoric@cox.net .
SKYPE voicemail 619-618-0242.
(I prefer email.)
Office hours: MWF 12-1 and Fri. 2-3 by
appointment
Texts and Materials:
Austin, Michael. Reading the World: Ideas that Matter. 2nd ed. Norton, 2010.
Raimes, Ann. Keys for Writers, 6th edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2002.
A good college dictionary (Such as The American Heritage Dictionary).
Access to a computer with word processing and printing capabilities (or a typewriter) as well as
internet and email capabilities.
Course Description:
RWS 100/101, The Rhetoric of Written Argument, satisfies the composition component of the
university requirement in Communication and Critical Thinking. Other courses which satisfy this
requirement are Africana Studies 120, Chicana/Chicano Studies 11B, and Linguistics 100.
RWS 100/101 is an introduction to writing and reading as critical inquiry, focusing on the
rhetoric of written argument. The course is designed to help university students successfully
undertake writing projects that have the depth and complexity of university-level work. By the
end of the course, students should be able to identify and analyze features of written arguments
and to write an argument about problems or questions addressed in the course. They should be
able to write and revise papers in which they address complex questions effectively, use source
materials responsibly, and make sound decisions about structure, cohesion and conventions of
correctness.
The key ideas involved in this course description are Reading, Writing, Rhetoric, and Critical
Inquiry:
Reading: Course readings may be difficult, both in terms of amount and complexity. The
subjects are often unfamiliar, the ideas are often challenging, and the language is often
complex. The chosen reading assignments are intended to illustrate and examine the
principles of Rhetoric and Critical Inquiry and Critical Thinking.
Writing: The course involves a good deal of writing. The assigned writings will involve the
whole of the “writing process,” including annotations, summaries, drafts, and complete
essays. Because this course is intended to teach the process, all of these assignments
will form part of your grade.
Rhetoric: Perhaps the easiest way of understanding the term “rhetoric” is to see it simply
as the art of persuasion. Students in this course will study the principles of effective
argumentation, examining the writings of others to see these principles in action, and
employ these principles in their own writings.
“Critical”: Although most people tend to think of the term “critical” as somehow meaning
an expression of disapproval, that is not necessarily the case. The root term is the Greek
word “
,” meaning, “judge.” Critical reading is the level of reading that one
reaches after literal reading (simply understanding the words) and inferential reading
(understanding what is intended); reading critically means reaching a judgment about
what has been read. The combination of critical reading, critical writing, and critical
thinking is what is meant by the term “critical inquiry”—inquiring and investigating with the
goal of reaching judgment.
Grading:
Essays (5) (including a media project & final)(16% each) ------------------------------------80%.
Other written work ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15%.
Participation, effort, progress -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5%.
RWS 100 Student Learning Outcomes.
The following four outcomes describe the four main writing projects or "assignment types" for the
course. Students will be able to:
1. construct an account of an author’s project and argument; translate an argument into their
own words;
2. construct an account of an author’s project and argument and carry out small, focused
research tasks to find information that helps clarify, illustrate, extend or complicate that
argument; use appropriate reference materials, including a dictionary, in order to clarify
their understanding of an argument;
3. construct an account of two or more authors’ projects and arguments and explain
rhetorical strategies that these authors—and by extension other writers—use to engage
readers in thinking about their arguments;
4. Construct an account of two author’s projects and arguments in order to use concepts
from one argument as a framework for understanding and writing about another.
The following points describe outcomes to work on throughout the semester, to be attained over
the 15 weeks. Students will be able to:
5. describe elements of an argument--claims, methods of development, kinds of evidence,
persuasive appeals; annotate the work that is done by each section of a written argument;
6. use all aspects of the writing process--including prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and
proofreading;
7. choose effective structures for their writing, acknowledging that different purposes,
contexts and audiences call for different structures; understand the relationship between a
text's ideas and its structure;
8. identify devices an author has used to create cohesion or to carry the reader through the
text; use metadiscourse to signal the project of a paper, and guide a reader from one idea
to the next in their writing;
9. effectively select material from written arguments, contextualize it, and comment on it in
their writing;
10. determine when and where a source was published, who wrote it and whether it was
reprinted or edited; understand that texts are written in and respond to particular contexts,
communities or cultures; examine the vocabulary choices a writer makes and how they
are related to context, community or culture, audience or purpose;
11. respond in writing to ideas drawn from various cultures and disciplines, using the activity
of writing to clarify and improve their understanding of an argument;
12. analyze and assess arguments made by visual texts; incorporate visual images into their
documents;
13. edit their writing for the grammar and usage conventions appropriate to each writing
situation;
14. assign significance to the arguments that they read;
15. reflect on how they wrote their papers, and revise arguments and findings based on
critical reflection.
Essay Projects/assignments.
Essay #1 Assignment: Analyze, explain, and evaluate the effectiveness of Bird’s Rhetoric
in the essay "College is a Waste of time and Money."
Steps:
1. Read and annotate the text, marking vocabulary terms that may be difficult. (You will
be showing the instructor your annotated text.)
2. Study the text carefully with the goal of understanding all points.
3. Write a summary/paraphrase of the essay, covering all of the main points.
4. Identify and explain the various "Means of Persuasion" Bird uses (referring to the
"Classical Rhetoric" outline).
5. Evaluate the argument in terms of the effectiveness of the types of appeals and the
effectiveness of the evidence presented.
6. Construct an argument that Bird rhetoric either is or is not generally effective in
persuading the reader to accept his claim.
7. Submit your essay to another student for peer review and do a Peer Review of another
student's essay. (You will be given a grade for doing this Peer Review for someone
else.) Revise your own essay as you think fit.
8. Submit the following:
a. your annotated copy of the essay
b. the summary.
c. your original essay.
d. the peer review worksheet done by another student
e. your final draft.
This assignment works toward the following RWS 100 learning outcomes:
• construct an account of an author’s project and argument; translate an argument into
their own words;
• construct an account of an author’s project and argument and carry out small, focused
research tasks to find information that helps clarify, illustrate, extend or complicate that
argument; use appropriate reference materials, including a dictionary, in order to
clarify their understanding of an argument;
• describe elements of an argument--claims, methods of development, kinds of
evidence, persuasive appeals; annotate the work that is done by each section of a
written argument;
• use all aspects of the writing process--including prewriting, drafting, revising, editing,
and proofreading;
• choose effective structures for their writing, acknowledging that different purposes,
contexts and audiences call for different structures; understand the relationship
between a text's ideas and its structure;
• identify devices an author has used to create cohesion or to carry the reader through
the text; use metadiscourse to signal the project of a paper, and guide a reader from
one idea to the next in their writing;
• effectively select material from written arguments, contextualize it, and comment on it
in their writing;
• determine when and where a source was published, who wrote it and whether it was
reprinted or edited; understand that texts are written in and respond to particular
•
•
contexts, communities or cultures; examine the vocabulary choices a writer makes and
how they are related to context, community or culture, audience or purpose;
edit their writing for the grammar and usage conventions appropriate to each writing
situation;
assign significance to the arguments that they read;
Essay #2: Managing Sources
Study all of the following:
 “Education” pages 3-4
 Greek image 5-7
 Booth, “Is There Any Knowledge That a Man Must Have?”*
 Douglass “Learning to Read” pp. 46-52
 Newman “From Knowledge Its Own End” pp. 53-61
 Feynman “O American Outra Vez” pp. 68-75
 Stossel “The College Scam”*
(* handouts, not in the textbook)
Using at least two of the items on the list above and at least one other outside source (NOT
Wikipedia or Google or other Internet source unless it is a peer-reviewed scholarly article), write
an argument about education in America. What do you want your audience to understand, to
believe, or to do about education in America? Use a one-sentence answer to that question as
the claim (thesis statement) of your argument. Support that assertion in your essay.
In your essay, you must properly document everything you use from these essays in correct
MLA format, using both parenthetical citations and a “Works Cited” page (see the
appropriate sections in Keys for Writers). You may use other sources as well, with prior approval
of the instructor.
Submit the following:
a. an outline or summary of Booth, Douglass, Newman, or Feynman.
b. your original essay.
c. the peer review worksheet done by another student
d. your final draft.
This assignment works toward the following RWS 100 learning outcomes:
• construct an account of an author’s project and argument; translate an argument into their
own words;
• construct an account of an author’s project and argument and carry out small, focused
research tasks to find information that helps clarify, illustrate, extend or complicate that
argument; use appropriate reference materials, including a dictionary, in order to clarify
their understanding of an argument;
• construct an account of two or more authors’ projects and arguments and explain
rhetorical strategies that these authors—and by extension other writers—use to engage
readers in thinking about their arguments;
• Construct an account of two author’s projects and arguments in order to use concepts
from one argument as a framework for understanding and writing about another.
• describe elements of an argument--claims, methods of development, kinds of evidence,
persuasive appeals; annotate the work that is done by each section of a written argument;
• use all aspects of the writing process--including prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and
proofreading;
• choose effective structures for their writing, acknowledging that different purposes,
•
•
•
•
contexts and audiences call for different structures; understand the relationship between a
text's ideas and its structure;
identify devices an author has used to create cohesion or to carry the reader through the
text; use metadiscourse to signal the project of a paper, and guide a reader from one idea
to the next in their writing;
effectively select material from written arguments, contextualize it, and comment on it in
their writing;
determine when and where a source was published, who wrote it and whether it was
reprinted or edited; understand that texts are written in and respond to particular contexts,
communities or cultures; examine the vocabulary choices a writer makes and how they
are related to context, community or culture, audience or purpose;
respond in writing to ideas drawn from various cultures and disciplines, using the activity
of writing to clarify and improve their understanding of an argument
Essay Assignment #3: Proposal
Study the following:
Mencius “Man’s Nature is Good” pp. 94-99
Hsün Tzu “Man’s Nature is Evil” pp. 100-109
Hobbes “From Leviathan” pp. 119-124
Locke “Of Ideas” pp. 125-128
Jefferson, The Declaration of Independence (handout)
Lao Tzu “From the Tao te Ching” pp. 158-169
Machiavelli “from The Prince” pp. 184- 192
Drawing from (and using) the ideas expressed above, as well as from outside sources (again,
using only peer-reviewed, scholarly articles—ask the instructor if there is any doubt about the
quality of a source), write an argument about the nature of good government, considering both
what is desirable and what is practical.
Again, you must use proper MLA format to document all sources, using both
parenthetical citations and a Works Cited page.
Submit the following:
a. a summary of either Locke or Hobbes
b. your original essay.
c. the peer review worksheet done by another student
d. your final draft
This assignment works toward the following RWS 100 Student Learning Outcomes
• construct an account of an author’s project and argument; translate an argument into their
own words;
• construct an account of an author’s project and argument and carry out small, focused
research tasks to find information that helps clarify, illustrate, extend or complicate that
argument; use appropriate reference materials, including a dictionary, in order to clarify
their understanding of an argument;
• construct an account of two or more authors’ projects and arguments and explain
rhetorical strategies that these authors—and by extension other writers—use to engage
readers in thinking about their arguments;
• Construct an account of two author’s projects and arguments in order to use concepts
from one argument as a framework for understanding and writing about another.
• describe elements of an argument--claims, methods of development, kinds of evidence,
persuasive appeals; annotate the work that is done by each section of a written argument;
• use all aspects of the writing process--including prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
proofreading;
choose effective structures for their writing, acknowledging that different purposes,
contexts and audiences call for different structures; understand the relationship between a
text's ideas and its structure;
identify devices an author has used to create cohesion or to carry the reader through the
text; use metadiscourse to signal the project of a paper, and guide a reader from one idea
to the next in their writing;
effectively select material from written arguments, contextualize it, and comment on it in
their writing;
determine when and where a source was published, who wrote it and whether it was
reprinted or edited; understand that texts are written in and respond to particular contexts,
communities or cultures; examine the vocabulary choices a writer makes and how they
are related to context, community or culture, audience or purpose;
respond in writing to ideas drawn from various cultures and disciplines, using the activity
of writing to clarify and improve their understanding of an argument;
edit their writing for the grammar and usage conventions appropriate to each writing
situation;
assign significance to the arguments that they read;
Essay #4—Reading in New Contexts: Contemporary Media Project
The goal of this assignment is to make an argument about an issue of issues in our
contemporary world, using the principles and ideas of people who lived, worked, and struggled in
different contexts and then to present your argument in a contemporary media/multi-media
format such as
• A Quick Time movie
• A PowerPoint presentation
• An MP3 “podcast” type audio report in the form of a radio talk show, an audio drama
(multiple characters), etc.--- Note that the term “podcast” is generic and doesn’t mean an
iPod is necessarily involved. Basically, it’s just a recording in digital format. If you have no
means of converting your audio to digital format, contact me and I can arrange to have
audiotapes recorded in digital format.
• A magazine-type layout (using, perhaps, something like Microsoft Publisher, Adobe
InDesign, or Apple Pages—even Microsoft Word will work), using textboxes, pictures, etc.
• A “website” with linked html pages—note that it need not actually be posted on an Internet
server. Also note that there is a variety of web page authoring programs available. Even
Microsoft Word will allow you to construct a web page (although a professional web
designer informs me that the resulting html code is bloated and overly complex).
• Another contemporary media argument format, with the instructor’s prior approval
All of the writers we have covered this term are open for your use: Booth, Bird, Douglass,
Newman, Hobbes, Locke, etc. There are also quite a few other important writers in our text that
you might also find useful: Plato, Cicero, Malthus, Aquinas, Averroës, Aristotle, etc. (Read the
introductory materials and the questions and suggestions for writing that follow each selection for
ideas.) You might, for example, develop a Radio Talk show with Machiavelli as the host,
interviewing Hobbes, with Malthus and Jefferson calling in to ask questions and make
statements. You might construct a kind of “blog” by one of these people, with reader comments
and threaded discussions by the others. Try constructing an artificial news report with an anchor,
in-the-field reporters, and “celebrity” interviewees. Any or all of the people you use should be
writers we are studying. (What might happen, for instance, if Bird were a protestor at a book
signing by Newman with Jefferson as a CNN reporter covering the event?) If Locke could have
made a music-video, what would if have been like, and how would Machiavelli have responded
to it? What if several of the people were contributors to a special edition of the same magazine
(say Newsweek or US News and World Report) dealing with some important subject today (such
as terrorism or education or judicial nominations).
Also, turn in a detailed written report that explains your project, discussing the rhetorical choices
you have made (for example, why you chose certain colors, shapes, backgrounds, sounds, etc.).
What elements of your project seem most likely (and least likely) to persuade an audience? In
what ways do you think your choices reveal and reflect the issues in the unit you have chosen?
With pre-approval, you can work in small groups of two, or three on this project. While I would
like to give you all a chance to present your projects to the class, it is highly unlikely that there
will be sufficient class time to do so.
This assignment works toward the following RWS 100 learning outcomes:
• construct an account of an author’s project and argument; translate an argument into their
own words;
• construct an account of an author’s project and argument and carry out small, focused
research tasks to find information that helps clarify, illustrate, extend or complicate that
argument; use appropriate reference materials, including a dictionary, in order to clarify
their understanding of an argument;
• construct an account of two or more authors’ projects and arguments and explain
rhetorical strategies that these authors—and by extension other writers—use to engage
readers in thinking about their arguments;
• Construct an account of two author’s projects and arguments in order to use concepts
from one argument as a framework for understanding and writing about another.
• describe elements of an argument--claims, methods of development, kinds of evidence,
persuasive appeals; annotate the work that is done by each section of a written argument;
• use all aspects of the writing process--including prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and
proofreading;
• choose effective structures for their writing, acknowledging that different purposes,
contexts and audiences call for different structures; understand the relationship between a
text's ideas and its structure;
• identify devices an author has used to create cohesion or to carry the reader through the
text; use metadiscourse to signal the project of a paper, and guide a reader from one idea
to the next in their writing;
• effectively select material from written arguments, contextualize it, and comment on it in
their writing;
• determine when and where a source was published, who wrote it and whether it was
reprinted or edited; understand that texts are written in and respond to particular contexts,
communities or cultures; examine the vocabulary choices a writer makes and how they
are related to context, community or culture, audience or purpose;
• respond in writing to ideas drawn from various cultures and disciplines, using the activity
of writing to clarify and improve their understanding of an argument;
• analyze and assess arguments made by visual texts; incorporate visual images into their
documents;
• edit their writing for the grammar and usage conventions appropriate to each writing
situation;
• assign significance to the arguments that they read;
• reflect on how they wrote their papers, and revise arguments and findings based on
critical reflection.
Essay 5—An in-class, timed essay on a topic to be announced.
Policies
You are expected to attend all classes (on time) and to turn in all assignments (also on time).
The assigned readings for each class must be read before the beginning of class. Assignments
are due at the beginning of class. You are expected to participate in class discussions based on
these readings (and the quality, not just the amount, of your participation is important). You
cannot participate if you have not read the assignments or if you are surreptitiously attempting to
finish an assignment during a class discussion. Ordinarily there will be no make up work allowed
unless you have a documented emergency.
No Facebook, instant messaging, texting, etc. is allowed during class. If your addiction is so
great that you cannot last an entire class session, please withdraw from school and seek
professional medical help. Please turn off all beepers, pagers, phones, iPods, etc., before
entering class. Please do not turn them on again until you have exited the room entirely
(meaning do not stop in the doorway to dig you phone out of a backpack while thirty other
students are trying to get out to go to their next class).
Please observe all the standards of student conduct outlined in you SDSU Catalog. Please treat
each other with the respect appropriate to a college classroom.
A word of warning about plagiarism
Don’t Do it!
“One of the unintended effects of new technology is to force new moral decisions upon us”
Lawrence Hinman, UCSD
Yes, the massive availability of information through the Internet has provided those who lack academic
integrity a wealth of opportunity to cheat. Completely finished research papers may be purchased and
downloaded in a few minutes. Others are posted on personal web pages and may be copied for nothing.
It is very easy to lift major sections from web sites and to incorporate them into your paper without giving
credit to the author. (Study your handbook for legal ways of using such information.) It is also a bit
difficult for your teacher to catch all the offenders. Studies also indicate that about 80% of today’s
students seem to believe there is no problem with cheating. For those of you who tend to sacrifice
integrity for expediency, I have two points, one philosophical the other pragmatic: first, as both the ancient
stoics and the modern existentialists have pointed out, we become what we have chosen to be--we are
what we do (I laugh at those who try to tell me they are really honest people after they have cheated--get
a clue!); second, if I catch you, you get a zero--not an F--and you can go take the course again with
someone else.
Don’t Do it!
Some final thoughts:
“What is written without effort is,
in general, read without pleasure.”
Samuel Johnson
Or, as the Romans said: Labor omnia vincit (work conquers all)
This schedule is subject to change.
Bring it with you to class in order to record changes.
Monday
Wednesday
1
8/27
Course introductions/ adjustments
2
9/3
Holiday
3
4
5
9/10
Complete Reading Raimes 27-40
9/17
Student Conferences
Complete Reading Raimes 97-110
9/24
Complete reading of Booth
Complete Reading Raimes 110-125
Course introductions/ adjustments
9/5
Complete Reading of Bird
Complete Reading Raimes 1-27
9/12
Essay 1 – Peer Review
9/19
Student Conferences
9/26
Essay 1 –Final draft, peer review,
original, annotation and summary
Complete reading of Douglass
10/1
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Complete reading of Newman
10/8
Complete reading of Stossel
Complete Reading Raimes 51-80
10/15
Student Conferences
Complete Reading Raimes 161-175
10/22
Complete reading of Mencius
Complete Reading Raimes 176-209
10/29
Complete reading of Hsün Tzu
11/5
Complete Reading Raimes 349-361
11/12
Holiday
11/19
Essay 3 – Peer Review
Complete Reading Raimes 361-380
11/26
Essay 3 – Final draft, peer rev.,
summary of selected essay.
12/3
Student Conferences/Media
Projects
12/10
finals – details to be announced
Friday
8/29
10/3
Complete reading of Feynman
Complete Reading Raimes 40-50
10/10
Essay 2 – Peer Review
10/17
Student Conferences
10/24
Essay 2 – Final draft, peer rev., original,
outline or summary of selected reading
10/31
Complete reading of Hobbes
11/7
Complete Reading of Locke & Jefferson
11/14
Complete reading of Machiavelli
11/21
11/28
12/5
Student Conferences/Media Projects
12/12
finals – details to be announced
This section
of RWS meets
Mon/Wed.
On Fridays,
the instructor
will be
available for
conferences,
(with
appointment)
in the office
This schedule is subject to change. Bring it with you to class in order to record changes.
Monday
1
Wednesday
8/227
Course introductions/ adjustments
2
Course introductions/ adjustments
9/3
Holiday
3
4
5
9/5
9/10
Complete Reading Raimes 27-40
9/17
Student Conferences
Complete Reading Raimes 97-110
9/24
Complete reading of Booth
Complete Reading Raimes 110-125
7
8
9/12
9/19
Student Conferences
9/21
Student Conferences
9/26
10/3
Complete Reading Raimes 40-50
10/8
10/10
Complete Reading Raimes 51-80
Essay 2 – Peer Review
10/15
Student Conferences
Complete Reading Raimes 161-175
10/24
Complete reading of Mencius
10/29
10/31
11/5
11/7
Complete Reading of Locke
Complete Reading Raimes 349-361
12
11/12
Complete Reading of Jefferson
11/26
Essay 3 – Final draft, peer rev., summary
of selected essay.
11/28
12/3
16
11/23
Holiday
11/30
Student Conferences/Media Projects
12/5
Student Conferences/Media Projects
12/10
finals – details to be announced
11/16
Essay 3 – Peer Review
11/21
Student Conferences/Media Projects
10/26
Essay 2 – Final draft, peer rev., original, outline
or summary of selected reading
11/2
Complete reading of Hobbes
11/9
Holiday
11/14
Complete reading of Machiavelli
11/19
Complete Reading Raimes 361-380
15
10/19
Student Conferences
Complete reading of Hsün Tzu
11
10/12
10/17
Student Conferences
10/22
Complete Reading Raimes 176-209
10
9/14
Essay 1 – Peer Review
10/1
Complete reading of Stossel
14
9/7
Complete Reading Raimes 1-27
9/28
Essay 1 –Final draft, peer review, original,
annotation, and summary -----Complete reading
of Douglass
10/5
Complete reading of Feynman
Complete reading of Newman
13
8/31
Course introductions/ adjustments
Complete Reading of Bird
6
9
Friday
8/29
12/7
Student Conferences/Media Projects
12/12
finals – details to be announced
12/14
finals – details to be announced