Critical Response Papers

Order Description

Critical Response Papers :

Three times throughout the semester and once per each unit (media studies, interpersonal and organizational, and rhetoric), you will submit a 4-5 page critical engagement with the readings for the assigned week. Your responsibility is to synthesize and analyze the theoretical, methodological, and topical themes raised by the readings. This is not a summary paper but rather a critical engagement with the theoretical, methodological, or topical utility of the collective sum of these articles: what questions do they collectively raise? How do they collectively challenge or inform our understanding of communication processes? How do they collectively challenge or inform our understanding of what constitutes communication in and of itself? Et cetera.

CMC 600: Communication Research Methods (Fall 2014)

Office: Holmes Hall 226 or by Appointment

Course Objectives:

The purpose of this course is to introduce graduate students to the basic principles and methods of independent scholarly research in the field of communication. After taking this course, you should be able to:

1. Develop research questions and hypotheses that will enable you to conduct communication research.

2. Explain the differences between quantitative, qualitative, interpretive, and critical social scientific and humanistic research.

3. Explain the process of using different research methods (surveys, participant-observation, semiotics, psychoanalysis, etc.).

4. Use all of the above to conduct a thorough and exhaustive literature review and propose a research study.

5. Use all of the above to comprehend and critically evaluate published academic research articles.

6. Develop skills that enable you to lead discussions and present material effectively.

Course Materials/Resources:

Required:

Alison Alexander & W. James Potter (Eds.) (2001). How to Publish Your Communication Research: An Insider’s Guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Carl Burgchardt (Ed.) (various). Readings in Rhetorical Criticism. Strata College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Gillian Rose (2012). Visual Methodologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

APA Style Guide (6th Edition)

Additional readings online via the library website or angel.

Recommended:

Endnote Student Edition Software (or other citation software)

Course Requirements and Grading:

Attendance:

Punctual attendance is expected. I will take attendance at the beginning of every class. Missing one class meetings will lower your final letter grade by ½ a grade. Missing two class meetings will reduce your grade a whole letter. Missing three class meetings means you are failing the course, and requires you to consult with the instructor immediately. Students arriving to class 5 minutes late will not receive credit for attending class that day. Students must submit a valid excuse upon returning to class following absences.

Participation:

All the readings in the course are required. You should come to class ready to answer questions about the readings. Failure to do so will affect your grade.

Annotated Bibliography (10):

Each week beginning September 10th (week 4) and concluding November 26th (week 14) you will submit one entry into your semester-long annotated bibliography. This annotated bibliography is designed to build upon the course literature and contribute towards your Literature Review & Research Proposal Project. Each entry will be from a National Communication Association or International Communication Association journal related to the theoretical, methodological, or topical perspective most relevant for your intended literature review and proposed research project. You must settle upon a journal by week 3, and each entry into your annotated bibliography will come from the same journal. NCA Journals include: Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies; Journal of International and Intercultural Communication; Communication Education; Journal of Applied Communication Research; Communication Monographs; Quarterly Journal of Speech; Communication Teacher; Review of Communication; Critical Studies in Media Communication; Text and Performance Quarterly; First Amendment Studies (formerly Free Speech Yearbook); ICA Journals include: Journal of Communication; Human Communication Research; Communication Theory; Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication; Communication, Culture, & Critique.

Critical Response Papers (3):

Literature Review & Research Proposal:

This project will enable you to complete the series of steps that communication researchers follow prior to actually conducting a study (selecting a topic area, reviewing literature, developing hypothesis, research questions or problems, and outlining the methods to be used to conduct the study). You will complete each of these tasks in these stages and submit a complete proposal with a literature review, hypothesis/research questions, and method sections for two studies (that follow from the same literature review), one using a quantitative method and one using a qualitative method. A more thorough assignment description will be provided and discussed during the second week.

Presentation:

The last week of the course is dedicated to student presentations. These presentations are meant to be formal presentations of your literature review and proposed methodological frameworks. You will need to prepare a 10-15 minute PowerPoint presentation highlighting the significance of your proposed study and the ability for your literature review and proposed theoretical and methodological framework to address the question.

Grade Breakdown: Percentage

Attendance: Required

Class Participation: 10%

Annotated Bibliography: 10% (1×10)

Critical Response Papers: 15% (5×3)

Presentation: 10%

Literature Review: 25%

Research Proposal (Quantitative): 15%

Research Proposal (Qualitative): 15%

Grading Scale:

A+ = 97-100 C+ = 77-79

A = 93-96 C = 73-76

A- = 90-92 C- = 70-72

B+ = 87-89 D+ = 67-69

B = 83-86 D = 63-66

B- = 80-82 D- = 60-62

E = 0-59

Please Note:

Communication is a complex and precarious phenomenon. To communicate, openly, necessarily requires that one expose themselves to ideas that may be uncomfortable to you. For many, the power dynamics associated with confronting controversial issues proves to be overwhelming. Therefore, please do not hesitate to let me know of any problems that may arise from our classroom discussions. Likewise, we often hold strong opinions on many issues. This passion is welcome in the classroom; however, as a community of learners, our objective ought to be to engage, rather than obliterate, those whom with we disagree. Since we are a community, no one is above critique, not even myself, the instructor.

Plagiarism:

By properly citing your evidence, you help to expand our community of learning beyond the borders of the classroom; thus, our conversations now take on an increased level of significance as other voices beyond the confines of the classroom are included in the discussion. Failure to properly cite means that we are denied this opportunity to realize the significance of what we do in the classroom—it reinforces the illusion that the classroom is not a part of the real world. But in fact, what we do here is highly entrenched within the real world; and thus, it is to our benefit as a class, that we are constantly reminded of this fact.

Please note: Students with documented disabilities may be entitled to specific accommodations. The College at Brockport’s Office for Student with Disabilities (OSD) makes this determination. Please contact the Office for Students with Disabilities at (585) 395-5409 or osdoffic@brockport.edu to inquire about obtaining an official letter to the course instructors detailing any approved accommodations. The student is responsible for providing the course instructors with this official letter. Faculty work as a team with the Office for Students with Disabilities to meet the needs of students with disabilities.

Schedule [Concise]

INTRODUCTION

Week 1 (Aug. 26): Introduction to Graduate Studies

Week 2 (Sept. 2): Introduction to Communication/s Research

MEDIA STUDIES

Week 3 (Sept. 9): Introduction to Communications Research

Week 4 (Sept. 16): Psychoanalysis & Semiotics

Week 5 (Sept. 23): Discursive Formations & Audience Analysis

Week 6 (Sept. 30): Content Analysis, Media Effects, and the Two-Step Flow of Communication

INTERPERSONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATION

Week 7 (Oct. 7): Introduction to Interpersonal and Organizational Communication

Week 8 (Oct. 14): Mid-Semester Break

Week 9 (Oct. 21): Experimental Design and Interpersonal Communication Theories

Week 10 (Oct. 28): Conversation Analysis, Grounded Theory, and Mixed Methodologies

Week 11 (Nov. 4): Ethnography and Performance Studies

RHETORIC

Week 12 (Nov. 11): Introduction to Rhetorical Criticism

Week 13 (Nov. 18): Dramatistic, Narrative, and Metaphoric Criticism

Week 14 (Nov. 25): Social Movements, Ideographs, and Critical Rhetoric

PRESENTATIONS & FINALS WEEK

Week 15 (Dec. 2): Presentations

Week 16: Finals Week

Schedule [Complete]

INTRODUCTION

Week 1 (Aug. 26): Introduction to Graduate Studies

Potter, W. James. (2001). Avoiding Writing Traps. In A. F. Alexander & W. J. Potter (Eds.), How to Publish Your Communication Research: An Insider’s Guide (pp. 13-21). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Chaffee, Steven & Lieberman, Debra. (2001). The Challenge of Writing the Literature Review: Synthesizing Research for Theory and Practice. In A. F. Alexander & W. J. Potter (Eds.), How to Publish Your Communication Research: An Insider’s Guide (pp. 23-46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Burgoon, Judee K. (2001). The Challenge of Writing the Theoretical Essay. In A. F. Alexander & W. J. Potter (Eds.), How to Publish Your Communication Research: An Insider’s Guide (pp. 47-56). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Rubin, Alan M. (2001). The Challenge of Writing the Quantitative Study. In A. F. Alexander & W. J. Potter (Eds.), How to Publish Your Communication Research: An Insider’s Guide (pp. 57-75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lindlof, Thomas R. (2001). The Challenge of Writing the Qualitative Study. In A. F. Alexander & W. J. Potter (Eds.), How to Publish Your Communication Research: An Insider’s Guide (pp. 77-95). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Anderson, James A. (2001). The Challenge of Writing the Interpretive Inquiry. In A. F. Alexander & W. J. Potter (Eds.), How to Publish Your Communication Research: An Insider’s Guide (pp. 97-112). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Christians, Clifford G. (2001). The Challenge of Writing the Critical/Cultural Essay. In A. F. Alexander & W. J. Potter (Eds.), How to Publish Your Communication Research: An Insider’s Guide (pp. 113-130). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Folkerts, Jean. (2001). The Challenge of Writing the Historical Essay. In A. F. Alexander & W. J. Potter (Eds.), How to Publish Your Communication Research: An Insider’s Guide (pp. 131-150). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Week 2 (Sept. 2): Introduction to Communication/s Research

Craig, Robert T. (1999). Communication Theory as a Field. Communication Theory, 9(2), 119-161.

Downing, John D. H. (2005). Where We Should Go Next and Why We Probably Won’t: An Entirely Idiosyncratic, Utopian, and Unashamedly Peppery Map for the Future. In A. N. Valdivia (Ed.), A Companion to Media Studies (pp. 495-512). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Donsbach, Wolfgang. (2006). The Identity of Communication Research. Journal of Communication, 56, 437-448.

Stanfill, Mel. (2012). Finding Birds of a Feather: Multiple Memberships and Diversity Without Divisiveness in Communication Research. Communication Theory, 22, 1-24.

Hartnett, Stephen J. “On Postmodern Intellectuals, Implied Obligations, and Political Constituencies.” Western Journal of Communication 77, no. 5 (2013): 523-28.

McKerrow, Raymie E. “Criticism Is as Criticism Does.” Western Journal of Communication 77, no. 5 (2013): 546-49.

Condit, Celeste M. “How Ought Critical Communication Scholars Judge, Here, Now?”. Western Journal of Communication 77, no. 5 (2013): 550-58.

Hall, Stuart. (1992/2001). Cultural Studies and Its Theoretical Legacies. In V. B. Leitch, W. E. Cain, L. A. Finke, B. E. Johnson, J. P. McGowan & J. L. Williams (Eds.), The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism (pp. 1898-1910). New York: W. W. Norton & Co.

MEDIA STUDIES

Week 3 (Sept. 9): Introduction to Communications Research

Rose, Gillian. (2012). Visual Methodologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

***Chapters 1-4, & 12***

Mejia, Robert. (2012). Playing the Crisis: Video Games and the Mobilization of Anxiety and Desire. (Ph.D. Dissertation), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

***Chapter 4***

Week 4 (Sept. 16): Psychoanalysis & Semiotics

Rose, Gillian. (2012). Visual Methodologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

***Chapters 6 & 7***

Barthes, Roland. Mythologies. New York: The Noonday Press, 1957/1972.

***Read “Myth is a type of speech; Myth as a semiological system; the form and the concept; and the signification”***

Mulvey, Laura. (2006). Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. In M. G. Durham & D. M. Kellner (Eds.), Media and Cultural Studies: KeyWorks (pp. 342-352). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Hall, Stuart. (2006). Encoding/Decoding. In M. G. Durham & D. M. Kellner (Eds.), Media and Cultural Studies: Keyworks (pp. 163-173). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Week 5 (Sept. 23): Discursive Formations & Audience Analysis

Rose, Gillian. (2012). Visual Methodologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

***Chapters 8-11***

Appadurai, Arjun. (1996). Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

***Chapter 2***

Smythe, Dallas W. (1977). Communications: Blindspot of Western Marxism. Canadian Journal of Political and Social Theory, 1(3), 1-27.

Week 6 (Sept. 30): Content Analysis, Media Effects, and the Two-Step Flow of Communication

Rose, Gillian. (2012). Visual Methodologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

***Chapters 5***

Anderson, Craig A., Akiko, Shibuya, Nobuko, Ihori, Edward, Swing L., Bushman, Brad J., Sakamoto, Akira, . . . Muniba, Saleem. (2010). Violent Video Game Effects on Aggression, Empathy, and Prosocial Behavior in Eastern and Western Countries: A Meta-Analytic Review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 151-173.

Lee, Annisa Lai. (2010). Who Are the Opinion Leaders? The Physicians, Pharmacists, Patients, and Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Advertising. Journal of Health Communication, 15, 629-655.

Martins, Nicole, Williams, Dmitri, Harrison, Kristen, & Ratan, Rabindra A. (2009). A Content Analysis of Female Body Image. Sex Roles, 61(11-12), 824-836.

White, Candace, & Kinnick, Katherine N. (2000). One Click Forward and Two Clicks Back: Portrayal of Women Using Computers in Television Commercials. Women’s Studies in Communication, 23(3), 392-412.

INTERPERSONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATION

Week 7 (Oct. 7): Introduction to Interpersonal and Organizational Communication

Rollins, Boyd C., & Bahr, Stephen J. (1976). A Theory of Power Relationships in Marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38(4), 619-627.

Gottman, John M. (1998). Psychology and the Study of Marital Processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 169-197.

Schrodt, Paul. (2009). Family Strength and Satisfaction as Functions of Family Communication Environments. Communication Quarterly, 57(2), 171-186.

Hendrickson, Blake, and Ryan Goei. “Reciprocity and Dating: Explaining the Effects of Favor and Status on Compliance with a Date Request.” Communication Research 36.4 (2009): 585-608.

Kirby, Erika L., & Krone, Kathleen J. (2002). “The Policy Exists But You Can’t Really Use It”: Communication and the Structuration of Work-Family Policies. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 30(1), 50-77.

Chesebro, J., & Martin, M. (2010). Message Framing in the Classroom: The Relationship Between Message Frames and Student Perceptions of Instructor Power. Communication Research Reports, 27(2), 159-170.

Krusiewicz, Erin S., & Wood, Julia T. (2001). ‘He Was Our Child From The Moment We Walked In That Room’: Entrance Stories of Adoptive Parents. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18(6), 785-803.

Ellis C and Rawicki J. (2013) Collaborative Witnessing of Survival During the Holocaust: An Exemplar of Relational Autoethnography. Qualitative Inquiry 19: 366-380.

Patti, Chris J. (2012). Split Shadows: Myths of a Lost Father and Son. Qualitative Inquiry, 18(2), 153-161.

Week 8 (Oct. 14): Mid-Semester Break

Week 9 (Oct. 21): Experimental Design and Interpersonal Communication Theories

Bui, Khanh-Van T., & Hill, Charles T. (1996). Testing the Rusbult Model of Relationship Commitment and Stability in a 15-Year Study of Hterosexual Couples. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(12), 1244-1257.

Dunbar, Norah E., and Judee K. Burgoon. “Perceptions of Power and Interactional Dominance in Interpersonal Relationships.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 22.2 (2005): 207-33.

Guerrero, Laura K. (2005). Differences in Conversational Skills as a Function of Attachment Style: A Follow-up Study. Communication Quarterly, 53(3), 305-321.

Knobloch, Leanne K. (2005). Evaluating a Contextual Model of Responses to Relational Uncertainty Increasing Events: The Role of Intimacy, Appraisals, and Emotions. Human Communication Research, 31(1), 60-101.

Floyd, Kory. “All Touches Are Not Created Equal: Effects of Form and Duration on Observers’ Interpretations of an Embrace.” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 23.4 (1999): 283-99.

Hanna Edwards, Ashley A. “Co-Rumination with a Friend About a Romantic Relationship: Perceptions of Satisfaction and Inequity.” Iowa Journal of Communication 46.1 (2014): 1-23.

Young, Stacy L., & Bippus, Amy M. (2001). Does It Make a Difference if They Hurt You in a Funny Way? Humorously and Non-Humorously Phrased Hurtful Messages in Personal Relationships. Communication Quarterly, 49(1), 35-52.

Le Poire, Beth A., Hallett, Jennifer S., & Erlandson, Karen T. (2000). An Initial Test of Inconsistent Nurturing as Control Theory: How Partners of Drug Abusers Assist Their Partners’ Sobriety. Human Communication Research, 26(3), 432-457.

Week 10 (Oct. 28): Conversation Analysis, Grounded Theory, and Mixed Methodologies

Robinson, Jeffrey D. (1998). Getting Down to Business: Talk, Gaze, and Body Orientation During Openings of Doctor-Patient Consultations. Human Communication Research, 25(1), 97-123.

Dunbar, Norah E., & Mejia, Robert (2012). A Qualitative Analysis of Power-Based Entrainment and Interactional Synchrony in Couples. Personal Relationships, 1-16.

Wood, Julia T. (2004). Monsters and Victims: Male felons’ accounts of intimate partner violence. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21(5), 555-576.

Lyon, Alexander & Mirivel, Julien. (2011). Reconstructing Merck’s Practical Theory of Communication: The Ethics of Pharmaceutical Sales Representative-Physician Encounters. Communication Monographs, 78, 53-72.

Walden, Justin. (2013). A Medical Profession in Transition: Exploring Naturopathic Physician Blogging Behaviors. Health Communication, 28(3), 237-247.

Denzin, Norman K. (2012). Triangulation 2.0. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 80-88.

Mitra, Rahul. (2013). The Neo-Capitalist Firm in Emerging India: Organization-State-Media Linkages. Journal of Business Communication, 50(1), 3-33.

Week 11 (Nov. 4): Ethnography and Performance Studies

Goffman, Erving. (1989). On Fieldwork. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 18(2), 123-132.

Wolcott, Harry F. (2002). Ethnography? Or Educational Travel Writing? In Y. Zou & E. T. Trueba (Eds.), Ethnography and Schools: Qualitative Approaches to the Study of Education (pp. 27-48). Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield.

Conquergood, Dwight. (1988). Health Theatre in a Hmong Refugee Camp: Performance, Communication, and Culture. The Drama Review, 32(3), 174-208.

Fox, Ragan. “”You Are Not Allowed to Talk About Production”: Narratization on (and Off) the Set of CBS Big Brother.” Critical Studies in Media Communication 30, no. 3 (2013): 189-208.

Alexander, Bryant K. (1999). Performing Culture in the Classroom: An Instructional (Auto)Ethnography. Text and Performance Quarterly, 19(4), 307-331.

Warren, John T. (2001). Doing Whiteness: On the Performative Dimensions of Race in the Classroom. Communication Education, 50(2), 91-108.

Johnson, Julia R., Rich, Marc D., & Cargile, Aaron C. (2008). “Why Are You Shoving This Stuff Down Our Throats?”: Preparing Intercultural Educators to Challenge Performances of White Racism. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 1(2), 113-135.

RHETORICAL CRITICISM

Week 12 (Nov. 11): Introduction to Rhetorical Criticism

Bitzer, Lloyd F.. (2005). The Rhetorical Situation. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 58-67). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Black, Edwin. (2005). The Second Persona. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 87-96). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Hill, Forbes. (2005). Conventional Wisdom—Traditional Form—The President’s Message of November 3, 1969. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 138-150). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Browne, Stephen H. (2005). “The Circle of Our Felicities”: Thomas Jefferson’s First Inaugural Address and the Rhetoric of Nationhood. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 163-186). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Lucas, Stephen E. (2005). The Stylistic Aristry of the Declaration of Independence. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 569-584). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Thorpe, Elizabeth. (2013). “Under God”: An Epideictic Weapon in the Fight Against Communism. In M. Ballif (Ed.). Re/Framing Identifications (pp. 1-22). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

Campbell, Karlyn K. & Jamieson, Kathleen H. (2005). Form and Genre in Rhetorical Criticism: An Introduction. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 400-417). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Ware, B. L. & Linkugel, W. A. (2005). They Spoke in Defense of Themselves: On the Generic Criticism of Apologia. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 417-428). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Week 13 (Nov. 18): Dramatistic, Narrative, and Metaphoric Criticism

Burke, Kenneth. (2005). The Rhetoric of Hitler’s Battle. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 188-202). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Tonn, Mari B., Endress, Valerie A., & Diamond, John N. (2005). Hunting and Heritage on Trial: A Dramatistic Debate Over Tragedy, Tradition, and Territory. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 203-219). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Prelli, Lawrence J., Anderson, F.D., & Althouse, M.T. (2011) Kenneth Burke on Recalcitrance. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 41(2), 97-124.

Fisher, Walter R. (2005). Narration as a Human Communication Paradigm: The Case of Public Moral Argument. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 240-262). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Lewis, William F. (2005). Telling America’s Story: Narrative Form and the Reagan Presidency. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 262-285). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Osborn, Michael. (2005). Archetypal Metaphor in Rhetoric: The Light-Dark Family. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 306-317). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Ivie, Robert L. (2005). Metaphor and the Rhetorical Invention of Cold War “Idealists.” In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 317-334). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Week 14 (Nov. 25): Social Movements, Ideographs, and Critical Rhetoric

Wander, Philip. (2005). The Ideological Turn in Modern Criticism. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 96-114). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

McGee, Michael C. (2005). The ‘Ideograph’: A Link between Rhetoric and Ideology. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 452-466). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Cloud, Dana. (2005). Hegemony or Concordance? The Rhetoric of Tokenism in ‘Oprah’ Winfrey’s Rags-to-Riches Biography. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 542-561). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Morris III, Charles E. (2005). Pink Herring & The Fourth Persona: J. Edgar Hoover’s Sex Crime Panic. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 664-682). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

McKerrow, Raymie E.. (2005). Critical Rhetoric: Theory and Praxis. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 114-136). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Nakayama, Thomas K., & Krizek, Robert L. (2005). Whiteness: A Strategic Rhetoric. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 628-647). State College, PA: Strata Publishing

Simons, Herbert W. (2005). Requirements, Problems, and Strategies: A Theory of Persuasion for Social Movements. In C. R. Burgchardt (Ed.), Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 366-376). State College, PA: Strata Publishing.

Kowal, Donna. (2000). One Cause, Two Paths: Militant vs. Adjustive Strategies in the British and American Women’s Suffrage Movements. Communication Quarterly, 48(3), 240-255.

Brasted, M. (2012) MoveOn: The Rhetoric of Polarization. Relevant Rhetoric, 3, 1-27.

Week 15 (Dec. 2): Presentations

Week 16: Finals Week

* Any changes to this syllabus, if necessary, will be discussed during class*

Professional (10 points)Competent (8 points)Marginal (6 points)Unacceptable (0 points)

Presentation

OrganizationInformation presented in a logical sequence which reader can follow. Organization allows for immediate access to specific information without reading entire document. Information presented in a logical sequence which reader can follow. Occasionally difficult to access specific information without reading large portions of the document.Reader has difficulty understanding information because of interruptions in logical sequence.Reader cannot understand information because there is no sequence of information.

Pizzazz

Document is highly marketable. A publisher would recommend its use with no changes. Excellent balance of visual and written tools.Document is acceptable. A few changes may be suggested but the document looks inviting to look at. Document would require serious editing before production. It lacks pizzazz

Document could not be used in its present form

SpellingNo spelling errorsMinimal spelling errors which do little to distract readerModerate spelling errors which distract readerNumerous spelling errors which create a barrier to the reader

———-

Added on 04.12.2014 05:56

The assignment and rubric are attached. please look at rubric for directions, not essay format it is an assignment

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂