Analyze the (potential) future of rhetoric in our electronic age.

Description

Compose an original research paper (five to seven pages) on the following topic: Analyze the (potential) future of rhetoric in our electronic age. Look at major theorists and movements, and how they have expanded our current understanding of rhetoric. You might take a closer look at concepts such as deconstruction or the rhetoric of display insofar as they influence our post-modern discourse and political process. You might note how rhetoric has substantially changed from the classical age, and incorporate a discussion of Cicero’s model as it has been adapted to digital methods of delivery. To support your observations, you must include at least four references. You may use the required texts for the course, the supplemental articles and speeches, or any other source that supports your analysis. Textbook utilized in course is The History and Theory of Rhetoric: An Introduction by: James A. Herrick; 6th Edition For further understanding of contemporary rhetorical theory, and to help prepare for the final paper, you might review the supplemental reading assignments and speeches, to include the following: Digital Rhetoric: Toward an Integrated Theory  (Links to an external site.)  Zappen, J. P. (2005) from the Technical Communication Quarterly (Hunt Library) Recovering Delivery for Digital Rhetoric and Human-Computer Interaction  (Links to an external site.)  Porter, J.E. (2008) from Science Direct (Hunt Library) Digital rhetoric: Theory, method, practice,  (Links to an external site.)  (Ch. 2). Eyeman, D. (2015) from ProQuest through the Hunt Library The fate of rhetoric in an electronic age.  (Links to an external site.)  Enculturation, 1(1). Brooke, C. G. (1997, Spring). Paper shall include all of the following elements (not required toward 5 to 7 pages of body text). Title page (name, date, course title/section and instructor’s name, and paper title). Abstract Page numbers properly formatted parenthetical references and “references” list paper shall follow standard APA guidelines, including font style, size, spacing, and margins, for research and documentation. I have a paper from my midterm that is already properly formatted and has title page and everything that I can send from the same class. ENGL 143 M9 Final Speculative Analysis Paper Rubric ENGL 143 M9 Final Speculative Analysis Paper Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Introduction (5%) Provides context; includes thesis and provides a clear scope 5.0 pts Proficient (4-5 Points) – Clearly provides all necessary information and sets expectations 3.0 pts Satisfactory (2-3 Points) – Minor lack or excess of information; minor lack of clarity 1.0 pts Poor (0-1 Points) – Confusing, vague or lacking 5.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Body Structure (5%) Paragraphs focus on one major idea each; transitions clearly show relationships among ideas 5.0 pts Proficient (4-5 Points) – Paragraphs consistently meet expectations; transitions very clear 3.0 pts Satisfactory (2-3 Points) – 1-3 lapses in paragraphs; 1-3 problems with transitions 1.0 pts Poor (0-1 Points) – So many lapses in paragraphs or problems with transitions that comprehension is difficult 5.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Conclusion (5%) Decisively ends paper, provides reflection as the future of rhetoric in our electronic age 5.0 pts Proficient (4-5 Points) – Ends paper with powerful impact; creates a fully satisfying sense of completion 3.0 pts Satisfactory (2-3 Points) – Ending works, but may be weak or does not create a good sense of completion 1.0 pts Poor (0-1 Points) – Weak, confusing or missing ending 5.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Content (30%) Paper provides a clear outline of the evolution of rhetoric and its influence on our post-modern discourse; speculates as to the future of rhetoric in our electronic age; adequately addresses the topic; source texts are referenced as required 30.0 pts Proficient (25-30 Points) – Paper thoroughly discusses rhetoric’s evolution and its influence; provides a thought-provoking speculation as to the future of rhetoric; supports analysis with references to concepts discussed in source texts; demonstrates a solid understanding of the assignment 24.0 pts Satisfactory (18-24 Points) – Paper adequately responds to the topic; length is adequate to address the topic; there is a reference to concepts discussed in source texts 17.0 pts Poor (0-17 Points) – Paper does not respond effectively to the topic; length is insufficient to adequately address the topic; reference to concepts discussed in source texts missing or incomplete 30.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Vocabulary (10%) Appropriate; avoids jargon, slang, and overly emotionally charged words 10.0 pts Proficient (9-10 Points) – Skillful word choice that is precise, purposeful and appropriate in formality 8.0 pts Satisfactory (7-8 Points) – Relatively few minor errors 6.0 pts Poor (0-6 Points) – So many errors that writing is difficult to comprehend or offensive or irrelevant 10.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Writing Style (10%) Variety of sentence constructions, appropriate brevity, use of parallelism, poetic effects (such as metaphor, simile, alliteration) 10.0 pts Proficient (9-10 Points) – Pleasing variety of sentence constructions; always effective and appropriate brevity, use of parallelism and/or poetic effects 8.0 pts Satisfactory (7-8 Points) – Relatively few minor errors 6.0 pts Poor (0-6 Points) – Errors detract significantly from comprehension or create significant distractions 10.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Grammar (10%) Fragments, run-ons, tense, voice, agreement, spelling, punctuation 10.0 pts Proficient (9-10 Points) – Few to no errors (1% or less of assignment word total) 8.0 pts Satisfactory (7-8 Points) – Some errors (less than 5% of word total) 6.0 pts Poor (0-6 Points) – Errors detract significantly from comprehension 10.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Sources – Number, Quality and Variety (10%) Sufficient (at least five), credible, unbiased sources show an in-depth exploration/points of view; draws on the course texts as primary sources 10.0 pts Proficient (9-10 Points) – Significantly more than the minimum required; clearly credible and unbiased; effort beyond expectations; use of primary and secondary sources 8.0 pts Satisfactory (7-8 Points) – At least the minimum required; most are credible and unbiased; effort made to ensure quality and depth 6.0 pts Poor (0-6 Points) – Less than the minimum required; most sources lack quality criteria (ex: Wikipedia); no attempt to explore various points of view 10.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Sources – Integration and Citation (15%) Quoting, summarizing, and paraphrasing; in-text citations and references adhere to required style 15.0 pts Proficient (13-15 Points) – Sources interspersed with writer’s own analysis or synthesis; quotes are less than 10% of paper; 1-5 minor errors in documentation 12.0 pts Satisfactory (10-12 Points) – Sources interspersed with writer’s own work; quotes are less than 20% of paper; more than 5 minor errors in documentation 9.0 pts Poor (0-9 Points) – Sources strung together with little of the writer’s own work; quotes are 50% or more of paper; citations missing or with major errors; plagiarism 15.0 pts Total Points: 100.0