1. Agenda, Wednesday Oct. 30
Main Objective: Outline a Practice Rhetorical Analysis
Group Work – continued (10 mins)
Discussion
Practice Rhetorical Analysis
Closing
HW: Turn bullet points into a Shitty First Draft in your
notebook. We will exchange and discuss these in class
tomorrow.

2. Round One:
If you were to make a claim about the overall
effectiveness of the Seattle Times argument, what would
it be?
What reasons would you give?
What evidence would you give for those reasons?
What suggestions would you give for improving this
argument?

3. Round Two:
What are the strengths of this essay?
What evidence (examples) can you give?
What are the weaknesses of this essay?
What evidence (examples) can you give? (Remember, in
this case evidence could also mean the absence of
something).

4. Round Three:
What evidence do you see of the author’s use of pathos?
(trying to evoke emotion in readers in order to convince
them)?
Does the author use pathos effectively, or does he go
overboard/underboard with it?
What evidence do you see of the author’s use of logos
(using hard, cold facts, figures and statistics, and/or
logically reasoning)?
Does the author use logos effectively, or does he go
underboard/overboard with it?
What evidence do you see of the author’s use of ethos
(convincing through his own credibility. This could be
referring to his own background as a subject matter
expert, or pointing out all the evidence he has
researched/gathered to make his point)?
Does the author use ethos effectively, or does he go
overboard/underboard with it?

5. Conclusion: Revisit your claim about the overall
effectiveness of the argument. Now can you make it
more nuanced and specific?