QUESTION

Rhetorical Analysis
Rhetorical Analysis
Criteria Ratings
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Effectiveness of purpose:
Excellent
Essay has a complex, insightful, effective thesis / purpose, that is sustained consistently throughout the entire essay. All elements of prompt addressed with sophistication within major claim(s).
Good
Essay contains a clear, appropriate thesis / purpose that is sustained consistently and answers the question(s) posed in the prompt.
Acceptable
Essay has a thesis / purpose, but there may be inconsistencies or unevenness among the various elements. Not all elements of prompt addressed clearly or completely in major claim(s).
Weak (In Need of Focused Improvement)
The thesis or purpose is weak or absent. The essay is more a listed compilation of rhetorical elements. Some components of prompt not addressed in major claim(s).
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeResponse to assignment:
Excellent
Each component of the essay responds to the assignment in depth, thoroughly exploring the movement assigned and the analyzing the rhetorical devices and strategies in a meaningful way. Position and argument goes beyond class conversation to bring new insight.
Good
Each component of the essay responds appropriately to the assignment, exploring the assigned movement and the rhetorical devices and strategies strongly. Position might step out beyond class conversation, but understanding of rhetorical strategies is less insightful.
Acceptable
Most components in the essay respond to the assignment. Attempt at evaluating rhetoric and its relationship to the text’s transference of meaning to an audience explored in a general way. Ideas might at times display understanding of class conversation, but not go beyond it.
Weak (In Need of Focused Improvement)
respond to the assignment appropriately and treat the issues of the movement and the rhetorical strategies behind it in a superficial, simplistic, or disjointed manner. Does not display understanding of class conversation or readings.
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSupport:
Excellent
he thesis and supportive evidence are fully and convincingly developed, supported with insightful reasons and explanations, appropriate analysis of elements, and compelling examples that are suitable for an academic audience. Research is insightful and supportive.
Good
The thesis and supportive evidence are well-developed, supported with good reasons and explanations, analysis of elements and examples that are suitable for an academic audience. Research is appropriate in scope and volume.
Acceptable
The thesis and supportive evidence are adequately developed, supported with some reasons and explanations, analysis of elements and examples, most of which are suitable for an academic audience. Research might be less insightful, appropriate, or explored.
Weak (In Need of Focused Improvement)
The thesis and supportive evidence are inadequately developed, unsupported, and elements are ignored. Examples may be unsuitable for an academic audience. Research is thin, off-topic, or merely dropped into the paper without analysis.
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization:
Excellent
Each component is well structured; its form contributes to its purpose. All elements are carefully linked and synthesized to support the thesis. There is a logic to the movement of the argument.
Good
Each component is generally well structured with only a few flaws in overall organization. All elements are linked to the thesis, but lack complete synthesis. Transitions might not be smooth.
Acceptable
Elements are adequately organized and generally linked to the thesis but lack synthesis. Might be difficult for reader to comprehend. Some repetition.
Weak (In Need of Focused Improvement)
Several components are poorly structured; organizational flaws undermine their effectiveness. Various elements may be only peripherally linked to the thesis or not linked at all.
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar and Mechanics:
Excellent
Each component is correct in terms of its syntax, grammar, spelling, punctuation, and format. Mastery over grammar and syntax with little to no flaws.
Good
Only a few errors in terms of its syntax, grammar, spelling, punctuation, and format. Still exhibits control over grammar and syntax throughout.
Acceptable
Wavering command of syntax/grammar that distract somewhat from essay’s effectiveness but does not hinder reader’s ability to decipher content. Frequent MLA mistakes.
Weak (In Need of Focused Improvement)
Sentence and speech level errors are so frequent and disruptive that they detract from the essay’s effectiveness. No attempt at MLA.

 

SOLUTION

Struggling with where to start this assignment? Follow this guide to tackle your assignment easily!

---

Step-by-Step Guide to Writing Your Rhetorical Analysis Essay

---

Step 1: Understand the Assignment

A rhetorical analysis breaks down how an author or speaker uses rhetorical strategies (ethos, pathos, logos, tone, diction, structure, etc.) to persuade or inform an audience. You’re not summarizing the content—you’re analyzing how the message is constructed and why it works or doesn’t.

---

Step 2: Develop a Sophisticated, Insightful Thesis (Effectiveness of Purpose)

• Your thesis must answer this question: What rhetorical strategies does the creator use, and how effective are they in achieving the intended purpose with the intended audience?

• Go beyond stating “the author uses ethos, pathos, and logos”—show a deeper insight like:

  “Through sharp contrasts in tone and an appeal to collective memory, the speaker not only constructs a shared emotional experience but also positions the audience as moral agents, which makes the overall argument more compelling and urgent.”

Aim for: Complex insight sustained throughout your paper.
Avoid: A generic statement with a simple list of strategies.

---

Step 3: Directly Address the Prompt in Depth (Response to Assignment)

• Identify the movement or issue you’re analyzing.

• Engage with the rhetorical situation: Who is the speaker? Who is the audience? What is the context and purpose?

• Think beyond class discussion: What original perspective can you offer?

Dig into how rhetorical tools shape meaning.
Avoid superficial comments like “it makes the argument stronger” without explaining why.

---

Step 4: Support Your Argument with Evidence and Explanation (Support)

• For each body paragraph:

  1. Introduce a rhetorical strategy or moment.

  2. Provide specific textual evidence (quote or describe the moment).

  3. Analyze how it works and why it’s effective (or not) for the speaker’s goal.

  4. Connect it back to your thesis.

Use compelling, relevant examples with deep analysis.
Don’t just drop quotes in—analyze them!

---

Step 5: Organize Logically and Effectively (Organization)

• Suggested structure:

  1. Introduction: Set up context + thesis

  2. Body Paragraphs (3–5): Each covers a key rhetorical strategy

  3. Conclusion: Reflect on overall effectiveness and audience impact

• Ensure transitions between ideas are smooth and logical.

Synthesis: Tie each point back to your central thesis.
Don’t organize as a list of strategies without clear linkage or flow.

---

Step 6: Polish Grammar, Syntax, and MLA Format (Grammar and Mechanics)

• Review grammar, punctuation, and spelling carefully.

• Use MLA formatting for in-text citations and the Works Cited page.

• Read your essay aloud to catch awkward phrasing.

Aim for clarity and correctness in academic tone.
Avoid casual language, run-ons, or incorrect citations.

---

Final Checklist Aligned with the Rubric

---

Tip: Use usability.gov for more on audience analysis and persuasive techniques, especially for analyzing public or digital rhetoric.

The post Analyzing Rhetorical Strategies: A Deep Dive into Purpose, Audience, and Persuasion appeared first on Skilled Papers.