Good work with the rhetorical strategies assignments and CARS quiz. I

1

• Good work with the rhetorical strategies
  assignments and CARS quiz. Ill hand them back on
  Tuesday.
• Youve done some challenging genre-bending, or
  remixing.
• For some light relief http//rhetoric.pbwiki.com/
  RemixWritingLiteracy
• Genre bending is one of the first things many
  film school students do. You learn the
  strategies, the moves that go into different
  genres. Machinina is big right now.
• I just happen to be teaching a course that
  examines such texts (aka your daily dose of
  blatant self promotion) RWS 511http//rhetoric.
  sdsu.edu/minor/flyer_08.gif

2
Paper 4 review

• PART 1 introduction- select a topic from one of
  the major issues studied in class, and establish
  its significance- orient readers to the topic
  and indicate how the paper will proceed
  (metadiscourse)
• PART 2 - review and analysis of conversation-
  describe how others have talked about this
  topic/problem by providing accounts for 2 or 3
  texts that adopt contrasting yet representative
  accounts of it- describe and evaluate
  rhetorical strategies used (if relevant more
  general analysis, or establishing the existence
  of a gap, shortcoming, limitation, etc. are also
  OK).
• PART 3 Your argument and conclusion- present an
  argument that joins the conversation by
  clarifying, illustrating, extending or
  complicating existing views as represented by the
  2 or 3 texts you review and then present and
  support your argument (research)- draw from
  your review of research and from your own
  argument and comment in your conclusion about
  what your research suggests and what should
  happen/change from your research

3
Notes on assignment

• You may have done quite a bit of this work in
  paper 2 discussed one of Moores claims, and
  how other texts relate to this. You may be able
  to extend this - evaluate texts and add to the
  conversation refine, extend, support, clarify,
  complicate or fill in the gap.
• You contribution can be modest you dont have
  to solve the health care issue. You dont have to
  say something completely original, just represent
  some aspect of the conversation, do some analysis
  of it, and add your voice (supported where
  possible by some research)
• Anyone already have some ideas for assignment
  topics?

4
Homework for Tuesday

• Homework for Tuesday write an outline for your
  paper and post to the Blackboard discussion board.

5
A few paper ideas

• Focus on solutionsFew people disagree with
  Moore's argument that there are significant
  problems with our current system. However, a
  number disagree with his proposed solution. You
  could decide to focus on solutions. So, describe
  2 or 3 of the main alternative solutions authors
  have proposed. Do some analysis and evaluation -
  create a niche for your work. Then, present an
  argument that adds something to this
  conversation.
• Example some people basically argue we should
  keep the existing system, but try to find ways of
  expanding coverage. Others want to look to an
  overseas model (some suggest Japan, Germany,
  Taiwan, etc - the Frontline documentary explores
  this). Some suggest "Medicare for all" (Hacker
  describes it as "the not-so-secret weapon in the
  campaign for affordable health care for all").
  You could evaluate these, describe the solution
  you prefer, and argue for it. You contribution
  might be to extend one of these solutions, locate
  additional evidence/research to support it, add
  to it, etc.
• See also http//www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/s
  ickaroundtheworld/themes/lessons.html

6
More paper ideas

• What criteria should we use to assess health care
  systems? Moore focuses on life expectancy,
  infant mortality, WHO rankings and general harm
  in the form of things like bankruptcy, lack of
  access, and humiliation. Supporters of the
  current system focus on other criteria things
  like the absence of waiting lists, survival rates
  of cancer and other diseases, and technological
  innovation. You could contribute to this
  discussion what criteria do you think are most
  important? How should we measure the health of a
  society? How should we rank equity, access,
  choice, etc.?  Is the ranking of 37th for the
  U.S. realistic, and if not, what would make a
  better measure? Should we define health care as a
  human right, and if we do, how should we build
  this principle into our health care system? (see
  Frontline documentary wealthy and healthy pay
  more in other rich democracies).

7
More paper ideas

• What versions of universal health care that exist
  in other countries might be useful models for the
  U.S. given our current situation, our culture,
  history, etc.? Moore says England, France and
  Canada. Gawande and Sick Around the World suggest
  other comparisons. Which do you think is best?
• You can use Sick Around the World as a text
• http//www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaround
  theworld/
• http//www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaround
  theworld/talk/ See the discussion section note
  how many contributors make the moves we have
  talked about they mention things left out of
  the documentary, evidence that could be added,
  how it could be extended, etc.

8

• Are aspects of health care being left out of the
  current debate? E.g., are there wider public
  health issues that are ignored? Could we change
  aspects of our environment, health education, or
  social conditions and achieve better outcomes?
• Example England stresses public health and
  prevention (spends little). Japan has best
  outcomes in world, and spends half what we do -
  yet perhaps more due to diet and lifestyle?

9

• The presidential health care plans These lend
  themselves pretty nicely to the assignment. Easy
  to introduce the topic, make a centrality claim,
  and summarize the main features of each plan (or
  candidates statements on some aspect of the
  issue.) You can then discuss some strengths and
  weaknesses, and use the texts we've read over the
  semester toaddress some aspect of the plan you
  prefer - say by adding to it, extending it,
  refining it, filling in a gap, etc.
• The presidential plans and other links are all on
  Blackboard.
• VERY HELPFUL Sick round the world PBS links
  http//www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaround
  theworld/etc/links.html
• Additional assignment ideas are on Blackboard.

10
Criteria for analyzing arguments

• Rhetoric is centrally concerned with the
  production, interpretation analysis and
  evaluation of argument. Since Aristotle,
  countless books have written on the subject.
• There are many criteria for evaluation. The
  handout lists some common ones (theres a larger
  file on Blackboard that lists more).
• Here are a few

11
Elements of argument their analysis/evaluation

• Evidence
• Appeals (logos, ethos, pathos)
• Acknowledge refute opposition
• Chains of reasoning (GASCAP)
• Assumptions and implications
• Vulnerability to counterexamples and
  counterarguments
• Nuance (qualifications/authors use of
  distinctions? Think of Moore and UHC)
• Audience and context of debate

12
Evidence

• Evidence/Support for ClaimConsists of evidence,
  examples, experience, data, quotations, reports,
  testimony, statistics etc. that underwrite the
  claim.
• Evaluation Evidence is strong contains
  sufficient amounts of evidence from statistical,
  textual, an authority, or from experiential
  realms to support claim. In each case, there are
  criteria that determine whether the evidence is
  strong. E.g. authority is reliable and relevant
  the experience is reasonably typical and
  relevant. The statistics are reliable,
  applicable, relevant, well researched, involve
  controls, etc. In general, the evidence is
  detailed enough, up to date, and verifiable (this
  includes using proper citation). The evidence is
  strong in terms of its relevance, sufficiency,
  typicality, scope, consistency, quality and 'fit'
  with the claim.

13
STAR criteria for evaluating evidence

• STAR criteria useful rule of thumb for
  evaluating evidence stands for sufficiency,
  typicality, accuracy and relevance.

14
Evidence Sufficiency

• Sufficiency there should be enough evidence to
  support the claim(s). The amount of evidence
  required depends on context, audience, genre,
  etc., plus the nature of your claims.
• The stronger the claim (in terms of scope,
  generality, etc.) the more evidence often
  required. Extraordinary claims require
  extraordinary evidence.
• An audience likely to disagree with your position
  may need more evidence than one that agrees with
  you.
• Why would an author arguing for the validity of
  alien abduction stories require more evidence
  than one arguing against their validity? (also -
  burden of proof)
• NOTE few critics go after Moore on this ground

15
Evidence Typicality

• Typicality evidence should be representative
  not selected merely to fit a narrow
  interpretation. The examples, expert opinions
  etc. you include should be typical rather than
  cherry picked. In statistics, we expect a
  random sample (e.g. select evidence of U.S.
  educational quality from Jaywalking episodes -
  or Nobel prizes - or UN stats).
• If you argue against global warming, you
  shouldnt just select evidence from sources or
  year ranges that support your view, or quote only
  authorities from the Discovery Institute.
• Critics of Moore question the typicality of the
  evidence he selects they claim it is not
  representative (cherry picks data, and leaves out
  important information). Ignani claims he relies
  on anecdotes, i.e. evidence that is not
  representative.

16
Evidence Accuracy

• Accuracy evidence is stronger if it is
  accurate, up-to-date, carefully selected,
  properly documented, draws on recognized
  authorities, etc.
• Faith in the accuracy of a writers data is one
  function of ethos.
• Accuracy is something critics of Moore focus on.
  E.g. Ignani charges that he presents scandals
  from the past that have been corrected (Dr Pino).

17
Evidence Relevance

• Relevance evidence should be pertinent to the
  argument being made. There should be a close
  fit between the argument and the evidence
  provided, a strong connection between the
  evidence and what it is offered to prove. If you
  cite an authority for support, that authority
  should be relevant (Michael Crichton on global
  warming?)
• On this ground we might question Ignanis use of
  poll data showing that 87 of Americans are
  satisfied with the quality of their healthcare.

18
Analysis as a way of finding a gap and entering
the conversation

• If you can find weaknesses in one of these
  aspects of the evidence presented, this may be a
  clue that there is some shortcoming in an
  authors argument some gap, limitation or flaw.
  
• Pointing this out may complicate the argument,
  and point to a possible extension or revision of
  the argument.
• Locating such a weakness may provide a space for
  you to enter the conversation to make a
  contribution.

19
Youre a STAR baby

• Although mainly used to talk about evidence, the
  STAR criteria can be applied to other aspects of
  argument.
• For example, we can consider STAR in appeals to
  authority, and claims based on analogy

20
Authority

• Do we have a sufficient number of authoritative
  sources, who are representative (typical),
  accurately cited with relevant knowledge
  (relevant to the issue, context and audience)?
• To what degree does an authority exhibit logos,
  pathos and ethos (good sense, good character and
  good will)?

21
Analogy

• Extrapolating from one situation or event based
  on the nature and outcome of a similar situation
  or event. An argument based on parallels between
  two cases or situations. Arguing from a specific
  case or example to another example, reasoning
  that because the two examples are alike in many
  ways they are also alike in one further specific
  way. Has links to 'case-based' and
  precedent-based reasoning used in legal
  discourse.
• Moore argues by analogy when he shows us
  developed democracies and their systems of health
  care. He suggests that if they can achieve UHC,
  then so can we, and that the same levels of
  efficiency, coverage and fairness can be
  achieved.
• Moore also uses an analogy when he shows all the
  socialized services we currently enjoy schools,
  police, libraries, firemen, etc. He suggests that
  socialized health care would be similar to other
  socialized systems we currently use and value.

22
Examples of argument by analogy

• Gay marriage. Supporters use the analogy of equal
  rights for African Americans (and the injustice
  of anti-miscegenation laws). Opponents use the
  analogy of polygamy.
• Gun control and analogies with Japan/Switzerland.
• Iraq Threat posed by Hussein analogous to
  Hitler, or other annoying dictators like
  Ghadaffi, Nasser, Khomeini, who were successfully
  contained?
• War on terror analogous to the cold war
  (containment international alliances), a
  problem to be combated primarily via police/crime
  framework, or something entirely new, more
  dangerous, requiring pre-emption.
• Occupation of Iraq will be analogous to a)
  quagmires such as Vietnam/Algeria, or postwar
  Germany/Japan/Yugoslavia?

23
Evaluation

• Evaluation what is important here is the extent
  to which relevant similarities can be established
  between 2 contexts. Are there sufficient,
  typical, accurate, relevant similarities?
• If the analogy is based on similarities between
  two examples, we need to consider whether
  counterexamples exist. How strong is the claim?
  (The stronger the claim, the tighter the analogy
  must be). Are there counter-analogies that
  refute the original argument from analogy? Are
  there differences between the two situations that
  undermine the force of the similarity cited? How
  willing is the audience likely to be in accepting
  that the two different examples/cases/situations
  you present are really similar?

24
Analogy

• Some critics question the analogy Moore draws
  between countries with UHC shown in Sicko, and a
  system of UHC that will work in the U.S. They
  argue that England, Canada and France have forms
  of UHC that are very different from the current
  situation in the U.S., and would be hard to
  implement. They suggest its better to make
  analogies with countries such as Switzerland,
  Israel and Denmark.
• Other critics suggest Moore should use Medicare
  as the model, since a) people are already
  familiar with it, and b) its less exotic and
  foreign.

25
Sample analysis

• Mair charges that Moore ignores problems with the
  NHS. In particular, he ought to have considered
  evidence presented in stories in 2005 about the
  prevalence of antibiotic-resistant MRSA
  infections being spread throughout the National
  Health Service due to poor hygiene in NHS
  hospitals, and which in 2005 were blamed for 20
  percent of the 5,000 deaths occurring each year
  in British hospitals. Or maybe even one 2006
  story from a Glasgow newspaper that indicated
  that despite the supposed wonders of the NHS,
  average life expectancy in one part of the city
  was just 53 years. (http//www.sciam.com/articl
  e.cfm?idhospitals-and-superbugs)
• Mair writes that Moores account of the English
  health care system ignores problems in the NHS. A
  prime example is that in September 2006 more
  than 6,000 patients in eastern England had to
  wait more than 20 weeks to begin treatment
  already prescribed by their doctors.

26
Sample analysis

• Karen Ignagni, spokesperson for insurance
  companies, argues that Moores movie is flawed.
  Here are some of her main criticisms
• To make his case, he relies on one-sided
  anecdotes some dating back to the 1980s that
  grossly distort the role of health insurance
  plans in providing access to care to more than
  200 million people.
• To counter Moores claims, Ignani cites a survey
  that reports 87 of insured respondents said
  their coverage gives them access to good medical
  care at an affordable cost.
• Ignani states that Moore wants a total
  government takeover of health care, and that
  this would inevitably lead to rationed care,
  long waits for care, underpaid doctors and
  delayed adoption of new technologies.
• She writes, That's not to pretend that any part
  of the system is flawless. In every doctor's
  office, hospital and health plan, things
  sometimes go wrong. Yet our system of coverage
  and care leads the world in many important
  quality measures, including survival rates after
  diagnosis and treatment of a wide range of
  life-threatening conditions.

27
Why We Fight! (for you to write, argue and
analyze well)

• The ability to interpret arguments, locate claims
  and evidence, analyze moves and strategies, and
  evaluate arguments are crucial skills.
• They are central to business, law, professional
  life, and to academic study (including graduate
  school).
• You will be tested for these skills in the WPA,
  the LSAT, GMAT, and GRE all the gateways to
  professional life.
• Consider the GRE

28
Skills Measured in General TestAnalytical
Writing Section

• Articulate complex ideas clearly and effectively
• Examine claims and accompanying evidence
• Support ideas with relevant reasons and examples
• Sustain a well-focused, coherent discussion
• Control the elements of standard written English

29
Analytical Writing Tasks

• Present Your Views on an Issue (45 minutes,
  choice of 2 topics)
• Analyze an Argument (30 minutes)
• Each essay is scored on a 0-6 scale using
  holistic scoring
• Two scores for each essay
• GRE Website presents directions, actual topics,
  scoring guide, and sample essays for both the
  Issue and Argument tasks (www.gre.org/gentest.html
  )

30
Research Tips

• There is no one way to find things, no one tool
  or methodology that will work consistently.
• Instead, there are a set of tools and resources
  that you will need to adapt to your task, and
  which work well, or less well, depending on the
  topic/your discipline.
• Example http//infoguides.sdsu.edu/ GOOD place
  to start.
• Works well for some disciplines, not so well for
  others. Compare entries for rhetoric and writing
  studies, http//infoguides.sdsu.edu/sub.php?id112
  and biology, http//infoguides.sdsu.edu/sub.php?i
  d11
• Best place to start? Leave the matrix and go
  visit the brick and mortar library. Talk to a
  research librarian. Have them guide you through a
  key word search show you slick librarian tricks

31

• Another good place to start? Talk to your
  professor. Ask her what some of the key journals
  or databases are in your discipline. Ask her if
  she knows any journals or academic publications
  that are particularly good for undergraduates
• Nicoles sample
• The Journal of Nutrition
• Journal Of Nutrition Education Behavior
• Nutrition Business Journal
• Nutrition Food Science
• The extra credit exercise is still available

32

• You still want to take the red pill?
• Online research is an important skill but its
  tricky you can end up down a rabbit hole.

33

• Often, typing keywords into one of the major
  databases (e.g. Ebscohost) doesnt help much
  e.g. rhetoric and linguistics
• It can be more useful to search books, google
  scholar, or journals, and to try the search from
  several different angles.
• Well practice some in class today.
• http//rhetoric.pbwiki.com/research-tools-page