DCA Peer Review Prompt PDF

Preview

Summary

Peer review given on DCA essay...

Description

Discourse Community Analysis Peer Review Prompt English 1301: Rhetoric and Composition I

Introduction Early in the paper, the writer should incorporate what “they say” by situating his/her argument as a response to the conversation we’ve had in class about rhetoric, the rhetorical situation, and rhetorical reading and writing. He/she should also provide a clear statement of his/her claim and reasons. Finally, the writer should make it clear why we should care about what he/she has to say by answering the “Who cares?” and “So what?” questions. Are all these elements clear to you? If so, prove it by repeating these elements back to the writer (feel free to quote the writer directly in your response). If not, describe what is missing and suggest some options for how the writer might go about satisfying these elements of the assignment.  The writer appropriately responds to ‘who cares’ by saying “since we are all enrolled in (and ostensibly a participating member of) ENGL 1301, by the time the course concludes that will be one discourse community common to us all” and ‘so what’ by saying “By identifying the elements of the fine-arts discourse community I hope to demonstrate that the steps to joining discourse communities of any kind are similar”. His claim is clear in saying “I claim that the fine-arts community also fits the definition of a discourse community and that I am a participating member of that community.”. The introduction is pretty solid.

Evidence The writer should provide sufficient evidence (in the form of specific examples and significant anecdotes) to persuade us that he/she learned to make successful ethos, logos, and pathos appeals to other members of the chosen discourse community. Does the writer provide sufficient evidence that he/she learned to make successful ethos appeals? If so, describe that evidence and explain why it is persuasive. If not, explain why the writer’s evidence is insufficient and describe the type of evidence he/she needs to provide in order to fully support the reason. Repeat this process for logos and pathos appeals.  When having abbreviations, I would put a parenthesis that explains what those stand for.

For the Ethos section, I see how the writer earned credibility through a bachelor degree and extensive training. If the writer could provide an example where he earned credibility or trust from people who visited the museum, it would be more solid. ‘Logos’ part is excellent that the writer says “Broad fine arts experience has made me proficient in the specific terminology” and gives details. He has a level of proficiency that enables him to explain the idea of fine-arts to the general public. Pathos part is sufficient by stating how other famous artists are bridging the gap between fine arts and pop culture by making them more public to people and how he pursue the same interest. However, I personally do not see what values/emotions the writer holds or motivate him participate in the discourse community continuously. If you could expand it more, it would be easier for readers to understand.

Counterarguments At some point the writer should answer a skeptical reader who questions whether the writer’s accomplishments really qualify him/her as a full-fledged member of the chosen discourse community. Does the writer respond adequately to such a reader? If so, summarize the writer’s response and explain why it is effective. If not, explain what is lacking and suggest how the writer might go about answering a skeptic more effectively.  The writer introduces a counterargument “Some may say that by pursuing an engineering degree I have set aside my fine-arts credentials.” and rebuttal by saying “My belief is that the engineering discourse community is one more community that can be used broaden the scope of the fine-arts discourse community.”. He can solidify his claim by setting the common ground with the skeptical views and providing an example explaining how his engineering community can be used to broaden the scope of fine-arts or vice versa.

Overall, the paper addresses most of the elements in the rubric, but the writer needs to expand his ideas and give lively example in the sections of Pathos and counterarguments....