rhetorical analysis essay peer review

Teaching Rhetorical Analysis

Main navigation.

As the first assignment in our common curriculum, the rhetorical analysis provides students with not only an entryway into the class, but an introduction to foundational concepts of rhetoric, reading, and writing that will inform their work during the quarter. Below are some considerations to keep in mind as you design the assignment.

Designing the Assignment

Some of the first questions you need to answer for yourself as you start to design the assignment have to do with how to create an assignment consistent with the  learning objectives for the Rhetorical Analysis,  and what texts -- and what types of texts -- students will analyze.  For the rhetorical analysis, it's best to have students focus on a single text rather than write a comparative analysis. Consider the following questions:

• choose texts that you know will yield interest discussion concerning rhetoric 
• limit the array of choices so that you and the students can read multiple essays on the same texts (which helps with peer review and students working through their ideas together)
• avoid having to arrive at a rhetorical understanding of 15 unique objects. 

The disadvantage of you choosing is that you limit student choice. Many instructors opt for a hybrid model: they provide a short menu of possible texts the students could write on, but also allow student choice (with instructor approval)

• Think about relationship to other assignments - how much time do you want to devote to the RA assignment? Most lecturers have a draft due at the end of week two or beginning of week three.  In this case, the goal would be for students to start working on their second assignment (the Texts in Conversation) by week 4.
• What texts/objects will you select or can a student choose among for their analysis?  What will guide your choice or should guide their choice?  A PWR Rhetorical analysis may focus on a written, visual, audio, or multimedia text.  See  samples of Rhetorical analysis assignment sheets , grouped by genre.

Presenting the Assignment to Students

Since the rhetorical analysis essay is a specific academic genre, it might be helpful to indicate some of the typical features of the genre and the role it plays in the broader field of rhetoric.

Think about how to help students see that it’s different from just writing on a short story or novel as they’ve done in English class, focused more on the “how” and “why” of what a text says than on the “what.”  They might assume that it's just like an analysis of a literary text; we need to help them see how it's different.

Think about how to help students see how rhetorical analysis informs their own drafting and revision process, particular as they develop more awareness of the interaction between audience and purpose shaping their composing process

Think about the fact that some students (but only some) have taken APLang, a class in which they are introduced to rhetorical analysis, often through an emphasis on the classical rhetorical appeals.  

Scaffolding the Assignment with Class Activities and Prewriting

You should carefully scaffold the rhetorical analysis assignment through a range of low-stakes, ungraded activities designed to help students practice and develop some of the strategies they'll use in writing their essays.  These activities should also help them understand that the writing the do for the assignment begins even before they start their first draft.

What kinds of guiding questions can students analyze their texts? If there is pre-writing, will you look at it, or will they share it with classmates? 

How will you talk about the relationship between brainstorming and prewriting exercises and planning the essay itself?

Will you give them samples of past rhetorical analyses? Will you want to discuss them in class or just make them available to students as a reference?

See some  scaffolding activities for the Rhetorical Analysis  through our class activity archive

Designing Peer Review for the Rhetorical Analysis

This is likely to be one of their first experiences with peer review at Stanford, so you may want to think about how you want them to understand and value the process. Often, students come in the door with negative or mixed experiences of peer review, so it may be a good idea to start with their experience of peer review: what worked, what didn’t, to establish group expectations.

Some students are uncertain of their ability to give helpful feedback. How can you define the reviewer role in a way that helps students see the value of their responses as readers?

How structured do you want to make their peer review (very structured with assigned roles and specific questions provided by you or less structured based on the interests of the writers and reviewers)?

Will the students read the essays outside of class or during class?  Keep in mind that many students prefer advanced preparation, since reading on the spot may disadvantage students who read more slowly and/or have learning or cognitive differences that may make reading and then responding immediately difficult.

 Do you expect them to provide written comments or oral feedback or both? 

Do you want to see any of their written comments? 

Do you want students to reflect on and report back about the feedback they received and their developing plans for revision?  

How can you signal the connection between peer review and the evaluation criteria that you’ll use for providing your own feedback on their draft? 

See further advice and activities about  designing effective peer feedback sessions  

There is no requirement in PWR 1 to have a reflection component attached to any of the assignments; however, since we recognize the value of metacognition for student growth as writers, almost all instructors have students perform a self-assessment, write a cover memo for their essay, or otherwise write a reflection as a culminating moment in completing the essay.

Reflection on their writing process may be new for students, and it may be important to make explicit to them what the value of reflection is for their growth as writers, and the role it plays (or doesn’t play) in your assessment of their work.

Given the role the rhetorical analysis plays in their development as writers, what aspects of the drafting and revising process do you want them to focus on in their reflections? 

You might consider using the RA reflection to encourage students to look forward as well as back, or to connect to their broader experience of writers in other ways.

Assessing the Assignment

The evaluation criteria that you develop for your rhetorical analysis assignment should be clear, available to the students during their drafting phase (although drafts themselves should not be graded), and should retain a focus on formative feedback as much as summative assessment.  Always make sure the evaluation criteria you develop links directly to your learning objectives for the assignment.

Think about how to create a rubric that will be in dialogue with the other assignment rubrics. Many instructors have a single rubric that they use across the different assignments that they simple gently customize with language to fit the particulars of each assignment.

Consider using the rubric to organize your feedback on drafts so that students understand the relationship between your suggestions and the evaluation criteria for the assignment.

Use caution if adopting a numerical scale which might lead you to arbitrary quantification of elements of the essay.

Will students use the rubric in peer review? How will you teach them to use the rubric to inform the feedback they give?

Look at Bean's " Using Rubrics " chapter from  Engaging Ideas  to help you design your own effective grading rubric

Chapter 3: The Writing Process, Composing, and Revising

3.6 Peer Review and Responding to Others’ Drafts

Emilie Zickel

Students tend to have a love or hate relationship to peer review. Some have had wonderful, helpful, rich histories with classmates offering feedback on their work; others have the perspective that peer review is pointless.

When it works, both giving and receiving peer feedback can be a great learning opportunity. If you look at other people’s work in progress, you undoubtedly get some ideas about how you could do something different or better in your own draft. But even if you are looking at a draft that is weaker than yours, you may learn a lot: about what writing looks like when it is not working, perhaps why it is not working, or even what specific choices or revisions that writer could make to strengthen the draft. Identifying what makes things work –  so important in the learning process – can be hard to detect in our own work.

Remember that in peer review, you don’t need to cast judgment on a classmate’s work.

You don’t need to take on the role of a “grader” or offer suggestions to fix the paper. You don’t need to correct things. Sometimes, what is more valuable is if you share your experience as a reader of the draft, explaining what felt easy and clear to you, and also where you struggled to understand what the writer was trying to accomplish. Be honest, accurate, detailed, and descriptive. Write in such a way that you offer your genuine readerly perspective to your partner, not a list of directions or directives.

Rhetorical Reading Questions for Peer Feedback

The use of rhetorical reading questions can offer feedback on the effectiveness of the text-in-progress. Ask yourself the following while reading your own or a peer’s draft:

• What is the writer’s main point? Can you see what your partner’s main point is in this draft? Is the point held consistently throughout the text, or did you get lost while reading at any point? If so, can you point out where reference to or reiteration of to the main point would have helped your reading experience?
• What information does the writer provide to support the central idea? Did you need more information to feel like the central idea was well supported? Do all paragraphs relate to the text’s central idea?
• What kind of evidence does the writer use? Is it based more on fact or opinion? Can you clearly identify where this evidence come from? Are the sources authoritative and credible?
• Is the writer working towards achieving the assignment’s purpose?  This is a question that is easiest to answer if you fully understand the assignment’s purpose. What are the goals of the assignment? What are the goals of this particular writer? Do those goals overlap?
• Describe the tone in the draft. Is it friendly? Authoritative? Does it lecture? Is it biting or sarcastic? Does the author use simple language, or is it full of jargon? Does the language feel positive or negative? Now, consider the audience for this essay. Does the tone seem appropriate for that audience?

Using “I” statements to offer feedback on others’ work

Offer observations of assignment goals met/not met

• I see your thesis at the end of your intro paragraph
• I see transition phrases at the beginning of each new paragraph
• I can see that you ___________,  which is a goal of this paper
• In your ________ paragraph I see….but I do not see….
• I do not see a Works Cited

Express your experience as a reader

• My understanding is that the thesis of this paper should _______. I did not clearly see ______ in your thesis. Instead, I see (explain).
• I was confused by this sentence (share the sentence) and I took it to mean (explain how you read that sentence).
• In paragraph ______ I thought that, based on what you said in the first sentence, the whole paragraph would discuss X. But it looks to me like at the end of the paragraph, you begin discussing Y, which felt to me like a new and different idea.

Express places where, as a reader, you were drawn in to the writing

• I thought that the second paragraph was really clear and interesting because….
• I like the way that you structured paragraph X because ….
• I appreciate your use of (signal phrases? citations? MLA format? transitions? etc) because I have been struggling with that in my own writing. Thanks for the example

Phrases that can be ineffective

These types of phrases are telling the writer what to do and/or simply offering judgment. They are “you” statements, not “I” statements.  Try to avoid these types of peer assessment phrases:

• You should fix
• The assignment says to ____ _ but you didn’t do that
• You need more____
• You need less_____
• To make the paper better, you need to____

3.6 Peer Review and Responding to Others’ Drafts by Emilie Zickel is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Feedback/Errata

Comments are closed.

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

How to Write a Rhetorical Analysis Essay

3-minute read

• 22nd August 2023

A rhetorical analysis essay is a type of academic writing that analyzes how authors use language, persuasion techniques , and other rhetorical strategies to communicate with their audience. In this post, we’ll review how to write a rhetorical analysis essay, including:

• Understanding the assignment guidelines
• Introducing your essay topic
• Examining the rhetorical strategies
• Summarizing your main points

Keep reading for a step-by-step guide to rhetorical analysis.

What Is a Rhetorical Strategy?

A rhetorical strategy is a deliberate approach or technique a writer uses to convey a message and/or persuade the audience. A rhetorical strategy typically involves using language, sentence structure, and tone/style to influence the audience to think a certain way or understand a specific point of view. Rhetorical strategies are especially common in advertisements, speeches, and political writing, but you can also find them in many other types of literature.

1.   Understanding the Assignment Guidelines

Before you begin your rhetorical analysis essay, make sure you understand the assignment and guidelines. Typically, when writing a rhetorical analysis, you should approach the text objectively, focusing on the techniques the author uses rather than expressing your own opinions about the topic or summarizing the content. Thus, it’s essential to discuss the rhetorical methods used and then back up your analysis with evidence and quotations from the text.

2.   Introducing Your Essay Topic

Introduce your essay by providing some context about the text you’re analyzing. Give a brief overview of the author, intended audience, and purpose of the writing. You should also clearly state your thesis , which is your main point or argument about how and why the author uses rhetorical strategies. Try to avoid going into detail on any points or diving into specific examples – the introduction should be concise, and you’ll be providing a much more in-depth analysis later in the text.

3.   Examining the Rhetorical Strategies

In the body paragraphs, analyze the rhetorical strategies the author uses. Here are some common rhetorical strategies to include in your discussion:

●  Ethos : Establishing trust between the writer and the audience by appealing to credibility and ethics

●  Pathos : Appealing to the audience’s emotions and values

●  Logos : Employing logic, reason, and evidence to appeal to the reader

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

●  Diction : Deliberately choosing specific language and vocabulary

●  Syntax : Structuring and arranging sentences in certain ways

●  Tone : Conveying attitude or mood in certain ways

●  Literary Devices : Using metaphors, similes, analogies , repetition, etc.

Keep in mind that for a rhetorical analysis essay, you’re not usually required to find examples of all of the above rhetorical strategies. But for each one you do analyze, consider how it contributes to the author’s purpose, how it influences the audience, and what emotions or thoughts it could evoke in the reader.

4.   Summarizing Your Main Points

In your conclusion , sum up the main points of your analysis and restate your thesis. Without introducing any new points (such as topics or ideas you haven’t already covered in the main body of your essay), summarize the overall impact that the author’s rhetorical strategies likely had on their intended audience.

Expert Proofreading Services

Ensure that your rhetorical analysis essay stands out by having our expert team proofread it. Send in your free sample of 500 words or less and see for yourself the difference in your work!

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

How to insert a text box in a google doc.

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

2-minute read

How to Cite the CDC in APA

If you’re writing about health issues, you might need to reference the Centers for Disease...

5-minute read

Six Product Description Generator Tools for Your Product Copy

Introduction If you’re involved with ecommerce, you’re likely familiar with the often painstaking process of...

What Is a Content Editor?

Are you interested in learning more about the role of a content editor and the...

4-minute read

The Benefits of Using an Online Proofreading Service

Proofreading is important to ensure your writing is clear and concise for your readers. Whether...

6 Online AI Presentation Maker Tools

Creating presentations can be time-consuming and frustrating. Trying to construct a visually appealing and informative...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

9.5 Writing Process: Thinking Critically about Rhetoric

Learning outcomes.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Develop a rhetorical analysis through multiple drafts.
• Identify and analyze rhetorical strategies in a rhetorical analysis.
• Demonstrate flexible strategies for generating ideas, drafting, reviewing, collaborating, revising, rewriting, and editing.
• Give and act on productive feedback for works in progress.

The ability to think critically about rhetoric is a skill you will use in many of your classes, in your work, and in your life to gain insight from the way a text is written and organized. You will often be asked to explain or to express an opinion about what someone else has communicated and how that person has done so, especially if you take an active interest in politics and government. Like Eliana Evans in the previous section, you will develop similar analyses of written works to help others understand how a writer or speaker may be trying to reach them.

Summary of Assignment: Rhetorical Analysis

The assignment is to write a rhetorical analysis of a piece of persuasive writing. It can be an editorial, a movie or book review, an essay, a chapter in a book, or a letter to the editor. For your rhetorical analysis, you will need to consider the rhetorical situation—subject, author, purpose, context, audience, and culture—and the strategies the author uses in creating the argument. Back up all your claims with evidence from the text. In preparing your analysis, consider these questions:

• What is the subject? Be sure to distinguish what the piece is about.
• Who is the writer, and what do you know about them? Be sure you know whether the writer is considered objective or has a particular agenda.
• Who are the readers? What do you know or what can you find out about them as the particular audience to be addressed at this moment?
• What is the purpose or aim of this work? What does the author hope to achieve?
• What are the time/space/place considerations and influences of the writer? What can you know about the writer and the full context in which they are writing?
• What specific techniques has the writer used to make their points? Are these techniques successful, unsuccessful, or questionable?

For this assignment, read the following opinion piece by Octavio Peterson, printed in his local newspaper. You may choose it as the text you will analyze, continuing the analysis on your own, or you may refer to it as a sample as you work on another text of your choosing. Your instructor may suggest presidential or other political speeches, which make good subjects for rhetorical analysis.

When you have read the piece by Peterson advocating for the need to continue teaching foreign languages in schools, reflect carefully on the impact the letter has had on you. You are not expected to agree or disagree with it. Instead, focus on the rhetoric—the way Peterson uses language to make his point and convince you of the validity of his argument.

Another Lens. Consider presenting your rhetorical analysis in a multimodal format. Use a blogging site or platform such as WordPress or Tumblr to explore the blogging genre, which includes video clips, images, hyperlinks, and other media to further your discussion. Because this genre is less formal than written text, your tone can be conversational. However, you still will be required to provide the same kind of analysis that you would in a traditional essay. The same materials will be at your disposal for making appeals to persuade your readers. Rhetorical analysis in a blog may be a new forum for the exchange of ideas that retains the basics of more formal communication. When you have completed your work, share it with a small group or the rest of the class. See Multimodal and Online Writing: Creative Interaction between Text and Image for more about creating a multimodal composition.

Quick Launch: Start with a Thesis Statement

After you have read this opinion piece, or another of your choice, several times and have a clear understanding of it as a piece of rhetoric, consider whether the writer has succeeded in being persuasive. You might find that in some ways they have and in others they have not. Then, with a clear understanding of your purpose—to analyze how the writer seeks to persuade—you can start framing a thesis statement : a declarative sentence that states the topic, the angle you are taking, and the aspects of the topic the rest of the paper will support.

Complete the following sentence frames as you prepare to start:

• The subject of my rhetorical analysis is ________.
• My goal is to ________, not necessarily to ________.
• The writer’s main point is ________.
• I believe the writer has succeeded (or not) because ________.
• I believe the writer has succeeded in ________ (name the part or parts) but not in ________ (name the part or parts).
• The writer’s strongest (or weakest) point is ________, which they present by ________.

Drafting: Text Evidence and Analysis of Effect

As you begin to draft your rhetorical analysis, remember that you are giving your opinion on the author’s use of language. For example, Peterson has made a decision about the teaching of foreign languages, something readers of the newspaper might have different views on. In other words, there is room for debate and persuasion.

The context of the situation in which Peterson finds himself may well be more complex than he discusses. In the same way, the context of the piece you choose to analyze may also be more complex. For example, perhaps Greendale is facing an economic crisis and must pare its budget for educational spending and public works. It’s also possible that elected officials have made budget cuts for education a part of their platform or that school buildings have been found obsolete for safety measures. On the other hand, maybe a foreign company will come to town only if more Spanish speakers can be found locally. These factors would play a part in a real situation, and rhetoric would reflect that. If applicable, consider such possibilities regarding the subject of your analysis. Here, however, these factors are unknown and thus do not enter into the analysis.

Introduction

One effective way to begin a rhetorical analysis is by using an anecdote, as Eliana Evans has done. For a rhetorical analysis of the opinion piece, a writer might consider an anecdote about a person who was in a situation in which knowing another language was important or not important. If they begin with an anecdote, the next part of the introduction should contain the following information:

• Author’s name and position, or other qualification to establish ethos
• Title of work and genre
• Author’s thesis statement or stance taken (“Peterson argues that . . .”)
• Brief introductory explanation of how the author develops and supports the thesis or stance
• If relevant, a brief summary of context and culture

Once the context and situation for the analysis are clear, move directly to your thesis statement. In this case, your thesis statement will be your opinion of how successful the author has been in achieving the established goal through the use of rhetorical strategies. Read the sentences in Table 9.1 , and decide which would make the best thesis statement. Explain your reasoning in the right-hand column of this or a similar chart.

The introductory paragraph or paragraphs should serve to move the reader into the body of the analysis and signal what will follow.

Your next step is to start supporting your thesis statement—that is, how Octavio Peterson, or the writer of your choice, does or does not succeed in persuading readers. To accomplish this purpose, you need to look closely at the rhetorical strategies the writer uses.

First, list the rhetorical strategies you notice while reading the text, and note where they appear. Keep in mind that you do not need to include every strategy the text contains, only those essential ones that emphasize or support the central argument and those that may seem fallacious. You may add other strategies as well. The first example in Table 9.2 has been filled in.

When you have completed your list, consider how to structure your analysis. You will have to decide which of the writer’s statements are most effective. The strongest point would be a good place to begin; conversely, you could begin with the writer’s weakest point if that suits your purposes better. The most obvious organizational structure is one of the following:

• Go through the composition paragraph by paragraph and analyze its rhetorical content, focusing on the strategies that support the writer’s thesis statement.
• Address key rhetorical strategies individually, and show how the author has used them.

As you read the next few paragraphs, consult Table 9.3 for a visual plan of your rhetorical analysis. Your first body paragraph is the first of the analytical paragraphs. Here, too, you have options for organizing. You might begin by stating the writer’s strongest point. For example, you could emphasize that Peterson appeals to ethos by speaking personally to readers as fellow citizens and providing his credentials to establish credibility as someone trustworthy with their interests at heart.

Following this point, your next one can focus, for instance, on Peterson’s view that cutting foreign language instruction is a danger to the education of Greendale’s children. The points that follow support this argument, and you can track his rhetoric as he does so.

You may then use the second or third body paragraph, connected by a transition, to discuss Peterson’s appeal to logos. One possible transition might read, “To back up his assertion that omitting foreign languages is detrimental to education, Peterson provides examples and statistics.” Locate examples and quotes from the text as needed. You can discuss how, in citing these statistics, Peterson uses logos as a key rhetorical strategy.

In another paragraph, focus on other rhetorical elements, such as parallelism, repetition, and rhetorical questions. Moreover, be sure to indicate whether the writer acknowledges counterclaims and whether they are accepted or ultimately rejected.

The question of other factors at work in Greendale regarding finances, or similar factors in another setting, may be useful to mention here if they exist. As you continue, however, keep returning to your list of rhetorical strategies and explaining them. Even if some appear less important, they should be noted to show that you recognize how the writer is using language. You will likely have a minimum of four body paragraphs, but you may well have six or seven or even more, depending on the work you are analyzing.

In your final body paragraph, you might discuss the argument that Peterson, for example, has made by appealing to readers’ emotions. His calls for solidarity at the end of the letter provide a possible solution to his concern that the foreign language curriculum “might vanish like a puff of smoke.”

Use Table 9.3 to organize your rhetorical analysis. Be sure that each paragraph has a topic sentence and that you use transitions to flow smoothly from one idea to the next.

As you conclude your essay, your own logic in discussing the writer’s argument will make it clear whether you have found their claims convincing. Your opinion, as framed in your conclusion, may restate your thesis statement in different words, or you may choose to reveal your thesis at this point. The real function of the conclusion is to confirm your evaluation and show that you understand the use of the language and the effectiveness of the argument.

In your analysis, note that objections could be raised because Peterson, for example, speaks only for himself. You may speculate about whether the next edition of the newspaper will feature an opposing opinion piece from someone who disagrees. However, it is not necessary to provide answers to questions you raise here. Your conclusion should summarize briefly how the writer has made, or failed to make, a forceful argument that may require further debate.

For more guidance on writing a rhetorical analysis, visit the Illinois Writers Workshop website or watch this tutorial .

Peer Review: Guidelines toward Revision and the “Golden Rule”

Now that you have a working draft, your next step is to engage in peer review, an important part of the writing process. Often, others can identify things you have missed or can ask you to clarify statements that may be clear to you but not to others. For your peer review, follow these steps and make use of Table 9.4 .

• Quickly skim through your peer’s rhetorical analysis draft once, and then ask yourself, What is the main point or argument of my peer’s work?
• Highlight, underline, or otherwise make note of statements or instances in the paper where you think your peer has made their main point.
• Look at the draft again, this time reading it closely.
• Ask yourself the following questions, and comment on the peer review sheet as shown.

The Golden Rule

An important part of the peer review process is to keep in mind the familiar wisdom of the “Golden Rule”: treat others as you would have them treat you. This foundational approach to human relations extends to commenting on others’ work. Like your peers, you are in the same situation of needing opinion and guidance. Whatever you have written will seem satisfactory or better to you because you have written it and know what you mean to say.

However, your peers have the advantage of distance from the work you have written and can see it through their own eyes. Likewise, if you approach your peer’s work fairly and free of personal bias, you’re likely to be more constructive in finding parts of their writing that need revision. Most important, though, is to make suggestions tactfully and considerately, in the spirit of helping, not degrading someone’s work. You and your peers may be reluctant to share your work, but if everyone approaches the review process with these ideas in mind, everyone will benefit from the opportunity to provide and act on sincerely offered suggestions.

Revising: Staying Open to Feedback and Working with It

Once the peer review process is complete, your next step is to revise the first draft by incorporating suggestions and making changes on your own. Consider some of these potential issues when incorporating peers’ revisions and rethinking your own work.

• Too much summarizing rather than analyzing
• Too much informal language or an unintentional mix of casual and formal language
• Too few, too many, or inappropriate transitions
• Illogical or unclear sequence of information
• Insufficient evidence to support main ideas effectively
• Too many generalities rather than specific facts, maybe from trying to do too much in too little time

In any case, revising a draft is a necessary step to produce a final work. Rarely will even a professional writer arrive at the best point in a single draft. In other words, it’s seldom a problem if your first draft needs refocusing. However, it may become a problem if you don’t address it. The best way to shape a wandering piece of writing is to return to it, reread it, slow it down, take it apart, and build it back up again. Approach first-draft writing for what it is: a warm-up or rehearsal for a final performance.

Suggestions for Revising

When revising, be sure your thesis statement is clear and fulfills your purpose. Verify that you have abundant supporting evidence and that details are consistently on topic and relevant to your position. Just before arriving at the conclusion, be sure you have prepared a logical ending. The concluding statement should be strong and should not present any new points. Rather, it should grow out of what has already been said and return, in some degree, to the thesis statement. In the example of Octavio Peterson, his purpose was to persuade readers that teaching foreign languages in schools in Greendale should continue; therefore, the conclusion can confirm that Peterson achieved, did not achieve, or partially achieved his aim.

When revising, make sure the larger elements of the piece are as you want them to be before you revise individual sentences and make smaller changes. If you make small changes first, they might not fit well with the big picture later on.

One approach to big-picture revising is to check the organization as you move from paragraph to paragraph. You can list each paragraph and check that its content relates to the purpose and thesis statement. Each paragraph should have one main point and be self-contained in showing how the rhetorical devices used in the text strengthen (or fail to strengthen) the argument and the writer’s ability to persuade. Be sure your paragraphs flow logically from one to the other without distracting gaps or inconsistencies.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/writing-guide/pages/1-unit-introduction

• Authors: Michelle Bachelor Robinson, Maria Jerskey, featuring Toby Fulwiler
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: Writing Guide with Handbook
• Publication date: Dec 21, 2021
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/writing-guide/pages/1-unit-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/writing-guide/pages/9-5-writing-process-thinking-critically-about-rhetoric

© Dec 19, 2023 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Rhetorical Analysis Part I

We have heard that “you can’t judge a book by its cover,” but, in fact, we do it all the time. Daily we find ourselves in situations where we are forced to make snap judgments. Each day we meet different people, encounter unfamiliar situations, and see media that asks us to do, think, buy, and act in all sorts of ways.

In fact, our saturation with media and its images is one reason why learning rhetorical analysis is so important. The more we know about analyzing situations and drawing informed conclusions, the better we can become at making savvy judgments about the people, situations, and media we encounter.

Rhetorical Analysis is a high-order critical thinking skill. It takes practice to become effective at formal and intentional analysis of text and media. An analysis breaks a subject apart to study it closely, and from this inspection, ideas for writing emerge. When writing assignments call on you to analyze, they require you to identify the parts of the subject (parts of an ad, parts of a short story, parts of Hamlet’s character), and then show how these parts fit or don’t fit together to create some larger effect or meaning. Your interpretation of how these parts fit together constitutes your claim or thesis, and the task of your essay is then to present an argument defending your interpretation as a valid or plausible one to make. Our biggest bit of advice about analysis is to don’t try to do it all in your head. Analysis works best when you put all the cards on the table, so to speak. Identify and isolate the parts of your analysis, and record important features and characteristics of each one. As patterns emerge, you sort and connect these parts in meaningful ways.. The critical reading skills you are developing–like differentiating fact from opinion and making inferences–will help you become a more savvy consumer and a more discerning citizen.

Facts versus Opinions

Facts are statements that can be definitely proven using objective data. The statement that is a fact is absolutely valid. In other words, the statement can be pronounced as true or false. For example, 2 + 2 = 4. This expression identifies a true statement or a fact because it can be proved with objective data.

Opinions are personal views or judgments. An opinion is what an individual believes about a particular subject. However, an opinion in argumentation must have legitimate backing; adequate evidence and credibility should support the opinion. Consider the credibility of expert opinions. Experts in a given field have the knowledge and credentials to make their opinion meaningful to a larger audience; this credibility is sometimes called “ethos” and is one way that we make our arguments persuasive. For example, you seek the opinion of your dentist when it comes to the health of your gums, and you seek the opinion of your mechanic when it comes to the maintenance of your car. Both have knowledge and credentials in those respective fields, which is why their opinions matter to you. But the authority of your dentist may be greatly diminished should they offer an opinion about your car, and vice versa. In writing, you want to strike a balance between credible facts and authoritative opinions. Relying on one or the other will likely lose more of your audience than it gains.

Media and Rhetoric

Media is one of the most important places where this kind of analysis needs to happen. Rhetoric—the way we use language and images to persuade—is what makes media work. Think of all the media you see and hear every day: Twitter, television shows, web pages, billboards, text messages, podcasts, and more. Media is constantly asking you to buy something, act in some way, believe something to be true or interact with others in a specific manner. Understanding rhetorical messages is essential to help us become informed consumers, but it also helps evaluate the ethics of messages, how they affect us personally, and how they affect society.

Take, for example, a commercial for men’s deodorant that tells you that you’ll be irresistible to women if you use their product. This campaign doesn’t just ask you to buy the product, though. It also asks you to trust the company’s credibility, or ethos, and to believe the messages they send about how men and women interact, about sexuality, and about what constitutes a healthy body. You have to decide whether or not you will choose to buy the product and how you will choose to respond to the messages that the commercial sends.

Because media rhetoric surrounds us, it is important to understand how rhetoric works. If we refuse to stop and think about how and why it persuades us, we can become mindless consumers who buy into arguments about what makes us value ourselves and what makes us happy.

Rhetoric as Social Influence

Our worlds are full of these kinds of social influences. As we interact with other people and with media, we are continually creating and interpreting rhetoric. In the same way that you decide how to process, analyze, or ignore these messages, you create them. You probably think about what your clothing will communicate as you go to a job interview or get ready for a date. You are using rhetoric when trying to persuade your parents to send you money or your friends to see the movie that interests you. When you post to your blog or favorite social media app, you are using rhetoric.

Most of our actions are persuasive in nature. What we choose to wear (tennis shoes vs. flip flops), where we shop (Whole Foods Market vs. Wal-Mart), what we eat (organic vs. fast food), or even the way we send information (snail mail vs. text message) can work to persuade others.

Chances are you have grown up learning to interpret and analyze these types of rhetoric. They become so commonplace that we don’t realize how often and how quickly we are able to perform this kind of rhetorical analysis. When your teacher walked in on the first day of class, you probably didn’t think to yourself, “I think I’ll do some rhetorical analysis on their clothing and draw some conclusions about what kind of personality they might have and whether I think I’ll like them.” And, yet, you probably were able to come up with some conclusions based on the evidence you had.

However, when this same teacher hands you an advertisement, photograph or article and asks you to write a rhetorical analysis of it, you might have been baffled or felt a little overwhelmed. The good news is that many of the analytical processes that you already use to interpret the rhetoric around you are the same ones that you’ll use for these assignments.

Activity 2.1

• Watch the  Mad Men  advertising pitch for “The Kodak Carousel,” “ Mad Men – It’s not a slide projector or a wheel… it’s a Carousel ” by SpeechCoachLA, and think about the way the advertisers use images and language to persuade…this is rhetoric!
• What is it about the advertising pitch that is supposed to connect with the public and get them to buy the product, in this case the Kodak Carousel?
• What is it about nostalgia (Don Draper said in Greek it means “the pain of an old wound”) that is more powerful than memory?
• Is the advertising pitch by Don Draper effective at persuading the public? Why or why not?

The following are criteria this type of activity could be scored on:

Activity 2.2: Further study

• Download  Backpacks vs Briefcases: Steps Toward Rhetorical Analysis .
• Annotate the text.
• What are the implications of rhetorical analysis? (p. 3, p. 46)
• What is the “rhetorical situation”? (p. 5, p.48)
• What is the argument in rhetorical analysis? (p. 9, p. 52)
• What does context have to do with Rhetorical Analysis? (p.12, p.55)
• Why is rhetorical analysis important in college? (p.14, p.57)
• What are examples of rhetoric that you see and hear on a daily basis?
• What are some ways that you create rhetoric?

Contributors and Attributions

• Adapted from  What is Academic Writing ? by L. Lennie Irvin in Writing Spaces. CC-BY-NC-SA
• Adapted from  Analyzing Arguments: Rhetorical Analysis by Amy Hofer and Robbie Pock in OER Commons. CC-BY
• Adapted from  Successful College Composition  by Kathryn Crowther, Lauren Curtright, Nancy Gilbert, Barbara Hall, Tracienne Ravita, and Kirk Swenson at Galileo, Georgia’s Virtual Library.  CC-NC-SA-4.0 .

UNM Core Writing OER Collection Copyright © 2023 by University of New Mexico is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Rhetorical Analysis Peer Review

Rhetorical Analysis Peer Review Reviewer: Johana Morales Reviewee: Tomya Note: Text = article, essay, photo, advertisement, video, performance, etc. 1. Identify the text (article, essay, photo, advertisement, video, performance) being analyzed: The text that is being analyzed is a commercial (video) 2. Is there a title? Y or N Does it appropriately reflect the content of the essay? Explain or make a suggestion: Yes the title gives a bit of information on what the essay might be about. 3. Write the thesis statement: “The ads portrays people with darker skin tones as being a disadvantage” 4. Does this draft effectively satisfy the definition of rhetorical analysis as set out in the assignment? (An essay that breaks a work of non-fiction into parts and then explains how the parts work together to create a certain effect—whether to persuade, entertain or inform.) Explain: Yes, this essay really explains the item and the controversial ad really well. It informs the reader that many people might think of this ad in many different ways and how this could affect people in a negative way. 5. How does your partner discuss the author’s strategies, purposes, and approaches? Reference at least one example that does so effectively and one that needs work: i. Works well: They explained really well who the audience for this ad was and what the purpose of this ad. ii. Needs work: Personally, I believe they did a pretty good job in this section and doesn’t need anymore work. 6. How does your partner discuss the content (what the text is about)? Is it effective? Reference at least one example that does so effectively and one that needs work:

. Works well: Explains the ad and what’s happening in the video. I like how they added background information that really explained their thesis. ii. Needs work: 7. Is the composition (how the text is constructed) effectively reviewed? Reference at least one example that does so effectively and one that needs work: i. Works well: The essay is really well organized and everything is explained perfectly. ii. Needs work: 8. Does the analysis use a chronological or spatial approach to describe the text? Spatial approach 9. Identify examples of the following in the analysis: i. Logos (logic): ii. Pathos (emotion): anger, sadness, happiness, and hope iii. Ethos (character): 10. Does the conclusion sufficiently wrap up the analysis by reflecting on the main points of the essay? Explain: Yes, at the end of the essay she summarizes how the brand that is being promoted is colorist. 11. Does the selected text properly adhere to APA style? Yes or No Yes If not, what needs fixing?

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and site URL in my browser for next time I post a comment.

Need help with the Commons?

Email us at [email protected] so we can respond to your questions and requests. Please email from your CUNY email address if possible. Or visit our help site for more information:

• Terms of Service
• Accessibility
• Creative Commons (CC) license unless otherwise noted

• Writing Center
• Current Students
• Online Only Students
• Faculty & Staff
• Parents & Family
• Alumni & Friends
• Community & Business
• Student Life
• Video Introduction
• Become a Writing Assistant
• All Writers
• Graduate Students
• ELL Students
• Campus and Community
• Testimonials
• Encouraging Writing Center Use
• Incentives and Requirements
• Open Educational Resources
• How We Help
• Get to Know Us
• Conversation Partners Program
• Workshop Series
• Professors Talk Writing
• Computer Lab
• Starting a Writing Center
• A Note to Instructors
• Annotated Bibliography
• Literature Review
• Research Proposal
• Argument Essay
• Rhetorical Analysis

Argument Essay Peer Review

As a writer . . .  

Step 1 : Underline your thesis statement.  

Step 2: Include answers to the following two questions at the top of your draft:  

• What questions do you have for your reviewer? 
• List two concerns you have about your argument essay.  

   Step 3: When you receive your peer's feedback, read and consider it carefully.  

Remember: you are not bound to accept everything your reader suggests; if you believe that the response comes as a result of misunderstanding your intentions, be sure that those intentions are clear. The problem can be either with the reader or the writer!  

As a reviewer . . .  

As you begin writing your peer review, remember that your peer will benefit more from constructive criticism than vague praise. A comment like "I got confused here" or "I saw your point clearly here" is more useful than "It looks okay to me." Point out ways your classmates can improve their work.  

Step 1: Read your peer’s draft two times.  

Read the draft once to get an overview of the paper, and a second time to provide constructive criticism for the author to use when revising the draft.  

Step 2: Answer the following questions:  

• What is the writer’s thesis statement? (Copy it here.)  
• Is the thesis clear and well-supported?  
• Is the paper overly general, or does the writer make specific claims and then back them up using logical reasoning and/or researched evidence?  
• Does the writing “flow” smoothly? Note sentences or sections where flow could  be improved.  
• Is the essay reasonably free of sentence and spelling errors?  
• Remember the MEAL plan – does each paragraph follow this basic structure?  [M – Main idea;  E – Evidence; A – Analysis; L – Link]  
• Are all references to outside materials (direct quotations as well as very specific information that had to have come from reading others’ work) cited, both within the essay and on a Works Cited page?  
• Has the writer used at least three scholarly sources (no Wikipedia, personal blogs, etc.)?   

Step 3: Address your peer’s questions and concerns included at the top of the draft.    

Step 4: Write a short paragraph about what the writer does especially well.    

Step 5: Write a short paragraph about what you think the writer should do to improve the draft.    

Your suggestions will be the most useful part of peer review for your classmates, so focus more of your time on these paragraphs; they will count for more of your peer review grade than the yes or no responses.

Hints for peer review:  

• Point out the strengths in the essay.  
• Address the larger issues first.  
• Make specific suggestions for improvement.  
• Be tactful but be candid and direct.  
• Don’t be afraid to disagree with another reviewer.  
• Make and receive comments in a useful way.  
• Remember peer review is not an editing service; you should not focus on sentence-level errors like punctuation and spelling.    

Contact Info

Kennesaw Campus 1000 Chastain Road Kennesaw, GA 30144

Marietta Campus 1100 South Marietta Pkwy Marietta, GA 30060

Campus Maps

Phone 470-KSU-INFO (470-578-4636)

kennesaw.edu/info

Media Resources

Resources For

Related Links

• Financial Aid
• Degrees, Majors & Programs
• Job Opportunities
• Campus Security
• Global Education
• Sustainability
• Accessibility

470-KSU-INFO (470-578-4636)

© 2024 Kennesaw State University. All Rights Reserved.

• Privacy Statement
• Accreditation
• Emergency Information
• Report a Concern
• Open Records
• Human Trafficking Notice