1  

MAR  4503  Video  Reflective  Assignment       The  video  reflective  assignment  you  need  to  submit  INDIVIDUALLY.  Three   paragraphs  should  be  included  in  the  video  reflective  assignment.  Each  paragraph   can  contain  5-­‐10  sentences.  The  maximum  length  of  the  paper  is  two  pages,  typed,   double-­‐spaced  with  the  font  size  12.  Place  the  title  of  the  video  at  the  beginning  of   the  paper  and  list  the  discussion  question  number  in  front  of  your  answers.       1st  paragraph:  Answer  the  discussion  question  1.   2nd  paragraph:  Answer  the  discussion  question  2.   3rd  paragraph:  What  you  think  about  the  video.       Video:  McDonald’s  Taps  Ethic  Subcultures  for  Ongoing  growth       1) What  other  ethnic  subculture  segments  should  be  considered  as  an  important  

segment  for  McDonald's?    What  marketing  plans  and  activities  will  attract  these   segments?    

2) How  difficult  is  it  for  McDonald's  to  position  its  products  toward  one  segment   without  negatively  affecting  another  segment?  

  3) What  is  your  opinion  about  the  video?                                            

  2  

Video  Reflective  Assignment  Grading  Rubric    

Criteria   Does  Not  Meet  Standards   Approached  Standards   Meets  or  Exceeds   Standards  

Discussion  Question   #1   Information/Format  

0  point   • The  level  of  detail  in   each  question  is  poor   and  makes  no  attempt   to  include  textually   relevant  information.    

• Paper  is  not  formatted   correctly.    

1-­‐3  points   • The  level  of  detail  in  

each  question  is   emerging.  Attempts   to  engage  the  text  are   made.    

• Paper  is  partially   formatted.  

4  points   • The  level  of  detail  in   each  question  is   excellent.  Textual   details  are  relevant   and  student  has   connected  fully  with   the  literature.  

• Paper  is  formatted   correctly.  

Discussion  Question   #2   Information/Format  

0  point   • The  level  of  detail  in   each  question  is  poor   and  makes  no  attempt   to  include  textually   relevant  information.    

• Paper  is  not  formatted   correctly.    

1-­‐3  points   • The  level  of  detail  in  

each  question  is   emerging.  Attempts   to  engage  the  text  are   made.    

• Paper  is  partially   formatted.  

4  points   • The  level  of  detail  in   each  question  is   excellent.  Textual   details  are  relevant   and  student  has   connected  fully  with   the  literature.  

• Paper  is  formatted   correctly.  

Personal  Opinion   0  point   No  implications  are   mentioned.  

1-­‐3  points   One  or  more  implications   are  given  and  are   sufficiently  clarified.  

4  points   Implications  are  clearly   explicated  and   demonstrate  critical   thinking  skills.  

Writing  Convention   0  point   • There  are  numerous   spelling  or  grammar   errors,  making  the   answer  impossible  to   understand.    

• There  is  no   punctuation.    

• Paper  is  inadequate/   excessive  in  length.  

2  points   • There  are  numerous   spelling  or   grammatical  errors,   making  the  answer   difficult  to   understand.    

• Most  punctuation  is   not  used  correctly.  

• Paper  is  over/  under   word  length.  

3  points   • Proper  use  of  

English  spelling  and   grammar  is   employed   consistently   throughout  the   assignment.  

• Punctuation  is   utilized  correctly   and  only  when   necessary.    

• Paper  is  the   appropriate  length   as  described  for  the   assignment.    

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS SAMPLE ESSAY

Harriet Clark

Ms. Rebecca Winter

CWC 101

13 Feb. 2015

Not Quite a Clean Sweep: Rhetorical Strategies in

Grose’s “Cleaning: The Final Feminist Frontier”

A woman’s work is never done: many American women grow up with this

saying and feel it to be true. One such woman, author Jessica Grose, wrote “Cleaning:

The Final Feminist Frontier,” published in 2013 in the New Republic, and she argues that

while the men in our lives recently started taking on more of the childcare and cooking,

cleaning still falls unfairly on women. Grose begins building her credibility with

personal facts and reputable sources, citing convincing facts and statistics, and

successfully employing emotional appeals; however, toward the end of the article, her

attempts to appeal to readers’ emotions weaken her credibility and ultimately, her

argument.

In her article, Grose first sets the stage by describing a specific scenario of house-

cleaning with her husband after being shut in during Hurricane Sandy, and then she

outlines the uneven distribution of cleaning work in her marriage and draws a comparison

to the larger feminist issue of who does the cleaning in a relationship. Grose continues

by discussing some of the reasons that men do not contribute to cleaning: the praise for a

clean house goes to the woman; advertising and media praise men’s cooking and

childcare, but not cleaning; and lastly, it is just not fun. Possible solutions to the problem,

Grose suggests, include making a chart of who does which chores, dividing up tasks

based on skill and ability, accepting a dirtier home, and making cleaning more fun with

gadgets.

Throughout her piece, Grose uses many strong sources that strengthen her

credibility and appeal to ethos, as well as build her argument. These sources include,

“sociologists Judith Treas and Tsui-o Tai,” “a 2008 study from the University of New

Hampshire,” and “P&G North America Fabric Care Brand Manager, Matthew Krehbiel”

(qtd. in Grose). Citing these sources boosts Grose’s credibility by showing that she has

Hook

Context

Article author’s claim or purpose

Thesis

Summary of the article’s main points in the second paragraph (could also be in the introduction)

Third paragraph begins with a transition and topic sentence that reflects the first topic in the thesis

Quotes illustrate how the author uses appeals to ethos

done her homework and has provided facts and statistics, as well as expert opinions to

support her claim. She also uses personal examples from her own home life to introduce

and support the issue, which shows that she has a personal stake in and first-hand

experience with the problem.

Adding to her ethos appeals, Grose uses strong appeals to logos, with many facts

and statistics and logical progressions of ideas. She points out facts about her marriage

and the distribution of household chores: “My husband and I both work. We split

midnight baby feedings ...but ... he will admit that he’s never cleaned the bathroom, that I

do the dishes nine times out of ten, and that he barely knows how the washer and dryer

work in the apartment we’ve lived in for over eight months.” These facts introduce and

support the idea that Grose does more household chores than her husband. Grose

continues with many statistics:

[A]bout 55 percent of American mothers employed full time do some housework

on an average day, while only 18 percent of employed fathers do. ... [W]orking

women with children are still doing a week and a half more of “second shift”

work each year than their male partners. ... Even in the famously gender-neutral

Sweden, women do 45 minutes more housework a day than their male partners.

These statistics are a few of many that logically support her claim that it is a substantial

and real problem that men do not do their fair share of the chores. The details and

numbers build an appeal to logos and impress upon the reader that this is a problem worth

discussing.

Along with strong logos appeals, Grose effectively makes appeals to pathos in

the beginning and middle sections. Her introduction is full of emotionally-charged words

and phrases that create a sympathetic image; Grose notes that she “was eight months

pregnant” and her husband found it difficult to “fight with a massively pregnant person.”

The image she evokes of the challenges and vulnerabilities of being so pregnant, as well

as the high emotions a woman feels at that time effectively introduce the argument and its

seriousness. Her goal is to make the reader feel sympathy for her. Adding to this idea

are words and phrases such as, “insisted,” “argued,” “not fun,” “sucks” “headachey,” “be

judged,” “be shunned” (Grose). All of these words evoke negative emotions about

cleaning, which makes the reader sympathize with women who feel “judged” and

shunned”—very negative feelings. Another feeling Grose reinforces with her word

choice is the concept of fairness: “fair share,” “a week and a half more of ‘second shift’

work,” “more housework,” “more gendered and less frequent.” These words help

Analysis explains how the quotes show the effective use of pathos, as noted in the thesis

Analysis explains how the quotes show the effective use of ethos, as noted in the thesis

Quote that illustrates appeals to logos

Quote that illustrates appeals to logos

Transition and topic sentence about the second point from the thesis

Quotes that illustrate appeals to pathos

Transition and topic sentence about the third point from the thesis

Analysis explains how the quotes show the effective use of logos, as noted in the thesis

This document was developed by the

College Writing Center STLCC-Meramec

Created 2/2015 by HSC

establish the unfairness that exists when women do all of the cleaning, and they are an

appeal to pathos, or the readers’ feelings of frustration and anger with injustice.

However, the end of the article lacks the same level of effectiveness in the

appeals to ethos. For example, Grose notes that when men do housework, they are

considered to be “’enacting “small instances of gender heroism,” or ‘SIGH’s’—which,

barf.” The usage of the word “barf” is jarring to the reader; unprofessional and immature,

it is a shift from the researched, intelligent voice she has established and the reader is less

likely to take the author seriously. This damages the strength of her credibility and her

argument.

Additionally, her last statement in the article refers to her husband in a way that

weakens the argument. While returning to the introduction’s hook in the conclusion is a

frequently-used strategy, Grose chooses to return to her discussion of her husband in a

humorous way: Grose discusses solutions, and says there is “a huge, untapped market ...

for toilet-scrubbing iPods. I bet my husband would buy one.” Returning to her own

marriage and husband is an appeal to ethos or personal credibility, and while that works

well in the introduction, in the conclusion, it lacks the strength and seriousness that the

topic deserves and was given earlier in the article.

Though Grose begins the essay by effectively persuading her readers of the

unfair distribution of home-maintenance cleaning labor, she loses her power in the end,

where she most needs to drive home her argument. Readers can see the problem exists in

both her marriage and throughout the world; however, her shift to humor and sarcasm

makes the reader not take the problem as seriously in the end. Grose could have more

seriously driven home the point that a woman’s work could be done: by a man.

Works Cited

Grose, Jessica. “Cleaning: The Final Feminist Frontier.” New Republic. The New

Republic, 19 Mar. 2013. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.

Quote illustrates how the author uses appeal to ethos

Transition and topic sentence about fourth point from thesis

Analysis explains how quote supports thesis

Transition and topic sentence about fourth point from thesis

Conclusion returns to ideas in the thesis and further develops them

Analysis explains how quote supports thesis

Quote illustrates how the author uses appeal to ethos

Last sentence returns to the hook in the introduction

Essay 2: Rhetorical Analysis (15 points) Context: The last assignment required you to write a story and then to examine its purpose, meaning, cultural significance, and ​how ​the work achieved its purpose. Similarly, this next paper requires you to consider further how rhetorical choices affect the audience and their interpretation of a text. Assignment: Complete one of the options listed below

1) Write an essay in which you compare/contrast the rhetoric used in “Japan’s Nuclear Nightmare: How the Bomb Became a Beast Called Godzilla” and “Monsters and the Moral Imagination.” Then, determine how rhetorical choices influence readers’ understanding of the message.

2) Write an essay in which you compare/contrast the rhetoric used to portray werewolves and vampires in the films, ​Hotel Transylvania ​and ​Twilight​. Then,​ ​determine how rhetorical choices influence viewers’ understanding of the message.

Whichever option you choose, you must be able to explain what the authors’ or producers’ messages are, how rhetoric is used to make the message clear, who the target audience is, and how the rhetoric used directs your attention towards what is important in the work. Requirements:

● MLA Formatted page settings, in-text citations, and a Works Cited page ● Identify 3-4 ​specific​ rhetorical choices from each source ● Incorporate examples from each source ● Think deeply about what their message and methods say about society today

Getting Started:

● Look for 3-4 rhetorical choices made by the authors or film producers (as you’ve done in class) ● Collect examples of the choices ● Explain what the authors’/producers’ goals or messages are ● Explain whether or not their rhetoric helped or harmed them