A friend gave me two essays to analyze. One received a 6. once received a 9. One utilized much more advanced vocabulary than the other. Students were having trouble determining why one was so much better than the other. After scanning through them, I knew that one essay had much more depth and sophistication. But how could I SHOW this to the teacher and students? Christensen's propositional analysis seemed to fit the bill.
Here is a link to the document.
Notes for reading this type of discourse analysis: Each bullet point represents further elaboration. The further to the right, the deeper the elaboration. In this case analysis, I kept each sentence intact and did not tease apart the propositions internal to each sentence.
Both papers exhibit depth in elaboration, so the difference in score points was more than simple explanation.
Key Differences:
1. While the first writer does have an organizational strategy in mind, it is sometimes hard to follow. In line six, and order and focus is established, but does not form the order or focus of the ideas and paragraphs that follow. "While Kelley conveys her message through intentional forms of syntax and a call to action, she is most successful in appealing to pathos and ethos to institute a true cry for change." This thesis recognizes syntax and the call to action, but highlights a focus on pathos and ethos. The paragraphs that follow address: 1) syntax: rather weak examples of parallelism 2) call to action 3) ethos and pathos and concludes by calling all of the techniques "theatrical strategies." making the writer's analysis hard to trace and connect to the "one coherent idea" summarized at the closing of the essay.
In contrast, the second writer's thesis outlines the key details addressed and connects them to the writer's purpose and message: "Repeating key concepts, introduction of numerous examples..., and extolling the virtues of laws..., Kelley develops a highly effective argument that pulls her audience into the issue and invites them to join her efforts." The following paragraphs tightly cluster the examples listed in the thesis under broad categories of emotional appeals followed by literary techniques and devices. Tight construction. Effective transition and connection back to the author's purpose are included between and across the selected rhetorical approaches.
2. While the first writer does have levels of development, the c
onnection to the thesis and the author's craft and message seem to be missing at points.
Direct text evidence is used, but it it not particularly well chosen, connected to the thesis, nor embedded successfully.
Restatements of ideas results in unnecessary repetition that does not further develop the topics or the thesis.
First Writer:
·
In the late nineteenth century and the early
twentieth century, child
labor
was a major topic of debate.
o
Florence Kelley,
a United States social worker and reformer, fought ardently against child labor
and for improved working conditions for women.
o
In her speech before the National American Women
Suffrage Association,
Kelley promotes and
end to child labor and increased social reform.
§ While Kelley conveys her message
through intentional forms of syntax and a call to action, she is most
successful by appealing to pathos and ethos
to institute a true cry for change.
·
Kelley makes adequate use of syntax in order to
prove her argument, most notably by her use of parallelism.
o
In describing all of the difficulties and duties that
child labor must endure, Kelly maintains a constant pattern by her use of
parallelism in order to emphasize the harsh realities of child labor.
§
For instance,
Kelley states “The children make our shoes in the shoe factories; they knit our
stocking […]. They spin and weave […]. They carry bundles of garments from the factories
to the tenements, little beasts of burden.”
In contrast, look at the tight coherence between ideas in the second writer's text: Notice the explanation of each level in the simulated footnotes (RS#).
Second Writer: In contrast, the second writer's points all flow together. Several examples are given. Each of them are explained with embedded direct text evidence and language that supports the specific choices of the author and how those rhetorical moves influence the audience throughout the essay.
Throughout Florence Kelley’s 1905 speech
to the Philadelphia Convention of the National American Women Suffrage
Association, she emphasizes the need to alter the existing working conditions
for young children as a necessary change in society.
o Repeating key concepts, introduction
numerous examples of hazardous conditions and state policies, and extolling the
virtues of laws curtailing the workday, Kelley develops a highly effective argument that pulls her audience into the
issue and invites them to join her efforts.
§
Utilizing forceful emotional appeals to
the consciences of her audience, Kelley urges her audience to empathize with the
victims of the labor policies.
·
For example, in
the opening sentence of her speech, Kelley gives the audience an idea of the
scope of the problem: that over “two million children under the age of sixteen
year” have to earn their own living.
o
Through such dramatic references to
the population in question, Kelley commences her speech with a strong jarring
note that forces her audience to care.
·
Continuing in this vein, Kelley describes how “several
thousand little
girls work” throughout each and every night in textile mills, slaving
themselves over the production of consumer goods.
§
By generating sympathy from her audience, Kelley
prepares them for this argument, effectively linking the
problem with the state laws already in place.
3. The
sentence structures between writers are dramatically different. Note a typical construction of the first writer and then compare to the second writer. Both samples come from the section of the essay where writers transition from one point to another. The first writer's attempt represents a
rudimentary transition that does not really add value other than to suggest that the essay is almost over. The second writer
ties the previous paragraph to the next point, creating a streamlined coherence between points and paragraphs. In addition, the second writer add another layer,
connecting the author's techniques (pathos) to the author's purpose and message. The first writer almost ignores the author's message.
First Writer:
Second Writer:
Nevertheless,
throughout her oration, Kelley most often means to tie emotions of her audience in order to present her point.
While completing this analysis, my friend Sherry came by my cubicle. We discussed how analyzing AP student essays requires a macro as opposed to micro analysis of the work. The first writer used more sophisticated terms - that would be the micro level. But it was not until I compared the essays to each other in terms of macro, or propositional analysis, that the key differences slapped me in the face with such clarity. Using the propositional analysis, I could
see the organizational structure and development of each student's response. By annotating each level (
naming what each level modified and accomplished), elements of strengths and weaknesses (particularly in coherence) became more concrete.
x
References:
Christensen, Francis, and Bonnijean Christensen. 1976.
Notes Toward a New Rhetoric: Six Essays for Teachers. New York: Harper and Row.
Christensen, Francis, and Bonnijean Crhistensen. 1976.
A New Rhetoric. New York: Harper and Row.
