Peers in my Discipline
 |
| OFFICIAL LEWEB PHOTOS "Audience @ LeWeb 11 Les Docks-9303" (12/9/2011) via Flickr Attribution 2.0 Generic Creative Commons License |
In this post, I will analyze my audience for Project 2 based on the section "Identifying Your Audience" in A Student's Guide to First - Year Writing.
Who am I writing for? What are their beliefs and assumptions?
- I am writing for new and incoming students in my major / field of interest (this encompasses eSociety and Library Science).
- They need assistance understanding how an act of speech in the discipline will be rhetorically structured, and most likely don't know how to analyze the rhetoric or argument in the discipline.
What position might they take on this issue? How will I respond?
- My audience may not understand that context is just as important as textual analysis.
- I will explain the rhetorical construction and situation of the text, and elaborate upon how they build upon each other and connect.
What will they want to know?
- The audience wants to know how to take arguments apart and examine how they work from the inside out.
How might they react to my argument?
- They might be confused about how context and strategies are relevant to the overall text as well as the argument of the text.
How am I trying to relate to or connect with my audience?
- My audience has the same field of interest as myself, and I can show them how to deconstruct a speech act in our field.
Are there specific words, ideas, or modes of presentation that will help me relate to them in this way?
- Writing in second person may allow me to make the appeal more personal and more actively engage with my readers.
Reflection: When I went to look at the analyses of my peers, I came across an interesting trend. I think my analysis could have been a bit more detailed, and I forgot to include my lovely classmates and professor in my audience! Both Annelise and Jenny had very thorough layouts and it was easy to understand who their audience was, and the direction that they wanted to take their writing in. One commonality between their analyses was that it seemed that they were planning to write an opinionated piece based off of the opinionated piece that they had found. This concerns me, as the Project 2 Breakdown clearly states that we will be educating new students in our field about rhetorical analysis of texts in the field. I went back and took a look at the rubric, and found that they could still use most of their analyses and responses to audience if they chose to, but would still have to alter their audiences. This has shown me that I need to make sure I focus on my specific audience and remember the purpose of this Project.
I think you did a really good job talking about the audience in terms of what was outlined in the project 2 rubric. The rubric clearly outlines who the audience is and what they "want" and your analysis of the audience is perfect. Also, this was a very concise blog post which made it quick and easy to read.
ReplyDeleteI think that you did an awesome job with your answers being very concise and to the point! I never considered writing in second person to engage with your readers more but that actually could be a really good idea. I think that if you use the correct phrases and are able to connect with your audience, you should be able to avoid confusion in the reader!
ReplyDeleteI like how you broke your responses into bullet points, as a reader, it made it easier to follow. Like Rachel already said, you did a good job following Project 2's rubric. However, you could add more information about the article you chose for this project. Like Annelise and Jenny, I planned to write about rhetorical analysis through the article I chose. However, I think that we are allowed to do it the way you planned as well. Overall, your post was well thought out and concise.
ReplyDelete