Return to the COMM 652 Home Page
You will prepare a full bibliographic essay on each of the units (one Group A and one Group B) for which you present the seminar. This project should simply be a written report on your literature search that is part of your seminar presentation. What does "full" mean? Probably not everything ever written, but certainly it should be constructed based on (1) the work that those working in the field identify as precursor, (2) your identification of key moves in the study. and (3) the latest issues to be raised and addressed. What is a “bibliographic essay”? Obviously, it is not just a list (although it contains one); it is an essay, peppered liberally with authors and titles, designed to orient readers to a body of literature. The bibliographic essay is judgmental and directive: it declares what is essential to read, what less so but important, and may even tell you what to skip. The content-oriented lead book reviews that appear in journals such as Quarterly Journal of Speech would be a good example. Communication Yearbook now publishes these as well. Yours should be no longer than 1000 words (four pages, 12 point, word processed), excluding source list. These can be a group project. All working on the project are assigned the grade for the project. Due date and weight is indicated below. Think of it this way: you are going to write a paper for a conference – the Alta Argumentation Conference next year – and you want to orient yourself to one of these moves in contemporary theory. You will go to this bibliographic essay as a way of orienting yourself. Is yours good enough for others to do that?
Return to Contents of this page
Return to the COMM 652 Home Page
Write an essay which contributes to one of the projects current in contemporary rhetorical theory. Your paper should: (1) isolate a problem/question within the project; (2) establish the significance of the problem/question; (3) propose your solution to this problem/question or identify the solution of someone else you want to evaluate; and (4) defend the significance of the contribution of your proposal or if you are evaluating the solution of another, defend your evaluation. In other words, you have the option of either (1) proposing your own addition to the project, (2) finding some new theorist or some already developed idea that can contribute to the project but has not been related to it, or (3) evaluating the proposal of someone else you have read who contributes to the project. This assignment should reveal your ability to work with a theoretical project with some depth. It might be the project that your group has examined, but it need not be. Your reading, and our journals, are filled with papers that can serve as examples (good and bad) of essays that would meet this requirement. Note this is an essay addressing a problem in theory. It is not a criticism using a theory, although certainly some criticism might illustrate or illuminate your theoretical thesis
This paper should be about 3000-5000 words (check the total on your word processor, but on average this is 12-20 pages of 12 point non-proportional text). Be certain you narrow your focus sufficiently to make your project possible in an essay of this length. The paper should contain an extended author’s note containing: (1) the word count for the essay including notes and references as derived from your word processor; (2) notes on the provenance of your essay, (3) a short paragraph indicating your vision of the place of this paper in your scholarly program. (See explanation below for items 2 and 3. If you are using APA these items should be added to the title page.) Due date November 25 (yes, I am going to ruin your Thanksgiving).
Return to Contents of this page
Return to the COMM 652 Home Page
This assignment is designed to allow you to demonstrate the breadth of your understanding of contemporary theory. A number of years ago Michael Leff wrote an essay in which he attempted to characterize contemporary rhetorical theory. He reduced the complexity to only the epistemic move, so he failed, but I want you to try a version of this. Address the essay this way: Is there a coherence to contemporary rhetorical theory? If so, what is that coherence? In addition to the framework specified below, your essay will be evaluated on the breadth of knowledge of contemporary rhetorical theory you display. This paper should be 1500-2500 words (check the total on your word processor, but on average this is 6-10 pages of 12 point non-proportional text). Due December 16.
Return to Contents of this page
Return to the COMM 652 Home Page
Weight for assignments
Major essay, 40%; State of contemporary theory, 25%; Each bibliographic essay, 10%; Seminar Presentations and class participation, 15%.
Papers will be graded on:
Authors Note or Title Page
Each paper should contain an authors note (or title page in APA) containing: (1) the number of words in the essay, taken from your word processor; (2) your affirmation of the University Honor Code; and (3) the provenance of your work.
Provenance of your work
Scholars working on projects, your paper for this course being an example, always see their work within a broader frame of reference than a single iteration. Projects inevitably balance novelty with long periods of development. I expect that your work in this seminar will be both original and a part of your ongoing program of research. To facilitate your thinking on this relationship I offer the following observations:
Late papers?
This course will stack up on you very rapidly if you get behind. The guidelines of "The Great Klumpp Incomplete Memo" will be followed.
Return to Contents of this page
Return to the COMM 652 Home Page
Return to Contents of this page
Return to the COMM 652 Home Page