Shane Street

English 1010
Midterm Portfolio

Final Draft of Self Rhetorical Analysis

Week 7: Self Analysis
This is one of the works that I am most excited about. I think as a writer is
shows well how I have developed during the course of this class. It is my Self
Analysis paper which compares one of my earlier assignments to the
progression I have learned while in English.
As we follow the growth of a writer we see changes not only in the
words they use. We see changes in very manor in which they create.
Everything from the way they gather information, to the thought process in
which they form their perspective. As a writer, Shane Streets ability to
analyze rhetorically has developed considerably throughout the course of his
English class. We see this in his development of terminology that aids in
providing foundation for his evidence. He has a new found ability to look past
what the author has placed in front of us or wanted the readers to see, by
analyzing the implements the author uses to influence a reader into a
particular perspective. We also see more objectivity in his work, implying
that his understanding of how information is presented has changed. He is

however, more subjective in that we see him less apt to trust

unsubstantiated information. As his understand becomes, writers in essence
must persuade an audience.
As we compare Shanes assignments from week 4 with week 6, in the
later we see the use of professional terminology that was not present in his
earlier workings. In his opening paragraph of the Text Analysis, he informs
the reader that the authors SOAPTones, appeals, and style details will be
evaluated. It is important for him to identify these points early because it
provides the reader with the clarity that this IS a rhetorical analysis. Where
as in the Political cartoon, these concepts are never even explored. Even
though, they are crucial to the methodical process, and was the point of the
assignment entirely. The use of these new terms provides structure and
guides both Shane, as the author and the reader as to how we analyze.
These terms like pathos, logos, and appeals help us pinpoint more clearly
exactly what examples or imagery are being used on us. This also provides
direction in which the composition can more easily flow. Shane uses these
phrases to not only provide direction in dissecting the article, but to also
show growth in his understanding of how to analyze.
Another major development in the work we see, is Shanes ability to
move past just the subject the author has presented for us. In the political
cartoon the focus never seems to shift past the picture itself. The analysis
remains what the imagery represents as the author wanted us to see, and
less of why the author wanted us to see something a certain way. Much of

his time was spent giving interesting examples of Obama himself, and how
he campaigned. How he led us as a nation, and how fallacies of imagery
were a constant struggle during his election and time in office. Although
those topics are none the less interesting, they stray from the original
purpose of analyzing the work of the author. In our text analysis, we see
Shanes focus more so on not only the message that the authors were trying
to deliver, but on the means they used to attempt to communicate them. He
used examples, such as referencing the pictures and the graphs that were
placed within the article to not only provide concrete evidence, but to
generate urgency in the target audience. Or how he mentioned the use of
well-known, and well established references to give the article creditability.
Even the tone in which we see the information dissected has changed.
The understanding that this is the perspective of the author is beginning to
surface. The concept that he or she has chosen to omit or include every
detail based on personal perspective. For example, the author may attempt
to only include facts that will be very interesting to keep readers engaged.
Even that concept however is bias, based subjectively on what the author
finds interesting. We see Shane building a stance that all artistic works are at
heart a reflection of the author that come at the cost of the writers
perception. In the final paragraph of the text analysis, Shane concludes that
the article was probably intended to provide objective, factual information,
free of opinion. Even though, at second glance we begin to see empathetic
wordplay, and imagery purposed to play to our emotion, all over the article.

In the political analysis, we are never really provided with any real
speculation on what the author was trying to get us to see, or whether or not
the drawing was meant to provoke particular emotion.
As the more polished rhetorical thinker, it is evident to see that had the
more developed Shane written the first assignment, it would have turned out
very differently. Although he has done a fairly decent job of articulating his
words since the start of the class, his direction and thought progressions
have been altered. He has developed new strategies for investigating
material. It is easy to take something read or heard and accepting as reality
without question, but truly being a rhetorical thinker means having the
ability to see past the verbiage or imagery viewable by the naked eye. To
examine not only the speaker, and the audience to which he is attempting to
reach. But importantly to understand that everything from the tone of the
speaker and the work, to his appearance and presentation are absorbed by
us as the audience and interpreted, subconsciously or knowingly. Sometimes
this happens by complete coincidence, other times it is precise, tactical, and
purposeful.
Week 2: Re-think Writing
When I read this now, its clear that I didnt have a very well developed
understanding of rhetorical thinking. I enjoy reading this though just because
it is evidence that I am learning. Which is something that I enjoy very much,
I am truly in school to learn.

My current profession has required and taught me to practice rhetorical

sensitivity in all aspects of my trade. I have worked in the medical field for
most of my adult life. I have been fortunate enough to work around some of
the most well trained and well educated individuals that I have ever met.
They paved an example, of utmost professionalism and rhetorical sensitivity
towards our patients and those in our care. Those patients expect any
medical professional to dress appropriately, and to carry themselves in a
matter that easily allows them to place the trust and well-being of
themselves and their loved ones into our care. Someone working in this field
who dressed poorly, had unkempt hair, and did not look the part of a medical
professional would fail in the eyes of their patient before ever attempting to
administer any care. Not to mention if that individual did not take his or her
work seriously, or appeared to not have the patients best interest in mind.
Before ever entering the room of a patient I take a brief moment to make
sure that I have all of my thoughts together, my equipment ready, that I
have a direction for conversation, all in an effort to practice rhetorical
sensitivity. To gain and keep the trust of my patient, who in many cases will
take my word as unwritten law.
To my understanding rhetoric is a way of thinking. To consciously adapt
yourself, your project, your writing, or whatever your focus is to a specific
audience or surrounding. To see the details in your subject and target their
belief system, the way they think, persuading them to accept you or your
perspective. For example in the book it talks about using rhetoric thinking

while preparing for an interview. Your target is your interviewers, and you
must persuade them to see you as the most suitable candidate for the
position they are hiring for. You dress however you expect they want you to
be seen, you carry yourself in a matter that appears professional and
matches the job in the eyes of the interviewer. This is all in an effort to get
them to identify with you, and see you as a suitable match for their
environment.
Rhetorical sensitivity seems to be the state you are in when you are
successful in your attempt to think rhetorically. If you adapt well to the
environment, or you write a paper that captures and persuades as intended,
then you were rhetorically sensitive to your audience. Rhetoric seems to me,
the process with rhetorical sensitivity as the goal.
Rhetorical sensitivity is the goal, and rhetorical thinking the means to
an end. I would like to know in more detail the architect behind this idea. Is
there a map to follow to ensure rhetorical sensitivity? Has any form of
system been developed that writers and designers use to think rhetorically?

Peer Reviews to Others

This was a review from week 4. Phillip chose to write on the subject of global
warming, and how it has been affected by big business. This was a very

interesting subject for me and it was enlightening to see anothers

perspective on an issue that only recently is beginning to gain the attention
it deserves.
Phillip,
I think you chose a very interesting subject to analyze. One that is both
controversial as well as underrepresented provided the data behind it. I think
you were right on the money with your interpretation of what was
communicated through the artists work as well. It was actually helpful to not
see your political cartoon before reading what you had to say about it. It
allowed me to paint the picture of what was being conveyed through your
words and in some light your eyes. Then it allowed me to connect the dots in
my own perspective, tying them in with yours.
I enjoyed the point you made about the hands of big business behind
the silencing of evidence. In a society ran by personal gain and capitalism, it
only makes sense that those with the influence and interest in this market
would also have their hands in the pockets of the scientists supporting this
evidence. As it is my understanding many of these research programs are
funding by donation and sponsorship. So much of which comes from the
same people who pretend to support studies in these areas while behind the
curtains stringing red tape and tying the hands of the researchers.
I like as well the point that you made just about the color of the
caricature. That was a point I personally overlooked in my own. It was a

thought-provoking perspective that the colors could wholly represent the

black and white perspectives of those who gain so much from the silence of
these researchers, and those who genuinely only vocalize the hard evidence
of the situation. By admitting that the products these companies make their
profit on contribute to the destruction of our environment, they also admit
there is a problem. One that requires significantly more attention, and a
solution.
In my personal opinion, I felt that the scientist is frustrated that he is
unable to present his findings without jeopardizing himself. This is also I feel,
a representation of the pressure that companies place on the scholars for
silence. Whether it is by means of bribery, or threats from behind the view of
the public, it appears they are conflicted between sharing their findings with
the public, and the fact that finding themselves on the bad side of these big
wigs is an unwise decision.
Great choice again of the cartoon that you chose, at first glance, there
appears to be a simple message conveyed by the artist. However, as we
analyze and dissect the points represented, we find there are many other
ideas at work here.
This peer review comes from the Self Analysis during week 7. I think this is
where the concepts and tools of analyzing rhetorically really started to stick
for me. Robert did a great job on this assignment which really hit pulling

things of the article home for me. His was a great example of how I needed
to start analyzing information.
Robert,
I really enjoyed reading your analysis of yourself. I think you did a great
job of truly analyzing your own work, something I think we all struggled in
doing for this assignment. I like how immediately you began pulling that you
were trying to make emotional connection to your readers. Which also means
that you had a good concept of studying our target audiences. You had a
specific group you were playing to, and you used pathos to connect them to
your outlook. You went as far as to analyze your verbiage which I thought
was an interesting note. As that was one of the final things I thought to
analyze. You specifically noted that you used words that were not only
descriptive, but as well were relatable to your target audience.
I suppose as a critique, it would have been interesting to see you pull a
purpose from your analysis. I had a very difficult time in doing so myself, as
it isnt easy to find the overall purpose of your own analysis on a subject. I
found that in my political cartoon, my purpose appeared to form as myself
attempting to persuade my readers into the idea that right wing supporters
had purposely created an outlandish persona of the Obama Family. Even
though consciously, I was just trying analyze the work of the artist!
Again, you did a very good job of keeping the thought of self-analysis.
Im sure I will steal a few points to ensure I stay as objectively analytical as

possible in projects like these! It was easy to turn this assignment into a
summary of our own work instead of truly drawing out the tools we use in
our own writing! But you kept to the goal at hand! It seems you found that in
that particular assignment, you took a very empathetic approach, appealing
to the emotions of your audience most! Thank you again, good read, great
job Robert!

Peer Reviews Received from Others

It was so cool for me to see the progress that Id made through the eyes of
others in these critiques, I also enjoyed that the teacher implemented these
in the first place. So often in classes papers are written, and then nothing
comes from them. So to receive real feedback from people who are learning
the same subject, was a refreshing change.
From Julianie McCray: Week 5
Shane,
You will be more confident and more objective without your opinion.
You did stay objective through most of this summary. I would suggest you
take out the portion stating "appearing to me" in your analysis. Perhaps you
could rephrase "most points seem very matter of fact." to something similar

to most all of the statements were straight to the point" in order to take out
the word "seem" that is not as powerful. I enjoy that you stated it was an
interesting read. Although, this may be adding your opinion into it as well.
For this, I am not sure. In your last sentence you make a suggestion to
growing families to read this. Could you mention that is the target audience
without the addition of your opinion? Staying objective is difficult for me. I try
to mention the facts and whittle everything else out. I very much hope that
this helps. A few other small things to mention. The length of your paper
meets the requirements perfectly! There is an unnecessary space in "CDC
( Center for Disease Control)". Overall, you did a wonderful job writing this.
From Phillip Mackay: Week 7
I really enjoyed reading your analysis of yourself. I think you did a great
job of truly analyzing your own work, something I think we all struggled in
doing for this assignment. I like how immediately you began pulling that you
were trying to make emotional connection to your readers. Which also means
that you had a good concept of studying our target audiences. You had a
specific group you were playing to, and you used pathos to connect them to
your outlook.
From Holly Ockler: Week 7
Shane,
I am very impressed with your paper. At first glance this is defiantly a
college level paper, it meets the length requirements and has very good

spacing. When reading your assignment, I was very intrigued and impressed
with how well you did on this assignment! You completely nailed it! I wish I
would have read your paper before writing my own. I love that you attached
you work to this assignment so we could take a look at them ourselves.
Something I really liked as well, is you talking about yourself in third person
and if it were someone else comparing your assignments and doing the
analysis for you. Your grammar and punctuation were great. I wish I had
more constructive feedback for you however I don't know how you would
make this paper any better.
It was always so enlightening and confidence building to read the
reviews of my peers, their insight as scholars gave me outside perspective
and always helped me find the small improvements I needed to make to
take my work to the next level. Thank you for that.

Week 6: Text Analysis

Further Analysis of an Article:
Analysis of Short Answers to Hard Questions about Zika Virus
An article in the NY Times provides much needed information about an
under-broadcasted mosquito-transmitted infection called the Zika virus
rapidly spreading at an uncontrolled rate across the western hemisphere.
This article brings light to questions unbeknown to many Americans, about a

virus that could easily spread to Northern America. Female Zika mosquitos
transmit the virus by biting infected hosts and storing the virus in their
circulatory system, before excreting the pathogen through salivary glands
while feeding on uninfected hosts. This article is most particularly
informative, appearing to be mainly objective information supported by data
collected within the WHO (World Health Organization) and CDC (Center for
Disease Control). This article uses many graphs and geographically labeled
charts to solidify data within its readers. At the beginning of the article, most
points seem very matter of fact. All supported by evidence provided primary
sources. However, as it appears, the article becomes more subjective as it
progresses, taking on less definitive questions without absolute answers. Allin-all, this subjected was an interesting read because it answers many
questions most readers dont even realize they have about this disease. For
those who plan on having families or are currently pregnant, this topic should
be especially important as the virus causes the most significant detriment to
unborn children.

Text Analysis
In an article titled Short Answers to Hard Questions about Zika Virus,
by Donald G. McNeil, Catherine Saint Louis, and Nicholas St. Fleur, three
authors attempt to answer the most pressing questions of the public about a

spreading mosquito-transmitted infection causing birth defects in unborn

children in South America. In this analysis, we will examine the SOAPTones
the authors have chosen to focus, the appeals used to connect the audience,
and the style details that give weight to the topic.
The title of the article, suggests in saying short or simplified answers,
the target audience are those with little knowledge of disease pathogens and
control but enough to see relevance. An article in the IBTimes by Lisa
Mahapatra, suggests that 32 percent of The New York Times readers are
between the ages of 18-29, even though they make up only 23 percent of
the population. This demographic suggests The New York Times is shifting its
attention to a young, relatively educated audience. At first glance, this article
does not seem to push an agenda of product or point of view. Nearly all of
the questions answered are supported by scientific evidence provided by the
WHO and CDC, who provide most of the validity of this article. However, the
strong use of photos as sensitive draws may perhaps be an effort to inspire
interest through emotional connection.
The article uses strong logos and pathetic appeals to substantiate the
topic. Most of the photos and graphs used are sourced to back to heavy
hitters in the pathological word. Using well-recognized references for imagery
provides additional legitimacy and weight to the subject. It becomes
increasingly easy to accept the text as undeniable statistic with so many
references to research leaders like the CDC, WHO, AHO, Brazils Ministry of
Health, and University of Oxford. It does set a tone that even with so many

collecting data, there are still a lot of unknowns about the virus. Even
though, it has been in Africa and Asia for decades. Pathos for the article
make light, as the questions become more complex, creating more and more
subjective answers. We also begin see images of a crying baby, and men in
HAZMAT gear, in place of the graphs and charts seen in the opening of the
article. This seems suggestive that the writers used the second half of the
article to begin to make emotional connects of empathy, urgency, and fear
to the subject.
In analyzing the style details, one may note that the questions the
authors are addressing appear written to continue to bring the message back
to the effects on unborn children, which makes sense because that is the
population most afflicted by the virus. This is still a form of repetition worth
noting. As mentioned earlier, there is a strong use of imagery in this article.
Nearly all of the graphs use deep reds against shades of gray, which may
invoke urgency in readers. One of two of the only photographs in the article
are of a woman attempting to soothe a crying infant outside near dark. Even
though the article suggests that aside from microcephaly, many with the
virus have no other symptoms. This is also substantiated in the article,
Normally, about 150 cases of microcephaly are reported, and Brazil says it
is investigating nearly 4,000 cases. Yet reported cases usually increase when
people are alerted to a potential health crisis.
Although this article has been titled, Short Answers to Hard Questions,
the tone of the article is to not only educate people about the virus itself, but

as well to create emotional interest in the subject. As an interesting point,

this article suggests that the virus appears to have migrated from almost
solely in eastern Asia, to predominately the western hemisphere. This topic
does not get the attention it deserves, as projected in the article. Perhaps the
lack of answers and the increase in subjectivity is atonement to the lack of
responsiveness the media and scientific collection has generated on the
subject. As it appears without death, topics like this get little reaction from
news media especially.
The authors use a combination of many logos and pathos to both
convince the reader that the information is both well supported and
substantiated, although it does make notes that many of the research is still
in progress and mostly speculations can be drawn at this stage in
development. In order to authenticate the texts, the authors use the
authority of many other organizations. All of which is backed by plenty of
imagery carrying pathetic undertones. Although it is initially difficult to see
the point of view pressed by the authors, through use of rhetorical analysis
we are able to dissect the article and find the underlying tones used to
persuade us in place.
As a whole this has been an interesting project. To viewing not only my
own opinion about my work, but to then seeing where I have come from, as
a writer. Others gave me such positive feedback, and I am so appreciative of
that. I hope rhetorical analysis is a tool I carry with me from here on out.
Thank you to my peers as well to Bangerter Sensei.