Rhetorical Analysis

Structure

To structure this evaluation, you should introduce both sources and their topic (context) and provide a generalization of your evaluation (thesis). Your own opinion about the topic should be absent for now.

Follow your introduction with CEDAR paragraphs containing Claims and Evidence to support your evaluation of each source. Compare and contrast the sources in terms of their validity, soundness, and persuasiveness. Remember you are analyzing how and how well these articles are written. You are not talking about what they are written about yet.

This part, evaluating the writing, is the bulk of your argument, and you have a lot of freedom with the way you organize it. You can alternate sources from paragraph to paragraph, you can evaluate each against a single criteria in the same paragraph, evaluate each against a single criteria in their own back-to-back paragraphs, or some other organizational structure.

After providing evidence for which source is more persuasive, you should include your own stance on the topic, reflecting on how the more persuasive argument may have influenced you. The majority of your writing should focus on evaluating the 2 sources with your own comments serving as a conclusion or a final paragraph and conclusion.

Requirements:
1500-2000 words (more room for creativity)
Argument of Evaluation
Compares two sources for the writing (not the topic)
2 sources minimum and maximum.*

Logos: claim/proposal relying on facts and reason

Pathos: claim/proposal relying on generating emotion

Ethos: claim/proposal relying on trustworthiness of writer

Kairos: the best time, place, and way of making an argument

The CEDAR method for organization follows this structure:

Claim to be proved

Evidence used

Details to notice

Analysis to explain

Return sentence

A Rhetorical Analysis is “the close, critical reading” of an argument to figure out exactly how (and how well) it functions. This includes analyzing and evaluating the claims, reasoning, and point