M

Course Overview and Thinking Rhetorically — Notes and Key Concepts

Office hours and course context

  • Department and setting: History discipline; professor in the philosophy/history/politics wing. Office hours immediately after class; schedule:

    • Mondays: 02:30–03:30

    • Fridays: 11:30–12:50

    • Wednesdays: around 15:00–16:00 (by appointment for late slot)

  • Availability: Open to questions or casual chats outside of office hours by appointment as needed.

Course purpose and stance on writing

  • Foundational course for writing and learning across disciplines; emphasis on writing as a core skill for historians and beyond.

  • Writing as a muscle metaphor: the more you practice, the stronger your writing becomes.

  • In-class writing practice planned every week; students will write by hand in class, then hand the work to the instructor.

  • No in-class use of computers or AI (e.g., ChatGPT) for in-class writing exercises; focus on your thinking and argument.

  • Participation is assessed through in-class writing, class discussions, and engagement with activities; attendance tracked.

Course materials and costs

  • Required textbook: Starkey (Star-key) book; options:

    • Online/e-version via syllabus link

    • Physical copy

  • In-class readings are kept slim and affordable; the instructor prioritizes cost-conscious options for students.

  • Reading material approach: prefer library articles; Starkey is encouraged but not required if cost is prohibitive.

  • Book cost notes:

    • Physical copy around 25 (USD) if purchased low-cost; e-version cheaper.

    • The instructor emphasizes minimizing costs for students; aims to avoid expensive textbooks.

  • Writing supplies: bring a pen and writing pad for in-class exercises.

Technology, AI, and writing policy

  • AI use policy in this course:

    • AI tools may be used for research and locating sources, but you must cite any use of AI (e.g., ChatGPT).

    • Do not use AI to write essays or prompts unless explicitly instructed to do so.

    • If you use AI for research, you must disclose that usage and cite sources found via AI.

    • In-class writing must be handwritten; AI-generated writing will not be accepted for assignments.

  • Rationale: to develop writing and critical-thinking skills and to understand AI strengths/limits.

  • Human vs. machine assignment (new): a three-part exercise designed to explore AI capabilities and students’ own writing.

Course structure and assessments (major components)

  • Four major written components (in addition to ongoing participation and readings): 1) In-class writing exercises

    • Type: in-class writing; collected periodically

    • Weight: 2\% per exercise; total 10\% across five major exercises
      2) Annotated analysis (library/academic integrity focus)

    • Due: \text{Sept }26 (the first library workshop)

    • Weight: 15\% of the course

    • Task: read the academic integrity policy document; annotate and analyze; details posted on Moodle; focus on identifying arguments, evidence, and implications
      3) Early research preparation (bibliography/thesis planning)

    • Due: Oct\ 17

    • Weight: 5\%

    • Task: provide a short bibliography (three sources) for your prospective essay, with an annotated note for each source; include a tentative thesis statement
      4) Presentations

    • Dates: Oct\ 28, Oct\ 31, and Nov\ 3 (five-minute presentations)

    • Purpose: practice communicating your thesis, its significance, and why it matters; not a heavy slide-load requirement; instructor available to review PowerPoints

    • Meeting to discuss progress: scheduled for Oct\ 3 to plan topics and dates

  • Additional major assignment: human first machine (new assignment)

    • Context: runs alongside the standard research paper; aims to explore the interaction between human writing and AI prompts

    • Structure: three parts, all due and submitted in Moodle

    • Part 1: a 500-word essay produced by ChatGPT in response to a prompt provided in class; you must save and upload this AI-produced essay with the exact prompt

    • Part 2: your own 500-word essay addressing the same prompt (your own writing)

    • Part 3: a 500-word comparison essay explaining differences in complexity, nuance, and interpretation between the AI-generated essay and your own draft

    • Length: total roughly 1{,}500 words (across three parts)

    • Evaluation: you must submit all three parts; failure to submit results in a grade of zero for this assignment

    • Rationale: to develop understanding of AI limitations and strengths and your own writing capabilities; emphasizes critical thinking and ethical use of AI

Final research paper and peer review

  • Final research paper (Canada-related topic)

    • Length: 1{,}200\,--\,1{,}400 words

    • Theme: student-chosen topic related to Canada (politics, history, industry trends, education costs, etc.)

    • Process: includes a peer-review phase where classmates review initial drafts and provide feedback

    • Submission: final paper due by December\ 10

  • Peer review research essay

    • Weight: 25\% of the course grade (peer-review phase included)

    • Purpose: students review peers’ initial work and provide feedback; the instructor will assess the quality of this process

    • Note: the final paper is developed from your bibliography and citations and constitutes the main argumentative piece

  • Attendance and participation implications for grading

    • Library workshops attendance contributes 2.5\% each (two workshops planned this semester: Brenda Smith on Oct 10 and tibet/English librarian workshop on Sep 26)

    • Overall attendance is a meaningful portion of the participation grade; not attending can significantly affect your grade

  • Breaks and schedule context

    • Fall reading week: Friday plus the following Monday and Tuesday (Remembrance Day is on Nov\ 11)

    • Midterm break extended from the 7th to the 10th due to the holiday schedule

    • A guest lecture by Dr. Shaw on ethnographic writing will take place after Thanksgiving

    • Note: there is no final exam; your grade relies on the written components and presentations

First lecture content: thinking rhetorically and the writing process

  • Key ideas introduced

    • Title framing: thinking rhetorically and the writing process emphasizes two directions: rhetoric and the writing process

    • Rhetoric: defined as the art, theory, and practice of ethical communication (quote from Andrea Lumsford and coauthors, Everyone's An Author)

    • Rhetoric as ethical communication: writing should be purposeful, audience-aware, and ethically responsible

    • Writing as a conversation: writing engages readers, audiences, and critics; not just recording private thoughts

  • Purpose and audience in writing

    • Every piece has a purpose (argue, inform, entertain)

    • Every piece has an audience (professor, peers, public)

    • Writing rhetorically means aligning purpose, audience, tone, word choice, examples, and format with the intended outcome

    • Different genres require different voices (e.g., formal academic paper vs. newspaper editorial vs. social media post)

    • Flexibility is key: avoid a single rigid voice; adapt to context and audience; examples include standing-up comedian adapting jokes to crowd, or teacher adjusting explanations to different class levels

  • Bias, neutrality, and rhetorical choices

    • No writing is neutral or accidental; choices about language, details, statistics, and personal stories are strategic rhetorical decisions

    • Good writing reflects deliberate choices guided by purpose and audience

  • The writing process as iterative thinking

    • Brainstorming, drafting, testing against audience, revising, and reflecting

    • Writing should be seen as an ongoing process rather than a single-shot event

  • Practical guidance and examples

    • Grounding concepts with examples: when arguing for climate action or critiquing an outdated academic integrity policy, tone and urgency will differ

    • Audience considerations: different audiences require different explanations, references, and vocabularies

  • Rules for formal writing and style tips

    • The instructor mentions a “Rules for Paper Writing” section in the assignment instructions (to reduce nit-picking about style, but still encourage mindful practice)

    • Example guidance: avoid contractions in formal academic writing (e.g., use “cannot” instead of “can’t”)

  • In-class activity example: a real-world rhetorical analysis

    • Jeep Super Bowl ad featuring Bruce Springsteen discussed to illustrate rhetorical choices

    • Context: ad created during a period of political and cultural division in the United States

    • Task: analyze audience targeting, appeals, and values; consider how each element is designed to persuade

    • Note: students will watch the ad in class or asynchronously and discuss its rhetorical strategies as a class exercise

Reading and preparation expectations

  • Readings are assigned to prepare for class discussions and exercises; students are encouraged to complete readings before class discussions

  • Emphasis on critical reading and the ability to identify rhetorical strategies and biases in texts

Questions from students (example from the transcript)

  • Annotated analysis: in-class start vs at-home completion

    • Answer: start in class, complete at home, then upload to Moodle for submission

  • Presentation topic and structure

    • Clarified: presentations are based on the researched topic (thesis, its significance, and why it matters); five minutes each

  • The relationship of the “human vs. machine” assignment to other components

    • Clarified that the assignment is integrated with the course’s broader exploration of AI, writing, and critical thinking

Operational notes and reminders

  • Deadlines and Moodle usage are emphasized; students should monitor Moodle for detailed instructions

  • The instructor encourages dialogue and questions in class; active participation is expected

  • The instructor aims to keep costs low for students while ensuring essential resources and materials are available

  • The course emphasizes ethical engagement with AI, transparent use of AI tools, and a strong emphasis on student thinking and writing skills

Key terms and concepts to remember

  • Rhetoric: ethical communication; relationship between purpose, audience, and form

  • Audience awareness: tailoring tone, examples, and structure to audience

  • Invention, drafting, revision, reflection: the iterative writing process

  • Bias and rhetorical choices: not neutral by default; intentional choices shape meaning

  • Formal writing conventions: rules about contractions, voice, and style in academic writing

  • AI in writing: allowed for research; disallowed for writing tasks unless instructed; required disclosure when AI is used; critical evaluation of AI-produced content

  • Annotated bibliography: brief descriptive/analytic notes accompanying sources

  • Peer review: collaborative assessment of drafts to improve final work

  • The “human first machine” exercise: three-part assignment to compare human and AI-generated writing

Reflection prompts for study and exam prep

  • How does rhetoric extend beyond persuasion to ethical communication and audience responsibility?

  • What makes writing an iterative process, and how can drafting and revision improve your argument?

  • How do purpose and audience influence word choice, tone, and structure in different genres?

  • How can you ethically incorporate AI tools into your research workflow without compromising your own writing?

  • What would be effective criteria for evaluating a real-world example of rhetorical writing (e.g., an advertisement or policy document)?