Joining the Conversation: Rhetorical Analysis and Argumentation

Lesson Overview and Learning Targets

Scope and Curriculum Context

• Lesson Title: Lesson 1.6: Joining the Conversation

• Textbook Pages: Pages 37–45

Learning Targets

• Target 1: Analyze details and fallacies in an argument.

• Target 2: Explain how an author builds an argument.

Overview and Preview

• Analyze an argumentative text regarding communication and evaluate the evidence and appeals used by the author to construct her thesis.

Rhetorical Elements: Evidence and Appeals

Categorization of Evidence

Evidence is information used to support a position in an argument. Evaluating the type of evidence provided is crucial when assessing the overall credibility of an argument.

• Empirical Evidence:

  • Definition: Evidence based on direct experiences and direct observation through structured research.

  • Credibility Impact: High reliability when supported by sound research methodology and verifiable data.

• Logical Evidence:

  • Definition: Evidence based on concrete facts and clear, step-by-step reasoning or rationale.

  • Credibility Impact: Establishes direct, reasonable connections between claims and evidence.

• Anecdotal Evidence:

  • Definition: Evidence based on personal accounts or single incidents.

  • Credibility Impact: Least reliable type of evidence because it relies on individual observation or personal story rather than objective research or factual data.

Rhetorical Appeals and Persuasive Language

Writers craft powerful arguments by combining well-supported claims with persuasive language to appeal to audiences capable of taking action.

• Ethos (Ethical Appeal):

  • Focus: Appeals to ethics, character, and moral standards.

  • Purpose: Builds trust and establishes the author's credibility and authority.

• Logos (Logical Appeal):

  • Focus: Appeals to logic, rationality, and evidence.

  • Purpose: Persuades through clear structure, facts, and reason.

• Pathos (Emotional Appeal):

  • Focus: Appeals to emotions, empathy, and personal feelings.

  • Purpose: Creates emotional connections between the audience and the topic.

• Key Principle: A strong argument relies on a combination of well-supported claims and carefully used persuasive language.

Active Reading Strategies and Writing Exercises

Annotation Directives

When reading the excerpt from We Need to Talk: How to Have Conversations That Matter by Celeste Headlee (Page 38):

• Marking Evidence: Underline or circle specific portions of the text to distinguish empirical, logical, and anecdotal evidence.

• Vocabulary Acquisition: Circle unfamiliar words and phrases, using context clues, word roots/parts, or dictionaries to determine exact meanings.

Writing Journal Prompt

Practice sentence construction using details from We Need to Talk alongside specified transition words.

• Model Example: because / fractured

  • Because our world has become fractured by politics, it is more important than ever that we learn how to have a conversation.

• Prompt 1: Since / Mallery Thurlow

  • Sentence Prompt: Draft a sentence using the word "Since" and incorporating Mallery Thurlow.

• Prompt 2: Even though / talk about conversation

  • Sentence Prompt: Draft a sentence using "Even though" while addressing the topic of conversation.

Text Analysis: "We Need to Talk" by Celeste Headlee

Observations and Reading Questions (Page 42)

• Key Observations:

  • What argument is the author making about talking—and about listening?

  • What specific details in the text caught your attention?

Comprehensive Text-Dependent Questions and Answers

Question 1: The Tragedy of Air Florida Flight 90

• Question: What does the author suggest caused the tragedy of Air Florida Flight 90? How does she come to this conclusion?

• Answer: The author suggests that the tragedy occurred because the pilots did not communicate well as the plane was being de-iced during the storm. As evidence, the author provides the transcript between the pilot and co-pilot that shows the lack of communication between the two officers.

Question 2: Central Thesis and Analytical Method

• Question: What is the key idea of this passage, and how does Headlee support it?

• Answer: The key idea of this passage is that society needs to become better at communicating, which includes both speaking and listening. The author provides factual details regarding the crash of Air Flight 90, which Headlee claims may have been prevented if the pilots had communicated better. She also provides a personal anecdote.

Question 3: Listening Lessons and Emotional Resonance

• Question: What was one of Headlee's most valuable lessons in listening? What kind of appeal does she make?

• Answer: The author claims that one of the most valuable lessons was a result from her failure to listen. She then describes how France Neptune told his fiancée, Mallery Thurlow, that her godchild had died in the earthquake. The story is meant to be heartbreaking and appeals to the reader's emotions.

Question 4: Self-Reflection and Purpose

• Question: The author writes, "In my private life, I've lost contact with family members and I've seen friendships die in silence when I failed to say what was really on my mind." What is the author's purpose for including this reflection?

• Answer: The author provides this reflection to connect to the reader by showing that she, too, is guilty of the offense she describes in others. Here, Headlee is acknowledging that she is not perfect, but that she is able to see the problem.

Question 5: Structural Role of Opening Evidence

• Question: What do you think was Headlee's purpose in beginning with the story of Air Florida Flight 90? How does the story work with her argument throughout the text?

• Answer: The author begins with the transcript to illustrate how readers interpret the event differently. While some believe that de-icing standards were to blame or that the co-pilots need training in direct communication, the author is making the point that listening effectively is a survival skill because conflict is inevitable.

Question 6: Evaluating Evidence Impact

• Activity: Return to the marked text to categorize evidence as empirical, logical, or anecdotal. Discuss in small groups how each form of evidence impacts the reader's understanding and the credibility of the argument.

Identifying Logical Fallacies

Definition and Function

A logical fallacy is a common error in reasoning that undermines the logic of an argument. Fallacies are frequently based on irrelevant points or unbacked claims.

Table of Common Logical Fallacies (Page 44)

Notebook Assignment (Page 44)

• Prompt 7: Reread the excerpt from We Need to Talk to locate examples of fallacious reasoning. Provide evidence explaining why the reasoning is fallacious, and discuss how the text could be rewritten to remove these flaws.

Grammar and Punctuation: Colons and Semicolons

Practice Exercise Key

• Part 1:

  1. A

  2. B

  3. B

  4. B

  5. B

• Part 2:

  1. A

  2. B

  3. B

  4. A

  5. B

  6. B