Please provide an outline for a rhetorical argument analysis of this essay by Julee Christianson."Why Lawrence Summers Was Wrong: Culture Rather Biology Explains The Underrepresentation of Women in...
Please provide an outline for a rhetorical argument analysis of this essay by Julee Christianson.
"Why Lawrence Summers Was Wrong: Culture Rather Biology Explains The Underrepresentation of Women in science and Mathematics".
Assuming you have read the text, you will easily be able to insert evidence into the following skeleton I will provide for you.
First, examine your task. You are being asked to read a text and then to examine the rhetorical strategies (how the author conveys his or her ideas) used to prove a point (make the argument).
Next, what is the main argument being made? You need to be able to articulate this before continuing with your analysis. It appears, through the title, that Christianson is claiming that culture plays a stronger role in the underrepresention of women in the science field than biological differences in men and women. So, if this is correct, how does Christianson develop this argument and support her claim?
Look at patterns of development: Does she tell stories or share personal experience? Does she give specific examples? Does she define terms? Compare or contrast men and women's contributions? Does she compare her ideas to Lawrence's and how does she prove him wrong? Does she share specific data or percentages? How does she convince or persuade the reader to believe the way that she does. This is rhetorical analysis.
Begin with an introduction sharing her claim and your own interpretation of how she makes and supports it. Ex: Julee Christianson, in her essay entitled "......,' makes the argument....through her use of ....." This would be your thesis statment.
Next, use your body paragraphs to discuss different patterns of development. Be sure to give specific examples. Ex: The author, through use of ......, shares........
And then, simply, wrap it up.
By answering the above questions, reflecting on the piece itself, and organizing your analysis, you can't go wrong. Unless you haven't read it closely and don't understand the text, and that's a different question.