Writing, Ethics, and Civic Discourses

Owned by George Rhinehart
Last updated: Aug 14, 2020
8 min read

INQUIRY DESCRIPTION            

WRT 205 courses in “Writing, Ethics, and Civic Discourses” will focus on developing an understanding of writing at the intersection of publics, language use, and ethics. Discussions of research methods and methodologies and sustained inquiry across various genres and contexts will help students effectively position themselves as critical learners, readers, and writers. Students will be able to engage in critical inquiry, analysis, and research as situated processes; conduct and evaluate primary and secondary research on civic discourses across genres; and ethically participate in civic discourse as a form of rhetorical action and social practice. 

Below are two possible trajectories on which to approach this inquiry. Detailed explanations of each trajectory, readings, and assignment sheets are offered in links below.1

Trajectory 1

Trajectory 2

These trajectories were developed in consultation with leaders and members of the 2016-2017 inquiry working group and the 2017-2018 Lower Division Committee. Special thanks to Kate Navickas, Khem Aryal, and Martha Dillingham for providing the basis for Trajectory 1 and to Jessica Corey and Rae Ann Meriwether for providing the basis for Trajectory 2

TRAJECTORY 1

This WRT 205 class is composed of three main units. The first centers on reading practices, synthesizing shared readings and source materials about civic discourse and what it means to engage in it. Students compose a brief essay (3-4 pages) that synthesizes source material, considering diverse perspectives, in an attempt to define (for themselves and in a multi-faceted way) civic discourse. The assignment is designed to enhance students’ critical reading strategies while asking them to consider the connections between research, writing, and social action.  

In the second unit, students engage in sustained research on an issue of civic discourse and ethics that is important to them. They create a digital research portfolio of five different pieces of civic discourse in at least three different genres and provide brief annotations of each. For example, a student might use two articles from news sources, a blog post, a TED Talk, and an op-ed. The range of possible genres is very broad; indeed, some students use comments sections of articles, Twitter conversations (captured via screenshot), etc. Along with the portfolio, students create a visual source map in which they represent the ongoing discussion/debate, the stakeholders, and the rhetorical and ethical dimensions. These source maps can be created using a variety of tools: Piktochart, Prezi, PowerPoint, drawings, etc. They should include annotations on the nature of the sources in relation to each other, their connections/disconnections, incorporation of research, credibility, and the ethical dimensions of how the arguments are made. 

In the third unit, students consider what they’ve learned about their civic issue thus far and take a stand in a current debate by writing an op-ed to a specific readership (for example, readers of the Daily Orange, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal). Students also reimagine their argument as a visual text (for example, an infographic poster, a public service announcement,  or a video). Some teachers may find it helpful to limit the possible genres students might choose. 

Each of these projects includes a reflective component that becomes part of the final portfolio.

Along with the WRT 205 foundational readings provided here, below are readings that may be useful for this trajectory:

Introduction to Civic Discourse
Benson, Thomas W.  “The Rhetoric of Civility.” Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, vol. 1, no. 1, 2011, pp. 22-30. [pdf] 

Cooper, David C.  “Is Civic Discourse Still Alive?” Museums & Social Issues, vol. 2, no. 2, Fall 2007, pp. 
157–164. [pdf]

Ersolmaz, Lori H. “Engaging People: A Spirit of Collective Responsibility.” Voices of Hope Productions, 
2005-2016.  http://engagingpeople.tv  (several short documentaries at this site) 

Faber, Brenton. “Writing and Social Change.” Handbook of Research on Writing : History, Society, 
School, Individual, Text, edited by Charles Bazerman, L. Erlbaum Associates, 2008, pp. 269-280. [pdf]

Lane, Shelley D. and Helen McCourt. “Uncivil Communication in Everyday Life: A Response to Benson’s 
‘The Rhetoric of Civility.’” Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, vol. 3, no. 1/2, 2013, pp. 17-29. [pdf]

Wells, Susan. “Rogue Cops and Health Care: What Do We Want from Public Writing?” College 
Composition and Communication, vol. 47, no. 3, Oct. 1996, pp. 325-341. [pdf]  

            
Shared readings that work well together for collective (whole-class or small group) practice with reading rhetorically and visual mapping, etc.2 


Austin, Curtis. “Black Panthers, White Lies.” Youtube, uploaded by TEDx Talks, TEDxOhioStateUniversity, 6 April 2016, www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPN8LHVeFYA&t=2s. Accessed 24 Oct 2017.

Harris, Frederick C. “The Next Civil Rights Movement?” Dissent, vol. 63, no. 3, Summer 2015, pp. 34-40. [pdf]  

Olasov, Ian. “How did ‘All Lives Matter’ come to oppose ‘Black Lives Matter?’” Lexicon Valley: A Blog 
about Language, 18 Jul 2016. Slate.com, http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2016/07/18/all_lives_matter_versus_black_lives_matter_how_does_the_philosophy_of_language.html.  Accessed 26 Oct 2017. 

Reynolds, Barbara.  “I was a Civil Rights Activist in the 1960s.  But It’s Hard for me to Get Behind Black 
Lives Matter.”  Washington Post, 24 Aug 2015, http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/08/24/i-was-a-civil-rights-activist-in-the-1960s-but-its-hard-for-me-to-get-behind-black-lives-matter/?utm_term=.ad5e874835b2.  Accessed 9 Jan 2017.  

Yancy, George and Judith Butler. “What’s Wrong with ‘All Lives Matter?’” New York Times, 12 Jan 2015, opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/01/12/whats-wrong-with-all-lives-matter/.  Accessed 9 Jan 2017. 

Select teaching materials can be found here.

Martha and Rae Ann used texts regarding the #BLM debate when they piloted the course, but other texts addressing a public issue from various perspectives can be used for in-class practice.  In another Civic Discourse class not described in this document, Jeff Simmons and his students explored connections between the Black Panthers and today’s #BLM movement, through grassroots publications written in the 1960s. The range of possibilities for this course inquiry are vast!  

 

TRAJECTORY 2

This trajectory begins with a brief reflective unit and is followed by an extended inquiry project that comprises the bulk of the semester. The latter is designed to help students develop 1) reading strategies, with particular attention to how we recognize bias; 2) research practices (how to conduct primary and secondary research and how to analyze data); and 3) the ability to analyze and compose across a range of genres. 

For unit 1, students are asked to compose a text in any genre they consider appropriate for their intended audiences in which they explore their stances as writers engaging in civic discourse and as citizens of the world. Students read several texts explaining what civic discourse means, the spaces in which it takes place, and what it means to be civil when engaging in it. Several in-class activities help them consider these questions. For example, students participate in a privilege exercise adapted from sociology classrooms; they take one or two implicit bias tests offered online by researchers at Harvard; they consider how they have come to know what they know about political, social, economic, legal, environmental issues, etc. Then, they are asked to consider the ways in which their position might impact how they understand civic issues. The assignment is designed to help students become more aware of themselves as writers with particular biases about various issues and to keep that in mind as they progress through the rest of the semester. One way to structure this unit is to have students read two to three shared texts and have them explore their biases in relation to a particular issue.  

In the extended inquiry unit, students begin by considering news stories from different perspectives. Using allsides.com, students find a story of interest and consider it from three different perspectives: right, left, and center. They write analytical blog posts in which they compare the different texts. Students consider the language used, the inclusion or exclusion of information, how each article relates to the publication’s mission, and how each seeks to persuade its audience. Through this blogging, students develop a greater awareness of how bias works in texts, and they begin to hone in on a more specific topic for their extended inquiry project.

Once they select a topic, they begin in-depth research. Students find 6-8 sources about their topic in specific assigned genres (one scholarly text, one book, one video news story or TED Talk, one podcast or audio story, one long-form news story, and 1-3 other texts). They create an annotated bibliography that addresses the rhetorical situation of each text (genre, purpose, intended audience, author’s ethos). At the same time, they are introduced to methods of primary research (interviews, surveys, observations, etc.); they propose a plan that explains the primary research they will conduct and its value to the project. Once their plan is approved, students conduct their research and share their findings.  

While they are gathering research for their individual projects, students also work in groups to research and analyze a specific civic genre (op-eds, TED Talks, long-form news stories, political campaign commercials, political campaign print ads, political speeches, etc.). Groups present their findings about their chosen genres in a brief, formal presentation with examples. The assignment is valuable in how it teaches students how genres work while offering a range of possible ways students might present their own researched argument. Following this group presentation, students submit genre plans in which they discuss how a particular genre might be useful for their particular project. 

Upon completion of the extended inquiry project, students write a statement in which they explain the choices they made in conducting their research and composing their final text and how it contributed to their overall goals. They also assemble a portfolio containing  various texts and drafts from the course along with a reflective essay about their work over the course of the semester.

Along with the WRT 205 foundational readings provided here, below are readings that may be useful for this trajectory:

Introduction to Civic Discourse

Benson, Thomas W.  “The Rhetoric of Civility.” Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, vol. 1, no. 1, 2011, pp. 22-30. [PDF] 

Cooper, David C.  “Is Civic Discourse Still Alive?” Museums & Social Issues, vol. 2, no. 2, Fall 2007, pp. 157–164. [PDF] 

Ervin, Elizabeth. “Encouraging Civic Participation among First-Year Writing Students; Or, Why Composition Class Should Be More like a Bowling Team.” Rhetoric Review, vol. 15, no. 2, Spring, 1997, pp. 382-399. [PDF] 

Glenn, Cheryl, and Ratcliffe, Krista.  Introduction: “Why silence and listening are important rhetorical arts.” Silence and listening as rhetorical arts, edited by Cheryl Glenn and Krista Ratcliffe, Southern Illinois University Press, 2011, pp. 1-22. [PDF]

Lane, Shelley D. and Helen McCourt. “Uncivil Communication in Everyday Life: A Response to Benson’s ‘The Rhetoric of Civility.’” Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, vol. 3, no. 1/2, 2013, pp. 17-29. [PDF]

Liu, Eric. “Why Ordinary People Need to Understand Power.” TED.com, TedCity2.0, 2013 September.  https://www.ted.com/talks/eric_liu_why_ordinary_people_need_to_understand_power.  Accessed 9 Jan 2017.  

Spengler, Tom.  “The Ultimate Guide to Civic Engagement.”  The Huffington Post, 21 Aug 2013, https://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-spengler/the-ultimate-guide-to-civ_b_3789974.html.  Accessed 9 Jan 2017.  

Twenge, Jean. “Millennials: The Greatest Generation or the Most Narcissistic?” The Atlantic, 2 Mar 2012, www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/05/millenials-the-greatest-generation-or- the-most-narcissistic/256638. 

Ethics and Bias

Birk, Newman P. and Birk, Genevieve B. “Selection, Slanting, and Charged Language.”  Language Awareness: Reading for College Writers, Edited by Paul Escholz, Alfred Rosa, and Virginia Clark, pp. 347-354. [PDF]

Cushman, Ellen.  “The Rhetorician as Agent of Social Change.”  College Composition and Communication, vol. 47, no. 1, Feb 1996, pp. 7-28. [PDF]

Henning, Teresa.  “Ethics as a Form of Critical and Rhetorical Inquiry in the Writing Classroom.” English Journal vol. 100, no. 6, 2011, pp. 34–40. [PDF] 

Kroll Barry. “Arguing about Public Issues: What can we Learn from Practical Ethics?”  Rhetoric Review, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 105-119. [PDF]  

Miller, Carolyn R. and Charney, Davida.  “Persuasion, Audience and Argument.”  Handbook of Research on Writing: History, Society, School, Individual, Text, edited by Charles Bazerman, L. Erlbaum Associates, 2008, pp. 583-98. [PDF]

Project Implicit’s Implicit Assumption Tests.  Harvard University, https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/ Accessed 26 Oct 2017.  

Rottenberg, Annette T. and Winchell, Donna Haisty. “Common Logical Fallacies.”  Elements of Argument, 10th edition, Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2012, pp. 308-18. [PDF] 

Select teaching materials can be found here.