Discussion Board Forum 2 Instructions For This Course

Discussion Board Forum 2 Instructions This course utilizes the Post Fir

In Module/Week 8, you will write a 300–350-word Visual Analysis (Part I) and a 200–250-word response to a classmate’s thread (Part II). Please note the word count does not include citations.

Part I: Visual Analysis

1. Watch the video: Purdue OWL: Visual Rhetoric. Copy and Paste into your browser if the Blackboard link does not work.

2. Review Textbook Chapter 4 (Section 2-a) “Summary and Comparison of the Classical, Toulmin, and Rogerian Models” in the Week 7 Reading and Study folder.

3. Review the visual included in Blackboard.

4. Analyze the effectiveness of the visual argument presented in the visual in a word response containing the following information:

  • Based on the video: “Purdue OWL: Visual Rhetoric”: Describe the Rhetorical Situation of the visual (purpose, audience, context).
  • How do the visual elements persuade the viewer to think or act in a certain way? Give specific examples of visual elements in the visual. Are the elements effective considering the Rhetorical Situation you have identified? Explain.
  • Are there ways that the visual elements could be presented differently for a better result? What aspects of the visual are most effective? Explain.
  • Based on the “Summary and Comparison of the Classical, Toulmin, and Rogerian Models”: Which model do you think could best be supported with this visual? Give specific reasons to support your answer (i.e., use of appeals in Classical, use of claim, warrants, and backing in Toulmin, or the common ground in Rogerian).
  • Complete your analysis with a summary of the effectiveness of the visual argument presented in the visual.
  • Cite the visual according to your documentation style (APA, MLA, or Turabian).

5. Write the paper with the title: "Title–Citation style" (e.g., “Silence the Violence: A Visual Argument Critique – APA”) using the corresponding documentation style.

Part II: Reply to Classmate

Reply to your classmate’s post with a 200–250-word response, addressing:

  • Your response to your classmate’s analysis of the visual.
  • Specific points regarding your classmate’s content related to the OWL video and textbook comparisons of the models of argument.
  • Use principles of argument to rebut or support your classmate’s ideas.
  • Avoid generic statements like “I like what you said” or “I disagree with your comment.” Instead, explain why you agree/disagree or add additional ideas or perspectives.
  • Maintain respectful and courteous interaction per the netiquette policy.

Review the Discussion Board Forum Grading Rubric before submitting.

Paper For Above instruction

In this analysis, I examine a visual that advocates for environmental conservation. The purpose of the visual is to persuade viewers to appreciate and act to protect natural resources. The intended audience appears to be environmentally conscious citizens and policymakers, set within a context of increasing ecological awareness and urgent climate issues. The visual employs powerful imagery: a dying tree juxtaposed with vibrant wildlife, symbolizing the destructive impact of environmental neglect. The use of stark contrast in colors—a dull, brown background against the vivid green of healthy flora—serves as a visual metaphor emphasizing the importance of conservation. The visual elements effectively persuade viewers by evoking emotional responses; the stark imagery elicits concern and responsibility, urging immediate action. To enhance the visual’s impact, the elements could incorporate more data-driven infographics that appeal to the logical aspect of the audience, aligning with the Toulmin model’s focus on warrants and backing. The visual, with its emotional appeal, aligns strongly with the classical rhetorical model’s emphasis on ethos and pathos, while the use of clear claims and warrants would also suggest it supports the Toulmin model. Overall, the visual effectively communicates its message by combining emotional appeal with compelling imagery, though integrating more data could improve its logical persuasiveness. The visual is cited as (Author, Year) in MLA style, with the citation formatted accordingly.

References

  • Brummett, B. (2010). Persuasion in Advertising. Routledge.
  • Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication Theory as a Field. In G. Barnett (Ed.), Rhetorical Listening (pp. 229–247). Routledge.
  • Eccleston, R. (2011). Visual Rhetoric. In B. M. Boller & M. J. Stanley (Eds.), The Rhetoric of Visual Argument (pp. 45–61). Routledge.
  • Foss, S. K., & Foss, K. A. (2018). Inviting Interpretation: A Visual Rhetoric Approach. Waveland Press.
  • Gronbeck, B. E. (2005). The Rhetoric of Visual Arguments. Communication and Culture, 3(2), 73–84.
  • Hattwig, D., & Burgess, S. (2018). Visual Rhetoric and Digital Media. Journal of Visual Literacy, 37(2), 123–137.
  • MacDougall, D. (2005). The Medium is the Message. In The Visual Culture of Moving Images (pp. 45–67). Routledge.
  • Rogers, R. (2014). Digital Methods. MIT Press.
  • Serafini, F. (2014). Reading the Visual: An Invitation to Visual Literacy. Teachers College Press.
  • Walsh, M. (2006). The Rhetoric of Visual Argument. Journal of Visual Culture, 5(2), 169–188.

Related Assignments