1) Never again use the incorrect format– Use MLA format= Times New Roman, size 12, double spaced! 2) Never again-- use incorrect punctuation with quotations. Punctuation goes inside quotation marks (unless you’re British ). 3) Never again use “I” in analysis. 4) Never gain use “you” in analysis. 5) Never again use the pronoun they when talking about a singular speaker! Never again use he/she either. Just choose one. “In this quote, they are talking about…” “He/she believes that…” And staple your papers please…

1.To find out what something is made up of by identifying its constituent parts 2. To study or examine the structure of something or how its constituent parts are put together 3. To examine something in great detail in order to understand it better or discover more about it **Tear the passage apart. Use the proof (word choice, details, tone, language) to PROVE your hypothesis about the author and his/her purpose.

 The document clearly states that classical republicanism is not intended to please the individual, but then who is it supposed to please? The higher classes in society? The people who come up with these theories?  Government is used for the control of the people. Society cannot survive without government because then there would be too much chaos. Common good is favored by the lower class especially so that they too can be heard.  Classical Republicanism seems like too good of an idea, and that the thought of promoting the common good really will never work because there will always be some sort of discrimination or segregation in politics and classes and groups. Weed #1: **Analyzing is not a journal entry or a reflection. You are not giving commentary on the subject matter. You are looking at the text as a scientist would.

 The author talks about his six-year-old daughter and how she is a victim of racism. He states that she is forming “ little clouds of inferiority ” and that she will form a bitterness towards white people segregation is not ended soon.  This person believes that America faces a “ great danger ” that will occur if nothing changes. He sees a weak Confederation as incapable of “ speak[ing] for America. ” He believes that without a strong central government chaos will erupt. WEED #2: Analysis is not summarizing what the speaker says, believes, or feels. Instead, what is the author ’ s purpose, how is he expressing it, and why has he chosen to do it that way. Summary verbs: states, says, explains, feels, believes-- Avoid these verbs to avoid just giving summary.

The topic of classical republicanism is not a very exciting or creative topic so the immediate conclusion of the reader is that this is an informative piece. It is obvious that the author does not have a formal education because they wouldn ’ t speak a sentence of that extensive length. WEED #3: Analyzing is not cheerleading (don’t need to compliment the author) & it is not judgmental (Analyzing is not about us-- it is about the author and his intent for the passage.)

WEED #4- Lack of textual proof To analyze effectively, everything must be backed with proof, i.e. text. The way that republicanism is described makes it sound like a perfect solution. Change to: By using the work “classical,” the author uses the connotation of sophistication, purity, and value to imply that republicanism is a perfect solution. The author is clearly worried about the “great danger America faces.” Through the author’s serious and urgent tone voicing this “great danger,” his audience would be able to feel the gravity of the situation. His use of rhetorical questions such as “Who will speak for America?” voice his desperation and may even lead to his audience suggesting that he should speak for their country.

 Quoting incorrectly Quotations were non-existent (no textual proof) Quotations were too long (use partial quotations and word choice instead) Punctuation/ capitalization was wrong Now that we have done the mini-lesson and quoting practice, I would expect that this problem will disappear. Make sure you know how to insert quotations seamlessly. If not, see me.

** The focus of analysis is on the author and what he or she is doing (not saying). Take the opportunity to expand by using the following: Out of all the possible words/phrases/details/techniques, why did the author choose that particular word/detail? What are the connotations? What are the images evoked? What is the tone? What effect does __________ have on the audience? What else? Explore. Be curious. Try to figure it out and make sense of it. Say something. Remember… it is all about the author and what he or she is doing to express their point of view

 SOAPST?  Writing analysis “formula”  Power verbs  Connotation **** Everything we do in class has a purpose. Please use the resources to your advantage. Be coachable and open to constructive criticism in order to improve as analytical writers.

I State subject II Identify technique (word choice, imagery, tone, etc.) + example III In order to… IV State the purpose; connect back to thesis The author/ speaker… Uses the image of stinging darts In order toAllow his white audience (who have not experienced segregation) to make them momentary feel the discomfort and pain, hoping that they will be more apt to stop the practice entirely.

The speaker sounds like a worried politician who is urgently warning his listeners to be on alert and to demand a change. It is possible that he is insinuating that he is that change and is thus encouraging them to vote for him. The first sentence, “ This is the great danger that America faces ” makes the reader feel the seriousness of the situation as if it may be too late to do anything. The speaker uses short and choppy sentence to emphasize his point, which is to create a state of urgency among Americans to fix the problem of disunity within the country. The fact that the speaker asks questions directly to the reader creates a feeling of intimacy, and makes the reader feel as though the speaker is talking directly to them. The words “ individual against individual ” generates a connotation of violence. The whole passage makes the reader feel like if they don ’ t do something then America will self-destruct. This is exactly the author ’ s intent: to convince his audience to take action.

 Grade breakdown  Deciphering the marks on your paper  More roses from your classmates

 Remember your grade on the paper is NOT a reflection of your effort. I acknowledge the amount and time put into this assignment by the vast majority of you.  Your grade is instead a realistic barometer of where you are currently at in terms of writing rhetorical analysis.  This grade is not an “end-all.” The next opportunity is right around the corner!  Low scores do NOT alarm me in the least. If your grades stay the same, then we will become worried together. Please do not panic. (I have curved the grade to avoid widespread panic! ) This is a very new type of writing and there is a learning curve. You will be fine– trust me.  Allow your grade to push your toward improvement. Be coachable!  Concerns, comments, or for some individual coaching, please see me at lunch or during 7 th period.

8-Wow! Complete analysis, strong writing and use of textual proof 7-Impressive analysis and writing 6-Decent, seems to be on the right track; might not have directly Answered the prompt; expand more 5-Uneven analysis, seems to get parts but not others; often relies on generalities or plot 4 -Mostly summary or opinion; not analysis

A Congrats. You are analyzing well. B You are starting to analyze. Do MORE of what you started to do. C Check out what you did well and what you did not. You ’ re getting there … D 1-12 Does what we went over and the comments on your paper make sense? If not, see me ASAP.

AP= Answers the Prompt Stars and or plus signs= Great!! Strong word choice, analysis, etc. The more the better! You want to see a galaxy of stars! Circles=Errors– punctuation, spelling, etc. Squiggly lines or ? Marks= Awkward, poor word choice, Huh? WC=Poor word choice