Teaching

Course Description

This course is designed as a survey course of a variety of applicable rhetorical research and criticism methods. The primary goal of this course is to ensure students in the Communication Studies major have the necessary methods for research and analysis required for upper division rhetoric and public culture courses in the department. Additionally, this course instructs students on the process of developing a research question, a literature base, an outline, an analysis, and a term paper in the language, grammar, and syntax of the field of rhetoric.

Course Objectives

At the end of this course, students should be able to:

1.   Distinguish between rhetorical criticism and other methods of criticism in the academy and distinguish between basic rhetorical criticism methods.

2.   Evaluate and judge appropriate rhetorical methods for use in analysis.

3.   Examine a rhetorical artifact using the principles, methods, and tools of the discipline.

4.   Craft a term paper utilizing one or more rhetorical criticism methods analyzing an artifact of the student’s choice.

Course Syllabus

Course Description

This course is a skills development course that focuses on training undergraduate students in public speaking

Course Objectives

At the end of this course, students should be able to:

1.   Create messages appropriate to the audience, purpose, and context in a public speaking situation

2.   Analyze public speaking situations

3.   Locate and use information relevant to the speaking situation

4.   Present messages to an audience of diverse peers

5.   Critically analyze persuasive messages

6.   Critically analyze other’s messages

7.   Critically analyze one’s own message before, during, and after speaking

Course Syllabus

Course Description

The connection between the concepts of ethics, justice, truth and rhetoric date all the way back to the rhetorical fathers of ancient Greece. Individuals such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle explored how rhetoric could be used to promote justice as well as to manipulate truth. One of the leading Roman rhetoricians of his day, Cicero, promoted the idea that to be a good citizen and a true person of wisdom, one had to learn the ability to present oneself in an articulate manner. Societal good and the future of the community depended upon it. Additionally, the demand to participate in decision-making and deliberation in a diverse and democratic society requires that citizens learn crucial argumentation and research skills to stay informed. Every citizen, regardless of income, faith, race, station in life, or background, will have opportunities to engage in discussions about the future of our society. Debate offers specialized training in research, critical thinking, argument building, judgement, and analysis – essential skills in a world filled with fake news, ideological rigidity, and threats to our democratic system. Debate offers citizens “equipment for living,” as Kenneth Burke said, in a world where climate change, nuclear Armageddon, global pandemics, food insecurity, and water shortages threaten the health and well-being of all humans on the earth. How are we to manage a problem such as planetary warming when the scale, visibility, and complexity of the problem seem beyond the reach of any individual, government, or nation? Debate does not offer the easy answers to any of the complex problems facing human society. What it does is offer humans are the communicative tools we need to overcome these problems and engage in collective action to survive this century and thrive well into the next.

Course Objectives

At the end of this course, students should be able to:

1. Develop, research, and present a case in support of and in opposition to a specific policy

2. Develop question and answer skills during cross examination

3. Refute and rebut central arguments in a debate

4. Identify and avoid fallacious reasoning in competitive debates

Course Syllabus

Course Description

This course offers students a survey of relevant theories of argumentation and challenges students to develop contemporary applications and approaches to argumentation.

Course Objectives

At the end of this course, students should be able to:

1. Identify and analyze the soundness of constituent elements of arguments.

2. Construct arguments for public persuasion based on argumentation models and theories.

3. Analyze and contest public arguments with refutation and analysis tools developed in argumentation scholarship.

4. Develop methods for testing argument theory in the real world.

Course Syllabus

Course Description

The American Presidency exists at the fulcrum of public policy, public culture, and public address. When the president speaks, cameras power up, mics go hot, and the nation watches and listens, but sometimes they tween and meme too! The presidential campaign season consumes eighteen months of media attention every four years, presidential inaugurals, announcements, press conferences, and impeachment trials are covered by national news and viewed by millions of citizens. Tens of millions tune in for presidential debates, and even more when the highest office in the land speaks on a national tragedy. We have called them commander-in-chief, reverend president, and now Mommala. The rhetorical analysis of presidential speech contributes much to the study of the office, but to understand the institutional and symbolic power of the office of American Presidency, this course goes beyond traditional approaches to the presidency to offer undergraduate students a contemporary perspective on the speaking, doing, moving, and living symbol that is the American President.

Course Objectives

At the end of this course, students should be able to:

1. Explain the utility of viewing the American Presidency as a rhetorical actor,

2. apply generic categorization principles to the analysis of presidential rhetorical acts,

3. evaluate speeches according to generic and effectiveness analysis principles,

4. judge presidential rhetorical acts according to their historical precedents,

5. and evaluate innovations and contributions to the presidential genres of discourse.

Course Syllabus

Course Description

Rhetoric suffuses our world. From the movies we watch to the news and information we consume, rhetoric informs how individuals craft and receive persuasive messages in the public realm. What counts as rhetoric? Is silence rhetorical? What the heck is rhetoricity? These questions and more drive the theoretical development of rhetoric as an academic discipline. This course examines the history and development of rhetorical theories with a specific focus on the development of contemporary rhetorical theory vis-à-vis critical theory and continental philosophy. In particular, students will survey the history of rhetoric, the development of rhetorical theory as a practice, and discuss recent controversies and developments in the field of rhetoric. 

Course Objectives

At the end of this course, students should be able to:

1. Understand that (a) speech, words and language have consistent and long-lasting effects, (b) rhetoric describes a theory of the speaker and their ability to invent persuasion, a theory of the audience, and the scenes where rhetoric is received or taken up, and a theory of meaning-making and representation that gives text a viral life of its own and (c) rhetoric is a tool for ethical-worldmaking that allows us to make more deliberate and inclusive choices about their speech.

2. Understand that rhetoric is an art of speaking and representation and a technology of power.

3. Interpret and critically analyze rhetorical theories for significant contributions to the development of the theory and practice of rhetorical in contemporary and historical times.

Course Syllabus

Debate and classroom instruction are mutually reinforcing practices that allow me to be reflexive and adaptable in my approach to both. It is in that space where I believe I can direct my abilities toward producing a better future for others through a pedagogy of agency, inquiry, and advocacy. The social, cultural, and political institutions we established to safeguard the future currently lack the tools necessary to cultivate trust or judgement in individuals and certainly fall short in combating long-term global challenges. The classroom exists as a training ground for future generational challenges and as a space within which power can be confronted and agency fostered to ensure that social trust and civic justice do not perish. Teaching is a powerful tool of empowerment and social change, but to be effective, it must take place within an environment that encourages inquiry and fosters agency. My students are encouraged to approach real world problems and produce work that can be put into the world for public discussion and deliberation. My approach to teaching attempts to center these elements to maximize their impact and my experience in debate allows me to lean into research and knowledge of global and current events to elevate my teaching. 

Debate coaching serves the same functions and produces the same effects as classroom teaching, only more intensely and rapidly. Debate can produce more capable students, a more just society, and prepares us for an uncertain future with ever-changing parameters. I love the crucible into which I am thrown with my students every week, and the feeling of accomplishment that comes with returning home. My debate students are the best and brightest the university has to offer, and I get to travel around the country and think critically, research, and argue alongside them. As a leader and mentor, I play three roles in any squad that are essential to competitive success. First, I lead by example, providing an example of healthy and productive work ethic and interpersonal trust essential to building a successful team. Secondly, I advise students in both argument development and academic scholarship to the extent that I can. Debate frequently trades off with the demands of higher education, and I remind students that academic demands must be equally as important as those of the debate team. Third, I provide motivation for the students to learn from losing. The failure to win a debate, especially in a competitive environment like a debate tournament, can impact students’ confidence in their own abilities in other arenas. Debate, however, to be of value to the students, must look beyond wins and losses for its impact on the community. My team fields students from almost every college on campus, from Accounting to Engineering, from History to Math. I encourage students to put their scholarship first and ensure that academic excellence never interferes with competition eligibility. One way that I ensure we attract and retain students with limited experience is by spending extra time coaching during the week, setting up mentorships with more experienced debaters, and encouraging novice members to keep coming back even when they are not competitively successful. I work to constantly expand the diversity and inclusivity of the team to attract and retain students from a variety of backgrounds and experience levels. As a debate coach, developing and expanding global connections is essential to building student opportunity to engage debate experience outside the campus context. 

Coaching intercollegiate debate demands strategic vision, but also extreme intellectual adaptability. Debate coaching requires that a team always be prepared to engage the argument you have not thought about, the case you have not prepared, and the argument with which you have no engagement. Adaptability and flexibility are among the most important skills for both debaters and coaches. This allows me to throw out tradition, common wisdom, or rote practices if necessary to improve the classroom experience and debate team’s impact. Working through a pandemic, a war in Europe, and prevalent structural inequality and racism demands that educators develop skills necessary to adapt to ever-changing macro-conditions upstream from the academy. Second, my debate coaching experience shows that trust is one of the most important foundations for an educational approach inclusive of all. As a debate coach, you travel with the team and are legally liable for their safety; you are also ethically liable for their argumentation and engagement with the community of debaters. Debaters, to succeed in competition, must be able to trust their coaching staff and the advice and strategic approach advocated by those coaches. Developing trust means that one must remain open and vulnerable to another’s ideas and beliefs, and this capacity has benefited my classroom teaching. Third, former debaters and students are never far from my thoughts. Long past the final paper or exam that a student completes for me, I maintain my obligation to their lifelong development. Being a humanist and a rhetorician demands that I not only acknowledge that the educational relationship between teacher and student constitutes merely a fragment of my responsibility towards others, but that I explore, develop, and nurture the entirety of that relationship. This is not a mere project, but rather structures the entire ethical system into which my teaching practice emerges. My commitment to producing undergraduate researchers and professional arguers means that I make efforts beyond the classroom to offer students the ability to develop their methods papers into longer conference presentations and senior thesis projects. Adaptability, trust, and commitment to mentoring are evident in my interactions with students regardless of the course.