For our latest writing assignment, as a class we were tasked on reading Kantz’s “Helping Students Use Textual Sources Persuasively”, which focuses on the methods students can use to rhetorically read their sources and then use rhetoric devices (like questions such as “Why?”, “How?”, and “So what?”) to frame/write their arguments and/or papers. As such, post-reading, I am now expected to reflect upon the ideas which Kantz lays out, and connect said ideas to my own research process.
“Studnents Vs. Non-Pro/Con Sources” Source: Giphy
So, Kantz describes that many students struggle with creating original material when they are asked to use resources to create an argument or idea. As such, many are apt to repeat the ‘facts’ their sources provide or they see their sources as only ‘pro/con’, as disagreeing or agreeing with an idea – and that students become confused and often unable to reconcile with sources that do not fit into these categories. To help cope with these struggles, Kantz suggests that teachers should introduce students to tools like “Kinneavy’s triangular diagram of the rhetorical situation”, which allows sources to be read in three different aspects (Kant 74). These aspects include:
- Speaker/Writer (The Encoder)
- Audience (The Decoder)
- Topic/Subject (Reality)
Likewise, Kantz also suggests that students focus on finding and filling in ‘gaps’ in the literature to create original ideas and thoughts. What doesn’t the author say? What doesn’t the text address that affects how it communicates its ideas? What unintended effects did the text have? Why? How? And so what?
Now, I have definitely fallen on both sides of the student spectrum which Kantz implied, and I have gone through the same struggles that Kantz describes in regards to examining my sources. I’ve only recently gotten better at the entire thing involving finding and addresses gaps in what others have said. (In fact, that’s what I’m hoping to really get into when writing my argumentative essay that’s coming up). And like Kantz, I also agree that students would benefit greatly from being taught these patterns and lessons concerning reading texts – for said gaps, for the context of these texts, and then their overall meaning in a broader view.
So the question is, can or Kantz you apply these ‘triangular’ skills from now on?