Rhetoric Analysis

Rhetoric Analysis

In our day-to-day life, we interact and communicate with many people in different situations. The situations in which we engage in these conversations vary from one another. Writers who write about issues that concern the public need to employ effective rhetoric in passing out their information. For effective conversation, it is imperative that the speaker or the writer adopts application of Lloyd Blitzer’s theory of rhetorical situation and Stephen Toulmin’s strategy for analyzing the structure of arguments. Toulmin model asserts that every argument has three elements: claim, grounds and warrant (Joan p. 2). When a person makes a claim, the ground to support the claim must also be given. The ground is then backed with a warrant. For instance, a person may claim that the house is on fire. The grounds of such claim would be there is some smoke coming out of the house. The warrant in this case is that smoke is a sign of fire. Therefore, there must be consistency in any argument to ensure that there is flow and understanding. On the other hand, Lloyd Blitzer’s theory of rhetorical situation comes in handy in helping people to communicate and pass out their feelings and opinions. According to this theory, communication varies depending with the situations, therefore, rhetoric discourse are created by audiences or speakers through rhetoric situations (Lloyd p.1)

Then newspaper commentary “To boost post-college prospects, cut humanities departments” by Cohen will provide a case study for the development or rather evaluation of whether effective rhetoric was applied in conjunction with Lloyd Blitzer’s theory and that of Toulmin’s strategy for analyzing the structure of the argument (Cohan, p. 1). The commentary points out the need for colleges to offer course of programmes that will add value to students and enable them get jobs after they complete their studies. Cohen argues that those departments that offer humanity courses should be scrapped to avoid huge expenses that students and parents meet in ensuring that they successfully complete their studies (Cohan, para. 5). Therefore, colleges should provide relevant courses that will enable student to get jobs after graduation. This will remove the burden of parents and students in meeting the cost of their education.

Cohen used ethos, pathos and logos is the commentary to convey his message to the readers. He created credibility by providing evidence from credible sources such as department of labor. Pathos are also used by Cohen to arouse the emotions of the readers by selectively using language that demonstrates his disappointment. Likewise, logos are also employed in the way he presents his ideas. For instance, he supports his arguments logically but also agrees that even though some courses are not marketable but they are important in some areas.

The author of the commentary is credible with his arguments about college education and on statistics about the number of students that do not secure employment after their graduation. His credibility is manifested on how he refers to various institutions that are concerned with employment in arguing his case. For instance, he uses statistics and findings from the department of labor to argue that college students pursuing humanity courses miss to secure employment. The statistics for the department of labor estimates that approximate of

1.5 million Students with bachelor’s degrees are not employed (Cohan, para. 5).

The claim by Cohen that humanities courses should be abolished is not effective. The fact that many students graduating from colleges are not employed does not mean that such course s needs to be abolished. He leaves out other important factors that contribute to unemployment of college students such as increase in population, and reduced rate of industrial growth, lack of innovation among many other factors. Furthermore, he acknowledges that some countries may require such courses because of different policies. This, therefore, does not warrant eradication of such courses since they may be required somewhere else. It is also true that there are people who have pursued courses in humanity and succeeded even more than those succeed that have done other professions like teaching and nursing.

The medium through which this information was transmitted is New York Times. The credibility of this commentary is also determined by the credibility of the newspaper. The newspaper is popular among most young and educated people. Therefore, the commentary holds some sort of credibility because it managed to pas through the editorial board of the newspaper. Audience will therefore believe in the article because of that reason. Secondly is that the commentary presents evidence of the state of the student colleges. Reading through the first paragraph shows college students as the audience. For instance, the first paragraph begins with the phrase, “half of freshly minted college graduates are unemployed or underemployed” (Cohan, para. 1).

The author in the commentary makes a claim that half of college students completing their studies are unemployed. Statistics provided on the amount of money in loans helps to enhance credibility. However, because of lack of citing the source of his statistics, this may not be credible on most of the audience. Nevertheless, he develops his argument in the rest of the commentary by citing the source of the arguments. This op-ed is an effective response to the situation that the author provides. It is true that many students are graduating and staying unemployed. They spend colossal sums of money in colleges doing courses that are not on demand. Therefore, one way of ensuring that students do not incur such expenses is to abolish such courses from the learning institutions as the author proposes.

The author furthermore, claims that demands of the labor are different from the skills inculcated in these students. The author demonstrates why it could be important for humanity courses and other social courses that do not provide employment to be done away with. The author sets argument by further claiming that 53 percent of students from colleges aged below 25 years ere unemployed (Cohan, para. 2). He provides comparison in the rate of unemployment with the previous years. This has ensured that the commentary is logic in addressing the main claim of why higher education –humanities should be abolished. Hence the op-ed is effective as it has enabled the author to provide enough backing of his claim.

The third paragraph opens with the argument that college students are often employed in jobs that does not require college education (Cohan, para. 3). This claim resonates with the view of the author of doing away with the college education since it does not add value to the students. Further information is presented to support the claim. For instance, many students are employed as waiters and barmaids while few manage to get jobs as mathematicians, physicists and engineers (Cohan, para. 5). The author does not merely provide information but ensures that it is well supported with tangible evidence. The claim is effective and its credibility is achieved through the backing of data from the department of labor.

In the consequent paragraphs, the author developed his arguments well putting in mind various rhetoric situations. Even though, other students get white collar jobs they begin to work as receptionists and therefore not given an opportunity to be at the high ranks. The argument arrived is that there is still limited opportunity for the college students to get gainful employment even with their degrees. However, it is also true that not all courses offered have low employment opportunities (Cohan, para. 6). For instance, a person who has done accounting or nursing has more chances of securing employment than a person who has done philosophy or zoology. The author argument is well supported as he quotes that the source of the information is from a credible source-the Department of Labor. The emphasis of doing away with such departments as humanity is reiterated again by the author but again demonstrates that not all those who purse such courses like History do not get employment. The author uses this approach to balance his argument not to appear biased but to enhance credibility. It is also true that there are courses that may not be valuable in the country but valuable to others. Therefore, it is imperative that the demands of the markets dictate the kind of course that should be offered.

The commentary ends with emphasis on the need to abolish courses that are not promising for the students in future. This ending captures or reinstates the argument of the author about departments that are not providing skills to students to help them acquire gainful employment. The author develops his argument by claiming that abolishing will help such students to get into employment earlier, save them from high loans that they are expected to repay after studies and will save the parents’ investments. I find the commentary interesting. The author has incorporated the two theories in his commentary conveying his message precisely. The arguments are well supported by facts from credible sources of information and they can be held to be true and not mere speculation of the writer. The reasoning and presentation of the message is logics making it clear and easy to understand. The commentary is emotional especially to students who purse humanity courses and those who have already done them. Therefore, the author has employed rhetoric effectively in communicating his message to the audience. The op-ed has therefore worked in this commentary.

Works Cited

Cohan, Peter. “To Boost Post-College Prospects, Cut Humanities Departments.”

Forbes 29 May 2012. Web. www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2012/05/29/to-boost- post-college-prospects-cut-humanities-departments/

Joan, Kabrach. Using Toulmin’s model of argument. Journal of teaching writing. Retrieved from: https://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/teachingwriting/article/viewFile/821/810

Lloyd, Bitzer. The rhetorical situation. Retrieved from: https://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/teachingwriting/article/viewFile/821/810