This post includes many biographies and advertisements for public speakers and experts in “elocution,” which, in the 19th century United States, was synonymous with the rhetorical arts of delivery: the use of the body and voice in communication. The images, text fonts, and language were rich and entertaining enough to be excerpted in this post as screenshots from the book itself.
Wilbor, E. M. (Ed.). (1887). Werner’s Directory of Elocutionists, Readers, Lecturers and Other Public Instructors and Entertainers. New York, NY: E.S. Werner. Google-Books-ID: TF49AAAAYAAJ
Emma Dunning Banks, p. 272
This is the first of many images I’ve selected from this book. I found it worth emphasizing that the book included many female elocutionists. This woman looks very serious.
Books, by Raoul Luoar on Flickr with Creative Commons license
Titles of academic works strongly influence how a discipline sees itself and how people position themselves within a discipline.
A title is very short, and must be comprehensible to its target audience, not just descriptive of a work’s intellectual content. Titles implicitly answer the question “Why is this worth reading?” by naming topics and categories that are considered to be of value.
Titles communicate the values not just of the writers, but of the audience they target or invoke. The rhetoric of academic titles in a discipline announces the values of that discipline and how it structures and categorizes its subject matter.
The rhetorical pattern
I have observed that contemporary scholars in Communications and New Media studies, when defining areas of study, often use “medium” as a high-level filter, along with an issue and/or a specific people group of communicators or recipients of communication. This may seem obvious and insignificant to many people, but its implications are worthy of examination.
For example, when asked “What are you studying?” a scholar of communication or new media would likely answer with this recipe:
“I’m studying [communication about issue X] and/or [communication by/for people in Y category] within [medium (or media) Z].
In this blog post and an informal, face-to-face lunchtime “brownbag” seminar for faculty members held today on campus, I will present some principles and examples of free online applications that have worked well in my team-intensive professional communication and social research methods courses.
The main purpose of the workshop is to share instructors’ insights and specific experiences with communication technologies for student team research projects, starting with my own. Each technology has had its strengths and weaknesses, and some of these can work together or even be set up to function within or “through” the Blackboard course management interface we use at our university.
The relevance to rhetoric is that teams require appropriate forums for their collaborative everyday communication, and the forums can structure, enable and limit the kinds of informative and persuasive acts that learners and researchers need to engage in during a short-term university course.
A functional option today for an organization’s newsletter is to set up a free public blog on http://wordpress.com/ or to host a WordPress blog on your own website (if you have one).
Blogs are quite professional nowadays (no longer merely online diaries). They are respectable forums for academic associations. The Rhetoric Society of America has a blog (The Blogora) at http://rsa.cwrl.utexas.edu/
Blogs are even used by many nonprofit organizations as the basis for free websites. See this example of a website — the Trent Centre for Community-based Education http://www.trentcentre.ca/ — you wouldn’t even know it’s based on WordPress software unless you scroll down to the very bottom and see the notice “proudly powered by WordPress.”
The rest of the post explains how it can work for your association, why WordPress is a good choice, and how it can be used to automatically distribute content to members who may prefer to browse its content or stay up to date via Facebook or other social media platforms rather than (or in addition to) an email subscription to your blog. Continue reading
I’m a professor and for the past 10 months, I’ve used Zoho Projects for team projects in my classrooms and for collaborations amongst academics at a distance.
I’d just like to share my thoughts on how I use this tool, the things I absolutely love about this online collaboration application, and things I wish could be worked on. I’m also sharing this with the Zoho support team on their support forum.
Conversational rhetoric (From "img_5070" by bpsusf on Flickr with Creative Commons license)
If you’re a person who writes and speaks full time, like myself, have you ever wondered why there seem to be dry periods when you’re not very productive at the kinds of writing or speech that “count” the most to yourself or the people who evaluate you?
Well it bothers me. I know I am not the only professor who notices that during Fall and Winter terms while I focus on producing the rhetoric required by my teaching roles, I don’t seem to be as productive in aiming my rhetoric at broader public audiences: conference presentations, blog-writing (!), and publication in journals. The month of May comes around sooner than it should, and I feel like I haven’t accomplished “anything”– other than teaching, of course.
Adobe Acrobat 9 Pro PDF comparison
In my research today I compared the Canadian and American versions of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) instrument for 2010.
This is the survey that over 1 million university students across North America are invited to take in their 1st and 4th year.
The NSSE survey page calls the Canadian version the “Canadian English” version. But the version is not just different in terms of its “Canadian English” vocabulary (such as “school/college” in the US versus “university” in Canada).
The Canadian version is different in terms of its cultural content and rhetorical approaches.
This post provides comparative screenshots of survey content to help us ponder why these differences exist.