- 1. No remote class meeting for Wed, Feb 17
- 2.Coppola, N.W. (1997). Rhetorical analysis of stakeholders in environmental communication. (pp.9-24). pushed forward to Week Six: Feb 22 & Feb 24
- 3. Submit your paper draft to your Canvas Peer Review Groups. Any questions about the paper before we get started?
Class Meeting Agenda
The Following are the topics/goals we will cover into today’s class session:
- 1. Overview of Nixon, R. (2011). Scenes from the seabed. (pp. 264-280).
- 2. Group Discussion 1: Breakout rooms
- 3. Guide to writing academic paragraphs
- 4. Overview of Levanda, A.M., Behrsin, I., and Disano, F. (2021). Renewable energy for whom? Energy Research & Social Science 71 (1-13).
- 5. Discussion 2
- 6. Group Preference Forms for Proposal and Website
Slow Violence & Creative Climate Communication Strategies
DQ: Breakout Session 1
Please respond to the following in your breakout sessions. Just write down as much information as you need to respond during discussion:
- 1. What is your assessment of Nixon’s argument? Do you agree/disagree that experts, reproters, activists, and individuals need to find more engaging or symbolic ways to communicate slow violence?
- 2. Can/does the sort of environmental storytelling that he advocates call those most responsible for environmental devastation to account/create lasting change?
Guide to Writing Academic Paragraphs
Use the following as a template for body paragraphs in your Paper:
- 1. Topic sentence(s):1-2 services that remind readers of major claim/through line of specific section & introduce new info.
- 2. Transition: 2-3 couple sentences that develop your topic sentence and also set up (announce, contextualize) the citation you will include from the essay you are analyzing.
- 3. Citation: 2-4 sentences (approx.) of source material. Typically the best material to cite from a text is a passage that requires your analysis, i.e. cited passages should, of course extend and support you claim, but also can/should be complex, technical, or offer several reasonable avenues of interpretation.
- 4. Close Analysis: 2-4 sentences of “close reading”/analysis of the citation you include. What’s the main idea of the passage you cited & how do you know? That is, what phrases, rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos, logos), metaphors, or structure in the passage suggests to you what you say the passage means? Are you reading the passage you cited against its intended goal?
- 5. Conclusion:2-3 sentences that tie your analysis back into the larger goal of the paragraph. Now that you have responded to the question with your claim and developed you claim through an analysis of a evidence, you need to write 2-3 more sentences that put the pieces together for your reader.
Please take a minute and consider the following before we discuss:
- 1.What is your assessment of the methodology employed here? That is, how persuasive do you find the “global systematic review of environmental justice cases” the authors conducted (p. 3)? How does their methodology or rhetorical approach compare with Nixon’s recommendations?
- 2. What’s your assessment of environmental justice frameworks? Do you agree/disagree that the intersection between environmental degradation and historic discrimination always need to be considered together?