Rhetoric & Technical Communication
Rhetoric & Technical Communication
Toscano, Aaron, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Dept. of English

Resources and Daily Activities

  • Conference Presentations
    • PCA/ACA Conference Presentation 2022
    • PCAS/ACAS Presentation 2021
    • SEACS 2021 Presentation
    • SEACS 2022 Presentation
    • SEACS 2023 Presentation
    • South Atlantic MLA Conference 2022
  • Dr. Toscano’s Homepage
  • ENGL 2116-014: Introduction to Technical Communication
    • February 13th: Introduction to User Design
    • February 15th: Instructions for Users
      • Making Résumés and Cover Letters More Effective
    • February 1st: Reflection on Workplace Messages
    • February 20th: The Rhetoric of Technology
    • February 22nd: Social Constructions of Technology
    • February 6th: Plain Language
    • January 11th: More Introduction to Class
    • January 18th: Audience & Purpose
    • January 23rd: Résumés and Cover Letters
      • Duty Format for Résumés
      • Peter Profit’s Cover Letter
    • January 25th: More on Résumés and Cover Letters
    • January 30th: Achieving a Readable Style
      • Euphemisms
      • Prose Practice for Next Class
      • Prose Revision Assignment
      • Revising Prose: Efficiency, Accuracy, and Good
      • Sentence Clarity
    • January 9th: Introduction to the Class
    • Major Assignments
    • March 13th: Introduction to Information Design
    • March 15th: More on Information Design
    • March 20th: Reporting Technical Information
    • March 27th: The Great I, Robot Analysis
  • ENGL 4182/5182: Information Design & Digital Publishing
    • August 21st: Introduction to the Course
      • Rhetorical Principles of Information Design
    • August 28th: Introduction to Information Design
      • Prejudice and Rhetoric
      • Robin Williams’s Principles of Design
    • Classmates Webpages (Fall 2017)
    • December 4th: Presentations
    • Major Assignments for ENGL 4182/5182 (Fall 2017)
    • November 13th: More on Color
      • Designing with Color
      • Important Images
    • November 20th: Extra-Textual Elements
    • November 27th: Presentation/Portfolio Workshop
    • November 6th: In Living Color
    • October 16th: Type Fever
      • Typography
    • October 23rd: More on Type
    • October 2nd: MIDTERM FUN!!!
    • October 30th: Working with Graphics
      • Beerknurd Calendar 2018
    • September 11th: Talking about Design without Using “Thingy”
      • Theory, theory, practice
    • September 18th: The Whole Document
    • September 25th: Page Design
  • ENGL 4183/5183: Editing with Digital Technologies
    • August 24th: Introduction to the Class
    • August 31st: Rhetoric, Words, and Composing
    • Major Assignments for ENGL 4183/5183 (Fall 2022)
      • Rhetoric of Fear
    • November 16th: Voice and Other Nebulous Writing Terms
      • Finding Dominant Rhetorical Appeals
    • November 2nd: Rhetorical Effects of Punctuation
    • November 30th: Words and Word Classes
    • November 9th: Cohesive Rhythm
    • October 12th: Choosing Adjectivals
    • October 19th: Choosing Nominals
    • October 26th: Stylistic Variations
    • October 5th: Midterm Exam
    • September 14th: Verb is the Word!
    • September 21st: Coordination and Subordination
    • September 28th: Form and Function
    • September 7th: Sentence Patterns
  • ENGL 4275: Rhetoric of Technology
    • April 13th: Authorities in Science and Technology
    • April 15th: Articles on Violence in Video Games
    • April 20th: Presentations
    • April 6th: Technology in the home
    • April 8th: Writing Discussion
    • Assignments for ENGL 4275
    • February 10th: Religion of Technology Part 3 of 3
    • February 12th: Is Love a Technology?
    • February 17th: Technology and Gender
    • February 19th: Technology and Expediency
    • February 24th: Semester Review
    • February 3rd: Religion of Technology Part 1 of 3
    • February 5th: Religion of Technology Part 2 of 3
    • January 13th: Technology and Meaning, a Humanist perspective
    • January 15th: Technology and Democracy
    • January 22nd: The Politics of Technology
    • January 27th: Discussion on Writing as Thinking
    • January 29th: Technology and Postmodernism
    • January 8th: Introduction to the Course
    • March 11th: Writing and Other Fun
    • March 16th: Neuromancer (1984) Day 1 of 2
    • March 18th: Neuromancer (1984) Day 2 of 2
    • March 23rd: Inception (2010)
    • March 25th: Writing and Reflecting Discussion
    • March 30th & April 1st: Count Zero
    • March 9th: William Gibson’s Neuromancer (1984)
  • ENGL 6166: Rhetorical Theory
    • April 12th: Knoblauch. Ch. 4 and Ch. 5
    • April 19th: Jacques Derrida’s Positions
    • April 26th:  Feminisms and Rhetorics
    • April 5th: Knoblauch. Ch. 3 and More Constitutive Rhetoric
    • February 15th: Isocrates (Part 2)
    • February 1st: Aristotle’s On Rhetoric Books 2 & 3
      • Aristotle’s On Rhetoric, Book 2
      • Aristotle’s On Rhetoric, Book 3
    • February 22nd: St. Augustine’s On Christian Doctrine [Rhetoric]
    • February 8th: Isocrates (Part 1)-2nd Half of Class
    • January 11th: Introduction to Class
    • January 18th: Plato’s Phaedrus
    • January 25th: Aristotle’s On Rhetoric Book 1
    • March 15th: Descartes, Rene, Discourse on Method
    • March 1st: Knoblauch. Ch. 1 and 2
    • March 22nd: Mary Wollstonecraft
    • March 29th: Second Wave Feminist Rhetoric
    • May 3rd: Knoblauch. Ch. 6, 7, and “Afterword”
    • Rhetorical Theory Assignments
  • ENGL/COMM/WRDS: The Rhetoric of Fear
    • February 14th: Fascism and Other Valentine’s Day Atrocities
    • February 21st: Fascism Part 2
    • February 7th: Fallacies Part 3 and American Politics Part 2
    • January 10th: Introduction to the Class
    • January 17th: Scapegoats & Conspiracies
    • January 24th: The Rhetoric of Fear and Fallacies Part 1
    • January 31st: Fallacies Part 2 and American Politics Part 1
    • Major Assignments
    • March 7th: Fascism Part 3
  • LBST 2212-124, 125, 126, & 127
    • August 21st: Introduction to Class
    • August 23rd: Humanistic Approach to Science Fiction
    • August 26th: Robots and Zombies
    • August 28th: Futurism, an Introduction
    • August 30th: R. A. Lafferty “Slow Tuesday Night” (1965)
    • December 2nd: Technological Augmentation
    • December 4th: Posthumanism
    • November 11th: Salt Fish Girl (Week 2)
    • November 13th: Salt Fish Girl (Week 2 con’t)
    • November 18th: The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (Part 1)
      • More Questions than Answers
    • November 1st: Games Reality Plays (part II)
    • November 20th: The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (Part 2)
    • November 6th: Salt Fish Girl (Week 1)
    • October 14th: More Autonomous Fun
    • October 16th: Autonomous Conclusion
    • October 21st: Sci Fi in the Domestic Sphere
    • October 23rd: Social Aphasia
    • October 25th: Dust in the Wind
    • October 28th: Gender Liminality and Roles
    • October 2nd: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein
    • October 30th: Games Reality Plays (part I)
    • October 9th: Approaching Autonomous
      • Analyzing Prose in Autonomous
    • September 11th: The Time Machine
    • September 16th: The Alien Other
    • September 18th: Post-apocalyptic Worlds
    • September 20th: Dystopian Visions
    • September 23rd: World’s Beyond
    • September 25th: Gender Studies and Science Fiction
    • September 30th: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein
    • September 4th: Science Fiction and Social Breakdown
      • More on Ellison
      • More on Forster
    • September 9th: The Time Machine
  • LBST 2213-110: Science, Technology, and Society
    • August 22nd: Science and Technology from a Humanistic Perspective
    • August 24th: Science and Technology, a Humanistic Approach
    • August 29th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 2
    • August 31st: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 3 and 4
    • December 5th: Video Games and Violence, a more nuanced view
    • November 14th: Boulle, Pierre. Planet of the Apes. (1964) Ch. 27-end
    • November 16th: Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. 1818. Preface-Ch. 8
    • November 21st: Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. 1818. Ch. 9-Ch. 16
    • November 28th: Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Ch. 17-Ch. 24
    • November 30th: Violence in Video Games
    • November 7th: Boulle, Pierre. Planet of the Apes Ch. 1-17
    • November 9th: Boulle, Pierre. Planet of the Apes, Ch. 18-26
    • October 12th: Lies Economics Tells
    • October 17th: Brief Histories of Medicine, Salerno, and Galen
    • October 19th: Politicizing Science and Medicine
    • October 24th: COVID-19 Facial Covering Rhetoric
    • October 26th: Wells, H. G. Time Machine. Ch. 1-5
    • October 31st: Wells, H. G. The Time Machine Ch. 6-The End
    • October 3rd: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Ch. 7 and Conclusion
    • September 12th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 7 and Conclusion
    • September 19th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Prefaces and Ch. 1
    • September 26th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Ch. 2
    • September 28th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Ch. 5 and 6
    • September 7th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 5 and 6
  • New Media: Gender, Culture, Technology (Spring 2021)
    • April 13th: Virtually ‘Real’ Environments
    • April 20th: Rhetoric/Composition Defines New Media
    • April 27th: Sub/Cultural Politics, Hegemony, and Agency
    • April 6th: Capitalist Realism
    • February 16: Misunderstanding the Internet
    • February 23rd: Our Public Sphere and the Media
    • February 2nd: Introduction to Cultural Studies
    • January 26th: Introduction to New Media
    • Major Assignments for New Media (Spring 2021)
    • March 16th: Identity Politics
    • March 23rd: Social Construction of Gender and Sexuality
    • March 2nd: Foundational Thinkers in Cultural Studies
    • March 30th: Hyperreality
    • March 9th: Globalization & Postmodernism
    • May 4th: Wrapping Up The Semester
      • Jodi Dean “The The Illusion of Democracy” & “Communicative Capitalism”
      • Social Construction of Sexuality
  • Science Fiction in American Culture (Summer I–2020)
    • Assignments for Science Fiction in American Culture
    • Cultural Studies and Science Fiction Films
    • June 10th: Interstellar and Exploration themes
    • June 11th: Bicentennial Man
    • June 15th: I’m Only Human…Or am I?
    • June 16th: Wall-E and Environment
    • June 17th: Wall-E (2008) and Technology
    • June 18th: Interactivity in Video Games
    • June 1st: Firefly (2002) and Myth
    • June 2nd: “Johnny Mnemonic”
    • June 3rd: “New Rose Hotel”
    • June 4th: “Burning Chrome”
    • June 8th: Conformity and Monotony
    • June 9th: Cultural Constructions of Beauty
    • May 18th: Introduction to Class
    • May 19th: American Culture, an Introduction
    • May 20th: The Matrix
    • May 21st: Gender and Science Fiction
    • May 25th: Goals for I, Robot
    • May 26th: Isaac Asimov’s I, Robot
    • May 27th: Hackers and Slackers
    • May 30th: Inception
  • Teaching Portfolio
  • Topics for Analysis
    • A Practical Editing Situation
    • American Culture, an Introduction
    • Efficiency in Writing Reviews
    • Feminism, An Introduction
    • Fordism/Taylorism
    • Frankenstein Part I
    • Frankenstein Part II
    • Futurism Introduction
    • How to Lie with Statistics
    • Isaac Asimov’s “A Cult of Ignorance”
    • Langdon Winner Summary: The Politics of Technology
    • Marxist Theory (cultural analysis)
    • Oral Presentations
    • Oratory and Argument Analysis
    • Our Public Sphere
    • Postmodernism Introduction
    • Protesting Confederate Place
    • Punctuation Refresher
    • QT, the Existential Robot
    • Religion of Technology Discussion
    • Rhetoric, an Introduction
      • Analyzing the Culture of Technical Writer Ads
      • Rhetoric of Technology
      • Visual Culture
      • Visual Perception
      • Visual Perception, Culture, and Rhetoric
      • Visual Rhetoric
      • Visuals for Technical Communication
      • World War I Propaganda
    • The Great I, Robot Discussion
      • I, Robot Short Essay Topics
    • The Rhetoric of Video Games: A Cultural Perspective
      • Civilization, an Analysis
    • The Sopranos
    • Why Science Fiction?
    • Zombies and Consumption Satire
  • Video Games & American Culture
    • April 14th: Phallocentrism
    • April 21st: Video Games and Neoliberalism
    • April 7th: Video Games and Conquest
    • Assignments for Video Games & American Culture
    • February 10th: Aesthetics and Culture
    • February 17th: Narrative and Catharsis
    • February 24th: Serious Games
    • February 3rd: More History of Video Games
    • January 13th: Introduction to the course
    • January 20th: Introduction to Video Game Studies
    • January 27th: Games & Culture
      • Marxism for Video Game Analysis
      • Postmodernism for Video Game Analysis
    • March 24th: Realism, Interpretation(s), and Meaning Making
    • March 31st: Feminist Perspectives and Politics
    • March 3rd: Risky Business?

Contact Me

Office: Fretwell 255F
Email: atoscano@uncc.edu
ENGL/COMM/WRDS: The Rhetoric of Fear » Major Assignments

Major Assignments

Participation (Every Class Meeting)

This is not a drill-on-skill type of course. I expect everyone to be involved in class discussions, which are extremely important for critical thinking. You must contribute to class discussions. Twenty percent (20%) of your grade is based on participation.

In-class participation means you are ready to be called on at any time to respond to a question, prompt, and/or suggestion about the course material. Yes, I will call on you in class periodically, so be prepared to demonstrate that you’re reflecting thoughtfully on the readings. Thoughtful reflection doesn’t mean you give THE answer; instead, it means you show awareness for the complexity of our subject by describing your interpretation or asking questions that demonstrate critical thinking (as opposed to certainty). We embrace ambiguity in this course.

Merely showing up will not get you participation credit—you must engage the course materials. If you’re not in class, you can’t receive credit, so your participation grade will be affected. I will note your participation (or lack thereof) daily. Thoughtful participation means that you engage critically in our discussions or ask engaging questions about the subject. Contributions AND questions both count as participation, so, if you’re confused, please ask.

Doing work for another class or distracting other students will lower your participation grade—even to the point of falling below 20% (meaning, you can have a negative participation grade).

Please see me ASAP if you’re concerned about your participation grade because you’re shy or if you don’t understand these requirements. Telling me at the end of April that you didn’t participate because you’re the quiet type or because you didn’t understand what “thoughtful” meant will be too late. The purpose of participation is for students to have control over their own learning and to reinforce critical thinking generally and dialogic exchange of ideas specifically. I am willing to provide a quasi-alternative to supplement a student’s participation grade, but please note that discussion, which allows speakers to exchange ideas, is an extremely important component of critical thinking. One alternative is to do class reflections you post online. Please discuss this alternative with me early in the semester…like today!

Canvas Posts (Due Weekly–14 total)

In order to facilitate beyond-the-classroom-reflection, I’ll ask you to go to Canvas and respond to the prompt for that week. These should be at least 250 words. There’s no right or wrong answer, but I do expect you to be inspired by the course material.

Make sure you do these posts by 11:00 pm on Fridays.. Remember, the first one was your introduction worth 5 points; the 13 others are 15 points each.

Critical Thinking Essay (Draft: 2/07; FINAL DUE: 2/21)

This early semester work is supposed to demonstrate your commitment to thinking critically about a subject. This isn’t a research paper (although you’ll most likely use sources), but you will have to advance an argument about a topic. This is a class on rhetoric, so I expect you will provide assertions as well as sound argumentation for that assertion.

  • Assertion: Contemporary boycotts are futile attempts to change deep-seated systemic problems with capitalism…
  • Assertion: Boycotts focus narrowly on specific companies but rarely address totalizing concerns (national, global, industry-wide, etc.).
    While some boycotts may cause companies to rethink or discontinue a practice…
  • Argument: Capitalism is too pervasive to be addressed through simple campaigns like boycotts…
  • Argument: Consumers may feel they’re effecting change by focusing on a single company, but other companies might be as problematic (or more so) than the one being boycotted…
  • Argument: The underlying profit motive of capitalism drives companies to maintain sales, so they may respond to boycotts but not fundamentally alter their business models…
  • Argument: Boycotts
  • For Example: The BP-Transocean-Halliburton spill (2010) drew the ire of consumers because of the pollution the incident caused; however, boycotting BP was not an effective solution because there are many petroleum companies supplying gasoline. The boycott never addressed the precarity of petroleum infrastructure, overwhelming demand for oil, or the global market place for petroleum products–all of which combine to risk environmental damage.

The above “Arguments: …” are not complete, and your essay ought to have more support. Again, you don’t need to do research, but you need to have a logically sound argument. The goal of this essay isn’t to end the debate on fossil fuels, LGBTQIA+ issues, capitalism, reproductive freedom, etc.; instead, it’s to present a map of your thinking to someone who will scrutinize your arguments. This “essay” won’t necessarily be finished even with your final submission. It’s a writing as thinking assignment meant to allow you to work through a topic of interest.

Below are the format logistics:

  • Typed, double spaced (except heading), 12 pt font
  • 1-inch margins all around
  • Page numbers (anywhere)
  • A title other than “Critical Thinking Essay“
  • ENGL, COMM, & WRDS 4000-level: At least five (5) pages but no more than six (6) pages
  • ENGL 5050: At least seven (7) pages but no more than eight (8) pages

If you do use outside sources, use them according to the style guide of your choice (MLA, APA, Chicago, etc.), and include the proper in-text citation and Works Cited/References formatting. The Works Cited/References page(s) does not contribute to the 5-6 or 7-6 page requirement. Also, don’t pad your essay with unnecessary long quotations. When you don’t introduce a quotation, it’s a dead giveaway that you’re throwing it in to boost your essay’s length. That’s not appropriate and will affect the final grade.

Midterm Exam (March 14th)

This will be on Canvas, and you’ll do it wherever you have internet access. It will cover the readings, major concepts, and (some) class discussion topics. As I’ve mentioned, we can’t cover everything in great detail, but the Midterm Exam will reflect the class material up to March 7th.

Rhetoric of Fear Analysis Essays (Draft: 4/11; FINAL DUE: 5/02)

As you read and participate in class discussions, consider the rhetoric that surrounds you, bombards you, entertains you, and (attempts to) motivate you. Because no communication situation is devoid of rhetoric, you have lots of material. You’ll need to choose an instance of rhetorical discourse (widely defined—speeches, media, books, etc.) related primarily to emotion. While I expect that emotion to be fear or force, it doesn’t necessarily have to be ONLY those emotions. Additionally, you may address ethos and pathos of a “discourse,” but pathos should be the main focus. You should offer the cultural context—be that American, Western, Industrial, etc.—and argue how that effects the attempt at persuasion. You may need to identify a few cultural values that highlight key persuasive markers. Also, you shouldn’t just list or state the values. You must describe (make an argument for) why you feel those values are part of a culture.

I do not expect you to go into a tremendous amount of historical detail in your essays; instead, try to pick a situation that fits our discussions regarding American ideology. Although we might all agree that a particular value (e.g., individualism) is an American value, you must offer support for such a claim—you can’t just state it.

After you identify and describe the values, you must describe how those values undergird the attempted rhetorical strategy. You may use “I” and even bring in personal examples, but you have to defend your reasons for arguing the way you do. You are required to use sources:

  • You must cite from the class reading.
  • You may also use sources outside of our readings.

There is no set number, but the goal is to show you’re engaging with our texts. What you absolutely, positively cannot do is drop quotations into your essay and expect the reader (me and possibly a classmate) to make the connection from that source to your argument/analysis. Besides being unethical writing, it shows a lack of sophistication for a 4000/5000-level course.

Below are the format logistics (I don’t take off for formatting, but I am always asked about formatting so…):

  • Typed, double spaced (except heading), 12 pt font
  • 1-inch margins all around
  • Page numbers (anywhere)
  • A title other than “Rhetoric of Fear Analysis”
  • First draft at least seven (7) pages (due 4/11); Final draft at least nine (9) pages (due 5/02)
    • 5000-level: at least eight (8) pages; Final draft at least ten (10) pages
  • In-text citations: you must use quotations from the course reading and, if you choose, outside reading
  • Works Cited/References page (I don’t care which style—MLA, APA, Chicago, etc.—you use for your paper, but please choose one)

Once again, the Works Cited/References page(s) does not contribute to the 9- or 10-page requirement. Also, don’t pad your essay with unnecessary long quotations. When you don’t introduce a quotation, it’s a dead giveaway that you’re throwing it in to boost your essay’s length. That’s not appropriate and will affect the final grade.

Over the course of the semester, the above ideas should make more sense. You should workshop these essays with your classmate or visit the writing center (not a requirement but suggestion). Please start thinking about rhetorical situations and bring them up in class when they’re related to our topic.

Please don’t e-mail me a draft and say “look at this.” Office hours are Tuesdays 4:00-5:00 pm and by appt. If you’re wondering if one particular mode of discourse over another would be better suited, please ask, and I’ll offer some advice.

Final Presentation (Due 5/09—Final Exam time)

Shine on your crazy diamond(s)! Basically, you get up and present on your Rhetoric of Fear Analyses. I will score your presentation on a scale of 1 to 5 based of the following criteria:

  • Appearance of preparation
  • Eye contact
  • Voice Projection
  • Relevance
  • Time—don’t go over five minutes and don’t go under four minutes (practice so you get it just right)

Although it may seem like too much extra work, you should practice your oral presentations in order to gauge how long your part will take. You can’t possibly convey all the choices you made as an information designer in the time you have. Therefore, you must choose your points wisely. Whether you’re finished talking or not, I’ll cut you off if you go longer than your time limit (4-5 min). I will stop you mid sentence if need be.  Again, preparation is crucial. I can’t stress enough how important it is to be prepared for all oral presentations.

Possible Alternative: Due to a potential Study Abroad conflict, this assignment might have to be submitted via Canvas and not delivered in class. In the event that happens, you will record your presentation and upload it.

Skip to toolbar
  • Log In