1 - 10 of 41 results for: pwr*

Rhetorical analysis of readings, research, and argument. Focus is on development of a substantive research-based argument using multiple sources. Individual conferences with instructor. For more information about PWR 1, see https://undergrad.stanford.edu/programs/pwr/courses/pwr-1. For full course descriptions, see https://vcapwr-catalog.stanford.edu. Enrollment is handled by the PWR office.

Rhetorical analysis of readings, research, and argument. Focus is on development of a substantive research-based argument using multiple sources. Individual conferences with instructor. For more information about PWR 1, see https://undergrad.stanford.edu/programs/pwr/courses/pwr-1. For full course descriptions, see https://vcapwr-catalog.stanford.edu. Enrollment is handled by the PWR office.

Rhetorical and contextual analysis of readings; research; and argument. Focus is on development of a substantive research-based argument using multiple sources. Individual conferences with instructor. Exploration of multicultural experience and cultural assimilation, focusing on the theme of social acceptance. See http://www.stanford.edu/dept/undergrad/cgi-bin/drupal_ual/AP_univ_req_PWR_Courses.html

Rhetorical analysis of readings, research, and argument. Focus is on development of a substantive research-based argument using multiple sources. Individual conferences with instructor. For more information about PWR 1, see https://undergrad.stanford.edu/programs/pwr/courses/pwr-1. For full course descriptions, see https://vcapwr-catalog.stanford.edu. Enrollment is handled by the PWR office.

Rhetorical analysis of readings, research, and argument. Focus is on development of a substantive research-based argument using multiple sources. Individual conferences with instructor. For more information about PWR 1, see https://undergrad.stanford.edu/programs/pwr/courses/pwr-1. For full course descriptions, see https://vcapwr-catalog.stanford.edu. Enrollment is handled by the PWR office.

Rhetorical analysis of readings, research, and argument. Focus is on development of a substantive research-based argument using multiple sources. Individual conferences with instructor. For more information about PWR 1, see https://undergrad.stanford.edu/programs/pwr/courses/pwr-1. For full course descriptions, see https://vcapwr-catalog.stanford.edu. Enrollment is handled by the PWR office.

Rhetorical analysis of readings, research, and argument. Focus is on development of a substantive research-based argument using multiple sources. Individual conferences with instructor. For more information about PWR 1, see https://undergrad.stanford.edu/programs/pwr/courses/pwr-1. For full course descriptions, see https://vcapwr-catalog.stanford.edu. Enrollment is handled by the PWR office.

Rhetorical and contextual analysis of readings; research; and argument. Focus is on development of a substantive research-based argument using multiple sources. Individual conferences with instructor. Students investigate language and images that construct criminals, analyzing how these representations shape personal and cultural beliefs. Analysis of the costs and benefits of retributive, restorative, and transformative justice systems. See http://www.stanford.edu/dept/undergrad/cgi-bin/drupal_ual/AP_univ_req_PWR_Courses.html.

In a culture that rewards people who write and speak with conviction, ambivalence often seems like a personal shortcoming that must be remedied with certainty. Isn't it better to be confident and decisive? Writing teachers and textbooks tend to reinforce this view, insisting that students present a strong thesis as soon as possible. Even if you address counterarguments and offer concessions, your argument should override if not demolish them in the end. Even if you feel deeply ambivalent about a topic during your research, your final draft must demonstrate unwavering conviction: you slam your fist and make your point. nnRecent research questions the value of unwavering conviction. For example, management scholar Christina Ting Fong notes, "The results from two laboratory experiments demonstrate that individuals experiencing emotional ambivalence are better at recognizing unusual relationships between concepts, therefore showing an ability believed to be important to organizational creativity." nnWhat if, instead of sweeping your ambivalence under the rug, you tried to embrace it in your research and foreground it in your writing? Is ambivalence always a liability? What advantages can be found in the deep, risky waters of uncertainty? How do scientists, social scientists, and humanists regard ambivalence? What do ambivalent texts look and feel like? Can they move and persuade us? Is it possible to map and tap into a rhetoric of ambivalence? nnIn this course, we'll explore such questions in an attempt to understand the relationship between ambivalence and persuasion. We'll analyze and discuss the ways that writers such as Annie Dillard, Stephen Jay Gould, and Michael Pollan not only engage their ambivalence but weave it into their prose. Most importantly, we'll explore how you can develop rhetorical strategies and habits of mind to achieve results in your own analytical and persuasive writing. We'll study how to craft compelling arguments that do fuller justice to complex emotions and ideas.