Theory description:
in a Digital World. This theory will cover the
ideas of two women, Morgan Gresham and Roxanne
Kirkwood Aftanas who are tired of the 19th century view of a woman. These two woman are trying to bring knowledge to the scholarly argument of women whom present their arguments to others. They have come up with a formula that goes into specific detail about the process of rhetoric and scholarly argument.Furthermore this is a process in which "invitational rhetoric invites students
into conversation regardless of their prior experience with the subject
matter. There are multiple points of entry based on how the student, in
this case, identifies with the conversation.
As you can see below on the diagram, "argument takes time,
occasionally significant time, as we observe and gauge the moment at
which we are sanctioned to enter the conversation. We have to earn the
power to speak
Conversely, invitational rhetoric meets us where we are because the goal is engagement. We are each attributed power because we are human."
Specifically this theory goes above and beyond to explain how females specifically have trouble making their points. Specifically that the authenticity of their scholarly argument is valid.
Conversely, invitational rhetoric meets us where we are because the goal is engagement. We are each attributed power because we are human."
Specifically this theory goes above and beyond to explain how females specifically have trouble making their points. Specifically that the authenticity of their scholarly argument is valid.
Our disciplinary colleagues want to see how we have built our argument, want to have their own entrance into the texts we create. Implicit in this argument is a protestant approach: I cannot believe you until you show me. If this is true, and if we agree that it is true for much of our discipline, then we as scholars/authors must consider building meta-frameworks for the new digital compositions we create.
These are then, females who want to go beyond the standard method of approval and prove that their digital work is scholarly
Written by Taylor Cameron
I will now relate the theory with this Pin:
PIN #1
Lets step back from the student/learning perspective and add in the feminist movement aspect of the theory. We can start by applying this theory to the tv show, Mad Men, where 1960’s housewives have little to say, little to
argue about, and little to do with a man's work world unless they are secretaries.
Betty Draper(far left) is your typical
sit back, housewife, overanalyzer. Needless to say this type of female is the mother, who's argument this isn't.
On the other hand we have Peggy Olsen, who has worked her way up from a secretary into the creative department of the agency, while Joan(middle) has showed her hard earned rights as a leader by being one of the most consistant and level headed persons, including the men, in the building.
One way that Peggy Olsen(far right) is representative of these same
arguments is that she is constantly asked if her decisions in advertising pertain the project
being covered, she believes, but it is also the case in this era of time, it is because she is a woman.
Scholarly argument and
invitational rhetoric position conversates differently and attribute power
differently. In this show, powers are inadvertantly represented as a mans world that women merely live in.
"we see that argument takes time, occasionally significant
time, as we observe and gauge the moment at which we are sanctioned to enter
the conversation. We have to earn the power to speak."
Eventually Peggy earns her right to speak and argue a point, once her ideas are viewed as affective and valuable.
Invitational Rhetoric would be considered in the group collabrative meetings we see in the show, Mad Men, when Peggy Olsen and Joan Mitchell, the two women whom have worked their way up in the agency, give their presence in these meetings, their figures alone represented these values of self-determination and movement beyond the traditional realm of adversting and or advertising businness practices.
"Invitational rhetoric, grounded in feminist principles and focused on achieving feminist aims, is a next logical step for computers and composition because it 1) values choice and self-determination and 2) it moves the field beyond traditional argumentation into a dialogic space. During most of our existence as a sub-field and field, members have argued that the computer-mediated space is different from traditional communication spaces. We have argued that the former is more egalitarian, safer, more inviting, less silencing, and a better space for dialogic conversation.
Peggy Olsen, is by far the best representation of these very feminist principles in the show, she is instilled with the values and determination of a man in the Ad agency, (which in this case is symbolic of the new digital media, of it's time(circa 1960's) and goes beyond the typical argumentation to have her voice be heard...
Eventually Peggy earns her right to speak and argue a point, once her ideas are viewed as affective and valuable.
Invitational Rhetoric would be considered in the group collabrative meetings we see in the show, Mad Men, when Peggy Olsen and Joan Mitchell, the two women whom have worked their way up in the agency, give their presence in these meetings, their figures alone represented these values of self-determination and movement beyond the traditional realm of adversting and or advertising businness practices.
"Invitational rhetoric, grounded in feminist principles and focused on achieving feminist aims, is a next logical step for computers and composition because it 1) values choice and self-determination and 2) it moves the field beyond traditional argumentation into a dialogic space. During most of our existence as a sub-field and field, members have argued that the computer-mediated space is different from traditional communication spaces. We have argued that the former is more egalitarian, safer, more inviting, less silencing, and a better space for dialogic conversation.
No comments:
Post a Comment