東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

iRhetoric: Classical Rhetoric in Dig...

Rytov, Kyllikki.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

iRhetoric: Classical Rhetoric in Digital Multimodal Compositions.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	iRhetoric: Classical Rhetoric in Digital Multimodal Compositions./
作者:	Rytov, Kyllikki.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2020,
面頁冊數:	181 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-02, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International82-02A.
標題:	Rhetoric. -
電子資源:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=27830625
ISBN:	9798662464193

iRhetoric: Classical Rhetoric in Digital Multimodal Compositions.
Rytov, Kyllikki.

iRhetoric: Classical Rhetoric in Digital Multimodal Compositions. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2020 - 181 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-02, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 2020.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

While this dissertation was designed to respond to an exigence in scholarship attending to whether students composing texts that are digital and multimodal are influenced in their decisions by classical rhetorical concepts, it was also shaped by a timely if provocative message shared on the professional listserv for writing program administration to which many in the field of rhetoric and composition subscribe. The contention in the message was that the classical rhetoric commonly taught in schools, including on the college level, does not seem to be helping students develop as writers. Thus, to investigate the potential role that classical concepts have on students composing digital multimodal texts, I articulated the following research questions:1) Which, if any, classical rhetorical concepts play a role in students' decisions as they design, draft, and deliver a digital multimodal text?2) When, where, and how do these concepts affect students' decisions in their composition processes? In other words, how and to what ends are these concepts used?3) Are these concepts, if employed by students, used explicitly in decision-making processes?4) If, and when, these concepts are employed, are they embraced in their traditional configuration, repurposed, or shaped into a combination of both? How, and to what ends?To answer these questions, I employed a case study methodology: working with three participants, I followed each across the arc of a digital multimodal project, from before its formal introduction in class to after submission of the final draft. I conducted four interviews with each participant, and, after the course had concluded, I followed up with a brief questionnaire to clarify participants' prior instruction in classical rhetoric. In analyzing my data, I employed two methods: first, grounded theory as an inductive means of discerning how and where classical rhetoric seemed at work as students made decisions; and second, after completing the grounded theory coding, a deductive coding scheme that applied fifteen classical concepts to the data.My findings, in light of my research questions, suggest four prevalent patterns in the relationship between classical rhetoric concepts and how students understand and utilize them in composing digital multimodal texts. First, participants largely engaged classical concepts implicitly, seeming to employ them intuitively, which suggests the significance of a rhetorical attitude, or unconscious, embodied beliefs that predispose a student to act rhetorically even if they're not articulating rhetorical terminology to themselves. Second, classical concepts are porous and malleable, which lent themselves to being taken up so implicitly by participants, with students often pulling on more than one concept at a time. Third, implicit use of classical concepts by participants points to rhetorical agency, where participants made decisions in light of the project expectations, but also in answer to their own desires and goals, such that participants' decisions resembled the strategies embraced in do-it-yourself (DIY) rhetorics. Last, imitatio emerged as a classical concept implicitly recurring across the cases, gesturing to the potential for other classical concepts to be present, if repurposed and not traditionally recognizable, as well. Thus, while evidence of explicit reliance on rhetorical concepts was meager, evidence of implicit reliance on rhetorical concepts, which had become mortised into participants' composing processes, was rich and provocative.

ISBN: 9798662464193Subjects--Topical Terms:

516647
Rhetoric.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Classical rhetoric

iRhetoric: Classical Rhetoric in Digital Multimodal Compositions.
LDR:04672nmm a2200349 4500 001 2284979
005 20211124104321.5
008 220723s2020 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798662464193
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI27830625
035 $a AAI27830625
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Rytov, Kyllikki. $0 (orcid)0000-0002-5530-3733 $3 3564228
245 1 0 $a iRhetoric: Classical Rhetoric in Digital Multimodal Compositions.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2020
300 $a 181 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-02, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Fleckenstein, Kristie S.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 2020.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a While this dissertation was designed to respond to an exigence in scholarship attending to whether students composing texts that are digital and multimodal are influenced in their decisions by classical rhetorical concepts, it was also shaped by a timely if provocative message shared on the professional listserv for writing program administration to which many in the field of rhetoric and composition subscribe. The contention in the message was that the classical rhetoric commonly taught in schools, including on the college level, does not seem to be helping students develop as writers. Thus, to investigate the potential role that classical concepts have on students composing digital multimodal texts, I articulated the following research questions:1) Which, if any, classical rhetorical concepts play a role in students' decisions as they design, draft, and deliver a digital multimodal text?2) When, where, and how do these concepts affect students' decisions in their composition processes? In other words, how and to what ends are these concepts used?3) Are these concepts, if employed by students, used explicitly in decision-making processes?4) If, and when, these concepts are employed, are they embraced in their traditional configuration, repurposed, or shaped into a combination of both? How, and to what ends?To answer these questions, I employed a case study methodology: working with three participants, I followed each across the arc of a digital multimodal project, from before its formal introduction in class to after submission of the final draft. I conducted four interviews with each participant, and, after the course had concluded, I followed up with a brief questionnaire to clarify participants' prior instruction in classical rhetoric. In analyzing my data, I employed two methods: first, grounded theory as an inductive means of discerning how and where classical rhetoric seemed at work as students made decisions; and second, after completing the grounded theory coding, a deductive coding scheme that applied fifteen classical concepts to the data.My findings, in light of my research questions, suggest four prevalent patterns in the relationship between classical rhetoric concepts and how students understand and utilize them in composing digital multimodal texts. First, participants largely engaged classical concepts implicitly, seeming to employ them intuitively, which suggests the significance of a rhetorical attitude, or unconscious, embodied beliefs that predispose a student to act rhetorically even if they're not articulating rhetorical terminology to themselves. Second, classical concepts are porous and malleable, which lent themselves to being taken up so implicitly by participants, with students often pulling on more than one concept at a time. Third, implicit use of classical concepts by participants points to rhetorical agency, where participants made decisions in light of the project expectations, but also in answer to their own desires and goals, such that participants' decisions resembled the strategies embraced in do-it-yourself (DIY) rhetorics. Last, imitatio emerged as a classical concept implicitly recurring across the cases, gesturing to the potential for other classical concepts to be present, if repurposed and not traditionally recognizable, as well. Thus, while evidence of explicit reliance on rhetorical concepts was meager, evidence of implicit reliance on rhetorical concepts, which had become mortised into participants' composing processes, was rich and provocative.
590 $a School code: 0071.
650 4 $a Rhetoric. $3 516647
650 4 $a Communication. $3 524709
650 4 $a Pedagogy. $3 2122828
653 $a Classical rhetoric
653 $a Digital multimodal composition
653 $a Digital rhetoric
690 $a 0681
690 $a 0459
690 $a 0456
710 2 $a The Florida State University. $b English. $3 2095663
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 82-02A.
790 $a 0071
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2020
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=27830625