ENG-312 Persuasive Writing BYU - Review so far

[UptonSinclair]

As some of you know, I fought to be able to take an upper level writing course through BYU to meet my Written English Requirement at Excelsior. I believe my advisor at Excelsior may have paid off Kharma to kick me in the teeth. This is going to be an extremely challenging course. I have no idea about the grading because I haven't turned in a writing assignment yet, but let me share a few of the details.

First, the course uses a text titled, "Introduction to Rhetorical Theory" by Gerard Hauser. This text reads like a philosophy book. For all of you budding philosophers out there this may seem wonderful, but I tend to be pretty pragmatic. By the time I was finished studying for the Ethics DSST, I was about ready to pull what little hair I have out. Imagine my surprise when I open this text and it makes the ethics materials look tame. In addition to reading like a philosophy book, much of the book reads like it was written by a grad student trying to show off their amazing vocabulary. I am a big fan of using simple words to describe complicated topics, so this may be just the product of my limited vocabulary.

I have described the horrible textbook, so let me describe the first few writing assignments. The first is a essay describing rhetorical theory in a way that proves to the instructor that you read the textbook. The second isn't too bad; it is a resume and cover letter. When I read the third I wanted to bang my head on the desk. The third assignment is a self-evaluative essay of 1500 words written as persuasive rhetoric to the instructor evaluating your use of Hauser's rhetorical theory using rhetorical theory.

I have a feeling this course is going to bring my GPA down a bit. I made it through most of the text, but about the second page into some droning illustration I find myself skipping to the summary. I would prefer a course that approached persuasive writing a little more practically. I feel like this is a philosophy course with writing assignments more than a persuasive writing course.

[Tedium]

That is pretty gnarly if they want you to have the entire textbook read by your first assignment. I feel your pain, though. Many forms of logic are basically mathematical formulas. No matter how interested in philosophy I think I am, all I have to do is flip through an old logic text I got at Goodwill to assure myself that I did indeed choose the right major.

Good luck with the class and be sure to keep us posted.

[Prloko]

[I have a feeling this course is going to bring my GPA down a bit. I made it through most of the text, but about the second page into some droning illustration I find myself skipping to the summary. I would prefer a course that approached persuasive writing a little more practically. I feel like this is a philosophy course with writing assignments more than a persuasive writing course.[/QUOTE]

Can you withdraw and get some of you $ back? I took Acct 201/202 through BYU IS and those classes were tough, so I understand what you are going through. Maybe another IS course will fill a block.

If it was me, I'd tough it out, but with what you're saying, I'm sure you have a plan and need your GPA high.

[UptonSinclair]

The first writing assignment is in lesson 5. I have spent about a week with the text, but I despise books that I have to pry the information from. My biggest problem with philosophy is that academics seem to think they must use antiquated language to discuss topics that apply today. Whey must we speak of logos, ethos, and pathos when we could easily discuss the same issues using modern terms like logic, character, and emotion? I am cynical and have very little trust in academia, so my first assumption is that cling to outdated language to differentiate themselves from the masses. Tarus Skubala sounds far more educated than bulls**t.

There seems to be this idea that a students must wrestle with texts as some kind of right of passage.

[UptonSinclair]

I plan to stick it out. I will get angry and rant about it. I will post negative reviews of the textbook on Amazon. I will rant on classical rhetoric blogs about how ridiculous it is that people are still being forced to study Aristotle without modernizing the language. Then I will find alternative approaches that make sense to me and attempt to drag Hauser kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

I swear this textbook was written by Sheldon from Big Bang Theory.

[Prloko]

The first writing assignment is in lesson 5. I have spent about a week with the text, but I despise books that I have to pry the information from. My biggest problem with philosophy is that academics seem to think they must use antiquated language to discuss topics that apply today. Whey must we speak of logos, ethos, and pathos when we could easily discuss the same issues using modern terms like logic, character, and emotion? I am cynical and have very little trust in academia, so my first assumption is that cling to outdated language to differentiate themselves from the masses. Tarus Skubala sounds far more educated than bulls**t.

There seems to be this idea that a students must wrestle with texts as some kind of right of passage.

As I told my wife; it wouldn't be higher learning otherwise.

[UptonSinclair]

There are texts that must be grappled with because the concepts are inherently difficult and there are concepts that are made difficult because a writer insists on using antiquated language out of some kind of zealotry for "the classics". There is nothing taught in outdated language that couldn't be taught in the modern vernacular.

I passionately despise pretentious academic prose.

[Tedium]

Misery loves company. They had to sit through it, so now you will too, etc.

[Prloko]

There are texts that must be grappled with because the concepts are inherently difficult and there are concepts that are made difficult because a writer insists on using antiquated language out of some kind of zealotry for "the classics". There is nothing taught in outdated language that couldn't be taught in the modern vernacular.

I passionately despise pretentious academic prose.

I had a biology textbook that was way too complicated than it needed to be. I totally get your frustration. Boundless.com is a good alternative to these complicated and expensive textbooks, but of course they're getting the pants sued off of them by the major publisers.

[UptonSinclair]

I think I found a solution. There is a set of lectures on Audible.com that cover the same material by an enthusiastic professor. I will listen to the series and then revisit Hauser when I have a better understanding of the material.