The goal of this project is to practice a rhetorical analysis process on a text that is both
informational and argumentative. By practicing rhetorical analysis, you can better apply it to
future research that calls for close observation and interpretation of sources.
Task:
We are reading Cathy O’Neil’s introduction to Weapons of Math Destruction, which dissects
how math is used to make decisions that impact the quality of our lives. We are not
interested in whether O’Neil wrote a good book. The book is a New York Times bestseller
and was long listed for a National Book Award, so we can safely assume it is a good book.
Instead, we want to evaluate O’Neil’s writing in order to answer the questions:
How well does this introduction achieve O’Neil’s purpose?
What choices did she make to entice readers like you to keep reading?
As poet Ralph Waldo Emerson put it, “Speech is power: speech is to persuade, to convert,
to compel. It is to bring another out of his bad sense into your good sense.”
Has O’Neil persuaded you that her concern over WMD is good sense?
Rhetorical analysis starts with multiple readings of the text. We will work through an active
reading process to move from comprehension to analysis. Using several reading strategies,
we will track how our understanding of the text changes as we start breaking the
introduction down into parts. The component parts of rhetorical analysis are the
identification of the genre, subject, audience, author’s purpose, and context.
Assignment Goals
• Write a double entry journal to actively read the introduction of Weapons of Math
Destruction.
• Summarize the introduction for an audience unfamiliar with Cathy O’Neil’s book.
• Identify and describe the genre, subject, audience, author’s purpose and context of
the introduction of the book.
• Evaluate whether the author achieved her purpose for audience members like you.
• Use a writing process that includes peer workshopping and revising based off of
feedback received.
The following active reading strategies leading up to the drafting stage:
- First Thoughts: Read the introduction through. Put the reading material away. Fast
write for 5 minutes about your first impressions. - Highlight: Pick one paragraph that you liked best. Write for 2 minutes about what
jumped out at you. - Hazy & Confused: Pick one paragraph were the writer lost you or you wanted to put
the book down. Write for 2 minutes about what slowed you down. - Outline: Work paragraph-by-paragraph and write 5-10 words that describe what
happens in each paragraph. - Vocabulary: Hunt down words that you don’t use or that O’Neil uses in an unfamiliar
way. Look them up and note down a definition that fits the book’s context. - Rhetorical Situation: identify the 5 components of rhetorical analysis.
- Beta Reader: Pretend that O’Neil asked you to preview the introduction before the
book is published. What advice would you give her? - Double entry journal: Use this tool to pull evidence from the introduction as
preparation for drafting.
Draft the essay in stages by using insights from the reading process. - Summarize the introduction for an audience who has not yet read the book. What is
the central concern that caused O’Neil to write a book? - Describe the context in which the book was written. How does this contrast to the
context in which you read it? - Answer the central question. Here’s where the analysis happens! How well did
the author’s chosen strategies help achieve her purpose? Why did she use these
strategies for this audience and occasion? - Evidence your reasoning. Directly point at spots in the introduction to support your
answer. Get into the details. What type of evidence did O’Neil use? - Prioritize your evidence. Decide the order in which you should present your
evidence. Be sure to touch on all 5 components of rhetorical analysis. - Give your conclusion. Has the introduction clearly and successfully set up O’Neil’s
argument? Does it compel her would-be readers forward?