1. Thesis. What is the author(s)—from their perspective—arguing as the possible outcomes of reanimating lost or silenced counterstories and cultural rhetorical traditions?
2. Method.
A. What methods is the author(s) suggesting and/or practicing as a pathway to tap into community identity formation as expressed in past voices or rhetorical traditions?
B. What specific materials does the author(s) use to advance their projects?
3. Theory.
A. Does the author(s) advance any particular theoretical framework? Find evidence on whether they reference theory.
B. If none is offered by the author(s), how might we conceptualize their unspoken theoretical alignment—pedagogical (focused on inclusive teaching and/or empowerment of students/learners), decolonial (focused on destabilizing historical power structures and/or addressing historical violence against body, identity, living conditions, and/or culture), socioeconomics (focused on examining financial hierarchies that impact community and individual potential), critical race theory (focused on inequities based on structures that support white supremacy), gender and sexuality studies (focused on examining intersections of embodied-identity experiences), etc.? Explain the theoretical category that you assign to the author.
4. Ethnic Studies. Close your analysis by briefly speculating—from your perspective—on how studying rhetorical actions from the past impacts rhetorical strategies in modern communication choices within and/or beyond academia in regard to reality-making—specifically through activism.
Please feel free to structure your response to the above numbering system rather than construct a formal response. Remember, this assignment is intended as preparatory notes for in-class discussion, so no formal writing is required for this task.