I chose to do my final analysis papers on the Bitzer argument and the visual analysis.  I chose to do the Bitzer argument because I understood it very well and though it was most effective.  I am able to find the exigence, audience, and constraints in almost any argument and discuss their effectiveness.  I also chose this analysis because I thought the opinion article I wrote about was interesting and showed a different point of view of tuition increase. I did the visual analysis because I was able to incorporate everything I have learned in this unit and analyze an argument.  I used bits and parts of Bitzer, Toulmin, Rogerian agruments to dissect a visual argument and rate its effectiveness. I liked being able to use what parts I knew best of each argument to analyze the rhetorical argument of an image.

Bitzer, Toulmin, Rogerian, and visual analysis are all similar in that they are evaluating the effectiveness of an argument.  Each have a different set up and has different criteria, however they all have a particular audience in mind when exploring the argument.  They each also have a claim that must be stated. They are different in the criteria that each  model uses. Bitzer uses exigence, audience and constraints. Toulmin uses claim, warrants, qualifiers, backing, data, and rebuttals. Rogerian model uses connects the audience by using common ground and goals, explores audience perspective and the authors perspective, the conclusion is a compromise between the two different points of view.  The visual analysis uses sound, music, images, graphics, logos, written text, target audience, and credibility of information. Each model isn’t completely different yet the all have certain attributions that make them different.

The Rogerian style is more appealing to me. I say this because it explores both sides of the argument, the audience and authors and then comes to a compromise.  Its used to show credibility and build validity of two different points of view. The Toulmin style can hard to apply to arguments because not all arguments have clear cut qualifiers, warrants, or backing. When I used the Toulmin model, I had a  hard time with the criteria of this model. I wasn’t sure if I was using rebuttals or qualifiers correctly and wasn’t sure if a warrant existed in the argument. Using the Toulmin model was the most challenging part of Unit 1 because I didn’t understand it like I did the other models and wasn’t able to successfully apply it to an argument.

For the most part my stance on my topic of tuition increase has been reinforced by the reading and writing I have done.  Especially after watching a news clip of this issue. Student’s were interviewed about tuition increase at the university they were currently attending. I was able to relate to these student’s about the increase and the use of pathos was used effectively. However, during some of my readings I could also side with the need for tuition increase because of university budget cuts handed out by the government. The more research and reading I do on this topic, the more uneasy I am on which side I choose.