30:30
AP English Language: Incorporating Commentary in Rhetorical Analysis Essays
Advanced Placement
Overview
This video explains the concept of commentary in AP English Language rhetorical analysis essays, emphasizing its importance for achieving a higher score. It breaks down what constitutes effective commentary according to the AP rubric, differentiating between simplistic (score of 2) and more developed analysis (score of 3). The video provides strategies for generating commentary by focusing on the significance of evidence, its connection to the rhetorical situation, and its relationship to the essay's claim. It uses student examples to illustrate these points and offers practical advice for students to improve their analytical writing.
How was this?
Save this permanently with flashcards, quizzes, and AI chat
Chapters
- Commentary is crucial for high scores in AP English Language essays, often more so than the thesis statement.
- Effective commentary connects evidence to the essay's claim or line of reasoning.
- The AP rubric scores commentary based on the depth and insight of the analysis, not just the presence of evidence.
- Students often struggle with understanding what 'analysis' or 'commentary' truly means in this context.
Understanding commentary is essential because it directly impacts essay scores, and mastering it can significantly elevate a student's performance on the AP exam.
The anecdote about the student writing 'more analysis needed' highlights the common confusion surrounding the term 'analysis'.
- A score of 2 for commentary involves simplistic, inaccurate, or repetitive explanations that don't strengthen the argument.
- Commentary at a score of 2 often fails to explain the connections or progression between claims, lacking a clear line of reasoning.
- A score of 3 involves more specific analysis tied to particular words or details from the passage.
- Commentary at a score of 3 may still have room for improvement, such as fully integrating evidence or supporting a keen claim, but it is more specific and insightful than a score of 2.
Distinguishing between a score of 2 and 3 on the rubric helps students identify specific areas for improvement in their analytical writing.
The rubric descriptors for a score of 2 (simplistic explanations, lack of connection between claims) versus a score of 3 (focus on specific words/details, more specific analysis) provide clear benchmarks.
- Effective analysis requires more commentary (green) than evidence (yellow) in a paragraph.
- Sample B (score of 2) had more evidence but less developed commentary, failing to fully explain the significance of the chosen words.
- Sample A (score of 3) used less evidence but provided richer, more detailed commentary that explored the significance and implications of the evidence.
- Simply stating that a quote 'shows' something is insufficient; the analysis must explain *how* it shows it.
Comparing student samples visually demonstrates the impact of commentary quantity and quality on essay scores, reinforcing the 'more green than yellow' principle.
Highlighting evidence in yellow and commentary in green in Sample A and Sample B visually shows that Sample A has a higher ratio of commentary to evidence, leading to a better score.
- Commentary should explain the significance and relevance of evidence to the line of reasoning.
- Commentary should explore how rhetorical choices contribute to the writer's argument, purpose, or message within the rhetorical situation.
- Commentary must connect the evidence back to the essay's main claim or topic sentence.
- Aim for at least two sentences of commentary for each piece of evidence to ensure sufficient depth.
These strategies provide a practical toolkit for students to move beyond simply presenting evidence to actively analyzing its meaning and function.
Asking questions like 'Why would the writer make this choice?' or 'How is this persuasive to the audience?' helps generate deeper commentary.
- Explaining the importance of the example involves detailing *what* is stated, *how* a choice is seen, and the *effect* produced.
- Relating the example to the rhetorical situation means explaining its persuasiveness to the audience, its connection to the speaker/exigence, and its context.
- Connecting evidence to the claim requires explicitly stating *how* the example supports the paragraph's main idea, using varied language.
- Strong analysis often weaves together multiple layers: the example's importance, its relation to the rhetorical situation, and its link to the overall claim.
Focusing on these three interconnected areas—significance, rhetorical situation, and claim connection—provides a comprehensive framework for developing insightful commentary.
Sample A's commentary, which discusses 'godly duty,' connects to the 'resolved' tone, and explores the rhetorical situation by referencing Gandhi and civil disobedience, exemplifies these strategies.
Key takeaways
- Commentary is the analysis and explanation of evidence, not just a summary of it.
- Effective commentary is more valuable than extensive evidence in achieving a high score on rhetorical analysis essays.
- The 'iceberg' analogy illustrates that commentary is the deeper, less obvious meaning beneath the surface of the evidence.
- Develop commentary by explaining the significance of evidence, its role within the rhetorical situation, and its direct connection to your essay's claim.
- Strive for a higher ratio of commentary to evidence in your body paragraphs (more 'green' than 'yellow').
- Explicitly explain *how* evidence supports your argument, rather than just stating *that* it does.
- Connecting your analysis back to the topic sentence or claim of the paragraph is crucial for cohesion.
Key terms
CommentaryRhetorical AnalysisEvidenceClaimLine of ReasoningRhetorical SituationExigenceContextPurposeAudience
Test your understanding
- What is the primary difference in commentary between a score of 2 and a score of 3 on the AP rubric?
- How does the 'iceberg' analogy help explain the concept of commentary?
- What are the three main strategies for generating effective commentary on evidence?
- Why is it important to connect your commentary back to the specific claim of your body paragraph?
- How can a student ensure they are providing enough commentary for each piece of evidence they present?