RWS 305W Project 3 Prompt
Engaging in public discussion with an informed argument
The goal of this project is for you to apply the rhetorical analysis skills you refined during
Project 2, and practice your new skill of framing analysis in an arena of public discourse. Lakoff
contrasts framing models applicable to conservatives and liberals in order to encourage his
audience of progressive activists to find ways to create solidarity between their own sub-groups.
In what extends from Lakoff, Ryan and Gamson use a case study of a Rhode Island domestic
violence awareness movement to illustrate that while framing is a crucial tool for social change,
broader concrete efforts must also fuel the movement. With a focus just on the technique of
framing, Entman proposes that the communication discipline could accumulate the wide variety
of framing work to develop some inter-disciplinary theory. Entman diagrams the practice of
“framing” to show how framing analysis could be systematized. The latter two articles provide
specific descriptions of framing that could be used as basic tools for analysis of other texts.
Building upon your rhetorical analysis skills, add framing analysis and website evaluation to
investigate two websites. This is more of an analytical journal project than it is a formal writing
assignment. Document your analysis in a journal format, and compose the short writing tasks as
would be appropriate for the particular writing situation.
For the subject matter of this project, you have a choice between four options:
1. Contemporary social/political activist movement (e.g., an equality-related issue,
animal rights, food movement, etc.). Conduct a website evaluation and framing
analysis of two websites related to your selected issue.
2. Job/Career/Internship. Conduct a website evaluation and framing analysis of websites
for two companies/organizations in your field. You may focus on specific job
announcements for each company or organization, or you may focus on the company
itself or a combination.
3. Grad School. Conduct a website evaluation and framing analysis of two graduate
program websites relevant to your field.
4. Another option (related to your major) that we agree upon.
Criteria for Evaluation: Successful projects earning a “C” or above will accomplish the
1. Modify your Project 3 proposal to serve as an introduction to your analysis.
2. Provide a synthesized definition of framing analysis and how to do it, using Lakoff,
Ryan & Gamson, and Entman. Be sure to clearly describe steps to do a framing
analysis, as this will guide the analysis you do for each website.
3. Perform, document, and reflect a thoughtful framing analysis and evaluation of your
selected websites (two paragraphs for each website).
Framing analysis should be based on your synthesized definition in step 2 above.
Be sure to clearly identify the apparent purpose and audience of each website, as
well as any logical fallacies you identify.
Website evaluation should be based on categories in Web Evaluation Criteria
handout and Evaluating Web Sources activity.
4. Comparison/synthesis/commentary (one to two paragraphs): Do a comparison of
your two websites, based on your analysis and evaluation in task 3, commenting on
the relative usefulness and strength of each website. Discuss which website you trust
the most and which one seems most useful for your purpose, and explain why.
5. Organize the above writing tasks into a Word document to submit to Blackboard.
Single-space paragraphs, double-space between, and use appropriate headings.
Project 3 will be graded according to the following breakdown:
Intro (modified proposal) (5)
Framing analysis definition (5)
Analysis of each website (10 points each=20)
Formatting and readability (5)
Wednesday, March 25: Project 3 Proposal
Sunday, April 12: Project 3 Analysis due on Blackboard by 11:59 p.m.
Purchase answer to see full