Context

My junior year at Elon, I took a science writing class that focused on one large project throughout the semester. This project largely dealt with the way scientific ideas and issues are communicated through writing. Science is spoken not just among professionals in certain fields, but throughout the public as well. Therefore, I conducted an examination into the major journals and literature that talk about ornithology. My research of ornithology, the study of birds, led me to the construction of an ornithological annotated bibliography and the presentation of my ideas on how ornithological communication functions among experts and lay audiences. It was intended for my teacher at the end of the semester, yet the idea was to create a document that any other student or adult could reference it if interested.

Rhetorical Decisions

Rhetorically, this piece needed to convince readers that ornithological writing does not simply inform experts about bird data. Ornithological literature has an important function in moving uninterested lay audience readers to consider conservative action. I outlined the premise of this hypothesis in the introduction for my bibliography. Then, to prove this point I had to present a well-constructed argument through annotated bibliography of specific ornithological texts. 

I arranged my bibliography into sections that demonstrated how ornithological literature moves readers from interest in birds, to their threatened status, to human impact, environmental impact, and lastly toward ways to help with bird conservation. These sections were titled “general ornithology”, “birds niche on earth”, “birds and humanity”, and “birds and environmental change”. In each section I listed texts that strongly supported the section theme and explained how they function with their audience. While providing a brief description of each text, I laid out the key elements that the literature used to either entertain, inform, or stir emotion in their reader. My previous experience analyzing rhetorical traits within other contexts undoubtedly strengthened my ability to do so when analyzing ornithological writing. For instance, in my Life of the Skies annotation I clearly point out Jonathan Rosen's formation of authority and use of appeal to pathos to sway his audience toward bird conservation. Through my bibliography, I logically demonstrated and backed up my theory on ornithological communication among lay audiences.

Lastly, I presented a concluding few paragraphs explaining how these sections all work together. My bibliography is organized with the purpose of making it a strong reference for audiences interested in ornithological writing. It also works as an effective argument presenting a theory on how this type of science writing functions among lay audiences, potentially steering them toward support of bird conservation.

Reflection

Overall, this project strongly demonstrates my ability to research, rhetorically analyze, and build an argument over a long span of time. The information I gathered for this project spanned from personal research through online journals, to interviews with ornithological writers, to personal reading and research of ornithological text. After completing this long-spanning project, I feel confident in building much larger stronger argument using a wide array of sources and research. Furthermore, I am able to examine very large subject matter and break it down thoroughly and effectively to prove a precise hypothesis.