As the term began, I must admit I was a bit apprehensive.  Throughout high school, I had been instructed in the standard writing process of introduction, body, and conclusion with a emphasis on the criticality of selecting a strong thesis statement.  I felt I had developed a solid capability utilizing this process.  

However, I was a true novice with regards to an analytical approach to rhetoric.  Quite frankly I did not really know what to expect.  
As the term moved on, my apprehensive gave way to understanding.   As different rhetorical concepts were introduced, I began to see how utilizing a structured process can greatly enhance a persuasive argument.

In each of my essays, I have attempted to apply the rhetorical techniques available to strengthen my message. Learning to employ the strategies of logos, ethos, and pathos has provided me an extremely effective communication tool. My apprehension has long faded as I now am confident that my rhetorical training has benefited me in this class and will continue to do so throughout my career. 

I am most proud of my photo essay because it effectively shows my creativity in a new light. I was able to use elements of multimedia literacy and practical conventions of academic writing to create a compelling essay.

When I envisioned my life at college I envisioned of one particular aspect of my life improving, sleep.  I dreamed of 12:30 classes where I had time to sleep in and enjoy my day. Fast forward to second semester freshman year as my alarm goes off at 6:00am for morning workout practice.  I am a walk-on to the Women’s division one rowing team at Notre Dame, and I can tell you that my sleep has not improved, due to the time commitments of both 20 hour practice weeks and a full course load.  I was accepted to the university unaided by the athletic department, and I receive no scholarship for my participation, but I do receive all the perks of athletically competing at the division one level, including free academic tutors, priority scheduling, and additional academic advisors. Through this experience I have realised that my life is split in to, one half of my life is on the rowing team with my rowing friends, and the other half of my life in classes, my dorm, and with my non-rowing friends.  With this divide comes an unspoken tension between the two groups. Whether that be envy, anger, or confusion I hear comments from both sides which further divide one group from the other.

For some reason being an athlete here at Notre Dame sets you apart from the average student, whether you like it or not.  Certain stereotypes and stigmas are placed on student-athletes creating andivide from their non-athlete counterparts. What should be one whole inclusive student body, is being driven apart by misconceptions and blindly held beliefs.  Being a walk on gives me insight into both sides of the divide. I understand both the tension of the regularly admitted students and those of the recruited athletes, and have found through conversations with my classmates, dormmates, friends, and teammates main areas for this divide.  Some regularly admitted students have made comments such as, student-athletes “cheated their way into Notre Dame”, “receive special treatment from professors”, and “have their tutors do their homework”. Some also believe that their tuition money goes towards funding athletics instead of paying for their education.  From the other side of the divide, student athletes complain that they do not have enough time to socialise with people outside of their teams, therefore remaining isolated from the campus community. The growing divide between students and student-athletes is due to controversy and misconceptions surrounding time commitment and isolation, academic aids, admission to the university, misconceptions formed by the media, and athletic funding.

The largest controversy dividing the student population is athletic funding. Some regularly admitted students see new athletic facilities being built at the same rate as new dorms and automatically assume that their steep tuition tuition prices are footing the bill.  They also see student athletes wearing Under Armour sweatshirts, sneakers, and backpacks that they received for free, as a constant reminder that they will never receive that apparel unless they pay overpriced bookstore fees. What they don’t normally see is the millions of dollars in revenue that the football team alone generates through ticket sales, television agreements, and apparel sales and contracts.  In 2014, 2015, and 2016 the football team averaged $112 million in revenue and $72 million in profit (Smith). In 2016-2017 the Notre Dame annual athletic report included “Notre Dame’s two-and-a-half-decade relationship with NBC Sports to televise Irish home football games has resulted in more than $100 million being allocated from contract revenues to University financial aid. Athletics has contributed in excess of $4 million per year of revenue from the NBC Sports agreement to the University’s financial aid program” (University of Notre Dame Annual Athletic Report).  Looking at those numbers Football alone has the capacity to support all of the Notre Dame division one athletic teams with plenty of money to spare.  But, football is not the only team to generate revenue, in 2014 Under Armour signed a ten year contract, “value of the deal, in cash and merchandise combined, is worth about $90 million”(Rovell), with the universities athletic department as a whole. These numbers exclude the thousands of dollars generated from ticket lotteries and endowment (University of Notre Dame Annual Athletic Report).  With these statistics, it is easy to see that not only is the athletic department self sustainable, it is beneficial to to the overall growth and income of the entire university, “Athletic Director, Jack Swarbrick, has revealed that Notre Dame actually pours money back into the college’s coffers, to the tune of about $10 million in 2009.”(Dosh).  It is safe to say that the belief that student tuition is being used to fund athletics is false, and a consequence of misinformed opinions.

Another strain dividing the student body population is the tension surrounding student-athlete admission to the university.  Many regularly admitted students believe that student athletes “cheated” their way into the university. The term “cheated” applies to any student who received admission when their test scores, GPA, and extracirruclar activities were below the average of regularly admitted students.  As described in Lisa Rubin and Ron Moses journal Athletic Subculture Within Student-Athlete Academic Centers, “Many Division I universities offer conditional admission for students- athletes, regardless of their academic preparedness (Rid-path, 2010)” (Rubin and Moses).  While Notre Dame has not released specific numbers as to how behind student athletes are than their non-athlete counterparts, schools such as the university of texas, with a football team of similar achievement to Notre Dame, have reported “the average SAT score for a freshman football player from 2003 to 2005 was 945 – or 320 points lower than the typical first-year students score on the entrance exam”(Zagier).  Similarly, at the University of California “Golden Bear football players were 43 times more likely to gain special admissions than non-athletes from 2002-04.”(Zagier). Being a regularly admitted student I understand the frustration that non-athletes who received no aid to the admission process feel. Like many of my non-athlete counterparts, I was able to be recruited to various other institutions for my athletic skill, but chose to attend Notre Dame because of the higher level of education I would receive.  I dedicated just as much time to my sport as recruited athletes, but I was still being held to a higher academic standard. This begs the question, if there are students capable of performing at the division one level who hold the grades and test scores required to be admitted to the university, why does Notre Dame continually admit students below admission standards, and will their lack of academic skill inhibit them from excelling in the classroom while attending the university? From personal experience I believe that the hundred athletes that do not meet the academic criteria to be admitted unaided to the university add more value than they detract.  The amount of revenue that they generate for the school allows for better facilities, professors, and overall quality of life for students. Duncan students center for example, is attached to Notre Dame stadium and both structures would most likely not exist if not for the success of the football team, and the players who make it exceptional.

This divide has been further heightened in recent months with a recent scandal involving academic admission to prestigious universities for students under the impression that they are recruited athletes even if they have never competed in the sport (Medina, Benner, Taylor).  The scandal involved, “top college athletic coaches, who were accused of accepting millions of dollars to help admit undeserving students to a wide variety of colleges, from the University of Texas at Austin to Wake Forest and Georgetown, by suggesting they were top athletes”(Medina, Benner, Taylor).  While this scandal does not depict how many deserving athletes are accepted to universities based on their exceptional athletic prowess, it does make the process of admittance much more difficult. College athletic programs are now under more scrutiny, leading to strict recruiting and a possibility of program suffering.  The widespread portrayal of this case in the media also creates a hostile environment among students. Personally, I have heard and witnesses my pears make comments questioning if some students were admitted by bribery at Notre Dame. Some athletes find this as an attack on their own admittance and feel further divided from the student community.  

While some regularly admitted students are not opposed to student-athlete aid, they may be opposed to the special academic treatment they receive once attending school. In order to handle new academic stresses of college, many institutions including Notre Dame have student athlete academic centers.  These centers provide additional academic advisors, free tutoring, private study rooms, and free printing. Some students may see these as an unfair advantage, and believe that athletes should only receive additional aid in their sports. I, along with may professionals, disagree with this opinion and see these services as critical for success.  Without aid, student athletes would drown in course work while dealing with 20 hour study weeks, countless missed classes for travel, and pure physical exhaustion. Ridpath describes this in his Journal, Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics, “However, these services are more concentrated in athletics, with the main reason being because the athletes’ time is so limited due to complex demands that result from participating in competitive sport”.  Another critical role that these academic centers contribute to is keeping student athlete academically eligible by NCAA standards. This means that athletes must “achieve 90 percent of the institution’s minimum overall grade-point average necessary to graduate (for example, 1.8) by the beginning of year two, 95 percent of the minimum GPA (1.9) by year three and 100 percent (2.0) by year four.” (NCAA).  If athletes do not maintain academic eligibility they are unable to compete and consequently do not generate revenue for the university. By being regularly admitted to the university I have the ability to perform academically in the classroom without aid, but the additional stress that rowing adds to my mental and physical health makes it significantly harder than my non-athlete counterparts to perform in the classroom.  

The media portrays these academic centers in a negative light leading students to assume and make generalizations about all academic support centers.  In a recent scandal, student-athletes at Stanford university were given a list of classes where they would be able to achieve an easy A, “‘It’s definitely not going to be a hard class if it’s coming off that list,’ said Karissa Cook, a sophomore women’s volleyball player, who consulted the list to pick classes in her first quarter at Stanford.”(Harris, Mac).  This list was not widely distributed but was given to athletes, if asked for it, by administrators (Harris, Mac). Another example includes years of student athletes participating in fake or no-show classes at the University of North Carolina. The report states “For 18 years, thousands of students at the prestigious University of North Carolina took fake “paper classes,” and advisers funneled athletes into the program to keep them eligible”(Ganim, Sayers).  These scandals lead students to believe that programs at their school designed to assist student athletes perform in the classroom are really used to exempt students from their academic responsibilities. The one sided portrayal of corrupt academic assistance centers leads to tension among school communities, specifically students at Notre Dame.

Another aspect of academic success among student athletes stems from culture and common stereotypes associated with student-athletes. As described by Engstrom and Sedlacek, “For years, part of the university system has included myths and stereotypes that range from the student-athlete being the campus hero to the student being the campus idiot”.  These stereotypes have been spread through social media, movies, and television and add another dimension to academic performance of student athlete. In most cases these stereotypes negatively affect student-athlete performance in the classroom. One study conducted by Daniel Oppenheimer a professor of psychology and marketing at the Anderson School of Management at UCLA found that student athletes are often pressured by the opinions of their teammates in matters of academics.  He describes this by saying, “Because when an athlete thinks that the rest of the team doesn’t care about academics, that athlete tries to fit in by pretending not to care either. In a perverse form of peer pressure… based on the mistaken belief that if they care about academics, they are in an uncool minority”(Square). These stereotypes surrounding student athletes lead to underachievement in their academic fields and ultimately a continuation of the same stereotypes.

Work Cited  

• Smith, Chris. “College Football’s Most Valuable Teams: Texas A&M Jumps To No. 1.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 25 Sept. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2018/09/11/college-footballs-most-valuable-teams/#6f6d02786c64.
• University of Notre Dame Annual Athletic Report . 2016, University of Notre Dame Annual Athletic Report .
• Rovell, Darren. “Under Armour Signs Notre Dame.” ESPN, ESPN Internet Ventures, 21 Jan. 2014,www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/10328133/notre-dame-fighting-irish-armour-agree-most-valuable-apparel-contract-ncaa-history.
• Dosh, Kristi. “How Does Notre Dame Do Financially?” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 30 July 2012, www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/2011/04/19/how-does-notre-dame-do-financially/#4425a25b1559.
• Rubin, Lisa, and Ron Moses. “Athletic Subculture Within Student-Athlete Academic Centers.” Sociology of Sport Journal 34.4 (2017): 317-328. Web.
• Zagier, Alan Scher, and Associated Press. “Admissions Rules Bend More for Athletes, Study Says.” Tribune, San Diego Union-Tribune, 30 Dec. 2009, http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-admissions-exemptions-benefit-lock-2009dec30-story.html.
• Ridpath, B.D. (2010). Perceptions of NCAA division I athletes on motivations concerning the use of specialized academic support services in the era of academic progress rate. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics, 3, 253–271.
• “Staying on Track to Graduate.” NCAA.org – The Official Site of the NCAA. 04 Apr. 2019 <http://www.ncaa.org/student-athletes/current/staying-track-graduate&gt;.
• Engstrom, C.M., & Sedlacek, W.E. (1991). A study of prejudice toward university student-athletes. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70(1), 189–193. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1991.tb01582.x
• Medina, Jennifer, Katie Benner, and Kate Taylor. “Actresses, Business Leaders and Other Wealthy Parents Charged in U.S. College Entry Fraud.” The New York Times. 12 Mar. 2019. The New York Times. 04 Apr. 2019 <https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/12/us/college-admissions-cheating-scandal.html>.
• Harris, Amy Julia, and Ryan Mac. “Stanford athletes had access to list of ‘easy’ courses.” The Stanford Daily. 08 May 2014. 04 Apr. 2019 <https://www.stanforddaily.com/2011/03/09/1046687/&gt;.
• Ganim, Sara, and Devon Sayers. “UNC athletics report finds 18 years of academic fraud.” CNN. 23 Oct. 2014. Cable News Network. 04 Apr. 2019 <https://www.cnn.com/2014/10/22/us/unc-report-academic-fraud/index.html>.
• Square, Zócalo Public. “Why Student Athletes Continue To Fail.” Time. 20 Apr. 2015. Time. <http://time.com/3827196/why-student-athletes-fail/&gt;.

I grew up watching my dad yell at the TV every football weekend in the fall.  No matter the team, not matter the game he always had an opinion, bad pass, bad call, or bad defense.  There was always a critique. Fast forward to my freshman year at Notre Dame and my first home game, the irish were playing Michigan and there was an electricity in the air.  Leading up to the game everyone was buzzing, ready to see those gold helmets run across the field. As the game went on I always had an opinion, bad pass, bad call, or bad defense.  In my mind the players were pros, they weren’t allowed to make mistakes. A few weeks later I decided to walk on to the women’s division one rowing team here at Notre Dame. I quickly learned that I was the same as those players I was so harshly critiquing just a few weeks earlier.  While rowing does not receive even a fraction of the attention from the media and campus community, my rank amongst the university is the same as the football team.

For some reason being an athlete here at Notre Dame sets you apart from the average student whether you like it or not.  Certain stereotypes and stigmas are places on both students and student-athletes creating an unspoken tension between the groups.  What should be one whole inclusive student body, is being driven apart by misconceptions and blindly held beliefs. Being a walk on gives me insight into both sides of the divide.  I understand bot the tension of the regularly admitted students and the recruited athletes, and have found through conversations with my classmates, dormmates, friends, and teammates main areas for this divide.  Regularly admitted students believe that athletes “cheated their way into Notre Dame”, “receive special treatment from professors”, and “have their tutors do their homework”. They also believe that their tuition money goes towards funding athletics instead of academics.  From the other side of the divide, student athletes complain that they do not have enough time to socialise with people outside of their teams, therefore remaining isolated from the campus community. The growing divide between students and student-athletes is due to controversy surrounding time commitment and isolation, academic aids, admission to the university, and athletic funding.

The largest controversy dividing the student population is athletic funding.  Regularly admitted students see new athletic facilities being built at the same rate as new dorms and automatically assume that their tuition steep tuition prices are footing the bill.  They also see student athletes wearing Under Armour sweatshirts, sneakers, and backpacks, that they received for free, as a constant reminder that they will never receive that apparel unless they pay overpriced bookstore fees.   What they don’t normally see if the millions of dollars in revenue that the football team alone generates through ticket sales, television agreements, and apparel sales and contracts. In 2014, 2015, and 2016 the football team averaged $112 million in revenue and $72 million in profit (Smith).  In 2016-2017 the Notre Dame annual athletic report included “Notre Dame’s two-and-a-half-decade relationship with NBC Sports to televise Irish home football games has resulted in more than $100 million being allocated from contract revenues to University financial aid. Athletics has contributed in excess of $4 million per year of revenue from the NBC Sports agreement to the University’s financial aid program” (University of Notre Dame Annual Athletic Report).  Looking at those numbers Football alone has the capacity to support all of the Notre Dame division one athletic teams with plenty of money to spare.  But, football is not the only team to generate revenue, in 2014 Under Armour signed a ten year contract, “value of the deal, in cash and merchandise combined, is worth about $90 million”(Rovell), with the universities athletic department as a whole. These numbers exclude the thousands of dollars generated from ticket lotteries and endowment (University of Notre Dame Annual Athletic Report).  With these statistics, it is easy to see that not only is the athletic department self sustainable, it is beneficial to to the overall growth and income of the entire university, “Athletic Director, Jack Swarbrick, has revealed that Notre Dame actually pours money back into the college’s coffers, to the tune of about $10 million in 2009.”(Dosh).  It is safe to say that the belief that student tuition money is being used to fund athletics is false, and a consequence of misinformed opinions.

Another strain dividing the student body population is the tension surrounding student-athlete admissions.  Many regularly admitted students believe that student athletes “cheated” their way into the university. The term “cheated” applies to any student who received admission when their test scores, GPA, and extracirruclar activities were below the average of regularly admitted students.   As described in Rubin and Moses journal Athletic Subculture Within Student-Athlete Academic Centers, “Many Division I universities offer conditional admission for students- athletes, regardless of their academic preparedness (Rid-path, 2010)” (Rubin and Moses).  

Work Cited  

Smith, Chris. “College Football’s Most Valuable Teams: Texas A&M Jumps To No. 1.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 25 Sept. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2018/09/11/college-footballs-most-valuable-teams/#6f6d02786c64.

University of Notre Dame Annual Athletic Report . 2016, University of Notre Dame Annual Athletic Report .

Rovell, Darren. “Under Armour Signs Notre Dame.” ESPN, ESPN Internet Ventures, 21 Jan. 2014,www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/10328133/notre-dame-fighting-irish-armour-agree-most-valuable-apparel-contract-ncaa-history.

Dosh, Kristi. “How Does Notre Dame Do Financially?” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 30 July 2012, www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/2011/04/19/how-does-notre-dame-do-financially/#4425a25b1559.

Rubin, Lisa, and Ron Moses. “Athletic Subculture Within Student-Athlete Academic Centers.” Sociology of Sport Journal 34.4 (2017): 317-328. Web.

My first impression of show some skin was that I would like the performance but I would not necessarily be able to connect with the problems being spoken about. After seeing the production my impression has completely changed. I enjoyed and engaged with the show more than I ever thought I would. And I didn’t connect with just one monologue I was touched and moved by many. While I may not have experienced all of the hardships discussed in monologues I empathize with the speakers and thought about how I related their words to my own experiences and daily life. Some of the most memorable monologues for me were about women and body image. Being a young woman, growing up and learning to love my body, it was amazing to see how a large scale production recognized, understood, and wanted to portray my struggles. Yes, people talk about loving their body in the media, but it is a different experience to see a school production that talks about problems I viewed as more serious such as, race, homophobia, and gender inequality, also speak about your struggle in the same way.
I think that a large part of the productions power was due to its actors, directors, stage crew, and producers. It is one thing to read a piece and feel compassion but it is another for someone to stand in front of you look you in the eye and tell you what they have gone through. Granted the actors did not write the pieces, but I think that their strength and ability to tell the stories so eloquently only added to the original writers message. On top of that uses of images, music, and light all added to the overall message of the show. I think that the most powerful aspect of the show was the incorporation of background color and spotlights.
The number one concept from our reading that struck me was the use of examples. Most of the monologues were recounting of experiences to portray a message not preaching and or shouting their opinions the loudest. The show facilitated ethical rhetoric and will further building community, advocacy, and spreading knowledge. Overall I thoroughly enjoyed the show and look forward to attending next year.

After reading Campbells essay and looking at the Show Some Skin website I would argue that Show Some Skin is a very rhetorical performance. From looking at the website I believe that the show will utilize two of Campbell’s three aspects of rhetoric in theatre.  My views stem for this quotation of the show some skin website “We respectfully present anonymous submissions about individuals’ experiences by combining the arts of personal storytelling and performance.” (Show Some Skin). The first aspect of Campbell’s rhetorical theater that show some skin will utilize is  “The attitude the play script takes (and urges) toward its subject matter”(Campbell). I believe that the monologues of Show Some Skin will use strong elements of pathos and ethos persuading the audience and consequently using elements of rhetorical theatre. Another aspect of Rhetorical theatre Campbell describes as “second rhetoric comes into being, for the production takes, and urges, an attitude toward the text.” (Campbell).  This attitude will largely be interpreted first, by the actors wishing to portray the theme of the monologue, and by the audience. These two instances where the viewer and presenters can add their own opinions make the show persuasive even if it was never the intention. I look forward to seeing this show and learning if my prediction that it will be a rhetorical work is accurate.

I’m excited about my essay because it is a topic that explores individuality and creativity.  After reading the article on compiling an engaging photo essay some main elements popped out that could be helpful for my story.  The first element could be breaking down each dorm room and student by name, and showcasing what makes their room special, similarly to BBC’s Growing up Young.  I also think that using a consistency of style in both my photos and my text would emphasize that everyone was given the same 130 square feet it’s just what they do with it.  One issue with my essay is that I am taking photos of people’s personal space. This means that the photos are going to have some degree of staging. I am also taking photos to show similarities and differences which is highlighted in pictures similar to the photo essay Sunday Night Dinners.  I think that I will be making a strong rhetorical argument because I am presenting facts and many different examples.  I will not include my opinion on what makes a dorm room unique and feel like home I will simply be showing how others do that.  

Both of these images show how different people decorate their dorms to show their individuality.  They use pictures from home, blankets, and chairs to make their space feel more like home. Coming to college is hard, you have new classes, new friends, and are living in an unfamiliar place. We all use objects new or old to make us feel more comfortable in a place totally unknown to us.  Our dorms are a representation of our personality. They are one of the first impressions we make on our room and dorm mates and represent us at our most comfortable.