Rhetorical Analysis Using the Stases
Instructor Guide
Created in partnership between the University Writing Program, the University Libraries Digital Literacy Initiative, and TLOS, this module ("learning session") introduces the stases: an ordered series of questions that underlie the structure and content of arguments. First-order stases address questions of fact, definition, and cause; second-order stases address questions of action, value, and jurisdiction. While the stases have historically been used in the process of outlining or preparing arguments, this framework also proves a powerful tool for rhetorical analysis, as it uncovers the rhetor’s relationship to (and assumptions about) the audience, context, and intended impact of their arguments. As such, this Learning Session builds on foundational concepts in rhetoric by providing intermediate-level vocabulary and practice for understanding and evaluating rhetorical artifacts.
This session is designed to take about 50 minutes and includes 2 short videos and 4 informal writing activities. The session concludes with a discussion post as the final deliverable.
Learning Outcomes
Upon completing this learning session, students should be able to do the following:
Use the stases to identify rhetorical qualities in composing situations.
Apply the stases to analyze common sticking points in a public controversy
Apply the stases in individual reflection to rethink, re-see, and ultimately revise their work
How to Use This Learning Session
This learning session was designed with potential connections to the ENGL 1105 Rhetorical Analysis and ENGL 1106 Sustained Research Project assignments in mind, but could be used throughout first-year writing or other Discourse courses.
The design of this session allows for students to complete most learning activities asynchronously, including identifying the stases in online discourse and writing reflectively about their own drafts in progress (or, alternately, previously completed projects).
The session is designed for students' informal writing responses to be private and ungraded; such opportunities are valuable for engaging students in earnest reflection and metacognition. Moreover, letting students choose the material conditions of their own writing space (e.g. handwriting in a personal notebook or typing in their preferred notes app or word processor) promotes agency in their literacy development.
Recommended Follow-Up Activity (15–20 minutes)
As an extension of this learning session, students could employ the stases in peer review, using prompting material adapted from the self-evaluation in Activity #3: Getting Unstuck with the Stases. Pair or group students together and have them provide feedback on one another's drafts-in-progress via written comments or spoken feedback (depending on instructor or student preference and course delivery modality) using the prompt below.
Activity: Peer Review Using the Stases. Read the draft(s) from your partner or group and provide feedback on three areas: order, focus, and kairos. Use the prompts below to guide your reading and preparation of your comments to the author:
Reflect on the order in which the author addresses each stasis. Ask yourself:
Have they attended to matters of fact, definition, and cause before jumping to matters of value, action, and jurisdiction?
What background knowledge, experiences, and beliefs appear to be informing their argument and position?
Reflect on the focus of their writing by identifying the main stasis in which the author addresses their audience. Ask yourself:
Which stasis does the author address the most? Why do you think they are focusing on this stasis?
What assumptions does the author make about the reader’s positions or prior knowledge?
Reflect on the kairos (timeliness) of your writing. Ask yourself:
What is the right time and place for the author's call to action?
Is the author addressing this to an audience with the jurisdiction to act meaningfully?
Deliver your feedback to the author, keeping your comments focused on the questions above. Do not comment on minor mechanical errors (e.g., grammar, spelling, syntax). Instead, your goal is to be a friendly reader sharing your own understanding of a work in progress.
Scholarly Context (Optional Further Reading for Instructors)
The revived classical concept of the stases presents an ordered series of questions that underlie the structure and content arguments. First-order stases address questions of fact, definition, and cause; second-order stases address questions of action, value, and jurisdiction (Fahnestock and Secor 1988).
While the stases have historically been used in the process of outlining or preparing arguments, this framework also proves a powerful tool for rhetorical analysis, as it uncovers the rhetor’s relationship to (and assumptions about) the audience, context, and intended impact of their arguments (Fahnestock 1986). As such, this Learning Session builds on foundational concepts in rhetoric by providing intermediate-level vocabulary and practice for understanding and evaluating rhetorical artifacts.
Moreover, echoing the heuristic application of its classical usage (albeit for writing instead of speech), this learning session also employs the stases for the purpose of invention; specifically, the learning session guides students to use the framework in self-evaluation of their works in progress, thereby promoting revision as part of a reflective writing practice.
Works Cited
Fahnestock, Jeanne. "Accommodating Science: The Rhetorical Life of Scientific Facts." Written Communication, vol. 3, no. 3, Jul. 1986, pp. 275–296.
Fahnestock, Jeanne and Marie Secor. “The Stases in Scientific and Literary Argument.” Written Communication, vol. 5, no. 4, Oct. 1988, pp. 427–443.
Additional Resources
For background information on the development of the modern framework, see the following:
Fahnestock, Jeanne, & Secor, M. "Grounds for Argument: Stasis Theory and the Topoi." Argument in Transition: Proceedings of the Third Summer Conference on Argumentation, edited by D. Zarefsky, M.O. Sillars, and J. Thodes, Speech Communication Association, 1983, pp. 135–146.
Fahnestock, Jeanne, & Secor, M. "The Rhetoric of Literary Criticism." Paper presented at the Penn State Conference on Rhetoric and Composition, Jul. 1982.
Fahnestock, Jeanne, & Secor, M. "Toward a Modern Version of Stasis Theory." Oldspeak/Newspeak: Rhetorical Transformations, edited by C. Knuepper, NCTE, 1985, pp. 217–226.