Rhetorical Summary (1st Paragraph)

Before you begin: Cite the article in the format requested by your instructor.

Sentence 1: Author’s name, title of work and publishing information (in parentheses), an accurate verb, and a clause that contains the thesis statement/main idea of the work.

Sentence 2: Explain the arguments that support the thesis/main idea of the work, as well as the evidence the author uses to support those arguments.

Sentence 3: State the author’s purpose for writing the work.

Sentence 4: Describe the intended audience for the work. You can use the type of publication you found the work in to help you determine the audience. Sometimes authors even state the intended audience for you.

Credibility and Usefulness (2nd paragraph)

Sentence 1: State how this resource fits with similar scholarship. For example, discuss how this source relates to other things you are reading or investigating.

Sentence 2: Explain how you will use this source in your research project.

Sentence 3: Evaluate the credibility of the source and its author.

Sentence 4: List any questions this source does not answer about the topic, or further research that this source has inspired you to investigate.

Model

Mol, A. (2003). The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Durham,

N.C.: Duke University Press.

Annemarie Mol’s (2003) The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice (2003,

Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press) asserts that diseases are diagnosed and

treated differently depending on patient, place, and healthcare provider. The

disease studied in this book is atherosclerosis, and Mol (2003) sees it treated

differently in different hospital departments in this ethnography. The author’s

purpose is to reflect on different approaches to healthcare in order to show how

medical treatments are decided upon. Mol (2003) writes for an audience of science

and technology scholars.

Mol’s (2003) The Body Multiple exists in conversation with the growing field of

Rhetoric of Health and Medicine, a field that has its own peer-reviewed academic

journal of the same name. I will use this book to study how disease diagnosis and

treatment decisions are negotiated between healthcare providers and their

patients. Mol’s research is credible because of the methodology used, her decades

of experience teaching on and research this topic, and the peer-review process of

Duke University Press. Throughout the book, Mol continually refers to Bruno Latour

and “actor network theory,” so I will search for research on both to better

understand this topic.

i will upload the article