AP
®
ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION
2017 SCORING COMMENTARY
Question 2
Overview
Question 2, the rhetorical analysis question, asked students to explain the choices made by the writer or
speaker of the passage provided. Though it is not considered an “argument question,” it asked students to
take a position on what choices the writer or speaker makes. The question’s intent was to see how well
students understand the rhetorical situation of the passage’s writer or speaker and how these choices
address this situation. In other words, the question asked that students understand the purpose of the
writer’s or speaker’s text, who the audience of this text is, what the relationship is between that audience
and the writer/speaker, and what the audience’s attitude might be toward the writer’s/speaker’s purpose.
With this understanding, the passage then required students to articulate how the rhetor’s choices
address those complex relationships. The 2017 Question 2 passage was Clare Boothe Luce’s introduction
to her 1960 speech given at the Women’s National Press Club. The passage offered students abundant
opportunities to analyze how Luce uses the introduction to her speech to, as the task stated, “prepare the
audience for her message.” The passage and task, which reflect the language of the Course Description in
terms of the study and teaching of rhetorical analysis, challenged students to think about how Luce
managed her difficult task (of being asked to speak about problems with the press) with her audience of
fellow journalists, the very people she would be criticizing.
S
ample: 2A
Score: 8
This essay effectively analyzes how Luce uses the introduction of her speech to prepare the audience for her
message. The essay develops an effective analysis with evidence and explanations that include a convincing
explanation of the rhetorical context. T he opening paragraph presents a series of choices that Luce makes to
prepare the audience: “she employs the fact that they invited her there to speak, a strong consideration for
their feelings, praises of their profession, and a clear plea for open mindedness.” The second paragraph
effectively explains Luce’s “paradox about being happy and challenged” and convincingly analyzes how
Luce “makes her intentions clear, before even stating her argument.” The third paragraph presents an
effective analysis of how Luce’s “self-deprication” [sic] and use of humor make the audience “more likely to
accept her claims.” The penultimate (fifth) paragraph presents a convincing and appropriate analysis of
journalists’ shared concern for “truthfulness and honesty.” Additionally, this paragraph explains how Luce
invokes journalists’ duty to state the truth to prepare the audience for her criticism. Despite occasional flaws,
the essay consistently demonstrates control of the elements of effective writing.
Sample: 2B
Score: 6
This essay adequately analyzes how Luce uses the introduction of her speech to prepare the audience for her
message. The second paragraph notes that Luce “emphasizes the difficulty of her position” and offers
sufficient evidence and explanation to support this point. The third paragraph sufficiently explains how Luce,
after “stating the difficulty of delivering a controversial speech,” navigates her difficult rhetorical situation by
“cleverly proceed[ing] to place the responsibility on the audience” for her presence as an invited speaker and
by emphasizing journalists’ crucial role as truth-tellers (e.g., “reminding them of the basic values of their
occupation”). Throughout, the student correctly identifies Luce’s rhetorical choices (e.g., “Luce finishes her
introduction with a compliment to the U.S. press”) and supports examples with adequate discussion and
appropriate explanation ( e.g., “This way, Luce does not present herself entirely as an enemy to her
audience”). The prose contains some lapses in diction and syntax but is generally clear.
© 2017 The College Board.
Visit the College Board on the Web: www.collegeboard.org.