Revising for this online class
- Due Apr 7, 2024 by 11:59pm
- Points 100
- Submitting a discussion post
Hi, Everyone! (This is from an earlier period!)
Some assignments have been inherited from the last time I taught this class, which was in-person, and was a different time in our country's history. Nevertheless, let us focus on several aspects of this assignment, and adapt it for our purposes. I will retain the actual article, which I can provide for you below, along with all the comments. Although it was from a time several years ago, there is a progression in US history and politics, and I think it isn't unreasonable to relate to this issue historically. We can update it later with current events.
So, what was the purpose this assignment? First, it seems that students naturally view public speaking in the context of debatable issues and persuasive speaking. Certainly, such issues always bring up emotions, opinions, perceptions, interpretations, thoughts, and information which are readily available and are a part of most of our lives. Second, it is true that the art of rhetoric originally developed in a political context, within the Athenian democracy, so that all the classical techniques and rhetorical sentence structures which enrich speech communication were developed with persuasion in mind, and that is the essence of the combined triad of logos, ethos, and pathos. Third, it addresses the question of whether we should bring politics and the real-world into the classroom. And fourth, and perhaps most significantly, it enables us to combine (a) the resources of The Speaker's Handbook with (b) your own experience and abilities, within the framework of (c) Canvas, namely Studio, which enables the production of video recordings, along with the features of CC generation and associated Comments, which can be inserted as text into the video. So, let's do it!
Let's find something interesting and potentially useful to you from the textbook (eBook), and share it with the class via a video recording.
Would you like to tell a story based on your experience (a narrative speech), or take a debatable issue and make a persuasive speech, based on your opinion on real-world issues? That might be more exciting and interesting for you, and also may corresponds with how you perceive the essence of this course.
So, the assignment is to (1) come up with a topic which lends itself to debate, and you are interested in; (2) find some good stuff on the Web about debating, either examples of debates--both formal and informal--or instructions/guides for persuasive speaking, which will stimulate you, model for you, and instruct you to debate yourself; (3) go into MindTap, and find some concepts from the eBook or elsewhere (Sample Speeches, quizzes, etc.) which can build your knowledge of persuasive speech; (4) build a persuasive speech, taking either a pro position, or a con position.
Some possible topics came up in class: (A) Should politics be discussed within school and work settings; (B) Should Logos/Ethos more important than Pathos/Ethos in electing US presidents? (I am putting Ethos in both Logos and Pathos both in order to create a dichotomous debate structure (i.e,. that can be answered Yes/No, Pro/Con), and because perhaps Ethos naturally blends in or overlaps to some extent both Logos and Pathos. So, to put this in the simplest, more common language, perhaps: "Is thinking more important than feeling in electing US Presidents?"
This came out of our classroom discussion, as I asked you this question initially (i.e,. Should we bring politics into school and work communication?), and you came up with reasons that tended to start with Pathos and maybe blend into Ethos, but there seemed to be a reluctance to start with Logos (I may be wrong in my interpretation, or you could argue, perhaps, that your Pathos emerges from your Logos... But is that really the case? Let's examine our classroom discussion.
I began the class with the favorite topic of anxiety, with Jerry Seinfeld's joke. We also read Charles Blow's (nytimes.com columnist) opinion piece, entitled "Trump, Chieftain of Spite."
We read it aloud in class, and we examined the language, the logic, and the argument. We saw how in one paragraph Blow used a metaphor in the first sentence to epitomize the argument and theme of his piece (candle/torch) to appeal to the imagination, and in the following sentence uses explicit explanation to explain the metaphorical contrast. Why did he appeal to the imagination first, and then explain second? So as to use Pathos/Ethos first, then Logos (if we can make these associations).
I showed a couple of videos from Toastmasters, and from a classical debating society at a school in the UK. There's a lot of good stuff available on the Web, and a lot in our eBook. I don't know if we can pair up in this online class, with one student taking a pro and one a con position, on the same debatable issue. We could explore that...
Leor
Find Rubric
