DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Writing Lab Roundtable
HTML https://writinglabroundtable.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Writing Lab Roundtable
*****************************************************
#Post#: 79--------------------------------------------------
Outside Reading Assignment #6 - Persuasive Writing (Debate
Reaction)
DIR By: MrLyon
Date: October 23, 2012, 6:27 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
After viewing the debate, please write a response of no fewer
than 500 words in which you examine the persuasive techniques
used by the speakers at the debate. How do the speakers’ ideas,
organizational strategies, word choices, and voices help to
persuade the audience of their viewpoints? How well do the
debaters use the concepts of ethos, logos, and pathos to craft
their arguments and persuade the listeners? What lessons can you
take from watching this debate that you can use in future
writing assignments?
This assignment must be posted on the Roundtable no later than
Friday, October 26.
#Post#: 80--------------------------------------------------
Re: Outside Reading Assignment #6 - Persuasive Writing (Debate
Reaction)
DIR By: cblock07
Date: October 24, 2012, 4:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The debate that I watched today went very well. Both parties had
a lot to say and proved their points. All of the speakers were
very confident with what they had to say. They made sure the
audience understood what they were talking about. Each partie
expressed their ideas in a good way. Every point the partie
brought up they had evidence to back it up. That was great
because even if you didn't agree with their statement, you could
see what they meant. Both parties were very organized with what
they had to say. Every time there was a new question each partie
was ready to asnwer it. When they would describe certain issues,
they would use great words. It really showed how much each
partie knew about Politics. Each and every candidate had an
interesting voice. When each of them talked they were loud,
bold, and made their point. They had so much to say and really
showed a lot about what they were trying so do. Each partie was
able to persuade the audience with all of their facts about
every question. The debaters used the concepts of ethos, logos,
and pathos very well. One logo was wearing the color of their
partie. It showed who's side they were on and able to identify
them. Another logo was that some of them wore pins to show who
they were for. I really learned about each candidate who is
running for president. I heard two sides to each question. Each
candidate has their own views on what is going on in the world.
I have learned many lessons just from watching this debate. I
can remember to be prepared to answer a question.That is
important beacuse then you have a better view of how to answer
anything. It shows how prepared you are. Going to this debate I
learned a lot about each President. I got to hear some good
information that I didn't know before.
#Post#: 81--------------------------------------------------
Re: Outside Reading Assignment #6 - Persuasive Writing (Debate
Reaction)
DIR By: cblock06
Date: October 25, 2012, 4:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The debate we watched at school was very good. Each party had
very strong arguments and used persuasive language to prove
their points. Each party had evidence to back up every question
and they covered all parts of questions. The parties gave
examples to back up their main arguments. They also gave many
statics on what has happened with President Obama through the
last four years such as proving how Obama Care has helped people
who cannot afford health care. The other party gave statics
about Obama’s health care costing 2.6 trillion dollars a year.
Each party expressed themselves in a good way and they tried to
not say anything very bad about the opposite party. When they
were speaking about their party, they were very clear and the
spoke with confidence to the audience. The parties made it very
easy for everybody to understand what they were saying to prove
their points. Their word choices were very strong and their
strong choice of language made showed how they both knew a lot
about politics and how they can fix a problem. The tone of the
speakers showed how passionate they were about their party.
Their tone also showed how they were trying to persuade people
by showing good traits of the parties. The debaters used the
concepts of ethos, logos, and pathos very well. With ethos they
gave examples of each party and they told the truth about the
parties. They did not try to make each side very showy or try to
make them seem very outstanding. They used the concept of logos
very well because when they answered each question they showed
all of the main points necessary and they gave the audience a
clear answer. The parties also used the concept of pathos very
well because when they were answering the questions and they
gave their details, they were very bold and passionate about
what their party would do to fix any problems. Their
organizational strategies were very good. Each party kept their
answers very clear and they got to the point for every question.
They would not veer off of the questioned topic. Each party was
always prepared to answer a question with a logical answer that
had a good explanation on how something would be done. This
debate taught me what each candidate was for and what they
wanted to do about making America better and more successful. It
showed me the good ideas of each party and what they wanted to
do for people. In conclusion, each party used good persuasive
language to backup each answer to the questions and they were
always prepared to answer questions with strong answers. I have
learned how to use persuasive to language when arguing a point
in a debate to get people to understand my side. I have also
learned a lot about the different parties and candidates for
president. I understand what each side wants and how they use
persuasive speaking and language to get people to vote for their
side.
#Post#: 82--------------------------------------------------
Re: Outside Reading Assignment #6 - Persuasive Writing (Debate
Reaction)
DIR By: cblock11
Date: October 25, 2012, 5:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The debate I’m writing about is the first debate of the day. If
I hadn’t of known about any of this stuff then I got a good idea
about what each is about and what side the people were on.
First, word choice for both sides. The word choice was pretty
good but the republican side wouldn’t always directly answer the
question somehow work around it or just wait to answer in the
last few seconds. Throughout the debate both sides used great
word choice. Using bigger words really helped because they are
high schoolers and using slightly bigger words helps sell that
they actually knew what they were talking about. Not knowing
their ages and probably just listening to it in general I
probably wouldn’t guess that they were from Longmeadow High
School and that thought that they were too young to know what
they were talking about. Next the great thing that both sides
used was statistics. The statistics really sold that both sides
knew what they were talking about and that their arguments were
well researched. The democratic side used more statistics in
their arguments and knew exactly what they were talking about.
For example when talking about the oil spill and about the
pipeline they used statistics and the amount of money it cost to
clean up everything. Another example of using statistics in the
argument is when talking about having birth control as a
governmental option (I think that's what it was at least). The
democrats used statistics expressing the number of people who
use it in the church, 98% I believe. Another thing that both
sides did was talk about the other side. All sides do this when
in a debate, but sometimes that’s all they do. When being asked
a question some just go immediately into what their opponent
would or would not do instead of answering the question on what
they would do. Which doesn’t help be persuasive because they are
just stating their opponents position on the subject. Another
good thing that both sides did that made them persuasive is that
they talked to the audience. Most people when presenting may get
nervous and that’s okay but usually they end up talking really
quietly or into their notes that they bring up with them the
people who spoke during this debate didn’t do that at all. They
spoke to the audience and if necessary they spoke to their
opponents when they were making a rebuttal. This caused the
speakers to act and look as if they know what they are talking
about, and lastly that the speakers were prepared. The speakers
were asked a series of questions and I’m guessing that they had
time to prepare for their arguments. Which helped enforce the
belief that they know what they are talking about and know how
to respond. If someone was completely disorganized and looking
through all of their notes you wouldn’t believe them probably as
opposed to having someone stand there and talk about what they
know. Both sides did a great job in the debate and they did
fantastic research.
#Post#: 83--------------------------------------------------
Re: Outside Reading Assignment #6 - Persuasive Writing (Debate
Reaction)
DIR By: cblock13
Date: October 25, 2012, 6:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
After watching the most recent presidential debate on foreign
policies, my views of the two candidates have changed. From the
Republican Party, the candidate running for president is the
current governor, Mitt Romney. Barak Obama, from the Democrat
party, is running to be re-elected for president. Even though
the debate was on foreign policies, the candidates started to
debate on the topic, and then it would gradually start to
explain about another issue. Even though a debate is for each
party to give their views and explain what they would do to put
a plan in action, they presented their cases in a persuasive
way. One of the issues that seemed to come up a lot that was
unusual, seeing as though it had nothing to do with foreign
policies, was education. One of the most persuasive topics the
candidates discussed was backing up Israel if/when Iran attacks.
Even though Israel is extremely strong, if Iran got a hold to a
nuclear bomb that would be the end of it all. They would
potentially defeat the US. If we were to send troops in, the
economy would be bad. Romney persuaded the people that if he
were elected president, he would not only provide the people
with the correct health care that they need, but he would also
make education more effective for students. He tried to
persuade the people that Obama would not doing anything else to
curve the economy of the US, but is right for providing his
health care called Obama care. Obama persuaded the people that
he has done an excellent Job for this nation, even if it did
result in raising the US debt. We now have a stronger military
system and a more effective economy, where everybody is provided
with health insurance. Children are allowed to be under their
parents’ health insurance until the age of 26. After watching
this debate, I am permanently a strong Democrat and completely
support the ideas and view of our current president Barak Obama.
On Wednesday I watched the third and final debate at the school
in the BTC. This debate was between Fitzgerald and Mr. Dean. Mr.
Fitzgerald was representing the democrats while the republicans
were being represented by Mr. Dean. Both were asked to give
their views on several topics and the democrats seemed to
overtake the competition. Both candidates didn’t just give their
views, they did some serious research and proved some of the
point they made with details, quotes, and statistics. Each gave
excellent points and their opening and closing statement were
the most sophisticated statements that I heard throughout the
entire debate.
#Post#: 84--------------------------------------------------
Re: Outside Reading Assignment #6 - Persuasive Writing (Debate
Reaction)
DIR By: cblock12
Date: October 25, 2012, 8:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As I was watching the debate on Wednesday morning of 6 of the
mock trial members, I was intrigued at the topics they were
discussing and how they argued against the opposing team. The
main topics were topics that President Barack Obama and
Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney have previously discussed in
the debates. Examples of some of the questions being asked were
gay marriage, or their opinions on the oil distribution. One
side, an obvious Republican side, argued against the Democrat
side's opinions on these ideas. The Democrats (Barack Obama) all
agreed that the gay marriage issue should be a federal, or
national government issue, while the Republicans thought that
each state should decide if they think gay marriage is
acceptable in their state. The Republicans brought up the fact
that "they chose to live in that state, so if they want to move
to another state to get married to someone of the same sex. The
Democrats, however, didn't believe that someone should be
penalized for their sexuality, and have to move to a different
if their state doesn't accept them. In my opinion, I agree with
the Democrats, because gay marriages is just like any other
issue that has gone through the American Government, such as
slavery or the debate of women's rights. If states will not
accept someone because they are interested in the same sex, they
should not be penalized.
Another issue discussed was the oil distribution. The Democrat
side had a strong opinion that bringing oil to the United States
was this country’s best bet. They argued the idea of keeping our
good relations with our main oil producers, and that it would
boost our economy. Instead of taking the overseas idea, the
Republicans thought that if we ran a Keystone oil pipe, it would
bring in more oil for cheaper, and keep the good relations with
Canada, our neighbor, but the opposing side argued back that the
relations are as good as they are going to get.
The next issue brought into play was the vote for either Scott
Brown or Elizabeth Warren. Obviously enough the Republicans
agreed that Scott Brown was a better fit for the ideas they
believed in. They made the point that Brown was what the economy
needed at this stage, and how he would fight for every person,
not just solid Republicans (which may increase his voters on
election day.) The Democrats however were fighting for Elizabeth
Warren. They felt she would work with the people, and be equally
fair to everyone. When both sides are saying that the person
they favor would work to do the same things for the economy, the
votes could easily go either way.
This debate was extremely interesting to listen to, and, look at
both sides of the upcoming election. The different sides and
opinions of the groups debating formed an idea of what party I
would join when I become 18. This debate was definitely worth
watching, and had some good questions and responses.
#Post#: 85--------------------------------------------------
Re: Outside Reading Assignment #6 - Persuasive Writing (Debate
Reaction)
DIR By: cblock04
Date: October 25, 2012, 8:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Out of the three concepts, ethos, logos, and pathos, the
Democratic representatives during the debate modeled ethos
exceptionally well. Jenna Friedberg spoke loudly and with
authority, that alone made her point sound correct even without
listening to the argument. If she did not agree with one of the
opponent’s points she would speak down to him as if what he had
said was foolish. One time during the debate Jenna was proven
wrong by one of the Republicans, but her assertive rebuttal made
her seem right to the audience. Sharvari also demonstrated how
to dismiss an opponent’s argument and make it look incorrect.
The male Democrat was not as assertive and spoke quietly. These
made what he was saying seem less credible and in a debate this
can be detrimental. One of the male Republicans spoke quietly
and mumbled most of his sentences, mumbling alone makes a person
look less intelligent, but if the audience cannot understand
what he is saying then his efforts to win the debate were to no
avail. Mary Lemay Spoke loudly and clearly and showed many of
the same strengths as Jenna and Sharvari.
Both parties demonstrated logos very well. They both had
analogies to back up their views and specific reasons for their
beliefs, these aspects alone can sway the audience’s opinions on
the topics. I think the Democratic Party did a more efficient
job at being prepared; everything they had to say, including
their rebuttals, were spoken swiftly and with very little time
to think in between. They also looked at their notes often
while speaking which proves they were prepared enough to have
everything written down. Members of the Republican Party seemed
to come up with a lot of their points off the top of their
heads, which is impressive on its own, but shows that they were
not as prepared. The biggest problem with this is how much the
Republican Party had to pause to think of what to say, which
ruined the flow of the debate.
One of the male Republicans modeled pathos very well by saying
to one of the Democrats “You bring up a good point,” and then
goes on to prove his opponent point wrong. Saying this to his
opponent not only shows good sportsmanship, but shows the
audience that this person is willing to go out of his way to do
something nice despite the stressful situation. Sharvari, on
the Democratic side, also does a very good job of connecting
with the audience. She uses an example of a boy who graduates
from college and breaks his leg, leaving him unable to work, to
prove her claim on health care correct. This was very smart
because many members of the audience are getting ready to attend
college, and work in the real world, and would hate to find
themselves in the same position as this hypothetical boy. The
assertiveness of Jenna, Sharvari, and Mary excites the audience
and keeps the debate interesting; the mood can jump from being a
calm debate to a thrilling verbal fight.
#Post#: 86--------------------------------------------------
Re: Outside Reading Assignment #6 - Persuasive Writing (Debate
Reaction)
DIR By: cblock03
Date: October 25, 2012, 8:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
During the student debate in the BTC, both sides brought up
good points. Since both sides were providing details or evidence
to their reasoning’s, that’s what made me come to believe that
the debate would be a tie between both sides. It seemed to me
that both sides had different views on every different topic,
which is expected. However, there are still things that I think
went better for one group than the other. One of these topics
being about homosexual marriage. In my opinion, the Democratic
representing side brought up better points about it. They had
mentioned how in Massachusetts, where gay marriage is legal, the
divorce rate had dropped, where in Alaska, where gay marriage
isn’t legal, divorce rates have increased. This shows that they
did their research into the topic and were ready to defend their
point when a back-to-back argument broke out between the groups.
The Democratic side also seemed to have argued this topic with a
lot of thought in it. It showed how much they truly care that
gay marriage should be something that is legal.
However, the Republican side was also well prepared for the
debate. They paid very close attention to what the Democratic
side had to say and were able to point things out about what
they were saying. There was a point at which the Democrats said
something that was wrong, where the Republicans corrected them
and then the Democrats had changed what they said to match what
the Republican side said. That shows how well prepared they
were. But in the end, I believe that both sides were as equally
prepared as the other, having their pros and cons on different
subjects of the debate.
#Post#: 87--------------------------------------------------
Re: Outside Reading Assignment #6 - Persuasive Writing (Debate
Reaction)
DIR By: cblock10
Date: October 25, 2012, 9:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
In the debate we listened to the speakers utilized ethos and
logos extremely well, while also connecting with the crowd using
pathos. The speakers used ethos by always stating where their
information came from. The speakers stated specific lawsuits,
when debating Scott Brown or Elizabeth Warren, they always
stated where their statistics were from and who said the quote
they were saying. Statistics included unemployment rates, then
and now, what President Obama said but had not succeeded in
doing, or what someone said before and how it compares to what
is happening now. All the facts used as the core of arguments
were cited and also very credible.
The logos was probably the best used out of the three concepts
of persuasion. Each of their arguments were structured and easy
to understand. They started with the issue, what they believed
about the issue, their proof with their reason and why their
reason was better. They were very clear and didn’t make the
language or the speech to hard to understand. The diction was
very basic, but the speakers did sneak in a few higher diction
words, but not very often. During the rebuttals the speakers
restated the issue and then either stated why the other sides
take wouldn’t work or why their side of the argument would work
better, while appealing to the middle class.
The debaters also used pathos by addressing the middle class,
the current audience. They kept on addressing the issues of the
middle class and how their side would make it better. They
wanted to try to connect with the people, and then appeal to
what they want. At one point in the debate the sides both got
really heated and the speakers were able to make the atmosphere
more tense by debating back and forth with some emotion, showing
their obvious dislike of the last statement made by the other
group.
The debaters tried to use strong voices that would convince the
audience that they had confidence in what they were saying. They
tried to articulate and make sure that nothing they said would
be misunderstood or unclear. They sometimes used gestures, with
the way they moved their free hand and they also stood with the
correct posture or leaning into the microphone, as if trying to
get closer and convince the audience of something.
Some lessons I take from this debate is that the all the three
concepts are very important to the essay but the way they are
worked in is very different. For ethos it is best if you make
sure to always give a credible source of your facts and maybe
have some quotes, said by experts in the back ground of your
question. The credibility as an author can be established but
depending on the actual credibility it may be more advisable to
stay with citing sources. Logos can be work in through
organization and choice of word and sentence structure. The
writing must be put in a logical order with each sentence
smoothly transitioning into the next sentence. Also making sure
the essay is written formally, just like how the debaters talked
formally, no slang or contractions. Pathos is harder to work
into the argument than the last two. Logos and ethos can
structurally put in logically but pathos will generally be put
in with the word choice or a story. The story could cause a loss
in credibility, according to the topic, but word choice must be
just right, not too boring but not too smooth or flowery. You
want to try to find the right balance where it won’t seem like
your trying too hard to convince or even trick the reader but
just enough to show them that you are human,
#Post#: 88--------------------------------------------------
Re: Outside Reading Assignment #6 - Persuasive Writing (Debate
Reaction)
DIR By: cblock09
Date: October 25, 2012, 9:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I watched the first presidentual debate between obama and
romney. The topic of discussion was jobs. Obama started with all
of the benefits. Jobs created, housing increased, auto industry
increased. Obama speaks with emotion. When he talks he makes
everything seem like what he is doing is right and his views are
what is right. Romney starts off with a sad story. Talks about
tragic event between family. Family losing job and home. He then
lists how what he wants to do is the best. He speaks with
confidence. His voice has a nice jump. Starting off sad drives
in the audience then talks about what is right. Obama believes
education is the key. Teachers are getting laid off and tuition
is going up. I dont believe he can pull that off. I think his
voice isnt as confident with his plan as the debate went on.
Romney lets everyone know obama is wrong. I like when both
candidates attack eachother on what they believe each policy is.
Whenever obama says romney is going to do something that is
wrong he shoots back with what he is going to do. Same with
romney to obama. The candidates become unreliable. I have no
idea what they are going to do. Romney speaks better. Obama
sounds nervous and unprepared. I think romney was more prepared
to speak and knew what he was talking about. I think romney won
the debate on jobs. If I had no idea o every situation I would
think romney drew the crowd in, faught better with the views on
jobs, and was a lot more prepared.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page