Summary answer scheme

Your class's answer key

Highlighted in yellow are the paraphrasing that we'd found questionable, but did not have the time to remedy. You should be able to give yourself a (rough) mark for your attempted summary with this guide.

For comparison, here's the version generated by the only class I'd managed to complete the exercise with - 3L's answer key

Debates #3: E-debate debrief

I've looked through your trial debates, and realised that many of the groups had not quite managed to engage in a proper argument. Hopefully this is due to the limitations of the environment and reduced interaction with the electronic debate. Regardless, I hope that there have still been some takeaway lessons from this.

1) Working with your team - Hopefully this chance of splitting the work has given you an inkling of how to divide the research/preparation for the actual debates.

2) Planning your debate - Somewhat related to the earlier point, but you'll need to think about what points you expect to make during your oral debate, and preferably pre-empt some of the opposing team's arguments and prepare rebuttals for them.

3) Generating rebuttals - Some of you might not have got to this stage, but it is quite an experience to hear an unexpected point from the opposing team and attempt to generate a response on the fly.

Debates #2: Dissecting the debate

Thanks to Mrs Albar for these slides.

These slides will serve as a good resource when preparing for your assessed debates (when complemented with the handouts you already have). I have attempted to convey the essence of it to you in class, but you may now take a look at them at your own pace.

Debates #1: In-class blog discussion

1) Visit this website - Preparing de bait

2) Select a preferred article and read it.

3) Write a 2-3 paragraph comment on the WordPress site as a response to it. Your response should carry a title (first line of comment) and make an argument regarding an element in the article. You are free to choose to go in any direction with this, but suggestions are listed under the 'tags' for each article. Avoid making a balanced viewpoint at this stage - you will need to leave some room for the next step.

4) Write a reply to an existing comment (click 'Reply' below the commentator's name to reference that comment), disagreeing with what was said. You should give examples or arguments to show why their viewpoint was incorrect.

p.s. WordPress seems to believe that all the RI Com Lab users are a single entity (probably due to IP address), so you are advised to write the comments out in Notepad/Word prior to posting.

The Power of Persuasion (Unit Recap)

From Week 2-4 we went through a unit on Persuasive Speeches, culminating in your presentations for your Social Advocacy projects. Here's a brief recap of what we've gone through.

1) Thank You For Smoking, use of logos/pathos/ethos.

2) Rhetorical devices worksheet - Examining a list of rhetorical devices that could be utilised for a more impactful speech.

3) Practice analysing the Obama speech.

4) Social Advocacy Presentations - Utilising what we have covered in this unit, along with your content from last term's Social Advocacy proposal, you made a presentation meant to persuade the listener to adopt your proposal. This was your assessment for this unit.

Commentaries #6 (Lesson Recap)

In this lesson you have been briefed on how to spice up your introductions and conclusions with two specific methods - the brief story, and the interesting statement.

Time had been spent working on your introductions, with you exchanging opinions with your peers regarding your introductions. Finally, you were given time to edit the introduction once again, with your peers' comments in mind.

You were shown how you can refer back to the motivator, in your conclusion, in order to conclude with a clincher.

Note: I will not have time to go through each and every one of your commentaries, but I will entertain special requests to do so (just email me using the link on the right, or leave a comment), or general queries regarding commentaries.

Did you enjoy Commentaries #6?

Commentaries #5 (Lesson Recap)

In this lesson you would have had some hands-on experience attempting to decipher your peers' commentaries. This allowed you more practice in reading commentaries, and provided you with feedback on whether your peers found your commentary accessible or lacking in any way.

The rubric for the coming assessment was also disseminated. Using it to grade each others' commentaries would have given you some understanding of what we are looking for, as well as the tough job that your teachers often face. =P

Note: I will not have time to go through each and every one of your commentaries, but I will entertain special requests to do so (just email me using the link on the right, or leave a comment), or general queries regarding commentaries.

Did you enjoy Commentaries #5?

Commentaries #4 (Lesson Recap)

In this lesson the Hamburger Essay structure was briefly reviewed, with some elaboration on how you might attempt writing a commentary. After which, you were assigned to a practice task where you were asked to write your very own commentary.

Did you enjoy Commentaries #4?

Commentaries #3 (Lesson Recap)

Anonymous comments have been allowed, so you can now comment without letting anyone know who you are.

In this lesson, you would have been exposed to the Hamburger Essay structure. You would also have had some practice picking out the structural elements from an essay about mountain climbing. You would also have attempted to skim an article in a short timeframe in an attempt to extract its gist, utilising the knowledge of the general structure of an article.

Did you enjoy Commentaries #3?

Commentaries #2 (Lesson Recap)

In this lesson, you would have been acquainted with the three appeals of argument - Logos, Ethos and Pathos. These are methods by which to appeal to the audience when putting forth your argument. You would have had some practice identifying these appeals from texts and film clips from Thank You for Smoking (2005).

Finally, it was explained how arguments are used in a commentary, and you would have done an in-class practice on writing an argument.

Did you enjoy Commentaries #2?

Commentaries #1 (Lesson Recap)

I will be posting summaries of each lesson I go through with you. In order to find out what worked for you and what didn't, I expect you to vote in the poll at the end of each recap. You may also comment on the respective recaps (such as this one) to elaborate further.

In this lesson, you would have come to appreciate that different parties have different points of view (POVs) when approaching the same topic. These differing POVs may colour their opinion when reading a commentary piece, and it is likely that the author would have tailored his writing for specific audiences (with respect to their POV).

You would also have been briefly introduced to Paul's Wheel of Analysis. This is a tool that can be used to evaluate a text, such as a commentary. Paul's Wheel will be revisited in the following lessons.

Did you enjoy Commentaries #1?