Delivery & Presentational Aids

Part 1- Explanatory Speech Planning Outline

  • Opening Elements
    25% of total gradeExceeds ExpectationsSpecific purpose in place. Opening with a relevant attention gaining device/tactic. Connect with audience by stating relevancy. Clear, purpose/ thesis statement. Preview main ideas. Format of opening correct with roman numerals and headers.25Meets ExpectationsMissing one of the opening elements. Opening element not correctly stated. Improper formatting.12.5Below ExpectationsOpening elements are not identified or missing. No formatting in place. Starting with a “title.”0
  • Body
    25% of total gradeExceeds ExpectationsMain points are clearly identified. Sub and supporting points are in place. Complete sentences are used not key words. Signposts and transition statements bridge ideas together. Spelling and grammar at college standard.25Meets ExpectationsMain points are identified but sub and supporting points are not in place or are not fully developed. Signposts and transition statements to bridge ideas together are not clear or missing. Minor formatting, spelling or grammatical problems.12.5Below ExpectationsThe body of the speech is not organized. No sub or supporting points. No signposts or transition statements or incomplete. Not formatted correctly. Spelling and/or grammatical errors.0
  • Closing Elements
    25% of total gradeExceeds ExpectationsIdeas are clearly summarized. Close with impact statement in place. Format correct25Meets ExpectationsMinor problems with summary statement and close with impact statement. Or minor formatting issues.12.5Below ExpectationsSummary and closing with impact are not identified or missing. No formatting of ideas. “Thank you” or a dismissive last statement (e.g., “that’s all I got.”)0
  • Sources (APA Format)
    25% of total gradeExceeds ExpectationsAppropriate number of credible sources cited in correct APA format.25Meets ExpectationsMissing a source citation. Minor errors with formatting.12.5Below ExpectationsLess than the minimum number of credible sources. No attempt to place in APA format.

Part 2- Explanatory Speech Speaking Outline (Powerpoint)

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Delivery & Presentational Aids
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay
  • Attention Gaining
    33% of total gradeExceeds ExpectationsCaptures audience attention; Engages eagerness to see the presentation; Generates interest in learning more about the topic33Meets ExpectationsGets the audience’s attention; Engaging initial slide; Convey speech purpose16.5Below ExpectationsAudience is not captured; No topic or topic is vague; Uses a Title Slide0
  • Content
    34% of total gradeExceeds ExpectationsStrong pattern development that enlightens the topic’s consideration; Solid organization; Generates strong understanding of the topic34Meets ExpectationsSolid pattern development for audience comprehension; good organization17Below ExpectationsUnorganized; Minimal understanding0
  • Writing Mechanics &
    Textual considerations
    33% of total gradeExceeds ExpectationsText conveys the content and enhances understanding of the topic; Fonts style & size add flair to the presentation33Meets ExpectationsText is legible and adds to the cogency of the material; Text elements are easy to read (font size & style)16.5Below ExpectationsGrammatical & syntax issues; Spelling errors or wrong word; Text/Font difficult to read; Background & color distract and make text illegible0
  • Layout
    0% of total gradeExceeds ExpectationsLayout enhances understanding by projecting connectedness and relationships for the elements and topic0Meets ExpectationsHeadings, bulleted lists & graphics enhance topic support and aids listeners; Appropriate balance of text, graphics & “white space”0Below ExpectationsPoor use of placeholders; slide is too full; too many complete sentences that require reading to the audience; text dominates the slide0
  • Graphics, Sound,
    & Animations
    0% of total gradeExceeds ExpectationsEnhances overall theme and topic understanding; Creates relevancy0Meets ExpectationsIntegrates topic and graphical enhancements for audience comprehension0Below ExpectationsUnrelated to the topic & distracts from content; inappropriate0
  • Source Attribution
    0% of total gradeExceeds ExpectationsAll sources are properly cited so audience can determine credibility; Command of the information creates air of professionalism0Meets ExpectationsAll sources are properly cited and aid credibility0Below ExpectationsNo source attribution or incorrectly cited0

  • Practically Speaking
  • by J. Dan Rothwell

    © 2018 2

    Chapter 13
    Argument, Reasoning, and Evidence

  • An Argument: Staking Your Claim
  • • Criteria for Reasoning and Evidence

    • Credibility, Relevance, and Sufficiency

    © 2018 3

    Chapter 13
    Learning Objectives

    • 13.1 Practice constructing an argument that uses
    sound reasoning and logical evidence.

    • 13.2 Distinguish the differences in fact and fallacy
    to maximize speaker credibility when
    constructing a given argument.

    • 13.3 Determine components of using sufficient
    proof when constructing a given argument.

    © 2018 4

    An Argument: Staking Your Claim

    An argument ”implicitly or explicitly presents a
    claim and provides support for that claim with

    reasoning and evidence” (Verlinden, 2005, p. 5).

    Reasoning is the thought process of drawing
    conclusions from evidence.

    Evidence consists of statistics, testimony of
    experts and credible sources, and verifiable

    facts.

    © 2018 5

  • Why are Reasoning and Evidence Critical?
  • • Michele Bachmann Speech

    • John Oliver takes on opioid addiction

    • John Oliver takes on media reporting of
    bad “science”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/john-oliver-opioids_us_580dbdd3e4b02444efa3fefc

    © 2018 6

  • Syllogism: Formal Logic
  • • Syllogism is the basic structure of an argument

    • A syllogism contains three parts:

    1. A major premise

    2. A minor premise

    3. A conclusion

    © 2018 7

    Toulmin Structure of Argument:
    Six Elements of an Argument

    1. Claim – A generalization that remains to be proven

    2. Grounds – Reasons to accept a claim and evidence
    used to support those reasons

    3. Warrant – The reasoning that links the grounds to
    the claim

    4. Backing – The reasons and relevant evidence

    5. Rebuttal – Exceptions or refutations that diminish
    the force of the claim

    6. Qualifier – Degree of truth to the claim

    © 2018 8

  • The Toulmin Structure of an Argument
  • © 2018 9

    Identifying Elements of the Toulmin
    Structure of an Argument (1 of 2)

    Choose grounds, claim, warrant, & backing for
    the following. Create rebuttal and qualifier.

    ____ Cost of higher education is skyrocketing.

    ____ Access to higher education is decreasing.

    ____ Gaining a college degree is important.

    ____ A college degree opens doors to careers.

    ____ Public higher education should be free.

    © 2018 10

    Identifying Elements of the Toulmin
    Structure of an Argument (2 of 2)

    Choose data (grounds), claim, warrant, & backing
    for the following. Create rebuttal and qualifier.

    _G__ Cost of higher education is skyrocketing.

    _G__ Access to higher education is decreasing.

    _W _ Gaining a college degree is important.

    _B__ A college degree opens doors to careers.

    _C__ Public higher education should be free.

    © 2018 11

    Criteria for Reasoning and Evidence:
    Is it Fact or Fallacy?

    • A fallacy is any error in reasoning and evidence that
    may deceive your audience

    • Three criteria for evaluating evidence and
    reasoning:

    1. Credibility

    2. Relevance

    3. Sufficiency

    • Fallacies commonly occur when these criteria are
    unmet

    © 2018 12

  • Credibility: Should We Believe You?
  • • Credibility of evidence refers to its believability

    as determined by consistency and accuracy

    • Be mindful of:

    – Manufactured or questionable statistics

    – Biased sources

    – Expert quoted out of the field

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickferri/2013/01/10/ts-official-gurus-cant-accurately-predict-markets/

    © 2018 13

  • Questionable Statistics
  • • The number of text messages in America

    • Weird and wild statistics

    • One questionable statistic

    • “Researchers say they’ve figured out why people

    reject science, and it’s not ignorance”

    http://ldsmediatalk.com/2011/02/08/how-we-use-mobile-phones/

    https://www.google.com/search?q=silly+statistics&client=firefox-a&hs=VvK&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=TqTNUq3GN5HcoASY_4F4&ved=0CCsQsAQ&biw=1039&bih=907

    https://www.sciencealert.com/researchers-say-they-ve-figured-out-why-people-reject-science-and-it-s-not-ignorance

    © 2018 14

  • Relevance: Does it Follow?
  • • A common type of fallacy is non sequitur,

    meaning “it does not follow”

    • Two common non sequiturs:

    1. Ad hominem

    2. Ad populum

    © 2018 15

  • Ad Hominem Fallacy: Diversionary Tactic
  • • The ad hominem fallacy is a personal attack on

    the messenger to avoid the message

    • Examples of the ad hominem fallacy:

    –Marco Rubio Attacks Trump

    – Trump attacked Nancy Pelosi, who attacked him

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-pelosi-prison-trigger-nicolle-wallace_n_5cfb02dae4b0aab91c066456

    © 2018 16

    Ad Populum Fallacy:
    Arguing from Public Opinion

    The ad populum

    fallacy is when views

    are based primarily on

    popular opinion (even

    if it contradicts

    scientific evidence)

    © 2018 17

  • Sufficiency: Got Enough?
  • Several fallacies exhibit insufficiency that involve:

    • Self-selected samples

    • Inadequate samples with large margins of error

    • Hasty generalizations

    • Correlation mistaken for causation

    • False analogies

    © 2018 18

  • Self-Selected Samples
  • • A random sample is a portion of the target
    population chosen so that every member has
    an equal chance of being selected

    • Self-selected sample attracts the most
    committed or motivated individuals to fill out
    surveys on their own

    • Example of self-selected sample results versus
    random sample results

    http://theconversation.com/online-polls-are-everywhere-heres-why-we-should-be-wary-before-trusting-them-88964

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/poll-impeach-obama-support-33-percent-109369

    © 2018 19

    Inadequate Sample:
    Large Margin of Error

    • A single study proves very little

    • One study is insufficient to draw general
    conclusions

    • The margin of error is a measure of the
    degree of sampling error accounted for by
    imperfections in a sample selection

    © 2018 20

    Hasty Generalizations:
    Arguing from Example

    • Individuals make hasty
    generalizations when they
    jump to conclusions based
    on a single or handful of
    examples

    • The vividness effect fallacy
    is when vivid images skew
    perceptions of what to
    believe is true

    © 2018 21

    Inductive vs. Deductive Reasoning
    (1 of 2)

    Induction: Reasoning from specific observations
    or instances to a generalization/conclusion

    Deduction: The process of reasoning from
    general premises to a certain conclusion

    Do syllogisms use inductive or deductive reasoning?

    © 2018 22

  • Example: Sherlock Holmes
  • This is Sherlock Holmes in action
    Analyzing Watson’s girlfriend

    Showing off to a client

    Does he use inductive or deductive reasoning?

    © 2018 23

    Inductive vs. Deductive Reasoning
    (2 of 2)

    Sherlock Holmes was wrong!

    He did not use primarily deductive reasoning.

    He used primarily inductive reasoning.

    http://www.dinosaurtheory.com/theory.html

    © 2018 24

  • Deductive Reasoning as a Syllogism
  • Major Premise: All humorous teachers are great
    teachers.

    Minor Premise: Professor Hilarious Parody is a
    humorous teacher.

    Conclusion: Professor Hilarious Parody is a
    great teacher.

    This is a “valid” argument (its conclusion follows
    logically from its premises). It is not a “sound”

    argument, however–its premises are not all true. Why?

    © 2018 25

    Correlation Mistaken for Causation:
    X Does Not Necessarily Cause Y

    • Causal reasoning occurs when we see events
    and infer what caused these events

    • A correlation is a consistent relationship
    between two variables

    • Correlations suggest possible causation

    • Even a perfect correlation does not mean there
    is causation

    © 2018 26

  • False Analogy: Mixing Apples and Oranges
  • • Analogical reasoning alleges that because

    two things closely resemble each other, both
    should logically be viewed in similar ways
    – John Oliver Employs Analogical Reasoning

    • Comparing politicians to Hitler:
    – Obama as Hitler

    – Bush as Hitler

    – Hillary Clinton as Hitler

    – Donald Trump as Hitler

    https://nortonsafe.search.ask.com/search?&chn=&cmpgn=&ctype=pictures&doi=&geo=en_US&guid=&o=APN11910&p2=%5EEQ%5Ech00us%5E&page=4&prt=&q=images+of+Obama+as+Hitler&tpr=10&trackId=&ver=&ots=1560040735780&imgs=1p&filter=on&imgDetail=true

    https://nortonsafe.search.ask.com/search?&chn=&cmpgn=&ctype=pictures&doi=&geo=en_US&guid=&o=APN11910&p2=%5EEQ%5Ech00us%5E&page=2&prt=&q=images+of+George+W.+Bush+as+Hitler&tpr=10&trackId=&ver=&ots=1560040622321&imgs=1p&filter=on&imgDetail=true

    https://nortonsafe.search.ask.com/search?&chn=&cmpgn=&ctype=pictures&doi=&geo=en_US&guid=&o=APN11910&p2=%5EEQ%5Ech00us%5E&page=4&prt=&q=images+of+Hillary+Clinton+as+Hitler&tpr=10&trackId=&ver=&ots=1560040537883&imgs=1p&filter=on&imgDetail=true

    https://nortonsafe.search.ask.com/search?&chn=&cmpgn=&ctype=pictures&doi=&geo=en_US&guid=&o=APN11910&p2=%5EEQ%5Ech00us%5E&page=1&prt=&q=images+of+Donald+Trump+as+Hitler&tpr=10&trackId=&ver=&imgs=1p&filter=on&imgDetail=true

    © 2018 27

    Review of

  • Chapter 13 Learning Objectives
  • • 13.1 Practice constructing an argument that uses
    sound reasoning and logical evidence.

    • 13.2 Distinguish the differences in fact and fallacy
    to maximize speaker credibility when
    constructing a given argument.

    • 13.3 Determine components of using sufficient
    proof when constructing a given argument.

      Practically Speaking

    • Chapter 13 Argument, Reasoning, and Evidence
    • Chapter 13 Learning Objectives

      An Argument: Staking Your Claim

      Why are Reasoning and Evidence Critical?

      Syllogism: Formal Logic

    • Toulmin Structure of Argument: Six Elements of an Argument
    • The Toulmin Structure of an Argument

    • Slide 9
    • Slide 10
    • Criteria for Reasoning and Evidence: Is it Fact or Fallacy?
    • Credibility: Should We Believe You?

      Questionable Statistics

      Relevance: Does it Follow?

      Ad Hominem Fallacy: Diversionary Tactic

    • Ad Populum Fallacy: Arguing from Public Opinion
    • Sufficiency: Got Enough?

      Self-Selected Samples

    • Inadequate Sample: Large Margin of Error
    • Hasty Generalizations: Arguing from Example
    • Inductive vs. Deductive Reasoning (1 of 2)
    • Example: Sherlock Holmes

    • Inductive vs. Deductive Reasoning (2 of 2)
    • Deductive Reasoning as a Syllogism

    • Slide 25
    • False Analogy: Mixing Apples and Oranges

    • Review of Chapter 13 Learning Objectives

    Calculate the price of your order

    550 words
    We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
    Total price:
    $26
    The price is based on these factors:
    Academic level
    Number of pages
    Urgency
    Basic features
    • Free title page and bibliography
    • Unlimited revisions
    • Plagiarism-free guarantee
    • Money-back guarantee
    • 24/7 support
    On-demand options
    • Writer’s samples
    • Part-by-part delivery
    • Overnight delivery
    • Copies of used sources
    • Expert Proofreading
    Paper format
    • 275 words per page
    • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
    • Double line spacing
    • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

    Our guarantees

    Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
    That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

    Money-back guarantee

    You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

    Read more

    Zero-plagiarism guarantee

    Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

    Read more

    Free-revision policy

    Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

    Read more

    Confidentiality Guarantee

    Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

    Read more

    Fair-cooperation guarantee

    By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

    Read more

    24/7 Support

    Our specialists are always online to help you! We are available 24/7 via live chat, WhatsApp, and phone to answer questions, correct mistakes, or just address your academic fears.

    See our T&Cs
    Live Chat+1(978) 822-0999EmailWhatsApp

    Order your essay today and save 30% with the discount code ESSAYHELP