Chat with us, powered by LiveChat Explanatory Speech Planning Outline | EssayAbode

Explanatory Speech Planning Outline

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)

  • 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 &amp;<br>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,<br>& 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”

© 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

© 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

© 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

© 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.

© 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

© 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

Related Tags

Academic APA Assignment Business Capstone College Conclusion Course Day Discussion Double Spaced Essay English Finance General Graduate History Information Justify Literature Management Market Masters Math Minimum MLA Nursing Organizational Outline Pages Paper Presentation Questions Questionnaire Reference Response Response School Subject Slides Sources Student Support Times New Roman Title Topics Word Write Writing