TED TALK ANALYSIS

TED TALK ANALYSIS


• Choose (1) persuasive TED Talk presentation (click the link to go to site), preferably 12 minutes or less in length, but you may pick any one you'd like.

• Briefly describe the presentation.  Answer WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY.  What is the specific purpose?

• Analyze and discuss the CONTENT, ORGANIZATION, and DELIVERY of the presentation and assess its OVERALL   PERSUASIVE EFFECTIVENESS and WHY. Include an assessment of CREATIVITY and INNOVATION within each section as well.
                            Speaking to Persuade 


CONTENT

USE OF APPEALS

          Provide specific examples and assess their effectiveness, and provide suggestions if necessary.

         • LOGICAL (logos)

         • EMOTIONAL (pathos)

         • SPEAKER CREDIBILITY (ethos)


ORGANIZATION



DELIVERY



OVERALL PERSUASIVE EFFECTIVENESS and WHY or WHY NOT?



YOUR FINAL ASSESSMENT

Impromptu Speaking

AGENDA:

Read over the handout.
After you are assigned (or select a speaker number),  choose one quotation from the 3 that are listed. You have 5 minutes to think about and prepare a 3 minute speech about your quotation. Then give your speech!

Speaker #1: 

1.     “They always say time changes things, but you actually have to change them yourself.”  – Andy Warhol

2.     “I’ve been struck by how hungry we all are for a different kind of politics.” – Barack Obama

3.     “Aim above morality. Be not simply good; be good for something.”  –  Henry David Thoreau

Speaker #2:

1.     “No question, 2006 was a lousy year for Iraq.” – Pres. George W. Bush

2.     “We did not change as we grew older; we just became more clearly ourselves.” –  Lynn Hall

3.     “College isn’t the place to go for ideas.”  – Helen Keller

Speaker #3:

1.     “Thank you to every American who hasn’t sued me so far.” – Sacha Baron Cohen

2.     “The more things change, the more they remain… insane.” – Michael Fry and T. Lewis

3.     “Fathers send their sons to college either because they went to college or because they didn’t.”  –  L.L. Henderson

Speaker #4:

1.     “Education is a state-controlled manufactory of echoes.”  –  Norman Douglas

2.     “There can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love.”  –  Martin Luther King, Jr.

3.     “Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history that man can never learn anything from history.”  – George Bernard Shaw

Speaker #5:

1.     “The whole of science is nothing more than a refinement of everyday thinking.”  – Einstein

2.     “I respect faith, but doubt is what gets you an education.”  –  Wilson Mizner

3.     “The best way to predict the future is to invent it.”  –  Alan Kay

Speaker #6:

1.     “To live a creative life, we must lose our fear of being wrong.”  –  Joseph Chilton Pearce

2.     “Excellence is the best deterrent to racism or sexism.”  –  Oprah Winfrey

3.     “There can be as much value in the blink of an eye as in months of rational analysis.” – Malcom Gladwell

Speaker #7:

1.     “The dead cannot cry out for justice; it is a duty of the living to do so for them.”  –  Lois McMaster Bujold

2.     “Woman is woman’s natural ally.”  –  Euripides

3.     “That all men are equal is a proposition which, at ordinary times, no sane individual has ever given his assent.”  –  Aldous Huxley

Speaker #8:

1.     “Always do sober what you say you’ll do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut.”  –  Ernest Hemingway

2.     “It is not true that equality is a law of nature. Nature has no equality. Its sovereign law is subordination and dependence.”  –  Marquis de Vauvenargues

3.     “I’ve never been a millionaire but I just know I’d be darling at it.”  –  Dorothy Parker

Speaker #9:

1.     “Technological progress has merely provided us with more efficient means of going backwards.”  –  Aldous Huxley

2.     “Someday I want to be rich. Some people get so rich they lose all respect for humanity. That’s how rich I want to be.”  –  Rita Rudner

3.     “In order that all men may be taught to speak truth, it is necessary that all likewise should learn to hear it.”  – Samuel Johnson

Speaker #10:

1.     “When I meet a man I ask myself, ‘Is this the man I want my children to spend their weekends with?’  –  Rita Rudner

2.     “We are inclined to believe those whom we do not know because they have never deceived us.”  –  Samuel Johnson

3.     “Morality, like art, means drawing a line someplace.”  – Oscar Wilde

Speaker #11:

1.     “A little sincerity is a dangerous thing, and a great deal of it is absolutely fatal.”  –  Oscar Wilde

2.     “Advertising is the modern substitute for argument; its function is to make the worse appear the better.”  –  George Santayana

3.     “The truth will set you free.  But first, it will piss you off.”  –  Gloria Steinem

Speaker #12:

1.     “Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.”  –  Oscar Wilde

2.     “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”  – Benjamin Disareli

3.     “Why do you have to be a nonconformist like everybody else?”  – James Thurber

Student congress Debate Video

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=High+School+Congressional+Debate&adlt=strict&view=detail&mid=12EBF47EBE023E56C99412EBF47EBE023E56C994&FORM=VRDGAR

Parliamentary Procedure

Parliamentary Procedure: Types of Motions

Jump To Type of Motion: Privileged | Subsidiary | Questions | Incidental

There are several types of motions. Each type serves a special purpose. While every type may not be used by an organization, here is a listing of a number of motions, along with notes about their use-whether they can be amended and debated and the vote required.

---

Privileged Motions

Privileged motions have to do with the rights or needs of the organization. They outrank all other motions and have rank among themselves. They are as follows:

• To adjourn: "I move we adjourn." Use: to bring the meeting to a close. Second needed. Not debatable. Not amendable. Majority vote.

• To raise a question of privilege: "I rise to a question of privilege." Use: to request rights or privileges. No second needed. Not debatable. Not amendable. No vote.

Subsidiary Motions

Subsidiary motions are applied to other motions. They rank below privileged motions. They are as follows:

• To lay on the table: "I move to lay the question on the table." Use: to lay one matter aside temporarily so that a more urgent matter can be considered. Second needed. Not debatable. Not amendable. Majority vote.

• To stop debate and vote immediately: "I move the previous question." Used to stop debate and vote immediately on the question before the organization. If adopted, a vote is taken at once on the pending question.

• To limit or extend limits of debate: "I move that debate be limited to … (or end at)." Use: to define length of time of speeches, number of speakers or to close debate at a specified time. Second needed. Not debatable. Amendable. Two-thirds vote.

• To postpone to a definite time: "I move that we postpone consideration of this question to…." Use: to set up a time when a question can be considered more fully at a more convenient time or because arguments advanced during debate have indicated the need to make a decision at a later time. Second needed. Debatable. Amendable. Majority vote.

• To refer: "I move that we refer the question of…to…(name group) for…(further study, study and report back)." Use: to change or modify a motion. Change must be related to the subject of the motion. Amendments can be made by adding to, striking out, inserting, striking out and inserting, and substituting. Second needed. Debatable. Amendable. Majority vote.

• To amend a main motion: "I move to amend by…." Use: to change or modify a motion. Change must be related to the subject of the motion. Amendments can be made by adding to, striking out, inserting, striking out and inserting, and substituting. Second needed. Debatable. Amendable. Majority vote.

Motions to Bring a Question Again Before an Organization

By their adoption or introduction these motions serve to bring matters back for consideration or action:

• To reconsider: "I move to reconsider the action on the question of…I voted with the prevailing vote." Use to prevent action being taken on a motion already carried. A motion to reconsider may be offered only by one who voted on the prevailing side of the question. If the motion to reconsider is adopted, the question before the organization is exactly the same question and in the same form as at the time the original vote was taken. Second needed. Debatable. Not amendable. Majority vote.

• To take from the table: "I move to take from the table the motion that …which was laid on the table (state time)." Use: to bring up a motion temporarily set aside by being laid on the table. Second needed. Not debatable. Not amendable. Majority vote.

• To rescind: "I move we rescind the action that…which was adopted…." Use: to annul something previously adopted. If notice of interest to rescind is given at a previous meeting, a simple majority vote is needed. If the motion to rescind is made at the current meeting and the intention is to call for a vote at this meeting, then a two-thirds vote is necessary for immediate passage. Second needed. Debatable. Amendable. Majority with previous notice/two-thirds at same meeting.

Incidental Motions

Incidental motions are incidental to the pending question. They must be disposed of before action is taken on the question from which they arise:

• To call for a point of order: "I rise to a point of order." Use: to call attention to a mistake in parliamentary procedure or the relevancy of a member's remarks based upon the organization's constitution or bylaws. The member addresses the presiding officer. She/he need not be recognized before speaking, and she/he may interrupt a speaker who has the floor. No second needed. Not debatable. Not amendable. No vote.

• To make a parliamentary inquiry: "I rise for parliamentary information." Use: to ask for information on parliamentary procedure. No second needed. Not debatable. Not amendable. No vote.

• To request additional information: "I rise for information." Use: to ask for information on parliamentary procedure. No second needed. Not debatable. Not amendable. No vote.

• To verify accuracy of vote: "I ask for a division." Use: to request a vote again on the same question when the results of the first vote seem to be in doubt. No second needed. Not debatable. Not amendable. No vote.

• To assure a true expression of the assembly's will: "I request the vote be taken by ballot." Use: to have a secret vote if this will allow members to vote their true opinion. Second needed. Not debatable. Amendable. Majority vote.

Remember: Parliamentary Procedure is a tool that helps organizations carry out their business in an orderly, fair, and impartial manner. It gives the majority the right to decide while allowing the minority to express its views. Parliamentary Procedure is good manners in action at a meeting.

Student congress

Student Congress  

Student Congress (also known as Congressional Debate) is a form of high school debate in the United States. The National Forensic League and National Catholic Forensic League offer Student Congress as an event, as do many national debate tournaments and State Forensic Associations.

In Student Congress, high school students imitate United States Congresspeople by debating bills and resolutions. Before the event, each school submits 'legislation' to each tournament. After the legislation has been compiled, it is given to each participating team, which then attempts to research as much of the material as possible, with the goal of being able to speak on both sides of every bill. Before tournaments, many Congressional Debate teams practice speaking on the bills together.

At the beginning of the event, groups of students play the roles of Congressional committees, deciding which legislation is to be debated and in what order. Bills are debated through a series of mostly three-minute speeches, alternating between proponency of, and opposition to, a given bill. The speeches are designed to capture the attention of the audience and convince them to vote a certain way on each bill. Judges rank speakers on their logic, organization, and eloquence, usually on a scale from 1 to 6. After the chamber feels that debate on a particular bill has been exhausted, participants vote on the bill.

Many students and debate coaches enjoy the Congressional Debate format because

• it lets students debate material that they've written themselves, on topics that concern them.
• it gives students knowledge of a wide variety of important issues.
• it forces students to prepare arguments for both sides of any given topic.
• it introduces students to the practices and procedures of the U.S. legislature.
• it encourages students to think and speak "on their feet."

Critics of the Student Congress format point out that the debate can often sound more like a "symphony" than a clash of ideas, with each side of the debate repeating its points in succession. Ideally, Congressional debates include a large amount of refutation, with each side attempting to discredit the arguments of the other. If this fails to occur, and no new ideas are brought up by speakers, debate can become quite boring.

Format

The typical Congressional Debate speech is three minutes long. Within this time, the speaker must lay out an organized, logical defence of why the chamber should vote for or against a given bill. The general format of a speech is as follows:

1. Introduction: A statement, anecdote, fact, or statistic designed to capture the imagination and the attention of the audience. The introduction is then tied into the argument of the speech, as the speaker urges the chamber to vote one way or another. Then the three main lines of argument are "foreshadowed" to give the audience an idea of where the speech is leading.
2. Contentions: Usually three arguments for or against the bill. Each contention should be explained in the speaker's own words, as well as supported by evidence from reputable and relevant sources.
3. Conclusion: The speaker restates his three contentions, and hopefully returns briefly to the attention-grabber of the introduction to give the speech thematic unity.

Criteria for judging

While judging a speech is clearly, to a certain extent, subjective, there are certain key standards that most would agree distinguish a good speech from a bad one:

• Eloquence: A good Congressional debater should speak powerfully and clearly, correctly use appropriate vocabulary, and vary his or her voice throughout the speech to emphasize certain points or to create a specific mood.
• Logic: The points advanced by a debater should be well-explained and should effectively sway the audience towards the speaker's beliefs on the subject.
• Organization: The speech should have a well-defined outline, generally following the guidelines of the "format" section above.
• Extemporaneity: Although a speaker may bring up notes or a note card when delivering his or her speech, the less reading, the better. Pre-written speeches on a bill are referred to as canned speeches and are highly discouraged, and in some organizations considered a form of cheating. Unless it is the first speech of the session, a speech should refer to the points that have already been made, usually by refuting points brought up by the opposition.

Procedure

The exact procedure for Congressional Debate varies widely across the country. There is no one "standard" for correct Congressional Debate procedure. However, most Student Congress associations use some variation of the following outline.

Chambers and sessions

Students attending each tournament are divided up into groups of somewhere between ten to thirty (usually around twenty). These groups are called chambers, Houses, or Senates, depending on the region and the tournament (some tournaments include both Houses and Senates).

Time-wise, a tournament is divided into several sessions, each of which are several hours long. If a tournament lasts several days, there is often one session on the first night of debate, followed by several more on the subsequent day.

Presiding Officers and judges

Each chamber has a Presiding Officer (informally known as "the P.O."). The two main tasks of the Presiding Officer are (1) to enforce parliamentary procedure and (2) to record each speaker's number of speeches and questions. The Presiding Officer is generally a student debater, and is usually elected by the chamber. It is his or her job to ensure that the chamber runs smoothly.

Speeches are ranked by judges, usually adults, who rotate between chambers.

Some styles of debate include a Parliamentarian, an adult who remains with the chamber the entire time and resolves any difficulty with rules or parliamentary procedure that the P.O. cannot handle. Parliamentarians often serve a judging function as well, either ranking speeches like a judge or nominating students for excellent performance in the chamber.

The format

Committees

Rounds usually begin with a method for selecting which bills will be debated, and in which order. In some styles of debate, students break up into committees to set an agenda, or "docket," of bills. One popular arrangement of committees is to have three: one for bills related to "Public Welfare", another for "Economics," and a third for "Foreign Affairs." Each committee is headed by a chairperson, usually an experienced debater.

After the docket has been set up, Presiding Officers are voted on, and once one is selected, debate begins.

Parilimentary procedure

Congressional Debate uses Robert's Rules of Order, a popular system of parliamentary procedure. The debate is guided by motions made by students, who rise and say "motion" to get the attention of the P.O. Motions guide the general flow of debate, but the P.O. himself is responsible for acknowledging motions, conducting votes, and generally running the chamber.

Some styles of debate require a motion "to open the chamber for debate," or a "main motion." If committees are not used to set a docket, a motion is made to choose which bill to begin with. To begin debate on a bill is to, "take a bill of the table." "The table" refers to bills which are not currently being debated. Once a student feels that debate on a bill is exhausted, he or she may motion to "lay a bill on the table," which ceases debate on that bill.

Once a bill is taken off the table, the Presiding Officer will either read the bill, or "waive the reading" of the bill in the interest of time. Debate then begins.

The authorship

The Presiding Officer then announces that a speech in authorship/representation of the bill is now in order. The representative that wrote the bill must give an introductory speech laying out the main arguments for the bill. This speech, unlike any other Congressional Debate speech, may be pre-written. If the author of the bill is not present in the chamber, someone from his or her school gives the authorship speech. If no one from that school is present, a "sponsor" gives a "sponsorship" speech instead.

Subsequent speeches

After the authorship or sponsorship speech, the Presiding Officer calls for a speech in opposition to the bill. Whichever debaters which to speak on the bill stand, or otherwise indicate their desire to speak. How the P.O. chooses speakers varies greatly by region and by level of competition. In general, however, two rules are observed:

1. When one speaker has given less speeches (either in that session or in the tournament as a whole) than another speaker, the former has precedence.
2. When one speaker has spoken earlier in the session than another speaker, the former has precedence due to speaking order.

At the beginning of each session, when few debaters have spoken, most speakers standing will have equal precedence. The Presiding Officer announces his/her method of selection at the beginning of the session. Practices vary in popularity based on the tournament and the region, but include:

• Calling "randomly" on speakers
• Considering which speakers were the first to stand
• Considering which speakers have been standing for the most number of speeches
• Distributing speeches equally among geographic regions (considering separately the four quadrants of the chamber)
• Following a pattern based on location, for instance, by calling on speakers from front-to-back, or left-to-right, and then reversing the order in the following session

Another process that is used: In the first preliminary round, as well as the semi-final and final rounds, each speaker is issued a set of priority cards, typically one through five or one through six depending on the number of rounds and bills. Speakers wishing to speak on the side of the bill (Proponency or Opponency) currently in order hold up their lowest number priority card to indicate the desire to speak. Lower numbers have priority over higher numbers, and in case of tied numbers, priority is given to the speaker who has unsuccessfully attempted to speak the most times or asked the most questions. In cases of an absolute tie, speakers are asked to yield or to participate in a coin toss or quick game of Rock, Paper, Scissors. The speaker who wins the floor surrenders their lowest number priority card to the Presiding Officer. A speaker who has exhausted the supply of priority cards may only speak if no other speakers contest said speaker for the floor.

Questioning

Once the floor is awarded to a speaker, a three minute maximum speech is given, the remainder of the time either yielded to questioning or "absorbed by the chair." At this point, the House has two minutes to ask questions of the speaker with the floor. Speakers who have given the least questions are called on first. If the chamber feels that the content of the speech or the speaker's response to questions merit additional questioning, some tournaments allow for the suspension of the rules to extend questioning time.

Typically, questions will attempt to expose faults in the speech just given. Sometimes speakers planning to speak or having spoken on the same side of the bill as the Senator currently holding the floor will ask him or her to agree with a statement pertaining to the relevant side of the argument. This is known as a "friendly question" and in some regions is discouraged. Questions, and their respective answers, are to be short and to the point, as delays will unfairly cut into other speakers' question time. However, asking questions to suggest the speaker to make a point is against NFL rules.

Motions

A pair of one proponency and one opponency speech in that order is considered a cycle. In between cycles, time is given for speakers to introduce motions onto the floor. In most tournaments, the Presiding Officer has a large amount of discretion to exercise over whether or not to rule motions in order, but at high level competitions, such as CHSSA State Qualifiers, the Presiding Officer is meant to be a strict procedurist; that is, the P.O. should simply follow through with any motions introduced.

Some motions are meant to change the topic of debate. Motions falling under this category include motions to lay a bill on the table (ending debate on a bill), motions to take a bill from the table (re-starting debate on a bill), and the motion to previous question, which is a motion to vote to pass or fail a bill. Some tournaments establish a minimum time before the Previous Question can be called; others have a limit on how long debate can run. Because voting on a bill will end debate on that bill immediately, it is sometimes considered rude or in bad form to make such a motion before all participants who desire to speak on that bill have done so. A Presiding Officer might rule the motion dilitary in such a situation. If some participants wish to speak while others want to move on, a compromise might be reached in which the bill is tabled and then returned to.

Conclusion

After the Previous Question has been called and the bill or bills voted on, the Presiding Officer announces whether or not a two-thirds vote has been reached, which is required to pass any bill. This is merely a formality, as well as in some states an explicit signal of the end of the round. The Presiding Officer will than entertain Motions to adjourn or recess, which is seconded and passed. The speakers exit.

At most Congressional Debate tournaments, awards are given to recognize the best speakers in each chamber. Often, members of the chamber itself vote for one of the awards given. The best legislation written and best all-around teams are also often recognized.

Bill/Resolution Authorship Speech

AGENDA:

Finish writing authorship speech and turn in a finished copy of your bill with your name on it as the author.
https://roslynmodelgovernment.wordpress.com/2011/06/09/authorship-speech/


Go over handouts on motions for Student Congress.

STUDENT CONGRESS

AGENDA:

Go over handout and blog.
Write a bill or resolution for our Student Congress session.  Remember that you will be the speaker for the bill and need to prepare a short speech about why the Congress should pass your bill or resolution.

HOW TO WRITE A BILL OR RESOLUTION FOR STUDENT CONGRESS

In Student Congress, speakers debate a topic or an issue. These are commonly called "bills" or "resolutions" and become “main motions" for debate. If a bill or resolution is voted upon by a majority of the members and passes, it will eventually be put into effect exactly as it was written. It is, therefore, extremely important that a bill or resolution be written precisely to avoid any vagueness. There are several rules to follow.

Choosing a topic/proposition:

1. The resolution or bill should contain only one central idea. Avoid putting two ideas into one topic. The following example shows a faulty motion: Be it resolved that the Welfare Department should increase the amount of monthly payments and the number of people eligible for food stamps. The motions is faulty because it includes two separate issues.
2. The bill or resolution must be debatable. There must be sufficient information available to research the topic. Check to see that the subject is in the Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature or that there are books and pamphlets on the issue.(This is so outdated!)  Use GOOGLE search.
3. The bill or resolution must call for a change in current policy or practice. There is little point in supporting something that already exists; debate is created when change is proposed.

Wording the proposition:

1. The bill or resolution must be worded in the affirmative (positive). Avoid words like "not." Instead of writing "Be it resolved that the Welfare Department should not increase its payments." write "Be it resolved that the Welfare department increase its payments." Even if you oppose the increase, you will get to debate on the negative side of the affirmatively-worded proposition.
2. The wording of the bill or resolutions must be neutral. "Loaded" words and emotional language give one side an unfair advantage. Imagine trying to oppose a resolution that called for a ban on the inhumane, tortuous gas chamber as a form of capital punishment.
3. The bill or resolution should be phrased clearly and precisely.

Structuring the bill or resolution

1.      The bill or resolution is always typed, double-spaced, and each line is numbered.

2.      Bills or resolutions should fit into the following topic areas; National, International, State/Local, Public Welfare, Economic, and Constitutional.

3.      A bill contains the phrase "BE IT ENACTED BY STUDENT CONGRESS ASSEMBLED THAT:" and goes on to say exactly what steps the author has in mind. A bill has the force of law and may contain sections to clarify how the law would be implemented and/or enforced.

SAMPLE BILL		Topic Area
1	BE IT ENACTED BY STUDENT CONGRESS ASSEMBLED THAT:
2 3 4 5 6	Put the proposition here. This bill, when enacted, will have the force of law, so it must be exact. Section 1: Qualifications and details go here. Section 2: More details about who, what, how much, under what circumstances.

4.      A resolution should state two or three possible reasons why the proposition should be considered and accepted. These are called "whereas clauses." The last "whereas clause" is followed by the words "THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED IN STUDENT CONGRESS ASSEMBLED THAT:" (The proposition then follows:)

SAMPLE RESOLUTION:		Topic Area
1 2 3	Whereas: (Reason #1), and Whereas: (Reason #2), and Whereas: (Reason #3), and
4	BE IT RESOLVED BY STUDENT CONGRESS ASSEMBLED THAT:
5	Put the proposition here.

SAMPLE BILL AND RESOLUTION
	A BILL TO REQUIRE IDENTITY CARDS                                       National
	1	BE IT ENACTED BY THE STUDENT CONGRESS HERE ASSEMBLED THAT
	2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17	Section 1. The United State government issue a National Identification Card to all U.S. citizens and legal resident aliens. Section 2. Upon passage of this bill, eligible persons will be given six months to obtain their identification card. Section 3. The cost of obtaining these cards will be borne by the affected individuals, but the cost should not exceed the fee of the average driver's license. Section 4. At the end of the six-month grace period, people will be required to show their cards upon being employed, obtaining drivers' licenses, or upon the demand of a peace officer. Section 5. All employers will be required to ask for the card to hire any person, and employers must retain copies to be made available to appropriate government officials. Section 6. Persons apprehended without a valid identification card will be sent back to their country of origin. Section 7. Employers in violation of this legislation will be fined $5000 per violation.
	A RESOLUTION ON EQUAL ACCESS TO HIGHER EDUCATION          State
	1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8	Whereas, in the state of California, all public colleges and universities operate under the policy of affirmative action in determining the entrance of students; and Whereas, minorities often gain entrance and white persons not of the minority race, though more qualified, are denied entrance; and, Whereas, acceptance of minorities to colleges and universities  does not assure their ability to successfully compete with the more qualified non-minorities; and, Whereas, lesser qualified minority students often fail to meet the demands of higher education; therefore,
	9 10 11	BE IT RESOLVED BY STUDENT CONGRESS ASSEMBLED THAT the colleges and universities in California abandon the affirmative action policy and judge entrance based solely on records of academic performance.