A+ English Oral Presentation & Statement of Intention PDF

Preview

Summary

A+ English Oral Presentation ...

Description

Oral Presentation Anecdotal evidence - only be used once, cannot be used for whole speech Statistics, quotes, expert opinion, Could start with a rhetorical question, imagine a world…, a joke AND IF YOU CAN, ‘BOOKEND’ WHAT YOU START WITH TO THE END. Introduction (1 mins): ● Context (why is it an issue?) and background ● Your P.O.V has to be VERY clear - what position are you taking? Arguments (3 mins): ● Sign post arguments; FIRSTLY, SECONDLY, FINALLY - Must start with these for arguments Argument 1: Firstly…. ● 1 x reason for point of view ● Evidence supporting material - statistics, expert opinion, recent findings/studies e.t.c. ; must research your piece Argument 2: Secondly….. - Same as above Argument 3: Lastly - Same as above Opposing Argument (1 min 45 secs); ‘opponents in this debate suggest….’ REBUTTAL; EXPLAIN THE FAULTS IN YOUR POSING ARGUMENT Must way up both sides so you point of view looks like you are reasonable and not biased - DO NOT spend to long on this - EVIDENCE other argument has to present their POV but then YOU rebut with YOUR evidence. Conclusion; BRIEF Like that of an essay, have a powerful quote/finish to drive home your point and leave the audience in no doubt that you are correct - In form of a quote, connect beginning and end - ‘BOOKEND’

TOPIC: Are our Politicians doing enough to counter terrorism? DISAGREE - NOT DOING ENOUGH 1. Not stringent/tight enough law 2. Deflecting blame 3. Terrorist threats Rebuttal: Some people may say that we haven’t had a massacre so why should we worry BUT…. 

HOOK: My heart remains heavy, and it bleeds for a victim gone too soon. *PAUSE* I question how the morning can be so bright, when the night was so dark, And how the birds can still sing when in the end, he left his mark. He may have faced what some call a fair fate, but in the end, who’s really won? When he’s managed to inject the deadly venom of hatred that some struggle to fully overcome.  It is the contingent of a virus, Hiding itself in frail armour as intruders march in veins. It travels on a path of radicalism and cruises in a ship of animosity, slowly breaking the defense of morality we long to upkeep.  I question now how politicians can carry on, When tears were shed. How they can continue to shout and argue, When a person, perhaps their fathers age, has bled.  Now we’re told by our politicians, to move on because everything's fine, But I refuse to turn a blind eye knowing that perhaps the next life could be mine.  INTRODUCTION: Good afternoon Ms Dore and students, I think many of us can remember what occured last year; On the 9th of November 2018 a terrorist set his car on fire and stabbed three people, one fatally, in the CBD, before being shot and killed by police. To put it simply, enough is NOT being done by our politicians to prevent instances like this from happening. And i’m not the only one who believes this; in fact, 56%, more than half of Australians, believe the government could do much more to prevent attacks as such from happening. Instead of working to prevent terrorism, our politicians constantly deflect blame, have not put in place tight enough laws and are still allowing terrorist threats to plague our country. This is NOT GOOD enough.  ARGUMENT 1: D  eflecting blame Firstly, by definition a terrorist is defined as ‘a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.’ Not once does this definition mention a specific group of people, the colour of someone’s skin or the religion this specific person believes in. Therefore it belittles me to see our very own Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, deflect the blame on other groups. In an interview on November 13th 2018, Scott Morrison put the onus on religious leaders by urging them not to “look the other way”. Morrison reached out to these groups and said ‘If you’re an imam or a leader in one of those communities, you need to know who those people are in your community that might be doing that.’ The hypocritical nature of Morison essentially implies that these groups have information they are not sharing, or that they’re failing to take action when they see a problem. How could one of our leaders think it’s okay to target a specific group of people? That makes us no better than the bad guys. However, the reality is that Islamic leaders generally have little to do with the troubled people most likely to be involved in lone-wolf attacks like the one in Melbourne. Muslim communities, like many others in multicultural Australia, face a challenge in closing the gap between young people and the older generation recognised as the community’s formal leaders or religious teachers. They live in two separate worlds.   

 ot stringent/tight enough law ARGUMENT 2: N Secondly, Australia’s  counter-terrorism strategy does not contain stringent or tight enough laws. Instead, It remains focused on prosecuting individuals for offences like being a member of a terrorist organisation or conspiring to plan a terrorist act. While prosecution is necessary, our politicians have only only provided a short-term solution. When it comes to investing in longer-term, community-based approaches to preventing terrorism, it becomes evident federal government is failing. After analysing federal budget documents, it can be suggested that dedicated funding for “Countering violent extremism”, CVE programs, has dried up and grant money is no longer being allocated. These programs are generally designed to prevent homegrown terrorism and include youth mentoring projects, interfaith sporting activities, police-led intervention programs and efforts to “deradicalise” hardened terrorist prisoners.   ARGUMENT 3: Terrorist threats https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/terrorism-in-australia-in-2019-more-of-the-same/ Finally, Australia is still receiving terrorist threats from terrorists. In a October 2018 speech, Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi called on followers ‘in the countries of the crusaders, in Canada, Europe, and elsewhere’ to carry out attacks against Westerners, saying that one attack in the West was equal to a thousand in Iraq or Syria. In Australia, 26 organisations are currently listed as ‘terrorist organisations’ under the Criminal Code. That’s too many to be useful. The list should be culled to those organisations that pose a specific threat to Australia, Australians and Australian interests, or that have funding or recruitment links to Australia. Furthermore, Islamic State’s online publications like Rumiyah have provided instructions for target selection and simple attacks using knives, firearms and vehicles. (Limited access to firearms in Australia will continue to be a problem for would-be terrorists.) No new issues of Rumiyah have been released since September 2017, but past releases and new material containing attack guidance are regularly circulated online. This means that threats will continue to be circulated online and continue to arise; dread. trepidation. Fear.  REBUTTAL: Opponents in this debate may suggest that enough is being done to “stamp out terrorism” as Australia has not yet experienced a massacre. However, this is so incredible wrong because it suggests that we should allow our politicians to wait for a massacre to occur, to wait for lives to be destroyed, before adequate action is taken. Have we not seen enough massacres happen in the past year? Perhaps even the past month? Instead of waiting for such a horrendous act to take place, a better approach would be to work harder to put preventative measure if place. Increase funding. Increase security. Increase protection. This is the lives of people we’re talking about. And that is something so incredibly valuable, yet something that could be taken away in an instant.  CONCLUSION: So for now my heart will remain heavy, coated in the worry that this could happen again. Perhaps with a worse outcome if our politicians do nothing to step up and protect our country, to protect US, innocents, from terrorism. Thank you.         Statement of Intention - Oral Presentation

Are our Politicians doing enough to counter terrorism?

The issue of whether Australian politicians are doing enough to counter terrorism will be the focus of my oral presentation. This issue had precipitated large controversy within Australia, as members of the public have called out politicians for current laws not being stringent enough to protect individuals. According to a recent poll, more than half of Australians (56%) believe the government could do much more to prevent such an attack and this is the position I would like to adopt. Throughout my speech, I have embedded a range of persuasive techniques to highly engage my audience and effectively influence them to agree with my point of view. I will employ the technique of pathos at the beginning of my speech to appeal my audience's emotions and use sympathy. The technique of pathos will also be used to elucidate feelings of fear and worry within my audience. More specifically, I have written a piece of poetry that will demonstrate the technique of pathos substantially and will enable me to immediately seize my audience's attention. I will also include repetition and rhetorical questions in many parts of my speech, as well as a range of evidence (ethos), including statistics and research, to create a sense of reliability. I will often use generalisations, as well as the inclusion of language like “we”, “our” and “us”. To further strengthen my points, I will use the technique hyperbole when talking about the Australian Government to make the audience curious about what is happening behind closed doors when concerning this issue. Before my conclusion, I will rebuttal an opposing view to create a sense of authenticity within my speech and make my arguments appear superior. This will enable me to convince my audience to agree with my point of view, which will demonstrate that I have created an effective persuasive presentation. The tone I decide to use will evidently be an important part of my speech and therefore, I will adopt an accusing, attacking and sympathetic tone and at times. However, by the end of my presentation, my tone will become optimistic that this issue can be resolved with the government implementing better preventative strategies (hypothetically by the audience). Throughout my speech, I will utilise a range of public speaking techniques to enhance my overall presentation. I will pause constantly to emphasise important statements and add emotion to my overall speech. By pausing, I will also create time for audience members to think and draw conclusions that will replicate my point of view. Additionally, I will speak clearly and ensure I am constantly using eye contact to connect with my audience and portray my presentation as authentic. As a result, I aim to convince my peers (audience) that Australian politicians need to take more effective measures to prevent terrorist attacks. ...