English Oral Discussion 2011 - Topics, Tips and Strategies

[pi]

If it makes you guys feel any better, I've had a pretty terrible start (getting a B on my oral)
I honestly thought it was worth at least an A but ah well

*goes to have a breakdown*

Don't worry. I know a guy who got a C+ in his first SAC and ended up with 45 raw after working really hard.

Have faith and things WILL turn around!

[smiley_1332]

i'm planning to do surrogacy.
im not sure how to start tho... any help? >.<

[pi]

i'm planning to do surrogacy.
im not sure how to start tho... any help? >.<

For or against?

I would go 'against' if I had the choice and drum out the 'celebrity surrogacy' issue

[Tobias Funke]

against surrogacy? celebrity surrogacy covers like 1% of it, hardly a basis of an argument

something about how the laws dictate that the biological mother is the person who is actually pregnant, so that sometimes they can actually decide to keep the baby

[pi]

against surrogacy? celebrity surrogacy covers like 1% of it, hardly a basis of an argument

But in terms of a speech being persuasive, its these things that win people over. We were told (my class) that we were marked 1) How persuasive 2) Delivery and then 3) content.


But if you going content wise, then go for support of surrogacy. But I would find that side to have less awesome persuasive facts and figures

[burbs]

Pretty sure how persuasive you are is dependent on content.

[werdna]

Pretty sure how persuasive you are is dependent on content.

Only to an extent. The way you present yourself, the tone of speech you use, and so on, all add to persuasion also. Otherwise, they'd just get us to do a written task like an opinion piece or persuasive essay if persuasion was only dependent on content. Persuasion stretches far beyond that.

[burbs]

Oh right that's what he meant, I thought he meant persuasiveness of arguments, not manner.

[acinod]

I'm having trouble starting my oral on Wikileaks.

I'll be dressing up as Julian Assange and presenting my speech as him, do I need to say 'Good morning ladies and gentlemen, I am Julian Assange and today I will be talking to you about...' or can I just skip straight to my anecdote?

[Water]

I'm having trouble starting my oral on Wikileaks.

I'll be dressing up as Julian Assange and presenting my speech as him, do I need to say 'Good morning ladies and gentlemen, I am Julian Assange and today I will be talking to you about...' or can I just skip straight to my anecdote?

Are you FOR or AGAINST.


If your "For" , Wikileaks, make sure to maintain a serious tone.


If your "Against" , do it in a mocking tone.


Either way, you should keep it. Its Good for contextualizing your oral before you actually start.

It's a good technique to engage the audience, that many people shy away from with these school ORAL sacs. and ITS great for BONUS Marks.

[acinod]

I'm having trouble starting my oral on Wikileaks.

I'll be dressing up as Julian Assange and presenting my speech as him, do I need to say 'Good morning ladies and gentlemen, I am Julian Assange and today I will be talking to you about...' or can I just skip straight to my anecdote?

Are you FOR or AGAINST.


If your "For" , Wikileaks, make sure to maintain a serious tone.


If your "Against" , do it in a mocking tone.


Either way, you should keep it. Its Good for contextualizing your oral before you actually start.

It's a good technique to engage the audience, that many people shy away from with these school ORAL sacs. and ITS great for BONUS Marks.

I am FOR my company of course.
So should I start off introducing myself as Julian Assange or is it more effective if greet the audience and introduce myself after my little anecdote/analogy?

[Water]

I'd be inclined to take up the Persona as julian assange,

Make myself appear as the victim.

Like

Since X (Date) I have been persecuted by the American litigation system, or whatever. Then you state the issue your contention and why WikiLeaks is the most awesome site in the world.


Remembering that, you are taking up a persona if you choose to do julian assange, and must be very well aware, that you have to maintain it.






If you choose to add in, anecdote or analogy, make sure it does not feel displaced, with your entire introduction, cause that'd be a trap.

[pi]

I'm having trouble starting my oral on Wikileaks.

I'll be dressing up as Julian Assange and presenting my speech as him, do I need to say 'Good morning ladies and gentlemen, I am Julian Assange and today I will be talking to you about...' or can I just skip straight to my anecdote?

No offence, but Julian Assange is one of the most dull speakers of all time. Try speaking as one of the other editors otherwise you'll be in this dull monotone for the whole time and people will focus more on your hair (if you are doing the Assange wig) more than on your speech. (If you saw his interview on Dateline [or something like that] last week then you'd know what I mean)

If your "For" , Wikileaks, make sure to maintain a serious tone

I didn't. I was in a more sarcastic tone as I bagged governments and emphasised global democratic hypocrisy.

[Water]

I didn't. I was in a more sarcastic tone as I bagged governments and emphasised global democratic hypocrisy.




Well yes, you could always distort or exaggerate the disposition of a certain persona.

[werdna]

Well yes, you could always distort or exaggerate the disposition of a certain persona.

Stop being so overly wordy.