My first research topic choice is "Should foreign languages be required for all high school students?" Arguing this topic will provide germane ideas that prove how studying a foreign language will benefit students in the future. If a student graduates high school knowing a language, other than English, they will stand out to colleges that do not require their incoming freshman to know a foreign language. Another benefit of this discussion is if high school students graduate knowing Spanish, French, German, etc. when they travel to those countries they will know how to properly communicate with local citizens. This point stands out from other topics because it can apply to high school academics, college academics, and every day life.
My second choice for my research essay would be "Should college decisions be based on test scores?" This argument can apply to many high school students, especially Juniors and Seniors, because students are beginning to submit college applications. If a student's acceptance is denied because their SAT and ACT scores were not as high as the college would have liked, but they had a high GPA, extra curricular activities, and school involvement, should they really have been denied? Colleges should not be carping towards students with everything except outstanding test scores. This topic would bring eye opening points to readers by revealing how important other things are to colleges. Juniors and Seniors often stress about making outstanding test scores that sometimes their grades in school will slip because they begin to lose balance of all the important factors of getting accepted into colleges. This discussions stands out from other arguments because it will be more applicable to students. 1. Carol Dweck's main claim is that students will grow more in their academic lives if they are given hope and encouraging commentary, such as "not yet." Dweck makes an excellent point when she says "If you get a failing grade you think 'I am nothing, I am nowhere' but if you get the grade 'not yet', you understand that you are on a learning curve" (Dweck 0:24-0:30).
2. Carol Dweck's purpose is to prove to the audience that children enrolled in school need to be praised even when they are wrong. Dweck is trying to convince her audience to understand that the process of a child becoming correct is what matters. If a student gets an answer wrong on an assignment, they should be told things like "good try, but not quite!" The outcome is not the only thing they should be rewarded for. 3. Dweck's session appears to be taking place in front of a large audience of adults. Dweck is explaining to these adults how children should be praised for solving the problems, as this is an idea worth spreading. 4. The situation that stimulated Carol Dweck's argument is that when students were provided with harder math problems than usual, they claimed they were more likely to cheat rather than study if they failed a test (Dweck 2:00-2:08). Nowadays, many students feel that if they do not get an A+ or the correct answer, that they have failed completely and they continue "to run from difficulty" (Dweck 2:21). 5. Carol's intended audience is adults in general, but teachers and parents specifically. This was her intended audience because teachers and parents are the ones constructing the minds of students, and will build up how a students handles grades good or bad. If a parent becomes angry or disappointed when their child does not succeed they way they had hoped, that is when students come down on themselves and try to find other ways to receive a good grade besides studying. Carol Dweck calls out the adults by stating some children's "biggest goal is getting the next A or next test score" (Dweck 3:24-3:32). 6. The author, Carol Dweck, organizes her ideas by opening her speech with the story behind "not yet" and why that impacted/inspired her lesson for the adults. She then provides the stats of different studies that were used on students to backup her claim. Dweck begins to explain the audience how they can fix this issue by doing things such as "praising wisely" (Dweck 4:05). Carol Dweck informed the audience her partnership with the University of Washington to create a game that rewards students of their effort and the process of their learning, not just the outcome. Dweck also organizes her ideas by providing an orderly powerpoint. 7. Carol Dweck provides endless amounts of evidence. Her top two choices of evidence, in my opinion, were the game created by University of Washington and the Native Americans students that outdid the microsoft students (Dweck 7:51-8:23). Using these evidence cases persuades the audience to truly believe that Carol Dweck has a firm grasp when it comes to knowing what to present to the adults to change the environment of a student's learning. These examples prove that if a child has a strong mindset of growth, they will perform stronger on tests and other assessments. 8. I would say that I have a bit of a mixture when it comes to fixed mindset and growth mindset. I feel very comfortable with my abilities that I know I will perform well, but I try to stay open to the idea of a challenge that will help my mindset grow/evolve. My parents have always told me "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger," so what is wrong with facing an academic challenge every now and then? It will only benefit me and build up my solving strategies in the end. 1. Camille A. Langston's main claim is that the way to accomplish change is through deliberative rhetoric. Langston also claims that it is very important to know your audience and use these tools at the right place and time.
2. Langston chose this claim because it can apply to many different situations, in terms of persuasive conversations, but truly "we apply it to any form of communication" (Langston 0:24-0:26). The author, Camille A. Langston, discusses how rhetoric speech can be used by anyone that is willing to take their audience into consideration. 3. Camille A. Langston sets her tone by only providing factual evidence, along with cartoons so catch the audience's eye. Some of her factual evidence includes stating how it is much easier to persuade an audience when you provide them with a sense of hope for the future. Langston's tone can be identified as hopeful and direct. It is safe to say that Langston has persuaded her audience to take what she is saying to heart. 4. The intended audience of this video seems to be students in high school. Many students are still learning what rhetoric speech truly means, and how they can use it properly. Videos that are intended for student use will often contain cartoons and other fun graphics to keep the student's attention. The viewers can follow along with this video without getting bored or tired of the concept. Many students have a short attention span, so Langston did a wonderful job with keeping her video interactive and short. 5. Langston arranges her ideas by beginning her argument with describing what the three types of persuasive speech: "Forensics establishes facts and judgements about the past...Epideictic makes a proclamation about the present situation...Symbouleutikon focuses on the future" (Langston 0:33-0:58). She also presents Aristotle's three persuasive appeals, Ethos, Logos, and Pathos, in an orderly fashion along with an explanation of each and perfect examples (Langston 1:44-4:08). 6. Camille A. Langston establishes her credibility by providing endless amounts of examples to ensure viewers she is comfortable and confident with the topic she is presenting. At the end of the video, Langston provides links to other videos that she has created, this is her way of showing her audience that she has other popular works that they might enjoy watching. 7. Camille A. Langston wants the viewers to evoke emotions of pride in regards to the information they have just cultivated. Langston is quick to remind the viewers that while they can use these rhetorical tools, they should be aware if someone else is attempting to use the same strategy against them. 8. Camille A. Langston keeps her logical arrangement by kicking off her video with a claim that the way to get what you want is to use your words. Langston's follow up with this claim is describing the three persuasive speeches. After providing many helpful examples, Langston discusses Aristotle's ethos, logos, and pathos and how they are often used. 9. Two rhetorical strategies I noticed are Langston's skill of using, forensics, factual evidence, and symbouleutikon, by focusing on the future and showing how these strategies will benefit the audience. Using questions towards the audience convinces the viewers to listen in on what the author has to say. 10. I can use rhetoric in my every day life to get what I want by knowing my audience/listeners. Knowing who you are speaking to and focusing on the place and time will benefit using rhetoric in any conversation. When I am presenting ideas to my Cobb Youth Leadership group, I can show logos to involve facts and logical reasoning, as well as ethos to convince them of my credibility. If I present them with a positive hope for future meetings, they will be more likely to enjoy and focus in on what I have to say. |