Debate Presentation Grading and POI

app. If that's true, then get on the computer and download the file. All of the important information is in there. Once your grades are posted, at the bottom of your grade, one of the most important things there is your POI, your point of interest, the point of information question. Again, those are the types of questions you would normally be interrupted with during your speaking time. I'm providing you with one of those and you will have a few days to write a response to that as a homework assignment. That homework assignment will get added to your overall grade for the presentation. So

So if you lost points on the presentation, taking a little extra time to write a very good response to the question helps gain back a few more points. So those will all be up this week sometime. Things to, I want to point out, very basic things that some of you struggle with. Overall, I'll be honest, I would say about half of you did a pretty good job. half of you really seem to not understanding what we're doing in this class.

is what it really comes down to. Following basic instructions. We were pretending, and we will be pretending for the next presentation, that you're just standing up like you're one person who's part of a debate team. We know in a debate, different people stand up. They give different arguments. They defend what people have said before them. They provide new information. We were doing a very simplified version of that, where you just stand up, you tell us that you're on side government, you tell us that you agree with the topic,

And then you tell us one reason why you agree with it. In the actual rubric, we have to hear an introduction. Greet the audience. Clearly state that you represent the government. Introduce the resolution. The resolution is your topic. And I even gave you this quote here that you can follow. Hello, ladies and gentlemen. This government supports the revolution for several reasons. first and then your reason. For example,

We have here, this house supports President Yoon's decision to end the nuclear, to end President Moon's denuclearization plan. So, hello ladies and gentlemen, this government supports President Yoon's decision to end President Moon's denuclearization plan for several reasons. First, we strongly believe that whatever your topic is, okay, we go to the next one. Okay, the National Pension Refune, Reform.

afternoon ladies and gentlemen this house supports the government's decision to pass the 2025 pension reform for several reasons first and then tell us your reason okay now here is where some of you really really missed the point okay on this powerpoint when i was introducing your topics i was talking about your survey results what are the policies what are the things you said you wanted to talk about in your debate and a lot of you said you wanted to talk about the real name policy the

The real name policy has been declared unconstitutional for 14 years, meaning this has not been law since you were in kindergarten. We're not going to talk about that. Every year students say they want to debate this and I think it's mostly laziness because you already know a lot about it. It's not a really valid thing right now. It's been out of the law for over 14 years. So I said, this is what you brought up and this is the background information, what the original law was.

What we are going to talk about is a new policy that just came out, and that's this facial recognition scan for new phone numbers. This is Korea's newest way to get around the real name policy being unconstitutional. They cannot reinstate the real name policy, so they came up with this plan for facial recognition scans for phones. This is what it is. It's not a law. It's a telecommunications policy, meaning nobody ever voted on this. The telecommunications agency just made this rule.

So, this is what you were supposed to talk about for this topic. If you did an entire presentation on the real name policy, you failed this presentation because that was not your topic. The topic was the facial recognition scan for new phone numbers. So, again, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. This government supports the Korean government's biometric identity verification policy for new phone numbers for several reasons. First, and second.

you tell us which reason it is that you are supported. Your topic was not the real name policy. That was your idea that got us to your actual topic here. And then again here, finally, the Australia's ban on social media use. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. This government supports Australia's ban on the use of social media by children under the age of 16 years old. That's all I was looking for here.

in order to give you two out of two points. I have never had a semester where so many students didn't just memorize this sentence and automatically get those two points. I'm not sure why that happened, but it was a big problem. As far as content and flow, we're looking on how well do you present your idea? How well are you presenting your one argument? First of all, it was supposed to be one argument. Several of you came up here and talked about,

You mostly started with one and then you went on a tangent and started talking about a second argument. That is not allowed. You were supposed to present one argument in detail. And you're graded on how relevant is it to the debate, how well did you find information and research details and present them in a persuasive way. Now, some general things here. Overall,

One thing, again, became apparent, and I don't, it's never happened before. I don't understand it. We had that day. You did your brainstorming and pre-research. You got together in your groups. You made a list of all of your ideas. And then I came around to each group, and you shared what did you think are your two strongest ideas on the government side? What are your two strongest ideas on the opposition side? And then we talked about it. Some of you, I agree, those are the best ones. Some of you have said, "Ah, that one's not so great. This one's better." But we came to an agreement. These are the two strongest on both sides.

And then what did I tell you? Present one of these two, or for some of you it was three ideas. Choose one of these two or three ideas that we agree are the strongest ideas. Choose one of them. Make that your presentation topic. And some of you did completely different things that were not very good. When we do activities in class, it is to help point you in the right direction. It is not just to kill time. Okay? So if you chose something that wasn't on that list of two or three things that we said were the good ideas, there's a very strong chance that it hurt your greed.

Now, as far as actual arguments, I'm trying to remember the exact things. When it comes with the nuclear power plan, some of you focused on just the need for nuclear power in Korea, explaining how much power, what percentage of the power is used, how we don't have something that is, we don't have a viable replacement for it. That was good.

Some of you talked about the idea of green energy. Nuclear power is green energy as far as it does not emit carbon dioxide. It doesn't emit greenhouse gases. That's okay. Overall, not bad here. Looking at this pioneer, supporting the pension law. This is one, some of you went off in very different directions. We had talked about the idea of delaying the insolvency or providing us more

more time to come up with a new plan. That was really the strongest argument here. You had to be very honest. This does not permanently fix the problem, but it does delay it for this long by this dollar amount, and it gives us more time to come up with more plans. That's one of the strongest arguments on that side. Not bad. The real name policy. Just talking about how the main idea that most of you went with, fighting against fraud.

Right now, there were a few of you who gave a lot of really good statistics showing that fraud through phone scams is becoming a huge problem in Korea. Showing how it's growing over the years and how there's no real way to fight against it. All of that was good. Some of you kind of stopped there. Fraud is a growing problem. Phone fraud is a problem. We need a way to fight against phone fraud. That's a great start to the argument. But then what we need at the end, how does this law actually fight against bone fraud?

No, this is brand new, so we don't have real numbers, real statistics, but you at least need to mention why does the government believe that this will help stop those problems. And I think only one or two people added that last piece to the puzzle. We all agree fraud is bad. If we're arguing that we support this policy because of fraud, what will this policy do to end fraud? And here, this one, this honestly was probably the easiest one to argue. Most of you went with the idea that social media harms children.

made, that it causes mental problems, it causes extreme anxiety, and you had lots of different arguments and different studies that show the mental health crises that are happening here. That's good. If you were relying mostly on the studies that show specifically connecting social media to childhood anxiety, stress, depression, that was good. Some of you made the argument that since social media has started,

Anxiety and whatever has gone up. That's called a post-hoc argument if you don't have other evidence. This started and then this started. There's probably a correlation, but what's the evidence that this actually made this happen? We need to make sure that we have that connection there. Now, the thing to be aware of, and I want to tell you this, don't give up.

Even if you got a very bad grade on this, don't give up. You have two presentations left. Both of them are worth more points than this one. And all three of your debates, they all get added together into one grade category. I do that so that if you make a big mistake on the first debate, you can make up for it. If you had, like, in the writing class or the regular presentation class, all of your writing assignments, all of your presentations, they're individual grades for a percentage of the semester. These debate presentations all add up to one big grade.

So if you made mistakes, learn from those mistakes, figure out how to not do the same problems again, and then you should do better on your final two debates. The other thing I would encourage you, only two students from this class have come to office hours this semester. And both of those students ended up having some of the better presentations that we saw. I'm not going to say boo, but coming to office hours, asking for help,

telling me what you're confused about and asking for guidance, that helps. If you have class during my regular office hours, tell me and we can try to figure out another time that you can come. It is literally my job to help you learn these things. If you give me the opportunity to help you learn it, I will. But if you just sit there on your own and hope, that's on you.

Give me the opportunity to help you understand what you're confused about. And then we can all get better grades. Like I said, the great thing with this class, you're not on a grade curve. So whatever your actual grade is, is the grade that you will get. Everyone starts the semester with the ability to get an A in here, unlike the writing class or other classes with curves. So, yeah, that's all I'll say about that. You'll get the grade sheets back this week. You'll see I put in comments. Most of the comments are negative.

Because I think it's more important for me to point out what needs to be improved than to be like, hey, really good eye contact. So because I have to fill out all this information for all of you, I focus on telling you what to get better at. If there are no positive comments, that doesn't mean you didn't do anything good. It just means I'm letting you know what needs to be improved. If you have a category like eye contact or body language and there's no comment and you got points, that means you did a really good job.

But I'm not going to take the time to write out, wow, it's so good. Okay. All right. So that's that. All right. Yeah, those will be up very, very soon. Now, what we're going to do today. First, the first thing you need to know, your next presentation, you are doing the same topic again. Okay. The facial identity thing, the nuclear power. What are the other ones? The social media band. And...

Social recognition, social media ban, national pension and nuclear power. Those four. Whichever one of those you did on your first presentation, you are doing the same thing again, but now you are on the opposition side. You are against this. This, as the opposition, we do not support the Korean government's plan to whatever. And you will once again be presenting one reason why you do not support the Korean government's

not support it. Look back at that list that we talked about. We have two or three things for each group that we said are the strongest reasons. If you don't remember what it was, what those were, talk to the other people that are doing the same topic. I don't care if everyone has the same topic when they come up here. You're all going to be preparing and presenting it on your own. You are preparing to go to the opposite side. We have about two weeks to get ready for this and

And then we do them. All right, from this point forward, there's not a lot left to learn this semester. Today, we're going to talk about rebuttals. This is the last big thing that you really need to learn. We'll talk about rebuttals. We'll practice this a little bit. And then you're going to have time to prepare in class next week. And then we have our debates, our second debates. After that, we get into our MACE debates, which are the big final debates. Those take the last few weeks to do. So there's not a lot more left to learn. Now it's just getting better at doing the research and organizing our ideas.

Alright, anyway, let's talk about rebuttals.

So a rebuttal is when you show a clear understanding of your opponent's argument, and you focus on the biggest differences of opinion between your side and the other side. And we attack their points at the strongest place. So a rebuttal is where you are trying to prove the other side's argument is not good. We saw this when we were learning about British parliamentary debate.

The leader of the government gets up and they give their first main argument. The leader of the opposition gets up and one of the first things they do is try to argue against what the prime minister just said. That's a rebuttal. Taking what they said, trying to show that it's not good. We need to attack their points at their strongest. We are not misrepresenting what they said. We are not making straw man arguments.

If they make a point, we're not trying to twist it to make it sound a little ridiculous or make it easy to argue against. What is the strongest way we can think about what they said and how can we argue that that's not a good thing? This is a big part of debate, is being able to say, you had your time to talk, but some of the things you said, there are clear problems with it, and here they are. And now again, we are not going to be doing real-time rebuttals in this class.

You will be doing a rebuttal in your next presentation and we'll talk about that more in the next class. And when we do the MACE debates, you'll be doing rebuttals, but you have the two days between class to come up with what you're going to say for your rebuttals. Now, first thing to understand, reasons to rebut the other side. What are the main reasons why you would say that you have a problem with their argument? Number one, the point is not true. Simply, what you said is not correct.

It may just be not true ever. You have misunderstood the facts. There are examples that clearly show you are wrong. It's just not true. It may not always be true. There are some exceptions, and these aren't little exceptions. These are very important exceptions we need to consider. Or it's not necessarily true. There is some doubt about supporting the evidence. With the social media group, I know this was coming up. A lot of you were asking me about this during class. We've all heard about how social media is harming the mental health of young people. There have been many, many studies that were done. And your group, this was the first time I've ever heard this, said that there were a couple studies recently coming out.

saying that it's probably not as bad as we thought it was, or that the connections are loose. There is some doubt coming out in the academic field about whether or not social media really is the boogeyman that we all thought it was. Now, I don't believe that. I think it is a horrible, horrible thing. But if you can raise doubt with some new evidence of the latest studies, that's a good thing. So it's just flat out not true, you are wrong. It's not always true, or it's not necessarily true. There are other possible things. Okay?

Another argument here, it's not important. It's not relevant. It has nothing to do with the resolution. Sometimes people just get off topic. It's not significant. Yes, there are numbers and there's data, but a small numerical difference. It's only slightly related to the resolution. What you're saying is true sometimes, but not that often. It's not an important part of this. It's easy to solve. You are correct. You're pointing out a problem.

And that problem is a problem. And here is a way we can easily solve it so that that problem doesn't exist anymore. These are all, again, they fit under these two main categories, but we want to be very specific when we're beginning a rebuttal. Why are we rebutting this? What is the main reason why we disagree with it? The other option here is to give an even-if statement. Hypothetically, what if your opponent is correct?

This is a way you can say, even if that were true, meaning I am considering the idea, what if you were right? We can engage with their thinking. We can show an understanding of what they're saying without actually conceding the point, meaning we're not admitting they're right. We're saying, what if you're right? And then after we say, even if that were true, we can explain why it doesn't matter. This is what's called the second conditional.

In the second conditional, we're talking about unreal or unlikely events. They're not completely impossible, but they're things that we don't really think are going to happen. If I were a millionaire, you would have a different professor. Do I really believe I'm going to be a millionaire? No. Could it happen? Technically, yes. Will it happen? Unfortunately, probably not. That's what the second conditional is for. This is something you usually learn about in the writing class.

The way the grammar works for this, we use if and then the past simple for our verb. And then we can use would, could, or might plus the next verb. If I were taller, I might be better at basketball. So the second conditional, we can engage with the arguments they're making. Even if the welfare budget needed to grow, the government could find ways to offset the costs in other areas. Okay, they're saying we can't do this because it will mean that we need a bigger budget.

even if it needed to be bigger. We have a multi-trillion dollar budget. We can offset it in some way. Even if they invaded our country, our military would easily defeat them. It doesn't matter if they invade, we are superior, we will win. Even if that were true, your predicted outcome would not be. I have this underlined here. The second conditional, it's one of these weird grammar things. Anytime you're using the verb to be, we use were.

So it seems like it should be if that was true, that would be normal grammar. We use were in the second conditional to show we're in the second conditional. There's a long detailed grammatical explanation, it doesn't matter. Just remember second conditional, I were, you were, he were, they were, we were, were, were, were, were, were, were. So again, we can talk about things not being true, things not being important, and we can engage with them even if you were correct. Here's why it doesn't matter.

Now, we've got these three main categories here. We're talking about cats versus dogs. And I'm going to show you some very, very basic arguments about cats being better than dogs because cats are better than dogs. And if you were arguing against me, what category would this fall into? So number one reason, cats are smarter than dogs, which is why they're better. If you wanted to argue against that,

why would you say it's a bad argument? It's not always true. I had two cats. One of my cats died a week ago. It was very sad. The guy who died, smarter than me. Brilliant. Always knew what was going on. Really, really smart. Knew how to hide. It was crazy. My other cat, who's still with us, dumb as a rock. Adorable. Really stupid. Not all cats are smarter than all dogs.

give you two out of two points. I have never had a semester where so many students didn't just memorize this sentence and automatically get those two points. I'm not sure why that happened, but it was a big problem. As far as content and flow, we're looking on how well do you present your idea? How well are you presenting your one argument? First of all, it was supposed to be one argument. Several of you came up here and told me

talked about, you mostly started with one and then you went on a tangent and started talking about a second argument. That is not allowed. We're supposed to present one argument in detail. And you're graded on how relevant is it to the debate, how well did you find information and research details and present them in a persuasive way. Yeah. Some general things here.

Overall, one thing again that became apparent and I don't, it's never happened before, I don't understand it. We had that day, you did your brainstorming and pre-research, got together in your groups, you made a list of all of your ideas and then I came around to each group and you shared what did you think are your two strongest ideas on the government side, what are your two strongest ideas on the opposition side and then we talked about it. of you I agree those are the best ones

Some of you have said, ah, that one's not so great. This one's better. But we came to an agreement. These are the two strongest on both sides. And then what did I tell you? Present one of these two, or for some of you, it was three ideas. Choose one of these two or three ideas that we agree are the strongest ideas. Choose one of them. Make that your presentation topic. And some of you did completely different things that were not very good. What we do activities in class is to

help point you in the right direction. It is not just to kill time. So if you chose something that wasn't on that list of two or three things that we said were the good ideas, there's a very strong chance that it hurt your brain. Now, as far as actual arguments, I'm trying to remember the exact things. When it comes with the nuclear power plan, some of you focused on just the need for nuclear

power in Korea explaining how much power, what percentage of the power is used, how we don't have something that is, don't have a viable replacement for it. That was good. Some of you talked about the idea of green energy. Nuclear power is green energy as far as it does not emit carbon dioxide, it doesn't emit greenhouse gases. That's okay. Overall,

Overall, not bad here. Looking at the, this pioneer, supporting the pension law, this is one, some of you went off in very different directions. We had talked about the idea of delaying the insolvency or delaying, providing us more time to come up with a new plan. That was really the strongest argument here. You had to be very honest. This does not permanently fix the problem, but it does

delay it for this long by this dollar amount and it gives us more time to come up with more plans. That's one of the strongest arguments on that side. Not bad. The real name policy is talking about how the main idea that most of you went with, fighting against fraud. Right now, there were a few of you gave a lot of really good statistics showing that fraud through phone scams is becoming a huge problem in Korea showing how it's

growing over the years and how there's no real way to fight against it. All of that was good. Some of you kind of stopped there. Fraud is a growing problem. Phone fraud is a problem. We need a way to fight against phone fraud. It's a great start to the argument. Then what we need at the end, how does this law actually fight against phone fraud? This is brand new, so we don't have real numbers, real statistics, but you at least need to mention why does the government believe

that this will help stop those problems. And I think only one or two people added that last piece to the puzzle. We all agree fraud is bad. If we're arguing that we support this policy because of fraud, what will this policy do to end fraud? And here, this one, this honestly was probably the easiest one to argue. Most of you went with the idea that social media harms children. that it causes mental problems

problems, it causes extreme anxiety and you had lots of different arguments and different studies that show the mental health crises that are happening here, that's good. If you were relying mostly on the studies that show specifically connecting social media to childhood anxiety, stress, depression, that was good. Some of you made the argument that since social media has

started, anxiety and whatever has gone up. That's called a post-hoc argument if you don't have other evidence. This started and then this started. There's probably a correlation, but what's the evidence that this actually made this happen? We need to make sure that we have that connection there. Now, thing to be aware of, and I want to tell you this, Don't give up. Even if you've got a very

very bad grade on this. Don't give up. You have two presentations left. Both of them are worth more points than this one. And all three of your debates, they all get added together into one grade category. I do that so that if you make a big mistake on the first debate, you can make up for it. If you've had like in like the writing class or the regular presentation class, all of your writing assignments, all of your presentations, they're individual

grades for a percentage of the semester, these debate presentations all add up to one big grade. So if you made mistakes, learned from those mistakes, figure out how to not do the same problems again, and then you should do better on your final two debates. The other thing I would encourage you, only two students from this class have come to office hours this semester. and both of those students

ended up having some of the better presentations that we saw. I'm not going to say boo, but coming to office hours, asking for help, telling me what you're confused about, and asking for guidance, that helps. If you have class during my regular office hours, tell me and we can try to figure out another time that you can come. It is literally my job to help you learn these things. and give me the opportunity to help you learn it

I will. If you just sit there on your own and hope, it's on you. Give me the opportunity to help you understand what you're confused about, and then we can all get better grades. Like I said, the great thing with this class, you're not on a grade curve. So whatever your actual grade is, is the grade that you will get. Everyone starts the semester with the ability to get an A in here, unlike the writing class or other classes with curves. Right.

So that's all I'll say about that. You'll get the grade sheets back this week. You'll see I put in comments. Most of the comments are negative because I think it's more important for me to point out what needs to be improved than to be like, hey, really good eye contact. So because I have to fill out all this information for all of you, I focus on telling you what to get better at. if there are no positive comments, that doesn't mean you did

didn't do anything good. It just means I'm letting you know what needs to be improved. If you have a category like eye contact or body language and there's no comment and you got points, that means you did a really good job. But I'm not going to take the time to write out, "Wow, good." Alright. So that's that. Those will be up very, very soon. Now, what we're going to do today. First,

The first thing you need to know, your next presentation, you are doing the same topic again. The facial identity thing, the nuclear power, what are the other ones? The social media ban, and facial recognition, social media ban, national attention, and nuclear power. Those four. Whichever one of those you did on your first presentation, you are doing the same thing again, but

now you are on the opposition side. You are against this. At the opposition, we do not support the Korean government's plan to whatever. And you will once again be presenting one reason why you do not support it. Look back at that list that we talked about. We have two or three things for each group that we said are the strongest reasons

If you don't remember what it was, what those were, talk to the other people that are doing the same topic. I don't care if everyone has the same topic when they come up here. You're all going to be preparing and presenting it on your own. But you are preparing to go to the opposite side. We have about two weeks to get ready for this, and then we do them. From this point forward, there's not a lot left to learn this semester. Today, we're going to talk about rebuttals. This is the last big thing.

thing that you really need to learn. We'll talk about rebuttals, we'll practice this a little bit, and then you're gonna have time to prepare in class next week, and then we have our debates, our second debates. After that we get into our MACE debates, which are the big final debates. Those take the last few weeks to do. So there's not a lot more left to learn. Now it's just getting better at doing the research and organizing our ideas. Anyway, let's talk about

Rebuttals. Rebuttal is when you show a clear understanding of your opponent's argument and you focus on the biggest differences of opinion between your side and the other side. We attack their points at the strongest place. So a rebuttal is where you are trying to prove the other side's argument is not good. We saw this when we were looking

learning about British parliamentary debate. The leader of the government gets up and they give their first main argument. The leader of the opposition gets up and one of the first things they do is try to argue against what the Prime Minister just said. That's a rebuttal. Taking what they said, trying to show that it's not good. We need to attack their points at their strongest. We are not misrepresenting

representing what they said, we are not making straw man arguments. If they make a point, we're not trying to twist it to make it sound a little ridiculous or make it easy to argue against. What is the strongest way we can think about what they said, and how can we argue that that's not a good thing? This is a big part of debate, is being able to say, that you had your time to talk, but some of the things you said...

There are clear problems with it, and here they are. Now, again, we are not going to be doing real-time rebuttals in this class. You will be doing a rebuttal in your next presentation, and we'll talk about that more in the next class. And when we do the MACE debates, you'll be doing rebuttals, but you have the two days between class to come up with what you're going to say for your rebuttals. Now, first thing to understand, reasons to rebut the other side. What are the main

reasons why you would say that you have a problem with their argument. Number one, the point is not true. Simply, what you said is not correct. It may just be not true ever. You have misunderstood the facts. There are examples that clearly show you are wrong. It's just not true. It may not always be true. There are some exceptions, and these aren't little exceptions. These are very important exceptions we need to consider

Or it's not necessarily true. There is some doubt about supporting the evidence. With the social media group, I know this was coming up. A lot of you were asking me about this during class. We've all heard about how social media is harming the mental health of young people. There have been many, many studies that were done. And your group, this was the first time I've ever heard this, said that there were a couple studies recently coming out saying that it's probably not as bad as we thought it was. were that there

the connections are loose. There is some doubt coming out in the academic field about whether or not social media really is the boogeyman that we all thought it was. Now, I don't believe that. I think it is a horrible, horrible thing. But if you can raise doubt with some new evidence of the latest studies, that's a good thing. So it's just flat out not true. You are wrong. It's not always true, or it's not necessarily true. There are other possibilities.

things. Another argument here, it's not important. It's not relevant. It has nothing to do with the resolution. Sometimes people just get off topic. It's not significant. Yes, there are numbers and there's data, but a small numerical difference. It's only slightly related to the resolution. What you're saying is true sometimes, but not that often. It's not an important part of this. It's easy to solve. You are correct.

we're pointing out a problem and that problem is a problem and here is a way we can easily solve it so that that problem doesn't exist anymore. These are all, again they fit under these two main categories but we want to be very specific when we're beginning a rebuttal. Why are we rebutting this? What is the main reason why we disagree with it? The other option here is to give an even if statement okay hypothetically what if

your opponent is correct. This is a way you can say even if that were true, meaning I am considering the idea what if you were right. We can engage with their thinking, we can show an understanding of what they're saying without actually conceding the point, meaning we're not admitting they're right, we're saying what if you're right. And then after we say even if that were true, We can explain why it doesn't

doesn't matter. This is what's called the second conditional. In the second conditional, we're talking about unreal or unlikely events. They're not completely impossible, but they're things that we don't really think are going to happen. If I were a millionaire, you would have a different professor. Do I really believe I'm going to be a millionaire? No. Could it happen? Technically, yes. Will it happen? Unfortunately, probably not.

That's what the second conditional is for. This is something you usually learn about in the writing class. The way the grammar works for this, we use if and then the past simple for our verb, and then we can use would, could, or might plus the next verb. If I were taller, I might be better at basketball. So the second conditional, we can engage with the arguments they're making. even if the welfare budget needed to grow,

The government could find ways to offset the costs in other areas. They're saying we can't do this because it will mean that we need a bigger budget. Even if it needed to be bigger, we have a multi-trillion dollar budget. We can offset it in some way. Even if they invaded our country, our military would easily defeat them. It doesn't matter if they invade. We are superior. We will win. Even if that were true, you're presumed.

outcome would not be. I have this underlined here. The second conditional, it's one of these weird grammar things. Anytime you're using the verb to be, we use were. So it seems like it should be if that was true, that would be normal grammar. We use were in the second conditional to show we're in the second conditional. There's a long detailed grammatical explanation. It doesn't matter. Just remember second condition

I were, you were, he were, they were, we were, were, were, were, were, were, were. So again, we can talk about things not being true, things not being important, and we can engage with them even if you were correct. Here's why it doesn't matter. Now, we've got these three main categories here. We're talking about cats versus dogs. And I'm going to show you some very, very basic

arguments about cats being better than dogs because cats are better than dogs. Okay? And if you were arguing against me, what category would this fall into? Okay? So number one reason, cats are smarter than dogs, which is why they're better. If you wanted to argue against that, why would you say it's a bad argument? Always. Okay? It's not always true. Right? I had two cats. One of my cats died with me. Yeah.

The guy who died, smarter than me. Brilliant. Always knew what was going on. Really, really smart. Knew how to hide. It was crazy. My other cat, who's still with us, dumb as a rock. Horrible. Really stupid. Not all cats are smarter than all dogs. Good. Cats are cheaper than dogs. If I want to go to a pet store and buy a cat, it's around $200. If I want to go to a pet store and buy a dog, it's around $400. So clearly cats are better. They're cheaper.

Cats are cheaper than dogs. If I want to go to a pet store and buy a cat, it's around $200. If I want to go to a pet store and buy a dog, it's around $400. So clearly, cats are better. They're cheaper.

Not necessarily true. There are some. If I want to get a purebred Egyptian blue, those adorable grayish blue fur cats, there are thousands of dogs. And if I go to the pound, I can adopt a dog for free. So it's not necessarily true. It's not always true. We could also argue it's not relevant. People get pets because they want pets.

Not necessarily true. There are some. If I want to get a purebred Egyptian blue, those adorable grayish blue fur cats, there are thousands of dogs. And if I go to the pound, I can adopt a dog for free. So it's not necessarily true. It's not always true. We could also argue it's not relevant. People get pets because they want pets.

People get pets because they hope to have them for a long period of time. Or it's not significant. It's a $200 difference. My cat that just died lived for 17 years. $200 over 17 years? Not really an issue. Cats are cheaper to feed than dogs. It costs $25 a month to feed a cat, but it costs $27 a month to feed a dog. I'm saving $2 a month. That's $24 a year. That's $240 in a decade. That's almost $500 in the lifetime of a cat.

People get pets because they hope to have them for a long period of time. Or it's not significant. It's a $200 difference. My cat that just died lived for 17 years. $200 over 17 years, not really an issue. Cats are cheaper to feed than dogs. It costs $25 a month to feed a cat, but it costs $27 a month to feed a dog. I'm saving $2 a month, that's $24.

a year, that's $240 in a decade. That's almost $500 in a lifetime of a cat. Clearly better, not significant. In general, hopefully, hopefully, I hope for you that $2 a month is not a significant amount of money for you. Not a big deal. Cats are cuter than dogs. Nothing to argue. Moving How can we argue against this?

Not significant. Okay? In general, hopefully, hopefully, I hope for you that $2 a month is not a significant amount of money for you. Okay? Not a big deal. Cats are cuter than dogs. Absolutely. Some of you are, yep. Nothing to argue. Moving on. How can we argue against this? Not necessarily true. Okay? The beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, all that stuff. The cats are coming from dogs.

Clearly better.

not necessarily true okay, beauties in the eyes of the holder, all that stuff, but cats are clean dogs, cats are clean, dogs are dirty cats were the most popular pet in ancient Egypt not relevant okay, I'm not buying a pet based on what was popular thousands of years ago in Egypt taking that moment just looking at it, we want to be very, very specific.

Cats are clean, dogs are dirty. Good. Cats were the most popular pet in ancient Egypt. Not relevant. I'm not buying a pet based on what was popular thousands of years ago in Egypt. Taking that moment, just looking at it, we want to be very, very specific. Why? Don't just start arguing against it. Why are we arguing against it? Be as specific as possible.

Why? Don't just start arguing against it. Okay? Why are we arguing against it? Be as specific as possible. Now, as we are doing rebuttals, you are going to be required to follow a very, very basic five-point rebuttal plan. On your next presentation, when you are providing a rebuttal, a big part of the grade is making sure you have each of these pieces. It's five pieces, but it's very, very simple. First, we need what's called

Now, as we are doing rebuttals, you are going to be required to follow a very, very basic five-point rebuttal plan. On your next presentation, when you are providing a rebuttal, a big part of the grade is making sure you have each of these pieces. It's five pieces, but it's very, very simple. First, we need what's called a signpost. A signpost is to let us know, let the audience know, let the debate judges know. What you're doing. Their first point was this. They talked about this. They mentioned that. They argued this. This is the first point.

a signpost. A signpost is to let us know, let the audience know, let the debate judges know what you're doing. Their first point was this, they talked about this, they mentioned that, they argued this. This tells us, "Hey, I'm not providing my own information right now. I'm about to talk about what they said." So clearly tell us that you are talking about the opposite side's opinion. And then rephrase their point and

This tells us, hey, I'm not providing my own information right now. I'm about to talk about what they said. So clearly tell us that you are talking about the opposite side's opinion. And then rephrase their point and make sure you do it accurately. Again, no straw man arguments. No twisting their words. Say what they said as accurately as you possibly can. Sometimes this isn't a matter of trying to make a straw man argument. It shows that you didn't understand their argument.

make sure you do it accurately. Again, no straw man arguments, no twisting their words. Say what they said as accurately as you possibly can. Sometimes this isn't a matter of trying to make a straw man argument. It shows that you didn't understand their argument. Anytime you're going to rebut, you need to make sure you have a strong understanding of what they actually said. After this, you provide your negation. - Okay.

Anytime you're going to rebut, you need to make sure you have a strong understanding of what they actually said. After this, you provide your negation. What is the reason why you disagree with that? That's what we had on the previous slides. It's not relevant. It's not significant. It's easily overcome. Something like that. And then, I'm sorry, the negation, you say that you disagree with it. The why is the why. And then you get into

What is the reason why you disagree with that? That's what we had on the previous slides. It's not relevant. It's not significant. It's easily overcome. Something like that. And then, sorry, the negation, you say that you disagree with it. The why is the why. And then you get into the rationale. So, how does this work? First, these two things basically go together.

rationale. Okay, so how does this work? Okay, first, these two things basically go together. Okay, the signpost is saying that you're talking about them, rephrasing their point, say what they said. The negation and why, it is not always true because, and just give us a basic topic sentence or basic reason, and then the rationale, a detailed explanation. This is where where some students will often drop the ball.

The signpost is saying that you're talking about them, rephrasing their point, say what they said. The negation and why. It is not always true because, and just give us a basic topic sentence or a basic reason. And then the rationale, a detailed explanation. This is where some students will often drop the ball. They'll negate, it's not always relevant, because this, and they just kind of end with that. You need to provide a little extra explanation

So negate, it's not always relevant because this, and then just kind of end with that. You need to provide a little extra explanation, the details that go along with it. Now, for example, signpost, rephrase, negation, why, and rationale. The argument here, cats are better than dogs because they are easier to take care of. Cats can be left at home for several days and easily take care of themselves. This is one of the main reasons why I have cats.

the details that go along with it. Now for example, signpost, rephrase, negation, why, rationale. The argument here, cats are better than dogs because they are easier to take care of. Cats can be left at home for several days and easily take care of themselves. This is one of the main reasons why I have cats. My wife and I are musicians, we are out of the city and out of the country a lot. Sometimes we'll leave

My wife and I are musicians. We are out of the city and out of the country a lot. Sometimes we'll leave for like a week at a time or months at a time. And we can just leave out food and water. Cats just take care of themselves. We'll have someone stop by the house once a week to clean out their litter box, give them more food. It's so easy. That's why cats are better than dogs. Now, if we want to argue against this, it's very simple. Grind post, make sure that we're showing clearly we're about to argue against it.

for like a week at a time or months at a time. And we can just leave out food and water. Cats just take care of themselves. We'll have someone stop by the house once a week to clean out their litter box, give them more food. It's so easy. That's why cats are better than dogs. Okay? Now, if we want to argue against this, very simple. Signpost. Make sure that we're showing clearly we're about to argue against it. Rephrase it. What did they say? Negation.

rephrase it, what did they say, negation, why do we think this is wrong, specific point, and the details in the rationale. My opponent's first point was care. They said cats are better because they require less care. So that's my side post and rephrasing. Even if this were true, it would not be an important distinction between cats and dogs, since for many people, part of the joy of owning a pet is caring for it.

why we think this is wrong, specific point, and the details in the rationale. My opponent's first point was care. They said cats are better because they require less care. So that's my side post and retracing. Even if this were true, it would not be an important distinction between cats and dogs since for many people, part of the joy of owning a pet is caring for it. So my negation, even if it were true, it's not important.

So my negation, even if it were true, it's not important. And the why, people like taking care of their pets. And then a more detailed rationale, people often treat their pets like their children. They enjoy teaching them to do things, feeding them, and with dogs doing physical activities like taking them for walks. Maybe for you, not having to take care of your pet is a good thing. But for many people, the joy comes from the daily routine of taking care of them.

And the why, people like taking care of their pets. And then a more detailed rationale, people often treat their pets like their children. They enjoy teaching them to do things, feeding them, and with dogs doing physical activities like taking them for walks. Maybe for you, not having to take care of your pet is a good thing. But for many people, the joy comes from the daily routine of taking care of them. So it's not a strong argument. A lot of people

So it's not a strong argument. A lot of people feel the opposite when choosing a pet. This is what this five-point rebuttal looks like. In this case, because this is a very simple argument, it's short. They don't need to be very, very long. For your upcoming presentations, they won't be super long. But we need to make sure that we're following this step by step. Now, I've got one more example here. Let's say I am the secretary of state of a country, and I am trying to convince our government that we should invade the country of barbaria.

feel the opposite when choosing a pet. This is what this five-point rebuttal looks like. In this case, because this is a very simple argument, it's short. They don't need to be very, very long. For your upcoming presentations, they won't be super long. But we need to make sure that we're following this step by step. I've got one more example here. Let's say I am the Secretary of State of a country, and I am trying to convince our government that we should invade

the country of Barbaria. It is widely accepted that Barbaria has acquired nuclear capability. But because the country lacks missile technology to launch a warhead, Barbaria is not yet in a position to use its weapons against an invader. Independent analysts like the IARA claim that the development of nuclear weapons is due to fears about the relative weakness of their own armed forces.

it is widely accepted that barbaria has acquired nuclear capability. But because the country lacks missile technology to launch a warhead, barbaria is not yet in a position to use its weapons against an invader. Independent analysts like the IARA claim that the development of nuclear weapons is due to fears about the relative weakness of their own armed forces. And the very weakness of its armed forces that led to nuclear development will make it easier for our mission to succeed.

And the very weakness of its armed forces that led to nuclear development will make it easier for our mission to succeed. We should send in the troops now and invade them. This is actually a very timely argument. If we look at what is the main argument, what is this person saying? First, background information. We know this country, Barbaria, they have developed a nuclear weapon. But they are unable to put it on a missile

We should send in the troops now and invade them. Okay, this is actually a very timely argument. If we look at what is the main argument, what is this person saying? First, background information, we know this country, Barbaria, they have developed a nuclear weapon. Okay, but they are unable to put it on a missile and actually launch it into another country at this point. So they have it, but they could only blow it up inside their own borders. Okay, so if we are ever going to fight against them, we need to fight against them before they can launch it at us in retaliation.

and actually launch it into another country at this point. So they have it, but they could only blow it up inside their own borders. So if we are ever going to fight against them, we need to fight against them before they can launch it at us in retaliation. We know that they have a relatively weak military. The reason they developed their nuclear weapons is because their traditional military is not very strong.

We know they have relatively weak military. The reason they developed their nuclear weapons is because their traditional military is not very strong. Since their military is not very strong, we will easily beat them and this war will be over in a couple days. Famous last ones. So this is the argument to attack. Now let's say I need to rebutt.

Since their military is not very strong, we will easily beat them, and this war will be over in a couple days. Famous last words. So this is the argument to attack. Now let's say I need to rebut. Prime Minister said barbaria lacks missile technology. We cannot know with absolute certainty whether or not this is true. So it is an enormous gamble with the lives.

The Prime Minister said Barbaria lacks missile technology. We cannot know with absolute certainty whether or not this is true, so it is an enormous gamble with the lives of our troops. Given, one, how secretive the regime is, two, the fact that it is an enormous military secret they are unlikely to reveal to us, and three, our woeful track record predicting other countries' weapon of mass destruction capabilities.

of our troops. Given, one, how secretive the regime is, two, the fact that it is an enormous military secret they are unlikely to reveal to us, and three, our woeful track record predicting other countries' weapon of mass destruction capabilities. So our signpost, the Prime Minister said, I'm announcing, I'm talking about the other side, and what was my rephrasing? Barbaria lacks missile technology. Thank you.

So our signpost, the Prime Minister said, I'm announcing, I'm talking about the other side. And what was my rephrasing? Barbaria lacks missile technology. With the negation, why are we arguing against this? We cannot know with absolute certainty whether this is true. So it might be true, it might not be true. There's no possible way for us to know. Why? It is an enormous gamble with our troops' lives. Since we can't possibly know this is true,

Why is, with the negation, why are we arguing against this? We cannot know with absolute certainty whether this is true. So it might be true, it might not be true. There's no possible way for us to know. Why? It is an enormous gamble with our troops' lives. Since we can't possibly know this is true, you're gambling our lives. The rationale? If we are wrong, we know the regime has a lot of secrets. This would be one of their biggest secrets they would

We're gambling our lives. The rationale, if we are wrong, okay, we know the regime has a lot of secrets. This would be one of their biggest secrets. They would do everything they can to keep it from us. And in the past, we have made bad calls when we think we know what weapons the other side has. We can't make those same mistakes again. We can't send in our troops just because we think that these weapons don't exist, because if they do, troops could die and other people outside could die.

do everything they can to keep it from us. And in the past, we have made bad calls when we think we know what weapons the other side has. We can't make those same mistakes again. We can't send in our troops just because we think that these weapons don't exist, because if they do, troops could die and other people outside could die. Signpost, rephrase the the actual argument, negate the argument,

signpost, rephrase the actual argument, negate the argument, what is your topic sentence, why do you disagree with this, and then providing the details of why you disagree. Very, very simple, step by step by step, five points. Now, here's what we're going to do. I was going to, we were going to take time and practice with these here in class. We're not gonna do that.

What is your topic sentence? Why do you disagree with this? And then providing the details of why you disagree. Very, very simple, step by step by step, five points. Here's what we're going to do. I was going to-- we were going to take time and practice with these here in class. We're not going to do that. We're actually going to leave early today for two reasons. One, you just did your presentation.

We're actually going to leave early today for two reasons. One, you just did your presentations, and I know after the beginning of class, some of you are really stressed out and not listening to what I'm saying anyway. Okay, that's fair. Also, today is my birthday, and I want to finish early, so you're going to finish early. It's not happening. I'm 45 today. That's like one of the sad birthdays. Very, very good. Homework. All right. Here is what you are going to work on.

and I know after the beginning of class, some of you are really stressed out and not listening to what I'm saying anyway. Okay, that's fair. Also, today is my birthday and I want to finish early, so we're going to finish early. It's not happening. I'm 45 today. That's like one of the sad birthdays. Very, very sad. There is what you are going to work on between now and Thursday's class. I have

between now and Thursday's class. I have four points here. The argument is schools should be closed on Saturdays. I have four reasons why schools should be closed on Saturdays. Number one, our first point is family. If students don't have school, they will spend more time with their families. Our second point is cost. If schools are closed on Saturday, the schools will save much money on heating, electricity, and teacher salaries.

Four points here. The argument is schools should be closed on Saturdays. And I have four reasons why schools should be closed on Saturdays. For one, our first point is family. If students don't have school, they will spend more time with their families. Our second point is cost. If schools are closed on Saturday, the schools will save much money on heating, electricity, and teacher salaries. Our third point is free

Third, our third point is free time. If there is no school on Saturday, students will have more free time to enjoy their hobbies and interests. And our final point is lesson preparation. If teachers don't have to teach on Saturday, they will use the time to study, prepare lessons and or make tests. What you need to do for homework is create a five-point rebuttal for each of these points. Okay? You're going to write one paragraph each,

time. If there is no school on Saturday, students will have more free time to enjoy their hobbies and interests. And our final point is lesson preparation. If teachers don't have to teach on Saturday, they will use the time to study, prepare lessons, and or make tests. What you need to do for homework is create a five-point rebuttal for each of these points. You're We're going to write one paragraph each, minimum four.

Minimum four, maximum seven sentences. You don't have to actually do research and look up real data for these. Just use basic logic and examples from your brain. In your real presentation, I want real data. But for this, we're just practicing the structure. So one paragraph, every single one of you is doing all four of these. Type them up on your computer and bring them to class with you. Four to seven sentences. And here's the important part. When I come around to check them, what I need to see, I want to see these color-coded.

maximum seven sentences. You don't have to actually do research and look up real data for these. Just use basic logic and examples from your brain. In your real presentation, I want real data. But for this, we're just practicing the structure. So one paragraph, you're doing every single one of you is doing all four of these. Type them up on your computer and bring them to class with you. Fortas

seven sentences and here's the important part when I come around to check them what I need to see I want to see these color-coded okay show me you understand the structure so type your paragraph and then where you say uh our opponent's first point was that's your signpost highlight that in a color and then rephrase what they said was uh impact on family and then impact on family is a different color.

Show me you understand the structure. So type your paragraph and then where you say, our opponent's first point was, that's your signpost, highlight that in a color. And then rephrase what they said was, impact on family. And then impact on family is a different color. I want color coded. I can visually see you understand this structure. This is going to be a 10 point homework assignment. If it's not color coded, you will get a zero out of 10.

I want color coded. I can visually see you understand this structure. This is going to be a 10 point homework assignment. If it's not color coded, you will get a zero out of 10. So four to seven sentences, four paragraphs, color coded, a chance to add 10 more points to your homework category grade. I'm going to come around and check it. And then I'm just going to randomly call

So four to seven sentences, four paragraphs, color-coded, a chance to add ten more points to your homework category grade. I'm going to come around and check it, and then I'm just going to randomly call on people to stand up and read your rebuttals. Because I know if I ask for volunteers, I know the three people who are going to volunteer. So prepare something that you think is good enough to read in front of the class, because most of you will be reading something in front of the class on Thursday.

Call on people to stand up and read your rebuttals. Because I know if I ask for volunteers, I know the three people who are going to volunteer. So prepare something that you think is good enough to read in front of the class because most of you will be reading something in front of the class on Thursday. Any questions? Right. Enjoy leaving a little bit early today or a lot early today. Have a wonderful day. Good luck on any of your

Okay, any questions? Alright, enjoy leaving a little bit early today, or a lot early today, have a wonderful day. Good luck on any of your midterm exams this week, and I will see you on Thursday. Oh yeah, I'm gonna put it up right now. - Yeah, I'm gonna put it up right now. - Yeah, I'm gonna put it up right now. - Yeah, I'm gonna put it up right now. - Because I'm going to be a試- - Because I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - I'm going to be a試- - Thank you.

your midterm exams this week, and then we'll see you on Thursday. Oh yeah, I'm gonna put it up right now.

시험 있는 줌이 꼭 필요하겠네 나 뭐? 어? - 스토 뭐 좀 있잖아 - 맞아 나 개 사이퍼 같아 6.5일날 영어 소름 때문에 하기로 가야 돼 내가 자유 때릴까 싶은데 문외컴 조별 과제를 끝에 잡아버려서 때릴 수 있는 거 같아 - 이깍 - 대박 근데 우리 시발 금요일에 시험 있잖아

자유 때릴까 싶은데 문외컴 조별과제를 끝에 잡아버려서 때렸습니다.

- 그러니까. - 그리고? - 잘한다. - 잘한다. 야 근데 우리 씨발 금요일에 시험 있잖아.

I'm going to go.