August 21, 2019, 11:49:08 pm

### AuthorTopic: English Oral on Vaccinations  (Read 119 times) Tweet Share

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### sendthemtotherange

• Fresh Poster
• Posts: 2
• Respect: 0
##### English Oral on Vaccinations
« on: July 22, 2019, 02:27:46 pm »
0
I really need feedback on my presentation, I feel like I keep repeating myself but I don't know

#### Bri MT

• VIC MVP - 2018
• National Moderator
• ATAR Notes Superstar
• Posts: 2555
• invest in wellbeing so it can invest in you
• Respect: +1710
##### Re: English Oral on Vaccinations
« Reply #1 on: July 22, 2019, 03:04:45 pm »
+4
Hey,

It's clear that you have a strong stance on this issue and I think very few are likely to disagree with you here. My question to you is who is your audience (who is it that you are trying to persuade)? It seems unlikely that you have focused on persuading anti-vax parents since much of the language you have used paints them (not just their anti-vax behaviours but themselves as people) as the problem.

Secondly, some of your sentences are too complex. By this, I mean that there are too many ideas within the one sentence. For example, your opening sentence is "For decades parents and scientists have argued that vaccinations have caused more harm than good and have attempted to spread false claims to prevent children from being protected from damaging diseases. " This has many components 1) parents and scientists have argued that vaccinations cause more harm than good  (for decades) 2) they have attempted to spread false claims 3) the reason they have spread false claims is to prevent children from being protected against damaging diseases [sidenote: this is unlikely to be their motivation despite being a result]. I'm definitely not suggesting that you break the sentence in the way I have, but it is far too long, ESPECIALLY for an opening sentence. I recommend that you read your speech aloud to yourself to check what "flows" nicely and where you could improve the fluency.

On the plus side, you've made nice use of some techniques (e.g your repetition of "We should be grateful") and each paragraph has a strong idea banding it together. Referencing specific dates, facts, and figures also helps you establish yourself as an authority and it is clear that you have done this throughout your speech.

I hope you find this helpful and good luck with your speech
2018-2021: Science Advanced - Global Challenges (Honours) @ Monash

Leadership  ; Scientific Methodology ; Wanting to stay productive?

#### AlphaZero

• MOTM: DEC 18
• Forum Obsessive
• Posts: 305
• $F(s)=\int_0^\infty \!f(t)e^{-st}\,\text{d}t$
• Respect: +128
##### Re: English Oral on Vaccinations
« Reply #2 on: July 22, 2019, 05:04:26 pm »
+4
Funnily enough, my speech when I was in year 12 was about the 'No jab no play' laws and I'm also very passionate about the topic.

I'll be echoing some of Bri's excellent points but I'll also add to them.

Not many will disagree with the points you've made, but I don't quite understand what your contention is. In your second paragraph, your first sentence "Children should not be enrolled to schools if they are not vaccinated" screams a contention, yet you don't seem to come back to this point at all. In fact, you almost change your focus to where you try to essentially convey that 'vaccines are good'. Try to pick a clear contention and make sure your arguments directly support your central idea. This will help with the clarity of your speech as well.

Next, audience! Who is your audience here? The way you write and the substance of your speech needs to target them specifically.

Your sentences are too complicated. I found some that are 4 lines long. Your use of hyphens and the word "although" particularlu bothers me. Chop up your sentences. Eloquence in speech doesn't come from long sentences. It comes both from easy to understand thoughts which people can understand. Read your speech aloud to someone. If they struggle to understand it or don't seem engaged, it's not their fault. It's your's.

You've made some great refutations and counterarguments. I think if you just made them simpler, they will read very well. However, you also have some low forms of argument - mainly, ad hominem. I've found that attacking someone's character is the worst way to convince them of your point of view and often will increase their affinity to their beliefs. It often takes great discipline not to do so, especially when frustrated with opposing views. Attack the substance of your opponents' argument, not their persona. As much as it is the case that many people think anti-vaxxers are unintelligent for their views, you have to realise that they have been convinced by someone else's words. I don't believe for a second that anti-vaxx parents don't have the best in mind for their children. Most are misinformed, not deliberately turning a blind eye.

I highly suggest you watch Kurzgesagt's video on vaccines. Pay particular attention to their conclusion from 9:35.
2015$-$2017:  VCE
2018$-$2021:  Bachelor of Biomedicine and Concurrent Diploma in Mathematical Sciences, University of Melbourne