In the first debate we had the discussion of “Professional teaching in the school”. I think this debate was incredibly well prepared because they really thought of the arguments and counterarguments that could be shown in the debate. However, the team that was against professional in schools should improve the use of logos because they did not show any statistics that could have given them a strong argument against the other team. Another important characteristic of the debate that should be improved is remembering all the facts that should be mentioned. I am quite sure both teams forgot to mention an important survey or fact they had researched. I think the team in favor won because they presented more facts than the other team and they also sounded more convincing. In addition, at the end I think one member of the against team made a huge mistake in answering the questions the in favor team had presented.
In the second debate about the voluntary vote and automatic registration, I also think they lacked facts and statistics. They could have done an incredible work by doing some research about different decades and how that is presented nowadays. They also sounded nervous, so anxiety is something they must improve. I cannot define a winner because the debate did not finish. There was something I wanted to say, but probably I will express it tomorrow.
9 comentarios:
I would like to listen what you have to say tomorrow.
I completely agree with your post. I think that the team in favour "professionals as teachers" won, because they had better sources =D
See you in class!!
Hey Carola! I liked your post. Very honest, as always.
I also think that your team won, because you were more credible than the other team. But that doesn't mean that I agree with you and what you said.
Take care,
I bet you went to bed at 8 o'clok! Stop sleeping! Enjoy life, haha take care honey, see U tomorrow bye
In my opnion, our thoughts were supported through interview and books and we quoted more than one authors in our presentation. so we applied logos. I agree with your comment about the second group they should investigate a little more and they ought to communicate more than once.
I agree that responding defensively weakened the "against" side's rebuttal, but they had sources comparable to your groups. Statistics are good, but it would have been a good idea to interrogate them a bit. For example, your source wasn't cited--where did the info come from? Luckily for you, the other group didn't ask.
Good post!
I agree with you but it is not because we were in the same group!
*These are my reasons:
Even when the other group against the reform had a lot of quotations: experience (our experience)could express exactly what we were defending.We as students have had a lot of teachers who had not taught us values at all, and they did study pedagogy but they have not convinced us to consider them as examples. So that, most of us have learnt from the counter example...
I mean, we have had few teachers who loved us as students more than the love they felt to the power and knoledge they actually had!
Bye..
I agree with you when you say that there was lack of fact in arguments that the group which was against "profssional as teachers", but I also believe that the group which was in favor, some of them do not use properly the information, for example when one says that Paulo Freire was not a teacher because he had to study pedagogy in order to write his great books.
See you!!
I agree with you Carolina. The different ways of the presentations made the difference in the first debate about Professional Teachers, and the self-confidence that each group had in order to the expressions they used. Your presentation of the topic was the most different among the three teams and you all sounded with more confidence with yourselves and with the topic; therefore, your group was the strongest of the debates. It is possible that to have a better development in English skills made an easier and a better work for you all. Yes, the others groups needed to improve in many ways as you mentioned, including me in every necessity that you saw and said.
Thanks for your critique, because for me every critique is positive!!
In the first debate we had the WW discussion *ABOUT* “Professional teaching in the school”. P I think this debate was incredibly well-prepared* because they ((who is ‘they’?)) really thought *ABOUT* the arguments and counterarguments that could be *USED* in the debate. However, the team that was against professional S/P in schools should improve the use of logos because they did not show any statistics that could have given them a strong argument against the other team. Another important characteristic of the debate that should be improved is remembering all the facts that should be mentioned. I am quite sure both teams forgot to mention an important survey or fact they had researched. I think the team in favor won because they presented more facts than the other team and SS they also sounded more convincing. In addition, at the end I think one member of the against team made a huge mistake in answering the questions the in-favor* team had presented.
In the second debate, *WHICH ADDRESSED* the voluntary vote and automatic registration, I also think they ((again, who’s ‘they”?)) lacked facts and statistics. They could have done an incredible *JOB* by doing some research about different decades and how that ((what is “that”?)) is presented nowadays. They also sounded nervous, so anxiety is something they must improve. I cannot define a winner because the debate did not finish. There was something I wanted to say, but probably I WO will express it tomorrow.
Publicar un comentario