While I wouldn't call the revised introduction strictly better than the original, the revised version does abide by the guidelines established in Points 1, 2, and 3 more than the original. The new introduction also gives background information on the topic covered in the public speech act. My original introduction was lacking this element entirely, and I think that's the largest flaw of the original that I fixed in the revised version.
Screenshot from my computer, 10/17/15 |
The rhetorical elements of an argument within the field of computer science are unique from the elements of any other type of argument. The specific cultural context of the argument, audience, speaker, and message the speaker is trying to convey will shape how the author forms his argument. In this paper, I will explain exactly how a member of the computer science academic field would construct their argument to effectively persuade their audience of something. Hadi Partovi’s method is unique, since his public speech act was a TEDx talk as opposed to a scientific journal entry. Nonetheless, Partovi still uses conventions such as appealing to his own credibility, presentation of compelling statistics, and a myriad of other tactics to make his argument as agreeable as possible.
Revised:
It is incredible that public speech acts have been used to persuade audiences for thousands of years. What's even more incredible is how little rhetorical strategies have changed. In an ongoing debate regarding computer science education, many voices come forward to give their take on how we should educate today's youth. In Hadi Partovi's TEDx talk on computer science education, Partovi attempts to combine appeals to his own abilities, compelling statistics regarding computer science education, and several other rhetorical strategies to specifically appeal to the upper-middle class audience of the Seattle, Washington area.
No comments:
Post a Comment