AP Seminar Performance Task 2: Doing an effective IMP and Oral Defense

Summary

In this educational video, Jerry Gonzalez guides viewers on delivering a compelling oral defense and presentation. He emphasizes the importance of strong claims, evidence, and analysis for an effective argument. Using a rubric, he distinguishes between medium and high-scoring presentations, highlighting the need for specificity, coherence, and complexity in arguments. Gonzalez provides examples and critiques to illustrate the differences, advising on the use of visual cues, transitions, and synthesis of evidence for a persuasive presentation. He concludes with the significance of a strong argument structure backed by solid evidence and analysis.

Takeaways

• 📌 The strength of an argument in an oral defense depends on the strength of claims, evidence, and analysis provided.
• 🔍 Focusing on the medium and high columns of the rubric helps identify the areas where students often fall short and need improvement.
• 🎯 For a high-scoring presentation, the introduction should be specific and focused, rather than general.
• 💡 Establishing a clear and complex argument with logical reasoning is crucial for a high-scoring presentation.
• 📚 The evidence provided should be synthesized to create a new understanding or conclusion, which is a key difference between medium and high scoring presentations.
• 🔗 It's important to connect the evidence to the claims being made and ensure that the argument is coherent and well-organized.
• 🌟 Use visual cues such as headings, subheadings, transitions, and animations to guide the audience through the argument.
• 🗣 The presenter should match the oral delivery with the visual content to ensure the audience can follow the argument without confusion.
• 🤔 During the oral defense, provide specific examples from the research process to answer questions effectively.
• 📈 The presenter should demonstrate how their research question evolved and address additional questions that emerged from their research with specificity.
• 📝 The effectiveness of the argument in both the presentation and oral defense is reliant on the strength of claims, evidence, and analysis.

Q & A

What is the main focus of the video by Jerry Gonzalez?

The main focus of the video is to teach viewers how to deliver a strong oral defense and presentation, emphasizing the importance of the strength of claims, evidence, and analysis in an argument.

What are the key components of an argument according to the video?

The key components of an argument are the strength of claims, the strength of evidence, and the strength of analysis provided throughout the presentation.

What does Jerry Gonzalez suggest focusing on in the rubric for a presentation?

Jerry Gonzalez suggests focusing on rows one, two, three, and four of the rubric, which cover the content, argument establishment, evidence incorporation, and conclusion alignment of the presentation.

What is the difference between a medium and high scoring presentation in terms of content according to the rubric row one?

A medium scoring presentation has more general content in the introduction, while a high scoring presentation is more specific, focused, and situated in the context of the research question.

How should a presenter establish their argument according to rubric row two?

To establish their argument, a presenter should make it clear, coherent, and complex, with logical reasoning and organization, especially since the presentation is delivered orally and live.

What is the difference between incorporating and synthesizing evidence in a presentation?

Incorporating evidence means using individual pieces of evidence to support the argument, while synthesizing evidence involves using multiple pieces of evidence to generate a new conclusion or understanding.

What should a presenter do to ensure their oral delivery matches the visual content on the screen?

A presenter should make sure that what they are saying orally closely matches the information on the screen, using visual cues like headings, subheadings, transitions, and animations to guide the audience.

Why is it important to use transitional phrases during an oral presentation?

Transitional phrases are important to indicate to the audience where the presenter is in their argument, helping them follow the flow of the presentation and understand the connections between different points.

What does the presenter in the sample video suggest as a solution to reduce traffic-related air pollution in developing countries?

The presenter suggests placing vegetative barriers near roadways in developing countries as a solution, as they have been proven effective in trapping airborne particles and removing gaseous emissions, and are affordable.

What is the significance of the research question in the sample presentation about traffic-related air pollution?

The research question is significant as it addresses how to reduce traffic-related air pollution in developing countries, a problem that has negative impacts on children's cognitive abilities and is linked to developmental abnormalities.

How does the presenter in the sample video connect the evidence to the argument in the high-scoring presentation?

In the high-scoring presentation, the presenter connects the evidence to the argument by providing specific details from the sources, using verbal transitions to show how different pieces of evidence support and build upon each other, and by analyzing how the evidence supports the overall thesis.

What is the difference between a medium and high scoring response in an oral defense according to the rubric?

A medium response is more generalized and could fit any project, while a high scoring response answers the question with specificity, providing detailed examples from the research process to support the argument.

Why is it important for a presenter to provide specific examples from their research in their oral defense?

Providing specific examples from the research helps to demonstrate a deeper understanding of the topic, strengthens the argument, and shows the relevance of the presenter's work to the questions being asked in the oral defense.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Introduction to Strong Oral Defense Strategies

Jerry Gonzalez introduces a seminar video focused on delivering a compelling oral defense. The video emphasizes the importance of strong claims, evidence, and analysis in crafting an effective argument. A rubric for a multimedia presentation is reviewed, highlighting the key areas that differentiate medium and high-scoring presentations. The focus is on the first four rows of the rubric, which cover the content, argument establishment, evidence presentation, and conclusion alignment with the research question. The video aims to guide students on how to improve their presentations from medium to high quality by providing clear, logical, and well-reasoned arguments supported by synthesized evidence.

05:01

🔍 Analyzing Presentation Quality through Rubric Criteria

This paragraph delves into the specifics of what constitutes a medium versus a high-scoring presentation according to the rubric. It discusses the need for a detailed and clear research question, the importance of connecting the argument to the stimulus materials, and the necessity of a coherent and complex argument. The paragraph also stresses the significance of evidence synthesis, where multiple pieces of evidence are used to form a new conclusion or understanding. Additionally, it touches on the importance of presenting a realistic resolution or solution, and the challenges of assessing the validity of a solution based on a short presentation sample.

10:01

🌿 Case Study: Reducing Traffic-Related Air Pollution

The script presents a case study on reducing traffic-related air pollution in developing countries. It discusses the trend of rapid urbanization and its impact on air pollution, particularly the effects on children's cognitive abilities. The proposed solution involves placing vegetative barriers near roadways, which have been shown to be effective, affordable, and capable of withstanding various weather conditions. The paragraph examines the presentation's introduction, argument establishment, evidence integration, and the proposed solution's feasibility, using specific examples from the research to illustrate the points.

15:02

📈 Enhancing Presentation Impact with Detailed Analysis

The paragraph contrasts two samples of the same presentation, one with medium detail and the other with a higher level of specificity and analysis. It highlights the importance of providing detailed context, making explicit connections to the stimulus materials, and offering a coherent and complex argument. The high-scoring sample demonstrates how to effectively use evidence to support claims and build a strong argument, as well as the need for a realistic and viable solution to the problem at hand. The paragraph emphasizes the significance of maintaining a high level of detail and analysis throughout the entire presentation to achieve a high score.

20:02

🗣️ Oral Defense: Demonstrating Understanding and Insight

This section shifts the focus to oral defense, examining how a presenter can effectively answer questions about their research. It outlines the criteria for a medium versus a high-scoring response, with an emphasis on specificity and the use of examples from the research process. The paragraph provides examples of medium and high-scoring responses to questions about the evolution of the research question and the emergence of additional research questions. It underscores the importance of providing detailed and specific evidence in responses to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the research topic.

25:03

📝 Conclusion: The Power of Strong Claims, Evidence, and Analysis

In conclusion, the video script stresses that the effectiveness of an argument in both presentations and oral defenses depends on the strength of claims, evidence, and analysis. It reinforces the importance of specificity, coherence, and complexity in argumentation, as well as the need for a realistic and viable solution to the problem being discussed. The script ends with a reminder to the audience to apply these principles to enhance the quality of their own presentations and oral defenses.

Keywords

💡Oral Defense

Oral defense refers to the process where a student presents and defends their research findings in a live setting, often to a panel of experts or professors. In the video's context, it is a crucial part of the AP Seminar where students must not only present their arguments but also respond to questions about their work. The effectiveness of an oral defense hinges on the strength of claims, evidence, and analysis provided by the student.

💡Argument

An argument in this video script refers to the main point or thesis that a student is trying to prove or support with their research and presentation. The strength of an argument is determined by how well the student can logically connect their claims to the evidence and analysis. For example, the script mentions that the argument must be 'logical, well-reasoned, and complex' to achieve a high score.

💡Claims

Claims are the specific points or propositions that a student asserts in their argument. They are the building blocks of an argument and must be clearly defined and strongly supported by evidence. In the script, the presenter emphasizes that the effectiveness of an argument is dependent on the strength of these claims.

💡Evidence

Evidence in the context of the video refers to the information, data, or sources that a student uses to support their claims. It is a critical component of an argument, and the script distinguishes between merely incorporating evidence (medium level) and synthesizing evidence to create a new understanding (high level).

💡Analysis

Analysis is the process of examining and interpreting the evidence to support the claims made in an argument. It involves more than just presenting facts; it requires the student to provide a deeper understanding of how the evidence relates to their argument. The script highlights the importance of strong analysis for a high-scoring presentation.

💡Rubric

A rubric is a set of criteria or standards used to evaluate work, such as a student's presentation. In the video, the rubric is used to assess different aspects of the presentation, including the content, argument establishment, evidence provision, and conclusion. The script provides examples of what constitutes a medium versus a high score on the rubric.

💡Synthesis

Synthesis in the context of the video refers to the act of combining multiple pieces of evidence to form a new conclusion or understanding. It is a higher level of analysis compared to simply incorporating evidence. The script explains that synthesizing evidence is a key factor in achieving a high score for the evidence component of the rubric.

💡Coherence

Coherence is the quality of an argument being logical and consistent. It means that the different parts of the argument fit together in a clear and understandable way. The script mentions that a high-scoring argument must be 'coherent and complex', indicating that coherence is essential for a strong presentation.

💡Transitions

Transitions are the words or phrases used to connect different parts of a presentation, making the flow of ideas clear to the audience. In the script, transitions are highlighted as important for guiding the audience through the argument and ensuring that the oral delivery matches what is presented visually.

💡Visual Cues

Visual cues are elements in a presentation that help guide the audience's attention and understanding. This can include headings, subheadings, animations, and other visual elements that correspond with the spoken argument. The script notes the importance of using visual cues to help the audience follow the argument.

💡Research Question

A research question is the central inquiry or problem that a student is investigating in their research project. It guides the entire research process and is the focal point of the presentation. The script discusses how the clarity and specificity of the research question are assessed in the rubric.

💡Solution

In the context of the video, a solution refers to the proposed answer or method to address the research question or problem. The script mentions that the solution should be realistic, feasible, and fully aligned with the research question. It is a critical part of the presentation that needs to be sufficiently argued and supported by evidence.

Highlights

The video focuses on how to deliver a strong oral defense and presentation.

Effectiveness of an argument depends on the strength of claims, evidence, and analysis.

The video reviews a rubric for individual multimedia presentations.

Differences between medium and high scoring presentations are discussed.

High scoring presentations are more specific and focused compared to medium scoring ones.

Importance of being well-reasoned, complex, and organized in oral presentations.

Use of visual cues, headings, and transitions to guide the audience through the argument.

Sample presentation on reducing traffic-related air pollution in developing countries.

Proposal of vegetative barriers as a solution to reduce air pollution.

Evidence from various studies is used to support the argument.

Analysis of the effectiveness of vegetative barriers in reducing air pollution.

Importance of connecting evidence to claims and the overall thesis.

Second sample presentation provides more detail and analysis.

Inclusion of more specific examples and connections between evidence in the second sample.

Discussion on the importance of representing different perspectives in the argument.

Oral defense samples demonstrate the difference between medium and high scoring responses.

High scoring oral defenses provide specific examples from the research process.

The necessity of maintaining consistency throughout the presentation for a high score.

The video concludes with the importance of strong claims, evidence, and analysis for effective arguments.

Transcripts

hey and welcome to another video on ap

seminar

my name is jerry gonzalez and in this

video we'll be covering

how to deliver a strong imp

and oral defense so in this video we'll

be taking a look at

really like just covering the strength

of an argument so what i really want you

to know today

is that the effectiveness of your

argument is dependent on the strength of

your claims

the strength of your evidence and the

strength of your analysis that you

provide throughout that presentation

i wanted to review a little bit

something that mrs malloy covered in the

previous video

so here we have a rubric of the

individual multimedia presentation

and in this video what i really want to

focus on is rows

one two three and four

which are the rows that are really going

to cover a lot of that

content of the that you cover in your

presentation

so i have um i've i've clipped these

four rows here

and i actually just want us to focus on

the medium column and the high column

because that's really

where we see the most um like the most

gray area between where our students are

sometimes we see students who do who are

get delivering presentations that

have the potential to be high but

they're living more so in the world of

medium

so i really want to focus on the

differences between medium

and high here on the right hand side

in the colored boxes i've sort of

summarized what each of the

um components uh consist of

so for rubric row one uh generally

speaking the the content

the context that's covered usually in

the introduction

is going to be a lot more general for

that medium scoring presentation

versus for a high scoring presentation

being much more situated

much more focused much more specific

and i'll show you a couple of video

samples so that you can see

the differences between those two for

rubric row 2

in establishing your argument that keep

proficiency there

we have mostly clear and logical

versus logical well-reasoned and complex

and i'll get into the reasons for why

it's important to be

well reasoned and complex and organized

as well

because if you remember this is this

presentation will be delivered orally it

will be delivered live

and so as a result of that it's going to

be very important for us to be organized

as well

rubric row 3 is going to be focusing on

the evidence that you provide

and the differences between a medium and

a high is incorporating evidence

for a medium versus synthesizing

evidence for a high

so that synthesis piece using multiple

pieces of evidence

to generate a new conclusion a new

understanding

which is further elaborated in rubric

growth four

looking at specific conclusions that are

partially aligned to your research

question versus detailed conclusions

that are fully aligned to that research

question that you are

covering in your presentation so we've

seen this

before probably your argument must be

logically organized to allow the

audience to clearly follow what you're

saying

we do that by using those visual cue

cues to

guide the audience through what your

argument is so sometimes we have clear

headings and subheadings sometimes we

use transitions sometimes we use

animations

to to really amplify the information

that we're currently speaking about

you should not expect your audience to

be able to read

read the text and listen to something

different that's being discussed

so you really want to make sure that

your uh

what you're delivering orally is

matching

closely what's on the screen that you um

to follow that main point that you have

and as always you want to make sure that

you're using transitional phrases as you

speak

to indicate to the audience where you

are in your argument

okay and so we're going to watch a

sample here

of one of my students and in this sample

there are a couple of questions that i

want you to think about

the first question for row one and again

in this presentation

we're just really looking at the content

of what's

set so we're looking at what is said

we're not really going to be looking at

how it's being said so for rubric row

one

one question that i want you to consider

is the relevance of the research

question detailed and clear

for rubric row 2 is there a clear i'm

sorry continuing

with rubric row 1 is there a clear

connection to the stimulus materials

for rubric row 2 is there an argument

and is that argument coherent and

complex

rubric rule 3 is there relevant evidence

brought together

and integrated so is that synthesis

occurring

and are those pieces of evidence in

conversation with one another

and then also our different perspectives

represented

so sometimes on this uh perspective

piece

we're only going to be looking at a at a

one

piece of the presentation for this one

so

different perspectives may not

necessarily be seen as explicitly as it

would be if we had watched the entire

presentation

and finally for rubric row 4 does the

presentation

have a realistic resolution conclusion

or solution now again for these last two

rows for row three

and row four keep in mind that we're

only going to be looking at the first

couple of minutes of this presentation

so we may not be able to assess the

overall validity

or the overall feasibility of this

solution that's being argued here

so let's take a look at this sample

today i will be presenting on reducing

traffic related air pollution in

developing countries

recently there has been a trend in rapid

urbanization in developing countries

as described by montgomery and one of

the stimulus sources

vehicles contribute to traffic related

air pollution by releasing exhaust

where airborne dust particles into the

environment

this has a large negative impact on

children's cognitive abilities

as geoxens and her colleagues found that

gray matter in the cerebral cortex

region gets thinner upon exposure to air

pollution

however it can be challenging to find a

solution to this problem

as developing countries tend to have

weaker economies and thus finding a

solution that is both effective and

affordable can be challenging

this leads us to the question how should

traffic-related air pollution in

developing countries be reduced

the proposed solution is to place

vegetative barriers near roadways and

developing countries

as they have been proven effective in

trapping airborne particles

removing gaseous emissions from the

environment and being inexpensive enough

for developing countries to be able to

afford them

on this slide we see that vegetative

barriers tend to be tight clusters of

trees that are placed

in rows adjacent to roadways and form a

barrier between the road and nearby

human inhabited areas

this solution has been shown to be

extremely effective in reducing airborne

particulate levels

brantley found that vegetative barriers

decrease black black carbon particulate

matter levels

by 22 percent kenyon lamb found that

deposition

or vegetation's ability to trap airborne

particles is able to occur

during non-ideal conditions like like

powerful wind conditions

so let's reflect on um the

presentation that we just watched now i

want to focus

on row one and row two first so i'll

focus on row one

first so thinking back to that um first

question that i asked

was the relevance of the research

question detailed and clear

now overall that introduction that you

watched

was detailed but there was a lack of

overall specificity

or application that made for a

generalized

context so there wasn't necessarily a

specific mention to the overall

importance of the research question or

the overall significance of what the

problem or

issue was now get into that a little bit

more

in the other rubric roads the second

major question that

um we want to ask ourselves was is there

a clear connection to the stimulus

materials

now in this case the mater the stimulus

material that was used was that

montgomery source that was referenced at

the beginning

and that there was a reference to that

source but the overall reference was

broad

and there was nothing specifically used

from the source that was connected to

the research question

so this is an area where sometimes the

student

delivering the presentation sort of

forgets to make that connection

of the stimulus material to the overall

research question

and when we're writing we're really

forced to make that explicit connection

so you have to remember to make that

connection explicitly

in your presentation as well in that

second rubric row

the big question that we want to ask

ourselves is there

an argument and if there is an argument

is that argument coherent and complex

so generally there is an argument we do

know that there's a thesis

that's presented in the form of a of a

solution that's being argued for

but there was a general lack of

connections that was being made

between the smaller claims and the

evidence that's presented

in that um in that piece of the

presentation that we saw

so sometimes this happens when a student

uh just kind of reads the general points

that are

on the slide instead of going into more

detail

into explaining the so what so

how does that piece of evidence connect

to the claim that's being made and how

does that claim that's being made

connect to the overall thesis that's

being argued

if those connections do not exist you

are likely to score

in the middle for that presentation so

you want to make sure

that there is a that there is sufficient

detail

that's connecting the evidence to the

claim

and remember that you're usually going

to have multiple points

sub points sub claims that you're

arguing for so you're going to want to

make sure that you're doing that

for each of those smaller claims

focusing more on the more specifically

on the research

or on the evidence for rubric row 3

are there pieces of evidence that are in

conversation with one another

so when i say this there are many times

that students will have

multiple pieces of evidence that are on

the slide so

if you can imagine two bullet points

each of the bullet points

sort of being dedicated to its own

individual source

and that's a good start it's great that

you're using multiple pieces of evidence

to support your argument but that's

really only that's not going far

enough what we really want to see

is a connection made between pieces of

evidence right so we want you to

articulate

how those two pieces of evidence are

being used

to create a new point so if you are

treating the sources as being

independent of one another

that's going to lead you to a medium

scoring pres uh

presentation for this rubric row so you

would score

medium in row 3 if you are treating the

sources

as independent of one another

for rubric row 4 does that presentation

have a realistic resolution conclusion

or a solution now depending on

how the rest of the presentation would

would sort of

move forward this this the content of

this presentation

is on the way to getting to a high

the solution that's proposed these

vegetative barriers

it is aligned uh to the problem that's

being

that was being discussed the traffic

related air pollution

but we haven't yet seen whether or not

that solution is going to be um

sufficiently argued for sufficiently

discussed in terms of validity so we

would need to see the rest of the

presentation

in order to make a fair determination

for

where this row where the student would

score for this row

so this would this example right here

was an example of this

of a medium and so what i want to do now

is to watch another sample that is

more so focused on it's going to be the

same presentation

but there's gonna be a little bit more

detail okay

so we're gonna take a look at the same

uh the same student

delivering the same content but they're

gonna add a little bit more detail to

that

so i want you to keep these same

questions in mind and pay attention to

the differences between the first sample

that you watched

and the second sample that you watched

today i will be presenting on reducing

traffic related air pollution in

developing countries

recently there has been a trend in rapid

urbanization in developing countries

as discussed by montgomery and one of

the stimulus sources

86 percent of the world's population

increase between 2000

and 2024 is predicted to occur in

developing countries urban areas

this large increase in population will

translate to a large increase in

vehicles on the roadways

which in turn will translate to a large

increase in traffic related air

pollution in these regions

vehicles contribute to air pollution by

releasing exhaust

which contains toxic gases as well as

releasing vehicle wear

and airborne dust particles into the

environment

this negatively impacts children's

cognitive abilities in these regions

because their brains are still

developing

the blue regions and the images of the

brain highlight areas in the gray matter

of the cerebral cortex region

that get thinner upon exposure to air

pollution as found by geoxens

an assistant professor at the barcelona

institute for public for global health

and her colleagues they also found that

these developmental abnormalities

are linked to inattentiveness a decrease

in working memory and lower overall test

scores

however it can be challenging to find a

solution to this problem

as developing countries tend to have

weaker economies and thus

finding a solution that is both

effective and affordable can be hard

this leads us to the question how should

traffic related air pollution in

developing countries be reduced

the proposed solution is to place

vegetative barriers near roadways and

developing countries

as they've been proven effective in

trapping airborne particles

removing gaseous emissions from the

environment and being inexpensive enough

for developing countries to be able to

afford them

on this slide we can see that vegetative

barriers tend to be tight clusters of

trees

as can be seen in the image on the left

that are placed in rows adjacent to

roadways as can be seen in the image on

the right

and they are there in order to form a

barrier between the roadway and near

nearby human inhabited areas

one main benefit of this solution is its

ability to reduce airborne particulate

levels

brantley a member of the u.s

environmental protection agency

and her colleagues tested ultrafine

particle concentrations at a roadside

golf course

when a vegetative barrier was placed

between it and a nearby highway

she found that the vegetative barrier

decreased black carbon

particulate matter levels by 22 percent

this is extremely important

as this translates to large as this

indicates a large reduction in traffic

related air pollution at nearby roadways

with the implementation of vegetated

barrier

such as the roadside golf course to

further add on to this

moore canyon lamb tested deposition or

vegetation's ability to trap airborne

particles

during various weather conditions they

found that vegetation

that deposition occurred successfully

even during powerful wind conditions

which is extremely significant as it as

it indicates

that vegetative barriers would be able

to reduce airborne

or air pollution levels during even

during non-ideal weather conditions

and when examining a solution for a

region as diverse as developing

countries

this is extremely important in

indicating the viability of the solution

so hopefully you were able to see some

um

some differences between those two

samples and so i want to go

through each of these rubric rows again

to see to

discuss some of those differences so

coming back to that first question again

on is the relevance of the research

question detailed and clear

and so in this question or in this

introduction

the explanation of the context goes

beyond the text that was on the screen

and the image that was that was used in

the second slide

was also going into uh exemplifying the

negative consequences of the problem

so the high sample here is going to have

a lot more detail into the significance

of the overall problem or issue

as it specifically pertains to the

research question that's being asked

and we also see a greater amount of

detail

and space dedicated to that stimulus

source

so there's an explicit reference to the

stimulus material and it's followed up

with

specific details from the source that

help connect to the topic

now you don't necessarily need to call

the stimulus source the stimulus source

the whoever's watching your presentation

is going to know which source is the

stimulus source

but you do want to make sure that you

are doing a sufficient job

making that connection to what your

topic is about

and in rubric row 2 is there an argument

and

is that argument coherent and complex

there is analysis that's provided to

connect that evidence to the claim that

is helping to support the overall thesis

right and the same point is going to be

made in terms of the

the coherence and complexity of the

overall argument

this argument is on the way to scoring

high

there is analysis that's provided to

support the idea

that vegetative barriers are effective

in reducing airborne

particulate levels but

it's important to note that the rest of

the presentation would have to continue

following this trend to score high right

so just because

you are doing a good job on one of your

points doesn't necessarily mean that you

have reached that threshold you have to

maintain that consistency throughout the

presentation

in order to score high

for row three are the pieces of evidence

in conversation with one another

and i think that this is where um that

our

this high sample is doing a great job

there are multiple connections that are

being made between pieces of evidence

and established verbal transitions right

so

transitions like this is further

reinforced by this is also supported by

those types of verbal transitions really

help the audience

understand that you're sort of stacking

evidence on top of one another

to promote the synthesis that occurs

so those sources are being used to build

on each other and strengthen the overall

argument are there different

perspectives represented yes there are

um eventually down down the line in the

in the presentation we would see

the inclusion of more perspectives that

would also be added to the conversation

that's happening

and finally for rubric row 4 does the

presentation

have a realistic resolution conclusion

or solution

and this is also on the way to getting

there that solution

is again the same and it is aligned to

to solve the problem but once again we

would need more information

as seen throughout the rest of the

presentation to evaluate whether or not

it was sufficiently presented as

realistic

as viable as feasible

so that's a uh so those are two

uh samples of presentations i also

wanted to take a look at

an oral defense sample in the same way

that we just looked at

the presentation sample so here we have

our rubric

and um we i once again want to take a

look at the differences between medium

and high here so for medium

the medium response is going to be more

generalized

more generic more adept at

fitting any real project okay

whereas the high sample is generally

going to

answer the question and provide specific

examples from the research

from the process to answer the question

so two big questions here for rubric

rule one

does the presenter provide uh relevant

evidence

specific to their work in their

responses

so we're seeing is there a level of

specificity there

is there a specific example and for row

2

does the presenter provide relevant

evidence

specific to their work in their

responses

so we're looking for that specificity

we're looking for a specific example

that's provided

in the response so let's take a look at

an example

of a medium scoring sample

how did your research question evolve as

you move through the research process

after reading the stimulus sources i had

picked out the problem i wanted to focus

on

but when i began to research i was

focusing more on an effect of the

problem

but throughout my research process i

changed my research question

to instead focus on finding a solution

to the problem

what additional questions emerge from

your research and why are these

questions important

um one question was surrounding like the

implementation

and how easy it would be to implement my

solution

because not a lot of studies focused on

that um so

that would be really important to see if

it was viable or not

so coming back to those um questions

does the presenter provide relevant

evidence

specific to their work in their

responses

and in this case there is um

there is evidence provided but there is

sort of like a lack of specificity

to support the why or the how right

and so without the y or the how we're

not really going to be able to

move that student's score into the high

scoring range

and so we see that again for rubric row

2

where if we have the question of whether

the presenter is providing relevant

evidence

specific to the work in their responses

they did

provide a little bit but that response

did not address the specific ways

in which viability could be researched

or

addressed right so the student is sort

of

getting like 80 of the way there but

doesn't go all the way into that high

scoring range

so let's take a look at an example of

the same

question to see how the same question

could be answered a little bit more

effectively

did your research question evolve as you

move

through the research process um

so after reading the stimulus sources i

knew i wanted to talk about

or i wanted to research something

surrounding the recent environmental

changes and their effects on humans

but at first when i was beginning my

research

i was looking into the cognitive effects

on children

of the recent environmental changes but

as i looked further into that i realized

that there wasn't a debate surrounding

that topic

because um all the sources i was reading

uh directly pointed to the adverse

mental health effects so um then i

decided to change my research question

to

to instead try and find a solution to

the problem of

uh traffic related air pollution that

was causing

those negative effects on children's

cognitive abilities

what additional questions emerged from

your research

and why are these questions important

um i think the biggest question that

emerged from my research

was how difficult it would be to upkeep

the vegetation that would be along the

roadways

and that's really important because it

affects the

um the viability of implementing this

solution

and how easy it would be to implement it

for developing countries however when i

was doing my research there wasn't much

out there about how difficult it would

be

to actually upkeep all these all this

vegetation along roadsides so that'd be

that's one question that's really

important

so same questions here does the

presenter provide

relevant evidence specific to their work

in their responses

in this case this response is going to

provide specific examples

that detail how the research question

evolved

so here's an example from her response

she says

all of my research pointed to the

adverse mental health effects

so i had to change my question to find a

solution

to the problem that was causing these

negative effects and that's why she

eventually ended up with a solutions

based question

the same trend follows for rubric row 2

does the presenter provide relevant

evidence specific to their work

in their responses and once again the

student does that

the response is specific it details

those specific areas for more research

to be considered

she says more research should be done on

how to upkeep the vegetation

since it could affect how much it costs

to support

and that is something that's specific

that could be that could be tied to

the need for more research so what

should we take away here

the effectiveness of your argument is

going to be dependent on the strength of

your claims

the strength of your evidence and the

strength of the analysis that you

provide

throughout the presentation thanks for

watching