Lesson video

Hello, everyone! My name is Ms. Kayla, and welcome to today's lesson.

In this lesson, we are going to have a go at writing our own speeches, and in particular, we're going to be exploring how we can make best use of rhetorical devices in order to persuade the audience.

So let's get started.

So by the end of today's lesson, we will be able to write an effective speech that uses a range of rhetorical devices to persuade the audience.

So let's explore today's key words.

We have refute, rhetorical devices, conclusion, authorial voice, and emphasise.

So do take a moment to make sure you are really familiar with all of these words because we're going to be encountering them quite a lot in today's lesson, but also I'd just like to draw your attention to rhetorical devices, 'cause that's a really important one that we're going to be focusing on today.

So these are techniques that we use in writing or speaking to persuade or impact the audience in some way.

So examples of rhetorical devices might include rhetorical questions, direct address, anecdotes, listing, hyperbole.

There are lots and lots of different examples that we can choose from.

So let's explore how the lesson is going to look.

In order to write the effective speech, we're going to first start off by really thinking about this authorial voice and how we create an authorial voice that's engaging.

And then when we've done that, we're going to focus on how we build a conclusion, and in particular, how we use our conclusion to be thought-provoking, to leave something for our audience members to think about after we've stopped speaking.

So once we've planned out the structure of our speech and we are ready to write, we can begin to think about authorial voice.

So voice entails how we communicate our perspective.

So it's always really important that we do that planning first because we need to know what that perspective is before we think about how we're going to communicate it.

So let's look at an example.

So Sam says, "Festivals are a blight on our parks.

It has been reported that a festival in a local area can be responsible for a 67% increase in litter and can cause lasting damage to our green spaces." So now let's compare that to another of our Oak pupil's speeches.

So Sofia says, "Imagine the scene.

It's a glorious spring day, you're with friends and you're about to take in the beauty of your local park.

However, after a large festival, it isn't blue bells and bumblebees you encounter, but broken bottles and bags of rubbish." So if we see here, both Sam and Sofia are communicating a similar idea.

They're both communicating this idea that festivals are in some way damaging to the local environment.

And in fact, they both communicates in the similar idea that litter is what is causing the damage to green spaces.

But my question to you is this: How does the voice vary in each? Because although they're communicating a similar idea, they're doing it in very different ways.

So take a moment to read each example carefully and think about how each pupil is really using their authorial voice.

Perhaps make some notes if you're working on your own, on your paper or on your laptop, or if you're working with others, take a moment to share your views with the people around you.

So pause the video here and click play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, welcome back.

Some really interesting discussions that I overheard there, and I could see people really actually drilling down into examples from each of these students, which really shows the type of voice that they're using.

So let's explore that in a bit more detail.

So, arguably, Sam has a much more serious and formal voice.

Her use of words like green spaces and blight achieves this, as does the use of statistics.

So in particular, she has chosen a rhetorical device here that perhaps we might associate with more formal types of transactional writing.

So therefore, using this perhaps more formal rhetorical device helps to create that serious and formal voice.

Sofia, however, has a much more conversational and sarcastic authorial voice.

The use of imperative, such as imagine, there in that first sentence, and direct address, you're with friends, you're about to take in the beauty of your local park, really helps to bring out that conversational aspect of the speech because direct address is a great way to grab the reader's attention.

You are directly referring to them using that second person pronoun.

So here, it is helping to create a conversational voice because a speaker is feeling included in that discussion.

They're not just feeling like they're being spoken to.

Also, we have lots of alliteration, which really helps to shift the pace, perhaps even slow it down or speed it up, depending on which examples you're using.

But we have broken bottles, bags of rubbish, it draws attention to that image of the litter.

And she also really cleverly uses contrast, particularly with the B sounds, and I think it's very effective the way that she does it.

So we have, "It isn't bluebells and bumblebees, it's broken bottles and bags of rubbish." So we've really got those links there in the sounds which helps to emphasise that contrast.

So as we can see, we've got two very different examples of how we can use voice to explain the same point in a very different way.

So ultimately, we can vary our authorial voice to best appeal to the audience of our piece.

So chances are both Sam and Sofia here are delivering a speech to different types of people and they've chosen the different voices in order to best relate to their audience.

So for our task, our audience are local residents.

So which authorial voice below do you think would work best for this speech? So pause the video here while you think, make your mind up, and even better, think of some reasons to justify which one you've chosen, and when you're ready for us to feedback together, click play and we'll continue.

Okay, welcome back.

So which of these two pupils then do you think has the right authorial voice for a speech to local residents? Well, I would argue, probably, Sofia's authorial voice is a bit more appropriate for this type of speech, because a less formal, more conversational tone will work best with local people.

They will respond best to a speaker they can relate to.

If, for example, the speech was perhaps given to local counsellors or local business owners and so was taken place in a much more formal setting, then I would argue that Sam's authorial voice would be much more appropriate in this case.

So we can also vary the authorial voice across a speech to shift the tone to suit each section of it.

So yes, we choose our authorial voice for the entire speech and we make it appropriate or we try to tailor it to our audience, but actually, even across the speech itself, we can vary it.

Why do you think that this could be particularly effective to vary this authorial voice across a speech? So pause at the video here while you have a think, share your ideas with the people around you or make some notes, and when you're ready for us to feedback together, click play.

Okay, welcome back.

So why could it be particularly effective then? Well, you may have said something like this: "A speech is the only type of non-fiction text where the delivery is just as important as the context." If we think about the other types of transactional writing or non-fiction texts that we might be asked to produce, for example, a letter, a report, a review, an article, all of these come as a hard copy and we have a reader who would then read and engage with the words.

However, when we have a speech, we are writing the speech and then we are delivering the speech, and that is how our audience receives the words.

They receive them when they are delivered by the speaker.

So in this way, the delivery or the performance is just as important as the content.

So for example, a speech that's too playful might not be taken seriously, particularly if we're talking about a serious issue, but we've got a really playful tone, then perhaps our audience won't really realise the gravity of the situation.

Whereas a speech that's overly serious may be less engaging, like we just saw with that example there from Sam.

If she'd perhaps carried on with that formal tone, she might not have been able to engage local people in the way that she wanted to.

So it's really important to choose which rhetorical devices to use so that you can tailor the voice to suit the message of each part of your speech.

So you might want to, for example, begin with a more playful conversational tone in order to seem relatable to your audience, but then perhaps when you come on to talking about your evidence or some statistics you have, or just if you want to really emphasise the gravity of the situation, you might want to shift into a more serious voice at that point.

So let's have a look at an example.

So Jun is using a single paragraph outline to plan one of his paragraphs about whether festivals should be banned in detail.

So if we look at his topic sentence, festivals cause widespread damage to the local environment through pollution and litter, so we know that Jun is arguing that festivals should be banned.

And then as a supporting detail continues, he lists which rhetorical devices he's going to use in this paragraph.

So he's going to use imagery to paint a scene of the aftermath of a festival, he's going to use an anecdote, showing that he understands local issues because of a personal example, and he is also going to use hyperbole to dramatise the consequences of the damage to the local environment.

And then by his concluding sentence, he's gonna begin with "all jokes aside" and shift to a serious message.

And this contrast in tone, he thinks, will draw attention to his final message.

So my question to you is why is this an effective way to use voice? So take a look at how he's varying the voice across the course of this paragraph and think about how this might be really effective in having impact on his audience and helping them to be persuaded by his arguments.

So pause the video here while you take some time to think, discuss it, make some notes, and when you're ready for us to feedback together, click play.

Okay, welcome back.

So you could hear lots of people debating the different reasons why they thought this was a particularly effective way to use voice.

So let's just summarise some of the ideas that I overheard.

So if we track how the voice shifts across this paragraph, Jun starts by creating a relatable conversational voice.

So he's quite direct with his topic sentence so we know what the argument is.

And then when we get into this supporting detail, he's using rhetorical devices in order to get the audience on his side, particularly while he's discussing the damage that festivals cause.

So we've got devices like imagery, hyperbole, both of which are gonna help to really dramatise the effect that festivals are going to have on the local area.

And we could probably assume that local residents, his audience, are going to care about the local area.

So this is something that's really gonna grab their attention because they're not gonna want to see that damage happen.

So imagining it is really gonna get their intention and engage them with a speech.

And then he also uses an anecdote, which is a great way of showing that you are a relatable speaker because you are giving them a personal example from your own life.

So quite often, anecdotes are a great way to get your audience to relate to you.

So here, he's building that relationship with the audience, wanting to seem relatable, but also really emphasising the issue that he's there to speak about.

And then in the concluding sentence, he shifts to a more serious message or "jokes aside." So he's built up this dramatised version of it, and now he's shifting to a serious message to really drive that central argument and be as persuasive as he can be.

So let's pause here and check our understanding.

True or false, an opinion piece will always have a serious voice.

So pause the video here while you take some time to think, and when you're ready for me to reveal the correct answer, click play and we'll continue.

Okay, welcome back, and well done to those of you who said false.

So why is that? Well, the voice of our writing will vary depending on the form and audience of our writing.

And also, as we've just discovered, it can vary across the course of a text in order to really have as much impact as it can.

So now we're on to the first practise task of today's lesson.

So here is Jun's single paragraph outline again that we were looking at before, and what I would like you to do is to write up this persuasive paragraph using Jun's plan as your skeleton.

And what we'd like you to do is vary your authorial voice to engage the audience.

So think really carefully about the journey that Jun was going on with that paragraph.

So he was starting in a way that was quite relatable, trying to get the audience on his side, and then by the end, shifting to that serious message.

So do bear that in mind as you're writing the paragraph.

And also we need to remember that the audience are local residents.

So all the time, we need to have in the back of our heads how can we use our voice to make ourselves seem relatable to them.

To think what their priorities are, think about what sort of people you imagine they might be, and then choose your voice to suit.

So pause the video here, take as much time as you need to give this a really good go, and make sure you're using all of those fantastic rhetorical devices from the single paragraph outline.

So pause the video and click play when you're ready for us to feedback together.

Okay, welcome back.

How did you find that task? How was using lots of different rhetorical devices? Did you find it easy to vary your voice as you went through the paragraph? Well, let's see how Jun got on when he wrote up the paragraph from his plan.

He said, "Festivals wreak havoc on the environment, leaving behind a trail of pollution and litter that scars our community.

Picture the scene: the morning after a festival, fields a strewn with discarded bottles, plastic wrappers and broken tents, remnants of a night filled with drunkenness and disorder.

I recall one such event near my hometown, where usually serene park was left in shambles, with local wildlife visibly distressed by the sudden influx of waste.

The damage to our environment is staggering; every festival leaves behind a trail of destruction that could take years to repair.

All jokes aside, we must seriously consider the long-term impact on our communities and recognise that the environmental cost of these festivals is simply too high to ignore." So now it's time for you to review your paragraph.

So think really carefully, did you begin a clearly stating your argument in that first sentence, ideally? Did you use imagery as per the single paragraph outline to convey the destruction festival's cause? Did you use an anecdote to show your understanding and seem relatable to the audience? Did you use hyperbole to really emphasise the consequences for local people in your audience? And finally, did you shift to that serious voice at the end of the paragraph? So take a moment to review what you've written and check that you've managed to do all of the things on that single paragraph outline.

If you haven't, don't worry, this is a golden opportunity for you to redraft.

So take a moment to see if there's anything that you can add in.

Feel free to magpie or borrow some ideas here from Jun's response if you need to.

So pause the video here and click play when you're ready to continue.

So we've made it to the halfway point of today's lesson.

So I hope you're really pleased with everything that you have achieved so far, and I hope that you're feeling a lot more confident when it comes to creating that engaging authorial voice.

So now we've got our voice and we've started to think about how we might write the speech, let's really focus on how we're going to create a thought-provoking conclusion.

So let's start by recapping some useful rhetorical devices.

So we have talked about some already in the lesson, and I'm sure that there are others there on that list on the left that you are familiar with, perhaps you've used before.

So take a moment to read through this paragraph.

Can you identify each of these devices in the conclusion? So pause the video here and click play when you're ready for us to feedback together.

Okay, welcome back.

Did you manage to identify all of the rhetorical devices? So let's go through it together and see where they all were.

So first of all, we had anaphora there in the second sentence with the repetition of that "festivals bring." We've got alliteration up there in the first sentence.

Businesses booming, repetition of that B sound.

Hyperbole.

Festivals aren't just events; they're the heartbeat of rural prosperity.

Festivals are just events, so in a way, we're exaggerating there.

They're not necessarily the key reason why rural communities manage to succeed or be prosperous.

Rhetorical question, we've got two there next to each other.

"Can't you" and "who wouldn't want to see." Direct address, "You can almost feel it, can't you?" So we're really engaging the audience there.

Onomatopoeia, we've got two examples.

We've got booming at the top there and the clang of cash registers down there in the middle.

Analogies.

So we've got that keyword there that should help us to know it's an analogy.

"Like a spark igniting a fire," we've got that comparison.

"They energise rural communities, much as a breath of fresh air." So we've got two there.

Sensory language, we've got the clang, which is a sound, aroma, which links to smells, and the sights of happy crowds.

So three different senses there.

Personification.

"Festivals energised rural communities," "They're the heartbeat of rural prosperity." And then finally, we've got listing down there at the bottom.

We've got that list of three.

They're the heartbeat, the key, and the reason.

So when we write speeches, we are aiming to grab the audience's attention, seem relatable to the audience, and emphasise key messages.

These are our three primary aims when we are giving a persuasive speech.

So what I'd like you to think about is how these different rhetorical devices link to these three key aims. So if we must have to sort the devices according to which of these effects they have, what order would you put them in? So which, how would you group them together? Which of these do you think grab the audience's attention, which do you think helps you to seem relatable, and which do you think emphasises key messages? So pause the video here while you take some time to think, makes some notes, or discuss it, and when you're ready for us to feedback together, click play.

Welcome back.

I could hear lots of fierce debate there, with people not necessarily agreeing what they thought the main effect of each of these devices were.

So in my opinion, I would've sorted them in the following way: For grabbing the audience's attention, I would've chosen devices like hyperbole, rhetorical questions, and onomatopoeia, because these are all quite dramatic devices.

They help to dramatise what you're saying and really snap the audience out.

Their attention was beginning to wander, they make sure that their attention snaps back to your speech when you use these three devices.

To seem relatable to the audience then, we've got that direct address.

We're speaking to them, they feel included.

We've got analogies and sensory language, and both of these really help audience members to imagine what you are saying in their minds.

So that's a really great way to seem relatable to the audience.

And finally, emphasise key messages then.

We've got anaphora, alliteration, hyperbole, again, 'cause I think I would argue that it's got two functions here, personification, and listing.

So we've got this idea that these all draw attention to particular sentences, particular ideas, and particular arguments that you're making.

They make them stand out against the rest of what you are saying.

So the most effective speeches will use rhetorical devices to grab the audience's attention, seem relatable to the audience, and emphasise these key messages.

So the most effective speeches will do all three of these things.

And it's particularly important to do this during the conclusion.

So why do you think that is? What's the point of a conclusion? Why do we write one? What are we aiming to do in a conclusion? Where does it come in the speech, for example? So pause the video here while you have a think and discuss it, or make some notes, and when you're ready for us to go through it together, click play.

Okay, welcome back.

So why did we think this was? Well done if you were picking up on this idea that the conclusion is your final paragraph, it comes at the very end of your speech, which means it is your last chance to persuade the audience and end on a memorable note.

This is right before you're gonna stop speaking, so this is a point where you need to throw everything you've got at that last chance attempt to persuade your audience.

So based on that, what do you think a good conclusion should aim to do? So pause the video while you discuss it, make some notes, and when you're ready for us to feedback together, click play.

Okay, welcome back.

So had lots of great suggestions there.

So just to summarise, a good conclusion should summarise key ideas from your speech and end with a catchy, thought-provoking statement that will stay with people.

So you've got two real key aims to a conclusion.

We need to sum up everything that we've already covered so far, and then introduce this one final, catchy, thought-provoking statement that is gonna really stay with people and get them thinking about the topic you've been talking about.

So let's review Sam's conclusion alongside her plan.

So we've already read through this 'cause this was the same paragraph that we were just using to analyse and identify those rhetorical devices.

So if you think about that in relation to her plan, so her core message is that music festivals helped to put isolated rural communities on the map.

And then the key ideas that she had covered throughout the paragraphs of her speech were that festivals boost tourism, that they generate jobs, and then for a counter argument, while pollution is upsetting, surely the boost to the economy outweighs this.

This is what she needs to summarise.

So what do you think makes this an effective conclusion? Has she covered everything that she needed to in her plan, and how thought-provoking and memorable do we think it is? So pause the video here while you reread Sam's conclusion and think about what really makes it effective.

Pause the video here and click play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, welcome back.

So what makes this an effective conclusion then? Well, we've definitely got this idea that she's summarising her key ideas really well.

Festivals bring money, bring jobs, bring life.

And actually, really cleverly, she has summed up the different ideas that she's covered throughout her speech using anaphora.

So she's really drawing attention to those key ideas.

She is also working really hard to grab the audience's attention.

So we've got lots of rhetorical devices here that are really grabbing their attention.

"Picture this," we're starting with that imperative.

It'll be hard for her audience not to imagine this scene when she's starting with that direct command.

We've also got analogies to really help her audience to imagine those with the descriptions, and then we've got rhetorical questions, "who wouldn't want to see these communities flourishing?" And really cleverly, she's phrasing it in such a way that it would be unlikely for anybody to really disagree with that question.

Who wouldn't want to see these communities flourishing? Well, everybody would want to see communities flourishing.

I can't see any reason why anybody wouldn't except she's not necessarily linked that to the festival.

So people who disagree with it, they disagree with it not because they don't want to see communities flourishing, but they've got lots of other reasons.

So she's really cleverly twisting that opposite view there.

And finally, she works really hard to seem relatable to the audience.

So we're getting these use of sensory descriptions in order to really help them imagine what it would be like to be at a music festival.

And also this, you can almost feel it, can't you, that direct address to really make them feel included in the discussion.

So the next question then, does it end with a thought-provoking message? Because she summarised her ideas well, she's also meeting those aims of a great speech by grabbing the audience's attention and seeming relatable, so the last important thing that she needs to do with that conclusion is end with that thought-provoking message.

So take a moment to just read the end of this conclusion.

Do you think it is thought-provoking? And if you do, why? And if you don't, why not? What do you think she might need to do differently next time? So pause the video while you think, discuss, take some notes, and when you're ready for us to feedback together, click play.

Okay, welcome back.

So I've just isolated that last sentence there at the top so we can see it.

This is Sam's final message.

"Festivals aren't just events; they're the heartbeat of rural prosperity, the key to growth, the reason to celebrate." So a real what went well for the end of this speech, a real great effective thing that Sam does is ends with that list, driving that core message, also using that personification as well.

The heartbeat, hyperbole, the heartbeat of rural prosperity.

But does this sentence really get the audience thinking? I would argue no, because Sam is actually telling them what to think here.

She's saying festival aren't just events, this is what they are.

So is she really encouraging them to think for themselves? I'm not sure she is.

So really, a final sentence should aim to persuade the audience to be invested in the issue you've raised.

So why should they care about the problems you've described? And a great way to do this is to consider what the world would be like if the opposite to your argument was true.

Because this demonstrates why what you are pushing for is so important.

So an example of how Sam could have done this is she could have said, for example, "Imagine missing out on the opportunity to turn your local community into a hub of cultural activity." So she's really, she's using hyperbole here to dramatise how great it would be to have a festival in the local area, and then saying, "Imagine missing out on that golden opportunity." So this is a great way to get the audience to think, "Oh no, she's right, I would be missing out," and therefore this could move them to be persuaded by your arguments.

So let's pause and check our understanding.

A good conclusion will do what? Pause the video here while you make your mind up, and when you're ready for me to reveal the correct answer, click play.

Okay, welcome back, and well done to those of you who said A and C, it will summarise the key ideas and leave the audience with a thought-provoking message.

And actually, you should avoid introducing any new ideas in the conclusion as you won't be able to fully develop those arguments in the amount of space you have left.

So now we're on to the final practise task of today's lesson.

So earlier, we helped Jun to write a paragraph of his speech using that authorial voice, so now we are going to have a go at writing the conclusion.

So here is Jun's plan.

So his core message is music festivals cause damage to rural communities.

And his key ideas, so he's gonna focus on the environmental concern, so the pollution, the litter.

And he is gonna focus on how they encourage anti-social behaviour.

And then for his counter argument, he focuses on while pollution is upsetting, surely the boost to the economy outweighs this.

So that's how he's gonna refute that.

So when you are writing this conclusion, you should aim to: Summarise all the key points from his speech.

You've got that plan in order to help you do that.

Use lots of rhetorical devices to grab the audience's attention, emphasise those key messages, and seem relatable to the audience.

And end with that all important thought-provoking message.

So pause the video here while you take as much time as you need to write a really effective conclusion.

And when you're ready for us to go through it together, click play and we'll continue.

Okay, welcome back.

So here is how Jun wrote up his paragraph.

"In conclusion, while music festivals might seem like a boost to the local economy, we cannot ignore the ugly reality: they leave behind a trail of pollution, litter, and environmental destruction.

They disrupt the peace, disturb the wildlife, and degrade the very land they claim to celebrate.

Festivals often encourage reckless behaviour, with drunkenness and disorder becoming all too common.

Can we really justify these costs for a short-term economic gain? Imagine this: the rustle of leaves replaced by the rustle of trash, peaceful nights shattered by rowdy revellers.

Is this the future we want for our rural communities? What if we lost these cherished landscapes forever? Festivals might bring a brief burst of profit, but the long-term loss could be something we can never recover from." So now it's time for you to review your paragraph, thinking about the important things we needed to include in the conclusion.

So first of all, did you summarise the key points from the speech? They were the key points from Jun's plan.

So we had this idea of the pollution and the litter, environmental destruction, and we also had how festivals encourage that reckless behaviour.

And then his counter argument was, can we really justify all of this damage for that short-term economic gain? So we did have this idea that he's covered and summarised everything from early on in his speech.

Did you use rhetorical devices to grab the reader's attention? So we've got lots of sensory descriptions here, we've got some repetition, we've got rhetorical questions, we've got lots of different things about trying to grab the reader's attention.

We've got the use of an imperative, "imagine this," and we've also got the use of that personal pronoun, we, direct address to seem relatable to the audience.

And finally, did you use rhetorical devices to emphasise the key messages? So here, we've got lots of listing, we had some alliteration.

What are you doing to really emphasise those key ideas? And last of all, did you end with that thought-provoking message? "What if we lost these cherished landscapes forever?" We've got that rhetorical question that's really thinking about the consequences, thinking about what the world would be like if the opposite were true.

So take some time to review your paragraph, and if you've missed anything, that's okay.

This is a brilliant opportunity for you to redraft and add anything in.

So pause the video here and click play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, so you've made it to the end of the lesson and a massive well done for all your hard work today.

I hope you're feeling a lot more confident when it comes to using authorial voice and constructing an effective conclusion.

So let's just summarise what we've covered in today's lesson.

The status of the recipient defined in your task will indicate the level of formality required in the speech.

Take a clear stance for or against the statement; alternative arguments should be refuted at least once in the piece.

We can employ rhetorical devices to seem relatable to the audience, grab their attention, and emphasise key messages.

The conclusion is your final chance to persuade the audience so use as many relevant rhetorical devices as you can.

And finally, a great way to end your speech is to consider what the consequences would be if people don't take action.

So thanks again for joining me in today's lesson.

I hope that you've enjoyed it as much as I have, and I look forward to seeing you again soon.

Have a fantastic day.