You have been asked to analyse the arguments these groups are presenting in the leaflets they have been distributing, and provide her with a clear understanding of their claims, and guidance on how it would be best to respond to facilitate a constructive and respectful discussion.
Resources : – You have been provided with a dossier of relevant material (the leaflets are below, others are available in iLearn). It contains:
Councillor Lee thinks this meeting may have significant consequences for the peace of the community, and wants as much supporting information as possible. What she really wants from you is to know what the strengths and weaknesses of each side’s arguments are. She is keen to know if there are any fallacious arguments or misleading rhetoric that she might point out to counter the claims made in the leaflets. She is also interested in their use of the surveys they cite. On the more positive side, she is looking to see if there is any common ground between the opposing sides, and whether there is any way she can encourage a constructive and respectful debate, to move forward as a community.
With all that in mind, then, here’s what you need to deliver :
A standardisation of the argument used in the ‘Change for our future’ leaflet.
A standardisation of the argument used in the ‘Pride in Australia’ leaflet.
An analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments, as you’ve standardised them. (approx. 600-850 words on each argument). You should consider the strength of the inferences, any fallacies, their use of the polls they cite and the authors’ use of language and rhetoric.
A one page (approx. 300 word) “recommendation” briefing. What points should Councillor Lee emphasise in her response to the arguments? What points should she make the focus of her own positive response at the meeting? How can she best encourage a respectful and constructive debate?
#Scenario #Public #Response #Research