Much of the public policy debate in the United States is oral debate. Advocates
appear on television and radio, before meetings and groups, and at the formal
hearings held by public agencies. Their task is to persuade listeners to accept
their analyses of a public issue and their prescriptions for policy change.
Their success depends, in large part, on the substantive intelligence of their
arguments and on their persuasive skills as oral advocates.
This course is about oral advocacy in a public policy setting. It provides opportunities
to develop oral arguments on controversial policy issues and then to present
them to a skeptical audience. The goal is to familiarize you with the settings
in which advocacy occurs and to the most common techniques for successful presentation
of policy views.
Office Location: Diamond 267
Phone: Office: Ext. 5306
Home: 666-8064
E-mail: gcmacken@colby.edu
Office hours:
Tuesday: 11:00-11:45; 2:15-3:00
Wednesday: 3:00 - 4:00
Thursday: 11:00-11:45; 2:15-3:00
No books have been ordered for the course. Readings will be selected by students and will be provided electronically.
Course grades will be determined in the following way.
Oral Presentation # 1 = 35%
Oral Presentation # 2 = 45%
Seminar Participation
and Evaluations = 20%
Feb 4. Introductory Meeting
Feb 11. Powerpoint Workshop
Feb 16. Dinner with Prof. Paul Light of NYU (5:30pm); Lecture by Paul Light, "Making Tough Decisions on the Policy Issues that Matter" (7:00pm)
Feb 18. The sale and use of drugs such as marijuana, heroin and cocaine should be legalized in the United States.
Advocate: Alyssa Cass
Opponent: Andy Cook
Feb 25. The death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment and should be abolished in the United States.
Advocate: Chris DeRoo
Opponent: Todd Boertzel
Mar 4. Affirmative action is a failed policy and should be eliminated. No preference should be granted by law to any person or group because of their race or gender.
Advocate: Alex Freyer
Opponent: Brandon Kessler
Mar 11. America's manned spacecraft program should be eliminated.
Advocate: Tim Porter
Opponent: Alea Thompson
Mar 18. The No Child Left Behind Act has made significant progress in accomplishing its objectives.
Advocate: Ben Wakana
Opponent: Colin Weiss
Mar 25. SPRING BREAK. NO SEMINAR MEETING.
Apr 1. The legal age for consumption of alcohol should be lowered in all states to 18.
Advocate: Kalli White
Opponent: Andy Cook
Apr 8. Physician-assisted suicide should be legal in the United States.
Advocate: Alyssa Cass
Opponent: Todd Boertzel
Apr 15. The United States should enact a national health insurance program similar to the one proposed by Barack Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign.
Advocate: Chris Deroo
Opponent: Alex Freyer
Apr 22. The current presidential nominating process in both parties is confusing and unfair and should be replaced with a national primary.
Advocate: Brandon Kessler
Opponent: Tim Porter
April 29. The manufacture, importation, sale, or possession of handguns or
handgun ammunition should be prohibited in the United States.
Advocate: Alea Thompson
Opponent: Ben Wakana
May 6. If America is ever to accomplish genuine energy independence, it must
construct more nuclear power plants and rely much more heavily on nuclear power.
Advocate: Collin Weiss
Opponent: Kalli White
Blue Team (Questions Advocate):
Todd Boertzel
Andy Cook
Alex Freyer
Tim Porter
Ben Wakana
Kalli White
Gray Team (Qustions Opponent):
Alyssa Cass
Chris DeRoo
Brandon Kessler
Alea Thompson
Collin Weiss
Policy Presentation
Every week, two people will present the case for alternative (usually opposite) courses of action on the same policy issue. They will be referred to as "advocates" and "opponents," and they will have the following responsibilities.
On the scheduled date, the advocate and the opponent will each make presentations of their positions to the class. The advocate will defend the proposition as written; the opponent will oppose it. Each will have a maximum of 30 minutes for the formal presentation. After both presentations have been completed, the advocate and the opponent will respond to questions from each other and from the class. During this question period, both will be expected to defend vigorously the positions they have taken.
The class will be divided into two teams. Each week, members of the Blue Team will pose questions to the advocate. Members of the Gray Team will pose questions to the opponent. All members of the class should participate in the questioning.
To assist the class in preparing for these meetings, the advocate and the opponent should each prepare reading materials that can be accessed electronically. This need not be original material; you may reproduce it from whatever source you choose. It may be material from the Internet. A listing of the assigned materials should be e-mailed to every member of the class, including the instructor, no later than 5 pm on the Friday before the presentation. URL addresses of assigned material on the Internet should also be included in the e-mail.
Though your presentation will be evaluated by other members of the seminar, grades will be my responsibility solely. After your presentation, I will meet with you personally to discuss it and the evaluations of it by your classmates. I will give you a grade at that time.
Your presentations will be digitally recorded and you will receive a copy on DVD for your review. In some cases, I may wish to review the video with you.
A note of caution. DO NOT READ YOUR PRESENTATION. Your grade will suffer grievously if you do. You may, of course, use notes or outlines. You should also feel free to use any visual aids or handouts that might strengthen your argument. You may not use Powerpoint during your first presentation, but you must use Powerpoint during your second presentation. I can provide technical help on this if you need it, and we will have a Powerpoint workshop before the second round of presentations.
Seminar Participation
Grades for seminar participation will be based on your contributions to the question period following each presentation and on the seriousness and perception reflected in your written evaluations of the presentations. Everyone is expected to attend and participate vigorously at every meeting.
To provide advocates and opponents with a range of reactions to their presentations, each member of the seminar will write an evaluation of each presentation. These must be e-mailed to me by noon on the day following the presentation. I will read them; then I will remove the evaluator's name from them and forward them to the person whose presentations they evaluate. The subjects of the evaluations, therefore, will not see the names of the individual evaluations. Your evaluations will not be a factor in the grades individuals receive for their presentations. Hence a critical evaluation will not affect the grade of the person you are evaluating. You should be candid and constructive in what you write. The evaluations should focus on the following points:
1. The utility of the assigned electronic readings.
2. The clarity and persuasiveness of the formal presentation.
3. The speaker's success in capturing and holding your interest.
4. The effectiveness of responses to questions.
5. The speaker's command of the issue.
6. The quality of the data and policy analyses on which the speaker relied.
[Last Updated: January 29, 2008, 5:22pm.]