Vidisha – Feedback – Practice Presentation 30 th August 2013

 You must introduce your presentation with a stronger tone.

 Are you going to have cue cards? You really shouldn’t hold your computer
during the formal presentation. And you shouldn’t read. You will actually
get marked down for that.
 I think your introduction of your RLS is too long – too much long winded
explanation. Ideally its good, but we don’t have the time. You must
introduce the facts about your RLS and make the link between that and
your KI. You COULD give more detail later if it fits e.g. the role of the
antagonist and the use of the car.
 You link between your RLS and your KI I don’t think is strong enough. You
must present that you think what happened was exploitation “and
therefore….. (KI)”.
 Your description of WWE could be more concise. E.g. we don’t need the
detail about the different types Raw and Smackdown.
 Which dictionary are you using?
 Oh, you need to say “McMahon” correctly too.
 What evidence that you have that the money was going to profit for
themselves? (have I asked that already?) If you don’t have this evidence it
may be your own knowers perspective that this is that reason why they
used eddie guerrero and therefore it is exploitation.
 You need to stress the point that the family only knew about the show
when it aired, and therefore did not give written permission. You should
stress this on a slide, and conclude that this form of exploitation is
involuntary – only if ‘involuntary vs voluntary’ is a key part of your overall
conclusion.
 Sometimes your text is too small and difficult to see e.g. “Wrestlers and
their families is difficult to see – and my attention is drawn to the word
‘knowers’ instead. It should probably be the other way around in terms of
size (but not so small for the smaller one)
 When you start to talk about how emotional his family was and then how
there was merchandising and the antagonist was cursing eddie out, this
section is way too descriptive and does not discuss the KI. There should
be a TOK discussion of how emotion and language is used to KNOW that
this is exploitation and therefore the wrong thing to do. A prolonged
explanation does not gain you any TOK marks.
 Vince McMahon has made a claim that he cannot know for certain “eddie
would have wanted it that way. He has used this as justification for his
actions. Do you believe this to be a true claim? Or do you think McMahon
knows its exploitation – i.e. “Everything is fair in business”. This may be
evidence in language to suggest it doesn’t matter if it is exploitation or not,
and therefore he might be saying that it is not wrong to exploit.
 Your quote of your slide for the script writer is far too long. Focus on the
most important part of the quote. You must have his name as a title, not
“knowers”
 Far too much description of the script writers account. Reduce the quotes
to the bare essentials and then analyse it for its knowledge.
 I don’t see how you have analysed the situation for ethics. What ethical
premises have you used? Your slide does not support your content well in
this case. You have the definitions of utilitarianism and deontological
ethics – and you don’t need to make the definitions so long winded – but
you don’t present the basic arguments for your topic. You need more clear
justification of how people are happy or unhappy. This is too brief a
discussion.
 For kate + 8 you have a claim that someone has made that the kids are
being exploited. This is important to your argument so you must make
emphasis on this and use their knowers perspective to argue why.
 After the KI slide (which is good to reinforce) the text is too small to read
properly therefore it is ineffective.
 Are their any laws you can quote regarding exploitation of minors in the
US?
 I think you are going too much into depth with your 2 nd RLS. The purpose
of this 2nd RLS is simply to give a contrast/comparison to your 1 st RLS, e.g.
when you discuss ethics, you should be discussing the similarities and key
differences to Kate + 8 alongside WWE. That is the whole point. You don’t
need to do a whole presentation on this RLS.
 What is your 2nd AOK? Ethics and…….?
 Your slide with the criteria for justification must be more clear. As there is
a lot of explanation it is sometimes difficult to pick up when you have said
it has or has not met the criteria. You can do this with explicitly clear
phrases like “Yes, this meets the criteria because…..” and/or you can add
ticks to the margin of the of each criteria as you explain them.
 As your conclusion says both of them are not ethically justified, it is difficult
to say that you have provided argument for it ever being justified. Also,
you have only given this conclusion with reference to these two situations
only – what about ANY situation of exploitation? How is your audience
going to KNOW if they are in a situation of exploitation what to think of it?
You must make your conclusion universal so that you are treating the
knowledge rather than just these situations.