Week 11 · Chapter

Chapter 11 — Informative Speaking

Public Speaking Free sample edition

The module's primary reading · ~40–50 minutes · Objective 7 (compose and deliver an informative speech that teaches without an agenda and a persuasive speech that moves an audience ethically using the three appeals (ethos, pathos, logos), sound reasoning (inductive, deductive, causal, analogical; claim, evidence, warrant), and an awareness of the common logical fallacies, on a topic from the pinned non-partisan roster), Objective 3 (choose and narrow a topic, write a general purpose, a well-formed specific purpose, and a central idea, and support the speech with credible examples, statistics, and testimony that are evaluated for credibility and cited aloud in a complete oral citation naming who, what, and when — never fabricated, never plagiarized) · Read it first this week; the lecture, the slide deck, the tutorial, the quiz, and the Speech Workshop all build on it.

In plain language

This week you give the term's first big speech: an informative speech (a speech that teaches an audience something without taking a side). You learn three quick tests that tell you whether your purpose teaches or quietly argues. You learn to sort a speech by what it is about and pick a shape that fits. You learn eight moves that make a speech easy to follow and hard to forget. And you learn the promise every informative speaker makes: report the evidence whole, and check every number a chatbot hands you before you say it out loud.

Why you already care about this

At a neighborhood meeting on a weeknight, about 25 neighbors sit on folding chairs in a library basement. A volunteer stands up to explain how the new curbside recycling pickup works. She covers the bin colors and the pickup days in 2 clear minutes. Then she says, "Honestly, the old system was better," and spends the next 3 minutes on why. The neighbors who liked the change stop taking notes and start whispering. The scene is illustrative and attributed to no one.

Nothing she said about the bins was wrong. What went wrong was the job. She came to teach, and halfway through she started to argue. The neighbors who disagreed with her stopped learning, because they were busy defending themselves. You have sat in that audience, and you have probably given that speech too.

An informative speech keeps one promise: everyone in the room leaves knowing more, whatever they believed when they walked in. This chapter shows you how to keep that promise on purpose, using the running speech about the campus dining hall's plate waste.

By the end of this chapter you will be able to:

tell an informative speech from a persuasive one, and test an informative specific purpose three ways;
sort an informative speech by its subject and choose the pattern that usually suits it;
place the four clarity strategies and the four retention strategies on real moments in a speech;
report a source's whole finding, and say a complete oral citation before the evidence;
build, rehearse, and check the running speech end to end, including a chatbot draft verified at the source.

Carry this sentence with you: teach the whole room — not only the people who agree.

Where we are

Already covered: Weeks 1 to 10 built every part of a speech: the audience, the purpose and central idea, the evidence and its oral citations, the pattern, the two outlines, the words, the delivery, and the aids.
This week: the informative speech itself, its three purpose tests, the five subjects this course sorts it by, eight strategies for clarity and retention, the accuracy and objectivity promise, and the running speech built end to end.
How they connect: every earlier week's piece goes into one finished speech, so this week is the first time you deliver the whole thing as a graded headline speech.
Where we're going next: Week 12 turns the same running speech into a persuasive speech, built on the three appeals and Monroe's Motivated Sequence.

Here is what each earlier week hands you now. Week 2 gave you the audience profile: about thirty first-year students who eat in the dining hall. Week 3 gave you the general purpose (to inform), the specific purpose, and the central idea, and it drew the first line between informing and persuading: inform teaches; persuade moves. Week 4 gave you three real sources and their oral citations. Weeks 5 and 6 gave you the topical pattern, the preparation outline, and five speaking-outline cards. Week 7 wrote your sentences for the ear. Week 9 gave you the delivery self-assessment table, and Week 10 gave you two aids. This week you put all of it on one stage.

1. The informative speech: teach without taking a side

Think about the last time someone taught you something useful out loud. A coworker showed you how the new time-clock app works. A coach walked your team through a new drill. A pharmacist explained when to take a prescription. None of them asked you to vote, buy, or change your mind. They wanted you to leave knowing how something works.

That is the informative job. Its four verbs are teach, describe, explain, and demonstrate, and none of them asks your audience to change a view or take an action.

An informative speech is a speech whose job is to teach, describe, explain, or demonstrate something to an audience without taking a side, so listeners leave knowing more rather than believing or doing something new.

Week 3 drew the line in four words: inform teaches; persuade moves. This week you sharpen that line with three tests. An informative specific purpose (the one-sentence goal for a speech that teaches) is a specific purpose for an informative speech. It passes three tests:

It starts "To inform".
It describes or explains rather than advocates.
A listener who disagrees with the outcome would still feel fairly treated.

The third test is the one people skip, and it is the most useful. Picture the listener who would hate where your topic is heading. Would that person feel your speech gave them a fair account? If yes, you are informing. If no, you have drifted into persuading.

Worked example — three drafts, three tests. The two flawed drafts are illustrative and attributed to no one.

Three specific-purpose drafts for the running speech, checked against the three informative tests
Draft	Starts "To inform"	Explains, not advocates	Fair to a listener who disagrees	Tests passed
"To inform my audience about how our campus dining hall handles its plate waste."	Yes	Yes	Yes	3 of 3
Draft A: "To discuss food waste in the dining hall."	No	Yes	Yes	2 of 3
Draft B: "To inform my audience why our dining hall should remove its trays."	Yes	No	No	1 of 3

Walk the drafts one at a time. The running speech's version starts "To inform", it explains how something is handled, and a listener who likes trays or hates them would still feel fairly treated. It passes 3 of 3 tests.

Draft A fails the first test, because "to discuss" names an activity, not a teaching goal. A discussion can go anywhere; a teaching goal says what the audience will know at the end. It passes 2 of 3 tests.

Draft B is the sneaky one. It starts "To inform", so it looks fine at a glance. But "should remove" advocates, and a listener who wants trays would not feel fairly treated. It passes 1 of 3 tests.

The tally across the three drafts: 3 + 2 + 1 = 6 tests passed out of 3 × 3 = 9 checks run. Only the running speech's version passes every test, so it is the one you keep. In words: the words "To inform" at the front do not make a purpose informative; the rest of the sentence has to teach too.

The same check runs on the central idea. Here is the running speech's central idea:

"A dining hall's plate waste is measured by weighing what comes back on plates, targeted by changing how food is served, and diverted through donation and composting."

It is one declarative sentence, it states the message, and it takes no side. Compare an arguing central idea (illustrative): "Our dining hall must go trayless to stop wasting food." The word "must" turns a message into a verdict. That sentence belongs to a persuasive speech, and Week 12 is where you write one.

Misconception check. Students often write "My purpose is to discuss…" or hand in an informative central idea that argues, such as "Renewable energy is our only hope." Both feel safe. "Discuss" sounds academic, and a strong opinion sounds like a strong thesis. The cure is the three tests. Swap "discuss" for "inform my audience about", then read your central idea as the listener who disagrees would hear it. If that listener would feel pushed, cut the verdict words ("must", "should", "only", "best") and say what is true instead.

2. Sort by subject: match the subject to a pattern

Picture three friends planning three short talks for a club meeting. One will explain how a bike's gears work. One will tell the story of the club's founding. One will explain what "burnout" means. Each talk needs a different shape, and the subject points to it. A gear system has parts. A founding has a timeline. A word like burnout needs a definition and examples.

This course sorts informative speeches by what they are about. The grouping is the course's own; other treatments sort informative speeches differently, so the count is taught in words and no quiz asks you to recite it. Each subject has a pattern that usually suits it:

A speech about a thing or place is an informative speech on an object, a structure, or a location, such as the parts of the eye; it usually suits a spatial pattern or a topical pattern by parts.
A speech about a person is an informative speech on someone's life or work; it usually suits a chronological pattern or a topical pattern that groups the person's roles.
A speech about an event is an informative speech on something that happened, such as a lunar landing; it usually suits a chronological pattern or a causal pattern.
A speech about a process is an informative speech on how something works or is done, such as how a search engine indexes a page; it usually suits a chronological pattern.
A speech about an idea is an informative speech on a concept, theory, or principle, such as confirmation bias; it usually suits a topical pattern built on definitions, examples, and an analogy.

Worked example — five subjects, five patterns. All five topics are illustrative and attributed to no one.

Five illustrative informative topics sorted by subject, with the pattern that usually suits each
Topic	Subject	Pattern that usually suits it
The parts of the eye	A thing	Spatial or topical by parts
A grandparent's career driving a city bus	A person	Chronological or topical
A lunar landing	An event	Chronological or causal
How a search engine indexes a page	A process	Chronological
Confirmation bias	An idea	Topical, built on definitions, examples, and an analogy

That makes 5 subjects, each with a pattern that usually suits it. Notice the word "usually." The subject suggests a pattern; it does not order one.

Now sort the running speech. How a dining hall handles plate waste reads as a process, which usually suits chronological order. Week 5 even built that version: a tray's path from the serving line to the bin. Then Week 5 set it aside. The audience's question is "how is it handled", not "what happens first", so the speech stays topical, with one main point each for measuring, targeting, and diverting. That is Week 5's decision logic at work: name the purpose, ask which logic fits the audience's question, then pick the pattern.

Misconception check. Students often pick a subject and then grab whatever pattern feels easy, or they line up three interesting facts with no central idea holding them together. Both are tempting, because each fact feels like progress. The cure is two questions asked in order. First: what is my one message? Second: which pattern carries that message to this audience? A list of facts with no central idea is a pile, not a speech, and a subject with no matching pattern leaves the listener without a map.

3. Clarity and retention: make it clear, then make it stick

Think of the best explainer you have ever heard, maybe a lab partner who finally made a concept click, or a trainer at a first job. Two things were true. You understood them the first time, and you still remembered the point a week later. Those are two different achievements, and an informative speaker works on both.

Clarity strategies are the four moves an informative speaker uses so listeners understand the message the first time: organization and signposting, defining terms, examples and analogies, and managing the information load.

Retention strategies are the four moves an informative speaker uses so listeners remember the message after the speech: relevance, novelty, repetition with variation, and vivid support.

Two of those need their own definitions before you use them. The information load is the amount of new material a speech asks listeners to take in at once, managed by keeping one main idea per main point and a few strong pieces of support. An analogy is a comparison that explains something unfamiliar by showing how it works like something the audience already knows.

How many main points should an informative speech have? Advice runs from two to five, most often three, and this course teaches that range in words rather than as a rule. The running speech has three, and that is a choice for a five-minute speech, not a law.

Worked example — eight strategies on one speech. You place each strategy on 1 moment of the running speech. The definition and the analogy are illustrative wording.

The running speech's eight clarity and retention strategies, each placed on one moment
Strategy	Kind	The moment in the running speech
Organization and signposting	Clarity	Your preview names all three points, and the signpost "Second, and separate from donation" marks your place inside point III.
Defining terms	Clarity	"Plate waste means the food diners leave on their plates and send back to the dish-return window."
Examples and analogies	Clarity	"Weighing the plates works like reading a utility meter. One reading tells you little, but readings before and after a change show what the change did."
Managing the information load	Clarity	One main idea per main point, one statistic per main point, and the bar graph shown only under point II.
Relevance	Retention	Your audience eats in this dining hall, so the opening scene is a conveyor they have seen.
Novelty	Retention	Oral citation 2's surprising half: a week without trays cut how much food diners took but did not show a significant reduction in food waste.
Repetition with variation	Retention	The message is said 3 times in 3 forms: the central idea, the preview, and the conclusion's summary.
Vivid support	Retention	The opening scene, "Picture the dish-return conveyor at closing time." Then the clincher: "Every plate that comes back full was a choice somebody made — and every one of those choices can be measured."

Count them: 4 clarity strategies + 4 retention strategies = 8 strategies, each placed on 1 moment of your speech. In words: every strategy is a decision you can point to in your outline, not a mood you hope the audience catches.

Look closely at four of them, because each has a definition the whole course will reuse.

Relevance is a retention strategy that shows listeners how a topic touches their own lives, such as opening on a place the audience visits every day.
Novelty is a retention strategy that gives listeners something new or surprising about a familiar topic, such as a research finding that runs against what most people expect.
Repetition with variation is a retention strategy that states the speech's message more than once in different words, such as in the central idea, the preview, and the conclusion's summary.
Vivid support is a retention strategy that uses concrete scenes, sensory details, and memorable lines so the message stays with listeners after they leave.

Here is the repetition in full. The central idea says the message in the introduction. The preview says it again as a road map: "I'll walk you through how the waste is measured, how serving changes target it, and where the diverted food goes." The summary says it a third time as a wrap-up: "Plate waste is weighed at the return window, cut back by how food is served, and sent to donation and composting." Same message, three forms, and the listener hears it from three angles.

A short caveat on the analogy: every analogy breaks somewhere. A utility meter reads one building; a dining hall's scale weighs many plates from many people. Use the analogy for the one feature it shares, measuring before and after, and drop it before it carries more than that.

Misconception check. Students often think the most informative speech is the one with the most facts. That is tempting, because more facts look like more work. But a listener cannot scroll back. Ten statistics in five minutes is an information load nobody can carry, and the one surprising finding gets buried. The cure is the load strategy: one main idea per main point, one well-sourced statistic per point, and repetition of the message, not of the data.

Pause and reflect. Choose one option and jot two or three sentences.

(a) Think of a class, training, or tour where you understood the explanation in the moment but forgot it by the next day. Which retention strategy was missing?

(b) Pick a topic you could explain to a friend in five minutes, such as a recipe, a game, or a bus route. Which clarity strategy would you need most, and why?

4. Accuracy and objectivity: report the whole finding

Picture a friend who tells you a new phone "has a great battery" after reading one review. Later you read the full review. It said the battery is great for calls and poor for video. Your friend did not lie. Your friend reported half a finding, and you made a choice on the half you heard.

An informative speaker owes the audience the whole finding.

Accuracy and objectivity is the informative speaker's obligation to report evidence correctly and fairly, including the parts of a finding the speaker did not hope for, so the audience draws its own conclusions.

Worked example — the two halves of oral citation 2. Here is the running speech's second oral citation, exactly as the speech says it:

"In a study published in the journal Sustainability in December 2022, researchers Wenhao Zhang and Junehee Kwon found that a week without trays in a university dining hall, compared with a week with trays, reduced how much food diners took but did not show a significant reduction in food waste."

Split it at the word "but." Half 1: a week without trays reduced how much food diners took. Half 2: it did not show a significant reduction in food waste. The finding has 2 halves, and you report both. Saying only "going trayless cuts food waste" turns half a finding into a claim the study did not make. A listener who later read the study would feel misled, and the third purpose test would fail after the fact.

Here is an honesty note about the word "significant." In a research article it is a technical word, and you do not need its technical meaning to report the study accurately. You need to keep the study's own words and not swap in your own.

The oral citation is the informative speech's proof. It tells the audience where each fact came from, so they can trust it without taking your word for it. Each of the running speech's 3 citations names who, what, and when before the evidence. So 3 citations × 3 parts = 9 parts you say aloud across the speech.

The running speech's three oral citations broken into who, what, and when
Citation	Who	What	When
1	The U.S. Department of Agriculture, drawing on its Economic Research Service	The Food Waste FAQ page	The page carries no date, so the citation names the department and the service instead
2	Researchers Wenhao Zhang and Junehee Kwon	A study in the journal Sustainability	December 2022
3	Associated Press reporter Dee-Ann Durbin	An article for PBS News	2022

Citation 1 shows an honest workaround. The USDA page has no dated stamp, so the speaker does not invent a year. The citation names the department and its research service, which tells the audience who stands behind the figure.

Misconception check. Students often think a credible-looking website is a citation, so "according to a health website" or "according to the internet" will do. That is tempting, because the page looked professional. But a citation is not a feeling about a page. Name the author or organization, the title or venue, and the date. If you cannot find all three, say what you can find honestly, as citation 1 does, or choose a source that tells you who stands behind it.

5. Build it, rehearse it, and check the machine

Now you build the speech end to end. A carpenter checks the plans, then the materials, then the joints before calling a cabinet done. You check the running speech the same way: the plan, the parts, the rehearsal, and any draft a chatbot touched.

Worked example — the build, counted. Every count comes from the running speech's earlier stages.

3 main points, each carrying 1 oral citation: 3 citations spread over 3 main points is 3 ÷ 3 = 1 citation per main point.
3 transitions, written out in the preparation outline.
2 aids: the title slide "Where does the plate go?" and the bar graph under main point II.
1 introduction card + 3 main-point cards + 1 conclusion card = 5 cards, for a speech planned for five minutes.

Card 3, the one for main point II, now carries everything that point needs in a glance: "serving changes · trayless · AID: bar graph, reveal, reference, return · Zhang and Kwon, Sustainability, Dec 2022, no significant waste reduction". Notice the last cue, "no significant waste reduction." It keeps the surprising half of the finding on the card, so nerves cannot shrink the citation to the half that fits a hoped-for story.

The rehearsal loop for a headline speech

You rehearse the informative speech with the rehearsal loop from earlier weeks: record a take, watch it, name one moment to fix, and record again. You self-assess in the shape of the delivery self-assessment table. You track rate, fillers, eye-contact share, deliberate pauses, and the one moment to fix. The table's numbers are illustrative, and none of them is a target.

If you would rather not be on camera, you have options. An audio-only recording on a phone works for rate, fillers, and pauses. A friend or family member with a stopwatch can tally eye contact while you speak to the room. Nothing about your recording goes to a chatbot; you describe what you noticed in your own words. Nerves before a headline speech are normal, and a planned pause after the hook is one of the best tools you have for them.

Check the machine

A chatbot can help you draft, but it cannot check its own facts. That job is yours, and it happens before a word reaches your audience.

Worked example — a chatbot's draft of main point II, checked at the source. The exchange is illustrative and names no product. You ask a chatbot to draft main point II. It writes "Studies show going trayless cuts food waste." It adds "About 35 percent of food is wasted." It suggests a new central idea: "Going trayless is the smartest way to end food waste."

Check each line at the source, one at a time.

Problem 1, a misreported finding. "Studies show" names no one. The course's pinned study on trays, Zhang and Kwon's, did not show a significant reduction in food waste. So you replace the line with oral citation 2, both halves intact.
Problem 2, an unsourced statistic. The percentage traces to Durbin's article for PBS News. There, about 35 percent of the food available in the United States in 2019 went unsold or uneaten, according to ReFED. The chatbot's line drops the year, the country, and the group that counted. So you say it as oral citation 3, in the pinned wording, under point III, where it belongs.
Problem 3, an arguing central idea. "The smartest way" is a verdict. It fails the second purpose test, so your running speech's central idea stays.

Problems caught: 1 misreported finding + 1 unsourced statistic + 1 arguing central idea = 3. In words: every one of the chatbot's lines sounded confident, and every one needed a source check. Verify every chatbot statistic at its source before you say it aloud. If you cannot find the source, drop the number.

Misconception check. Students often think a statistic from a chatbot counts as evidence because it arrived with a number and a confident tone. That is tempting, because it saves a search. But a figure with no who, what, and when is not evidence; if no source stands behind it, saying it aloud is fabrication. The cure is the same check you ran in Week 4: find the original page, copy its wording, and build the oral citation. A chatbot is a drafting partner, not a source.

Key terms

Informative speech — A speech whose job is to teach, describe, explain, or demonstrate something to an audience without taking a side, so listeners leave knowing more rather than believing or doing something new. (first used: 1. The informative speech: teach without taking a side)
Informative specific purpose — A specific purpose for an informative speech; it starts "To inform", explains rather than advocates, and treats fairly a listener who disagrees with the outcome. (first used: 1. The informative speech: teach without taking a side)
Speech about a thing or place — An informative speech on an object, a structure, or a location, such as the parts of the eye; it usually suits a spatial pattern or a topical pattern by parts. (first used: 2. Sort by subject: match the subject to a pattern)
Speech about a person — An informative speech on someone's life or work; it usually suits a chronological pattern or a topical pattern that groups the person's roles. (first used: 2. Sort by subject: match the subject to a pattern)
Speech about an event — An informative speech on something that happened, such as a lunar landing; it usually suits a chronological pattern or a causal pattern. (first used: 2. Sort by subject: match the subject to a pattern)
Speech about a process — An informative speech on how something works or is done, such as how a search engine indexes a page; it usually suits a chronological pattern. (first used: 2. Sort by subject: match the subject to a pattern)
Speech about an idea — An informative speech on a concept, theory, or principle, such as confirmation bias; it usually suits a topical pattern built on definitions, examples, and an analogy. (first used: 2. Sort by subject: match the subject to a pattern)
Clarity strategies — The four moves an informative speaker uses so listeners understand the message the first time: organization and signposting, defining terms, examples and analogies, and managing the information load. (first used: 3. Clarity and retention: make it clear, then make it stick)
Retention strategies — The four moves an informative speaker uses so listeners remember the message after the speech: relevance, novelty, repetition with variation, and vivid support. (first used: 3. Clarity and retention: make it clear, then make it stick)
Information load — The amount of new material a speech asks listeners to take in at once, managed by keeping one main idea per main point and a few strong pieces of support. (first used: 3. Clarity and retention: make it clear, then make it stick)
Analogy — A comparison that explains something unfamiliar by showing how it works like something the audience already knows, such as comparing weighing plates to reading a utility meter before and after a change. (first used: 3. Clarity and retention: make it clear, then make it stick)
Relevance — A retention strategy that shows listeners how a topic touches their own lives, such as opening on a place the audience visits every day. (first used: 3. Clarity and retention: make it clear, then make it stick)
Novelty — A retention strategy that gives listeners something new or surprising about a familiar topic, such as a research finding that runs against what most people expect. (first used: 3. Clarity and retention: make it clear, then make it stick)
Repetition with variation — A retention strategy that states the speech's message more than once in different words, such as in the central idea, the preview, and the conclusion's summary. (first used: 3. Clarity and retention: make it clear, then make it stick)
Vivid support — A retention strategy that uses concrete scenes, sensory details, and memorable lines so the message stays with listeners after they leave. (first used: 3. Clarity and retention: make it clear, then make it stick)
Accuracy and objectivity — The informative speaker's obligation to report evidence correctly and fairly, including the parts of a finding the speaker did not hope for, so the audience draws its own conclusions. (first used: 4. Accuracy and objectivity: report the whole finding)

Summary

An informative speech teaches, describes, explains, or demonstrates; it takes no side.
An informative specific purpose starts "To inform", explains rather than advocates, and is fair to a listener who disagrees.
"To discuss" is not a teaching goal; "should" in a purpose is a verdict.
This course sorts informative speeches by subject: a thing or place, a person, an event, a process, an idea.
The subject suggests a pattern; the audience's question decides it.
Clarity: organization and signposting, defining terms, examples and analogies, managing the information load.
Retention: relevance, novelty, repetition with variation, vivid support.
Main points: two to five is the usual advice, and three is common.
Report the whole finding, including the half you did not hope for.
The oral citation is the informative speech's proof: who, what, when, before the evidence.
Check every chatbot statistic at its source before you say it aloud.

Check your understanding

Work these before looking at the answers — they are ungraded, and the answers (with reasoning) are at the bottom of the page.

A nursing student drafts this purpose for a talk to a parents' group: "To inform parents why every child should get a sports physical before tryouts." Run it through the three informative tests, say how many it passes, and rewrite it so it passes all three.
Sort each illustrative topic by subject and name the pattern that usually suits it: (a) how a food truck gets a health permit; (b) the floor plan of a new public library; (c) the meaning of "opportunity cost."
A lab group's four-minute talk on a campus bike-share program has 4 main points and 9 statistics. Each statistic needs one oral citation, and each citation has 3 parts said aloud. How many citation parts would the speaker say, and which clarity strategy should the group use first?
A news summary reports that a library's late-fee pilot "raised return rates, but checkouts fell by about the same amount." A speaker plans to say, "The pilot proved late fees work." Explain what is wrong, and rewrite the sentence so it keeps both halves.

Answers (worked reasoning — read after attempting)

Test 1 passes: it starts "To inform". Test 2 fails: "should get" advocates. Test 3 fails: a parent who doubts the physicals would not feel fairly treated. So it passes 1 of 3 tests. A rewrite that passes all three: "To inform parents about what a sports physical checks before tryouts." It now teaches what happens, and a skeptical parent would still feel fairly treated.
(a) A process. It usually suits a chronological pattern that follows the permit steps in order. (b) A place. It usually suits a spatial pattern that walks the floor plan, or a topical pattern by areas. (c) An idea. It usually suits a topical pattern built on a definition, examples, and an analogy. The subject suggests the pattern; the audience's question still has the final say.
9 citations × 3 parts = 27 citation parts in about four minutes. That is far too much. The first clarity strategy to use is managing the information load: cut to three main points with one well-sourced statistic each, so 3 × 3 = 9 citation parts, a load a listener can carry. That is 27 versus 9 citation parts, a 3-fold cut in the load.
The planned line reports half a finding as if it were the whole, and "proved" overstates any single pilot. Keep both halves, and name the summary's outlet and date before the evidence: "…the library's late-fee pilot raised return rates, but checkouts fell by about the same amount." A listener on either side of late fees would feel fairly treated by that sentence.

Next up in this module: the Readings & Resources page, the lecture tutorial, the practice set, and the quiz; next week the same running speech turns persuasive, with the three appeals and Monroe's Motivated Sequence as the method.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com