INTEGRATIVE ASSIGNMENT—PEDAGOGICAL GROUNDING
SYMPOSIUM GROUP INVITATIONAL ASSIGNMENT
Developed by George Jarrett and Kimberly Rosenfeld
Cerritos College
DISCIPLINES: PUBLIC SPEAKING AND U.S. HISTORY
LEARNING COMMUNITY PURPOSE AND GOALS
This learning community combines Public Speaking (Speech 130) and U.S. History
to 1877 (History 102), around the theme of freedom.
ASSIGNMENT DESCRIPTION:
Using a symposium format, students work together in groups to research, write, and
deliver a twenty-minute presentation about a current controversy that relates to the
United States Constitution (including amendments). Students are assigned to groups,
and given guidance in choosing a topic. The goal of the invitational speech is to
discuss an issue from multiple perspectives so the audience arrives at a better
understanding of the issue. Once the information is presented, students lead the
audience in a discussion of the issue from multiple perspectives, and then conclude
the presentation by summarizing both the information presented and the audience’s
comments.
PURPOSE OF ASSIGNMENT:
Students who successfully complete this assignment will be able to:
• Introduce a controversial topic and guide meaningful discussion, without
resorting to persuasion
• Work with other students to research, present, and discuss contemporary
controversies
• Understand how the development of the Constitution influenced present
controversies
• Use historical evidence and interpretation to explain the background and
context of contemporary controversies
Page 1
Jarrett and Rosenfleld
Integrative Assignment—Pedagogical Grounding
QUESTION OR ISSUES THE ASSIGNMENT ADDRESSES:
We wanted students to address a public issue of their choice. The issue must have
some relationship to the U.S. Constitution and amendments up to the fifteenth
amendment. (That covers many contemporary issues.) The skills of selecting an
appropriate topic and tailoring a speech to an audience are important outcomes for
public speaking instruction, so we did not want to prescribe a specific topic for the
students’ speeches.
DISCIPLINARY GROUNDING:
From history, students should bring specific knowledge of the Constitution and Bill
of Rights, as well as the development of federalism and legal precedents. They should
draw on skills they’ve gained analyzing primary sources, comprehending secondary
sources, constructing valid arguments from historical evidence, and understanding
continuity and change over time. From speech, students draw on their knowledge and
skills in the areas of audience analysis, research, information synthesis,
extemporaneous delivery, time management, and discussion facilitation. They should
also demonstrate knowledge of speech genres, especially symposium and invitational
speeches.
STEPS TAKEN IN EACH COURSE TO HELP STUDENTS DEVELOP DISCIPLINARY GROUNDING:
History: Students completed reading assignments on the origin of the Constitution,
the Bill of Rights, the issues of Constitutional government and rights in the early
republic, and on the development of the federal courts and judicial precedents. Later
in the semester, they studied the amendments introduced during the Civil War and
Reconstruction. This reading was reinforced with objective questions on quizzes and
exams. In addition, historical reasoning was modeled in reading on methodology,
writing assignments, an in-class essay examination, and class discussions of primary
sources. A student-led discussion on New York’s Constitutional ratification debate
was especially apropos to the speech topics.
Speech: Students completed a demonstration speech assignment requiring them to
analyze their audience, research a topic, synthesize their research, and work toward
using an extemporaneous delivery within a specified time limit. The invitational
speech, required them to use these skills in addition to learning about how a group
symposium works and how to facilitate discussion. To assist with these skills, in-class
exercises were run where students practiced writing thought-provoking questions and
facilitating discussion about them in small groups. Students also participated in
impromptu speaking exercises to help them sharpen their extemporaneous delivery.
Page 2
Jarrett and Rosenfleld
Integrative Assignment—Pedagogical Grounding
OBSERVATIONS ABOUT STUDENTS’ WORK IN RESPONSE TO THE ASSIGNMENT:
(evidence of disciplinary grounding and purposeful integration)
History: Student work varied in its integration of historical understanding. Of the
three teams, the team discussing lethal injection as a form of capital punishment did
an especially competent job of integrating historical understanding. They included
specific discussion of the eighth amendment, and showed an understanding of how
judicial precedent develops over time. They also effectively used diverse historical
sources, including newspapers, integrating appropriate direct quotations and
paraphrased information. The two other teams attempted to integrate historical
information into their speeches, but their integrations were less successful relative to
their overall purposes. The same-sex marriage group referred to the broad history of
homosexuality—with an unusual generalization that societies that have a romantic
understanding of love also have the concept of homosexuality. They discussed the
“full faith and credit” clause of the Constitution, which should govern whether one
state acknowledges a marriage made in another, yet failed to adequately research or
clearly explain the historical development of the gay rights movement and its
“defense of marriage” backlash. The group discussing state regulation of greenhouse
gas emissions never made the specific legal circumstances of their issue clear.
Speech: The strongest group, which focused on lethal injection, produced an end
product in alignment with the assignment outcomes. They presented a speech
introduction that was thought-provoking, established their credibility, related well to
their audience, outlined their thesis statement, and previewed the points they planned
to cover. I was especially impressed by the consistency with which they cited relevant
sources to back broader, synthesized claims. Their delivery was probably their
weakest point, but it was still quite good. The group’s time management, a very
difficult aspect of this assignment, indicated they had assessed the reality of their
goals in light of the time allotted and practiced their speech so as to attain those goals.
The group discussing gay marriage worked extremely hard during the scaffolding
process. Their end-product was satisfactory but not excellent due to poor time
management, limited information gathering, and lack of synthesis. I was impressed
with their motivation, display of teamwork, and overall delivery. For example, they
surveyed the audience about their knowledge and attitudes regarding gay marriage,
using the results to generate interest in their introduction and to tailor their message.
Their time management was very weak: they left literally no time for audience
discussion, a major goal of this assignment. The audience clearly indicated a desire to
discuss the topic further but was cut off prematurely. Finally, the group’s visual aid
was too small, not clearly marked, used improperly, and not adequately discussed.
The final group, which addressed carbon emissions, was the weakest of the three.
They suffered from a lackluster introduction, lack of cohesion (some group members
appeared to be more comfortable with the material than others), and weak use of
evidence. They needed to display a more comprehensive understanding and synthesis
of the material. This negatively impacted the class discussion.
Page 3
Jarrett and Rosenfleld
Integrative Assignment—Pedagogical Grounding
INSTRUCTORS’ REFLECTIONS ON THE ASSIGNMENT AND STUDENTS’ WORK:
One group demonstrated clearly that it is possible for students to make a competent
response to this assignment. All three groups showed greater commitment and followthrough, and for the most part gave better speeches, than the students who did the
assignment our first semester. Our challenge going forward is to bring more of our
students up to that level. We believe that further scaffolding and modeling earlier in
the semester will help. To that end, in History, we will integrate more discussion of
contemporary issues when covering relevant aspects of the Constitution. For example,
we will discuss how the Electoral College system designed in 1787 affects current
elections. Moving up the deadlines for writing individual speeches will allow more
time for the instructors to guide the students in their research and in developing their
reasoning. In Speech, additional scaffolding will be done with students on researching
topics, synthesizing information, writing and facilitating questions, and managing
time.
CHANGES FROM EARLIER VERSIONS OF THIS ASSIGNMENT:
The changes that were most needed were to start the students earlier on the process
and to scaffold the assignment a bit more intentionally and methodically. Thus, we
introduced the assignment earlier in the semester and worked with students in group
meetings and focus groups. In Speech, the instructors ran in-class exercises where
students worked to refine their purpose statements, thesis statements, and main points.
We also worked at writing thought-provoking questions. Sudents participated in
impromptu speaking exercise to help them sharpen their extemporaneous delivery.
They were required for this speech to present their message without using a podium.
Page 4