Sep 14 2014, 11:45 PM
QUOTE(RED-HAIR-SHANKS @ Sep 14 2014, 09:37 AM)
Please help the 4 of us. I know that if I want to achieve a satisfying mark in Speaking component, I will have to find ways to aid them and bring them up. It's not a one man job. Thanks for both of your attention and thoughtful advices.
One word that will change your life — CONTROL. In other words, you must play the role as the chair, which includes coordinating the discussion; ensuring that the meeting is not dominated by a single individual; moving from one issue to the next; ensuring that the necessary decisions are made; not allow the meeting to exceed the time allotted; and seeing that the minutes are kept. Therefore, it doesn't matter if your friend wants to defend his point. In fact, he doesn't need to defend if three of you don't argue with him in the first place. Keep in mind that Task B is not a debate, just a discussion. The activities in Task B of the Speaking component are very similar to holding a meeting, perhaps less formal. A typical meeting structure is as follows:
• the chair opens the meeting
• the minutes (may refer to Task A) are read
• the agenda is introduced
• first subject introduced
• the chair gives the floor to a participant (clockwise)
• another speaker takes the floor
• the chair keeps order
• the chair moves the discussion to a new point
• the chair directs the discussion
• participants propose new motions
• the chair moves to a vote
• voting occurs
• consensus reached
• any other business dealt with
• meeting closed
The language of formal meetings, particularly the language used by the chair, can be rather stylized. The degree of formality Task B requires depends what matters are being discussed. The language suggestions set out below:
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
Quote
Anyway, specifically for Task B, did your other 3 friends and you make your own preferences during the 2-minutes preparations before the Task B commenced? I know that we don't necessarily need to conclude on only one point, but my teacher told me that it would be much better if we do so.
We are like robots, and quite often that we will keep on rehashing the same old quote to initiate any talks like: ''Candidate B, what do you think about..., Candidate C, do you concur..., How about you Candidate A, do you feel that...''. 
But, how do I want to control the discussion in our group and keep the flow of the content in check? 
Pardon me though, my friends and I have already been following our teacher's instruction of the ways to discuss in Task B for long enough to the point where we were blinded by the fact that there are other ways that're more flexible and less strenuous that we can utilise. It's not our MUET teacher's faults, she is helpful, but I reckon that we are depending too much on her that we being spoon-fed.
. And no, my English is considered a joke as I tend to insert some of the low frequency words out of place, and if I were to compare mine with some of my classmates, it's like comparing an ant with a boot. 
I bet this along the Toulmin's Model of Argumentation will be a powerful arsenal for my classmates and me once we've learned on mastering them. 
.. How to do it??
0.0315sec
0.43
6 queries
GZIP Disabled