Need help? We are here

After reading Chapter 5: Basic Document Design (pp. 107-131) in MacRae’s Business and Professional Writing: A Basic Guide and watching Nancy Duarte’s “5 Rules for Creating Effective Presentations,” visit Slideshare.net (Links to an external site.). Slideshare is the world’s largest professional content sharing community and contains presentations on a wide variety of topics. Browse Slideshare and identify one deck of “effective” slides applying the design rules in Chapter 5 and in Duarte’s video. Identify one deck of “ineffective” slides based on the same design criteria.

On the Module 5 Discussion Forum, complete the following:

Connect with a professional writer in 5 simple steps

Please provide as many details about your writing struggle as possible

Academic level of your paper

Type of Paper

When is it due?

How many pages is this assigment?

  1. Post a link to the “effective” Slideshare presentation.
  2. Below this link, explain how the effective presentation embodies Duarte’s 5 rules. Explain why the effective presentation applies MacRae’s concepts in Chapter 5: Basic Document Design.
  3. Post a link to the “ineffective” Slideshare presentation.
  4. Below this link, explain how the ineffective presentation defies Duarte’s 5 rules. Explain how the ineffective presentation ignores or misuses MacRae’s concepts in Chapter 5: Basic Document Design.

ASSIGNMENT 2

Reading response———

Judgment at Nuremberg Act 1): Analyze the exchange between Capt. Byers and Judge Heywood on pp. 21-23. Consider carefully the implications of this exchange from the perspective of Heywood’s assumption that the Americans and their judges are in a significantly superior moral position compared to the Germans and their judges. What problem becomes apparent with Heywood’s assumption during his conversation with Capt. Byers?

 

Judgment at Nuremberg Act 2): Consider carefully the exchange between Gen. Merrin & Col. Parker on pp 72-73. Contrast this exchange with the one between Rolfe and Janning on pp 67-68. What is the significance of these conversations when we consider whether this particular trial is fair and impartial?