Directions: 1. Organizing persuasive outline for review. 2. Remember that this will check for plagiarism Topic: General purpose: To persuade Specific purpose: To persuade my audience that we should break the gender bias in the industry. Central idea: To help people pursue their desired careers, respective industries should emphasize breaking the gender bias through supporting gender equality. First Name Last Name May 15, 2020 Communication 120 MW 11-12:15 Persuasive Speech Sample Outline General Purpose: To persuade Specific Purpose: To persuade my audience that the US legislature should reduce restrictions that prevent scientists from conducting ethical tests on animals. Central Idea: The US legislature should reduce restrictions that prevent scientists from conducting critical and ethical tests on animals. I. Introduction A. Attention Getter: Covid-19, a global pandemic, has brought the world to its knees, millions have been infected, 100’s of thousands have died and will die if scientist don’t find a cure. We are living through a worldwide crisis and every solution must be on the table including animal testing. B. Controversy and Significance Statement: While many have abused animals in the pursuit of cosmetic research, ethical animal testing has allowed for great advancements for humanity and could be the solution to our current pandemic. C. Credibility Statement: However, as a concerned citizen, I am dismayed by the ignorance around what animal testing really is. D. Thesis: and thus, the US legislature should reduce restrictions that prevent scientists from conducting ethical tests on animals. E. Preview Statement: In order to advance my proposition I will first show how ethical animal testing has helped humanity. Next, why animals make great test subjects. And finally we will dive into solutions on a political and social level. II. Main Point 1: Contrary to popular belief, animal is not just for cosmetics, but has been used to advance human health. A. Internal Preview: Specifically, it has been used to discover vaccines and to treat life-threatening illness. B. Frederick Banting discovered insulin to treat diabetes. 1. Nobelprize.org has recorded that Banting discovered insulin by modifying and removing the pancreas of different dogs. 2. This gives my mother a way to treat an otherwise fatal disease. C. Jonas Salk found a vaccine for polio, 1. The Chemical Heritage Foundation reports: ‘Salk developed methods for growing large quantities of the three types of polioviruses on cultures of monkey kidney cells. He then killed the viruses with formaldehyde. When injected into monkeys, the vaccine protected them against paralytic poliomyelitis. 2. My mother also used Salk’s vaccine to cure her childhood polio. D. Louis Goodman and Alfred Gilman pioneered chemotherapy. 1. The Yale School of Medicine describes its alumni’s experiments saying, ‘Louis S. Goodman, MD and Alfred Gilman, PhD, began to study the effects of nitrogen mustard on lymphoma. Early studies in mice showed dramatic regression of the disease, which was confirmed in further studies in rabbits’ 2. My best friend Chris survived testicular cancer because of Goodman and Gilman. E. Summary Statement: Ultimately, without testing on animals, millions of human lives would be lost. F. Transition: Now that we have looked the positive impacts of animal testing on society, let us look into how animals make ideal test subjects. III. Main point 2: There are very few alternatives better than using live animals in scientific research. A. Internal Preview: The two main factors that make animals essential to animal testing are: genetic similarity and whole-body testing. B. For example, several animals are genetically similar to humans. 1. The Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History notes: ‘while the genetic difference between individual humans today is miniscule — about 0.1% on average — study of the same aspects of the chimpanzee genome indicates a difference of about 1.2%’. 2. According to the Jackson Laboratory: ‘Among the many advantages to using the mouse as a model organism, the most important is their striking similarity to humans in anatomy, physiology, and genetics. Over 95% of the mouse genome is similar to our own, making mouse genetic research particularly applicable to human disease’. C. There is no adequate alternative to testing on a living, whole-body system. 1. As researchers as Stanford Laboratory point out: ‘The processes central to our nervous, endocrine, immune, and circulatory systems can only be replicated in other living beings. 2. Clearly, animals make the best test-subjects when it comes to finding cures for the most debilitating diseases. D. While many individuals see Animal testing as a major harm to animals, it is a relatively small culprit of killing animals in the US. 1. The Humane Society shows that just last year, 9.1 billions of animals were slaughtered for food in the U.S. alone. 2. The types of animals that are tested on fall into categories of lease desirable. 3. Summary Statement: Overall, genetic similarity and whole body testing make animal testing necessary. E. Transition: It is clear: animal testing does more good than harm, and should, therefore, be less regulated. IV. Main Point 3: Solution The US legislature should reduce restrictions that prevent scientists from conducting ethical tests on animals. A. Internal Preview: We can achieve this objective on both a political and social level. B. First: To make sure animal testing remains legal, make sure you vote against any opponents to animal testing. Write to your district representative showing your support for animal testing. And most importantly, fund these researchers by paying your taxes. C. Secondly, we should recognize that there are already laws in place protecting animals. 1. For example, The Animal Welfare Act, a federal law, regulates the standards of care and treatment of research animals. 2. The AWA states, ‘The standards…shall include minimum requirements for handling, housing, feeding, watering, sanitation, ventilation, shelters’. 3. These laws do a great job of making sure animals are safe without tying the hand of companies trying to save lives. D. The last solution is on a social level. E. We should all be more aware the importance of ethical animal testing in research. 1. Visit understanding animal research.com to stay educated on the importance of animal research. 2. Take a pamphlet that I have printed out in order that has resources and links to websites that present balanced opinions about animal research. F. Summary Statement: HIV, Diabetes, Cancer, Covid-19, these diseases kill hundreds of thousands of Americans each year. And still, these diseases would kill thousands more if it were not for the tireless work of scientist fighting to find cures. V. Conclusion A. Review: Today we’ve looked at the positive impacts on animal testing in society. B. Visualization statement: Imagine that you wake up and instead of the feeling of dread and danger as you step outside, you feel freedom to not wear a mask, see your friends without fear, and live your lives. If we are going to make it through this crisis, all options need to be on the table including animal testing. Note: You have three options for how you can end your speech: a. Visualization Statement b. Call to Action c. Final Words See Samples Below Sample Call to Action: To make sure animal testing remains legal, there are a few things you could do. Make sure you vote against any opponents to animal testing. Write to your district representative showing your support for animal testing. And most importantly, fund these researchers by paying your taxes. Sample Final Words: In an ideal world, there won’t be a need for animal testing, but the sacrifice made by one puppy could potentially save millions of human babies. Works Cited 1. “Advantages of the Mouse as a Model Organism.” The Jackson Laboratory. The Jackson Laboratory, 2014. Web. 24 Nov. 2014. 2. . 3. “Animal Experiments: Overview.” PETA. PETA, 2014. Web. 23 Nov. 2014. . 4. Becker, Geoffrey S. The Animal Welfare Act: Background and Selected Legislation. Rep. no. RS22493. United States Congressional Research Service, 5 Dec. 2008. Web. 23 Nov. 2014. . 5. “Chemotherapy: From the Trenches of Warfare A Weapon to Fight Cancer.” Clinical Research at Yale. Yale School of Medicine, 2014. Web. 24 Nov. 2014. . 6. ” The Discovery of Insulin.” Nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB, 2014. Web. 24 Nov. 2014. . 7. “Farm Animal Statistics: Slaughter Totals : The Humane Society of the United States.” Humanesociety.org. The Humane Society of the United States, 2014. Web. 24 Nov. 2014. . 8. “Genetics.” Human Evolution by The Smithsonian Institution’s Human Origins Program. Smithsonian Institution, 17 Nov. 2014. Web. 23 Nov. 2014. . Liu1 Finding and Analyzing Sources Topic: To help people pursue their desired career, respective industries should emphasize breaking the gender bias through supporting gender equality. 1. Sandberg, S., & Thomas, R. (2019). Sheryl Sandberg: The gender gap isn’t just unfair; it’s bad for business. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/sheryl-sandberg-the-gendergap-isnt-just-unfair-its-bad-for-business-11571112300 A. Authority — The authors include; Sandberg, S., & Thomas author this article, R. The point of view from this article is that women are outnumbered by men in most American corporations from the entry-level to C-suit position that is an explicit indicator of unfairness and inequality. B. Purpose — The source was created to assess the gender gap in the corporate organization and why it is unfair for businesses. It focuses on the challenges that make it difficult for women to climb the career ladder. The intended audience are the corporate organizations and management since most of these inequalities exist in their workplaces and hinders inefficiency in operations. C. Publication & Format — The article was published in the wall street journal. The article is published as an online media/article. D. Relevance — The article is relevant for my research since it discusses the causes of inequality in most organizations and informs why women are not getting a fair deal and what most of these organizations need to change to address these inequalities. The scope of this article is on the inequality in gender pay and position held by women in organizations. Liu2 E. Date of publication — The article was published on October 15, 2019, and it has not been updated. F. Documentation — The article provides a citation by hyperlinking the source upon which its argument and discussion are based. For instance, the article cites the “Women in the Workplace report 2019” that was authored by LeanIn.Org and McKinsey & Co-authors. 2. Sardelis, S., Oester, S., & Liboiron, M. (2017). Ten strategies to reduce gender inequality at scientific conferences. Frontiers in Marine Science, 4, 231. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2017.00231 A. Authority — Three authors for this article include; Sardelis, S., Oester, S., & Liboiron. The point of view for this article is that although conferences organized by professional societies offer scientists and other professionals an opportunity to disseminate their work in research and findings; however, there are concerns that these opportunities are not equally distributed among men and women in science. B. Purpose — The purpose for creating this resource is to provide tips or strategies that will be used to reduce gender inequality in science conferences and professionals. The article maintains that addressing gender inequality should be one of the main considerations in the societies that host conferences. This article’s intended audiences are scientists and professionals in different areas that mainly participate in organized conferences. C. Publication & Format — The article is published in the frontiers marine science database in the Marine Conservation and sustainability journal. The medium used is the online publication, but a printed copy can be downloaded in pdf format. Liu3 D. Relevance — The article is relevant to my research since it focuses on the strategies adopted to address gender bias/inequality faced by women. Women are not given equal chances to present their studies of finding in the scientific and professional conferences. The primary scope of the article notes that there is a need to address gender inequality as a primary consideration for the society hosting such conferences. Most STEM conferences are struggling with inequalities of gender bias, and the focus should be on promoting the participation of women in professional or scientific conferences. E. Date of publication — The journal article was published on July 25, 2017, but it has not been updated since then. F. Documentation — The article is a scientific journal that cites more than ten credible resources from google scholar, PubMed, and websites such as the European Commission. 3.Tricco, A. C., Thomas, S. M., Antony, J., Rios, P., Robson, R., Pattani, R., Ghassemi, M., Sullivan, S., Selvaratnam, I., Tannenbaum, C., & Straus, S. E. (2017). Strategies to Prevent or Reduce Gender Bias in Peer Review of Research Grants: A Rapid Scoping Review. PloS one, 12(1), e0169718. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169718 A. Authority — This is a journal article written by 11 authors, namely: Tricco, A. C., Thomas, S. M., Antony, J., Rios, P., Robson, R., Pattani, R., Ghassemi, M., Sullivan, S., Selvaratnam, I., Tannenbaum, C., & Straus, S. E. Their point of view notes that regardless of the parity in the number of men and women that complete the undergraduate and the graduate training in health Liu4 science and biomedical, women are still underrepresented in research since they receive less funding compared to male. B. Purpose — the resource was created to review the strategies that are implemented to reduce or prevent gender bias in the issuance of grants meant to facilitate peer review research. The intended audience for this article is the people seeking a grant to conduct peer review research and the audience in biomedical and science, including researchers and professionals. C. Publication & Format — The journal article is published in the PubMed journal database, and the medium used is an electronic format. D. Relevance — The research is relevant to my research since it shows the context within which gender bias or inequality occurs. It shows the persistent gender inequality in the funding of research that has existed for a long time. Therefore, the scope of this article identifies that men are more likely to be funded in research through grant competitions and has substantially lasted for a considerable time. E. Date of publication — The article was published on January 6 2017 online, and it has not been updated since then. F. Documentation — The article cites 53 credible resources from reputable databases such as; google scholar, PMC free article, PubMed, and government organizations. 4.Ellemers, N. (2014). Women at work: How organizational features impact career development. Policy insights from the behavioral and brain sciences, 1(1), 46-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732214549327 Liu5 A. Authority — This article is authored by Naomi Ellmers. The article offers a point of view noting that although organizations receive immense benefits from gender diversity, statistics reveal consistent gender differences in payment and career development. B. Purpose — The resource was created to show that having more women in the workplace comes with benefits; however, there are fewer workplace benefits for women than those of male counterparts in terms of career prospects and pay. The intended audience for this article is the organizations that employ both male and female employees. C. Publication & Format — The article was published on Sage Journals, and the medium used for publication is an online print. D. Relevance — The article is relevant to my research since it articulates that breaking gender bias requires organizations to encourage gender diversity. Moreover, it shows that achieving equality requires the organization to encourage women by giving them career growth and equal pay. The scope of the article is on the implicit bias that most people hold since it creates a positive perception that women can enter and perform in a male-dominated career. The article is relevant since it articulates that encouraging diversity, career growth, and equal pay requires the organization to address implicit bias and enhance diversity. E. Date of publication – The article was published on October 1, 2014; however, no update has been made on this publication. F. Documentation — the article references 78 credible and reliable resources from credible databases such as google scholar, Sage, and science direct. Moreover, the articles cite recent peer-reviewed studies. Liu6 5.Stamarski, C. S., & Son Hing, L. S. (2015). Gender inequalities in the workplace: the effects of organizational structures, processes, practices, and decision makers’ sexism. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 1400. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01400 A. Authority — The article is written by two authors, including Stamarski, C. S., & Son Hing. This article’s point of view is on how decision-making, sexism, and organization practices, processes, and structures lead to gender inequality. B. Purpose — The resource was created to analyze how gender inequality in the workplace is a complex phenomenon that originates from organizational practices, processes, and structures. Therefore, the inequality and bias faced by most women originate from human resource policies and practices. The intended audience for this article is corporate management, such as HR, since it informs about how the practices, process, and structures adopted by an organization impacts gender equality. C. Publication & Format — The article was published in Frontiers datable in the journal of Educational psychology. The medium used in publishing this journal article is an online publication. D. Relevance — the article is relevant for my research since it focuses on how HR practices such as decision making, policies, and other enactment affect the training, payment, hiring, and the promotion of women in their careers. The scope of the article is on HR decision-making and practices and their impact on gender equality and gender bias in the workplace. E. Date of publication — The article was published on September 16, 2015. The article has not been updated since it was published. Liu7 F. Documentation — The article provides a citation for the references used. These citations are drawn from reputable databases such as google scholar and PubMed abstracts. 6.Gorman, E. H., & Mosseri, S. (2019). How organizational characteristics shape gender difference and inequality at work. Sociology Compass, 13(3), e12660. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12660 A. Authority — The article is written by two authors: Gorman, E. H., & Mosseri, S. the point of view for these authors notes that the organizational characteristics shape gender differences and inequality and the workplace. B. Purpose — The resource is created to study the process that leads to gender inequality in modern society, which takes place in people’s working lives. The intended audience for this article is scholars and students interested in inequality and gender differences in organizations. C. Publication & Format — The article was published in the Wiley online library. The medium used in the online access via the library or the reader can download the pdf format of the article. D. Relevance — The article is relevant to my research since it focuses on processes that produce gender inequality in modern society. The scope of the article notes that although inequality originates from individuals’ interactions and actions, the organizations provide the context for these inequalities. Therefore, the article focuses on three areas where gender differences and inequality originate: career outcomes, work-family conflict, and workplace experiences. E. Date of publication — This journal article was published on January 20, 2019. There is no update made on this article. Liu8 F. Documentation — The article provides a reference list of the materials cited. The resources are credible and verifiable and are sourced from credible databases such as Wiley online library, google scholar, and PubMed. References Ellemers, N. (2014). Women at work: How organizational features impact career development. Policy insights from the behavioral and brain sciences, 1(1), 46-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732214549327 Liu9 Gorman, E. H., & Mosseri, S. (2019). How organizational characteristics shape gender difference and inequality at work. Sociology Compass, 13(3), e12660. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12660 Sandberg, S., & Thomas, R. (2019). Sheryl Sandberg: The gender gap isn’t just unfair; it’s bad for business. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/sheryl-sandberg-the-gender-gap-isntjust-unfair-its-bad-for-business-11571112300 Sardelis, S., Oester, S., & Liboiron, M. (2017). Ten strategies to reduce gender inequality at scientific conferences. Frontiers in Marine Science, 4, 231. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2017.00231 Stamarski, C. S., & Son Hing, L. S. (2015). Gender inequalities in the workplace: the effects of organizational structures, processes, practices, and decision makers’ sexism. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 1400. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01400 Tricco, A. C., Thomas, S. M., Antony, J., Rios, P., Robson, R., Pattani, R., Ghassemi, M., Sullivan, S., Selvaratnam, I., Tannenbaum, C., & Straus, S. E. (2017). Strategies to Prevent or Reduce Gender Bias in Peer Review of Research Grants: A Rapid Scoping Review. PloS one, 12(1), e0169718. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169718 Purchase answer to see full attachment Explanation & Answer: 5 pages Tags: Gender Equality modern society Gender Bias User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool’s honor code & terms of service.