Self-paced
Professor Beckstein: Support American Sign Language is the native language of many North Americans. ██████████ ██ ██ ███ █ ███████ █████████ ███ ███ ████ ██████ ██████ ██ ███████ ██████ ██ █████████ ██ ███████ ███ ████████████ ███████ ████████ ███████████ ██ ████████ ███
█████████ ███████ █████████ ██ ████ █████████ ████████ ██████ ███ ██ ███████ ██ ███████ ███ ████████████ ███████ ████████ ███████████ ██ ████████ ██████ ██ ███████ ███████ █████ ████ ███ ███ ███ ██████ █████████ ██ ████ █████ ██████████ ███ ████ ████████ █████████ ███████ ███ ███████████ ██ ████████ ██████ ██ ████████ ███ ██ █████ ██ ██████████ ██ █████ ███████████ ████ ████ █████ ███
Speaker 1 Summary
Beckstein concludes that students shouldn’t be allowed to satisfy the foreign language requirement by learning ASL. This is because he believes ASL isn’t a foreign language, based on the fact that it’s the native language of many people in North America.
Speaker 2 Summary
Sedley undermines Beckstein’s argument by pointing out that Beckstein’s logic would commit him to arguing that French and Spanish shouldn’t satisfy the foreign language requirement, because many North Americans speak these languages natively. The point is Beckstein’s assumption for what’s required to be considered a foreign language is absurd.
20.
Professor Sedley uses which one ██ ███ █████████ ██████████ ██ █████████████ ██ ██████████ ██ █████████ ███████████ █████████
a
attempting to demonstrate ████ ███ █████████ ████ ██ █████ █ ███████ ██████████ █████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ████ ██ ███████████
This describes Sedley's strategy. He takes the reasoning Beckstein used to rule out ASL and shows that it applies just as well to French and Spanish, which are also native languages of many North Americans. Following that reasoning would mean banning those languages from the requirement, and Sedley notes that doing so would be ridiculous (undesirable).
b
trying to show ████ █ ███████ ██████████ ███████████ ████ ██ ███ ████████ ████ ██ ███████ ██
Sedley does not claim Beckstein's conclusion contradicts his own evidence. He never argues that the facts Beckstein cites actually work against Beckstein's point. Instead he extends Beckstein's reasoning to new cases, French and Spanish.
c
questioning an opponent's █████████ ██ ███████ ███ █████ █████ ██████████
Sedley says nothing about Beckstein's authority or qualifications to speak on the issue. His response engages only with Beckstein's reasoning, showing what it would require for French and Spanish. There is no attack on who Beckstein is or his standing to weigh in.
d
offering an alternative ███████████ ██ ███ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ██ █ ████████ ██████████
Sedley does not offer a different explanation of the facts. He accepts Beckstein's facts as they stand, that these are native languages of many North Americans, and applies Beckstein's own rule to French and Spanish.
e
agreeing with the ██████████ ██ █ ██████████ ████████ █████ █████████ ███ ████████ ████ ██ ███████ ███ ██████████
Sedley does not agree with Beckstein's conclusion. His whole point is that Beckstein's reasoning goes wrong, because it would force the absurd result of banning French and Spanish.