Alana wanted to speak about climate conditions that might favor tornado formation in the United States. For testimony she used a document by researchers Schaefer and Marzban on the NOAA website, and she said, "Schaefer and Tatom (1998) looked at the mean Sea Surface Temperature (SST) in the strip 5 deg. N to 5 deg. S and 180 deg. W to 150 deg. W and wrote, 'A Kruskal-Wallis H test was then used to see if any difference in different tornado measures exists between El Niño, La Niña and neutral years. Also the entire contiguous U. S. and three sub-areas were considered. All six of these combinations failed to have significance at the 99 percent level. One could not state with confidence that El Niño/La Niña had any effect on tornado or strong tornado activity.'" Why should she have paraphrased instead of using a direct quotation?

In this example, Alana is giving a speech about climate conditions, and she wants to talk about certain information that she found during her research. However, the way in which Alana is presenting this information is not the right way to present information during a speech. Alana is using a direct quotation that includes many specific details. These are likely to be difficult to follow, particularly for people who are not experts. Therefore, the best thing Alana could have done was to paraphrase this information and present it in a way that was more relatable and easier to follow.

1. read the following excerpt from franklin d. roosevelt's "fireside chat 19":

on the other side of the picture, we must learn also to know that guerilla warfare against the germans in, let us say serbia or norway, us; that a successful russian offensive against the germans us; and that british successes on land or sea in any part of the world strengthen our hands.

remember always that germany and italy, regardless of any formal declaration of war, consider themselves at war with the united states at this moment just as much as they consider themselves at war with britain or russia. and germany puts all the other republics of the americas into the same category of enemies. the people of our sister republics of this hemisphere can be honored by that fact.  

the true goal we seek is far above and beyond the ugly field of battle. when we resort to force, as now we must, we are determined that this force shall be directed toward ultimate good as well as against immediate evil. we americans are not destroyers — we are builders.

analyze the effectiveness of this excerpt. how does it function within the speech as a whole? how does the structure of the excerpt to convey the speech's purpose and key points? support your argument with evidence from the speech. (10 points)

i guess you are missing the idea that has to be supported, am i right?