Monday, October 6, 2008
Persuasive Speech Blog Critiques - Section D
Well, the election issues speeches are underway! Please post your critiques here for Section D class. Be sure that all critiques are detailed and make comment to how well the presenters applied their argument to Monroe's Motivated Sequence, in addition to including the supporting sources neededto provide the necessary evidence. Remember, arguments need logic and evidence every step of the way to be peruasive. Holes in the argument ( lack of evidence) need to be addressed in this critique.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
My Speech partner was Jarea Bivens, and his topic was Universal Health Care, Con side.
Jarea had a great attention getter, i saw how he really kept the audience entertained.The need and the credibility where there however im not to sure about the preview.
He did present the the need, the plan and the practicality well, however i think he lacked evidence. if i recall correctly he stated that congress will always state to raise the taxes however he never provided any evidence. so he did need more work on actually presenting the evidence. He however had a great argument but he needed to present it better.
He cited verbally and on his power point which some people just didn't even do that.
The ending could have been more smoother, it seemed like he just gave up at the end. His presentation was less than 10 minutes.
He was dressed professionally, and he looked great. He was smiling the whole time. He kept eye contact with the audience and he also had great posture, i did not catch any crazy had movements. He spoke clearly and eloquently.
His powerpoint was clear and understandable, it was also creative,and handled well by the speaker.
I got the message however i was not convinced, the call to action was not very strong, he did not make me want to go out and tell everyone to not be for universal health care.
He did do a great job for coming up for the first time since the summer!
-ASHLEY PICHARDO
My speech partner was Luis, his topic was setting a timetable for troops to come home, pro side.
Luis had an attention getter. It was a picture of a young woman laying beside a grave. This picture really got my attention because it made me ask a lot of questions, I wanted to know more.
The need was there but not the credibility. He also lacked a preview statement.
The central idea was clear and specific. I understood what he was saying. I also felt that he knew exactly what he was talking about, he seemed confident.
The body lacked some detail. He did use Monroe's sequence. With the attention getter, the needs, the plan, and practicality but he lacked the action.
He cited throughout the speech but not enough. The power point followed what he was saying and helped emphasize the main points. He also had citations throughout the power point.
His voice projection was loud and clear, I could hear every word that he spoke. He also used the words in proper context. He also pronounced words correctly. When he was trying to emphasize a main point, you could tell in his voice that it was important because he would speak a little louder. He never said "um" which is an improvement, instead he used pauses. The pauses helped give the audience to comprehend what he was saying.
His appearance was good, he wasn't wearing sweat pants or anything. He wore casual clothes. He didn't move around too much where it could have been distracting. He moved his hand only to emphasize the main points. He smiled sometimes but his issue was serious so under the circumstances there wasn't a lot to smile about.
He had eye contact with the audience but it was very minimal. He looked at the power point a lot.
Overall the speech was great. I agreed with everything he was saying. He achieved the specific purpose which was to persuade us that we should set a timetable for when the troops in Iraq should come home.
My Speech partner was Vanessa and her topic was Should illegal aliens receive any of the rights or benefits that lawful permanent residents enjoy.
Her attention getter was good because as she spoke, she kept eye contact with everyone and reeled us in. Her position on the matter was clearly stated from the beginning of her power point which was good because in order for the audience to know exactly what the purpose of her speech was, stating her position would eliminate uncertainties.
Her credibility was excellent as she cited every piece of information she had presented verbally and on the power point; also fully expounded some of the matters that could have been confusing to the audience; the needs on her presentation were clearly stated and presented as she moved slowly with the audience to make sure we understood her argument.
Her attire was very professional as she wore a comfortable business outfit. She spoke with confidence which is a change from her last two presentations as she looked nervous and eager to step out of the spotlight. This also boosted her kudos because she appeared to know her information well even though she looked a couple of times at her power point for guidance.
Her plan was eminently evinced as one of her slides in the presentation stated what she had in mind for such a problem. In addition, she indicated both sides would be beneficial if her plan was to carry out and balanced the proposal enough for the audience to want to help out.
The way she wrapped it up was also good as she used the essential tool of the “action”. To me, her presentation was flawless and made me want to visit the website she had displayed in the end and sign up for the organization; especially since she taught us how to use it as well.
In conclusion, in my opinion, Vanessa’s presentation was well thought out and presented. She has improved in many of her weaknesses such as the ums, anxiousness to get out of the “spotlight”, and generally her control of articulation and diction. If she keeps this up she will excel in class and in her profession.
My speech partner was Raquel and her topic was to teach safe sex, not abstinence.
The video with the girl asking questions about sex education to her peers was a good attention getter. It was also a good source to prove that the some teens are uneducated about sex. Next time try she should to remember the information a little better so that she’s not looking at the powerpoint so much. The cites on the powerpoint were too small, so you couldn’t read the sources.
There was a lot of important information that she forgot to cite out loud, but did make a good attempt to cite when she did. The articulation and volume was good. She spoke clearly and at a good rate with good diction, however she did say “umm” a couple of times, but not a lot. The body language was good and she tried to connect with her audience by keeping good eye contact and scanning the room. She had good conversational style
When talking about Sarah Palin’s daughter, she don’t really know enough about the situation that the reason she got pregnant was because she wasn’t taught safe sex just abstinence. It would’ve been a good example if she could’ve found out more about it and been able back up that point.
Her conclusion lacked a plan of action, which was unfortunate. She almost seemed like she summarized the presentation in her conclusion. The presentation kind of ended a little abrupt because there was no plan to action. However, I did think she improved since the summer.
The student that I critiqued was Aamir Hayes. He had a few good and bad points during his speech. During the speech he gave on ex-cons being able to vote he possessed many good speaking tactics. In the beginning, he started off with a great attention getter and kept his audience interested in listening to what he was going to say next, by having catchy connectives. What is a must in speaking, is knowing the topic of what you are speaking about and he knew it very well. Aamir provided good eye contact with the teacher and the students and also stay focused all the way till the end of his speech. Although according to public speaking he did some things very well, unfortunately he was lacking in many also.
The poor speech skills I viewed from Aamir were; having his hand in his pocket and nervous hand gestures. Reading off the PowerPoint and no verbal sites are two mistakes I noticed right away. Also, he didn’t have a strong enough conclusion, no credibility, no preview, and no call to action. Although his speech consisted well and poor speech skills, I thought he did very well explaining and entertaining us, as the audience about ex-cons.
My speech partner is Emma, but I am critiquing Deanna. I felt that her speech was good. Her introduction was very good and she was able to maintain the audience’s attention. The one thing I did like about her presentation was that she brought in her sister’s personal experience with the No Child Left Behind Act. She verbally cited a lot and also had the citations on the power point. She presented the needs and plans and benefits well, but the best was the action. Her action was simple and easy. Her conclusion was good.
Her appearance was on point. She looked very professional and well- dressed. However in the presentation she did say “screwed”, even though it is not a curse it is not an appropriate word to use in a presentation. Another fault was that in one part of her presentation she turned her head into the screen.
My Speech Partner was Irving Pole, and his topic was about rasing minimum wage. He took the Republican side and opposed it.
First and foremost Irving's physical apperance was a 10. He not only dressed for the part, with a nice shirt and tie, but he had a confident air and was very relaxed. I was interested before the speech even began.
Irving had a great attention getter. He asked the audience a question and the way in which he posed the question made it seem like he was leaning towards one side. However after hearing the audiences response, Irving shocked us all by going in a total opposite direction. I would say that his tatic was effective, because it didn't confuse me, it intriuged me and made me want to learn more about his ideas.
As his speech went on Irving presented some great ideas, and had a lot of good points which showed that he really new his topic well. And thoughout the entire speech Irving was engaging and kept the audience involved by asking questions and opinions throughout the speech.
However Irving did make a few mistakes. He looked at his powerpoit a lot during the speech. I don't think this was because he didn't know his material, I think it had to do with him getting nervous. There were times when Irving had great eye contact and he connceted with the audience, and there were times when he looked at his powerpoint and note cards to much. Also Irving lacked stong connectives and it made his transistion between points a little uncomfortable. Also Irving's conclusion was weak because he was missing a call to action, and in his conclusion he summarized his entire speech over. Irving when ending a speech it is best not to reiterate everything that you just said because you are basically telling your audience that you doubt there ability to retain information and that is kind of an insult to the audience.
All in all i enjoyed the presentation and it was a great first speech.
My speech partner was Amanda Aviles and her topic was high gas prices.
To start I want to say that I thought you did a great job with your speech, and you looked nice, very appropriate. Your attention grabber was good like I told you, but I thought it was a bit short. You kind of rushed the pictures. I think you could have elaborated more on it. It did grab the audience’s attention though.
Even though we already knew what your issue was, you didn’t clearly state your issue. You had your credibility in the introduction, which was stated clearly, which was good. You verbally cited correctly and you had all of your citations on your slides. You stuck to the six by six rule. None of your slides had an excessive amount of information on it. The design of your slides was nice, and it didn’t take away from your speech.
Your posture was good. You looked like you were confident up there, and you knew what you were talking about. I don’t know if you notice it, but sometime you talk with your hands and arms. That kind of got distracting after a while. But other than that your posture was great.
You had good eye contact. You looked at the whole audience at all times. I saw that you also looked into the camera at some points, which was good. You also had good projection and articulation. You spoke clearly and slowly, so everyone could hear what you were saying. Overall, I think you had a good presence in front of the class for your speech, and I’m sure the camera loved you!
Post a Comment