Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Persuasive Speaking - Day Section
Please post your critiques here for our persuasive speeches. The comments must address the argument and include comments on the steps to the motivated sequence and the evidence used to support them. Do not only address delivery. I want you to really analysis the argument in both verbal and visual forms. What kinds of evidence was used? What was the quality of the sources chosen? What specifically moved you or did not move you to take action? What kinds of areas does the speaker need to continue improving upon? These are some important points that need to be addressed in your blog posting with any other comments that you wish to include.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I am critiquing Joe’s persuasive speech on wikipedia. In his speech he addressed his problem with wikipedia being called an unreliable source, where it actually can be a helpful tool for students. He followed Monroe’s motivated sequence well by addressing the problem, the plan, and the practicality. I felt it was a very informative speech. He made me think differently about wikipedia, which was the goal of the speech- to persuade. Although, he could have made his speech even more persuasive by using more credible sources and citing out loud. As far as delivering his speech, he has a very conversational tone. He connects with the audience well and improved on his eye contact since his last speech. One improvement he could make would be to be more prepared though. In a few points in the speech, he lost his train of thought. Maybe with a little more preparation and the use of note cards, this would improve. And, I think that one final improvement would be to use the lectern as a tool to relax more and not move around as much. Overall, Joe’s speech accomplished what it was supposed to. I will probably use wikipedia as a starting point in research and look into the external links that he recommended.
Today I am critiquing Nicole's persuassive speech kids and cell phones. I really liked how she started off her speech by asking the audience questions, it was a great way to get our attention and keep us interested and even curious on what she was going to talk about next. I can definetely tell that Nicole did her research. She cited everything so well, outloud and in her power point. Nicole had well thought out plans to help solve the problems that she addressed in her speech. What makes it even better is that she has a very conversational voice, she's very easy to listen to. The only thing is that she was speaking a little too fast. I think that if she were to slow down her words more it all would of flowed nicely without using the word "um" too much which was another thing I caught her doing. Also, she could of had a little bit more eye contact. Nicole was reading off her notecards too much which took her attention off the audience. Overall, Nicole was very persuassive in her speech and you can hear her passion behind it, especially when she brought in her own life experience. She surely got me thinking about the topic even after class has ended...
I am critiquing Avonlea's persuasive speech. I think Avonlea did a fantastic job of preparing her speech and it was clear how much work went into the preparation. Her sources were really well incorporated with the speech and they added to the impact of the point she was trying to make. She followed Monroe's motivated sequence well and I could see all the steps were taken to achieve the goal of persuasion. She used a great attention getter, she cited out loud and on the powerpoint, and had a great conversational tone. Some things I thought that could use improvement in Avonlea's speech are the use of transitions, watching the 6x6 rule with the slides, and she was fidgety which I think caused her to use her hands more. To improve on these things I believe Avonlea can practice easy transitions so it helps the audience to follow along, and maybe using the lectern would help her stop using her hands. Practicing out loud may help with the problem of being fidgety, and maybe if she does it in front of someone they can give her feedback. Avonlea's speech was very well organized and presented and she did a great job.
I'am critiquing Marlee's persuasive speech on Explicit sexuality on tv. In Marlee's speech she stated her problem being that the sexuality on tv is taken too far and is attracting the wrong age group of viewers. Marlee had a good attention getter, but i wasn't clear on her view until after she stated her thesis which was well said.I can definitely see that Marlee worked hard on finding her research, because she had many citations in her power point but also she cited out loud very well.She looked very comfortable up in front of the class while speaking, she did not show any sign of nervousness. I felt that her voice could have been stronger so that she could have showed the audience how she really feels about her topic. Also although she made some eye contact more eye contact was needed. She would talk to the powerpoint sometimes. Overall she ended very well, her conclusion was strong and she made her point. She definitely got my attention while doing her speech with her visuals and her statistics.
For our persuasive speech I critiqued Danielle. She had an excellent speech her voice was loud and forcefull. It was clear and conversational for everyone to understand her she did talk a little fast and needs to slow it down a little but other than that her voice was fine. She hade a good attention getter with good points, facts and research to back up her thesis. She had a good ending and memerable statement. She was well organized and knew what she was talking about and was very confient in what she was saying. She just needs to use her hands less but other than that Danielle's speech was excellent and very easy to follow and she had me persuade.
Sami's speech was on college athletes and their academic expectations. To start off, there were a few distractions that made it hard to focus on her topic. She was a little bit too fidgety while she was speaking; I was more focused on the movement of her arms, hands, and feet than what she was actually saying. Also, she was lacking a smile; I feel like a good speaker needs to look like they are happy about what they are saying. Her eye contact was decent, but could definitely be improved; Sami could have looked at the audience a little more directly rather than looking just at the professor. This is an important aspect so that the audience feels like you really are interested in persuading them into something worth while. It seems like she could have practiced just a little bit more so that she would have been more comfortable in front of the class. Nervousness usually brings these downfalls to a speech and the more you practice, the less nervous you will be. There was a wide variety of citations in the slide show and mentioned aloud. The quality of these sources made for a persuasive speech to be effective. The only problem was that I was unsure what Sami was trying to persuad us. I feel like she needed to make her argument more clear rather than just stating an assortment of facts on college athletes academic expectations. Overall, the speech was delivered really well, of course with room for improvement.
I am critiquing Ja’lynn. She had really good attention getter. She held her eye contact with the audience, cited nicely in her presentation and the power point. I felt the transitions could have been smoother but all in all she did a good job. I can’t remember what the speech addressed but her arguments were forthcoming. She had good visuals that made the point stand out.
I will be critiquing Karin’s speech on violent video games. I actually enjoyed this presentation because I felt as if I could truly relate to it. However, there were a few things that could use some enhancement. When Karin began her speech, I immediately noticed her fear. I am a strong believer that fear is only an obstacle, but during this speech, I lost hope. I felt that she knew her material, so she should have relaxed and focused on persuading the audience and emotion. One thing I enjoyed about Karin’s speech on video game violence was that she connected emotionally with her topic. She truly believed in what she was telling her audience, and that was nice to listen to and to see. Karin’s attention getter was a bit confusing for me. I feel that an attention getter should be “contagious,” and it should also have a purpose. I had to wait to hear her “thesis” which was clear, to understand her attention getter. I liked to hear the statistics because that proved that she conducted research within her speech. Her citing was OK, but overall could have been more powerful. I do think her delivery of the speech could have been more persuasive, but again, overall it wasn’t bad. I did agree with the majority of her points and her positions, which made listening easy. Her voice is conversational, but the shakiness needs to subside. I would have enjoyed if Karin talked about ways that I, as an individual, could do something about this problem in video game violence. To sum it all up, her transitions and citing within the speech weren’t as clear as they could have been. I think Karin did a good job with getting her position out to the audience, but there is always room for improvement.
In critiquing Dean's persuasive speech I have recognized where he has improved and what he might be able to do for himself in the future. I felt that Dean's subject on alcohol advertisement was a topic that he was able to do a lot with. His opening slide served as an excellent attention getter and his facts were alarming. Dean did a much better job coordinating an easy to read layout this time as well as cited all of his information. As usual his voice was conversational and he did well when he brought in a personal experience. However, on the contrary Dean seemed like he needed a bit more time preparing for the speech as it seemed he was not sure exactly what he was talking about next until he reassured himself by checking out the slides. This brings me to another issue that many people, including myself, still have trouble with; eye contact. Although, it would have been nice for Dean to make more eye contact with the audience, I still thought he did well all in all. Lastly though, it would have been more convincing if Dean explained the link more at the end and explained how to go about changing things. In the end we all did a great job considering this was only our second speech in a short span of time.
I am critiquing Ashley’s speech on the paparazzi. I thought Ashley began her speech very well. Her attention getter was really wowful and made me wonder what she was going to have to say. She also had a lot of good information in her speech. She had some great quotes from celebrities, which I though was great since they are the people that are affected first hand. She cited all of her information and research well on her slides and also out loud. On the other hand, Ashley seemed a little nervous, she was fidgeting and had her feet crossed. I would suggest that she take a deep breath and relax. I also noticed that eye contact with the audience was also lacking during her speech. She was talking to the powerpoint a lot. And third I did not hear a preview sentence in the beginning of her speech. Aside from these couple of things I thought Ashley did a great job with her second speech.
I am critiquing Lori's persuasive speech on video games. To begin with, I already agree with her argument, so I thought her speech was put together well and I felt she had strong points. She cited really well both on her powerpoint and out loud, and I could really tell that she put a lot of work into what she was saying.
The only problem I really had with her speech is her delivery. Sure, she already had me and maybe a couple other people, but with the three other speeches that went almost directly against hers, I felt that she could have put a little more of herself into what she was saying so she could draw those people in.
Post a Comment