Evaluation of Public Speech in English



Similar documents
Rubrics for Assessing Student Writing, Listening, and Speaking High School

APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM ADMISSION TO TEACHER EDUCATION INTERVIEW INSTRUMENT COMMUNICATION PERFORMANCE ORAL EVALUATIONS

Form: Filled in table. Method: Peer assessment. Tool: Checklist. Form: Completed table. Method: Peer assessment. Tool: Checklist

IMPROMPTU PUBLIC SPEAKING

French Language and Culture. Curriculum Framework

SPEECH Orientation Packet

COMPREHENSIVE SPEECH EVALUATION Sheet for Teachers

Maryland 4-H Public Speaking Guide

DynEd International, Inc.

Prepared Public Speaking

National FFA Prepared Public Speaking Career Development Event A Special Project of the National FFA Foundation DRAFT

INFORMATIVE SPEECH. Examples: 1. Specific purpose: I want to explain the characteristics of the six major classifications of show dogs.

School and Festival Appearances. By Brian Falkner - Author

The Competent Communicator Manual

High School Speech and Debate Judging Basics and Event Descriptions

Study Guide for the Elementary Education: Content Knowledge Test

COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY IN TEACHING READING

COM 151 PUBLIC SPEAKING

COMPETENT COMMUNICATION MANUAL (NEW)

Section 8 Foreign Languages. Article 1 OVERALL OBJECTIVE

OBJECTIVES: GENERIC SKILLS

HOW CAN I IMPROVE MY PUBLIC SPEAKING SKILLS? (To be used in conjunction with the assessment developed for Standard 4B.J and 5C.J)

Reflections on teaching in English-medium courses

An Analysis of the Eleventh Grade Students Monitor Use in Speaking Performance based on Krashen s (1982) Monitor Hypothesis at SMAN 4 Jember

Maryland 4-H Public Speaking Guide

Link: University of Canberra

Lecture Overheads: Communicating Across Cultures. Communication for Managers Fall 2012

TO WRITING AND GIVING A GREAT SPEECH. A Reference Guide for Teachers by Elaine C. Shook Leon County 4-H

THE ART OF 4-H PUBLIC SPEAKING. 4-H Manual 95 Rep. July 1993 For Grade Levels 4-12

ADVANCED COMMUNICATION SERIES PUBLIC RELATIONS. Assignment #1: THE PUBLIC RELATIONS SPEECH

Care Skillsbase: Skills Check 5 What Is Effective Communication?

Study Guide for the English Language, Literature, and Composition: Content Knowledge Test

Pasadena City College / ESL Program / Oral Skills Classes / Rubrics (1/10)

Eighty-second Annual High School Oratorical Scholarship Program "A Constitutional Speech Contest"

ILLINOIS ASSOCIATION FFA Rules for Extemporaneous Public Speaking CDE

Teaching and Educational Development Institute. Presentation skills for teachers

Speech-Language Pathology Study Guide

Study Guide for the Library Media Specialist Test Revised 2009

stress, intonation and pauses and pronounce English sounds correctly. (b) To speak accurately to the listener(s) about one s thoughts and feelings,

EIGHT PUBLIC SPEAKING COMPETENCIES & CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT

Five Mistakes People Make Reading Body Language And Five Nonverbal Signals That Send Positive Messages

Winning the Toastmasters Speech Evaluation Contest

CALIFORNIA ACADEMIC DECATHLON

Government of India OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION Opposite Safdarjung Airport, New Delhi

TASIS England Summer School. TASIS English Language Program (TELP) Description of Levels and Key Learning Objectives

Designing a Multimedia Feedback Tool for the Development of Oral Skills. Michio Tsutsui and Masashi Kato University of Washington, Seattle, WA U.S.A.

Speaking and Listening Materials

5 Free Techniques for Better English Pronunciation

ANGLAIS LANGUE SECONDE

Virginia English Standards of Learning Grade 8

Second Language Acquisition Stages Stephen Krashen (1986) Silent and Receptive Stage

Study Guide for the Special Education: Core Knowledge Tests

Mock Interview Rating Scale

Verbal boxing by Matt Bryer

MATRIX OF STANDARDS AND COMPETENCIES FOR ENGLISH IN GRADES 7 10

Lost For Words This article originally appeared in Special Children magazine, Issue 191, October 2009

ELPS TELPAS. Proficiency Level Descriptors

Are your employees: Miss Miller s Institute will train your employees in: huge benefits for your company.

Academic Standards for Reading, Writing, Speaking, and Listening

Categories of Exceptionality and Definitions

Public Speaking Booklet

Lesson Effective Communication Skills

APEC Online Consumer Checklist for English Language Programs

Academic Standards for Reading, Writing, Speaking, and Listening June 1, 2009 FINAL Elementary Standards Grades 3-8

COURSE OUTLINE. 3 3 Lecture Hours Hours: lecture/laboratory/other (specify)

Types of communication

Copyright 2005 by Washington Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. All rights reserved. Educational institutions within the State of

Lesson 3. Becoming a Better Speaker. What You Will Learn to Do. Linked Core Abilities. Skills and Knowledge You Will Gain Along the Way.

The Official Study Guide

CONTROLLING YOUR FEAR

4-H Public Speaking Organizer s Guide

Body Language vs. Negotiating. Sumbiosis / Thinkpieces 1

Promoting Learner Autonomy and Language Awareness Through Blogging

Promote and sell products and services to clients Unit 317 1

Ⅱ Admissions Requirements. 1.Terms of Application

Tips for Effective Online Composition and Communication with Dr. Gary Burkholder

Kristin Slattery 1852 Enchantment Drive Fort Collins, CO (970) (cell)

SYLLABUS SPHR 1011: Voice and Diction Spring 2014

Inspiration Standards Match: Virginia

Working people requiring a practical knowledge of English for communicative purposes

Communications & Public Speaking

The Great Debate. Handouts: (1) Famous Supreme Court Cases, (2) Persuasive Essay Outline, (3) Persuasive Essay Score Sheet 1 per student

Language Skills in a Multilingual Society Syed Mohamed Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board

ALBUQUERQUE PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Choir 5. September 2014

EMPORIA STATE UNIVERSITY THE TEACHERS COLLEGE. CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT: ED334 Spring, 2011 Three Hours

Speech Communications Online SPC 2608

Persuasive Writing Persuasive Paragraph

Analyzing Videos to Learn to Think Like an Expert Teacher...

Choir 6. Content Skills Learning Targets Assessment Resources & Technology A: Rehearsal Skills

Communication Program Assessment Report

Use of Gestures in the English Classroom

Transcription:

Evaluation of Public Speech in English Tomoe Mega School of Education, Waseda University 1. The purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine what kind of speech is effective and persuasive in speech contests. 2. Procedure Step1: I asked the judges and audience to evaluate speeches in two English Speech Contests. Step2: I researched different criteria among their evaluation. Step3: I show what criteria should be written on evaluation sheets. 3. A case study 3.1. In my University s internal speech contest (middle-level contest) Form of the contest In this contest, each speaker delivers a speech within 7 minutes. After the speech, they have a question and answer session for 3 minutes, and answer questions from the judges about the content. Judges There are two judges. One is a native speaker of English who teaches English in Japan. The other is a Japanese English teacher who has some experiences of debating at college. Speakers All the contestants were Waseda university students. Among them, ten speakers were chosen as the top ten. Difference between judges and audience There are three differences: Unlike the audience (mostly students), the judges have a high fluency level of English. Unlike the audience, the judges are given the manuscripts of the speech beforehand. 122

Unlike the audience, the judges have some discussion time for the selection of the winners. How to evaluate: judging sheet (Appendix 2) Firstly, each judge evaluates a speech by him/herself. Secondly, they compare each other s evaluation of the speech and decide four prize winners. The top four speakers can get the prize. As for the audience, I gave them the following questionnaire and asked them to rank the contestants. Questioner to audience No.1 Name Contents Title 1 2 3 4 5 Organization 1 2 3 4 5 Introduction 1 2 3 4 5 Body 1 2 3 4 5 Conclusion 1 2 3 4 5 Originality 1 2 3 4 5 Analysis 1 2 3 4 5 Quality of Example 1 2 3 4 5 English& Verbal Grammar 1 2 3 4 5 Choice of words 1 2 3 4 5 Pronunciation 1 2 3 4 5 Articulation Intonation 1 2 3 4 5 Stress &Rhythm 1 2 3 4 5 Voice 1 2 3 4 5 Speed 1 2 3 4 5 Pause 1 2 3 4 5 Non-Verbal &Overall Posture 1 2 3 4 5 Gesture 1 2 3 4 5 Facial Expression 1 2 3 4 5 Eye Contact 1 2 3 4 5 Confidence 1 2 3 4 5 Sincerity 1 2 3 4 5 123

Memorization 1 2 3 4 5 Question & Answer To the Point 1 2 3 4 5 Fluency 1 2 3 4 5 Clear 1 2 3 4 5 Results of the Contest: The rank given by judges A B C D E F G H I Contents English & Verbal 1 9 6 5 7 4 3 8 2 2 8 3 7 4 6 5 9 1 Non-Verbal& Overall 1 9 8 6 5 3 7 4 2 Question& Answer 1 8 4 6 9 5 3 7 2 The final ranking by the judges seems to be related to the points of contents and question and answer sessions. Comparison of the results Lank (Top4) Total Rank by Judges Rank by Audience (Prize winners) 1 Speaker A Speaker H 2 Speaker I Speaker I 3 Speaker G Speaker F 4 Speaker F Speaker A Priority of evaluation : judges and audience The audience places too much emphasis on both fluency and delivery rather than on the content. i.e., the organization and argumentation of speech. The judges are given enough time to carefully read the manuscript of the speech beforehand. 124

The audience has to make a judgment on the spot while the speech is being delivered. Topics Speaker Speaker A Speaker B Topic Care service for handicapped children in Japan Psychology of Japanese people Speaker C The importance of organ transportation. Speaker D Breakdown in the elementary school classroom Speaker E Manner of use of portable phone in the train Speaker F How we view people in our first impression Speaker G The development of cloning technology Speaker H The importance of her club members Speaker I Service for cancer children Comparison of topics H spoke about how precious club members are, and how she overcame her personal problem by support of friends. F discussed how he misjudged people s character from first impression by citing his personal experience Since these two speeches were based on easy-to-understand topics rather than socially-complicated issues, the audience easily related to the speeches. How the topics affected the results Unlike the audience, the judges did not evaluate Speaker H so highly. The reason being is that her topic was relevant to the audience, but not to the judges. 3.2. In All Japan Intercollegiate English Oratorical Contest (High level contest) Form of the contest In the contest, each speaker delivers a speech within 7 minutes. After the speech, they have question and answer sessions for 3 minutes. 125

Judges There are three judges and one questioner in the contest. Three judges are: A. a professor and priest (a NS of English), B. an English teacher (a NS of English), and C. a bank worker who won several speech contests in the past (a NNS of English). A questioner is a bank worker who won a speech contest in the past. Speakers All speakers are university students from all over Japan. Ten speakers were chosen through the selection process. Difference between judges and audience There are three differences: Unlike the audience (mostly students), the judges have a high fluency level of English. Unlike the audience, the judges are given the manuscripts of the speech beforehand. Unlike the audience, the judges have some discussion time for the selection of the winners. How to evaluate Firstly, each judge evaluates a speech solely by him/herself. Secondly, they compare each other s evaluation of the speech and decide four prize winners. The top four speakers can get the prize. Topics Speaker Speaker A Speaker B Topic Supporting system of company for working women Working issue Speaker C Working issue Speaker D Necessity of hospice in Japan Speaker E Speaker F To support serious disease children s dream come true Domestic violence 126

Speaker G Death penalty discussion in Japan Speaker H Education at hospital for disease children Speaker I Ethical problems related to terminal treatment of children Speaker J After school care service for handicapped children in Japan Preferable topics All the speakers made speeches based on current social problems rather than on their personal experience. Personally- based topics are unlikely to be highly evaluated because of their subjective nature. Originality of Speech There were several topics which were very similar. (Speaker E, H, I, and J ) In this circumstance, the judges treated these topics as basically the same, and had no way but to highly evaluate the originality of the other speeches. That is, the originality became the determining factor of judgment. Results of Contest Rank Rank by judges Rank by audience 1 Speaker C Speaker J 2 Speaker J Speaker E 3 Speaker A Speaker C Effects of English and Since the audience made judgments based mainly on fluency, they gave Speaker E a high rating. Relationships between Contents and Question and Answer session The following data shows that there is a tendency for speakers with high points in Question and Answer session to receive high evaluation in contents. 127

4. Conclusion Favorite (popular) topics are different depending on the level of contest, Speeches are evaluated differently between the judges and the audience depends on the topic,. The judges and the audience give a high-priority rating to evaluation differently. The judges attach great importance to the content of speech. The audience attaches great importance to English and. The originality is the key for successful speeches in contests where there are several similar topics. Speakers who score high points in Question and Answer session get a high rating overall. 128

Appendix 1: An example of judging sheet Contents 90 Points Title Organization Introduction Body Conclusion Originality Analysis Quality of Example Sub Total 90 English&Verbal 60 Points Grammar Choice of words Pronunciation Articulation Intonation Stress & Rhythm Voice Speed Pause Sub Total 60 Non-Verbal & Overall 35 Points Posture Gesture Facial Expression Eye Contact Confidence Sincerity Memorization Sub Total 35 Question & Answer 15 Points To the Point Fluency Clear Sub Total 15 General Comments Judge s Signature Total 200 129

Appendix 2: Results among judges JUDGE B Speaker JUDGE A JUDGE C English& Non-Verbal& English& Non-Verbal& English& Non-Verbal& Verbal Overall Question& Verbal Overall Question& Verbal Overall Question& Contents Answer Total Contents Answer Total Contents Answer Total A 3 4 4 2 3 4 4 6 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 B 5 7 3 6 6 5 5 5 7 5 6 7 7 6 6 C 2 1 2 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 D 7 6 6 5 5 7 7 7 6 6 7 6 6 8 7 E 4 3 5 4 4 3 2 3 4 4 4 1 4 5 4 F 6 5 7 9 7 6 6 4 5 7 5 5 5 4 5 G 8 8 8 7 8 9 8 8 10 9 8 9 9 7 8 H 10 9 9 10 10 10 9 9 9 10 9 10 10 9 9 I 9 10 10 8 9 8 10 10 8 8 10 8 8 10 10 J 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 2 1 2 3 4 2 2 3 130