The Toastmasters' contest

Today I want to make a post about three performances from the 2016 World Championship of Public Speaking. We had a task to watch the videos, evaluate them, then imagine ourselves as juries and give speakers the first, the second, the third places. I enjoyed watching all of the videos, but now I’d like to assess speeches of all contestants.

·        Josephine Lee

№		Max points	Given points
I	Speech Content	45	42
	Organization (comment on effectiveness of introduction; clarity of body, including both major divisions and support points; and efficacy of conclusion)	20	19
	Support (comment on speaker's use of facts, stories, illustrations, examples and/or logic to expand, explain, defend, inform the audience)	15	15
	Cohesion (comment on the speaker's ability to unify the speech and keep clear focus through use of transitions, summaries, and other unifying elements)	10	8
II	Speech Delivery	40	34
	Vocal presentation	20	17
	1) volume
	2) tempo
	3) pitch
	4) emphasis
	5) clear articulation
	Physical presentation	20	17
	1) eye contact
	2) gesturing
	3) posture
	4) facial expression
	5) movement
	6) dress
III	General Effectiveness	15	15
	Amount of time used (8 mins)
	Adherence to time requirements (comment on whether or not the speaker made good use of time, including whether the speech was too short or too long)	5	5
	Creativity (comment on art/uniqueness/individualized nature of the speech)	10	10
	Total points:	100	91

Actually, I liked her performance very much, even though it seemed to me that she played a little too thoroughly in some places. She spoke about being loyal friend that one can count on. It is sad that sometimes people do not always value having close-knit friends. Her main message was pretty clear and Josephine Lee was very convincing in conveying her ideas to the audience.  

·        Darren Tay

№		Max points	Given points
I	Speech Content	45	44
	Organization (comment on effectiveness of introduction; clarity of body, including both major divisions and support points; and efficacy of conclusion)	20	20
	Support (comment on speaker's use of facts, stories, illustrations, examples and/or logic to expand, explain, defend, inform the audience)	15	15
	Cohesion (comment on the speaker's ability to unify the speech and keep clear focus through use of transitions, summaries, and other unifying elements)	10	9
II	Speech Delivery	40	33
	Vocal presentation	20	15
	1) volume
	2) tempo
	3) pitch
	4) emphasis
	5) clear articulation
	Physical presentation	20	18
	1) eye contact
	2) gesturing
	3) posture
	4) facial expression
	5) movement
	6) dress
III	General Effectiveness	15	15
	Amount of time used (8 mins)
	Adherence to time requirements (comment on whether or not the speaker made good use of time, including whether the speech was too short or too long)	5	5
	Creativity (comment on art/uniqueness/individualized nature of the speech)	10	10
	Total points:	100	92

This contestant had a great expressiveness and a good sense of humor. I liked the way he spoke about serious things using methods that made the audience laugh. The lesson he wanted to teach was important for all people because we all face such problem as a low self-esteem.

·        Aaron Beverly

№		Max points	Given points
I	Speech Content	45	44
	Organization (comment on effectiveness of introduction; clarity of body, including both major divisions and support points; and efficacy of conclusion)	20	20
	Support (comment on speaker's use of facts, stories, illustrations, examples and/or logic to expand, explain, defend, inform the audience)	15	15
	Cohesion (comment on the speaker's ability to unify the speech and keep clear focus through use of transitions, summaries, and other unifying elements)	10	9
II	Speech Delivery	40	40
	Vocal presentation	20	20
	1) volume
	2) tempo
	3) pitch
	4) emphasis
	5) clear articulation
	Physical presentation	20	20
	1) eye contact
	2) gesturing
	3) posture
	4) facial expression
	5) movement
	6) dress
III	General Effectiveness	15	14
	Amount of time used (9 mins)
	Adherence to time requirements (comment on whether or not the speaker made good use of time, including whether the speech was too short or too long)	5	4
	Creativity (comment on art/uniqueness/individualized nature of the speech)	10	10
	Total points:	100	98

Aaron Beverly’s performance is my favorite. I was annoyed at first because he had such a long name of his speech. However, I realized that it was actually the best one. It was hard enough to judge all speakers, because, in fact, they were all great in what they were doing. So, I would like to rank the contestants in this order:

1.     Aaron Beverly

2.     Darren Tay

3.     Josephine Lee

I suppose that I have decided to do so because I paid attention to the way how much their speeches impressed me. Aaron Beverly won the first place because I could relate to the message of his performance. Besides, his acting skills were awesome. As for Darren Tay, I liked that he used visual aid and was also super creative and persuasive. Josephine Lee’s speech was also very good, though I did not have any strong emotions after watching her presentation. That is why she took the 3d place.

It is time to explain why I preferred Aaron Beverly’s performance. First of all, I want to start with the analysis of his speech content.

The organisation of speech. His introduction struck me. At first, I felt uncomfortable because he stood there silently and watched the audience with a poker face. But then he asked a question with such a sincere smile and I realized that the joke was funny and that made me laugh. Even though I was a little bit irritated by the long title of performance and pause at the beginning, my heart still melted. It was a very good attention-getter, I guess. Every part of his speech was clear including the body, both major divisions and support points. There was no a thing that was left unexplained or misunderstood. Besides, I liked the conclusion as well, it was effective. He called on people to understand that words have to be meaningful. It is not about how much you say, it is about what you say.

Support. Aaron brought many funny stories and examples from his life that illustrated the main idea of his performance. All of the stories were suitable for telling them in front of a public. The efficacy of examples can be proved by the way how the audience reacted to them- people laughed, listened carefully because he told really interesting situations and experiences he had.

Cohesion. I reckon that he managed to perfectly unify the speech. During a whole speech he kept repeating its main message. He was also successful in transitioning to other parts of his speech, each part was not abrupt, also he summarized what he was talking about very well.

Now I would like to give some comments on the speech delivery.

Vocal presentation. Aaron is a master in working with his voice. He articulated all the words very clearly, spoke with a quite fast tempo, but it was easy to catch everything he said. The pitch and emphasis were also great, he pronounced some words with a special stress to draw everyone’s attention. Also, he used a particular intonation to denote that something he said was actually a sarcasm. I liked that Aaron made pauses when it was necessary. It helped him to emphasize the importance of what he was going to speak about.

Physical presentation. The eye contact with the audience was constant, he did not try to avoid it, it was obvious that he felt confident talking in front of many people. Moreover, the speaker used various gestures. His movements were not excessive, his posture was good, but I think it was quite relaxed. As for facial expression, I must admit his outstanding talent to act. He did not overact and this is really important for me. Aaron has such a natural charm that makes one want to believe him. He wore a costume and it looked quite appropriate for the situation.

The only thing that I did not like much is the duration of his performance. It is just 9 minutes long, however I believe he could have shorten it a little bit. For example, the pause at the beginning should have been not that long. However, these are just my own suggestions and thoughts. Probably, it was vital to do so. Aaron was very creative, he had a unique style of speaking, making jokes. All in all, the performance was very touching and effective. I stick to the idea of his speech and truly support it. To my mind, it is better to talk less, but tell important stuff, rather than talk so much and tell nothing valuable. Sometimes a few words can be more powerful than a meaningless chatter.
What about you? Who did you like most? Let me know in the comments down below!