The analysis of the informative speech

Hello! We have a task to evaluate one of informative speeches from the book that other students prepared. I decided to choose the text #5 “Another London”.

1. Introduction: (10 points)

·         What technique(s) was used in the introduction? 

The speaker asked a question.

Any link-element?

 I am afraid, there was no a link element in the introduction.

·         Was the thesis statement given?

I did not notice the thesis statement; the author has problems with formulating his main idea of the speech. The speaker immediately made a preview after the usage of attention getters.

·         How effective was the introduction? 

Very effective 10, 9, 8

Average 7, 6, 5

Not effective 4, 3, 2, 1

Max 10 pts ____5_____

2. Body:  (10 points)

·         How well structured was the information presented?

Highly organized 10, 9, 8

Some organized 7, 6, 5, 4

None 3, 2, 1

·         What organizational structure was used in the body of the speech? 

The speaker used outlining and organizational patterns. I liked that the speaker used linking words to structure his speech. However, the speech seemed to me quite puzzle-headed.

·         How understandable was the information (was it clearly explained)?

Very good 10, 9, 8

Had some problems 7, 6, 5, 4

Had major problems 3, 2, 1

·         Quality of point-support (appropriateness, completeness, variety)

Lots of 10, 9, 8

Some 7, 6, 5, 4

Almost no 3, 2, 1

·         Use of facts, illustrations, examples, stories.

Lots of 10, 9, 8

Some 7, 6, 5

None 4, 3, 2, 1

·         Was it coherent? 

The speech was coherent.

10  9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1

Max 10 pts ____7

3. Conclusion: (10 points)

·         What technique(s) was used in the conclusion?

Not sure about it, but I think the speaker did not use any.

·         Were all the steps followed (summary, action, emotional appeal?) 

No. It was hard to understand what main thought the author wanted to share with the audience. But I believe, it is that East London is absolutely different from usual London. There was no a summary and emotional appeal, but the speaker tried to inspire listeners to do an action step. The action step sounded a little funny because the speaker repeated some of the words many times. (“So, try to find out something new, and in this case you will always find it, I mean new”)

·         How effective was the conclusion?

Very effective 10, 9, 8	Average 7, 6, 5		Not effective 4, 3, 2, 1	Max 10 pts _____4
		Total points:  30	Given points:    ____16

The speech was good even though, there were some mistakes. I would recommend the speaker to improve the structure and of the speech and work on the main thesis. It would be great if the speaker stated the main message in the introduction as in the conclusion. Also, the speaker should learn to follow all the steps in the introduction (attention-getter, link-element (!), thesis statement (!), preview) and in the conclusion (summary (!), action, emotional appeal). Moreover, I would advise him to use more various examples and illustrations. But I liked the speech anyway, it was evident that the person put effort and worked hard. I learned some new and interesting information.

Источник: Уроки ораторского мастерства: учебно-методическое пособие / С.П. Хорошилова; Мин-во образования и науки РФ, Новосиб. гос. пед. ун-т. - Новосибирск: Изд-во НГПУ, 2014. - 138с. [с. 109-110]