Response to Navaiera's commemorative speech

Navaiera decided to commemorate the King of Pop: Michael Jackson.  This was a bold choice, as there are many mixed opinions about him, his music, and his character.  Her personal connection to the honoree was integrated throughout the speech, much of it anecdotal; I liked this approach because it made the audience view things her way.  Not only did Navaiera talk about his professional accomplishments (which were many: changed the music industry with his special effects, dance moves and choreography, bridged the race gap by being the first black mega-music-star...etc), but she also spoke about his personal attributes.  These personal qualities included humanitarian acts ("heal the world," donating money..), dealing with his skin lightening medical condition, and the creation of Neverland where underpriveledged children could go to play.  I enjoyed Navaiera's enthusiasm during this speech; her gestures, tone of voice, everything, were conducive to effectively portraying Michael Jackson as a commendable figure. 

Response to Luke's commemorative speech

Luke chose to commemorate the organization called Teen Challenge, a program that changes lives, relieving addiction, by demonstrating and instilling Biblical principles (referred to as the "Jesus factor").  Spiritual growth was identified as the only way for suffering individuals to experience a sustained recovery.  The program does more than help overcome addictions; the Biblical principles can be applied in all aspects of life, giving hope, learning to take responsibilities for their actions, restoring relationships, and reestablishing lives.  Citing the success of several "graduates" was a good decision, as this strengthened the audience's ability to see this program, which many of us had never before heard of, as commendable and worthy of our respect and admiration.  The only critique I have to offer Luke is that he should have established his personal connection with the program more thoroughly; I think it was not until the question/answer session when we were able to get these answers.

Reflection: Commemorative speech

12/06/2011

           

For this speech, I chose to commemorate the Peace Corps.  I have been entertaining the idea of joining the program for several years and had already felt that I had a decent knowledge base from which I could begin forming ideas for my speech.  Additional research would be beneficial not only for the speech, but also for helping me to continuing shaping my own opinion of the organization and how/if it would be a good fit for me.

When writing my speech, I found the homework assignment that had been assigned to be helpful; unfortunately it took me awhile to think to focus on it, so I failed to touch upon some of the valuable tips in my speech.  The assignment had forced me to apply the principles in the handbook to actual commemorative pieces.  I think that it would have been a valuable assignment if applied to all of the speeches that we have done this semester (probably would have pushed students to use the handbook for more than just the quizzes…potentially could replace quizzes, which would leave extra class time).  From the assignment, I focused on amplifying the virtues of the Peace Corps and tried to establish my personal “relationship” with the program (although I think I failed because the first question asked of me was if I had ever considered joining…I had stated early in the speech that I had and that that was why I felt qualified to deem the Peace Corps commendable).  If I could go back and rewrite my speech, I would have chosen more powerful success story examples, to more strongly unify my audience into feeling a common, impressive sentiment toward the Peace Corps.  I think this issue limited the effectiveness of my speech; I didn’t really feel a moment of connection with my audience, which leads me to believe that it was not a very memorable speech.

I chose to speak on the first speaking day this time.  During my presentation, I felt no pulsing of my heart for the first time; I was unaware of any fidgeting and felt no nerves!  It was a great feeling of comfort.  I am not sure if I appeared more confident, but my lack of physical nerves made me feel more self-assured, which is what really matters; I’m sure one day my outward presentation will reflect my inner composure.

*side note*

Professor Fjelstad,
I just realized that you probably didn't notice this, but I want to let you know that my first 2 response blogs are under my first post as "comments"...I couldn't figure out how to make a new post for a while....hope this helps my blog grade!

Response to Kingsley's persuasive speech (skept)

Kingsley urged the audience to consider what we buy and where our food comes from.  He showed us that it is possible to buy local on a budget, and proved it by investigating and comparing prices of staple food items at a typical grocery store and at a farm stand.  The audience concerns here would have been cost (local foods tend to be more expensive) and convenience.  But Kingsley showed us that the prices are not significantly higher--so, for example, factory eggs may cost $1.19 and free range eggs may cost $2 or $3.  He demonstrated that the benefits of buying local outweigh the perceived convenience and cost issues; buying local serves to boost the local economy, allows a connection between farmer and consumer (know where it is coming from and how it is treated...notes that there have been recalls on factory-made eggs and beef...), and is generally the healthier option (grocery store options have chemicals, high fructose corn syrup...), which could potentially cut down future health issues/costs.  What I found to be the most persuasive aspect of the speech was the fact that Kingsley actually went out to the store and farm stand to do the price investigations himself.  This made him more credible as a speaker.

Reflection: Persuasive speech (skept)

11/22/2011

           

After my last speech (unconventional wisdom), which I had changed my topic for at the very last minute and felt it resulted in a rough presentation, I had hoped not to repeat the mistake.  For my persuasive speech, I had originally planned on talking about how dieting is a hoax and that all people need to do to “diet” is eat real food (not processed, food-like substances), but then I discovered that Caitlin was going to talk about fast foods and Kingsley was going to talk about buying locally on a budget.  For the sake of capturing the interest of the class and not being repetitive, I changed my topic again (but not quite as last minute as last time).  I chose to talk about the Northern Pass Project not only because I had pre-existing knowledge on the issue, but also because I felt strongly opposed to it and knew that many people were in support of the project (this became evident to me when I almost got into an argument with my roommate’s parents…that moment actually made me realize that the Northern Pass Project would be a great topic to be geared toward a skeptical audience). 

I liked how I approached writing my speech.  Instead of discussing the major reasons that people are opposed to the project, I found out why people support it (which I did not really know at the time and realized that in not understanding the other side, my opinions on the issue were meaningless).  I soon discovered that the reasons were deceiving—empty promises, as I had imagined.  But what I had not speculated was the corporate aspect, that the project is merely a deal between three mega-corporations who are scheming to violate private property rights for the benefit of their private companies—I hope I was able to convey to my audience that if they are successful in obtaining the power of eminent domain, it would serve as a dangerous precedent for future corporate control. 

As far as the presentation of my speech, maybe it was because I was told that I am improving greatly, but I do feel like I have come a long way since September.  I do, however, attribute much of this speech’s success to the fact that we were allotted the first 10-15 minutes of class to practice.  During the practice round I did horribly, which made me a little nervous for the actual presentation; but I got all the stumbling out of my system.  I felt comfortable and didn’t notice any fidgeting; I’m not sure that I will ever be able to stop “um”-ing, but I will continue the fight against “ums” for my final commemorative speech.

Response to Drew's unconventional wisdom speech

I think that Drew's decision to talk about the positive aspects of videogaming was brave, as many people see them as an unproductive way to spend time. His speech served as a successful example of how to convey unconventional wisdom:  he did not totally debunk conventional ideas on the issue, but gave us some things to think about that we probably had not considered before.  In his question and answer session, the audience posed some clearly skeptical comments, but Drew dealt with it gracefully.

Response to Caitlin's unconventional wisdom speech

Caitlin chose an interesting topic, although I guess all of the topics spoken about were unconventional...nonetheless I really enjoyed this one.  She chose to talk about the importance of forgiveness, less for the sake of forgiveness itself than for the sake of the forgiver.  Bringing up valid points about the side-effects of holding a grudge, Caitlin cited several studies that had to do with the physiological effects/health issues related to grudge-holding, including increased blood pressure.  These points seemed strong to me and were effective in making the audience really think about her topic in a new way.  Although I did notice Caitlin referring to her note cards more often than she usually does, I did make note that I had felt that she still made adequate eye contact during her speech, which gave the impression of confidence in her words.  The speech itself seemed to flow differently than is typical of her speeches, less conversational; but I didn't see this as a bad thing, just different.

Reflection: Unconventional wisdom speech

11/07/2011

I had a difficult time coming up with an unconventional wisdom topic.  At first I was going to talk about the personal reward for performing random acts of kindness and how positive actions toward strangers can start a perpetuating cycle of kindness (“pay it forward”).  I questioned the “unconventionalness” of this topic idea, however.  I now think it would have been an acceptable subject, but at the time I did not, so I decided to consider talking about how people tend to search for miracle diets instead of simply eating real foods in moderation.  I drafted an outline and everything, but when I went to the library to work on it I passes some books about animal cognition and I immediately wanted to change my topic to the benefits of owning a dog.  I realized that I could use the diet outline for my persuasive speech instead.  This was this speech-round’s curveball to myself: last-minute topic switch, which inevitably left less time for preparation.

            I am glad I changed topics though; I felt much more enthusiastic and connected with my speech (especially since I had just gone home the previous weekend and had treated myself to some dog-therapy; I was truly feeling the benefits).  Although I do not think that I performed as well as I had on past speeches, based on the question/answer session I think that the audience felt my energy, which I took as a plus.  Because of my compromised preparation time, I feel as though my speech was a bit rough; under-practiced.  My words just did not come out as smoothly as I would have hoped.  For the upcoming persuasive speech I hope to stick to my topic, or at least not change it less than a day before my scheduled presentation.  

Response to Holly's persuasive speech (symp)

Holly chose to advocate for lowering the drinking age back to 18, but used new, less talked-about reasons to back her argument.  She quoted Ron Paul (a take on having the freedom to make good or bad decisions), and made appropriate use of statistics throughout the presentation.  It was an interesting speech that incited a fun and interesting discussion during the Q/A session.  There was some opposition to her position, which may have made her nervous (I noticed her increased use of "like" at this time, but not during the speech).  It was a great, well-thought-out speech. My only critiques would be her referencing her note cards somewhat frequently and this nervous fidgety/swaying thing she did (takes a step forward for a moment then shifts her weight back and returns to her original position).

Response to Caitlin's persuasive speech (symp)

I had the opportunity to work with Caitlin on Thursday (10/20) before the speeches began, to see how she prepared for her presentation.  As it turns out, she seemed to be so familiar with the facts associated with her speech that she did not choose to try to memorize/rehearse the wording on her outline--this may explain why her speeches tend to be more conversational than dictated; I like it though.  For this speech Caitlin chose to talk about animal testing for cosmetic purposes.  She defined "cosmetic", explained the suffering endured by test animals (which was appalling, by the way), and then went into the policy aspects.  She said "um" a noticeable amount of times but it was not too distracting (I probably only noticed because I was looking for things to critique)--she spoke with conviction and clearly has strong feelings on the issue.

Response to Allie's persuasive speech (symp)

Allie's fun, light speech was a breath of fresh air.  She chose to promote the use of dry shampoo, a topic that proved to relate and appeal to the audience.  She explored the history of dry shampoo and told us about the different types; she recommended the Tresseme brand for price and quality and demonstrated its use, which was entertaining.  Allie was very well-spoken and appeared comfortable throughout her presentation.  I cannot think of anything on which I could critique her...it was a very memorable speech.

Reflection: Persuasive speech (sympathetic audience)

10/25/2011

           

Last time, for my informative speech, I had found that I went well over the time limit, and I wanted to have a more focused objective for my persuasive speech; my topic had been too broad before and I found it difficult to omit information to form a more concise speech.  My goal for my persuasive speech was to restrict its length to somewhere between 5 and 6 minutes; I was successful.  To do this, I had to narrow my subject from global water availability (way too general) to wetland protection in light of global water availability.  While I easily could have gone into further depth on the issue, I remained conscious of the fact that I needed to stick to the bare minimum, most basic information that I needed in order to convey the message effectively. I decided to use the apple to demonstrate how much water is available for human use because I know that it effectively shows how little there is to begin with, before pollution takes its toll—I did this demonstration several times over the summer and assumed that if children can understand/visualize the concept this way, my audience could, too.

During my speech, I noticed myself saying “um,” but not as frequently as I had in the past.  I was unaware of any fidgeting that may have occurred.  I did notice that my heart was not racing throughout the speech—that was exciting for me.  Luke mentioned in one of his blogs that I appear extremely nervous but shouldn’t be because I am clearly prepared—I tried to focus on appearing less nervous, even if I was, and found that physically restraining my nerves actually caused me to feel less nervous. 

Response to Holly's informative speech

Holly chose to talk about child soldiers, a topic that spurred her interest after watching the movie Blood Diamond.  I too had seen this film, so I was familiar with the concept but not overly knowledgeable in the details of the issue or the extent of the brainwashing experienced by the children; it was a good choice of topic, as no one with a heart could help but feel sad afterwards.  The quotes and references she cited were relevant and seemed credible (although difficult to say for sure without investigating the source).  There was minimal fidgeting during the speech, and I was impressed with how smoothly Holly spoke.

Response to Luke's informative speech

I enjoyed Luke's informative speech.  He chose a topic that everyone could relate to: how one's ability to learn may be affected by the time of day.  It was a relevant subject to talk about, but also something of which many people are unaware--I don't think that anyone in the class knew much, if anything, about it.  Luke had a clear, obvious thesis statement, which helped the audience follow the points of the speech. I noticed that he did refer to his note cards more frequently than I remember him doing during other speeches, but I think that he did this mostly when he was relaying a quote, statistic, or citing information...which makes sense (I think everyone referred to their notes more frequently this time around).

Reflection: Informative speech

10/6/2011

            When forming the list of possible topics we were assigned to make, I decided that I wanted to make my informative speech on Nature-Deficit Disorder.  I had done a lot of reading and research on environmental education in the last few years, and thought it would be relevant for me to explore the problem (NDD) more in depth, as opposed to the solution (environmental education), about which I am already knowledgeable; I would gain more from the assignment if I were to learn something new.  I did enjoy the preparation of my speech more than I had in the past, maybe because I was especially interested in the subject, or maybe because, with the assigned draft outline and revised outline, I was forced to work on it a little at a time and not all at once at the end (as I unfortunately tend to treat all homework assignments in all my classes). 

            Come the day of the speech, I arrived at school only to realize that I had forgotten my note cards at home.  Instead of spending the free time I had between classes practicing my speech as I had anticipated, I had to re-write my cards.  In the future I will remember to rehearse my speech more thoroughly the night before (and not wait until the day-of to make sure I ended under the time-limit).  Because of this, I referred to my note cards too much during my speech.  My nerves this time around were less what I would describe as “pangy” (pulsing, radiating from the inside), and more of shaky nerve that I felt was visible in my hands and extremities.  I also fidgeted my feet a bunch, again.  When Navaiera spoke, she walked around and used arm gestures, and I immediately wished that I had remembered to do that (I had made note of this when she presented her current event speech and liked it then); to me this made her appear (and I imagine feel) more calm and relaxed.  I focused more on trying to speak more smoothly (as I felt Holly had done that day) and did not notice myself saying “um” in every sentence as I felt I had during my current event speech.  Perhaps this focus distracted me from conveying my points efficiently, as I went well over the time limit; I will be sure to have a more narrowed thesis statement next time—this topic was too broad and I had a difficult time omitting information to form a more concise speech.

Reflection: Current event mini-speech

9/27/2011

            When asked in class to come up with a current event idea, I had nothing.  I then realized that I am appallingly out of touch with current global news.  So I thought locally and remembered about the increased crime occurring in New Haven, CT that has made the places I used to frequent not worth the risk of visiting the city (not that I ever really felt safe there).  I knew I had a personal story to grab my audience’s attention, so I stuck with the topic. 

As I was preparing my speech, however, I remembered that in class we were told to present the current event in a way that revealed how or why the news was important/mattered to the audience.  This is when I decided to make a connection between the New Haven police’s response to crime and the way the UNH police force responds to crime.  Through the question and answer session though it was evident that the audience was more interested in my story about my sister and the happenings in New Haven than in the way UNH police conduct themselves.  I suspect that this is at least partly because many of my audience members are first-year students who have not been around campus long enough to feel as though violent crime is an issue on campus; they probably have not walked alone across campus at night either, to discover if they feel safe doing so or not (last year I did this frequently, but always with a bottle of pepper spray).  Therefore, I feel my connection with my audience was made within my first few sentences, but that connection seemed to linger there and not travel throughout the rest of my speech.  This makes me reconsider how I presented my material and how I chose to follow my story; if I were to rewrite my speech, I would probably develop a more obvious objective.

Before giving my speech, I felt fine; over the weeks I have felt myself become more and more comfortable with my classmates.  The second I stood up though, I felt a pang of nerves radiate from my heart, and it began to pound.  I had a few moments while the class was still discussing Kingsley’s speech to try to collect myself—I took several strong, purposeful and slow breaths; my heart rate may have lessened slightly, but was consistently racing throughout my speech.  As I began my sister’s story, I found that I was not nearly as comfortable talking about it as I thought I would have been (given that I did not myself experience the tragedy).  This discomfort caused me to say “um” far too frequently, and I realized it as it happened but I couldn’t stop.  This also led me to refer to my notecards too much (the topic made my mind wander to thoughts of my sister, and not the topic at hand: giving my speech).  These things must have been obvious to my audience.  I make note not to choose a sensitive topic again, as I could not effectively handle it.