17 - Critiquing Public Speakers

Summary

This video script explores the intricacies of handling criticism, particularly in the context of public speaking. It emphasizes the importance of both giving and receiving constructive feedback, focusing on aspects like speech content, delivery, and organization. The discussion also touches on the impact of personal biases and the significance of evaluating speeches based on their merits rather than the speaker's characteristics. The script includes insights from Judy Pearson from Virginia Tech University and encourages viewers to embrace criticism as a tool for growth and improvement in communication skills.

Takeaways

• 🤔 Criticism can be challenging to accept, but it's essential for personal growth and learning.
• 👀 The focus of criticism is often on negatives, but it can also highlight positive aspects and provide constructive feedback.
• 🎤 When evaluating public speeches, consider aspects like organization, delivery, content, and ethical standards rather than personal characteristics.
• 📊 Studies show that gender can influence how speeches are evaluated, with females sometimes receiving higher scores and more lenient feedback.
• 👥 Personal biases can affect the way we critique speeches, so it's important to be aware of and try to set these aside for fair evaluation.
• 📝 Using an evaluation form can help structure critical analysis and keep the focus on relevant attributes of a speech.
• 👂 Listening and responding with understanding is crucial in communication, and constructive criticism can enhance this skill.
• 💡 Content is as important as delivery in a speech; a polished presenter can deliver lackluster content, and vice versa.
• 👨‍🏫 Students should not be intimidated to critique public speakers, even those with high profiles, using critical listening and thinking skills.
• 🔍 It's beneficial to look for balance in criticism, acknowledging both strengths and areas for improvement to foster continuous improvement.

Q & A

What is the main theme discussed in the script?

The main theme discussed in the script is the importance of criticism, both positive and negative, in the context of public speaking and personal growth.

Who is Judy Pearson and what is her role in the discussion?

Judy Pearson is from Virginia Tech University and she joins the discussion to talk about criticism in public speeches, including how to evaluate speeches and how to give and take constructive criticism.

What are some ways to evaluate a speech as mentioned in the script?

The script suggests evaluating speeches by considering organization, delivery, content, and ethical standards. It also recommends using an evaluation form to keep focused on these attributes.

How does the script address the issue of personal biases affecting speech evaluation?

The script highlights that personal biases, such as age, race, sex, or stature, can affect speech evaluation and emphasizes the importance of focusing on the speech's attributes rather than the speaker's personal characteristics.

What is the significance of the story about the daughter and the 11-year-old from Trenton?

The story illustrates the value of learning from different experiences and people, suggesting that education and wisdom can come from unexpected sources, and it challenges the notion that formal education is the only path to learning.

Why is it important to separate the speaker from the speech when critiquing?

Separating the speaker from the speech is important to ensure fair and objective evaluation. It allows critics to focus on the content, delivery, and structure of the speech rather than being influenced by personal characteristics of the speaker.

What does the script suggest about the impact of genetics on discrimination?

The script discusses studies that show genetic discrimination is more common than people might think, with individuals being denied health insurance not because they are sick but due to their genetic predispositions or relationships to those who are sick.

How does the script recommend giving negative criticism?

The script suggests giving negative criticism in a constructive and considerate manner, using a written critique form to express negative comments, being specific about the issues without attacking the person, and balancing negative comments with positive feedback.

What is the role of the audience in giving feedback as per the script?

The audience plays a crucial role in providing feedback on speeches. Their critiques, whether positive or negative, help speakers improve and adapt their presentations, making them more effective communicators.

How does the script encourage speakers to handle criticism?

The script encourages speakers to view criticism as a tool for improvement, to listen with an open mind, and to consider suggestions for improvement seriously. It also advises speakers to focus on behaviors that can be changed or improved rather than taking criticism personally.

Outlines

00:00

🗣️ Criticism in Public Speech

The paragraph discusses the challenges of accepting criticism, especially in public speaking. It highlights the speaker's personal experience with criticism from their critical mother and how it affected them. The focus then shifts to the importance of understanding that criticism can be both positive and negative. The paragraph introduces Judy Pearson from Virginia Tech University, who joins the conversation about evaluating speeches. It emphasizes the need to look beyond personal biases and to focus on the speech's content, delivery, and impact. The speaker also shares a personal anecdote about their daughter's learning experience, which serves as a metaphor for the value of criticism in personal growth.

05:04

📊 Gender Bias in Speech Evaluation

This paragraph delves into the issue of gender bias in speech evaluations. It presents findings from a study that showed females received higher scores for their speeches compared to males. However, the study also revealed a disparity in the type of criticism given; females were often told they were fine without needing improvement, while males were pushed to work harder. The paragraph underscores the importance of focusing on the quality of the speech rather than the speaker's personal characteristics. It also discusses the use of evaluation forms to ensure a fair and structured critique, emphasizing the need to consider various aspects such as organization, delivery, content, and ethical standards.

10:05

🎤 Overlooking Delivery Flaws in Famous Speakers

The speaker reflects on the experience of listening to famous individuals like Henry Kissinger, noting that even renowned figures can have delivery flaws that make their speeches less engaging. The paragraph emphasizes the importance of focusing on the content of a speech rather than just the speaker's delivery. It also touches on the idea that as listeners and critics, we should not be intimidated by a speaker's fame or position but should critically evaluate the speech on its merits. The speaker encourages students to question and critique even their own teachers, highlighting the importance of critical thinking in public speaking evaluation.

15:05

🔍 Embracing Criticism for Improvement

This paragraph discusses the value of embracing criticism to improve public speaking skills. It highlights the speaker's personal journey from being nervous about receiving criticism to valuing it as a tool for growth. The speaker shares how they became more comfortable with giving and receiving critique and the importance of focusing on the speech rather than the person when critiquing. The paragraph also touches on the idea that criticism should be given in a constructive manner, with suggestions for improvement, and how to handle both positive and negative feedback effectively.

20:06

📝 The Power of Written Criticism

The paragraph emphasizes the effectiveness of written criticism in helping speakers improve. It contrasts oral and written feedback, suggesting that written comments can be more thoughtful and less intimidating for the recipient. The speaker shares personal experiences where written critiques helped them become aware of unconscious behaviors during speeches and how they worked on improving those aspects. The paragraph also discusses the importance of being open to suggestions for improvement and using criticism as a means to enhance future speeches.

25:08

🌟 The Role of Criticism in Public Discourse

In this paragraph, the speaker discusses the broader implications of speech criticism in society. It argues that the ability to give and receive constructive criticism is crucial for a free and democratic society. The speaker encourages students to view criticism as a challenge to be met and mastered, rather than something to be feared. The paragraph concludes with a metaphor about Singapore being an 'island paradise' and the importance of evaluating such claims critically, highlighting the role of critical thinking in public discourse.

Keywords

💡Criticism

Criticism in the context of the video refers to the act of analyzing and offering judgments on the merits and faults of public speeches. It is a central theme as the video discusses how to give constructive comments and how to receive criticism gracefully. The video emphasizes that criticism can be both positive and negative, focusing not just on what is wrong but also on what is right, thereby facilitating improvement and learning.

💡Constructive Comments

Constructive comments are suggestions or feedback intended to help improve a speech or presentation. The video underscores the importance of providing such comments in a manner that is helpful rather than demeaning. It illustrates this through examples where criticism is given on aspects like speech content, delivery, and organization, aiming to enhance the speaker's future performances.

💡Evaluation

Evaluation, as discussed in the video, is the process of assessing and ranking speeches based on certain criteria such as content, delivery, and impact on the audience. It is a key aspect of public speaking as it allows speakers to understand their strengths and weaknesses. The video provides insights on how to evaluate speeches effectively, using an evaluation form to maintain focus on important attributes.

💡Delivery

Delivery in public speaking pertains to the way a speech is presented, including vocal variety, body language, and overall engagement with the audience. The video script mentions that even if a speaker's delivery is flawless, the content of the speech must also be substantial. It gives examples of speeches where the delivery was excellent but the content was lacking, leading to a less impactful presentation.

💡Content

Content refers to the subject matter and the substance of a speech. The video stresses that while delivery is important, the content is equally crucial for the speech's success. It provides an example of a speech where the presenter had excellent delivery but the content was outdated, causing the audience to disengage.

💡Bias

Bias in the context of the video is a preconceived preference or attitude that can influence the evaluation of a speech. The video warns against letting personal biases, such as those based on gender, race, or age, affect the critique of a speech. It encourages fair and objective evaluation by focusing on the speech's attributes rather than the speaker's personal characteristics.

💡Genetic Discrimination

Genetic discrimination, as mentioned in the script, is the unfair treatment of individuals based on their genetic makeup, even if they are not currently sick. The video uses this term to highlight a serious social issue discussed in one of the speeches, where people were denied health insurance due to their genetic predispositions, emphasizing the importance of addressing such topics in public discourse.

💡Public Speaking

Public speaking is the act of addressing an audience, which is a central focus of the video. It discusses various aspects of public speaking, including the importance of criticism and evaluation in improving one's skills. The video provides tips on how to give and receive criticism in the context of public speaking, aiming to enhance the speaker's ability to communicate effectively.

💡Prejudices

Prejudices are preconceived opinions that are not based on reason or actual experience. The video mentions that it can be challenging to set aside prejudices when evaluating speeches. It encourages evaluators to be aware of their potential biases and to strive for objectivity to ensure fair assessments of speeches.

💡Ethical Standards

Ethical standards in the context of the video refer to the moral principles that guide the content and delivery of a speech. The video suggests that evaluators should consider whether a speech adheres to ethical standards, implying that public speaking should not only be effective but also responsible and morally sound.

💡Adaptation

Adaptation in public speaking means adjusting one's speech to suit the audience or the situation. The video implies that a good speaker should be able to analyze the audience and adapt the speech accordingly. This concept is integral to effective communication, as it ensures that the speech resonates with the listeners.

Highlights

Criticism can be both positive and negative, focusing not only on mistakes but also on good aspects.

The importance of evaluating public speeches and giving constructive comments.

Learning how to take criticism graciously is crucial for personal and professional growth.

Personal anecdotes can be powerful in speeches, as illustrated by the Princeton and Trenton story.

Criticism should be based on the speech's content and delivery, not the speaker's personal characteristics.

Gender differences in speech evaluation, with females receiving higher scores in a study.

The impact of genetic discrimination and its prevalence, as reported by Stanford and Harvard medical schools.

The necessity for adults to learn effective communication with younger generations.

The value of using an evaluation form to keep focused on the qualities of an effective speech.

The significance of speech content even when delivery is excellent, using a Rotary Club speech as an example.

How political speeches can have great content but suffer from poor delivery.

The challenge of critiquing famous or professional speakers and the importance of focusing on the speech, not the person.

The discomfort of giving and receiving criticism and strategies to manage it, such as focusing on the speech, not the person.

The benefits of written critiques for providing negative feedback in a less public and less humiliating manner.

The importance of being specific and constructive when giving criticism, avoiding personal evaluations.

How to respond to both positive and negative criticism, with a focus on improvement and self-awareness.

The role of practice and self-critique in addressing issues identified through criticism.

The significance of context in evaluating critiques and considering the majority opinion when multiple suggestions are made.

The final thoughts on speech criticism as a challenge to be met and mastered, contributing to a free society.

Transcripts

I think criticism is a very difficult

thing to take I have a difficult time

sometimes taking criticism

my mother was pretty critical when I was

a kid she was critical and she was

critical of my weaith and she was saying

I joked around too much I remembered

that I was always getting home too late

breathing I know that bothered I when we

think about criticism we usually focus

on the negative what we did wrong how

people will correct us but criticism can

be positive as well not only for what we

learn but for all the good things that

can be said today we're going to talk

about criticism of the public speech

we'll look at ways to evaluate a speech

show how to give constructive comments

and learn how to take criticism

graciously now joining me is Judy

Pearson from Virginia Tech University

we all make judgments about the speeches

we give and the speeches we hear we

might think we did terribly or feel we

were right on the mark we may like a

particular speaker's informal style of

delivery or be put off by the language

used or a choice of topic sometimes our

evaluations of others are based

proportionately more on the speaker then

on the speech itself watch and listen to

the following speeches and then rank

them in order of your preference my

daughter is a freshman at Princeton this

year and since I'm paying about $20,000

a year in portion and they only go to

school 21 weeks a year I think it's

about a thousand dollars a week she

could go to a spa but that's not very

interested in what she's getting out of

it but but I had a very very interesting

discussion with her she came home at

Christmas I said to her what is the most

important thing you learned at Princeton

Lionel

getting for my money and she said why I

didn't learn her Princeton

she said the most important thing I've

learned I learned in Trenton Trenton is

just a few miles down the road she said

I go to Trenton every afternoon and I

cancelled this a little 11-year old one

and she said mother I am terrible about

what this means

so Trenton is he's taught me 25 words

for getting beat up now this is a child

where if I walked in her room and say

Jaime clean your room she files a

complaint for childhood I mean the idea

of being physically beat up she can't

believe and then she went on and on and

on she said I've learned so much more

from him than he's ever going to learn

from me I can't believe it and I can get

on the bus and escape said he one's

gonna be so bad he shows up every day I

don't dare missin but I'm so troubled

that our country doesn't see it how we

gonna have Princeton and Trenton sitting

20 months apart in fact according to

last Friday's edition of the USA Today

genetic discrimination is more common

than you may think that article cited

the results of recent studies conducted

at the medical schools of both Stanford

and Harvard which documented hundreds of

such cases of discrimination in only

four categories of illness these people

were denied or lost their health

insurance coverage not because they were

sick but because they were related to

someone who was sick or because they

were asymptomatic gene carriers this

type of discrimination should not escape

our attention and scrutiny primarily

because Michael kabak a professor at the

University of California at San Diego

tells us everyone carries at least five

to ten genes that could possibly make us

sick under certain conditions and given

the fact that we have no control over

our genetic makeup we have the potential

even if we're healthy and insured right

now to fall victim to genetic

discrimination at any time in the future

we as adults have to learn how to talk

to you and listen and respond with

understanding

a lot of us adults have forgotten how to

do that we talk at you and not to you

you have a lot of things on your mind

that you want to share but sometime we

don't grant you the courtesy to listen

you're very intelligent these days and

haze believe me you can articulate

things very well you understand

hypocracy

when I tell you to say no to drugs and

I'm standing in front of you with a high

ball in one hand and a cigarette that

long in the other saying to you just say

no you're smart you understand you

emulate what you see be it at home or on

the streets and I commend you for that

so why did you rank them as you did what

did you like or dislike about them did

you focus more on the speeches or on the

speaker's try to avoid judging a speaker

on personal characteristics like age

race sex or stature it can be extremely

difficult to put our prejudices and

preferences aside but fair evaluators

must do just that you know how I didn't

study a few years ago looking at gender

differences in evaluation procedures and

evaluation behavior and I learned in

that study that females actually receive

higher scores and their speeches than

males that a woman is more likely to get

an A than a man is in a college

classroom yeah and that's kind of

strange why is that or what was the what

was the upside of that study well you

know at first it appeared to me that

this was a good thing that maybe women

were more competent I don't know what

the reason is but it does appear that

women get a better shake what was more

disturbing though is after I went

through and analyzed the data I looked

at a situation where the grades between

the woman and the man were held constant

for example both the male and female

speaker got a C grade to look at the

criticism or the content of the

criticism that the evaluators provided

and what I learned was that in the

female instance the female was told oh

don't worry about it

great but it's just fine you don't have

to worry about this at all there's

nothing you need to do to really improve

but we weren't expected to do better

that's exactly right they were told

essentially that they were fine and they

didn't have to improve at all but the

man who got a similar speech as C grade

on his speech was told that he had to

improve that he had to work harder that

this was something that was going to be

important for his career in his

livelihood and so he had to improve so

we had a very disparate situation then

between the male and the female in the

college classroom and it really is

something everybody needs to take into

consideration because you could probably

ask those people and they'd probably say

you know I don't distinguish between the

two genders exactly and yet we probably

all are guilty at the same behavior

instead of judging speakers on personal

characteristics evaluators should focus

on those attributes that contribute to a

good presentation like organization

delivery content and ethical standards

the Iowa Legislature has theirs for 150

years their interaction with Native

Americans has been minut and so we run

into a situation at the Iowa Legislature

of the legislature saying well this is

always the way this is the way it's

always been and we have the tribes in a

situation of saying we've got to empower

ourselves and key and the whole process

is this question of image one good way

to keep focused on these attributes is

to use an evaluation form in your

critical analysis there's an example of

one in the study guide an evaluation

form can keep you on track by reminding

you of the qualities of an effective

speech this not only makes criticism of

other speeches easier but the form can

help you better prepare your own

presentations most evaluation forms

include criteria like topic choice

purpose arguments organization vocal and

bodily aspects of delivery audience

analysis and adaptation although it's

very easy to focus on delivery and

evaluations because that's often the

most visual part of the presentation the

content of a speech is also extremely

important a speaker may be a Polish

presenter

but lack substance for example have I

heard a speech last week by a very

experienced consultant at a Rotary Club

she was there to speak on nonverbal

communication when I looked at the

delivery of her speech I couldn't fault

her on anything at all but when I

thought about the content there was a

great deal lacking the topic had the

possibility of being very interesting

for the audience but what happened was

that the material she delivered was all

old information that everybody knew as a

matter of fact I heard some of the

audience members as they were leaving

the speech saying things like well

nothing new there there's nothing

nothing that we learned today it's old

that the content was flawed even though

the delivery was excellent so a nice

speech but people were just switching

off because they really did yes and

conversely a speech may be beautifully

developed and structured but the

delivery is weak and I've seen some

examples of this Judy namely political

speeches when a lot of times there's a

lot of really good content a lot of

interesting issues that are being taken

very very seriously by people but the

delivery of the speaker is such that you

know maybe they're not an experienced

speaker whatever somebody who's going to

be a first-time person in politics and

and and they people tend to switch off

that way and some really good content

goes right by them every University

Community College has speaker series

they have people coming on campus to

give talks and if you went to every talk

that was given on a campus you would

find that a good many of them are

delivered by professional speakers or

very well-known or famous people who are

not particularly good speakers I

remember hearing Henry Kissinger give a

very long speech that seemed even longer

because the man has a decided accent

when he speaks he also never changes his

tone of voice and he's fine to listen to

on a news program where you're hearing

30 seconds of Henry Kissinger but

believe me an hour of Henry Kissinger is

somewhat torturous same thing can be

said for lots of others so as a good

listener or someone who's trying to be a

good citizen about public speaking you

sometimes have to overlook people's

delivery flaws or some of the other

things that they might do because all

these all these speakers are human

beings and they all have certain

frailties as far as being a public

speaker and so either even the famous or

what's more important what you say or

how you say it he was arrested for

planning demonstrations against American

involvement in Vietnam under the dreaded

I sa some 19 years into his detention

following intense international pressure

for his release the government tried to

justify his continued detention by

belatedly labeling him a communist you

can and should be critical of any speech

you hear don't be intimidated by the

position or fame of a speaker use your

critical listening and thinking skills

judge if the speech meets your

expectations one of the things that I've

discovered is when it comes to

critiquing public speakers students feel

inadequate they feel like they don't

have the expertise in order to do that

and as a result they will tend to accept

things as truth and as valid and as good

simply because of the credibility of the

person who did it I encourage my

students even with myself okay even with

me when you're examining me are you

listening to what I say you need to

constantly be asking yourself the tough

questions about what I'm saying don't

accept anything at face value always

look deeper okay because no one has all

the right answers no one knows

everything try not to let your own

biases enter into the evaluation these

biases result when you compare your own

skills and attributes with those of the

speaker and Judy any kind of bias of

course has the same result that is you

don't learn as much as you should yes

and the biases can be positive or

negative and still act the same way for

example if somebody has more education

more experience or a higher position

than you have you might assume that what

they're saying is accurate and give them

a positive kind of evaluation that's not

fair on the other hand if somebody

belongs to a different political party

than you do or they have less of some of

these qualities you might assume that

they are are less than they actually are

and in either case you're doing the

person a disservice yes you are

now evaluated student speeches may make

you very uncomfortable you might think

that you're unqualified to give an

opinion after all you're in training -

of course you're not an expert but you

can describe what you saw heard and felt

that's valuable feedback for a speaker

[Music]

i've value criticism I value that

because I know that I can improve you

can always improve every stage of your

life you are always improving so yes I

want that criticism I want to to come

across as a credible person and if I

don't have their criticism coming back

to me I won't ever know if it was good

or not at first you know I didn't think

I really wanted to offer criticism to

other students because I thought well

Who am I to be criticizing other

students you know when I'm here trying

to learn how to public speak and but I

but I've been again I wanted others to

give me criticism because I wanted to

know was I doing okay is there some

things I could change so you just kind

of have to put yourself you know out

there and have people give you criticism

and accept that and understand that

they're just trying to help you give a

better speech I love to hear critical

feedback from my audience I love to be

critiqued it does not embarrass me it

helps to improve my future speeches I

really that is a key essential and my

first night of class I told everyone I

was kind of blent about it I said please

tell me what I'm doing wrong I want to

know what I'm doing wrong so I can

improve and I can go on and give better

speeches

actually the bad comments probably I

value the most because it gives me areas

that I know that I need to work on and

improve that's something that someone in

the audience can pick out and says you

know I really had a problem with this

well if I can make the next time I give

a speech if I can make that person more

comfortable with that

I'm at least getting my point across to

that person there's one particular

gentleman in the class that every time

he got up in front of the class it was

like he had a terribly dry mouth and he

licked his lips and constantly smacked

his lips together and it absolutely

drove me crazy and I know that I should

have said something but I didn't and as

a listener and a critique I should have

said something so he would be aware of

this and it would help him out in the

future I think after a certain point I

felt better about getting criticism from

others actually it was easier I think

I'm my part to receive criticism than it

was to give criticism to others I

probably everyone thinks that way but it

but after a while it became easier I

encourage my students that when they are

critiquing each other they're not

critiquing the person they're critiquing

the speech that's very different

now you can critique delivery you can

critique the speech itself okay their

words the organization etc that's not

saying that something is wrong with that

person as we said before criticism can

be both negative and positive many of us

have been socialized to be modest and

have never learned how to take

compliments with ease and grace for

example hub I've heard from a lot of our

viewers of this particular series that

they really find you an attractive host

for this program they complement

everything from your light green eyes

and are curious about whether you've

contacts or not to talking about your

vocal characteristics and your you know

your general journalistic kind of

broadcast your voice all those kinds of

things now imagine if you will that one

of those viewers is sitting here right

now with you today and they make some of

those comments how would you respond to

that it was easy to get a little bashful

and stuff like that about something like

that but you just have to say thank you

and move on

you know you've got a you got a job to

do you gotta keep going yes and they

aren't contacts that's they are

non-contact that's right when someone

compliments you on your speech a simple

thank you is an appropriate reply then

filed a comment away with others to call

upon the next time you're asked to make

a presentation you'll want to do the

same good thing again

you know flattered you can be

embarrassing suggestions for improvement

are even more difficult to swallow it's

easy to get on the defensive especially

if you've worked hard in a speech or if

the subject is an intensely personal one

that's why I ask my students not to put

their negative comments that they have

about another speaker in an oral format

but rather to write it down to use a

written critique form to express those

negative kinds of comments that way it's

not so public and not so humiliating for

the speaker who may have made several

errors and doesn't necessarily want to

be told about it in that situation I

think it's real important to be positive

in a classroom situation that I have

it's a project that a person is working

on it's not a speech so they're not like

right out in the front but we do have a

session where we do some oral comments

and we try to accentuate the positive

things what's good about this what can

we talk about this really good and if

there are some things that that are

maybe not completely 100% positive you

know we talk about those in very open

very broad terms not very personal not

very pointed and and maybe some of the

other comments are made a little bit

later in a written form yes and because

it's a project rather than a speech that

probably is appropriate in that

situation if you're the giver of

negative criticism always word your

remarks in the kindest possible way

don't apologize for your opinions but be

considerate of the feelings of others

you don't necessarily have to tread on

eggshells but on the other hand you do

need to recognize that what you say is

going to have a powerful impact on who

they are the language that is used in

critiques is very important because if

you say well that was a stupid way of

doing it then you are evaluating that

person not the speech now if you want to

say that there was a problem with the

way someone did something be very

specific say when you were tapping your

fingers on the podium that became a

distraction to

your speech so I missed some of what you

were saying that doesn't mean that it

was stupid it just you know it's it lays

out the behavior and the results of it

rather than adding that evaluative

dimension which says you know it was

stupid it was bad it was wrong

feedback always helps you know when they

when they tell you the positive things

that you do I mean I think there needs

to be a balance between negative and

positive things that you do here's a bad

thing but this is something you did

really good and that way you know it

doesn't feel like you've just been torn

apart by by your class my first class

that I provided criticism it was orally

where I was asked to provide first a

positive comment and then some

suggestions for improvement to the

student and the fact that I started out

with a positive comment really helped

because then I could see the person

beaming and sometimes I think then they

didn't it didn't hurt as much that I was

saying and your foot tapped a bit turned

this beach or whatever the the problem

was so I became more comfortable with

that but the the way that I'm probably

most comfortable with giving criticism

would be in a written form and later on

in my speech communication classes that

is the form that we took so that the

individual giving the speech would walk

away maybe with five forms with maybe

you know 10 or 15 sentences in total

that they could look at and really learn

from and if it hurts too much to look at

right away I know they went back to them

and looked at them later because I did

when people provided the written

comments as a speaker you have to

understand that when you're getting

constructive criticism it's just that

it's designed to help you if you look at

it at that as that then you can take

from that okay what can I do what

behavior can I engage in to alleviate

this criticism the next time for me I

often find my students tell me I talk

very fast okay I know that I talk very

fast so as a speaker I have to say okay

I need to be aware of the rate that I'm

speaking so I need to begin to slow down

maybe that means that I need to take

particular care and our ticket

relating my words and in doing that that

will automatically slow down my speech

okay so as a speaker take your criticism

and if people are focusing on behaviors

figure out what you can do with that

behavior or how you can stop that

behavior in order to improve your

speaking the first night of class I was

very nervous and I was very fidgety when

I got up in front of the audience and

through practice and throughout the

course of the semester and so forth I

was able to see what I was doing wrong

and I was critiqued by my audiences and

especially the teacher and so I was

aware of what I was doing because at the

beginning I was not aware I didn't know

that I was rocking back and forth and

swaying from side to side and after

listening to my fellow students and my

teacher I became aware of this and

through my practice I was able to see

that I was doing it even at home when I

was practicing I would catch myself and

so I would start over again and I would

in the back of my mind that was always

there to make sure I knew how I was

standing and that I wasn't moving around

and with the use of my note cards that

helped me a little I think the best way

to receive criticism from others was not

in a threatening way but in a way that

they suggested Roger this is what you

were doing maybe next time you could try

this and that always felt good because

it didn't only come with with criticism

but it came with an idea that I could

use on my next speech something that a

way to improve then not just you know

you really need to stop standing there

and moving around like you are and so

that helped a lot one of the things that

the instructor called to my attention

and I wasn't aware of it at all is that

when I was standing and we weren't using

a podium at this particular time but it

was a table and I had my notes lying on

the table in front of me since I where

trifocals once you get something into

focus you don't want to move

and so he said that you know maybe if

you looked a little more relaxed and

moved around he said you're standing

pressed right up against the table and

it it looks awkward or uncomfortable and

I said well the reason for it was and he

said well now that I know there's a

reason but maybe you might still want to

you know work on a different technique

that doesn't look quite so stifling or

something that a student who anytime he

spoke he would be so nervous that he

would scratch I mean he would just get

itchy all over

he was just scratch and scratch and

scratch rather than simply telling him

you need to stop scratching I would say

why don't you try just holding your

hands down in front of you by holding

your hands you're preventing them from

scratching he did not have gestures but

he was not scratching and I mean to the

point where it made other people

uncomfortable even if I talked about it

you know I get itchy but you know by

doing that by holding his hands he was

able to stop engaging in a very

distracting behavior in his delivery

so take the criticism look at the

behavior that is being criticized figure

out what you can do in order to

alleviate that criticism or stop that

behavior or remedy that behavior or if

it's not engaging in gesture to figure

out how you can begin to feel more

comfortable using gestures you know so

the key is focusing on okay

this has been identified as a problem

what can I do to fix it when people tell

me what is wrong in a speech that I give

and how to fix it I appreciate that

because I feel that there's little point

and just continuing to give speeches if

you're never going to improve that you

should constantly improve so I do

appreciate and value that criticism but

I really value most of all suggestions

for improvement because oftentimes if I

made the mistake I may not realize that

there's a problem with it and therefore

if I don't know it's a problem I won't

know how to correct it generally so

their point of view really brings more

life to to the way that I change my

speeches in the future than if i just

depended on my own criticism of my work

when your speech received suggests

for improvement take them in the helpful

spirit in which they're intended and you

may not agree but you should always

listen with an open mind after all this

is your audience speaking to you if they

miss read your intent or didn't follow

your arguments or thought you were

serious when you were joking you'll need

to make some changes in order to

communicate more effectively next time

all critiques should be judged in

context if only one audience member

suggests a modification in your delivery

you might overlook it if it's echoed by

several others you should seriously

consider making a change for example

imagine that one person evaluating your

speech talked about the

inappropriateness of your language they

suggested it was too complicated too

complex they didn't understand it it

went over their head but maybe several

others in the audience took your

language as something to be especially

complimentary of they talked about how

it was appropriate it was expressive and

they understood exactly what your

content was just because of the language

choices you made in that instance what I

would do is disregard the comments have

one person in order to look at the

majority of comments that really

suggested the language was exactly

appropriate for that particular topic

your ability to give constructive

criticism and take it will greatly

enhance your contributions to this

public speaking course in the world

outside of the classroom critical

evaluations of the speeches of others

are integral to a free society your

usefulness in that society will be

measured by your ability to think for

yourself and to express your opinions in

a constructive way now speech criticism

is not something to be feared it really

is a challenge to be met and mastered we

are oftentimes regaled with the official

vernacular that Singapore is an island

paradise there is an old adage which

says the proof of the pudding lies in

the eating the number of emigrations by

native bon Singaporeans fleeing Li Kuan

Yew's island paradise is quite

phenomenal given the size of the

population as we all know emigration is

a major

matic experience in anyone's life