Sample "Persuasive Speech Evaluation Form"

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Download Sample "Persuasive Speech Evaluation Form"

268 times
Rate (4.3 / 5) 18 votes
PERSUASIVE SPEECH EVALUATION
Name:______________________________________
+ = excellent, √+ = good, √ = adequate, √- = flawed, - = poor/missing
Note: The percentages here are guidelines. All these categories are mutually dependant.
Arrangement (20%)
Invention and Style (50%)
√+
The speaker clearly and effectively introduced the topic
The speaker identified and responded to the most relevant
and explained its importance and relevance
and pressing concerns of the opposition
√+
The speaker clearly and effectively previewed the
√-
The speaker appealed effectively to those areas where the
argument and main points in the introduction and
audience could be moved
reviewed them in the conclusion
The speaker effectively used a variety of proofs designed to
The speaker highlighted the structure of the speech and
persuade an oppositional audience
made it easy to follow with artful transitions
√+
The speaker effectively used a variety of supporting
The main points and the subpoints adhered to the
materials that would be judged as credible by an
principles of coordination, subordination, and
oppositional audience
discreteness
√+
The speaker cited supporting material effectively and
The speaker arranged the main points appropriately to
appropriately
persuade an oppositional audience
√-
The speaker used language that increased the
persuasiveness of the argument
The speaker used language that highlighted shared values
Delivery (20%)
-
The speaker used notes minimally and engaged the
and did not alienate or offend the oppositional audience
audience
√-
The speaker spoke at a pace that contributed to the
Overall (10%)
meaning and rhythm of the speech
√+
The speaker addressed a controversial public issue
√-
The speaker moved and gestured in a natural way that
√-
The speaker’s argument was appropriate for the time
contributed to speech
constraints and the constraints of the assignment
-
The speaker spoke confidently and with appropriate
projection for the space
-
In general, the delivery contributed to the speaker’s ethos
and persuasiveness
Additional Comments:
Invention and style: My most global comment is that this speech was an argument designed to show the superiority
of your position and not really aimed at persuading an oppositional audience. That is, there are many statements
and arguments that debate matters of fact and try to resolve the question 100% instead of simply trying to move the
target audience closer to your position. So, the target audience is probably going to believe some or all of the three
things you attempt to wholly disprove. Consequently, it is doubtful that you were able to change many minds. You
had a well researched speech, but it spoke more to the already converted. You emphasized the divisions between
you and your target audience. For example, you don’t have to say that the second amendment is almost worthless
in order to argue convincingly that it doesn’t protect armor piercing bullets. You have so much good evidence in
this speech, but I would like to see more variation and summary. So, you give us a lot of statistics, but you should
try to summarize these numbers so that they are more meaningful (in other words tell us the raw numbers and what
they mean).
Arrangement: The transitions needed to be clearer. They were there, but you didn’t vocally provide a significant
break. Someone who wasn’t listening closely could have missed these transitions altogether.
Delivery: We need to work on getting you off the cards. You read much of this speech, which hurt the overall
understandability of your points. Often, you would go very fast through statistics or citations that simply made
them hard to understand. A related issue is vocal variation. Since you were reading many sections of this speech, it
came across as rather monotone.
Grade for Speech: ___58/75______
Time:__________6-8 min
Time Penalty (if any): ________
PERSUASIVE SPEECH EVALUATION
Name:______________________________________
+ = excellent, √+ = good, √ = adequate, √- = flawed, - = poor/missing
Note: The percentages here are guidelines. All these categories are mutually dependant.
Arrangement (20%)
Invention and Style (50%)
√+
The speaker clearly and effectively introduced the topic
The speaker identified and responded to the most relevant
and explained its importance and relevance
and pressing concerns of the opposition
√+
The speaker clearly and effectively previewed the
√-
The speaker appealed effectively to those areas where the
argument and main points in the introduction and
audience could be moved
reviewed them in the conclusion
The speaker effectively used a variety of proofs designed to
The speaker highlighted the structure of the speech and
persuade an oppositional audience
made it easy to follow with artful transitions
√+
The speaker effectively used a variety of supporting
The main points and the subpoints adhered to the
materials that would be judged as credible by an
principles of coordination, subordination, and
oppositional audience
discreteness
√+
The speaker cited supporting material effectively and
The speaker arranged the main points appropriately to
appropriately
persuade an oppositional audience
√-
The speaker used language that increased the
persuasiveness of the argument
The speaker used language that highlighted shared values
Delivery (20%)
-
The speaker used notes minimally and engaged the
and did not alienate or offend the oppositional audience
audience
√-
The speaker spoke at a pace that contributed to the
Overall (10%)
meaning and rhythm of the speech
√+
The speaker addressed a controversial public issue
√-
The speaker moved and gestured in a natural way that
√-
The speaker’s argument was appropriate for the time
contributed to speech
constraints and the constraints of the assignment
-
The speaker spoke confidently and with appropriate
projection for the space
-
In general, the delivery contributed to the speaker’s ethos
and persuasiveness
Additional Comments:
Invention and style: My most global comment is that this speech was an argument designed to show the superiority
of your position and not really aimed at persuading an oppositional audience. That is, there are many statements
and arguments that debate matters of fact and try to resolve the question 100% instead of simply trying to move the
target audience closer to your position. So, the target audience is probably going to believe some or all of the three
things you attempt to wholly disprove. Consequently, it is doubtful that you were able to change many minds. You
had a well researched speech, but it spoke more to the already converted. You emphasized the divisions between
you and your target audience. For example, you don’t have to say that the second amendment is almost worthless
in order to argue convincingly that it doesn’t protect armor piercing bullets. You have so much good evidence in
this speech, but I would like to see more variation and summary. So, you give us a lot of statistics, but you should
try to summarize these numbers so that they are more meaningful (in other words tell us the raw numbers and what
they mean).
Arrangement: The transitions needed to be clearer. They were there, but you didn’t vocally provide a significant
break. Someone who wasn’t listening closely could have missed these transitions altogether.
Delivery: We need to work on getting you off the cards. You read much of this speech, which hurt the overall
understandability of your points. Often, you would go very fast through statistics or citations that simply made
them hard to understand. A related issue is vocal variation. Since you were reading many sections of this speech, it
came across as rather monotone.
Grade for Speech: ___58/75______
Time:__________6-8 min
Time Penalty (if any): ________