Prepared Public Speaking
Career Development Event
Revised May 2010
The rules for this career development event are to be utilized in conjunction with the rules contained in the
introduction section of the Arizona Association FFA Career Development Event Manual.
I.
Purpose
The State FFA Prepared Public Speaking Career Development Event is designed to develop agricultural
leadership by providing for member participation in agricultural public speaking activities and stimulating
interest in leadership and citizenship. The event will be held in conjunction with the State Leadership
Conference.
II. Event Description
In this CDE, you write and deliver a six- to eight-minute speech about a current agricultural subject. The
experience will help you excel in school, community and career settings. Participants are rated based on an
online exam, written speech, speech delivery and their answers to judges’ questions.
III. Standards
4.1 4.10
4.6 9.8
4.7
 Utilize communication and leadership skills
 Develop the ability to public speak
 Utilize written skills
 Utilize listening skills
IV. Event Format
A. ELIGIBILITY
1. The State FFA Prepared Public Speaking Career Development Event will follow the general rules and
policies for all State FFA Career Development Events.
2. The event is open to two individuals per district not to exceed 16 individuals. In the even that a
district does not fill its quota, the remaining slots may be filled using either a succession or lottery of
the 3rd and/or 4th place individuals from other districts.
3. Each participant's manuscript will be the result of his or her own efforts. It is expected that the
participant will take advantage of all available training facilities at his or her local school in
developing his or her speaking ability. Facts and working data may be secured from any source but
must be appropriately documented.
4. Participants will submit the following materials by established deadline on the registration form:
A. Twenty double-spaced typewritten copies of the speech on 8 1/2" x 11 " white bond paper with
cover page that gives the speech title, participant's name, chapter and date. The format should
use 1" margins, 10 characters per inch and follow the APA (American Psychological Association
style manual. Do not bind or place in folders, special binders or covers. Place a staple in upper
left corner. Manuscripts not meeting these guidelines will be penalized.
1|Prepared Public Speaking
Prepared Public Speaking
Career Development Event
Revised May 2010
B. A signed statement of originality on the certification form provided.
C. A complete and accurate bibliography used in writing the speech. All participants in State FFA
Prepared Public Speaking Career Development Event should give credit to others where any
direct quotes, phrases or special dates are used in the manuscript, in order not to be guilty of
plagiarism.
 A bibliography MUST be included as part of the public speaker's manuscript and direct quotes
from any source of information must be marked in "quotes" on the manuscript and be
identified in the bibliography. Failure to do so will automatically disqualify a participant. This
applies to all events above the local level.
 Factual information pertaining to agriculture is available from the United States Department
of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250; state colleges, research centers and/or experiment
stations; or the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
DC 20402.
5. A participant shall wear complete official FFA dress as defined in the current Official FFA Manual.
B. SUBJECTS
Participants may choose any current subject for their speeches that is of an agricultural character
(nature), which may include:
 agriscience
 technology
 agribusiness
 agrimarketing
 international agricultural relations
 agricultural communications
Official judges of any State FFA Prepared Public Speaking Career Development Event shall disqualify a
participant if he or she speaks on a nonagricultural subject.
C. TIME LIMIT
Each speech shall be a minimum of six minutes in length and a maximum of eight minutes. Each
participant will be allowed five minutes additional time in which he or she will be asked questions
relating to his or her speech. Participants will be penalized one point per second on each judge's score
sheet for being under six minutes or over eight minutes. No time warnings will be given by event
officials or observers.
D. EVENT PROCEDURES
1. The State FFA Executive Secretary will assign a chair to this event.
2. A 50-question, multiple choice, online exam will be taken prior to the event. The State FFA Office
will distribute further information regarding the administration of the exam.
3. Prior to the event the content and composition of all manuscripts will be scored by one qualified
individual who will record the scores on a score sheet that will be provided. The scored manuscripts
will be provided to the chairman after each participant has presented. A list of 10 questions for
each manuscript will also be developed and provided to the CDE Chairperson to use at his/her
discretion throughout the process.
2|Prepared Public Speaking
Prepared Public Speaking
Career Development Event
Revised May 2010
4. The speaking order will be randomly determined by event officials. The program chairman shall
introduce each participant by name and in order of the drawing. A participant will be permitted to
use note cards while speaking, but up to a deduction of 10 points may be given. No props are to be
used. Applause shall be withheld until all participants have spoken. A tiered system will be used at
the professional discretion of the CDE Chairperson for assessing deductions as follows:
a. No cards used = 0 deductions
b. Note cards used some = 5 point deduction
c. Note cards used excessively = 10 point deduction
5. One timekeeper shall be designated who will record the time used by each participant in delivering
his or her speech, noting under time or overtime, if any, for which deductions will be made.
6. An accuracy judge will be designated to keep track of any missed/added words throughout the
event. Professional discretion shall be used in assessing deductions as follows:
a. Few words missed/added (i.e. 10 words or less) = 0 deductions
b. Moderate words missed/added (i.e. 1-2 sentences) = 5 point deduction
c. Excessive words missed/added (i.e. paragraph or more) = 10 point deduction
7. The state event will be conducted in two rounds: semifinals and finals. No ranking will be given
except for the final four. Preliminary rounds will be conducted at the district level.
8. A judge shall be provided by each school, for each contestant registered in the Prepared Public
Speaking CDE. This judge will be utilized in the same semi-final round as his/her student. During
that round, the judge will not score his/her own student. Failure to provide a judge may result in
the disqualification of the student from the event. If a student/judge arrives late to the judges
meeting (or leaves before the end of the meeting) professionalism points will be deducted from the
students score in both the preliminary (and finals if appropriate) round(s).
9. The CDE Chairperson will meet with all judges, coaches and contestants prior to the semi-final round
and will discuss the procedure for the event, the scorecards, the scoring procedure, the meeting
following the conclusion of the speeches and answer any questions. The CDE Chairperson will also
inform coaches and contestants when and where they will be notified of the results from the semifinal round.
10. Each judge shall formulate and ask questions. Questions shall pertain directly to the speaker's
subject. Judges will score each participant on the ability to answer all questions asked by all judges.
Three to five minutes for questions should be used.
11. When all participants have finished speaking, each judge will total the score on delivery and
response to questions for each participant. The composition score, the accuracy score and the
timekeepers' record will then be given to all judges and used in computing the final score for each
participant. Judges will rank the contestants (based on the total scores) from 1 to 8 (with 1 being the
highest). The judges' score sheets will then be submitted to event officials to determine final
ranking of participants.
12. The judges' ranking of each participant then shall be added, and the top two contestants from each
round will be the participants whose total of rankings are the lowest. This calculation is to be done
without consultation between judges. Other placings shall be determined in the same manner (low
3|Prepared Public Speaking
Prepared Public Speaking
Career Development Event
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
Revised May 2010
point score method of selection). In case of a tie, that individual who has the highest grand total
score shall have higher rating.
The top two participants from each semi-final round will be eligible to advance to the final round.
The CDE Chairperson will meet with all judges, coaches and contestants prior to the final round and
will discuss the procedure for the event, the scorecards, the scoring procedure, the meeting
following the conclusion of the speeches and answer any questions.
For the final round, a minimum of three competent and impartial persons will be selected to judge.
At least one judge should have an agricultural background. The judges will be seated in different
sections of the room in which the event is held. They will score each participant on the delivery of
production, using the score sheet provided.
Each judge shall formulate and ask questions. Questions shall pertain directly to the speaker's
subject. Judges will score each participant on the ability to answer all questions asked by all judges.
Three to five minutes for questions should be used.
When all participants have finished speaking, each judge will total the score on delivery and
response to questions for each participant. The composition score, the accuracy score and the
timekeepers' record will then be given to all judges and used in computing the final score for each
participant. Judges will rank the contestants (based on the total scores) from 1 to 4 (with 1 being the
highest). The judges' score sheets will then be submitted to event officials to determine final
ranking of participants.
The judges' ranking of each participant then shall be added, and the winner will be that participant
whose total of rankings is the lowest. This calculation is to be done without consultation between
judges. Other placings shall be determined in the same manner (low point score method of
selection). In case of a tie, that individual who has the highest grand total score shall have higher
rating.
The CDE Chairperson is to deliver the results to the State FFA Executive Secretary immediately
following the conclusion of the judges’ final meeting.
V. Tiebreakers
In the event of a tie, the judges’ raw score will be used to determine rankings. If a tie still exists, the
online exam score will be utilized.
VI. Awards
Plaques will be awarded to the state finalists by the Arizona Association FFA. A cash award of $225 will be
awarded to the state winner.
4|Prepared Public Speaking
Prepared Public Speaking
Career Development Event
Revised May 2010
VII. References
SAMPLE COVER PAGE
SAMPLE FIRST PAGE FORMAT
The Biotechnology of Agriculture
FFA makes a positive difference in the lives of students by
developing their potential for premier leadership, personal
The Biotechnology of Agriculture
growth and career success through agricultural education. FFA
makes FFA makes a positive difference in the lives of students
by developing their potential for premier leadership, personal
growth and career success through agricultural education. FFA
By
makes FFA makes a positive difference in the lives of students
James A. Smith
by developing their potential for premier leadership, personal
Chandler FFA Chapter
growth and career success through agricultural education. FFA
State FFA Prepared Public Speaking Career Development
Event
2008
makes.
1
SAMPLE BIBLIOGRAPHY ENTRIES
Bibliography
Borlaug, Norman. “Feeding the World.” Farm Industry News, November 1992, pp 21-22.
National Research Council (NRC). (1988). Understanding Agriculture: New Directions for Education. Washington D.C.:
National Academy Press.
Romans, J.R., Costello, W.J., Carlson (1994) The Meat We Eat. (13th ed.) Danville, IL.
Arizona FFA Online CDE Test Bank (to be distributed by CD annually)
5|Prepared Public Speaking
Prepared Public Speaking
Career Development Event
VIII. Scoring
Revised May 2010
STATE FFA PREPARED PUBLIC SPEAKING CAREER DEVELOPMENT EVENT
JUDGES' SCORE SHEET
Items to be Scored
Max.
1
2
3
4
5
Content of Manuscript
10
Importance/appropriateness of the subject, suitability of
the material used, Accuracy of the statements included,
Evidence of purpose, Completeness and accuracy of
bibliography and Relationship to agriculture
Composition of Manuscript
10
Organization of content, unity of thought, logical
development, language, sentence structure,
accomplishment of purpose, conclusions, spelling &
grammar
Voice
10
Quality, Pitch, Articulation, Pronunciation and Force
Stage Presence
10
Personal appearance, Poise and body posture, Attitude,
Confidence, Personality and Ease before audience
Power of Expression
10
Fluency, Emphasis, Directness, Sincerity, Communicative
ability and Conveyance of thought and meaning
Response to Question
30
The ability to answer satisfactorily the questions on the
speech that are asked by the judges indicating originality,
familiarity with subject and ability to think quickly.
General Effect
20
Includes the extent to which the speech was interesting,
understandable, convincing, pleasing and held attention.
TOTAL POINTS (Gross)
100 max
Less Time Deductions**
Less Accuracy Deduction*
Less Notecard Deduction
Less Professionalism Point Deduction***
(applied to both prelim and finals rounds)
SUBTOTAL POINTS
7
1 pt/ sec
Up to 10
pts
Up to 10
pts
10
100 max
Multiply subtotal by .75
75
Test & Workplace Employability Score multiplied by .25
25
Grand total
6
100 Pts
max
Rank of Participant
*From accuracy judge’s record
**From the timekeeper's record
***Based on student/judges being on time and present for entire judges meeting
****Based on student being registered for event by deadline
6|Prepared Public Speaking
8
Prepared Public Speaking
Career Development Event
Revised May 2010
Speaking Finalist Judge Comment Card
This card will be filled out by each finalist judge for each speaker in the finals round. The Speaking CDE
Chair will collect the forms and distribute to the finalist (if time permits) or deliver to the State FFA Executive
Secretary to be distributed after the event.
Name:
Chapter:
Positives:
Areas of Improvement:
General Comments:
7|Prepared Public Speaking
Prepared Public Speaking
Career Development Event
Revised May 2010
Prepared Public Speaking Manuscript Rubric
Content
Max
Low
Medium
High
1. Importance and
appropriateness of the subject
and relationship to agriculture
3
the topic on the periphery and
affects only a small population
of the agricultural industry
topic is relavent and current;
the approach taken limits
the scope and focuses in
detail on only one side of
the issue.
topic clearly is related to
current issues facing the
agricultural industry; the
approach taken allows for a
wide variety of audience
members to identify with the
issue
2. Suitability of materials used
1
limited examination of evidence
is present; manuscript vaguely
addresses evidence about
topic; interpretations are
exaggerated and/or unfounded
adequate examination of
evidence is present;
evidence is adequately
linked to specific data about
topic; fact based
conclusions are included;
interpretations occasionally
go beyond normal limits of
evidence
clear examination of evidence
is present; conclusions drawn
from evidence are fact-based
and warranted; strong
connection between evidence
and conclusions are
demonstrated; interpretation of
evidence is within normal
limits
3. Accuracy of statements
included
2
lack of care in some and or all
statements used; there is
reason to believe that the
statements were skewed so
that desired conclusions could
be proved
Work exhibits some lack of
care in taking in statements
used; there is no evidence
that the statements were
skewed; appropriately
excludes invalid statements
Work exhibits great care was
taken in all statements used;
there is no evidence that the
student skewed the
statements; reports and
appropriately excludes invalid
data
4. Evidence of purpose
2
the purpose statement is
incomplete, vague or imprecise
the purpose statement is
correct and concise, but is
little more than a summary
statement
the purpose statement
provides clear and detailed
information about the goal of
the manuscript
5. Completeness and
accuracy of bibliography
2
few, if any, of the sources are
related to the topic; mostly one
source type (i.e., internet sites,
books, etc.) and none are
written at the appropriate level
for the projects purpose; APA
style either not used or used
poorly
sources cover the topic, but
are less interesting and the
relationship to the project is
less clear; the sources
selected are less varied, but
most are written at the
appropriate level for the
project ’s purpose; use of
APA style evident but not
accurate
sources are interesting and
they are all clearly related to
the topic; a variety sources
selected and they are all
written at the appropriate level
for the projects purpose;
correctly uses APA style
Total Content Score
10
8|Prepared Public Speaking
Prepared Public Speaking
Career Development Event
Revised May 2010
Composition
Max
Low
Medium
High
1. Organization of content
1.5
the text lacks an organizational
plan; the text lacks an
introduction or conclusion
2. Unity of thought
1
the text does not coherently
connect most or any of its
ideas, exhibiting a fundamental
lack of integration in word,
phrase, sentence and
paragraph
the organizational plan of
the text is not uniformly
executed, and suffers from
conceptual gaps;
introduction or conclusion
are underdeveloped
the text expresses some
ideas coherently, but with
apparent difficulties at one
or more of the following
levels: word, phrase,
sentence or paragraph
begins with an informative
introduction and ends with a
summative conclusion; the text
follows a discernible
organizational plan uniformly
and with no conceptual gaps
the text expresses ideas
coherently interwoven at all
levels, explicitly integrating
words, phrases, sentences
and paragraphs into this
pattern
3. Logical development
1
the text lacks basic support for
its case, using little or no
effective argumentation or
evidence or logical
development
the text demonstrates partial
support for the case but
needs considerable
improvements in logical
development
1.5
uses simplistic, bland language
uses language which is
appropriate for the task
(e.g., descriptive language
when describing, clear and
concise language when
giving information and
explaining, persuasive
language when persuading)
clarity is compromised, as
the text contains obvious
linguistic or manuscript
preparation errors
summary statement(s) is/are
present; final conclusions
are adequately addressed;
conclusions address
evidence about topic;
conclusions are adequate
for evidence; conclusions
provide some linkage with
focus
the text establishes compelling
support for the thesis on the
basis of logical development of
the argument and accurate,
pertinent, authoritative, and
appropriately documented
evidence
uses language in highly
effective ways to emphasize or
enhance the meaning of the
message; as appropriate to
the task a variety of language
techniques such as vivid
language, emotional language,
humor, imagery, metaphor,
simile are used
the text exhibits exceptional
clarity through the mastery of
linguistic and principles
4. Language used
5. Sentence Structure
1
the text lacks clarity as it
neglects basic linguistic
principles
6. Accomplishment of
purpose conclusions
2
no final summary statement(s)/
conclusions present; no use of
evidence in final conclusions;
final conclusions not linked to
initial focus; summation does
not describe previous evidence
7. Spelling and grammar
2
manuscript has numerous
composition errors; manuscript
has not been carefully or
systematically edited; paper
demonstrates a poor grasp of
spelling, grammar, and/or
punctuation; errors significantly
detract from the paper
Total Composition Score
10
Grand Total Manuscript
Score
20
manuscript has some
composition errors and/or
has not been thoroughly
edited; paper demonstrates
some, but not complete
evidence of understanding
of composition /editing;
errors detract from the
content of the paper
strong summary statement
with final, overall conclusions
is present; conclusions contain
synthesis of various points of
evidence; conclusions are
warranted from evidence
previously presented;\
conclusions and summary
reiterate initial focus, direction,
and rationale
manuscript demonstrates
mature composition and
editing with few/no spelling,
grammar or punctuation
errors; mature composition
adds to the overall effect of the
content of the paper
9|Prepared Public Speaking
Prepared Public Speaking
Career Development Event
Revised May 2010
Protocols for Speaking CDE Chairperson
Judge Preparation
 Thank the judges for their time and their professionalism.
 Explain the scorecard to the judges to be sure that they understand what they are looking for.
 Review the format of the CDE including important topics such as drawing for order.
 For prepared and creed, choose which judge asks which question and in what order.
 Judges are only responsible for certain areas (i.e. accuracy, time, presence).
 Explain what to look for in question answers
o Answering questions completely
o Answering all parts of multiple part questions
o Accuracy & knowledge
o Organization of answer
o Confidence
 Confidentiality of scores
 Written feedback should be taken given only to finalists after CDE
Scoring
 Each judge totals their scores and ranks contestants
o 1 being best, 2 being second best, etc.
 Chair collects rankings and totals. Rankings should be handed to chair (in lieu of verbally reporting
results).
 The lowest sum of rankings is the winner, next lowest is 2nd, etc.
 Chair then discloses the final results to the judges.
 If the judges have concerns, the chair will re-tally.
 No discussion will take place.
 Finals judges will submit written feedback for the contestants to review.
 All placings should be confidential.
10 | P r e p a r e d P u b l i c S p e a k i n g