Assignment 2
Procedures for Evaluating Oral Presentations
You will be asked to evaluate oral presentations given by your fellow students. Sample
memos are given below.
Evaluation of others is important for several reasons, including the need for feedback
from more than one audience member and what we learn about improving our own
presentations in evaluating what does and does not work in others' presentations.
Evaluation Memo
Your instructor will ask students to write an evaluation memo for designated
presentations. When you are asked to write an evaluation memo, you will type or word
process a memorandum to a fellow student that evaluates his or her performance on a
specific speaking assignment and email a copy of this memorandum to your instructor
(blanton@etsu.edu). The instructor will mark and return a copy to you and will forward a
copy with comments to the student you have evaluated.
Requirements for Evaluation Memo

Use standard memorandum format (see sample memos). If your memo is two
pages, label the second page at the top left with the name of the person to whom it
is addressed, the date, and the page.
Jane Smith
March 3, 2003
Page 2









Type or word process all memos.
Write no more than two pages.
Email a copy to the instructor (blanton@etsu.edu) on date required.
Summarize the speaker's main points.
Evaluate the presentation according to assignment criteria.
Give specific examples from the presentation to illustrate each factor you
evaluate, whether your judgment is negative or positive. (Taking notes during the
presentation will help you provide the required examples.)
Be tactful, but honest, because honest evaluations will help you and your
classmate improve and thus make a better final grade.
Make any recommendations for improvement that you have.
Do not recommend a grade; assigning grades is the instructor's responsibility.
Sample Evaluation Memos
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 12, 1994
TO: [instructor]
FROM: [student evaluating speech]
SUBJECT: Proposal to combine the Georgia Institute of Technology and Georgia State
University into one school
COPY:[students who gave the speech]
Content Summary
The proposal was for what was seen as a possible need to combine the Georgia Institute
of Technology and Georgia State University. The proposal suggested that the advantages
of this move outweigh the disadvantages.
Criteria Comparison
Michael did a good job in the introduction to this controversial topic by stating that this
was not necessarily a proposal for a plan of action but rather a possible need and
something to consider.
Michael also gained favor with the audience by picking out individuals and sympathizing
with some of their needs that may be met by the classes that a liberal arts school would
provide.
The proposal was more effective by first going to the advantages rather than the
disadvantages since the audience was skeptical toward such a topic. Michael's and Brian's
overheads were clear and concise and both were able to discuss their points without
reading from the overhead.
Brian was quite effective when he began to address the disadvantages of the proposal. He
clearly referred, as his overhead did, to the disadvantages as hurdles. This was a key
move to sway the attitude of the audience.
Evaluation
Michael has a great speaking voice and seems very relaxed in front of an audience. He
made mediocre eye contact with the crowd, but his hand gestures gave some great energy
to the speech.
Michael had rehearsed well what he wanted to talk about, but toward the end of his
section he began to slow down somewhat and tended to look down too much.
Brian also has a good speaking voice that conveyed a friendly and honest tone to the
audience. He had good eye contact towards the beginning of his section and his gestures
were good. His smiling was very effective in covering the disadvantages of the proposal.
Brian suffered from the same problem toward the end of his section that Michael did. He
tended to read more toward the end of his speech and began to say "um" while doing this.
Suggestions for Improvement
Michael had a nervous habit of rattling the change in his pocket while he was giving the
introduction. Though his introduction went well, this was somewhat distracting. Michael
could try to smile while giving his part of the proposal. Although Brian's overheads were
clear, he should have used the pointer when referring to them so that he could still be
addressing the audience.
MEMORANDUM
Date: March 6, 1995
TO: [instructor]
FROM: [student evaluating speech]
SUBJECT: Proposal for a New Golf Course
COPY: [students who gave the speech]
Content Summary
This proposal addressed investors needed to support the building of a world class golf
course on the East coast. It discussed the proposed course location, cost estimates, and
investment returns. It also described the course design and how it will attract serious golf
players.
Criteria Comparison
Mac and Brian did a good job of following the guidelines for the speech. The proposal
was easy to understand and well organized.
Brian and Mac addressed an opportunity to build a golf course for a group of investors.
The speakers presented evidence that helped show why their design and location were the
best available.
The proposal was within the time requirements for the speech.
Evaluation
Mac and Brian did a good job of describing the golf course they were proposing. They
discussed location, design, costs, and potential methods of gaining a return on the
investment.
Mac increased the effectiveness of his portion of the speech by having the investors
visualize a scenario at one of the holes.
Both Mac and Brian projected very professional attitudes. The delivery was steady and
the speakers seemed very credible.
Mac and Brian worked well together and gave the proposal a good flow. This was
especially noticeable in the question/answer section.
Both speakers made good eye contact.
Suggestions for Improvement
Some of the questions that surfaced after the proposal could have been anticipated and
answered during the speech. Specifically, the speakers did not mention how long it would
be before a return on the investment would be seen.
The total cost for building the course was 6.4 million dollars. The proposal needed more
energy to get the investors excited about spending that much money.
The speakers should not leave the overhead projector on when it is not being used
because it distracts the audience.
Difficulty
This proposal was fairly difficult to deliver. The speakers need to convince the investors
that they have found the best possible way to spend their money. Both speakers seemed
very credible and professional. The main aspect of the proposal that needed to be
improved was the energy level.
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 8, 1994
TO: [instructor]
FROM: George Jones
SUBJECT: Presentation of Full-Time Painting Crew Plan
COPY: Jane Smith
Content Summary
This presentation dealt with the benefits of hiring a full-time painting crew for a
construction company. The company has been employing sub-contractors to do the
painting, but Smith said that the company could save $20,000 per year by employing its
own crew.
Criteria Comparison






Instead of showing how the recommended course of action would solve the
problem demonstrated in her previous presentation, Smith repeated that speech.
Smith presented no evidence to show that the proposed full-time crew of two
painters could handle the volume of work required.
She did not state any alternative solutions, which were required by the
assignment.
She did not present as required a plan for implementation.
Her concluding remarks did not stress or even state her main point.
Her transparencies were too pale to be read easily, and the graphics shown as
support for the proposed course of action did not give any concrete support.
Evaluation
Jane Smith spoke look enough to be heard, and she walked in front of the lectern to
emphasize several points. On the other hand, her manner was far too relaxed to be
professional; for example, she frequently said "you know," and she at times draped
herself over the lectern.
Not only was her presentation style not entirely professional, but she failed to forecast the
speech, did not connect points, and did not give evidence of sufficient quantity or quality
to be credible. For example, she did not name any member of the company or any outside
expert who agreed that her proposed plan would be profitable to the company.
Suggestions for Improvement





Use relevant data and judgments, so your audience will believe you.
Use a video or mirror to help you practice a more professional style.
The best part of your presentation was your sincere conviction that the proposal
was needed and workable.
Keep that sincerity and enthusiasm!
Make accurate and readable visuals.