Critique the other groups projects.
Use the chart below as a guide to write a few sentences about their presentation. When critiquing someone you should open up with positive feedback and then give critical feedback, but end it on a high note. Also, feel free to ask any questions that you have about anything that they presented that was confusing or would like to know more about. If you found something extremely interesting please make a note of it as well.
| 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
Fluency/Articulation/Enunciation |
|
|
|
|
|
Volume |
|
|
|
|
|
Tone – sincere and interested |
|
|
|
|
|
Organized has clear introduction, middle and end |
|
|
|
|
|
Signposting and Transitions (does not say um) |
|
|
|
|
|
Speaker shows expertise on the topic |
|
|
|
|
|
Simple and concrete word choice |
|
|
|
|
|
Overall Presentation is interesting and informative |
|
|
|
|
|
Comments:
For Sangwon and Ryan
ReplyDeleteThe fluency/Articulation/Enunciation is close to perfect as I can understand every single word they said. There volume and tone was also good as i didn't have to mess with the volume of the computer at all. The tone is matching the situation as both are in serious tone where the 2 talk about the assimilation seriously. The organization is well set out as the listener can follow through the ideas presented in the slides. Transitions are nice as no "ums" were heard. The speakers also knew a lot about their topic as Sangwon was able to explain the pictures of how Indian boys and girls were educated without looking at the text. Word choice is easy to follow and the presentation gives good information. Still, some questions are left unanswered (what are reservation schools and day schools specifically?)
-TJ
The volume was well done however I thought that the tone could have expressed a bit more emotion especially when talking about some sensitive topics. Fluency was good for most of the presentation.
ReplyDeleteThe organization was sort of predictable because you just repeated whatever was said on the presentation for almost every point. It seemed like you were an expert, but then again you just said whatever was said on the slides...
Word choice was easy to understand and I learned a lot from the presentation!!!
^ryan and sangwon btw
ReplyDeleteTJ/Alex/Caroline - I think that the mike you used was of poor quality, especially when Alex started talking. It hurt my ears :( I don't know if it was because of the mike but in some parts of the video I couldn't understand what you were saying, especially when it wasn't written on the powerpoint. I feel that the last two slides contained too little information compared to the amount of talking you did. Also, the ending seemed a little abrupt (and you also spelled "cited" wrong!)
ReplyDeleteI would give you a 3 for the fluency and articulation, a 4 for volume, 5 for tone, 4 for organization, 5 for signposting, expertise, and word choice, and a 4 for the last criteria.
Sangwon and Ryan's Presentation:
ReplyDeleteIn Sangwon and Ryan’s presentation on Indian schools, they demonstrated clear volume and used fluent language with smooth transitions. Being that the subject might be a sensitive one for some people, their serious tone was very appropriate. The presentation was organized in a suitable order, going from simply identifying what Indian Schools were to the effects that they had brought. Sangwon and Ryan showed expertise on the topic and used concrete word choice. The presentation, overall, was very interesting.
Sangwon & Ryan:
ReplyDeleteAll the technical aspects are good; nice volume, good enunciation, easy to understand, etc.
There is a good introduction, starting with themselves and what they're topic is. There is also a clear middle, and the ending with talks about the effects of their topic. They do not have any vocal pauses, so it sounds very smooth. They also sound very professional. However it gets a bit confusing as they go back and forth between speakers. It almost gets hard to keep up with their conversational tone. Overall, it feels very personal and engaging.
The video itself was very informative and interesting. The tone was serious (as it should be) and the speakers seem to have prepared for the video quite nicely. However, there were several instances where fluency and transitions were not clear. For example, during TJ's portion of the video, he seemed to temporarily stop speaking for a second or two in several parts, which really interrupts the flow of the monologue. In Alex's part, the scratchy mic sounds really hurt my ears and annoyed me. Alex's mic, though it might be unavoidable, was one of the weakest points of the video. In addition, there was no ending, and the video ended abruptly. A summary of your points might have been good to wrap up the video.
ReplyDeletearticulation = 4
volume = 4
tone = 5
organization = 4
singpost/transition = 3
expertise = 5
simple/word choice = 4
overall = 4
^for TJ, Alex, and Caroline
DeleteTJ, Alex, & Caroline:
ReplyDeleteYou sound a bit rushed at the beginning, so it's a bit hard to follow. However, you really sound professional, and it seems like you really know what you're talking about. There are not vocal pauses, so it's very smooth and easy to the ears. The way you divided the parts coincide with a beginning, middle, and end. There are a few awkward pauses, but it's insignificant. The sound quality fluctuates throughout the presentation, though. The word choice is simple and easy to comprehend very quickly. Overall, it's a nice quick informative presentation to listen to.
Caroline, TJ, Alex-
ReplyDeleteThere was good volume, and pronunciation which allowed it to be easier to understand. It is really organized, and the overall flow is great. It was also informative and covered a lot of details. However, some of the powerpoint slide could have been less wordy.
For kevin, angela, annette
ReplyDeleteThe volume isn't that well done. It seemed as if kevin and others were fading away at times.
The articulation was great for most of the time, but sometimes the language was really hard to understand. In addition, there were a lot of differing volumes between the different members of the group (especially annette-->angela). Other than a couple of confusing times, the organization seemed very well done and the information was spread out in an easy to understand manner. Word choice was pretty concise and I learned quite a bit from watching!~
PS: try to add more enthusiasm
Annette Kevin Angela
ReplyDeleteThe information presented in the presentation along with the tone and organization are of quality. Still, the quality of the sound itself is bad as the mike or the area around the mike was not a good environment and a lot of static was recorded. Also, giving the listeners a chance to look at the slide's text (for like the 2nd slide) would be good as the transition was too quick at that moment. The presentation itself was interesting and the speakers showed expertise. Try to record in a better environment next time.
-TJ
Milton, Sally, Ellen:
ReplyDeleteThe sound quality is not ideal so it's a bit hard to listen to. However, you sound very professional and articulate, and you really seem to know what you're talking about. A clear beginning, middle, and end can be felt with the introduction of your character, what he did, influence/significance + works cited & extra information. Overall, It was very organized and easy to comprehend, as well as smooth and fluid.
Sangwon and Ryan:
ReplyDeleteOverall, they had a very smooth presentation. Their voice was clear and the volume was nice. However, I think if they had more enthusiasm in their speaking tone, it would grab more of the audience's voice. Also, it kind of seemed like they basically read off of their slides. It would have been more interesting if they had more detail in their presentation, outside of the information posted on the slides. The organization of the presentation was in an appropriate order and made the information easier to understand. The facts were well-delivered.
For Kevin, Annette, and Angela
ReplyDeleteThe greatest complaint I have about this video is the mic problems. Throughout the first 2/3's of the video, the constant static/whining sound in the background prevented me from hearing Kevin and Annette clearly. Angela's portion was EXTREMELY soft. I could barely hear what Angela was saying! Overall, the video is still very informative and interesting to watch. There were no ums (as far as I can hear), and the organization was somewhat good. Main complaints, however, were the volume and mic problems.
articulation = 4
volume = 2
tone = 5
organization = 4
singpost/transition = 4
expertise = 5
simple/word choice = 4
overall = 4
Kevin/Annette/Angela - I think that your mike was of very poor quality, as there was so much background static that it prevented your voice from coming out clearly. After about 3 minutes Angela's voice comes in with less static, but way too quiet. I'm not sure if the background "music" was intentional or not, but it seemed rather out of place, especially at the end. Talking about the end, it seemed very abrupt with no real conclusion. Also, some advice is to put more words next to your pictures, so if there are some parts that we cannot hear, we can at least read the basic information. Other than that, I felt that the speakers were very well informed.
ReplyDeleteArticulation = 3
Volume = 3
tone = 4
Organization = 3
Signpost = 4
Expertise = 5
Word choice = 4
Overall = 4
Fluency/Articulation/Enunciation
ReplyDeleteGood articulation and fluency throughout the video and you maintain a serious tone which is always good for the listener. 5
Volume
The volume is sometimes hard to hear during the last part of the presentation because of the sound quality but it might be due to technical difficulties but overall the volume is well maintained. 5
Kevin Chun
Tone –
The tone throughout the recording is sincere and solid which makes the listener more compelled to listen to it but it sounds monotonous at times. 4
Organized
The piece is well organized and flows well together and has a beginning middle and ending. 5
Signposting and Transitions
Even though you have good trasitions sometimes the transitins and signposting is not as clear and there are a few um's in the presentation.. 3
Speaker shows expertise on the topic
Each one of the speakers know their topic well.5
Simple and concrete word choice
Somtimes too wordy and the slides themselves have too many words. 3
Overall Presentation is interesting and informative
As a result of the monotonous speaking voice sometimes I got distracted from the powerpoint. 4
Ellen, Milton, Sally-
ReplyDeleteThe volume was fine, but your voices seem to be echoing at times, which disturbed my concentration at times. Your presentation was really organized and informative as well. I liked how you explained pictures as well at the end, which made it clearer to understand the information presented. However, it seemed as if your group was simply reading off the powerpoint, and could have been done differently~
For sally, milton, ellen
ReplyDeleteThe volume is best in this presentation because of the fact that it was consistent throughout. The articulation, too, was very clear and consistent. However, for tone, I would have hoped you guys would be a bit more enthusiastic (haha). For organization, there was a bit too much text and not enough photos so that it got really boring to look through the slides. However, the word choice in itself was simple and concise. Finally, I've never even heard about this guy and I'm glad I do now~~~
Annette, Kevin and Angela:
ReplyDeleteThe weakest point of the presentation was the problem with the mics; a lot of disruptive side noise was caught on the mic and made my ears hurt a little bit. The volume during the last part of the presentation was very quiet and hard to hear, which made me play around with the volume. Even with such technical problems, the presenters quite successfully delivered the information they needed to deliver. It was hard to get a clear distinction of the introduction, middle, and the end; the presentation just seemed like a very informative one without much division. The presenters showed smooth transition when speaking without any “ums.” They also seemed to know the information very well and had confidence in speaking. Intelligent words were chosen in the presentation, and in overall, the presentation was interesting.
Ellen Sally Milton
ReplyDeleteThe information is fascinating as the topic covers information from the other presentations. The speaking, tone, and volume are nice except that the audio quality of the video doesn't fulfill expectations. There is good organization and transitions, along with word choice which prevents readers from struggling with the information. All in all, the presentation was interesting and informative and helped me learn a lot about this man
-TJ
TJ, Alex, Caroline
ReplyDeleteFluency:4
Volume:5
Tone:4
Organization:4
Transitions:3
Expertise:5
Word choice:4
Overall Presentation:4
This would be a great presentation in content. It had a very adequate amount of information that was new and the speakers presented the information in a very interesting way. I could relate a lot to the presentation because my own research briefly mentions the American Indian Movement as well. The only fault in the video was the bad mic quality. Definitely not entirely the groups' fault but they could have dealt with it.
Kevin, Annette, Angela:
ReplyDeleteThe information is well-organized and informative. However, it is very difficult to understand and hear because of the poor sound quality. They definitely seem to know what they are talking about. I think they should add more enthusiasm as well to grab the audiences attention. Overall, the presentation was very informative, except it was difficult to hear because of the mic condition.
Sangwon&Ryan-There was nice volume and enunciation which made it easier to understand the information presented. It was really informative and organized as well. However, it seemed as if you were simply reading off the powerpoint, so it would have been better if there were key words on your powerpoint, and you explained the information yourselves with a separate script. Other than that, overall, it was done well.
ReplyDeleteCaroline, TJ, and Alex
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning, it was a little bit hard to understand because of the volume, but the slides really helped out. They seemed to know their information well and the presentation was well-organized. It would be more interesting if they had more excitement in their tone. Also, a couple of slides were very wordy and could be more concise.
Sangwon and Ryan
ReplyDeleteFlency and Articulation=5
Volume=5
Tone=4
Organized has clear intro, middle, and end=5
signposting and transition=4
speaker shows expertise=4
simple and concrete word=5
overall presentation is interesting and informative=4
The presentation has good flow and shows the time spent on their presentation. It would have been better if they had a smoother flow throughout the presentation and linked one slide to another. Overall, the presentation was well organized and easy to understand.
-Ellen
Dasoo/Sally/Ellen
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the video, mainly due to its clarity and simplicity. The tone is calm, the video audio flows smoothly, and the volume is appropriate. However, I did detect several ums and pauses, which makes you question whether if they prepared for the video properly. I found the video very informative as well!
Fluency:5
Volume:4
Tone:4
Organization:4
Transitions:3
Expertise:4
Word choice:4
Overall Presentation:4
Ellen/Dasoo/Sally - Although the mike was not optimal, I was still able to hear most of what you guys said. I think most of the presentation was good, but I felt that Ellen was simply reading off of the words of the powerpoint. Tell us something we don't know from reading! Milton had a lot of "um"s in his part. Other then that, I thought the presentation was fairly informative.
ReplyDeleteArticulation = 4
Volume = 4
Tone = 4
Organization = 5
Signpost = 3
Expertise = 4
Word choice = 5
Overall = 4
For Sangwon and Ryan
ReplyDeleteI liked the overall presentation and the way the slides were presented. The tone and the sound quality were easy to hear but i had a problem with the way you were reading from the powerpoint. It sounded kind of monotone because you didn't vary the sound of your voice. Also the way you were speaking seemed as if you were simply reading off the information from the powerpoint which i could easily do. I thought it was rather better to talk about the images that you made and elaborated by giving further descriptions about it rather than reading information the audience can easily view.
Sangwon, Ryan
ReplyDeleteFluency:5
Volume:5
Tone:3
Organization:4
Transitions:4
Expertise:4
Word choice:5
Overall Presentation:5
The clear audio quality just made this presentation so much better. After listening to so many scratches it felt really soothing to the ear. Thus my impression of this presentation was much better. There really wasn't any criteria that lack so much from the others, and it was a real well rounded presentation. One fault might be how they were so monotonous.
Milton, Sally, and Ellen:
ReplyDeleteThe fluency/articulation/enunciation of the presentation was good, but some pronunciation errors were seen. The volume and the side noise caught by the camera appeared to be a little bothersome. The presenters had an interested tone with seriousness because the subject of their presentation needed gratitude in it. One of the strongest points in the presentation would be the clear organization of introduction, middle, and end. Their simple and concrete word choice made the presentation easy to hear, but catch the needed information. The overall presentation was informative and pleasant to listen to.
For milton sally and ellen
ReplyDeleteIn your presentation you guys really seemed to know what you were talking about and were experts on the piece. However, the biggest problem i had was that you guys didn't bring in "new" information onto your powerpoint. Rather than trying to comment on the powerpoint that you made by incorporating information you simply read off the powerpoitn and also the volume of the presentation wasn't that ideal. Otherwise, you did a good presentation.
Alex Son Caroline kim TJ kIm
ReplyDeletefluency/articulation/enunciation=4
Volume=4
Tone=4
Organized has clear intro,middle, and end=5
Signposting and transition=5
Speaker shows expertise=5
Simple and Concrete word =4
Overall presentation is interesting and informative=4
The information is organized and easy for the audience to understand. But if the change of volume from one person to another makes the audience have a hard time concentrating on the powerpoint. This presentation could have been better if you could have adjusted the volume and matched the transitions. But the presentation itself was interesting and very informative.
Kevin, Annette, Angela
ReplyDeleteFluency:4
Volume:3
Tone:4
Organization:3
Transitions:5
Expertise:5
Word choice:4
Overall Presentation:4
I liked how this presentation used their graphics usefully. It was much pleasing to the eye than a barrage of texts and it made their content easier to understand. I would have liked it if their presentation was more organized though. They sounded really knowledgable about their topic and effectively informed their audience with an adequate amount of information
Kevin Chun, Angela Son, Annette Hong
ReplyDeletefluency/articulation/enunciation=4
Volume=3
Tone=5
Organized has clear intro, middle, and end=5
signposting and transition=3
speaker shows expertise=4
simple and concrete word=5
overall presentation is interesting and informative=5
The presentation is informative and you guys are interested in the topic, but the voice is screechy and the transition makes it harder for the audience to concentrate and focus on the presentation. Also the movement of the arrow disturbs the presentation. But, the presentation contains all necessary informationa and helps the audience clearly understand the material.