Name was changed to protect person
Partner Introduction
This paper discusses X's partner introduction speech. The partner introduction speech was to be focused on the central impression of the person's partner. X's speech was a very average one, missing the main goal which was a central impression of his partner. X's organization was lackluster, although his delivery and closing were pleasant.
X's speech organization did not meet the requirements of the partner introduction. He started by introducing himself and his partner. X then went on to state that his partner was very family-oriented as his central impression. The following details that X provided did not exactly explain why or how his partner was family-oriented. X provided his partner's birthplace and life growing up which was unnecessary and did not add anything to the central impression of his partner. Overall, I failed to see how his partner was family-oriented. It was certain that during his speech, I was uninterested and no longer actively listen. If I was bored, I am sure that other audience members were also bored.
On the other hand, X's delivery was good with only one problem that I spotted. It became obvious that X was reading from his paper rather than devoting most of his time at maintaining eye contact with the audience. As the speech progress, eye contact problem became less severe but was still noticeable. He had very good posture besides the occasional shifting of his feet. Another thing that X did well was the placement of his hands which were always situated on the podium. He met the requirements of wearing a collared shirt and decent pants. His enunciation was good, I understood everything he said. As far I could tell, there was no distracting quirk about his delivery except eye contact. His delivery was very good and I thought it helped to maintain some of the attention. The audience was able to get the information effectively even if it was unnecessary information.
X's closing was average. He met the requirements for a closing which was to restate partner's name, invite the audience to get to know his partner, and to restate the central impression. X restated that his partner was family-oriented although I did not know exactly how his partner was family-oriented. He initiated the "touch" which is a plus. The closing did not leave a lasting impression because I forgot everything he talked about the very next day.
Overall, the speech was an average one. His speech organization need work such as the elimination of unnecessary and the inclusion of necessary details to meet the speech requirement. His eye contact needs improving which could be done by the making an outline of his speech with only phrases and not full sentences. X's closing was fine and I could not find a major complaint about it except to not restate the exact opening. I would have given him a C+.
Partner Introduction
This paper discusses X's partner introduction speech. The partner introduction speech was to be focused on the central impression of the person's partner. X's speech was a very average one, missing the main goal which was a central impression of his partner. X's organization was lackluster, although his delivery and closing were pleasant.
X's speech organization did not meet the requirements of the partner introduction. He started by introducing himself and his partner. X then went on to state that his partner was very family-oriented as his central impression. The following details that X provided did not exactly explain why or how his partner was family-oriented. X provided his partner's birthplace and life growing up which was unnecessary and did not add anything to the central impression of his partner. Overall, I failed to see how his partner was family-oriented. It was certain that during his speech, I was uninterested and no longer actively listen. If I was bored, I am sure that other audience members were also bored.
On the other hand, X's delivery was good with only one problem that I spotted. It became obvious that X was reading from his paper rather than devoting most of his time at maintaining eye contact with the audience. As the speech progress, eye contact problem became less severe but was still noticeable. He had very good posture besides the occasional shifting of his feet. Another thing that X did well was the placement of his hands which were always situated on the podium. He met the requirements of wearing a collared shirt and decent pants. His enunciation was good, I understood everything he said. As far I could tell, there was no distracting quirk about his delivery except eye contact. His delivery was very good and I thought it helped to maintain some of the attention. The audience was able to get the information effectively even if it was unnecessary information.
X's closing was average. He met the requirements for a closing which was to restate partner's name, invite the audience to get to know his partner, and to restate the central impression. X restated that his partner was family-oriented although I did not know exactly how his partner was family-oriented. He initiated the "touch" which is a plus. The closing did not leave a lasting impression because I forgot everything he talked about the very next day.
Overall, the speech was an average one. His speech organization need work such as the elimination of unnecessary and the inclusion of necessary details to meet the speech requirement. His eye contact needs improving which could be done by the making an outline of his speech with only phrases and not full sentences. X's closing was fine and I could not find a major complaint about it except to not restate the exact opening. I would have given him a C+.
