Question 3

I do not think there was one thing that I will take from the class. There was no key piece of information that really benefited me. The experience that I gained overall though was very important. Writing the outlines was a great lesson in patience. The way that I use to do speeches was just go up with a few talking points and go. This worked well, but I would tend to ramble on and on because I can usually talk for days about topics I am well versed in. Also the experience of dealing with a lot of culturally different people. Placer County is pretty much the same, however there was a good mix of different back grounds in this class and presenting to them and seeing their reactions will help me down the road when I am addressing more diverse crowds. Minus the outlines I really enjoyed the class and the interaction we were forced to do on the blogs. It allowed me to see into the minds of my classmates and better understand the class and my peers.

Question 1

I liked the different forms of reasoning. I am pretty cut and dry when it comes to my forms of reasoning, but seeing other points of view and other options I think will benefit me in the long run. I do not know if I will change my ways and branch out to the other forms of reasoning that I didn't really use in the class, but at least I know that they are there. I like to keep it simple. I like to show a problem and solve it. I like to give tons of examples and show cause and effect. This allows me to pretty much get rid of any possible arguments before any could even arise. I like this position because then the opposition has to start off immediately defensive, which makes it easier for me. I think reasoning is the back bone to any speech or just any opinion really, if a person has sound reasoning they tend to have a decent view point. 

Question 2

I think my favorite speech was the last one about renewable energy. I actually got to talk about something important, not just to me, but important to everyone. I was really disappointed when the teacher shortened the time limit because I was only able to scratch the service of what I wanted to say. I went way over the time limit for the speech and my grade suffered tremendously, however to me sharing the knowledge about the dangers of our ways and the rewards of renewable energy far out way the consequences. If I was able to change one persons mind, to get one person off the couch, it was well worth the punishment. Anyways I really liked all the speeches in this class. We had a wide variety of topics that's that we had to work around. At the time I didn't like it because I had an agenda, but looking back it made me do some pretty interesting speeches that I would not have been able to do otherwise. 

Question 3

I was interested in the deductive reasoning. I plan to use a lot of causal and example based reasoning, but I want to attempt to use deductive as well. It is almost robotic the way it attempts to persuade people. I think a huge flaw though is that it just assumes that it is correct. Obviously it is based off of a fair amount of information before it assumes such a thing, but it feels like it is not as agile as other forms of reasons. Like if you threw a variable in there it would just mess everything up. If I can work out the flaws I think it would make for a very snippy few lines of reasoning. I would need to make it broad and narrow it down quickly to a very simple answer. I see it almost being a joke really, but I am not sure how or when I am going to use it. Then again I might wuss out and just stick to some standard reasoning's when I get up there and start babbling.

Question 2

I really enjoy debating people. Formal debates are fun, but I like when it is just back and forth (polite of course), but no opening statements or conclusion statements, just good old fashion arguing. I have a debate next week so I tested out some tactics on one of my ignorant friends. The topic was animal testing and of course I want to end it immediately, and my “friend” doesn't see the problem with it. So I used a lot of example based reasoning and causal reasoning, and some just plain old common sense. Needless to say he really didn't have a chance, it was a hollow victory though because he will never change his ways unless there is a gun pointed to his head or it is changed for him. I tried to use deductive reasoning, but it just confused him. I want to try to use some in my speech, but I want to make sure I make it short and simple so I people don't get lost in the tangled thoughts that are my speeches.

Question 1

I thought the videos were pretty decent. All of them gave pretty good examples for me and my persuasive speech. I liked the guy who was talking about hikers straying off the trail. I think his approach fits my style very well. The causal type argument shows there is an issue and shows how it is affecting us. The obvious conclusion that we shouldn't hike off the trail. The pro and con speeches were pretty interesting as well. I like public schools all though are horribly failing, so I guess I should say I like the idea of public schools. It is the great equalizer. The pro for public schools didn't do as good of a job as I think he could of. I just didn't feel like there was enough information in his speech and I wasn't really feeling what he was saying even though I agreed with is view point. The con lady however did very well. I liked her speech and I liked the sarcasm that she threw in about learning how to deal drugs and duck behind desks. I think if used properly those types of lines can easily persuade a lot of people.  

Question 3

I liked the part about ethics of persuasive speaking. I think this was a very important part of our reading for this week. Unfortunately many people will just believe what they are told. This is becoming a huge issue with so called "news agencies" pumping people full of false or tainted information. A lot of people responsible for this lack any for of ethics or morality. It is very important for us as speakers or really just us a people to make sure we comment to acting ethically when we are tyring to inform or persuade people. Obviously you are trying to persuade someone so you are going to try to make your side seem better, but be sure to include all sides of the argument at hand. Not only that, but explain why that can be an option too. You will have a much stronger argument if the listener decides on their own rather than you coercing them into your beliefs.

Question 2

Due to the lack or regulations we as a society have decided not to put in place we are faced with thousands of persuasive messages a day. When we walked out doors there are billboards, advertisements, and sign wavers. When we get in our car there are radio advertisements. When we go places like doctors, businesses, or schools there are advertisements all over from partnering businesses or from companies that sponsor those institutions. When we get back home our TVs and the Internet is filled to the brim of advertisements. It doesn't matter if your watching a show, a movie, playing a game, anything there are advertisements or at the very least persuasion to do certain things.  To remain vigilant and not to become a sheeple, people must realize that they are being force fed fake information all the time. Always be informed and always read the fine print. Realize that just because something is seen everywhere it is not the best thing. The most important thing is to educate oneself. If you are always asking questions, you will never be taken advantage of.

Question 1

If I understand this correctly I will be using the Problem Solution Pattern method for my final speech. Monroe's approach seems fine, however I always tend to stray away from to persuasive. I do not want to tug at people emotions, I want them to make the decision for themselves. The Monroe approach seems like there is a lot flashing lights, and attention getter's, to get people on its side. The problem/solution organizational seems to be more my style. To present the problem and explain it in detail. To show the history of the problem I am discussing to give it context and a background. This way I can give a logical argument for or against a certain topic because I have explained it in detail. There is very little emotion or room for argument if there is only logic involved. This style I prefer because it feels natural to me. It is sort of like a game, if you eliminate any possible counter argument then only option is your side. This to me is the best form of persuasion.

Question 3

I liked the impromptu section of chapter 12. I love on the spot speeches and talk. I really  think  that impromptu speeches shows how knowledgeable someone is if they can just give a spontaneous speech on a topic. A person can research something and memorize information, however if that person was forced to make an impromptu speech they wouldn't stand a chance compared to someone who knows and lives in the subject at hand. It also shows how well someone can talk on their feet a sort of BS test. To me it feels more natural, I get way to nervous if I plan a speech or try to memorize it. I prepare by studying and just getting  a basic outline, but that is about it. I feel much more comfortable if I am just talking to the class verses giving them a speech.  The hardest part is structure. It is very easy to go in circles or get lost in your on speech if you don't have some sort of basic outline or are very good at creating outlines on the spot. I really  think other than that impromptu speeches are the best choice, well at least for me.

Question 1

I think there was a lot of great information in chapters 10 and 12. I am actually wondering why it wasnt closering to the start of the semister instead of the end. Some of the information was pretty obvious however, it serves as a good reminder to watch out for some classic mistakes. I think the practice part was key as well. If you just read the speech and memorize it you will have no idea about how it sounds. Also if you memorize it you will just read as you do in your head with no change in tone or pitch. I thought in some of the videos they talked to slow. It seemed like what they were suggesting was to be very slow and mono tone on their examples. I think they were just tyring to show contrast between to fast and slow, but if they are examples they should be at least good ones.

Question 2

This was a pretty interesting conversation. I didn't really think much about the girl/women thing until this. I am a little bit torn, I would be a little insulted if I was referred to as a boy. On the other side I do not think anyone is trying to belittle women. I asked a few of my friends that our girls/women and they gave a pretty similar response. They thought of themselves as a girl not a woman. All of them were over 18 and below 30. I am not sure if this is because of societies views or what the cause is. The rest of the comments are pretty interesting too when it comes to different terms people use. Most of the people didn't seem to mind and felt that the lady was over reacting. I have still yet to really make up my mind because it seems that a women is someone who is older and ladies do not like to think of themselves that way, however I do not want to insult anyone who feels that girl is a belittling term.

Self-Evaluation 2

I think this time around I actually did worse on my speech compared to my last one. I felt that I didn't do bad, it was just not up to my standards. I didn't get almost any of the information that I thought I was going to be able to squeeze in. I was was comfortable and confident I feel, but at the end when I was forced to finish I was almost embarrassed that I didn't get to say most of my speech. If I could do it over again I wouldn't spend so much time explaining what a GMO is. I think the class would have been much more confused, but at least I could of gotten more information in about what the harms are. I noticed a lot of people were directly citing from their bibliography. I didn't know we were supposed to do that so I would add in some quotes to help support my claims. That is also assuming that I would have time to get to them. The goal I have about my next speech is actually reaching my content. The last speech and the upcoming speech both say 5-6 minutes, but I guess this class has 4-5 requirements. I need to figure out how to get to all the information I want to share out there in a timely manner. I don't think I nee to improve on my delivery that much. I keep getting marked down for fidgeting, but like I said on my last self evaluation there really isn't anything I can do about that. I took a muscle relaxer this time around, but it didn't seem to help so I'm pretty much stuck just getting marked down for moving around to much. They felt the same really. The only difference is that I just went way past the time on my last speech. This however got me a better grade vs me just skipping everything and ending. As I just mentioned the thing that seems to distract some people is me moving around and sadly there isn't much I can do to change that. On all the positives people said I had really good eye contact, which is good so I would say a 9 or 10. This is mainly because I rarely look down at my notes. I just make sure I am not skipping around to much and then continue talking. I think the grade I got was a little lower than I should of got however it wasn't to far off. I think I should of gotten a middle of the road B on my speech. I literally skipped pages of research, to try to squeeze the speech in the allotted time frame. I really only used one just because I luckily remember the citations information. I wasn't aware that we were supposed to use citations in our speech so next time around this will not be an issue. No it was worse in my opinion. I think next time if I am having a time issue I will just go over the time limit. In a perfect world I would be able to condense the information into the allotted time.  

Question 3

I liked the tips that the video section brought up. Everything they brought up were pretty good points. Keeping it short is sometimes hard to do because you feel that the entire message is very important, but if it is too long people will just tune it out. Embedding the video is important as well, even though its not crucial it really disrupts the presentation if you have to exit out of your slides then go to YouTube search for it then find it and play it vs playing it in your slide. Citing the source is very important too or I guess even citing the information that the video is referencing. This makes the video credible and not something someone came up with and made a quick video about their opinions. Making sure it is legitimate ties in to what I was just saying. Anyone can make a video and the speaker needs to make sure it has correct information before they show it to the class.

Question 2

I saw a speaker a while ago on the dangers of the industrial military complex. The speaker was fantastic. He used a wide array of images, charts, graphs, and some text lines. He sort of mimiced the Colbert Report in the sense that he would ask a question and then on his screen have the answer sort of mocking what he was saying. This type of humor really kept the audience intreged and ingaged. One of the things that he did well too was not a lot of text. Quotes are good, but long quotes or just blocks of information in text really make the audience loose intrests, or make them focus on what is on the screen rather than what you are saying. I think the only thing that he could of improved on more was the information provided, it was a little on the light side when it came to concrete information. Not saying he wasnt correct in what he was saying he just needed to back it up with a little more sources for information

Question 1

I don't fully understand the question so I will answer two different ways. Answer one is geared more to the speaker changing the information him/herself. Obviously this is unethical and should not be allowed. This is purely the speaker changing or creating information that is either very bias or flat out untrue. Answer two, which I think the question is more geared toward is that it is the speakers responsibility to produce accurate information. This means fact checking everything. So you have an image of a baby shooting someone to try to prove that guns are bad. Great, however you need to verify where you got this image from, check there qualifications, then check the source of the image and then check their qualifications. What most of us don't do is then try to find similar images or information about it as well. Try to disprove the image or information you have is one of the best ways to prove that it is a valid source of information and should be trusted.

Question 3

I liked the establish your credibility part of chapter 9. I think it is very important for people to understand why they should believe in what you are saying. I do not like people who are full of themselves that just list of their credentials in a pompous matter. A person need to state why they are credible carefully so they do not come off as elitist and turn off the majority of the audience. A simple little explanation on how and why you are familiar with the subject should do and then your knowledge of the subject as your talking should be enough for people to understand you as a credible source and be listening the whole time. The last little snip it at the end confused me a little bit like they just had a quote from the department of labor. To me that doesn't really show credibility that is just something they looked up which anyone now a days can do. So I don't think that just one line from a source is enough. 

Question 2

The main thing I need to work on is an attention getter. I think they are cheesy and are a ploy to get people to feign their interest. They should be interested already because the topics in our class our interesting and don't need some little magazine headline style intro. Anyways I liked the examples they gave like showing an image or playing a song. Ending my speech is always a hard thing to do. I just sort of stop usually do to time constraints and it is not effective at all. It feels like I just gave up on the speech which is not the case. I really like the thank the audience ending. It feels like that is something that will come naturally rather than just reciting the topics I just spoke to them about and also everyone likes to get thanked. I haven't decided yet, but I think my intro will be the definition of a GMO, which should get everyone's attention and then tell them it is in their food supply. That should really get people to listen...hopefully. The ending will probably be me just thanking everyone for listening and encouraging them to be good humans. 

Question 1

In chapter 9 I wasn't sure if I was supposed to like the cell phone ladies intro or if was really opinion based, but I didn't think it was that good. It asked to many questions and was a little confusing. The conclusions were pretty weak, however I did like the bigger guy ending. I am pretty sure we were not supposed to, but that guy and I share the same humor...I think and I like how he just walked off when he said it. The techno speech was very good. I felt like he said techno far to much. He just needed to say trance or hardcore. It felt like he was saying it just to take up time. Overall I thought his speech was good and his transitions were not as lame as others. The picture lady was very good as well and had a great flow. Epic pun thrown in which is always funny. Also myspace...enough said. In all seriousness she did a good job taking a very long and complex topic and made it interesting without being long and drawn out.  

Question 2

More facts and statistics! No emotions just logic! As sated multiple times by me already on this and other posts I feel that we shouldn't really need emotional narratives to get the attention or convince a person. Obviously this isn't the correct way to go about a speech, but this is my preferred style, throw in some humor on your side and you have a nice speech in my mind. Facts and statistics are great when trying to explain your point of view or back up the point you are trying to make. They are not as effective when there are too many or too complicated. You can add a dash of statistics periodically to make your speech sound more authoritative so people believe what you are saying. Also just laying down your facts and statistics in a row will kill the average person so they need to be separated with nice simple words.

Question 1

In chapter 7 I think they did a good job telling us what the pros and cons are about each type of supporting material we can use. I liked all of them, but the narrative. I think that is a person bias though I am not a fan of trying to get someone attention of convince them of something by making them feel a certain way. I prefer facts and logic overwhelmingly. This can lead to issues though because if there are to many facts or statistics a lot of people will start to tune out and not pay any attention. Chapter 7 also tells us to make sure we choose wisely when it comes to information, which is great. Always fact check your facts, just because one place says something no matter how reputable it should be fact check a few times to get the whole story. Chapter 8 told us about patterns and transitions. I like some of the pattern ideas like cause-and-effect and problem solution. These fit more of my logical style of transmitting ideas. Transitions are always a little hard for me because in my mind I see the big picture and its all a single idea, however people that are listening tend to get confused because my transitions are not pronounced enough. The transitions given here will help me separate main points easier.

Question 3

I liked the audience research questionnaire section of our assigned reading. At first it seemed a bit silly to me until I reached the conclusion that it was similar to marketing and then it all made sense. It was used to get the opinions of the perspective audience, but I think more importantly it was used to gather the knowledge of them. It is good to tailor your speech to their opinions in some situations, but even if its tailored for their tastes and they are not knowledgeable enough to understand what you are saying might might as well not even give the speech. You as the speaker have to understand what they know. Example is sure most people know of pollution and they know its bad, but do they understand why there is pollution in the first place? Do they understand that their decisions are making the pollution so, do they get what it is doing to the environment, is there a clear connection between action and results for them? Once you have understood their knowledge of the particular situation then you can make a speech that will be comprehended by everyone.

Question 2

It is much easier for me to explain audience analysis and audience adaptation in marketing terms and logic, it also helps that they are pretty much identical except instead of audience its market. So just like marketing you must first understand your target audience/market. This is who the speech is going to be delivered to. Just like marketing you need to do a ton of research. If you market a product that has no use to that particular market it is not going to go well. This can be easily translated to if you give a speech that no one in the room is going to care about it will not go well at all. You must understand the audience's demographics, psycho-graphic, etc to properly prepare a speech. You have to tailor your words and your ideas so that they can identify with you. Having a lot of experience with marketing I think that it will be easy to identify and analysis my audience and prepare a speech for them. Luckily in this class we can choose are own topics and the class is pretty much forced to listen, so I can speak my mind with impunity.

Question 1

Talk about an attention getter! The drinking speech beginning I think it was way over the top and silly, but I did defiantly pay attention after that. He had an issue with stuttering and getting his words out. He did have a lot of stats though, which is hard to get out for most people. The use of the projector seemed awkward and distracting, but with the amazing invention of power point will eliminate this problem. Towards the middle and end he got a little bit nervous and you could tell by his hand and body movement and placement. I did like his speech overall it was full of information, but he managed to tell it in a non boring fashion, which made me pay attention to all of the details. The light pollution girl spoke much more fluently, however she was looking at her paper way more often than the drinking guy did. She fumbled with her hands a little bit, but I am not sure if this was a constant problem because the video was so short.

Week 2 Question 3

Gathering research materials! I love to research, I love to learn and better myself. Usually on my on time, somehow doing it for school seems painful. Regardless, researching is the back bone of any speech. In reality research and the understanding of things is pretty much the back bone of society but that is a different topic. I always say do your own research! Fact check everything! Due to my curious nature and my upbringing of never trusting anyone this luckily comes nature to me. Researching your topic will make it way easier to write your paper. If your filled with a ton of knowledge because you love your topic or you just poured a ton of time into researching writing and composing the speech should be much easier. With an easier time writing it will take the burden off you when your up there giving your speech. You wont have to remember every single line because you have learned it instead of memorized it. So if you forget a line its not big deal because you know the facts instead. 

Week 2 Question 2

First off do people still actively kill slugs with salt? I thought as a society we moved passed torture animals. Second off what is with all the religious stuff it has nothing to do with education. Back to the question at hand. I really enjoyed the slug ladies speech. She was very entertaining without being totally awesome at public speeching, which I think gives the rest of us hope in doing well in this class. She had a lot of different topics that moved seamlessly from topic to topic. I think that might have been the best part of that. Her speech was very well planned out. That is probably the best thing to learn from that speech. Everything she did was good, but her planning I think won the day. I tend to jump around a lot in my speeches due to nerves and just poor planning, but if I can really have a structured speech I think that will defiantly help.

Week 2 Question 1

Over the years I have done a few interviews for various reasons usually involving work. I am very in depth when it comes to my research probably a little to over the top. The people I have interviewed I kind of feel bad for because it is almost like an interrogation. This is probably the issue I have with the interview process. I can tell when people are not totally forthcoming or are just pulling stuff out of their...well you know. Don't BS a BSer...hooray editing! Anyways my strong points would be that I can become easily informed on a topic so if I have a good person to interview I can adept my questions accordingly to their level of intelligence and knowledge of the subject at hand. My advice would do a ton of research. I like to know as much or more as my person I am going to interview so that I can relate to their answers. Make sure to have great questions, if you do not fully understand something make sure to ask it.

Question 3

I really liked a part of the building your confidence before the day of your speech. I think a part that is really good advice is the choose a topic your care about section. This is huge! People usually will just pick a topic that is easy or they think will be well recieved. This might be a mistake for them if they are having issues with speaking in front of people. If you pick a topic that is interesting you wont have an issue talking about it. An example would be if you like dogs, you can go on and on about dogs, but you pick cats because your teacher is a total cat lady. You dont really know much about cats and infact when you were five years old a cat bit you and to this day you are still a little afriad of them. You have a hard time finding topics for your talk and you akwardly assemble them to a speech and sputter through it. In a different scenario you do your talk about dogs you have no problem pouring your collective knowledge out and getting a good outline going. You go up to do your talk and you compeltey forget your speech, but you still know everything about dogs you can still manage a great and true to heart speech even if you forget every word that was planned out.

Question 2

First of all I found it pretty shocking that school material in this day in age would use a reference mentioning god. I found it it particulary amusing that she said that god is in control when this is a class that is focusing on how to better train yourself in better public speaking not letting her so called god guide the way. Anyways, these videos wernt exactly super hepful at least not for me. Not saying I am great in public speaking they just didnt have anything really helpfull with the issues I have. I did like the suggestions of controlled breathing to calm yourself before a speech, however it seems a little inpracticle to stand up in the middle of class start breathing heavily. I liked the hand movements of the lady giving the speech. Her topic and relating story were pretty out there, but her constant hand narrativce kept me watching and listening. I am not sure how well I would use this technique because my hand might be shaking and people might be conserned if I am going to pass out or finish the speech.

Question 1

I personally believe that the anxiety that comes with public speaking is because of all the negative hype associated with it. Public speaking wasn't really a huge area of study for previous generations at least when speaking to a few parents of different ages. I feel that the anxiety attached to public speaking is because of the lack of knowledge and practice of the ones who raised us. I think with the large emphasis that our currently curriculum's that are in place now the fear of public speaking will start to diminish. For me personally my biggest issue with talking in front of a crowd is engaging all of them. As in it is hard for me to engage each and every person or the opposite of just looking in the general directing of them. In that scenario I feel like I am ignoring the people listening. So for me it is hard finding that happy medium of eye contact and no eye contact. One of the book references does ring true as well for me as well. It is the uncertainty about the audience's response. I have a very unique way of talking and a dry and complex sense of humor. When I explain things people tend to get lost because they get overwhelmed with details that I include or I explain it with an expectation that they are listening to every word I am saying. When I go back to reference something I had said earlier people tend to get lost. Also when someone tells a joke thinking it is going to get the audience going and there is no response it kind of kills the mood.

Hello

Hello everyone. I am majoring in communications and hopefully going to transfer to Sac State in a semester or two. I am currently unemployed/self employed. I fix and build computers. Computers are my passion along with being a decent human being. Anyways we are supposed to be anonymous on these things so not sure how in depth this is supposed to be soooooo hopefully everyone has a great semester!