Tuesday, June 6, 2017

Seungchae Na(나승채) / Video Links / THU 1-2

Seungchae Na - PIE - the person I admire         https://youtu.be/frF9_fub02U

Seungchae Na/Great Vacation Idea/Thursday12         https://youtu.be/jiIE6HOeRA8

Seungchae Na / Ice breaker / Thursday 1.2         https://youtu.be/SDGKDpK_BkA

      Seungchae Na/Unit 4/THU 1-2        https://youtu.be/aLcRV-lPRdE

      Seungchae Na / PIE / Opinion / Thursday 1-2        https://youtu.be/Oqtob52msLg 

5 comments:

  1. Evaluator: Sumin Park
    1. What was the overall purpose of the speech. Try to restate or summarize the main point. How well was it addressed?
    The overall purpose of the speech was to recommend a place for vacation and he suggested London, England for perfect vacation place.
    2. Was there a hook? Was it effective? How could it have been improved?
    It was very effective that he suggested 2 main reasons and those main reasons were very specific. But it could have been much better if he used visual aids to help the audience understand more clearly.
    3. Was the structure logical? Point supported by evidence or examples? Good transitions between ideas?
    The structure of his speech was very logical because he organized his speech by dividing introduction, body and conclusion. And his 2 major reasons supported his opinion clearly.
    4. Was the conclusion concise? Were main points restated or summarized? Was the closing memorable?
    The conclusion he made was concise because his main points were restated.
    5. Did the speaker use enthusiasm, pauses, humor, visual aids,
    Yes, he paused well while delivering his speech therefore it was easy to hear.
    6. What did you notice about the speaker’s body language? Posture, eye contact, gestures.
    His eye contact toward his audience was great.
    7. Was the volume good? Did the speaker enunciate and pronounce clearly? Could everything be understood?
    The volume was good and he pronounced clearly so that everything could be understood.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Generic Presentation Evaluation
    Assignment / Title: The person I admire
    Evaluator: Yohan Seo
    Speaker: Seungchae Na

    1. What was the overall purpose of the speech. Try to restate or summarize the main point. How well was it addressed?
    : Seungchae introduced his role model, Diego Pablo Simeone, because of his passion and enthusiasm. He thought that if he had Simeone’s characteristics, he could overcome many problems. The main point was addressed well enough.
    2. Was there a hook? Was it effective? How could it have been improved?
    : Actually, I cannot find out anything particularly that attract my attention. However, his voice was enthusiastic and strong, so that can be a hook.
    3. Was the structure logical? Point supported by evidence or examples? Good transitions between ideas?
    : It was logical. He introduced who Simeone is, where he belongs to, what he does, and why he is admirable to him.
    4. Was the conclusion concise? Were main points restated or summarized? Was the closing memorable?
    : It was. He hoped that he also has Simeone’s characteristics, which is enthusiasm and passion, not-giving-up mind, so that he would be able to overcome a lot of problems. This hope when he said for the closing was interesting and memorable enough.
    5. Did the speaker use enthusiasm, pauses, humor, visual aids?
    : He used enthusiasm, few pauses, and no humor, no visual aids. This video was the first video he and we took, so it should have never been perfect, I think. But he delivered who he admires the most effectively. That matters.
    6. What did you notice about the speaker’s body language? Posture, eye contact, gestures.
    : He didn’t used any body language.
    7. Was the volume good? Did the speaker enunciate and pronounce clearly? Could everything be understood?
    : The distance between him and camera was close, so the volume was definitely good. His voice sounds enthusiastic and clear. For those reasons, I could understand all he said.

    Thank you for your speaking. I really enjoyed it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Feedback for unit 5

    Date : 2017.06.08
    Evaluator: Hyeonseok Nho

    1. What was the overall purpose of the speech. Try to restate or summarize the main point. How well was it addressed?
    He explained why he opposed to animal experiments, based on 2 reasons. I think audiences can fully understand his content well.
    2. Was there a hook? Was it effective? How could it have been improved?
    I was impressed with his preparation for presentation. He memorized all presentation content. But it could be better if he reduce ‘a..’ during his speech.
    3. Was the structure logical? Point supported by evidence or examples? Good transitions between ideas?
    He well arranged why he opposed to animal experiments. Also, he use good transitions between 2 reasons.
    4. Was the conclusion concise? Were main points restated or summarized? Was the closing memorable?
    I think it would have been better if he had more summarized his speech.
    5. Did the speaker use enthusiasm, pauses, humor, visual aids.
    He didn’t use visual aids. It could be better if he use power point or pictures to make it easier to understand.
    6. What did you notice about the speaker’s body language? Posture, eye contact, gestures.
    I think his posture is too stiff. But it is good that he had many eye contacts with video shooter.
    7. Was the volume good? Did the speaker enunciate and pronounce clearly? Could everything be understood?
    His voice was clearly and audibly enough to hear presentation. And the volume of his voice is enough too.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Generic Presentation Evaluation
    Evaluator: Hyobin Jeon
    Video: Unit4 how to raise a certain type of pet
    1. What was the overall purpose of the speech. Try to restate or summarize the main point. How well was it addressed?
    He explained about how to raise a certain type of pet. Especially, he told his audiences about how to choose healthy fish and how to take care of them.
    2. Was there a hook? Was it effective? How could it have been improved?
    He started his speech by asking a question of experience about raising pet fish. I think this method of starting with question is really effective.
    3. Was the structure logical? Point supported by evidence or examples? Good transitions between ideas?
    Yes, it was. He explained the specific process of choosing healthy fish.
    4. Was the conclusion concise? Were main points restated or summarized? Was the closing memorable?
    He did not simmarize or restate the process but he mentioned his speech subject at the end of the speech.
    5. Did the speaker use enthusiasm, pauses, humor, visual aids?
    He didn't use any visual aids or enthusiasm.
    6. What did you notice about the speaker’s body language? Posture, eye contact, gestures.
    His eye contact with audiences was very good, but he needs more body gestures.
    7. Was the volume good? Did the speaker enunciate and pronounce clearly? Could everything be understood?
    Volume of his speech was perfect and I can clearly hear what he said. It was very excellent.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Evaluator: MinJee Kim
    Video: Animal testing
    1. What was the overall purpose of the speech. Try to restate or summarize the main point. How well was it addressed?
    That people should be banned. It was well introduced in the introduction.

    2. Was there a hook? Was it effective? How could it have been improved?
    There was a hook, but it was barely noticeable.

    3. Was the structure logical? Point supported by evidence or examples? Good transitions between ideas?
    There was good transition and structure was very logical. I really liked that he pointed out the alternatives.

    4. Was the conclusion concise? Were main points restated or summarized? Was the closing memorable?
    It was a bit rushed on, but very concise. It restated the main reasons well.


    5. Did the speaker use enthusiasm, pauses, humor, visual aids?
    He did not have any of it. He was very serious.

    6. What did you notice about the speaker’s body language? Posture, eye contact, gestures.
    He had great eye contact, but he did not move his body at all, which made the speech quite stiff.

    7. Was the volume good? Did the speaker enunciate and pronounce clearly? Could everything be understood?
    I really liked his volume. He spoke clearly and slowly so we can understand the speech quite clearly. It was very good.

    ReplyDelete