This past meeting, since we had a single speaker, we tried an experiment. Instead of only having one evaluator for the speaker. We made copies of the evaluation sheet from the CC manual and had all attendees evaluate. The idea was to give a more thorough evaluation that you couldn't receive from a single evaluator. The speaker would be able to hear different perspectives and gain more insights into how he or she connected with different people in the audience.
Since I was the first sacrifice for the experiment, these are my reflections.
I thought it would have been better if there were more time to conduct the evaluations so there could be some explanation or questions for the speaker about why they did something or how they could have done something else.
In my case, I tried to give a first person type of story. I thought that it could have been inappropriate after a time and switched up the speech. Although this wrecked the speech, I was able to learn afterwards that this was something that people wanted to hear more about and I was able to ask if it would have become inappropriate. This type of discussion and feedback is priceless and I think it goes beyond what the toastmaster format does now.
It is obvious that this type of TM day can only be conducted when there are single speakers. But it does appear to be something very useful that could greatly improve speakers and possibly evaluators. The, "Oh, I didn't see that even though I was watching the speaker."
Again, this would need a lot of time and more than one round of table topics seems to break this down.
No comments:
Post a Comment