Call to Action Self Reflection by Jason Sweeney Personally, I think this was my best speech yet. I feel like I clearly illustrated the need to put an end to tobacco distrubution on our campus. I believe I gave a very specific action by including the time, date, and place for the protest and the flyer handout. I think I gave the audience a clear idea of how they could put an end to this and I think it was a valid argument. I thought I used giood persuasive strategies by connecting with the audience and but I think I could have used more motivating expressions to provide a sense of urgency for the solution. Posted by jasweene ( Apr 27 2008, 11:57:39 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Call to Action Peer Review for Johnny Betts by Jason Sweeney Johnny did a good job on his paper. I think he illustrated the need for a fair way to punish criminals, and a cheaper way instead of using the death penalty. Also, many people who have been put to death have been innocent. He also proposed that we can get more use out of our prisoners by not killing them. The action Johnny proposed what very specific. He mention specific time and dates of where he was passing out flyers. He used convincing arguments such as the unfair act of the death penalty, the way we can be benefited by prisoners that are not put to death, and that it would help out the economy because the death penalty and death row court hearings are very expensive. He used phrases such as "I Beg You..", "I'm asking you...", and "Together we can..", to motivate the audience to take action. He also spoke to motivate by saying that we can easily change teh death penalty to life in prison and that prisoners may have a better chance at rehab. The style he used was not energizing, but it made me think about the positive and negative aspects behind capital punishment. I think he did a really good job and I think he was his best speech all year. Posted by jasweene ( Apr 27 2008, 11:57:27 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Call to Action Peer Review for Will MacEwan by Jason Sweeney

Overall I think  Will did a great job on his speech. He demostrated the hurt caused by college basketball by the NBA age rule, he talked about how the athletes suffer as students and stating that they will have nothing to fall back on. He also described his attitude toward the NBA age rule , taking a negative stand, because the young players may not be physically or mentally ready for the pros. The action he proposed was very specific. He specified dates and times of when the protest was going on. He used strong persuasive strategies and he argued for his solution well. He did a good job using evidence to support his solution and he talked about the positive effects of raising the NBA age rule by a few years. He motivated me to want to take action by mentioning how effective the boycott would  be, since the game is held on national TV, and that because the UNC game is one of the biggest games of our schedule. Will also did a good job of making the mood serious and motivating the audience by telling that the student body has a lot of power, by bringing the message closer to home. He connected with the audience by mentioning one of our very own star players at State who has declared signing up for the draft. The style of delivery was a style with urgency and a serious tone, with a strong delivery of opinion and fact, in order to motivate the audience to a specific action. Once again, I enjoyed listening to Wills speech and I thought he did a good job!!

Jason Sweeney

Posted by jasweene ( Apr 27 2008, 11:41:28 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Self Reflection for Call to Action- Tyler Lassiter I believe I made a good argument as to why there is much need for my topic. The actions I proposed to the audience were specific and they should have had a good idea on what to do and how to do it. When making my argument on why the audience should act I tried to explain how if abortion were illegal it could possibly benefit them and the people around them. I could have improved my arguments by searching for stories of parents who almost had abortions and their child they chose to have accomplished something great. I believe my comment on how one of the audience members or their loved ones could need a cure of an illness that would never be found if the child that was supposed to find the cure had been aborted. My language was not the best. I did not make very good eye contact or have a motivated voice like I could have. I do not think my style energized the audience as well as it could. Overall I thought my speech was good but could have been better if I showed more care about my topic and made better eye contact.  Posted by ttlassit ( Apr 27 2008, 08:21:49 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Self-Reflection Persuasive Speech-Doniece Bolds I think my arguments were a bit vague in some areas because I did wait until the last minute to really research my topic. I think I could have gone a bit deeper into why animal testing is unethical because ethics can be expanded into so many areas and I do not think I hit on the key issues of the unethical side of animal testing. From the feed back I received from the audience based on eye contact, I believed the audience understood what I was trying to say very well. I did receive an odd look every now ant then when I got tongue tied but that would only occur for a brief moment. I did see Caroline nod her head in approval at one point and it made me feel as if I was reaching the audience or that I had an affect on at least one person. Good eye contact with the audience was important in my case because it boosted my confidence and helped me feel like I was really getting my message out to the audience. I do not think I addressed opposing arguments well because I did not supply alot of evidence from the opposing side. Most of the evidence was more of opinion instead of fact but my argument about Iams Dog Chow, I believe was a good argument. The evidence created a mental illustration of the Iams Conpany removing muscles from a dog and then feeding the dog the dog chow in order for the muscles to grow back. The mental image was not a positive image and I believe it did touch on some peoples emotions from the looks I received from fellow classmates of disdain. I should have used more statistical data for the number of animals used in testing and other negative affects of testing. My weakness with using supporting evidence is that I tend to use only facts for evidence and not other forms such as statistics, quotes, testimony, etc. To be more effective, in the future I will try to implement more varities of examples throughout my speeches. I used a fallacy in one point where I was arguing that animal testing should be done away with then I said we should try and reduce the number of animals we use in testing. The topic of animal testing was hard for me to work with at some points because I was on the fence in some areas and I think that is what caused me to use fallacies in certain places. Overall, I think I should try to give myself more time to prepare for my speech so it can be as accurate as possible and that way the audience will not be confused by my message. Posted by debolds ( Apr 26 2008, 09:37:04 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Self-Reflection-Doniece Bolds I believe my action was very clear and concise. It was straight forward and very obvious to the audience what action I wanted to induce. I believe my action hit straight to the point. My topic was animal testing and my action was to either have the audience to stop buying products tested on animals or to write to their representatives asking for a special lable to be placed on items tested on animals. I do not think any confusion could amount from what I wanted from the audience. To persuade the audience, I provided examples such as the lotion being tested on lab rats and dog food being tested on dogs. With the negative affects occuring from the tests, I think it helped build my argument and illustrate to the audience the negative affects of animal testing on the community. I was rushing a bit so I think I could have elaborated more on some of my examplesl, in order to persuade my audiene more to join me in my efforts. Comments or phrases such as "would you want your pet to constantly be injected with harmful chemicals," and "would you want an animal to suffer so you can have a new brand of lipstick" may have really stuck out to the audience because it provided mental images. Most people in the audience owned pets as well so my statement really hit close to home and hopefully provided an emotional and sympathetic feeling from the audience towards animal testing. My weaknesses most likely occured due to the fact that I did not thoroughly practice my speech and therefore it was choppy in some places. This caused for me to be tongue tied in some areas or forget where I was in my notecards. Next time I will rehearse better so this will not happen and cause me to have negative ethos from the audience. Posted by debolds ( Apr 26 2008, 09:20:55 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Peer Review of Leslie by Doniece

Reviewer: Doniece

Person Reviewed: Leslie

Your introduction was great and your attention device really got my attention. Your provided gret reasons for why over population is harmful and the negative affects of over crowding. You used transitions between main ideas very well and they were very obvious when moving from one idea to the next. Your gestures aided in your speech and you used a good tone, volume, and eye contact with the audience. You provided a resolving action and reasons why it would benefit your cause which made me want to get involved in your cause. Also your statement, "What college student doesn't like sweets" helped you really connect with the audience and get them to pay more attention to what you were trying to say. You also provided great reasons for why your plans would be effective and help the community. Your conclusion was great and used the three R's effectively. In doing so you left me and most likey the entire audience with a feeling, positive or negative, that would make me want to get involved with your plan. Overall, yur speech flowed well and it was easy to follow . I think you did very well in presenting the information and providing a great resolvoing action to over crowding. I really took interest in your topic and I think you did great!

Posted by debolds ( Apr 26 2008, 09:11:28 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Peer Review of Johnathan Betts by Doniece

Reviewer: Doniece Bolds

Person Recviewed: Johnathon Betts

Topic: Death Penalty

To begin with, your attention device was a little shaky at first, but you pulled it together and successfully got your point across. Next time try to be more direct with what your trying to say and use appropriate language when addressing your audience. Your transition to your introduction was great. You listed what was going to be discussed and succesfully illustrated your topics. Transitions from one main idea to the next wee very evident and clear. Your use of examples to support your claims were diverse and very good. You used statistics and hypothetical situations to create this illustration for your audience. Your posture was great and I just want to suggest that you try not to rock from side to side because it can be a bit distracting and cause the audience to lose focus. Your eye contact was food and you spoke in a great volume and tone. Throughout your paper you got a bit tongue tied probably due to nerves,and I was not quite sure of what you were saying or what your resolving action was, but in the end you pulled it together. To avoid this happening, try to pause and take a deep breath so you can relax and focus and what message your trying to relay to your audience. During your conclusion you should try practicing the three R's. Restating your attention device would have provided for a great ending and it willo give your audience something to think about after the speech has concluded. This will also leave them feeling some kind of emotion or want to take up an action which is great for a call to action speech.

Posted by debolds ( Apr 26 2008, 08:59:36 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Call to Action Peer Review by Tim Agius

Call to Action Peer Review

Reviewer:  Tim Agius

Speaker:  Marquette

Topic:  Legalization of Marijuana

I felt that Marquette gave a fantastic speech that related well with the audience.  A clear need for action in his topic was illustrated very well because he spent a good amount of time discussing how our jail cells are overflowing with people who have been committed of very minor crimes dealing with marijuana.  The actions that were discussed were specific and to the point in terms of getting the laws changed by protesting and writing to our senators.  He did a great job in his persuasive strategies since he related very well to the audience by asking how many of us in the audience knew someone who had either done marijuana or had gotten in trouble because of marijuana.  It was this phrase that made me want to take action, because he talked about not how we would feel if someone close to us was thrown in jail for at least 10 years for something as minor as having a small amount of marijuana.  I definitely agreed with him on this speech and you can tell that he was passionate about his topic.  Also, the clarity and rhythm he used was veyr good to motivate the audience and did a great job of energizing the audience.  Overall, I thought Marquette gave a great speech in which the majority of the audience not only related to him, but agreed with him.

Posted by tjagius ( Apr 26 2008, 05:44:04 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Call to Action Peer Review by Tim Agius

Call to Action Peer Review

Reviewer:  Tim Agius

Speaker:  Stephen Lee

Topic:  Universal Healthcare

I felt that Stephen did an excellent job with his speech and really got through to the entire audience discussing a very important topic like universal healthcare.  By using several key statistics and emphasizing how much not having healthcare affects everybody, he did a great job of illustrating an immediate need for action.   The actions proposed were specific and very helpful.  He proposed protesting and taking our own actions and care when it came to our health and what to do to ensure our health.  Stephen did an excellent job of moving a committed audience to want to act because he did a fantastic job of relating to the audience and showing how not having healthcare is bad for everybody.  One phrase that stuck with me was how he mentioned to think of your family and friends and what would happen if one of them got sick and were not able to be adequately treated due to not having healthcare.  Overall, I thought Stephen once again did an excellent job with his speech and really vivid in motivating the audience to act and energizing the audience since you could tell that he really cared about the topic that he was speaking about.

Posted by tjagius ( Apr 26 2008, 05:22:43 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Peer Review: Call to Action

Speaker: Jing

Reviewer: Caroline Lea

Topic: Ban Smoking in Restaurants

In her speech to ban smoking in restaurants, I felt Jing did an excellent job of conveying a clear need for action on this issue. Throughout the speech, it was clearly shown that there are serious health risks to be obtained from inhaling second hand smoke. In one specific example, I remember her saying that in one year alone, 35,000 people died as a result of illnesses from second-hand smoke, illnesses which could have resulted from sitting in a smoke tolerant restaurant. She also mentioned how children are greatly affected from allowing smoking in restaurants because of the effects the carcinogens have on their developing bodies. By giving the statistics and facts on the potential dangers of breathing in second-hand smoke, the speaker effectively conveyed the need to ban these practices.

                Along with her strong argument, the speaker also gave a good, specific action to put the ban into effect. For her action, the speaker suggested that we first gather at Talley Student Center to spread the knowledge about the dangers of continuing to allow people to smoke in restaurants. Then it was suggested we meet later that afternoon to sign a petition to ban smoking in our restaurants. Giving the audience a clear idea about what to do worked really well for this speech by providing a clear definition about what was expected of their participation.

                While listening to this speech, there were also key phrases which were very motivating to her action. The speaker effectively used phrases such as health risk, harmful, and death which made the issue stand out greatly with listeners and made them want to prevent these things from happening to themselves or others. Repeatedly using phrases like these throughout a speech also works to keep audience members focused on the issue which made them more likely to support her actions to ban smoking in restaurants. Overall, I thought this speech effectively showed audience members the need for change, and gave them a good, specific action to set these changes in place.

Posted by eclea ( Apr 25 2008, 07:00:01 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Call to Action speech - Elizabeth

Reviewer: Jing Lin

Speaker: Elizabeth

Elizabeth's speech was on banning cosmetic surgery on animals. First, she explained that thousands of animas die each day because of these surgeries. These surgeries should be banned because they are useless, only to make animals look nicer, and the results are different. Animals could die from bleeding. She made a really good point by saying that us humans would not want our fingers or our ears to be cut off, why should we do this to animals. Her call to actions are to spread the awareness of the dangers of these surgeries, she wants to us to go to a meeting so we can do something to help these animals and to contact local newspaper about these problems. She also explained that we should set an account on facebook so people from all over can help in achieving the goal of banning cosmetic surgery on animals.

Posted by jlin7 ( Apr 25 2008, 06:28:08 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Call to Action speech-Zach C.

Reviewer: Jing Lin

Speaker: Zach C.

Zach's speech about genetic food modification clearly stated the actions he want the audience to take. He first explained how the genetic food modification effects the people and the fact the 12 million people had food allergies as a result. He explained that currently there are no law to make the companys to label their food if it has been modified and urged us to take action so we know what we are eating. His call to action includes spreading the problem to the world, label the modified foods, and boycott the major stores that sell genetic modified food. The speech was well brought out and his actions were clear.

Posted by jlin7 ( Apr 25 2008, 06:17:09 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Peer Review - Call to action

Speaker - Jing

Reviewer- Robert Smith

Topic - Smoking in Restaurants

The speaker was clear in her illustrations of the dangers of smoking and of second hand smoking, but did not make the link to restaurants as well.  She had two very specific actions that she was calling for.  The first being handing out flyers in support of this argument, this would make the public more aware of this issue and help build support.  The second was action that she called for was to sign a petition.  The speaker’s persuasive strategies were used well.  The danger to the public was a useful way in getting the people to feel that this was an issue concerning them.  Her repeated reference to children was good at trying to evoke an emotional feeling, this may have been more affective with an audience that was made up of people would had children; it may have been somewhat less effective on the class.  She used the phrase “let our voice be heard”, this was used to inspire the audience to take action and was very affective.  She was very clear, and did a decent job of being vivid.  She keep evoking a mental image of someone smoking in a restaurant this was useful.  I am not sure if the speaker was able to energize the audience so much.  She could have been a bit more passionate about her topic, but it was not a glaring weakness.

Posted by rasmith6 ( Apr 25 2008, 03:28:45 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]

Peer Review - Call to Action

Reveiwer - Robert Smith

Speeker- Donice

Topic - Animal Testing

The speaker was very clear in illustrating a need for action on the topic of animal testing.  She claimed that using animals in testing is not a true comparison to humans, therefore making it not beneficial.  She had two actions that she called for and they were very specific.  There were to stop buying products that were tested on animals and gave the audience a way to find out which products were tested on animals.  She also encouraged us to write our governmental officials.  The speaker used persuasive strategies very well; she was one of the better speakers at that.  Her argumentation was more than adequate.  Her evidence was not as strong, but not bad enough to take away from the effectiveness of her call to action.  Her speech did not make me want to take action, but I am firmly on the other side of the argument on this topic.  Had I no opinion on the topic it would be safe to assume that I would have been motivated to take action.  I would not view this as a poor reflection of her speech.  I would have been considered a hostile, yet respectful audience member.  Donice did a good job of using linguistic strategies in her speech.  She was very clear, and vivid.  She did an excellent job of giving an visual image of the animals being used in testing.  On the subject of how energized she made the audience with her speech, I would put her soundly above the average speech in the class, but would not say that she was exceptional in this facet of her speech.  On a whole, the speech was entertaining; time did not drag while she spoke.  It was easy to follow her logic, she was understood by the audience, and effectively communicated her thoughts.

Posted by rasmith6 ( Apr 25 2008, 03:05:23 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [0]