Victoria Quay Toastmasters Evaluation
General Overview
The purpose of an evaluation is to give feedback to a speaker that will have the effect of:
- Encouraging them to work on improving their presentation skills
- Helping them to improve their presentation skills.
The CRC
Australian Toastmasters have developed a very effective structure for evaluations.
It is a sandwich of Commend | Recommend | Commend – the CRC.
Recommendations for improvement are wrapped between Commendations for existing skills.
This style is based on educational research which has established that negative feedback is a very ineffective way of changing human behaviour. Clear explanations and demonstrations of proposed changes followed by praise for improvement, no matter how slight, and encouragement to keep trying, is the most effective style to facilitate change in behaviour.
At Victoria Quay we have developed an
Evaluation Pro Forma which will help you in your Evaluations. It is meant as a helpful guide, not a requirement.
Praise and Encouragement
We use positive feedback at all times.
We identify skills which the speaker already has which can be used again.
We recommend ways to improve existing skills.
We recommend ways to overcome current weaknesses
We do not give negative feedback in any way.
We do not identify errors. We look for opportunities for improvement.
We do not use negative words or phrases like "criticism" or "error" or "pick on".
Help
The most effective help is identifying current skills which can be enhanced.
Recommend improvements which can be made in current skills
Recommend changes to current practices which will lead to improvement
Explain why you are making the recommendation
Explain and demonstrate how to make the change being recommended.
The importance of recommendations for all speakers
Most Toastmasters come to meetings to work on improving their speaking skills. They are looking for ways to improve their skills. This includes the very experienced, and very skilful speakers.
It may give a brief, warm glow for a speaker to hear that the evaluator has no recommendations for improvement, but it won’t help him or her to improve.
Be courageous. Make a recommendation for improvement to the very best speakers, as well as the ones you think of as the others. Express it as your personal opinion, but don’t devalue it by apologising. The very skilful speakers will be very grateful for your personal insight.
Exclude from your evaluations expressions like "I can find no recommendations for this speaker."
If all else fails, use this formula: "I recommend that all the members learn from the way Mary (John) … " and then give a very specific analysis of some particularly effective technique used by the speaker. Your analysis may clarify an important matter of technique for the speaker.
Give a brief summary at the end
It is good practice to model the standard speech structure of beginning, middle and end. A concluding summary helps members understand your points in the context of the CRC.
Keep your strongest commendation for the final one
In Western Australia we have developed a particular form of the CRC. It is not proposed to be inflexible, but gives a guide to achieving an effective balance.
Start with several commendations – probably three.
Give two recommendations.
End with the strongest commendation you can find for the speaker.
IDENTIFY LOGICAL REASONING
Logical Reasoning
Logical reasoning is the process which uses arguments, statements, premises and axioms to define weather a statement is true or false, resulting in a logical or illogical reasoning. In today’s logical reasoning three different types of reasoning can be distinguished, known as deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning and abductive reasoning based on respectively deduction, induction and abduction.
Deductive Reasoning
Deductive reasoning originates from the philosophy and mathematics and is the most obvious form of reasoning. Deduction is a method for applying a general rule (major premise) in specific situations (minor premise) of which conclusions can be drawn. Example:
Major premise: All humans are mortal
Minor premise: Socrates is human
Conclusion: Socrates is mortal
Immediately the obviousness and straightforwardness of the conclusion can be drawn from the premises above of the example of deductive reasoning. Notice that deductive reasoning no new information provides, it only rearranges information what is already known into a new statement or conclusion.
Inductive Reasoning
The antithesis of deductive reasoning is inductive reasoning. In this form of logical reasoning specific conclusions are generalized to general conclusions. A famous hypothesis is ‘all swans are white’. This conclusion was taken from a large amount of observations without observing any black swan. Inductive reasoning however is a risky form of logical reasoning since the conclusion can as easily be incorrect when, looking at the swans example, a black swan is spotted. However, nowadays inductive reasoning is a commonly used type of reasoning in physics and philology.
Abductive Reasoning
Abductive reasoning is the third form of logical reasoning and is somewhat similar to inductive reasoning, since conclusions drawn here are based on probabilities. In abductive reasoning it is presumed that the most plausible conclusion also the correct one is. Example:
Major premise: The jar is filled with yellow marbles
Minor premise: I have a yellow marble in my hand
Conclusion: The yellow marble was taken out of the jar
The abductive reasoning example clearly shows that conclusion might seem obvious, however it is purely based on the most plausible reasoning. This type of logical reasoning is mostly used within the field of science and research.
Formal and Informal Logic Reasoning
Next to these 3 types of logical reasoning it is also possible to make a difference between formal reasoning and informal reasoning. Formal reasoning is a type of logical reasoning based on valid premises and therefore valid conclusions, thus it is a form of deductive reasoning. It provides no new information, but only rearranges known information to a new conclusion.
Next to formal reasoning we also have informal reasoning. This form of logical reasoning possesses all the elements of formal reasoning, like the deduction part, however it also includes probabilities and truths about premises and conclusions. It can be said that informal reasoning is related to abductive reasoning, one of the other three types of logical reasoning explained above
Combining these two forms of logical reasoning together with the three different types results in the following distinguish in logical reasoning:
- Deductive
- Formal deductive reasoning
- Informal deductive reasoning
- Inductive
- Formal inductive reasoning
- Informal inductive reasoning
- Abductive
- Formal abductive reasoning
- Informal abductive reasoning
Wrong can be Right Logically
Within logical reasoning it can sometimes happen that the premises and conclusion seem obviously wrong, but are logically speaking correct when applying one of the logical reasoning types mentioned above. Be aware that conclusions are drawn based on logical reasoning and not on the validity of the context of certain premises or conclusions. Example:
Major premise: Eating a lot makes you lose weight
Minor premise: Craig is obese
Question: What can we do to make Craig lose weight?
Conclusion: Make Craig eat a lot
By just observing the context of the words you would think that this conclusion is incorrect, since you know form everyday life that eating a lot does not make you lose weight at all. On the contrary it makes you gain weight. However based on logical reasoning this conclusion is most certainly correct, since both premises are valid, which automatically makes the conclusion a valid conclusion. What you need to understand is that the correct answer to any given logical reasoning argument requires the proper identification of relationships between assertions (typically facts and opinions), not the accuracy of those assertions.
Logical Reasoning in Aptitude Tests
Logical reasoning generally is a very important section in
aptitude tests and/or IQ tests. Logical reasoning is universal and it is used in every form of reasoning, in every job, in every field every day. So if you have good logical reasoning skills you should be able to apply this everywhere. Better developed logical reasoning skills make you able to understand, analyze, and to question arguments based on statements or questions. These skills are in general used to identify clues that make an argument weaker, or to recognize a particular assumption. Logical reasoning can be tested in several different ways, however here on Fibonicci we offer the most important and most commonly accepted form of logical reasoning namely syllogisms.
INDENTIFYING MAIN IDEAS AND SUPPORTING DETAILS IN NON-CONTEXTUALISED SPEECH
The main idea is the most important element of a paragraph or selection. It is the focus of the text. Details are sentences that tell about the main idea. Details are “small pieces of information.” Facts are “small pieces of information” that can be proven true. Readers are able to determine the major points of information provided. They distinguish the relative importance of various pieces of information. Readers recall details from a selection, use details to visualize ideas, and use facts to support conclusions, predictions, and responses. Students collect details and facts that support main ideas. They identify details that reveal specific information.
Questions that help students identify main ideas and supporting details:
- Based on the title, what do you think the article will be about?
- What do you think is the BIG IDEA of this article? Of this paragraph?
- What two words would you use to describe the “gist” of the paragraph? selection?
- Which details helped you picture . . .?
- What details from the selection support this hypothesis?
- When students read, they think about what most of the sentences are describing. Is there one sentence that describes the main idea for this topic?
- What was the focus of this reading selection?