Introduction
The duty herein is to assess and evaluate the speech presentations given. The paper covers those speeches given at the Southern California Conference for Undergraduate Research, for the year 2014. Professor Bill Cunliffe is the key speaker, representing the Music Department at California State University at Fullerton (CSUF) and has delivered the longest speech presentation (taking up approximately half of the video) brief comments on the other three speakers shall be included. As a key academic field, speech communications empowers people to prepare for careers in many areas. For example, many people seeking careers in mass media opt for jobs in journalism, or television anchor positions. Thus, the major in Speech Communications fosters ideal preparation in several areas in which adequate verbal expression is vital. Good speech delivery methods can become great ones, with practice and attention to all aspects and details. Each aspect of message’s delivery is critical. Several different dimensions of speech communications drive the scholarship. However, scholarship is one thing. Practice is quite another. This evaluation considers how messages are delivered, and the nuances involved. Messages contain hints that point to a healthy mix of socio-cultural, political, and other focuses as well. There may even be hermeneutical aspects to speech communications in some contexts. The scope and flexibility of speech communications, as an academic discipline, balance the broader practical applications for its usage.
The brief speech presentations by Dr. Binod Tiwari, an Assistant Professor, were basically informative and served as introductions to other Department heads. Dr. Virgil H. Adams III, President of the Board of Directors of SCCUR, and Dr. José Cruz spoke briefly. The speech evaluation herein also include a brief commentary on their presentation. The speech will be described as informative or persuasive. Sometimes the speaker may use both. This speech evaluation will use the three main criteria of (a) description and audience demographics, (b) assessing the introduction, in terms of whether a thesis statement was given or how effective they were, (c) assessment of the body of the speech, were claims supported, or if evidence used, (d) assessment of the conclusion, such as if claims were finalized, (e) assessment of the speaker, and (f) recommendations by addressing the components.
Body
Prior to the main speech given by Professor Bill Cunliffe, of the Music Department at Cal State Fullerton, Dr. Binod Tiwari and Dr. Virgil H. Adams III spoke. Both of their brief talks were mainly informative speeches. Dr. Tiwari addressed an audience primarily of academic members, both students and teachers. Some members at the conference, it was learned later in the video, included family members in addition to the scholars in attendance. Dr. Tiwari rarely looked up and it was obviously that he was reading. His introduction was direct and to the point. It appears likely that Tiwari speaks languages other than English. Some of his words were not precisely understood, and the difficulty in understanding impedes ideal communication between speaker and audience. Tiwari got the attention by announcing an iPad (or iPod) winner to a student, and that they must remain at the Conference and are required to be present to win. Tiwari did not outline his topics in the introduction, however in the body of his speech he was credible because he gave recognition to other researchers, and introduced Dr. Adams to the podium.
Dr. Adams pitch and rate felt much more natural. He smiled and made direct eye contact to the audience, and used his introduction to immediately encourage the board members. The body of his speech was forthright and Dr. Adams used great links to tie the speech together by thanking everyone, and explaining why the Conference was so important. The framework of his speech coincided with concluding remarks and he did not stray from the topic. The assessment of Dr. Adams as a brief speaker found that he did not distract from the message, since he spoke with clear diction and an even rate of vocal rate, tone, and pitch. In particular the smile and sincere tone was an excellent use of credibility. Dr. José Cruz read a few brief remarks, and emphasized that the Conference wanted to honor the work of “Higher-Ed.” Some people in the audience who were family members may not have understood that “Higher-Ed” means higher education.
The keynote speaker was Professor Cunliffe. Bill Cunliffe as a professor, was introduced as an expert in the jazz genre of music, and has performed in live concerts. Professor Cunliffe did not have a formal introduction, and failed to stick to the point of his talk. Instead, Cunliffe explained how his trip and flight experience affected his ability to arrive at the Conference. Cunliffe did not provide an overview of what he would speak about. The demographics of the audience, as mentioned before, included mostly academic scholars. He immediately began to explain what jazz is, and its influences in terms of the African influence. Cunliffe then quickly switched to comment on how he is not very good at creating PowerPoint slides, then he jumps back to discussing jazz and compares it to classical music. At this point the audience gave polite applause when Cunliffe played the piano, to give a little demonstration of what classical music is like, in preparation to compare it to jazz.
Cunliffe did not provide an overview of what he was going to discuss about jazz, in his introduction. But he was very effective by integrating a demonstration of playing live music to indicate what he wanted to communicate. At first it seemed like he was going to play the jazz version, after playing the classical version. But instead he introduced two students, who would collaborate with musical demonstrations of the jazz trio. Cunliffe did not seem especially nervous since he is accustomed to performing in front of live audiences, but his speech was not very organized at the beginning or as he progressed. Cunliffe was dressed appropriately and his tone and rate of speaking were clear. He supported his claims by explaining how the pianist is usually the leader of the band, mainly playing the melody and making decisions. Cunliffe was very effective in explaining how the bass and drum interact, by demonstration. While the bass player was playing, Cunliffe told the audience to notice how the drummer was lightly feathering the cymbals. This was very effective, because the audience could connect the ideas and words of what he was saying, which made the framework of the speech more solid.
Once Cunliffe moved more into the speech he seemed to feel more comfortable. For example, he used the term ‘gig’ and did not explain to the audience what the word meant. But as Cunliffe progressed in his speech, he did explain that the term “comp” meant how the different instruments (piano, bass, and drums) complement each other. Cunliffe did a great job of conveying how important it is for the musicians in jazz trio to respect what the other two are playing, and not try to be overbearing. In other words, Cunliffe effectively explained to the audience that one musician should not try to drown out the other two. Cunliffe, as a speaker, did not stray from the logical frame as he got deeper into his speech. He explained jazz as a language that is easy, but you need to know the format of jazz, and therefore any jazz musician can play with anybody in the world. He tries to describe the beats and “32” beat process found in jazz, the bridge, musical keys, and a few different music theory terms. Some of the theoretical explanations may have not been understood, but Cunliffe explained how he forced students to memorize the tunes so they would not rely upon their iPods. The audience could relate, and gave a little laugh. Also, he explained how the music theory fit into what he would next show them.
The jazz trio began to play, and when it approached the bridge Cunliffe shouted “bridge!” and that was very effective in communicating to the audience music theory in action. He illustrated the fact that classical is different from jazz, because there are no errors in jazz. Cunliffe expressed the importance of saying “yes to everything” in jazz, and how important eye contact is with each jazz trio member. Cunliffe’s body language is very good. He faces the audience and stands close to the front of the stage, and explains how if the jazz trio gets “lost” in what they are playing, then they look at each other to try to regain the rhythm. Cunliffe continues to discuss “bars” in music, which the music scholar does not understand, but he does a wonderful job because he always demonstrates by playing the piano to show the audience what he means.
During the body of Cunliffe’s speech the evidence and support for his explanation of jazz trio phrases, in terms of music playing, always described to the audience by demonstration or indicating for the audience to look at the PowerPoint presentation. Cunliffe was very patient and effectively used the PowerPoint to explain the “rules” of jazz. He explained that “jazz is a democracy,” and if two players go somewhere (musically) then the third player must follow. If mistakes happen, the rule dictates that players soften their volume and try to listen to what the other two members in the trio are playing. Cunliffe emphasized the importance of being creative is not to be too critical of yourself, especially when playing in a jazz trio. He also, moved off the topic for a moment to explain to the audience that he was not very good at making PowerPoints. But it appeared that the audience really did not care. They seemed very interested in the topic, and wanted him to continue.
His use of evidence was very credible because he used both demonstration in action, by playing the music, and showed them in written words about the rules of playing in a jazz trio. Even though Professor Cunliffe did not give an overview of his speech in the introduction, he was very effective in conveying his meaning to the audience. The introduction was not very effective, because he basically did not make an introduction that related to music. Instead he talked about his flight, which had to stop in Phoenix, Arizona before he arrived in California. But Cunliffe’s evidence and presentation was so strong during the body of his speech, the audience did not seem to mind, and it was easy to follow his logic – once he got going.
In terms of the assessment of Professor Bill Cunliffe’s speech as a speaker, he was very knowledgeable about his topic. You could tell two things about him as a speaker: (a) He really knew his jazz music, and (b) He cared very much that the audience would understand and learn something about his world of jazz music. The audience did respond to the wonderful music, but you got the feeling they also responded to Bill Cunliffe’s ability and skill to try and teach them something about jazz. When he was not playing on piano with the jazz trio, Cunliffe gave great eye contact, and vocal pitch. The pitch was clear, pleasant, and steady. As a speaker, Cunliffe was excellent because after he played a longer jazz riff even though the audience broke into a loud cheering and applause, he did not lose his concentration. He explained why and how they had played that way. Cunliffe explained that in jazz things change in the moment, such as the pace or loudness of the beat, or maybe the drummer might decide to use the “brush” instead of his stick. The jazz trio, Cunliffe described, is a listening-and-response kind of music creation that is fun. He thoughtfully told the audience he wanted to think of ways how a non-musical organization could relate to jazz. Cunliffe said that knowing all you can know about your material is important, and knowing who the boss is at the moment. For example, who is leading at the moment? He says everyone’s input is important, and feedback is important, because jazz helps people to connect and work with each other.
In conclusion, Cunliffe explains that there is a structure in jazz and that naturally builds a relationship in which people cooperate with each other. Cunliffe says jazz is about relationship to other musicians, and the audience. The only recommendations would be to maybe not apologize about the PowerPoint, or explain about his flight at the beginning of his speech. Maybe it would help to give a little overview in the introduction, however Professor Cunliffe was extremely effective and spoke with a clear tone, and used evidence to support his points very effectively. It was a pleasure hearing him speak and demonstrate the caveats of the jazz trio. Overall, Professor Cunliffe was delightful to listen to and learn from.
References
*{None, except watching the video to evaluate the speech}.
TitanTVCSUF. (2014, December 2). Southern California Conference for Undergraduate
Research 2014. [Web vlog comment]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDHQ7jgHu_k
