Trial presentation critique form

Notes during the talk

Strengths to look for. Places where

  1. a difficult concept was clearly described
  2. the next point answered the question you had in mind
  3. a term defined in the talk was easily associated with its meaning, even when used much later
  4. you felt confident how this point contributed to the overall argument of the talk
  5. felt you clearly understood the point of a visual aid and the aid helped clarify an important point
  6. a later point in the talk reaffirms or restates an important earlier point

Problems to look for. Places where

  1. you felt lost
  2. terms or acronyms were used whose meaning was unfamiliar (even if they were defined earlier in the talk)
  3. captions were too small to read
  4. important points were not covered in enough detail
  5. you couldn't understand a graph or table
  6. you couldn't find which part of a graph or table the speaker was discussing
  7. a visual aid was removed before you could understand it
  8. you were distracted thinking about an unresolved point from earlier in the presentation and so missed the current point

On a separate sheet of paper, draw the following three columns. Put an entry on the sheet every time you experience one of the strengths or weaknesses noted above (or another strength or weakness). Use as many sheets as you want. In the "type" column, put either a plus (+) for a strength, a tilde (~) for a neutral point, and a minus (-) for a problem.

Slide number,
slide title,
or time into talk		TypeComment

Summary evaluation

Now that the talk is over, take a moment to develop your overall evaluation. Comment on the following items (write the comments on your separate sheet):

Structure: Was the main point clear? Could you follow the logic? Did the argument make sense? How could it have been made clearer?

Validity: Did you feel convinced? How could it have been made more persuasive?

Generality: Do you think you know how the results might be applied? Do the results seem widely applicable? How could the argument for their generality have been strengthened?

Visual aids: Did the aids have a clear purpose? How could they have contributed more to the argument?