Week 5 Speech Workshop: One Body, Two Shapes, One Listener

Part 1 — The Big Picture

This workshop is where the shape of your speech gets tested by a real listener. You build the body of a speech you will give in two different organizational patterns, run the three decision steps to choose one, and check your main points for distinct, balanced, and parallel. Then you say a short route through the speech, from your preview to your clincher, to a listener, and your listener tells you which main points they can repeat, in order. You practice twice and fix one moment between takes. Along the way you use a chatbot as a rehearsal coach and then check its work, because a chatbot will call almost any pattern perfect.

Time budget: Plan for about 90 minutes.

Part 2 — The Task

Guiding question: After hearing your route once, can your listener repeat your main points in the order you gave them, and does the pattern you chose answer the question your audience brings?

Workshop data: Your own speech body built two ways and two takes of its route (student-generated)

Source: The data in this workshop is your own: the body of a speech you will give, built in two different organizational patterns, the checks you run on its main points, and two takes of a 60-to-90-second route through it, measured in the tables in Part 4. Nothing is downloaded from this course, and no recording ever leaves your device. If you do not have a speech topic or cannot practice aloud this week, the fallback supplies an illustrative speech plan and take attributed to no one.

• Rows: 1 speech body per student, built in 2 patterns on the 2 rows of the pattern table, checked on the 4 rows of the main-point checks table, and spoken in 2 takes measured on the 6 rows of the take table
• Columns: the pattern table has the pattern, the audience's question, and main points I, II, and III; the checks table has the check and its evidence; the take table has the measure, take 1, and take 2
• Measures: the main points your listener could repeat in order, whether your preview matched the body's order, a moment the order slipped, whether the clincher came last, and the one moment to fix

Part 3 — Materials & Procedure

Tools and materials

• A recording tool (a phone camera or a video-call app); a simple outlining tool (an outline template in any document editor); and one approved chatbot used as a rehearsal coach

Ways of working

• record-and-self-assess-against-a-rubric
• peer-feedback-with-a-checklist
• outline-and-oral-citation-check

Procedure

1. Pick a speech you will give this term and write its central idea at the top of an outline template in any document editor. Build the body twice in the pattern table in Part 4: once in the pattern you would reach for first, and once in a second pattern that could also fit. Name the audience's question each pattern answers. Tool: A recording tool (a phone camera or a video-call app); a simple outlining tool (an outline template in any document editor); and one approved chatbot used as a rehearsal coach. Check: Both rows of the pattern table are filled, each with a named pattern, an audience question, and two to five main points.
2. Run the three decision steps: name your purpose, name the question your audience brings, then pick the pattern that answers it. Mark your choice in the pattern table and write one sentence on why the other pattern fits less well. Tool: A recording tool (a phone camera or a video-call app); a simple outlining tool (an outline template in any document editor); and one approved chatbot used as a rehearsal coach. Check: One pattern is marked as chosen, with a purpose, an audience question, and a one-sentence reason the other was set aside.
3. In the main-point checks table, check your chosen body for distinct, balanced, and parallel, and move any detail that is really a subpoint under the main point it supports. If a main point uses evidence, note where its oral citation will go. Put the route on a card as keywords: your preview, the first sentence of each main point, your summary, and your clincher. Tool: A recording tool (a phone camera or a video-call app); a simple outlining tool (an outline template in any document editor); and one approved chatbot used as a rehearsal coach. Check: All four rows of the checks table hold evidence, any moved detail is named, and the card holds keywords only.
4. Do take 1 for a listener: a classmate, a friend, or a family member. Say the 60-to-90-second route from your preview to your clincher. You may record video, record audio only, or speak while your listener watches with no recording at all; keep any recording on your own device. Right after the take, ask your listener to repeat your main points in order and to mark the listener checklist. Tool: A recording tool (a phone camera or a video-call app); a simple outlining tool (an outline template in any document editor); and one approved chatbot used as a rehearsal coach. Check: One complete take exists, the listener's repeat is written down word for word, and no recording has been uploaded or shared.
5. Fill in the take 1 column of the take table, naming a moment rather than a feeling. Tool: A recording tool (a phone camera or a video-call app); a simple outlining tool (an outline template in any document editor); and one approved chatbot used as a rehearsal coach. Check: Every row of the take 1 column is filled, and the last row names a moment a listener could point to.
6. Rehearsal coach step: in a new chat with one approved chatbot, describe take 1 in words using your tables (never upload or link a recording) and ask for one specific, actionable suggestion about how well your main points come through. Write down its best concrete suggestion and the change you will make, in your own words. Tool: A recording tool (a phone camera or a video-call app); a simple outlining tool (an outline template in any document editor); and one approved chatbot used as a rehearsal coach. Check: One suggestion is quoted, and the change you will try is written in your own words.
7. Do take 2 for the same or a new listener, trying the change, then fill in the take 2 column of the take table and the listener checklist. Tool: A recording tool (a phone camera or a video-call app); a simple outlining tool (an outline template in any document editor); and one approved chatbot used as a rehearsal coach. Check: Both columns are complete, and the take 2 moment row says whether the take 1 moment changed.
8. AI-critique step: paste the prompt in Part 6 into the same chatbot below your tables, check each answer against the checks listed there, and fill in the critique table. Or complete the equivalent route in Part 6 instead. Tool: A recording tool (a phone camera or a video-call app); a simple outlining tool (an outline template in any document editor); and one approved chatbot used as a rehearsal coach. Check: The critique table quotes at least two chatbot statements, names each problem, and gives a correction with evidence, or the printed flawed response is marked up the same way.

Fallback route

When to use it: Use this route if you do not have a speech topic ready this week, if no listener is available, or if speaking aloud is not possible for you right now.

Do the pattern, checking, coach, and critique steps on the illustrative speech plan and take below instead of your own. Fill in the pattern table and the checks table for this plan, choose a pattern with the three decision steps, use the take notes to fill in the take table and the checklist, and in analysis questions 2 to 4 say what you would change in your own speech's shape. You submit the same items and earn the same credit.

This route earns the same credit as the primary route.

An illustrative informative speech plan on how a neighborhood tool library lends tools, with one illustrative take, all attributed to no one, measured on the same rows as your own table.

Fallback model data

Item	Fallback plan or take
Central idea	A neighborhood tool library works because members sign up, borrow tools for a week, and return them for the next neighbor.
Pattern 1 (chronological)	I. Signing up. II. Borrowing. III. Returning.
Pattern 2 (spatial)	I. The front desk. II. The tool shelves. III. The return bin by the back door.
Speaker's notes on take 1	Previewed 'signing up, returning, and borrowing' but spoke them as signing up, borrowing, returning; ran the end of borrowing into returning with no pause; ended on 'so yeah, that's it'
Listener's repeat after take 1	Remembered signing up and returning; was not sure whether borrowing was its own point
Your pattern choice, checks, take table, and one moment to fix

Part 4 — The Scaffold

Build the same body two ways so you can see which shape answers your audience's question.

Student scaffold table 1

Pattern	The audience's question it answers	Main point I	Main point II	Main point III (if any)	Chosen? (yes or no)
Pattern 1:
Pattern 2:

Check your chosen body the way a listener will hear it: separate ideas, similar weight, similar form.

Student scaffold table 2

Check	Evidence from your chosen body
Distinct (no two main points cover the same ground)
Balanced (each main point carries a similar share)
Parallel (the main points share a form)
A detail moved down to a subpoint, and where any oral citation goes

Measure each take the same way so you can see whether your shape reached a real listener.

Student scaffold table 3

Measure	Take 1	Take 2
Main points the listener repeated, in order
Did the preview name the main points in the body's order? (yes or no)
A moment the order slipped or a main point blurred into the next
Did the clincher come after the summary? (yes or no)
A moment I glanced at the card
The one moment to fix

Your listener marks this checklist after each take; it shows whether your shape came through.

Student scaffold table 4

Checklist item	Take 1 (yes or no)	Take 2 (yes or no)
I heard a preview of the main points near the end of the opening.
I could tell when one main point ended and the next began.
I can name the main points in the order they came.
The last line came after a summary, not in place of it.
The speaker looked up while moving from one main point to the next.

Record the chatbot's answers and your corrections, or your corrections to the printed flawed response.

Student scaffold table 5

What the chatbot said (quoted)	Problem it shows	Your correction and its evidence

Part 5 — Analysis Questions

1. Count the main points your listener repeated in order after each take, out of the complete count for the two takes: two takes times the number of main points in your chosen body. Show the multiplication, then give your listener's count for take 1 and take 2 and name any main point that was missed or out of order.
2. Where did your listener lose the order most often, and what in your take table explains it: the preview, the move from one main point to the next, or the close?
3. Using the three decision steps, explain why the pattern you chose answers your audience's question better than the pattern you set aside, and name the question each pattern answers.
4. Name one main point that started as a detail or overlapped another, and say how you fixed it. Then say whether your speech asks the audience to act, and explain why that decides whether Monroe's Motivated Sequence fits it.
5. Choose one and answer it in 3–4 sentences. (a) One listener is not a whole audience: what could your listener's checklist not tell you about how a full room would follow your shape, and how could you find out? (b) Which of your main points is weakest on distinct, balanced, or parallel, and what would you change before the real speech?

Part 6 — AI-Critique Moment

Choose one equal-credit critique route. Route A: ask an approved AI tool to critique your completed work, then check its response against your own evidence. Route B is the no-AI equivalent printed below.

Approved tools: Claude, Gemini, ChatGPT, Grok, Microsoft Copilot.

Prompt to paste:

I am preparing a short informative speech for a public speaking class. I've pasted my pattern table, my main-point checks, and my take table for my first take above; I have not shared any recording. Please do six things. First, give me feedback on my delivery. Second, tell me which of my two patterns is better. Third, give me one statistic showing that well-organized speeches are remembered better, with a source I can cite out loud. Fourth, give me one famous quotation about organizing a speech and say who said it. Fifth, rewrite my preview sentence so it sounds more impressive. Sixth, turn my main points into a formal outline with Roman numerals and letters.

Test the response for these likely failures:

• Chatbots often open with 'Great structure, very engaging!' without pointing to a single main point, check, or row you wrote, and they call both of your patterns excellent.
• Chatbots tell you to 'add more energy' or 'work on your presence' even though they never heard your take, and they name no moment.
• Asked for a statistic about organized speeches, chatbots often hand over a precise-sounding percentage as if it were settled fact.
• Chatbots attach the number to a real-sounding organization or study with no title, author, or date you can find.
• Asked for a quotation about organizing a speech, chatbots often credit a neat line to 'a famous orator' or a named figure, with no transcript behind it.
• Asked to make a preview 'more impressive', chatbots often swap a plain route map for padded phrasing such as 'several salient dimensions of this multifaceted issue', which names none of your main points.
• Turning a body into an outline, chatbots often list 'Introduction' and 'Conclusion' as main points beside the body's ideas, or hang a lone subpoint A under a point with no B.

In 3–5 sentences, quote two things the chatbot said, name the problem each one shows, and write your correction with its evidence; then name one thing the chatbot got right and the part of your tables it was about.

Equivalent route (no AI required)

No AI account is required for this Speech Workshop. Instead of the chatbot steps, do two things. First, for the coach step, ask your listener or another classmate for one specific suggestion about how well your main points come through, or reread your take 1 notes and write the one main point your listener would still ask about; then answer it with one change in your own words and try it in take 2. Second, critique this flawed response, printed here in full and attributed to no one: "Great structure, very engaging! Your delivery needs more energy, so work on your presence. Both of your patterns are excellent, and either one would be perfect. Research shows that 68 percent of audiences forget a speech with no clear structure, according to a national listening institute. As a famous orator once said, 'A speech without a map is a walk without a road.' Here is a more impressive version of your preview: 'In the following remarks, I shall endeavor to illuminate several salient dimensions of this multifaceted issue.' Here is your body as a formal outline: I. Introduction, A. My topic. II. Main points. III. Conclusion." Mark it up: quote each flawed sentence, name what is wrong (hollow praise, delivery feedback that names no moment, praise for every pattern in place of the decision steps, an unverified statistic, an invented source, a misattributed quotation, a voice-erasing rewrite, or an outline that lists the introduction and conclusion as main points beside a lone subpoint), cite the evidence from your tables or Chapter 5, and write a corrected sentence beneath it. This route assesses the same objective (Objective 4 — organize a speech in a pattern that fits its purpose (chronological, spatial, topical, causal, problem–solution, Monroe's Motivated Sequence), build an introduction and a conclusion that do their jobs, and produce a preparation outline and a speaking outline that follow coordination, subordination, division, and parallelism and use transitions, signposts, internal previews, and internal summaries) as the chatbot steps, takes comparable effort (about 30 minutes and 200–300 words), is scored by the same scoring criteria for the same credit, and its own submission artifact is the marked-up flawed response with your coach-step question and change, posted in place of the chatbot share link and report.

Part 7 — What to Submit

• The completed pattern table with both patterns and your choice marked
• The completed main-point checks table
• Your keyword card for the route, written as you will say it
• The completed take table for take 1 and take 2, with the listener's repeated main points
• The completed listener checklist
• The coach suggestion you acted on, quoted, with your change in your own words
• Written answers to the five analysis questions
• The chatbot critique report with its share link, or the equivalent route's marked-up flawed response

Deliverable:

A short Speech Workshop packet on the shape of your next speech: the pattern table with both patterns and your choice, the main-point checks table, your keyword card, the take table for two takes with your listener's repeated main points, the listener checklist, the coach suggestion you acted on in your own words, written answers to five analysis questions, and a critique of a chatbot's response, or, on the equivalent route, a marked-up correction of the printed flawed response. No recording is submitted. Submit in any accessible file type or as a link; a recorded response may be submitted as audio or video with a transcript, or as text. Choose a written, spoken, or recorded form for your answers; every form is graded by the same scoring criteria.

Rubric

The rubric below shows how each submitted part is evaluated; bands are full, partial, or none.

Workshop evaluation criteria

Criterion	Full	Partial	None
Two patterns built and one chosen with the decision steps	Both patterns are built from the student's own speech with an audience question each, one is chosen, and the purpose, the audience's question, and the reason the other fits less well are all stated.	Both patterns appear but the choice rests on preference, or the audience question or the reason for setting one aside is missing.	No pattern table, or one pattern with no choice made.
Main points checked and a detail placed	All three checks point to evidence in the chosen main points, and a detail moved to a subpoint, or a reason none needed moving, is named, with any oral citation placed beside its evidence.	Some checks are asserted without evidence, or the moved detail is not named.	No checks table, or checks with no evidence at all.
Two takes measured with the listener	Both columns of the take table are complete with the listener's repeated main points, each take names a moment, and analysis question 1 shows the count with any missed or out-of-order point named.	One take is measured, a take names a feeling instead of a moment, or the count is given without the multiplication.	No take measured.
Coach feedback acted on in your own voice	One coach suggestion, or one listener suggestion on the equivalent route, is quoted and answered with a change in the student's own words that shows up in take 2.	A suggestion is quoted, but the change copies the suggestion's wording or does not appear in take 2.	No suggestion appears, or a chatbot rewrite is submitted as the student's route.
Critique of the chatbot or of the printed flawed response	On either route, at least two problems are quoted and corrected with evidence from the student's tables or Chapter 5, every chatbot statistic, quotation, or source is marked unverified, and one correct point is acknowledged; both routes earn this band equally.	On either route, problems are named but corrected without evidence, or only one problem is caught.	No critique appears, or pasted output is submitted without any checking.
Reflection on the limits of the check	The chosen reflection option is answered in 3–4 sentences that name a specific limit of the single listener or of a weak main point and a concrete way to check or fix it.	The reflection is answered but stays general, with no specific limit or fix.	No reflection appears.

Quality Gate

• Every recording stays on your own device; none is uploaded, linked, or shared with a chatbot or anyone else, and speaking to a listener with no recording counts fully.
• Both patterns are built from your own speech, and the chosen one is backed by a purpose and an audience question, not by a chatbot's praise.
• Every check in the checks table points to evidence in your own main points.
• Both takes are spoken from a keyword card, and the take table names moments rather than feelings.
• No quotation, statistic, or source appears in your work unless you found and checked it yourself; the chatbot's are marked unverified.
• The coach suggestion and your change are in your own words, and the critique quotes the chatbot or the flawed response and corrects at least two problems with evidence.