Week 9 — Two Takes: Measure Your Delivery and Name the Moment

Assignment 8 of the term — read the week's delivery table, deliver a short passage of your own speech twice from one card, measure both takes, and explain to a friend why the words still matter.

This adaptive assignment uses a coaching dialogue to help you turn a first attempt into clear, careful work on your own delivery. You remain the speaker and the author. The coach asks questions, checks the reasoning you show, and waits for you to revise before it produces the required report. This week's lecture tutorial, quiz, discussion, and Speech Workshop practice the same ideas from other angles; this assignment is where you put them together on a speech you will really give. It builds on Week 6's speaking outline: you deliver this week's passage from one of your own keyword cards.

The task

This week's shared example is the delivery self-assessment table, which is illustrative and attributed to no one. Chapter 9 walks through it. One speaker delivers the running speech twice from its five speaking-outline cards, and each take lasts 6 minutes:

• Take 1: 780 words spoken, 12 filler words, 21 seconds of eye contact in a 30-second sample, 9 deliberate pauses.
• Take 2: 720 words spoken, 6 filler words, 24 seconds of eye contact in a 30-second sample, 12 deliberate pauses.
• The fix named after take 1: "Pause after the hook instead of racing into the central idea."

Chapter 9 also walks through an illustrative chatbot that, given a description of take 1, answered "Great energy! Work on your delivery and try to sound more confident."

Work these four problems, and show how you reached each one:

1. Take 1 holds 780 words spoken in 6 minutes. How many words per minute is that?
2. Take 2 holds 720 words spoken in 6 minutes. How many words per minute is that?
3. Take 1 holds 21 seconds of eye contact in a 30-second sample. What is the eye-contact share, in percent?
4. Take 1 holds 12 filler words in 6 minutes. How many fillers per minute is that?

Then deliver a 60–90 second passage of your own next speech twice, speaking from one keyword card each time. You choose how to capture it: a video on your own phone, an audio-only recording, or no recording at all, with a trusted listener timing you and tallying fillers. You never submit or upload the recording itself, and you may delete it as soon as your counts are written down.

Beside each answer, add one brief explanation, using your own two takes for the parts that ask for them:

• Problem 1: say in one sentence why the table's rate is not a "correct" rate. Then give your own words per minute for each of your two takes, with the words counted and the seconds timed.
• Problem 2: name the delivery method your two takes used and explain why it is extemporaneous rather than memorized or impromptu. Then quote the words right before one strategic pause you planned, and say whether a filler you noticed in your first take was gone in your second.
• Problem 3: explain what eye-contact share measures and why a short sample is only a slice of a take. Then describe one physical-delivery change between your takes (a descriptive or emphatic gesture you added, or an adaptor you cut) and name the moment it happens; if you used no camera, say how you checked it, for example in a mirror or with your listener.
• Problem 4: critique the illustrative chatbot feedback: name what it lacks (a moment, a measure, and a fix) and explain why a chatbot that only read a description could not judge the take.

Explain it to a non-expert

Your friend is about to give a short toast at a family reunion and says, "Words barely matter; it's all body language, so I'm not going to plan what I say." Write a 3–5 sentence message that explains, in everyday words, why the words still matter, where the famous claim comes from and why it does not cover a toast, and one delivery tip to try, such as one planned pause. Include one limit, such as that a little nervousness is normal or that no single speaking speed is correct. Explain any course term in everyday words. More than one good answer is possible; this message is scored with Problem 4.

For a different, ungraded example, imagine a neighbor who will announce the results of a block-party raffle and says, "As long as I smile, nobody will notice if I mumble the names." Model answer: "Smiling helps, but the whole point is that people hear their names, so the words have to come through. Slow down on each name and say it crisply, then stop for a beat so the winner can react. Look up at the crowd between names instead of at the list the whole time. It's fine if your hands shake a little; most people get nervous, and nobody minds as long as they can hear."

Use that pattern for your friend, with your own wording and examples.

Part 1 — Student instructions

1. Draft all four answers, the four brief explanations, your two-take counts, your planned pause and filler check, your physical-delivery change, your critique of the chatbot feedback, and your message to the friend before opening a chatbot.
2. Open any course-approved chatbot. Copy the entire Coach Prompt box, including its first and last marker lines, and paste it as one message. The coach will ask for your draft and then work one question at a time.
3. Answer in your own words. Show your arithmetic when asked. Use the coach's feedback to revise at least one answer or explanation, even if your first attempt was strong.
4. Never upload a recording to the chatbot. Describe your takes in words; the coach cannot see or hear you and must not pretend to.
5. Continue until the prompt's exit condition is met, then save the chat's share link and copy the final report exactly as the coach gives it.

The chatbot is a coach, not a ghostwriter. It must draw out your reasoning rather than write your explanations or the message for you. If it praises your delivery, ask it which moment it is praising; it can only know what you told it.

Coach Prompt

COPY EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE
ROLE: You are a careful public speaking coach for an introductory Public Speaking course. Draw out and challenge MY thinking about the delivery methods, vocal and physical delivery, and my own two takes. Do not write my assignment, my explanations, or my message for me, and do not invent work I did not show. You cannot see or hear me: never ask for a recording, never accept an upload, and never claim to judge a delivery you have not seen. Treat nervousness as normal and give no medical advice.

ASSIGNMENT: Work through these four problems in order, one at a time. Do not invent, replace, or reorder a problem. The data: the delivery self-assessment table is illustrative and attributed to no one. One speaker delivered the running speech twice from five speaking-outline cards, 6 minutes per take. Take 1: 780 words spoken, 12 filler words, 21 seconds of eye contact in a 30-second sample, 9 deliberate pauses. Take 2: 720 words spoken, 6 filler words, 24 seconds of eye contact in a 30-second sample, 12 deliberate pauses. In an illustrative exchange, a chatbot given a description of take 1 answered "Great energy! Work on your delivery and try to sound more confident."
PROBLEM P1: Take 1 holds 780 words spoken in 6 minutes. How many words per minute is that?
PROBLEM P2: Take 2 holds 720 words spoken in 6 minutes. How many words per minute is that?
PROBLEM P3: Take 1 holds 21 seconds of eye contact in a 30-second sample. What is the eye-contact share, in percent?
PROBLEM P4: Take 1 holds 12 filler words in 6 minutes. How many fillers per minute is that?
After the four answers, I must briefly explain each one, using two takes of a 60-90 second passage of my own speech delivered from one keyword card: for P1, one sentence on why the table's rate is not a correct rate, plus my own words per minute for each of my two takes with words counted and seconds timed; for P2, the delivery method my takes used and why it is extemporaneous rather than memorized or impromptu, plus the words before one strategic pause I planned and whether a filler from my first take was gone in my second; for P3, what eye-contact share measures and why a short sample is only a slice, plus one physical-delivery change between my takes with the moment it happens and how I checked it; for P4, a critique naming what the chatbot feedback lacks (a moment, a measure, and a fix) and why a chatbot that only read a description could not judge the take. I must then write a 3-5 sentence message to a friend giving a toast at a family reunion who says words barely matter, explaining in everyday words why the words still matter, where the famous claim comes from and why it does not cover a toast, one delivery tip, and one limit. I must explain course terms in everyday words.

SCORING CRITERIA: Score only evidence I supply: accurate measures from the week's delivery table (40 points), delivery reasoning (32 points), clarity for a non-expert listener (16 points), and showing the work and the evidence (12 points). For each of P1-P4, give 2, 1, or 0 evidence units per criterion; one unit is worth 5 measure points, 4 reasoning points, 2 clarity points, or 1.5 showing-the-work points. Sum all four problems within each criterion. Count my final message only with P4, not again with P1-P3.
MEASURE UNITS: A correct rate, share, or fillers-per-minute figure = 2; the right values with only an arithmetic slip = 1; a missing figure or the wrong values = 0. Do not penalize an alternative valid method or equivalent wording.
REASONING UNITS: For P1-P3 separately, an explanation that meets both parts named for that problem = 2; exactly one part = 1; neither = 0. For P4, BOTH a critique naming what the chatbot feedback lacks and why it could not judge the take AND a message to the friend that explains why words still matter, where the famous claim comes from, one delivery tip, and one limit = 2. If full P4 evidence is absent but at least one accurate substantive part appears, give 1. No accurate reasoning = 0; naming a term alone does not earn a unit. An arithmetic slip alone is not a reasoning error.
CLARITY UNITS: For each problem, labeled evidence understandable to someone who has never taken a speaking course, with course terms explained = 2; intelligible evidence that needs rereading because of ambiguity or unexplained terms = 1; absent or unintelligible evidence = 0. Include the final message with P4 if submitted. Missing reasoning alone does not lower clarity for otherwise clear submitted work.
SHOWING-THE-WORK UNITS: For each problem, the values, labels, or steps behind the figure shown so they can be checked = 2; a relevant but incomplete value, label, or step = 1; a figure alone or no evidence = 0. Visible evidence stays checkable despite an arithmetic slip.

Do NOT invent grading rules.

DIALOGUE RULES: Ask exactly one question per message and wait for my answer. Start by asking for my complete first attempt. Build each next question from my exact words. Probe an unsupported claim and ask me to examine its evidence. When I describe one of my takes, ask me which moment shows what I describe and how I checked it, and never tell me how my delivery looked or sounded. Keep the conversation focused on questions rather than completed work.

ENGAGEMENT GUARDS: A greeting, copied prompt, yes/no reply, or one-word answer is not a substantive exchange. Do not flatter or accept agreement as evidence. Praise only a concrete move I made, and name the words you are praising. If evidence is missing, say what is missing and ask for it. Require a real revision plus a short reflection on why the revision is better. Do not issue the report early.

EXIT CONDITION: Continue until at least five substantive exchanges have occurred AND I have supplied all four answers and their brief explanations AND written my message to the friend AND revised at least one answer or explanation AND reflected on the revision. Stop only after whichever requirement happens last.

REPORT: After the exit condition is satisfied, output exactly these labelled lines in this order. Replace X with the exact earned score; it may end in .5 and must not be rounded to a whole number. Base every line only on evidence in this chat; write "Not supplied" for missing evidence and never raise the score for polished chatbot prose.
STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
EVIDENCE FOR THE SCORE: [specific evidence from my answers and explanations]
REVISION MADE: [what I changed and why]
STRENGTH: [one earned strength]
NEXT STEP: [one concrete improvement]
Then tell me to submit this report, my revised work, and the share link.
COPY EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE

Deliverables

Submit these three items in the assignment entry:

• your revised work with all four answers, their brief explanations, your two-take counts, your planned pause and filler check, your physical-delivery change, your critique of the chatbot feedback, and your message to the friend — written, or spoken and recorded as audio or video with a transcript; every form is graded by the same scoring criteria;
• the coach's five-line report; and
• the conversation share link.

You do not submit the recording of your takes; your counts and the moments you name are the evidence.

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.

Equivalent route (no AI required)

This route assesses the same Week 9 skills — reading the week's delivery table, delivering your own passage extemporaneously from one card, measuring two takes, naming a strategic pause and a physical-delivery change, rejecting feedback that names no moment, and explaining all of it to someone who has never taken a speaking course — for comparable time and effort, about 60 to 90 minutes, the same as the coached route. Complete the same four problems, the four brief explanations, your two takes, and the message to the friend. Then audit your own first draft against the attached scoring criteria, criterion by criterion, and write a second draft. Add a 150–200 word revision memo that names one answer or explanation you changed, the evidence that prompted the change, and one question you still have. Submit the revised work, your completed criteria checklist, and the revision memo in the assignment entry; together they replace the share link and the coach's report. This route uses the same scoring criteria and the same points, with no penalty for choosing it.

How you'll be graded

The full analytic rubric is attached to this assignment in Canvas.

Academic integrity and AI use

The figures, the explanations, your two takes and their counts, the revision, and the message to the friend must be your own. Do not ask the chatbot to write the assignment or to describe a delivery it never saw, and do not report a count you did not take. Submit an honest share link from your own dialogue. The equivalent route keeps the same workload and evidence and requires no AI account.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com