Speech IV - No Child Left Behind or No Child Left In School?

There was quite a bit of research involved for Speech IV. Both sides of the argument were readily available in equal amounts, I think. The hardest part was trying to figure out who was making informed decisions and who…well…wasn't. Doing both an audience analysis and an audience impact analysis was helpful. It gave me the chance to work on narrowing down my arugment to a specific demographic, while still keeping in mind other audiences. Making the PowerPoint and writing the speech were a breeze. I believe strongly in the argument I presented, so sounding convincing and persuading the audience wasn't a problem. The handout was easy as well. I embellished on ten arguments I've heard against NCLB, then realized it sounded a lot like Jamie Kenzie's "17 Reasons Why NCLB Must Go," so I slapped his name on there to make it seem more authentic.

My audience could have really been anyone, but I picked my primary audience to be the policy makers. It was hard to couch my message in terms that wouldn't bore policy makers, but also wouldn't be too complicated for my secondary audidnces (teachers, tax payers, parents, students, and advocates). However, I think being relatively passionate in my delivery made up for what my speech might have been lacking in intellectualism.

I think I did pretty well on the speech. I worked hard on the whole thing. I did my research, I developed good speech points, and I monopolized the double-mirror on our bathroom for two afternoons. I was worried I went over the time when I saw you check your watch a million times. But if I went over, it could have only been by 30 seconds max, because I hit a seven-minute timer on my cell phone just as I started the speech, and it went off just as I was telling the audience what I wanted them to do, and that was only, like, three sentences.