This talk was used during the make-up week because I wasn't able to attend class the week before. My Plan B situation was dealing with a disruptive audience.
I realized from the clip that my very first response to this was just simply brushing it off by pausing and saying "oh...okay." I thought I should have actually been more assertive from the very beginning with the first disruption to tell the audience that this was my time to shine. This was the first time ever for me in handling a situation like this, so I was overwhelmed when most people didn't have their attention on me (seeing people talk with one another, laptops open, people throwing paper planes, etc.) I can understand why professors can get annoyed with students being on their laptops during lectures, especially in a smaller class environment.
The hook that grabbed the audience's attention was solid. I was actually surprised in getting two responses of the polar extreme. Although I kept my composure throughout the presentation, I did get somewhat flustered. This had me struggle at times here and there and prevented a smooth continuity as I would have liked.
Another aside to note is that the clicker did not work that day. It had me closer to the podium to change between slides. To some extent, if the clicker were present, my presentation would probably have seemed worse because of my dependency on the notecards. However, it would have had me away from the podium and closer to the audience. By getting closer to the audience, I could have immediately made my presence known that I wouldn't tolerate disruptive behavior.
Now I want to mention some things to note on the presentation itself. I had a clear and strong voice. I thought the amount of "ums" were less than the usual. Towards the end, I seemed to get too comfortable behind the podium. Again, not having the clicker might have had something to do with this, but I should have been presenting in the center more. This was after a mini-TED talk, in which the speakers usually are "out there" walking back and forth and more engaging. I don't think I did a good time connecting with the audience other than using the hook and telling them to keep it down.
It's a shame I was unable to attend the actual class when the TED talks were first presented. This could have been something I would have liked to re-do. Nonetheless, it was definitely an enlightening experience in dealing with a new and unexpected situation.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Speaker Critique: Prince Zeid
On May 3, 2011, former alumni Prince Zeid Ra’ad Zeid Al-Hussein of Jordan and Professor Steven David exchanged in a political and interesting conversation about the Middle East. Topics ranged from Osama bin Laden's death to the current liberal outbreaks in the Middle East countries to what the future holds for these nations.
This was interesting because it wasn't a normal stand-up and deliver talk. Mr. Zeid and Professor David, his former professor, sat down and discussed the topics face to face. Professor David prepared the questions but for the most part, the conversation kept moving from whatever topic they would be into. It started off with the topic of bin Laden's death. Prince Zeid offered an interesting view on his death. To quote: "Was killing him the optimal way in taking down Al Qaeda?" He believed it would have been optimal for the United States to have capture him and extract the plans and operations directly from bin Laden. However, he didn't downplay the killing of bin Laden, saying that this brought great emotional satisfaction to those affected in the world. He also brings up that despite the fact he was buried at sea, the Arab world does not have the same kind of attachment. By this he means there aren't memorials and actual gravesites of where famous figures have been buried.
Before proceeding in describing the contents of the talk, I want to review the manner in which Prince Zeid handled the conversation. He had a good sense of humor often cracking jokes about himself and with a former classmate in the audience. One example was when he responded to a question by first saying "We're off the record, right?" In addition, he was always looking towards many different spots of the audience. He was very animated with hand gestures to emphasize his points. His voice was loud and clear and his tone reminded of Hans Gruber from "Die Hard."
Levity aside, he had a calm yet confident demeanor in responding to Prof. David's questions. One thing to mention was how he would respond during Prof. David's remarks. Whenever Prof. David would make a point, Prince Zeid would say "That's right." He actually said this numerous times so that at a point I couldn't really focus on what the content was. I guess it's the equivalent of me nodding my head when someone gives me lots of arguments. However, this did not take away from his overall performance. I found the talk very engaging and intriguing.
Prince Zeid believed the issue in the Middle East comes from a broken educational system. Some eye-popping comments made included "Do Arabs and Jews deserve peace? Should 'we' earn it?" In addition, he reminded us how it was not natural for Arabs and Jews to hate each other.
One of his sticky ideas was the following: "We have a problem with how we look at current events." He believes the way that news wires report news today are flawed. He makes the observation that as a country, we are not good at anticipating events. There are lots of unknowns.
During the Q&A session, his demeanor remained the same. However, for some questions it didn't seem like he answered what the person had asked. Nonetheless, his responses were lengthy and he gave great detail. The most interesting question I found was when Prof. David asked Prince Zeid to describe his years at Hopkins. Humorous as usual, he started off the response by stating that there were "vast amounts of consumption of non-alcoholic beverages" to which the audience erupted with laughter. In addition, he mentioned how after he graduated from Hopkins that not everyone in the world is as brilliant as his classmates were. To quote him, "I can overestimate my own intelligence." On an unrelated note to the talk, that response made me realize how gifted and privileged I was to attend such a prestigious and respectable institution.
I want to conclude by saying this conversation inspired some degree of interest in me about international studies. It made me understand why many of my friends have majored in this area; I'm a chemistry major and not really up to date on my current events. However, the conversation was not too complex, which was a testament to how brilliantly Prince Zeid and Professor David conducted their conversation.
This was interesting because it wasn't a normal stand-up and deliver talk. Mr. Zeid and Professor David, his former professor, sat down and discussed the topics face to face. Professor David prepared the questions but for the most part, the conversation kept moving from whatever topic they would be into. It started off with the topic of bin Laden's death. Prince Zeid offered an interesting view on his death. To quote: "Was killing him the optimal way in taking down Al Qaeda?" He believed it would have been optimal for the United States to have capture him and extract the plans and operations directly from bin Laden. However, he didn't downplay the killing of bin Laden, saying that this brought great emotional satisfaction to those affected in the world. He also brings up that despite the fact he was buried at sea, the Arab world does not have the same kind of attachment. By this he means there aren't memorials and actual gravesites of where famous figures have been buried.
Before proceeding in describing the contents of the talk, I want to review the manner in which Prince Zeid handled the conversation. He had a good sense of humor often cracking jokes about himself and with a former classmate in the audience. One example was when he responded to a question by first saying "We're off the record, right?" In addition, he was always looking towards many different spots of the audience. He was very animated with hand gestures to emphasize his points. His voice was loud and clear and his tone reminded of Hans Gruber from "Die Hard."
Levity aside, he had a calm yet confident demeanor in responding to Prof. David's questions. One thing to mention was how he would respond during Prof. David's remarks. Whenever Prof. David would make a point, Prince Zeid would say "That's right." He actually said this numerous times so that at a point I couldn't really focus on what the content was. I guess it's the equivalent of me nodding my head when someone gives me lots of arguments. However, this did not take away from his overall performance. I found the talk very engaging and intriguing.
Prince Zeid believed the issue in the Middle East comes from a broken educational system. Some eye-popping comments made included "Do Arabs and Jews deserve peace? Should 'we' earn it?" In addition, he reminded us how it was not natural for Arabs and Jews to hate each other.
One of his sticky ideas was the following: "We have a problem with how we look at current events." He believes the way that news wires report news today are flawed. He makes the observation that as a country, we are not good at anticipating events. There are lots of unknowns.
During the Q&A session, his demeanor remained the same. However, for some questions it didn't seem like he answered what the person had asked. Nonetheless, his responses were lengthy and he gave great detail. The most interesting question I found was when Prof. David asked Prince Zeid to describe his years at Hopkins. Humorous as usual, he started off the response by stating that there were "vast amounts of consumption of non-alcoholic beverages" to which the audience erupted with laughter. In addition, he mentioned how after he graduated from Hopkins that not everyone in the world is as brilliant as his classmates were. To quote him, "I can overestimate my own intelligence." On an unrelated note to the talk, that response made me realize how gifted and privileged I was to attend such a prestigious and respectable institution.
I want to conclude by saying this conversation inspired some degree of interest in me about international studies. It made me understand why many of my friends have majored in this area; I'm a chemistry major and not really up to date on my current events. However, the conversation was not too complex, which was a testament to how brilliantly Prince Zeid and Professor David conducted their conversation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)