My own performance to myself
I feel like my performance for seminar No.2 was impressive for being a leader.(For my self)
Asiding from the usual overwhelming amount of lows from leaders, I actually managed to squeeze out a couple of mids and even high. In previous seminars I have taken multiple shots at trying to get a high, and didn’t even score one. So with the improvement of my ability of get highs was good.
My performance as the leader to the class
For the class, I felt like my performance was average
I managed to get all people to speak, and made sure that hands were called in a correct order, skipped questions when no appropriate time is left, and ended points that were too long.
Proposal for change in point rating criteriae
We should also evaluate points from their logical value, if the point has multiple logical steps, it also means it has larger analytical value, which should mean a point with more quality. Evaluating and comparing shouldn’t be a necessary barrier to entry.
What will I change/try in the next seminar?
I would try more in comparing and evaluating multiple points, and I will present evidence material first, before presenting my logical analysis. Also I will note down my points first so I can organize my language better and not go into “consciousness flow” mode. This can avoid problems like a superior logical analysis first then present evidence, which is weird because the evidence isn’t explained(as it comes after the analysis) and just sort of “Slapped on”.
Clarification for my point
Engagement is measured by the interaction between the author and the audience or between the audience under the author’s setting(author’s post etc)
This can be taken from the posts that feel more “engaging” often have more comments in the comment sections.
And comments are a form of engaging, talking to the author, talking to other readers.
And the basis of engagement is built on the true self expression of the author, if the author prioritizes adapting to others first, people will notice and cease to comment to the author. As the content seems off. Why will they comment on a video by a person they know isn’t actually agreeing with them? Engagement is built on agreed disagreement or agreed agreement, which first is on the admittance of the author’s content. Without self-expression, it’s hard to even let the reader agree that they want to engage with you. In fact, self-expression strictly in the opposite of the readers is actually more engaging, opposite opinions create discourse, discourse normally creates more engagement and interaction, as agreeing has no potential for conflict, and without conflict there no potential of change and more engagement.