Chess 3/23/17

Initial gut reaction 1-Not at all   10-Yes, definitely

Did I convey presenter’s overall message? 5

Did I deliver the interpretation with confidence? 4

What is the presenter’s purpose?: His purpose was to educate the audience about chess.

What is the presenter’s attitude toward the topic?: (emotive, excited, lethargic…) The presenter is very matter of fact.  He gives the rules and doesn't have too much emotion behind his words. 

What was the presenter’s language quality? (clear, redundant, evasive, tangents…) His language is clear, but he went through the game's rules pretty fast.  At times he repeated himself, but that helped me catch up to his concepts. 

How was the audio/visual quality? The audio and visual quality were fine. 

How did the presenter structure the presentation? He used the game to show examples.  He would set up a scenario and then explain the options or conclusions that could happen. 

Did the source text use any culturally bound information or topic-specific jargon?  There was a lot of topic-specific jargon including the pieces' names and the specific moves that could occur. 

Brief notes:  That was really tough!  I didn't know how to use classifiers to show the pieces.  It wasn't until halfway through that I thought to adjust my palm orientation to show the difference between the white pieces and the black pieces.  I think I also changed my board orientation from like a billboard to in front of me on a table.  I don't think I effectively portrayed the message and the rules to the audience.