
Talk About What You Liked
We all tend to be harsh self-critics, so learning only items an evaluator didn't like is enough to send a new speaker screaming from the room. People remember what earned them praise and will try to repeat those things in the future, so praising a speaker's strong points will help reinforce them. Be sure to talk about what you liked - even if you're sure the speaker knows. Emphasizing the speaker's strong points can also teach the rest of the audience what you thought was successful, so they can try it too. It helps to start with a positive attitude, and then look for the parts we liked.
Sandwich Growth Between Praise
We are asked, as Toastmasters evaluators, to give the speaker one or more suggestions for improvement. Resist the temptation, especially with someone we think has a thick skin, to list a large number of perceived faults without balancing them with successes. People find it much easier to absorb criticism when they are also praised. Plus it makes change seem easier, and less overwhelming, to hear that some parts are already pretty good.
Be Specific
Saying 'That was a great speech!' doesn't tell the speaker anything. 'Your opening really drew me in, your pacing held my attention, and your conclusion inspired me to go home and write to my political representative,' gives more information. Better yet, be specific about words you liked, gestures that illustrated a point for you, setups that made a joke funny, places where the speaker paused and let you absorb some piece of information before going on. These details give a speaker a lot more information about not just what worked, but why.
Be specific about what worked and what didn't. It's hard to change when told, 'your conclusion was weak.' It's easier to improve when told, 'I expected a sentence or two more about the subject to draw together the opening and the body of your speech. Without it, your conclusion felt a little sudden.' It's also important to be just as specific about what worked. Saying 'I liked your humour' and then going into specific detail about what didn't work makes it seem like the first part was just to make the speaker feel good. Tell them in as much detail what worked, since otherwise they won't believe you.
Objective Subjectivity
Yes, your evaluation must be from your point of view. However, it is not about your opinion of the speech topic. Some speeches can be controversial. You, as evaluator, are not there to give your opinion of the debate, but to talk about how effective the speech was. Did it tap into universal human emotions? Did it have a compelling message, even if you did not personally agree with it? Maybe the speech made you very angry. If so, it certainly tapped into something. Articulating why it angered you can give both you and the speaker some good insight into what worked in the speech.
No Buts
When we are offering both positive and negative feedback, it is very easy to put 'but' in between. 'Your opening was compelling, but the body didn't back it up.' To the listener, everything that precedes the word but gets negated. It is no longer sounds like having a compelling opening matters, since 'the body didn't back it up.' Making them two separate sentences, or connecting them with 'and,' will help make it clear that these are two separate pieces of feedback. 'Your opening was compelling. I felt the body wasn't as compelling.' 'Your opening was compelling, and I was hoping the body would back it up. I thought it fell short'.' Also beware of but masquerading as however, nonetheless, and other similar words.
3. Thinking Tips
From What to Why
These are some advanced tools, which are especially useful when evaluating a polished, experienced speaker.
Talk About The effect On You
The more you can get at why a part of a speech is effective, the more helpful your evaluation will be. Maybe the tone of the speaker's voice really conveyed sadness, or maybe it was the drop in volume, or both. Don't give up, even if you don't really know why. Start with the effect you felt or saw, then brainstorm about what might have made it so effective.
Explore Other Options
Try other ways of getting the same effect, or ways to get different effects. Maybe you liked tha casual intimacy the speaker conveyed when moving around the room. You can try talking about the effect it had, and then exploring other effects the speaker could have tried for. Maybe the speaker's pacing gave a feeling of energy to the presentation. Perhaps the speaker could try standing still for the beginning and start moving midway through to build up to a high finish. Or the speaker could move for some parts and stand still for others. Or the speaker could try to convey the same intensity and energy without moving his/her legs, as a challenge to try something new. None of these approaches indicated that the speaker did anything wrong; they just explore different ways to try new techniques.
If you focus on the speaker and speak explicitly about your own experience of the speech, and how and why the speech worked, you will soon give powerful and useful evaluations.