My group recently had its oral presentation, for its project on the problem of congestion in MRTs. My group performed well on the whole. There were good transitions between the speakers. All of us spoke audibly and clearly, at a suitable pace. We maintained eye contact with the audience, and were familiar with the content of our presentation. During the question and answer session, each of the group members had an equal opportunity to voice his opinions and explain. However, the duration of our presentation could have been shorter and more succinct.
I feel that there was an improvement in my performance this presentation, as compared to the previous presentation. I maintained a high level of eye contact with the audience and referred minimally to my cue cards, with the aim of engaging the audience more. I spoke loudly, so my voice was clear and audible. I pronounced my words well and used emphasis. The pace of my speech was steady and my tone was varied. I used hand gestures to aid in the flow of my speech, and made appropriate references to the screen.
One area in which I definitely improved in as compared to the previous presentation was my level of participation in the question and answer session. I gave my opinions and knowledge in response to the questions posed. I sounded more enthusiastic and interested in our project in this presentation, although I could have been more cheerful, so as to endear more to the audience.
One aspect of the content of my presentation that I could have improved on was the cost-benefit analysis of the proposed solutions. The incentive for train companies to adopt our solutions should have been analyzed. The proposed solutions could also have been more detailed, to avoid ambiguity.
I believe that the delivery of our presentation was good, although more effort would be needed to effectively persuade the audience about our solutions.
