Professor Zach Owens
Group Presentation Extra Credit
1. Our group’s key strengths were mainly focused in our delivery. While our research and presentation were adequate, I feel that where we really distinguished ourselves was with our actual oral conversation. We were all extremely confident with the material, and have the advantage of being somewhat older students, meaning that we have given similar presentations before. I also had the fortune of working with intelligent and capable peers, who made collaborating an effortless process; we were all very comfortable with each other, and worked on the project together, rather than breaking it apart into pieces, which allowed us to have a more cohesive approach
2. Our group could have improved in a couple of areas. Primarily, I would have liked us to orally cite more of our sources, specifically when discussing the graphs and charts that we included in our slides. Additionally, I would have made the transitions from speaker to speaker more fluid, with introductions that encouraged the stream of consciousness in the audience. Finally, I would have liked to include a more interactive activity at the end (or beginning) of our presentation to engage the class. Our fun questions at the end were sufficient, but a short quiz or situational analysis would have been more appropriate.
3. When examining the provided rubric and its criteria against our presentation and its objectives/execution, I would say that our group did fairly well. We identified our goals early in the discussion, provided relevant statistics and evidence, and included visual representations of our data. We explored several facets of culture that helped our audience gain a better understanding of the cultural comparison, and dug deep into Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions, which was another staple of the project. Overall I would say we did ‘A’ work, minus a few hiccups, I feel that our...