Review your group members’ podcast recordings (their SoundCloud links) from the previous module in the discussion board. Then, post feedback to each of your peers by answering the following questions:
What is the purpose or central topic of this podcast? How clearly is it communicated?
How well does the interviewer maintain a conversational and natural style? Does she or he sound more like they are reading a list of questions/a script or having a conversation? How might she or he improve and be more spontaneous and conversational?
Describe the vocal quality of the interviewer. Does she or he display good vocal quality and variety? How could this person improve on vocal quality?
How well does the interviewer (not the guest) communicate or build her or his own ethos (community, values, and competence)? How does she or he present a self image that will be compelling to listeners? How could that self image be better communicated or improved to help the podcast accomplish its purpose?
What are the most and least compelling aspects of the introduction and conclusion? How well does the introduction draw the audience into the topic? How well does the conclusion summarize the key points from the interview? What could make the introduction or conclusion better?
Your feedback should:
Provide useful feedback that your peer can use to improve or enhance performance future online public communication. (33 points)
Reference specific events or segments of the recording by both their content and a timestamp (at least once per peer feedback post). For example, you might write something like, “I really liked the way you transitioned from your guest’s answer to the question about her education (at 1:37). I wonder if you could have done something similar when transitioning from the first to second question (at 0:45).” (33 points)
Follow the formatting as noted in the submission instructions below. (33 points)
i will post the links
