CAS speeches
Peer Review and Module Navigation
There are 12 participants in this session; the 12 people who are not speaking are the ones who will do peer evaluations.
Structure of peer reviews:
The class is organized into three groups, each with 4 students. Each group has the same set of 4 people being evaluated, across three rounds.
The instructor shows who you are evaluating at the bottom of the post; names you must peer-evaluate are highlighted in bold.
If some students are not here, an “x” is placed next to their name so you know they are unavailable; those absent are treated as invisible for evaluation purposes.
If a student misses and then does a makeup after speaking on the other day, you must peer-evaluate that student as part of your discussion.
Absent students vs makeups:
If a student is absent, you are not expected to reassign their evaluation to someone else by default.
If makeup is allowed (e.g., illness, family emergency, car trouble), you add that student to your peer-evaluation pool for the makeup session.
Feedback expectations and etiquette:
When you click Reply to give feedback, include the full name of the person you are evaluating so they can locate your feedback.
Feedback should be civil and constructive; avoid brutal honesty that could cause trouble.
Balance comments about content with delivery: eye contact, use of visual aids, body language, pace, etc.
If you relate to the speaker personally (shared hobbies, experiences), note that to make feedback more supportive.
Always reference the rubric when giving feedback; use examples provided by the instructor as well as the rubric to guide your critique.
Prohibited actions and reminders:
Do not assign points, percentages, or letter grades in peer feedback; you are not grading the speaker.
Do not use AI for listening assignments or any part of your work; this must be your own effort.
Rubric and resources:
The rubric for peer evaluations is available in the same module; use it as a guide for what constitutes good feedback.
The instructor emphasizes eye contact and delivery as part of the evaluation; the rubric covers both content and delivery.
Using the discussion platform:
You can post quickly and then go back to edit later if needed; posts live in the discussion thread.
The instructor encourages using the examples posted at the bottom of the module to see what a good peer-evaluation feedback message looks like.
Course logistics and deadlines:
All assignments live in the modules under Learning Activities; due dates may sometimes show last semester dates due to copying and pasting, so notify the instructor if you spot an incorrect date.
The instructor has occasionally extended deadlines to help students get organized early in the term; this is not expected to continue indefinitely.
Students are responsible for checking the modules and staying aware of due dates; the modules exist whether you are present or not.
Zoom is not allowed for this class; the instructor cannot conduct Zoom sessions.
If you’re unsure how to complete the introductory speech, the instructor has posted instructions again in Module Two along with the rubric.
Managing makeup work and extensions:
The instructor extends deadlines selectively when a large portion of the class is behind; this is intended to help but will not be extended indefinitely.
If you need clarification or to alert the instructor about a missed deadline, notify her so corrections can be made.
Classroom logistics during presentations:
If a participant plans to project something, announce it in advance so the instructor can mute the projector and avoid distractions.
A timer is used; the instructor will time speakers, especially the first speaker, who is timed by the instructor or a designated timer.
Opening remarks and general approach:
The instructor emphasizes that the best films, books, or media stay with you after you finish because they stay with you emotionally or philosophically; this sets the tone for discussion about media analysis and personal reflections.
Quick orientation to why instructions matter:
Everything in the module is designed to guide you through the peer-review process, the listening assignment, and the introductory speeches; following the rubric and instructions well helps avoid zeros and confusion.
Listening assignment specifics and chapter guidance
The listening assignment has three parts:
Identify the four forms of listening and explain them with definitions and examples.
Define and explain the six stages of listening per the assignment.
Do this with material from the correct chapter (chapter three, not chapter one or two).
Chapter guidance and model terminology:
The instructor emphasizes using chapter three (the chapter on listening) for this assignment.
Do not consult chapter one (transactional model of communication) for this assignment; pretend it does not exist for this specific task.
The model to reference is the HURIER model of listening, which includes the grid with exact terms and aligns with the assignment's expectations.
HURIER stands for: ext{H} = ext{Hearing}, ext{U} = ext{Understanding}, ext{R} = ext{Remembering}, ext{I} = ext{Interpreting}, ext{E} = ext{Evaluating}, ext{R} = ext{Responding}. (The instructor writes it as “hurier” with the grid of terms.)
Common student error:
Students mixed up chapter content by pulling terms from chapter one instead of chapter three; the instructor highlights the need to use chapter three only for this assignment.
If you are uncertain, contact the instructor for help; the aim is to correctly identify, define, and give examples for the four forms of listening and the six stages of listening.
Additional notes on originality and compliance:
The assignment must be your own work; AI assistance is not allowed; do not paste in someone else’s work or use automated tools to complete it.
Introductory speech expectations and general course context
Instructions for module navigation and expectations:
The instructor shows how to locate the peer-review discussion in Module Two, at the end of Module Two.
Instructions and examples are posted at the top of the peer-review discussion area; you can type first and edit later.
The bottom of the discussion shows a “Reply” option for feedback; include the full name of the speaker you are evaluating so they can see your feedback.
Delivery and feedback emphasis:
Peer evaluators should focus on both content and delivery; eye contact, use of visual aids, and overall presentation are important components of feedback.
Avoid overly harsh or negative feedback; be constructive and supportive, and include specific suggestions for improvement in the next speech.
Encourage a respectful and supportive tone to help peers grow; even if you disagree with a point, frame it constructively.
Projector, timing, and class logistics during speeches:
If a speaker plans to project slides or visuals, inform the instructor ahead of time.
A timer is used to keep speeches within the allotted time; a designated timekeeper may be assigned.
The instructor notes that Zoom is not allowed for this class, so all interactions occur within the LMS and in the live session.
Personal reflections on lectures and media analysis:
The instructor opens with reflections on media that linger after consumption and how that relates to critical thinking and perspective-taking.
Student speeches (presentations in order and key points)
Abdullah Zarbi – Shutter Island (speech on film as a medium for critical thinking)
Intro and pronunciation note from Abdullah; introduces the film Shutter Island directed by Martin Scorsese (note: pronunciation in transcript).
Plot overview (without spoilers): US Marshal Teddy Daniels travels to a secluded island to investigate the disappearance of two murderers in a hospital-turned-mental asylum.
Core discussion: the ending is open-ended and invites multiple interpretations; highlights how audiences bring bias to interpretation.
Personal reflection on perspective and bias:
Emphasizes that different viewers assign different weights to scenes and details, which shapes their interpretation of the ending.
Connects to real-life situations where people form conclusions based on biased information or selective attention.
Broader takeaway: critical thinking involves looking at the entire picture, not just sensational moments; movies can illuminate life principles and how we form beliefs.
Melanie Arne Srathat – Art and paintbrush metaphor
Introduces herself as a sophomore in aerospace engineering.
Metaphor: a paintbrush is more than a tool; it expresses ideas, brings thoughts to life, and is versatile (bold strokes vs. delicate lines).
Personal connection: uses art to express thoughts and connect with others; aims to leave a positive impact.
Attributes of a paintbrush:
Expression: enables visible realization of ideas on canvas.
Versatility: capable of bold or subtle lines depending on context.
Growth and color: carries color but does not keep it forever; can be dipped into new colors; mirrors openness to new experiences and perspectives.
Conclusion: the paintbrush symbolizes expression, adaptability, and continuous growth; resonates with her own goals and identity.
Branden Blomeline – Fishing lure metaphor; personality and social tendencies
Intro: name and background; speaks about a small frog fishing lure as the object.
How it works: ties on a fishing line, floats on water, and can be popped across the surface to attract fish.
Personal analogy: goes with the flow; spontaneous when friends text; enjoys fishing since childhood with father.
Lessons from fishing:
Teaches patience: sitting by a riverbank for long periods.
Reflects personality: introverted but easy to talk to once approached; value of genuine connection.
Takeaway: the object represents patience, spontaneity, and the balance between being thoughtful and social.
Wayne Brown – Economics and media influence on identity; Dragon Ball as life lesson
Introduces himself as a second-year student in economics; previously in mechanical engineering; switched due to chemistry dislike.
Media and identity: discusses how media (especially anime like Dragon Ball) has shaped his writing quality and perspective.
Favorite character: Lukud (note: may reflect a misremembering of canonical character names in the transcript).
Why Dragon Ball matters: writing quality and meaningful character moments inform how he chooses his social circle.
Personal philosophy: strives for perseverance and self-improvement; wants to surround himself with people of good character and strong writing.
Jack Chen – Independence, family business, and the value of being different
Introduces himself as Jack Chen; identifies as Chinese; mentions being from Brazil and a restaurant-owning family (service/food workers).
Early life: helped at the family restaurant from a very young age; experienced isolation and heavy work.
Impact on character: developed strong work ethic, independence, and resilience.
Message: being different is okay; diverse experiences shape who you are; sister helped; positive worldview leads to growth and success.
Austin Clark – Navy life, mutual respect, and cross-cultural challenges
Introduces himself as a freshman in the 2+2 program aiming for nuclear engineering; a Navy reservist.
Key lessons from service: mutual respect with contractors; importance of allowing others to do their work and trusting their expertise.
Operational realities: government is slow; parts and procurement delays; how to stay patient and proactive.
Language and cultural aspects: language barriers in Germany; importance of patience when communicating cross-culturally.
Personal reflection: the uniform (hat) represents shared values such as discipline and service; the speaker views it as a symbol of the lessons learned.
Cecilia – Bowling Alley (song and vulnerability; connection and belonging)
Introduces herself as a freshman and discusses her favorite song Bowling Alley by Audrey Hover.
Song themes: being invited but feeling invisible; craving attention yet needing space and authentic connection.
How the song represents her: quirky, awkward, playful, vulnerable; treats life with messy honesty and humor.
Song narrative: invited to a bowling alley party; feeling uncertain but attending; moment of visibility when she lands a strike and gains attention.
Personal resonance: being an only child, valuing independence while craving real connections; wants genuine relationships rather than surface-level attention.
Anthony Dottrow – Football journey and Tom Brady as a metaphor for perseverance
Introduces himself as a sophomore studying mechanical engineering; football sweatshirt as the object.
Tom Brady story: started playing football in his senior year of high school; late bloom and low initial ranking; drafted in the sixth round; overcame setbacks to win multiple Super Bowls.
Personal parallel: started playing football in high school, felt behind, but committed to hard work (training, practice, strength); earned a starting role by junior year and led to a state championship.
Takeaway: the value of perseverance and giving 100% effort in every play and practice; lessons applied to life beyond sports.
Andrew – Stuffed rabbit and learning to listen and engage
Introduces a stuffed rabbit he has had since moving to Carlisle in 2012; the rabbit is 13 years old.
Uses the rabbit to reflect on communication: he used to talk to objects rather than real people; now he tries to talk to people and value others’ input.
Travel experiences: visited Germany and Indonesia; these experiences broadened his perspective on cultural differences.
Central idea: sometimes silence is OK; if you have nothing to say, you don’t say it – listening and observing are important.
Brianna Gonzales – Graduation cap and growth through adversity
Introduces herself as an 18-year-old freshman studying English; graduation cap symbolizes long-term perseverance.
Personal challenges: shy and awkward; overcoming through support from teachers and peers; desire to become a teacher and make an impact.
Motivation: loves helping people, wants to empower others to achieve greatness; acknowledges past self-doubt but commits to growing and showing up.
Call for connection: asks peers to approach her and start conversations; expresses desire for more friends.
Absentees and group dynamics note
The transcript references several names and partial interactions where some students are not present or confirmed; some names are requested to be added or corrected on the board to set up evaluations.
The overall structure emphasizes inclusivity of all group members and ensuring feedback reaches every presenter, whether live or via the discussion board.
Connections to foundational principles and real-world relevance
Peer review as practice for civil, constructive feedback:
Emphasizes balancing critique with encouragement and using rubrics as a standard.
Highlights real-world scenario where feedback affects performance and confidence in public speaking, teamwork, and professional interactions.
Listening and critical thinking in media, communication, and daily life:
The Shutter Island discussion illustrates how bias and perspective affect interpretation of information.
The HURIER model anchors the listening assignment in a structured, evidence-based approach to understanding messages.
Personal storytelling as a learning device:
Each speaker uses a personal object to reveal aspects of their identity, values, and goals.
Objects serve as anchors for explaining abstract ideas (patience, growth, independence, perseverance, vulnerability).
Ethics and academic integrity:
Clear prohibition on AI assistance for assignments; emphasis on original work and individual effort.
Practical implications for time management and academic planning:
Deadlines and module navigation require proactive attention; schedules may shift and require communication with the instructor.
Understanding how to use LMS tools (discussion boards, rubrics, peers feedback) is essential for success in this course.
Notable conventions, terms, and references (with LaTeX-friendly formatting)
Number conventions from the transcript:
12 participants; 4-person groups; 3 groups; each group evaluates the same set of 4 speakers.
The four forms of listening and the six stages of listening are central to the assignment; the model used is the HURIER model:
ext{H} = ext{Hearing}, ext{ U} = ext{Understanding}, ext{ R} = ext{Remembering}, ext{ I} = ext{Interpreting}, ext{ E} = ext{Evaluating}, ext{ R} = ext{Responding}.
Time and program specifics:
The program referenced for the academic structure involves a 2+2 pathway (the “two plus two program”
The speaker mentions a one-week-in-one-month cadence for reservist duties and German language practice during deployment, illustrating the balancing of academic and military commitments.
Key ethical and practical cautions:
Do not assign grades or numeric scores in peer feedback; feedback is qualitative and developmental.
Do not rely on AI-generated content for assignments; maintain originality and critical thinking.
Quick recap for exam readiness
Know the purpose of peer reviews: constructive, rubric-based feedback, focus on both content and delivery, and avoid grading.
Understand the structure of modules and where to find peer-review prompts, instructions, and rubrics in Module Two.
Remember the listening assignment requires Chapter 3 content (listening) and the HURIER framework; avoid mixing with Chapter 1 or Chapter 2.
Be able to discuss the main points from each speaker’s presentation and the overarching themes: identity, growth, resilience, and the impact of media and artifacts on personal development.
Recognize the ethical guidelines around originality, the use of AI, and the importance of respectful, supportive feedback in peer evaluations.
If you want, I can tailor these notes for a specific exam format (short answer, essay, or multiple-choice) or add a condensed cheat-sheet of the key terms (HURIER, four forms of listening, six stages, and the rubric components).