GENERAL EVALUATOR
The role of General Evaluator is twofold. Firstly, you are responsible for introducing the evaluators
and evaluating their speaking. Secondly, you are responsible for evaluating the meeting in general.
Before the meeting:
Provide the Toastmaster with your introduction when asked. The introduction is how the Toastmaster
will introduce you. It should be a couple of sentences relating to the theme. It can be your opinion, a
quote, humorous or informative.
Review the guidelines for evaluations, familiarize yourself with the speeches for the evening and the
evaluators.
During the meeting:
Use the attached checklist to keep track of the meeting. This is just a guideline. Feel free to add
anything you feel is relevant. You do not need to comment on every item listed. This is a suggestion
for things to consider.
Remember to provide constructive and balanced feedback. Talk about 1-2 things done well and 1-2
points for improvement.
As General Evaluator you do not evaluate the main speeches. However, if you consider that a poor
evaluation has been given, you may add your own observations to rectify this.
Be confident in your own opinion. Do not only say positive. It is of no value to the club. Constructive,
well thought out advice for improvements will help create a better experience for everyone.
Refer to your notes as needed, however work on presenting your feedback as a mini speech using
the skills you have learned.
GENERAL EVALUATOR SCRIPT
Introduction:
Explain role; you can word it anyway you like, but an example is:
As General Evaluator for this meeting, it is my duty to introduce our evaluators. Further, I
have observed the meeting and I will be offering general feedback, comments and
suggestions on the meeting as well as providing feedback to our evaluators.
Then introduce the three evaluators:
Our first evaluator is … who will be reviewing …’s speech. … says…(Intro)
Please help me to welcome ….
Our next evaluator is …, who will be evaluating …’ speech. … says…(Intro)
Please help me to welcome ….
Our last evaluator is …, who will be evaluating …’s speech. … says …(Intro) 0
Please help me to welcome ….
After evaluations:
May I get a timer’s report?
May I get a grammarian’s report?
May I get an uh counter’s report?
Which evaluators qualified based on time (Circle)
Review of Meeting:
Refer to the General Evaluator Checklist
Include anything else you noticed about the meeting that was either exemplary or that could have
been done better.
Voting:
Ask people to vote for best evaluator (it can be any of the evaluators, functionaries, or the general
evaluator).
Finally, turn the meeting back over to the Toastmaster.
GENERAL EVALUATOR CHECKLIST
The General Evaluator gives feedback to the meeting participants who have not already been
evaluated. Here is the opportunity for the Toastmaster, Table Topics Master, Table Topics participants,
and the Evaluators to receive feedback on how well they did and to hear suggestions on how to
improve. Here are some things to consider when providing your evaluation:
Prior to Meeting
● Did people arrive on time?
● Was the room prepared?
● Did we have a hard time filling roles this week?
During the Meeting
● Did anyone speak out of turn?
● Were handshakes and introductions appropriate?
● Was control always maintained at podium?
Presiding Officer
● Did the meeting start on time?
● Were the guests welcomed?
Toastmaster
● Were the meeting roles explained?
● Were guests given an opportunity to introduce themselves?
● Did the introductions include...
○ a brief biographical sketch?
○ the objectives of the speech?
○ the speech title?
● Were the transitions between speeches smooth?
● Did the segues between speeches show that the Toastmaster was listening?
● Will the meeting end on time?
Table Topics Master
● Were the topics appropriate?
● Were the topics introduced in 1 minute or less?
● Were any special techniques (e.g., props, gestures) employed?
● Were members called on in the appropriate order (those with no role, then smaller roles, then
larger roles)?
● Were guests invited to participate?
Table Topics Participants
● How has each speaker improved?
● Were any special techniques (rephrase, artful dodge) used?
● What, in terms of the mechanics of impromptu speaking, can be improved?
Evaluators
● Was the ‘book report’ summary avoided?
● Was the 'sandwich' technique employed:
○ Did it begin on a positive note?
○ Was at least one suggestion for improvement made?
○ Were more than 3 suggestions made?
○ Was encouragement added at the close?
Just like a speech evaluation, the general evaluation should neither be a whitewash nor a scathing
criticism, but should point out where the club could use some improvement and what we are doing
well.
