14 As shown in Figure 5, the mean rating of the four aspects for speaker 1 falls within the range of 3.40 to
3.70. This indicates that Speaker 1 is rated as a good speaker. Specifically, speaker 1 received the highest mean 3.70 for his expertise, followed by both his delivery and methodology mean 3.44 and his
interaction mean 3.40.
Figure 5: Mean Rating for Speaker 1 Only two comments were written for speaker 1 that are
he is “Ok” and “a very motivated person”. Overall, participants rated Speaker 1 as a good speaker and they were satisfied with his presentation.
5.4.2 Speaker 2: En Ahmad Bin Yahya
As shown in Figure 6, the mean rating of the four aspects for speaker 2 falls within the range of 3.44 to 3.68. This indicates that Speaker 2 is rated as a good speaker. Specifically, speaker 2 received the highest
mean 3.63 for his expertise, followed by his delivery mean 3. 49 then his interaction mean 3.46 and finally his methodology mean 3.46.
Figure 6: Mean Rating for Speaker 2 Generally, participants were satisfied with Speaker 2, but they suggested shortening the length of the
presentation. The comments about Speaker 2 are listed below.
Ok 3.70
3.44 3.44
3.40
3.20 3.30
3.40 3.50
3.60 3.70
3.80 Expertise
Delivery Methodology
Interaction
Speaker 1
Mean
3.63 3.49
3.44 3.46
3.35 3.40
3.45 3.50
3.55 3.60
3.65 Expertise
Delivery Methodology
Interaction
Speaker 2
Mean
15
Very good but too long Good presentation
Very good innovation
Based on the mean rating and participants comments, it shows that Speaker 2 is a good speaker and participants were satisfied with the speaker.
5.4.3 Speaker 3: Datuk Kamarulzaman Darus PJN
As shown in Figure 7, the mean rating of the four aspects for speaker 3 falls within the range of 3.44 to 3.68. This indicates that Speaker 3 is rated as a good speaker. Specifically, speaker 3 received the highest
mean 3.76 for his expertise, followed by his methodology mean 3. 41 then his delivery mean 3.34 and finally his interaction mean 3.46.
Figure 7: Mean rating for Speaker 3 Participants were generally satisfied with Speaker 3 and suggested that the speaker should give short
responses during the Questions and Answer session. Participants’ comments are presented below.
Ok Answers to questions should be focused and short
Very informative; obtained a lot of knowledge He shows the way how to become a business mind
5.4.4 Speaker 4: Engr Abdul Shukor
As shown in Figure 8, the mean rating of the four aspects for speaker 4 falls within the range of 3.43 to 3.71. This indicates that Speaker 4 is rated as a good speaker. Specifically, speaker 4 received the highest
mean 3.71 for his expertise, followed by his methodology mean 3. 49 then his interaction mean 3.43 and finally his methodology mean 3.43.
3.76 3.34
3.41 3.33
3.10 3.20
3.30 3.40
3.50 3.60
3.70 3.80
Expertise Delivery
Methodology Interaction
Speaker 3
Mean
16 Figure 8: Mean Rating for Speaker 4
Participants gave positive comments to Speaker 4 that the presentation was good and interesting. However, they viewed that the speaker’s voice was too soft in which one of the participants assumed that
there was a problem with the microphone. Overall, Speaker 4 is a good speaker but he has to project his voice during the presentation.
Participants’ feedback on Speaker 4 is presented below.
A good reminder Very good idea but soft voice
His voice not so clear The content and expertise are excellent but the delivery not clear
Delivery voice is not clear enough A very interesting presentation and very pleasant personality
Mic problem
5.4.5 Speaker 5: Puan Yah Awg Nik
