346 INFORMATIVE SPEECHES FOR ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Medical Robots: From Science Fiction to Science Fact
Needs Improvement Version
1 So, I was really cramped—I had to study for a calculus exam last night—so this didn’t
necessarily get done well. But let’s just see how it goes, okay?
2 Basically, as a kid I watched Star Wars a lot, and I definitely loved seeing all the differ-
ent kinds of robots there. Now that I want to be a doctor, I thought about looking into robots in
medicine, and you definitely see them in hospitals all the time. So I thought that would be a good
topic.
3 I also heard about a woman in New Jersey who had a kidney transplant operation done by
a robot. Except there was a live surgeon that powered the robot, so they did it together.
4 First, though, there are orderly robots that carry stuff around the hospital, basically.
Here’s a picture of one. It’s kind of like a square R2–D2, as you can see. Mark Weigel says these
robots are fast and efficient, and they save hospitals a ton of time. So obviously that’s important.
7 These robots are actually really popular right now as well. I found a magazine article
called Hospital Management, and it said that remote–presence robots are used in hundreds of
hospitals. So obviously there is a trend in using these machines, and it’s quite useful.
8 My favorite robot, though, is the da Vinci. It’s named after the famous Italian painter. It’s
used for surgeries. I actually had a picture specifically of the robot, but I couldn’t find it this
morning when I double–checked. Obviously I’m here now and didn’t have time. But it’s definite-
ly cool—the robot—and it’s got a lot of arms, and it kind of looks like an octopus. Like Doctor
Octopus, almost. It basically is the surgery machine.
348 INFORMATIVE SPEECHES FOR ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Medical Robots: From Science Fiction to Science Fact
Needs Improvement Version
Commentary
The needs improvement and final versions of “Medical Robots” can help students see the difference be-
tween an ordinary informative speech and a superior one. Start by showing the needs improvement ver-
sion, followed by a class discussion having students assess the speaker’s development of ideas, delivery,
and visual aids. Then show the final version and have students assess the same aspects. Conclude by
discussing why the final version is superior to the needs improvement version. Video of both versions is
available online and on the DVD of student speeches that accompanies this edition of The Art of Public
Speaking. Below is an analysis of the needs improvement version.
Introduction: The introduction, which consists of paragraphs 1–3, demonstrates that the speaker has not
put enough time into his speech. Indeed, he begins by stating that he spent the previous night
studying for a calculus exam, rather than working on his speech.
In paragraph 2, the speaker fulfills one of the objectives of a speech introduction by reveal-
ing the topic of his speech. However, he fails to relate the topic to the audience, save for a pass-
ing reference to Star Wars, a familiar film. In paragraph 3, he mentions a woman who had an
operation involving a surgeon–controlled robot. But he does not explain the operation fully, and
he does not tell the story in a way that draws the audience into the speech. The introduction
ends without providing either a clear sense of the speaker’s central idea or a preview statement
of the main points he will discuss in the body.
Body: The body of the speech consists of paragraphs 4–9 and contains three main points. At the be-
ginning of each point, the speaker provides a connective to help the audience follow along.
However, the points themselves are poorly developed and ineffectually supported.
The first main point (paragraphs 4–5) deals with orderly robots. Testimony from Mark Weigel
on the effectiveness of orderly robots is a good way to begin, but the speaker does not state who
Weigel is or why he is a qualified source. In paragraph 5, the speaker attempts to describe light
whiskers, but aside from calling light whiskers “invisible beams,” he does not explain what they are
MEDICAL ROBOTS: NEEDS IMPROVEMENT VERSION 349
ly developed oral citation would include more than the title of the journal from which the infor-
mation came.
The third main point (paragraphs 8–9) is equally problematic. Unsure of how the point
should develop, the speaker launches into a free–association discussion of surgical robots,
comparing them to a villain from Spider–Man and to a popular videogame franchise. He does
not leave the audience with a clear sense of what surgical robots are or of how they work.
When comparing the needs improvement and final versions of the speech, students should
notice that the body of both versions follows much the same structure. In the needs improve-
ment version, the speaker has thought about the kinds of robots he wants to discuss, and he
understands how to move the audience from one point to another. But, unlike the final version,
he does not provide enough supporting materials to develop his ideas fully. The result is a
speech with more promise than fulfillment.
Conclusion: Paragraph 10 serves as the conclusion. By saying “In conclusion,” the speaker signals that
the speech is coming to an end. He then reinforces his central idea when he mentions that ro-
Delivery: As can be seen from the speech video, the speaker’s delivery is animated and conversation-
al. It is also fairly rapid and underscores the impression that the speaker is not properly pre-
pared. He starts by taking a swig from his coffee cup—hardly a positive way to get attention at
the outset. As the speech continues, he periodically leans on the lectern, inserts vocalized
pauses, and loses his place—all of which reflect his lack of sufficient rehearsal.
Visual Aids: Visual aids can greatly add to or detract from an informative speech. In the needs im-
provement version of “Medical Robots,” the speaker’s visual aids do little to enhance the infor-
mation he is trying to convey. They fall far short of the guidelines discussed in Chapter 14 of the
textbook.
350 INFORMATIVE SPEECHES FOR ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
After discussing orderly robots, the speaker leaves his slide of an orderly robot on screen until
he is part way through his next main point, on remote–presence robots (paragraphs 6–7). When he
finally moves to a slide of remote–presence robots, it is cluttered and confusing. Chances are that
the audience will spend more time puzzling over the visual aid than listening to the speaker.