Detailed feedback for speeches that do not fit a generic speaking checklist

The General category may include:

• Leadership addresses
• Company talks
• General keynotes
• Ceremonial speeches
• Personal monologues
• Community talks
• Professional speeches
• Mixed-format public addresses
• Sustained interview answers with a clear argument
• Speeches combining explanation, persuasion, and reflection

AskSpeech does not force these talks into a single rhetorical formula.

The analysis adapts to the talk's purpose, audience, genre, and stated ambition.

• Is there one controlling message?
• Does the opening support that message?
• Can listeners follow the major sections?
• Are claims responsibly presented?
• Does the speech develop its ideas sufficiently?
• Are stories and examples integrated?
• Is the speech useful to its intended audience?
• Is engagement sustained or concentrated in isolated moments?
• Does the conclusion return to and resolve the main idea?

Quick Verdict

A concise editorial assessment of the speech's most important strengths and limitations.

Intended Audience

A description of who the speech appears to address and why the subject matters to those listeners.

Audience context informs the evaluation but does not add points.

Key Quotes

Up to six transcript-grounded quotations reveal the thesis, strongest material, central weakness, important transition, or practical implication.

Strongest Elements

Up to three material strengths explain what the speaker does, why it works, and how it builds the message.

Most Important Weaknesses

Up to three material weaknesses explain what is going wrong, why it matters, and how it affects the listener.

Current Spine

A map of the speech as delivered, including:

• Core thesis
• Opening hook
• Major sections
• Purpose of each section
• Strong, weak, or drifting status
• Listener effect
• Bridge to the next section
• Suggested improvement
• Supporting quotation

Re-Spined

When the speech would materially benefit from a new order, Re-Spined rebuilds the message around its strongest existing material.

It is omitted when a substantial rebuild is unnecessary.

The original speech is always graded independently.

A general public speech is graded across seven categories:

• Evidence / Accuracy / Truthfulness
• Depth
• Structure
• Clarity
• Practicality
• Engagement
• Credibility

Evidence / Accuracy / Truthfulness

Evaluates whether claims are responsibly stated, supported within the speech, internally coherent, and appropriately qualified.

This is not a complete external fact-check.

Depth

Evaluates the substance and development of the speech's ideas in relation to its purpose.

Structure

Evaluates progression, proportion, connection, development, and resolution.

Clarity

Evaluates how understandable and conceptually precise the complete speech remains.

Practicality

Evaluates how useful the ideas are to the intended audience.

Practicality can involve action, reflection, a decision, a framework, an implication, or a meaningful change in understanding.

Engagement

Evaluates attention and audience connection across the whole speech.

The analysis distinguishes sustained engagement from one or two isolated high points.

Credibility

Evaluates whether the speech gives listeners sufficient reason to trust its claims, reasoning, qualification, and presentation of evidence.

The 1-10 score scale

Scores are displayed out of 10, with decimals when the judgment falls between two levels.

Read the scale this way:

• 1: Not functioning in this category; the transcript gives almost no usable evidence of the quality being measured.
• 2: Severe breakdown; there are fragments of intent, but the category mostly fails.
• 3: Weak; some relevant material is present, but major gaps or confusion dominate.
• 4: Underdeveloped; the category works in places but remains unreliable, thin, or poorly connected.
• 5: Mixed; the speech shows basic competence and clear limitations in about equal measure.
• 6: Adequate; the category generally works, but with noticeable unevenness, missing support, or missed opportunities.
• 7: Solid; the speech is effective in this category with specific areas to strengthen.
• 8: Strong; the category is consistently effective, with refinements needed more than repairs.
• 9: Excellent; the speech handles this category with unusual clarity, development, and control.
• 10: Exceptional; the category is handled with rare precision and effectiveness across the focused transcript.

A 0.0 can appear only when the transcript gives effectively no usable evidence for a category. The scale describes the public score; the report's reasoning explains why that speech landed there.

Overall score

The overall score is a holistic judgment of how well the speech accomplishes its category-specific task across the full focused transcript.

It is informed by the seven category scores and by the severity of the transcript evidence behind them, but it is not calculated by a hidden weighted formula.

Grading sequence

AskSpeech grades the focused transcript before writing the qualitative report. The category scores, reasoning, and overall score are selected from the original speech as delivered, then locked while the report explains them.

Re-Spined is produced only after grading. Its suggested rebuild can help revision, but it does not raise or lower the original scores.

AskSpeech does not grade on a curve or spread scores to match a preferred pattern. Two speeches with the same number can earn it for different reasons, which is why every score is paired with transcript-based reasoning.

AskSpeech can evaluate transcript-visible elements such as:

• Central claim
• Reasoning
• Evidence
• Examples
• Stories
• Verbal structure
• Transitions
• Repetition
• Audience orientation
• Application
• Conclusion

It does not directly evaluate:

• Eye contact
• Gesture
• Posture
• Facial expression
• Vocal tone
• Vocal projection
• Physical confidence
• Stage movement

This is a detailed analysis of the spoken message, not a visual performance score.