The Lecture Analysis Form
By Scott Wells
In a September 1992 column in M A G I
C, Paul Gertner briefly alluded to a method
of measuring the effectiveness of lecturers.
He suggested that perhaps some way of rating
the lecturers should be established. To my
knowledge, no club or lecturer has come up
with such a system. What a valuable tool such
a system could be for both the club and the
lecturer, especially for the lecturer who
could use the critical remarks in a positive
way and improve his lecture.
I put keyboard to monitor and whipped
out an "ANALYSIS OF LECTURE" form to be used
by club members following a lecture. To administer
the survey, you need to procure several pencils,
and circulate the forms prior to the lecture
with the request to complete and return the
survey immediately following the lecture.
The form itself should require no further
explanation. You may want to discuss the use
of the form with the lecturer to see if he
would like to receive the results.
After the club has seen a lecture, it
can only reflect on the end result then pass
on those results to the lecturer and/or to
other interested clubs. Regrettably, the club
will not directly benefit so much from this
exercise unless they plan to have the lecturer
return; however, if other clubs use such a
standardized rating system, then they can
exchange the results of such analysis with
one another before they choose to engage the
lecturer.
Perhaps there needs to be a "lecture circuit
clearinghouse" which could sort out and tabulate
the results and make some sense out of everyoneís
answers then distribute the results to interested
parties (e.g.; clubs and lecturers). The ideal
clearinghouse would of course be the lecturer
himself. The hosting club could directly ask
the lecturer to submit his rating with his
promotional material when considering whether
or not to engage him. Another idea might be
to publish the results in a widely circulated
magazine or perhaps through a syndicated column
that is published in magic club newsletters
nationwide.
I recognize that there are problems with
this analysis. First of all, there may be
a bias inherent with the club members. For
example, one club may not be representative
of what other clubs may want in a lecturer.
Basically each club looks for different things
and what is loved by one club (e.g.; self-working
club act tricks or knuckle buster card tricks
or how to build your own illusions) may go
unappreciated by another club. The results
of any survey would therefore reflect the
consensus of a particular clubís magic knowledge
and interest. With this in mind, I am afraid
that the results from clubs with a specialized
interest and a firm grasp of the basics of
magic might distort the norm and would only
be valid if combined with results from other
clubs at the other end of the spectrum.
Secondly, there is the matter of timing.
A lecturer may have a hot or cold night/audience.
The results of any survey would only reflect
how that club viewed that lecturer on that
night.
Furthermore, the lecturer may improve
his lecture using the results of this analysis
so the results may not represent how his next
lecture might be received. Also, if the lecturer
was acting as his own clearinghouse and responsible
for submitting results to clubs, then it is
possible that an unscrupulous lecturer could
skew the results to his benefit.
Overall, I believe that the pros outweigh
the cons in this endeavor; therefore, I am in
favor of instituting the following as a nationwide
lecture analysis form. Its use, application, and
dissemination I will leave up to you for the time
being.
THE FORM
Rate the following categories from 1 to
10 as they applied to you:
There was a wide range of tricks explained:
no some
a
lot
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
The effects were easy:
very easy a
little of both difficult
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
The lecturerís explanations were:
incomplete okay
thorough
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
The psychology behind the tricks was:
not explained fuzzy
completely understood
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
There was too much theory:
none just
right too
much
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
The lecturer had a lot to sell:
very little moderate
amount too
much
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
The price of the lecture notes and other
lecture items was reasonably priced:
not at all
somewhat very
reasonable
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
This lecturer had a point (e.g.; was there
a theme?):
rambled too much some
had a point
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
This lecturer made me think about the
way I do magic:
no
somewhat
quite
a bit
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
The effects were "commercial" and audience
tested:
no
some were everything
was
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
I learned new effects that I will use:
none some
many
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
I would recommend this lecturer to other
groups:
no
with some reservation
definitely
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
How many years have you been active in
magic (approx.):
1) one year or less
2) one to five years
3) five to ten years
4) ten years or more
How many lectures have you attended (approx.):
1) this is my first magic lecture
2) bout a half dozen
3) maybe a dozen or so
4) several dozen
|
