I Can’t Do Public Speaking (Yet): Increasing Student Expectancy by Providing Specific, Rubric-Based Feedback

October 2, 2025

After completing an introductory communication course, many college students report that their public speaking anxiety decreased or diminished in intensity (LeFebvre et al., 2019). But decreasing this anxiety in SCOM 122/123 doesn’t mean students are confident public speakers or believe they can transfer those skills to another situation, context, or disciplinary setting (Gamble & Gamble, 2024). So, what can you do? 

One thing you can do is motivate your students to be public speakers. Barron and Hulleman (2006)* note that motivation consists of two components: expectancy and value. Expectancy is the degree to which people believe they can complete a task, while value is the degree to which people are interested in or see the purpose for engaging in that task. You can incorporate expectancy into classroom activities by creating public speaking opportunities that are achievable but challenging so that students are able to see their progress and experience feelings of competence. While value is an important motivation component, this Teaching Toolbox will focus on expectancy, specifically on providing feedback. 

Feedback is an important tool that can increase student expectancy by helping them develop competency. Clear expectations provided by your feedback can help students figure out what competent communication looks like. Research shows that students are more likely to experience higher expectancy when they receive feedback that is specific rather than general and task-focused rather than ability-focused (Getty, Barron, & Hulleman, 2021). In this Toolbox, readers will be introduced to a presentation evaluation tool developed by JMU faculty members that provides students with specific and task-focused feedback. 

Developing a valid communication rubric* that reflects the characteristics valued by the JMU community was a collaborative effort undertaken in summer 2014 by 10 JMU faculty members from six JMU colleges thanks to a General Education summer grant. This rubric was developed with the idea that communication occurs across the curriculum. 

Rubrics are a common tool used by instructional faculty at all levels to communicate assignment expectations, provide feedback on submitted work, and assist in the evaluation of final products. This communication rubric focuses on four traits: purpose, structure, complexity, and delivery. What follows is a description of each trait. 

Purpose: Refers to the achievement of the presenter’s thesis or claim and its relevance to the audience, setting, and context. Examined features may include topic selection, appropriateness, content, clarity, and focus. This trait generally refers to conveying an identifiable content-rich message to the audience. A clear well-supported thesis, precisely stated and clear, engages the audience and enhances understanding of clear articulation and support for a specific thesis. 

Structure: Refers to the organization and coherence of the presentation elements. Features include the flow or sequencing of ideas (introduction, body, conclusion, and transitions) and other conventional elements appropriate to the content that aid the audience’s understanding and support the thesis. 

The introduction and conclusion of a speech are essential. The introduction gives the audience a reason to listen to the remainder of the speech. A good introduction needs to get the audience’s attention, state the topic, make the topic relatable, establish credibility, and preview the main points. Introductions should be the last part of the speech written, as they set expectations and need to match the content. 

In the conclusion the main points and the topic are brought together. Speakers can emphasize the thesis statement and review the main points. Speakers can also refer to the introduction and the attention getter and tell the audience what the next steps should be. 

Complexity: Refers to the depth or sophistication of the ideas presented to the audience(s). Features may include evidence or research that supports the thesis, use of analysis, integration of the content, an ethical purpose, creativity, and perspective(s). The speaker assesses and evaluates sources for relevance, uses and cites sources appropriately, and employs appropriate argumentative techniques. Claims are supported by appropriate data. 

Delivery: Refers to the speaker’s control of the vocal, physical, and audio-visual dimensions of the presentation or performance event to engage the audience(s) and enhance understanding. 

Vocal features may include the use of rate, pitch, tone, volume, rhythm, and articulation. Physical features include a speaker’s comportment as may be reflected by such characteristics as eye contact, posture, movement, gestures, position, and appearance. The audio-visual dimension may include the use of presentation tools (e.g., PowerPoint or Prezi), images, sounds, and objects. Other features that might be considered include evidence of rehearsal/preparation, adherence to time guidelines, and creativity. 

Many students use PowerPoint slides in their presentations, and the slides can be very text-heavy, which means that the slides do not follow the generally accepted design guidelines (Durso, Pop, Burnett, & Stearman, 2011). Designers believe that images instead of text should be used on PowerPoint slides because images capture the audience's attention more effectively than text alone. In addition, images can make presentations visually engaging and memorable. 

You can motivate your students to be public speakers by incorporating a rubric like the one developed at JMU in 2014. Show them the elements of the rubric and explain what purpose, structure, complexity, and delivery looks like in your discipline. Let them practice. And give them task-specific feedback. This kind of feedback will likely increase their expectancy so that they can express their ideas better in public settings. 

*This reference may require you to log in with your JMU e-ID and password. Please contact Andreas Broscheid (broschax@jmu.edu) if you still can’t access the documents.