Video address: (TBD)
Judges of this competition: Hou Yiling, Liu Xin and Jin Xiaoyu.
A major feature of this year's national finals senior high school group is the disparity between men and women. There are only two boys in the top 10, and the other eight are girls. It is also a coincidence that both boys' numbers are multiples of 5. More coincidentally, these two boys were both ranked as multiples of 5 in the 10 into 5 competition, but their rankings were equal to their numbers.
Yang Huameng (Jiangsu), contestant 1, lecture topic: the way to express oneself.
Public comments on the lighting situation: English 1 1 ticket, communication 1 1 ticket, a total of 22 votes, with 22 points. Evaluation by judges: √√×, 52 points. The total score is 74 points, to be determined.
The theme of Yang Huameng's speech is repentance. In fact, I don't think it is wise for her to choose this theme, because confession itself lacks the true feelings in her words. It can be said that her speech is somewhat sensational. At least as a rationalist, I don't like her speech.
No.2 contestant Xu (Beijing), the topic of the speech: Cha-cha-my most powerful way of communication.
Lighting situation in public comments: English 9 votes, communication 1 1 vote, a total of 20 votes, 20 points. Evaluation by judges: √×√, 52 points. The total score is 72 points, to be determined.
Xu performed a dance on the stage, and a public commentator offered to dance with her, which pushed the competition to a climax. In the bilingual communication, Xu said that the judges should jump and score. On the whole, Xu's performance was excellent, but Liu Xin gave her a chance because she finally changed her mind. I wonder what Liu Xin really means.
No.3 contestant Li Yijun (Heilongjiang), speech topic: I am the best communicator.
Lighting situation in public trial: English 10 votes, correspondence 6 votes, a total of 16 votes, accounting for 16 points. Evaluation by judges: ××√, 26 points. The total score is 42 points, to be determined.
There is nothing special about Li Yijun's speech. Her topic is "I am the best communicator", but she doesn't communicate well. Her English is good enough, but her communication is obviously insufficient, so the number of English votes in Public Comment is higher and the number of communication votes is lower, and only one of the three judges has ticked.
No.4 contestant Zhang new york (Hubei) gave a speech on how to communicate with cats.
Lighting situation in public trial: 6 votes in English and 7 votes in correspondence, with a total of 13 votes, accounting for 13. Evaluation by judges: √√, 78 points. Total score 9 1, promotion.
Zhang new york's speech is about communicating with animals. Although she was promoted directly, I don't think her performance is very good. She also admits that she is good at communicating with animals, but not with people. She only got 13 votes in the public evaluation. I don't understand why all three judges will blame her.
No.5 contestant Wang (Hebei), speech topic: Body language makes communication more powerful.
Lighting situation of public comments: English 3 votes, communication 3 votes, a total of 6 votes, 6 points. Evaluation by judges: ×××, 0 point. The total score is 6 points, and it is eliminated.
Wang is the only player who was directly eliminated from the senior high school group in this year's national finals. The number of votes in his public review was so low that all three judges crossed. The main reason for Wang's failure is that he lacks communication very much. His communication content and logic are problematic and unconvincing, which makes others unable to understand his meaning. Such a player can't get public comments and recognition from the judges.
No.6 contestant Shao (Zhejiang), lecture topic: Traditional Chinese Medicine and Communication.
Lighting situation in public comments: 8 votes in English, 0 votes in communication 10, a total of 18 votes, accounting for 18 points. Evaluation by judges: √×√, 52 points. The total score is 70 points, to be determined.
In his speech, Shao gave a big push to Guangdong Traditional Chinese Medicine and gave a live massage to Judge Liu Xin. Her knowledge of TCM has been recognized by the audience, but as Liu Xin said, it is a prerequisite for communication to get to know each other first.
No.7 contestant Zheng Chunying (Heilongjiang), speech topic: confident communication.
Public comments on lighting conditions: English 1 vote, communication 7 votes, a total of 8 votes, 8 points. Evaluation by judges: √√, 78 points. With a total score of 86, you're through.
Zheng Chunying's speech is not outstanding to me, and her English has an accent. Her performance on the stage has shrunk a bit and she can't let it go. As can be seen from the lighting situation in the public review, Zheng Chunying's performance was not recognized. Facing this result, Zheng Chunying cried sadly. May be moved by Zheng Chunying's tears, three judges actually made a tick, which made people feel very surprised. As a referee, you should have rational thinking, and the game should be judged according to the pre-set standards. Never change your judgment temporarily because of the players' tears. As a science student, I strongly object that all three judges are ticked, and I strongly disagree with the judges' decision.
Luo Zhen, No.8 contestant, topic of speech: Sincere communication with people.
Lighting situation in public comments: English 7 votes, communication 10 votes, a total of 17 votes, accounting for 17 points. Evaluation by judges: √××××, 26 points. The total score is 43 points, to be determined.
Like No.3 player Li Yijun, No.8 player Luo Zhen's speech is not worthy of the name. Compared with Li Yijun, Luo Zhen's communication is even worse. Luo Zhen's actual performance is not consistent with the theme of her speech, and her communication with people is not sincere. She is simply robbing the host of his job. To put it bluntly, she usurped the role of the host. She is just a player. She should keep a low profile in front of the host, judges and public comments. Maybe she has a strong desire to express herself, which is nothing wrong in itself, but she has too much desire and feels insincere.
No.9 contestant Li Sitong (Tianjin), speech topic: I am the best star of hope for English communication.
Public comments on the lighting situation: English 3 votes, communication 4 votes, a total of 7 votes, 7 points. Evaluation by judges: √√×, 52 points. The total score is 59 points, to be determined.
Li Sitong speaks very fast, which shows that she is fluent in English, but it is also fatal to her speech, because the direct result of speaking fast is that others may not hear clearly, and even if they do, they may not be able to keep up with the speech. Maybe Li Sitong is used to speaking very fast. I hope she can get rid of this bad habit.
Because she spoke too fast, her English was hard to be recognized, and her communication was not good, so Li Sitong got a low number of public comments. But it is hard to understand that two of the three judges actually checked, which is really incredible.
No. 10 contestant Xu Siyuan (Hubei) gave a speech entitled: language and calligraphy-my way of communication.
Lighting situation in public comments: English 1 1 ticket, communication 9 tickets, a total of 20 votes, 20 points. Evaluation by judges: ×√√, 52 points. The total score is 72 points, to be determined.
Xu Siyuan is the last player in the high school group of 10. Perhaps because he was the last contestant, the public comments and judges lowered their requirements for him. Xu Siyuan showed his calligraphy on the spot. I feel that his preparation before the game is not sufficient, more like an impromptu speech.
The number of boys in the senior high school group in this year's national finals is small. I had hoped to see the boys in the national finals get good grades, just like Hegao in the junior middle school group in the national finals in 2007 was the only boy in the top two junior middle school groups who won the second prize. However, I am not satisfied with Xu Siyuan's performance in today's program. He even got a high vote for public comments, and two of the three judges ticked him off. As a result, he narrowly beat the top five.
The high school group 10 into 5 competition has ended, and the top 5 in the high school group has also been born.
The advanced contestants are (in order of grades): No.4 contestant Zhang new york (Hubei), No.7 contestant Zheng Chunying (Heilongjiang), 1 contestant Yang Huameng (Jiangsu), No.2 contestant Xu (Beijing) and 10 contestant Xu Siyuan (Hubei).
The eliminated players are: No.6 player Shao (Zhejiang), No.9 player (Tianjin), No.8 player (Shandong), No.3 player (Heilongjiang) and No.5 player Wang (Hebei).
After watching the senior three group 10 into 5, I have to say one thing. A few days ago, there was a 10 competition between the primary school group and the junior high school group. Today is the senior three group 10 game. I am very disappointed in today's game.
I have been watching the Star of Hope English Talent Competition since 2005, and this year is the seventh year. I remember the best time was the eighth contest in 2007. Although it is not perfect, it is still wonderful. At that time, I had to make up lessons in the summer vacation, and the national finals of the Hope Star English Style Competition brought me a lot of joy and gains, which made me enjoy it. In 2008, the contest suffered from Waterloo and began to decline. The contest in 2009 is better than that in 2008, but there are still many shortcomings. The worst is 20 10, and the contest is simply a draft. Now it seems that the 20 1 1 contest is not much better.
I used to regard the Hope Star English Talent Competition as a formal academic competition, but since 2008, my idea has completely changed. Practically speaking, the gold content of the Hope Star English Style Competition is not even as good as that of the Hope Cup National Mathematics Invitational Competition. Now my feeling is that the Hope Star English Talent Competition has become a talent show.
As the saying goes, "If you don't know the goods, you are afraid to shop around." If we compare the Star of Hope English Style Competition with other academic competitions, it is obvious which is better or worse. There are many shortcomings in the Star of Hope English Style Competition, such as unfair competition, people-oriented work of the organizing committee and lack of enterprising spirit.
The organizing committee pursues "imaginary" things excessively. For example, the number of contestants reached 2.53 million this year, and the contestants got along well with each other and established profound friendship. In fact, these are nothing. There are many competitions in which the number of participants exceeds that of the Star of Hope English Style Competition, and the organizing committee has nothing to be complacent about.
I hope the organizing Committee will not pursue "imaginary" things, but pay attention to "real" things, such as fair competition, taking into account the feelings of players and putting people first. Only by finding ways to improve can competition get better and better, and vice versa.
I have mixed feelings about the English talent competition of Hope Star. I like watching this game, but I hate that I didn't do well in it. As the saying goes, "love is deep, hate is deep." I say this in the hope that the organizing committee will notice the shortcomings of the contest and make some improvements.
I am a science student, not an English major, and I may not understand the criteria of the judges. I'm just talking about my family's views. I'll explain my views on the game from the perspective of an audience. If you have any objection to what I said, please respect my right to comment. If someone makes personal attacks because they don't agree with my point of view, I will add it to the blacklist without mercy.