1 / 14

The Leland Stanford Junior University Marching Band

The Leland Stanford Junior University Marching Band. By: Dana Skubal. Goal. To mediate this free spirited band, but continue to keep let this student-run organization have control. Against. Their non-traditional style Specific Events. Non-Traditional Band. Scatter band (History)

xaria
Download Presentation

The Leland Stanford Junior University Marching Band

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Leland Stanford Junior University Marching Band By: Dana Skubal

  2. Goal To mediate this free spirited band, but continue to keep let this student-run organization have control.

  3. Against Their non-traditional style Specific Events

  4. Non-Traditional Band Scatter band (History) Switch instruments (Springen, Karen) “No past musical ability required” (Hesselberg, George) Humorous conent (Hesselberg, George)

  5. Shows • Irish Catholic (History) • Spotted Owl (History) • Polygamy (Herbert, David) • September 11, 2004 • Mocking Mormonism • Quote

  6. Supporting Practiced traditions Band spirit

  7. Traditions Want to entertain, have fun (What Do We Do?) Running, dancing, singing, randomly playing (What Do We Do?) Crazy Costumes (History) Mascot (History) Dollies (History)

  8. Spirit • Perform at: • BBQ’s, grand openings, weddings, graduations, funerals (What Do We Do?) • Football games, basketball, volleyball, rugby, water-polo, tennis, fencing (What Do We Do?)

  9. Mediation • Seth Snyder-Assistant (Springen, Karen) • Guidelines • Check for tastefulness • Committee • Athletic/administrators/alumni • “Band has gotten better at knowing boundaries”

  10. Questions

  11. Works Cited • Herbert, David. “Band’s Mormon-Mocking Halftime Show Leads to Apologies, • Sanctions.” Free Republic. Free Republic, LLC. 27 September 2004.n.d. Web. • 9 April 2013. • Hesselberg, George. “Stanford Band vows to strike up fun, not too naughty show.” • Wisconsin State Journal. 29 December 2012. Web. 28 March 2012. • “History” LSJUMB.n.d. Web. 28 March 2013. • Snyder, Seth. LSJUMB. n.d.. Photograph. LSJUMB. Web. 15 Apr 2013. • Springen, Karen. “LSJUMB adviser Seth Snyder.” Stanford Alumni. 29 October 2009. Web. 9 April 2013. • What Do We Do?” LSJUMB. Web. 28 March 2013.

  12. Rubric

  13. Overall Comments: Above, you can see that I didn’t have many reservations. I do agree w/ the respondents that you spoke too fast. You did have a puzzling early statement, saying you were going to “mediate the band,” & you did include a slide “Supporting...,” that seemed to have no purpose. Also, by presentation’s end it sounded as if the band was going to police itself, which is how it got in trouble in the first place. Still, a strong combination of text & visuals, w/ a strong 4-pt. plan, & you were sensitive to the questions as well. The response is below. A-

  14. Response Team MaddyScholten, Taylor Wisgerhof, Michael Kramer As a team, we responded to a presentation given by Dana Skubal over the Leland Stanford Junior University Marching Band. We assessed her performance based on visuals, text, voice, statistics, and logic. Dana included visuals on almost every slide of her presentation, giving the audience a clear idea of what the subject looked like. “The images she used helped me to see what the band was all about.” (Kramer) Dana did a good job of limiting the text on her slides and reciting from memory. It was evident that she was knowledgeable about the topic, though she spent too much time giving background information. Her voice was clear and loud, but she spoke too quickly. “Dana delivered a lot of information that was good, but the pace hindered understanding.” (Wisgerhof) Dana included helpful statistics and facts about the band, and the sources she used seemed to be valid. She also did a fair job discussing the different point of views on the topic. “Dana did a good job presenting both sides of the issue.” (Kramer) One major downfall of the presentation was that the slides did not seem to be in logical order. The way she presented the information was hard to follow, making the audience confused about what her solution was. “The mediation seemed slightly confused.” (Wisgerhof) Overall, it was evident that Dana has vast knowledge on the subject, and the content was interesting. One area of improvement would be working on how to successful present the information to the audience. Plus, balanced.

More Related