Just back from this year’s Churchill Public Speaking Competition for schools at glorious Blenheim Palace.

The format is interesting – and oddly difficult. Each school has a Chairperson, Speaker and Questioner. Within a timeframe of some ten minutes the Chair has to introduce the school and the team, then hand over to the Speaker to talk for four minutes on one of the themes offered, with the Questioner fielding questions from the audience and the Chair wrapping it all up.

So this is not a debate, but rather a test of many different aspects of public speaking rolled into one short session. The Speaker has to give the strong central effort. But the Chair and Questioner also have to be effective at setting the scene, fielding and answering questions, and ensuring graceful transitions to finish strongly within the given time. Quite a tall order for adults, let alone for youngsters.

In Years 7 and 8 (where Crawf Minima was competing on one of two St Hugh’s School teams) six teams took part. And from the point of view of the beady-eared and beady-eyed speechwriting connoisseur (ie me), there was a lot of human interest.

Different schools set about the problem of the core speech in quite different ways. One Speaker went strictly by the book: “Here are three things I’m going to talk about. First point…” and so on. Clear, polished and methodical. But unnecessarily ‘over-engineered’? As in any walk of life, you want to play by the rules in such a light-touch way as to give the impression you’ve never heard of them.

Another tried to be fiercely trendy, starting and finishing with quotes from the Sex Pistols. This had substantive dramatic effect as far as it went, but did not fully convince: most of the youthful audience clearly had no idea who or indeed what the Sex Pistols were/are.

Another couple of Speakers did not always make the transition from writing an essay about the chosen theme to turning it into a speech, with simpler language. Too many long and involved sentences using clunky clever words no sensible modern 13-year old should ever be writing, let alone speaking. As Ronald Reagan’s speechwriter Peggy Noonan has famously said, “Your speech should never be taller than you are”.

Then there was the biting-off-more-than-you-can chew tendency, particularly on the huge theme of not damaging the English language by ‘modern slang, adaptations or intrusions’ (as WSC himself once put it). If you have only about 500 words, you can’t afford to get becalmed in too much historical detail about the way that the English language has evolved and what textspeak means for better or worse. Find a couple of simple strong core points for and against, and build the team’s output around them.

One team boldly tackled “‘Harsh laws are better than no laws at all.’ Should this be applied to schools?” Again, the trick lay in reframing the issue to a higher level of generalisation to look at a couple of broad arguments for and against, rather than sinking into lists of complicated explanations that, happily, seemed to end up in favour of the return of bracing corporal punishment.

The two St Hugh’s teams tackled (respectively) Leadership and Popularity and History – the Most Important School Subject? Both sets of presentations came over strongly as I watched them (with studious lack of any detachment): nicely turned combinations of interesting content, teamwork, clarity of speaking and some successful humorous touches.

The second team tackling the History theme gave the overall winning performance on the day. Asked by someone in the audience to say a bit more about the idea that it falls to the winners to write history, the Speaker fired back with the Bayeux Tapestry as an example of William the Conqueror getting in his version of events at the expense of King Harold. Coo. This effortless sweep of the ball for 6 far over the pavilion rightly impressed the audience and judges alike.

Conclusion?

It will be good to see the competition growing fast in the coming years, as the format is more testing than the standard school debate set-up. Well done West Craven High Technology College for coming all the way from Lancashire to take part in the upper school part of the competition. Oxford Spires Academy likewise made a strong showing, fielding three teams in all on the day.

How to put in a winning performance? Easy: 

Keep it simple. Two or three strong, clear points delivered in a strong clear voice with a couple of unexpected lively examples will make a huge impression. No ponderously clever words that you’d be unlikely or unwise to say to your aunt.

Short sentences (ie only a few words each), so the speakers talking from their notes can confidently improvise a bit.

Finish strongly. Be you, with some added dramatic edge and a dab of raw charm. Aim to have a conversation with the audience – don’t give a lecture

Above all, remember the absolute basic thing in any public speaking: It’s not what you say – it’s what they hear.

No-one at an event like this wants to hear densely clever stuff about history or Churchill or the evolution of language as cranked out by hard-pressed teachers. They want to hear the children and their character coming through strongly.

They want to hear ‘Hmm, that was actually quite good! More, please!