Enhancing Public Speaking Skills in Engineering Students Through AI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research-to-practice full paper was inspired by the persistent challenge of effective communication among engineering students. Public speaking is a necessary skill for future engineers as they have to communicate technical knowledge with diverse stakeholders. While universities offer courses or workshops, they are unable to offer sustained and personalized training to students. Providing comprehensive feedback on both verbal and non-verbal aspects of public speaking is timeintensive, making consistent and individualized assessment impractical. This study integrates research on verbal and non-verbal cues in public speaking to develop an AI-driven assessment model for engineering students. Our approach combines speech analysis, computer vision, and sentiment detection into a multi-modal AI system that provides assessment and feedback. The model evaluates (1) verbal communication (pitch, loudness, pacing, intonation), (2) non- verbal communication (facial expressions, gestures, posture), and (3) expressive coherence, a novel integration ensuring alignment between speech and body language. Unlike previous systems that assess these aspects separately, our model fuses multiple modalities to deliver personalized, scalable feedback. Preliminary testing demonstrated that our AI-generated feedback was moderately aligned with expert evaluations. Among the state-of-the-art AI models evaluated—all of which were Large Language Models (LLMs), including Gemini and OpenAI models—Gemini Pro emerged as the best-performing, showing the strongest agreement with human annotators. By eliminating reliance on human evaluators, this AI-driven public speaking trainer enables repeated practice, helping students naturally align their speech with body language and emotion—crucial for impactful and professional communication.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".