Everyone did an outstanding job this weekend. I know you tried your best and I want you to know that all of you did great!
For our UCLA blog, answer the following questions by Wednesday, 11/12, before class.
(Please remember to be positive and do not make any disparaging or negative comments about any delegates.)
1. What went well for you at UCLA?
2. What did your partner do well (be positive!). If you did not have a partner, what were the benefits to not having a partner and/or what were the challenges you faced in your committee as a single delegate?
3. Who did the best in your committee and what did they do to make them stand out?
4. What did you learn this weekend? How can you translate your experience at UCLA to make you a better delegate?
5. Did anything surprise you at this conference? If not...how was UCLA different from other conferences you have been to?
55 comments:
1. A lot of things went well at UCLA conference. One point is that I believe every delegate in that very room recognized the Republic of Congo. My partner and I delievered our speech smoothly as always. We made our speech while we were going to UCLA and in addition, I was able to get to be first on the speaker list. I was able to express my ideas and gain support due to very concrete solutions. I was also able to create a caucus group that I can control or I may say have major influence. Being a small country, it didn't really matter to me but would have been nice to have one of the big nations to be able to have more of an influence. It was difficult to keep Greece under my hand due to knowing that they were seniors and that we were a small country in Africa. Luckily, they didn't win an award. Also the sad news, I may say that we got a research award and the commendation. My partner and I didn't expect to get a reserach award nor a commendation. I guess it doesn't matter how long you spend on your postion paper but the quality of delivering the ideas into the position papers.
2. Personally, I can work with my partner, Andy. I believe we have very constructive attitudes and opposite personaility during conferences. I am very let say intense in almost all the conferences this year. The UCLA conference confirms that. I chose the General Assembly due to several reasons. Andy is more reserved and quiet which kind of kept me in line from really getting off. I believe that we could do really well in Security Council if we are given the chance to be in that committee with a concrete country. The problem for me being a single delegate would be that no one would be able to keep me from being too Intense. That's why for some reason I feel that many chairs may not have PICKED me to speak due to impressions. Another difference between duo and single delegattion is the influence. My plan the whole time was that I try to make a caucus group with bigger nations and my partner gets all the developing african nations. Then we merge which would kept us on policy. Sometimes, this may not happen.
3. The best delegate in that room was either Croatia and a certain "country" from Edison. This certain country from Edison was able to deliver their speech really clear and contribute great ideas that many nations completely agreed with. Their persuasion skills were pretty well. It was seemingly an even match between those two country but when it came down to diplomacy compared to other nations. Croatia and several other nations presented to be more Diplomatic than the "certain" country from Edison. I believe that's why Croatia won.
4. Personally, I think I need to continue with partner committees just so I can create a lesser aggressive tone delegate... I can do fine alone but the problem is being intense due to debating passionately in MUN. I learned that this conference confirmed my assumptions. I still got a long way to make it up by finishing strong end of the year. I believe this is the turning point. It's time to live up to being one of the top 5 in MUN....
5. The UCLA conference wasn't any different to me that much because I went to UC Davis last year so I was pretty much prepared. UC Davis kind of prepared me for this conference. The only difference would be procedure matters but basically the main ideas are pretty much kept such as General and Sustantive debate.
1. Many things went well at UCLA. first of all, I felt as if I was very prepared for my topic and i knew most of the key dates and significant events that occurred. Also, I was able to speak a lot since there were only 7 delegates in my committee and the entire weekend was basically a very very long round robin. Furthermore, I actually had fun because my committee was extremely interactive. We were "evacuated" twice, did a mock trial for Louis Capet, witnessed his "beheading" at the guillotine, and received crescents and apple cider for our hard work. Overall, this has certainly been the most interesting committee I've ever been in.
2. I did not have a partner at this conference. As a single delegate, I had to plan and brainstorm ideas alone, but there were many positive aspects of this also. I appreciated the freedom I had to act as I felt needed and because so much improvisation was required, I was relieved that I did not have to scramble to arrange speeches with a partner.
3. I think that two people did very well. the Crisis Award Winner, Brissot, was the most interactive. He stood out mainly because he was the tallest, and paced and circled the delegates while he walked. Also, he wore full-on costumes both days, completed with a feather pen and pre-printed sheets of parchment paper that had French on them. Additionally, he spoke in a British/French accent when speaking but this made it difficult to understand him sometimes. Second, the gavel winner was Herbert and I think he stood out because he knew the most about the topic and was able to use it in committee. His speeches had excellent flow to them despite the fact that we usually only had 3 minutes to pull something together and he included significant context, which many other speeches lacked. Moreover, he proposed many unusual ideas in order to solve problems. Both delegates were the most articulate when sending directives, communicaes, and press releases.
4. I learned a lot this weekend. The historical crisis committees are run completely different so I was able to learn how a crisis committee was run. Also, I learned that MUN can be very interactive and that in crisis committees the Crisis Team actually makes the effort to make everything as real as possible, complete with costumes and food. Furthermore, I learned that it is more important to have context to what your saying. It doesn't matter how good your French accent is if you have no idea what your saying and your solutions are completely irrelevant. I also learned how to come up with solutions that could solve more than one problem at once/alleviate another problem/not create another problem because we often created problems during committee on accident. this conference has made me a much better delegate. I was able to experience a mock trial which i can utilize in the future, and I was also able to interact with chairs from the Surf City Con. who were serving as delegates in my committee. Also, I can focus on having specific solutions written out that are unusual but still effective. I also learned that pleasing the chair is extremely important, especially when they also play a role as one of the delegates.
5. Everything surprised me at this conference. UCLA was completely different from any other conference experience. I had never heard of a committee being "mobbed" and then "evacuated" and I've never had people banging on the doors and yelling French at me while I was giving a speech that I had literally 5 minutes to come up with. I've also never had random "characters" interrupt a caucus or speeches and update the committee on pressing issues. I don't think I have had to move around from room to room or climb up stairs as much as I did in this conference. I had also never been able to "lead a mob" and "hunt down" individuals. In a committee with only 7 delegates, I had never been in such an intense committee where at one point all the rules of diplomacy went out the window, we were all screaming and yelling, and it took the dias several attempts to quiet us down. Finally, I have never been "killed" in committee and then replaced as a completely different person, and I've also never had a chair act as both a chair and a delegate. UCLA was by far the most competitive and interesting conference I have ever been to.
At the UCLA conference, I was mostly very pleased with my performance. I was glad that my partner, Olivia, and I worked so well together. We were able to be the third person on the speakers’ list both times, which gave us a great advantage. Also, we never argued about anything during the conference. Sadly, we weren’t able to make the amount of comments that we wanted to due to the fact that the chair would not call on us for some odd reason. We were also able to get on the good side of everyone in our committee and it seemed like everyone wanted us in their caucus group. In our committee it was a very even playing field where no single delegation stood out. Some that I thought were good are Pakistan and Croatia. Pakistan was a very good speaker and was able to make an abundance of comments, as was the same in Croatia’s case. Something I learned this weekend is that it is very important to get a good seat and make yourself noticed by the chairs during un-moderated caucus. I feel that these are the main two reasons why we didn’t win an award. I was very surprised at the small size of our committee. I was in GA Plenary, which is usually very large, and there were only 30 delegations. One thing that was noticeably different from other conferences is that they had a continuous speakers’ list for both days. This was to our advantage because we were able to be third both days and even got to speak three times, which very few countries were able to do.
1. Many things went well for my partner and me at UCLA. We were able to get high on the speakers list and give two speeches, while most people only gave one. Although it was a large committee, I felt like we got chosen a lot and were able to give many comments. I felt like we were very prepared for our topic. UCLA was a very fun conference.
2. I thought my partner and I worked very well together. We were both able to contribute ideas and participate. Also, we were able to focus in committee and still have fun.
3. I felt like US did the best in our committee. They used interesting techniques in their speeches to stand out. They knew their countries policy very well and were also diplomatic.
4. I learned a lot at the UCLA conference. This was the biggest committee i have ever been in. I was able to learn what its like to be in a large committee and certain ways to stand out.
5. I was surprised how many delegates were able to participate actively in caucus and still be diplomatic. I didn't feel like anyone was overly aggressive and everyone tried to work together.
Many things went well for me at UCLA. First, in the beginning, I was the head of a caucuss group and the chairs noticed that. I also got to speak a lot during caucuss. This contributed to my score because we pretty much caucussed the whole day. My partner also did well during caucuss. We split up so that we could spread our country's policy around the floor faster and more efficeily. I think that our Japan did the best in the committee. I think that they did the best during caucussing because they organized a group of delegates with similar policy's under them and they were in charge of a caucuss group. I think that their power in the committee made them stand out the most. I learned that spreading your country's policy during caucuss is very important because it makes you stand out and look good to the chairs. What surprised me the most about UCLA was how small the committees were. I thought that since this was a college committee, the committees were going to be huge.
1) I think I was very prepared and was able to think on my feet, which allowed me to be very constructive in all my committee's discussions. Unlike other committees, crisis cabinet did not have any speeches, the entire thing was a moderated caucus. Because of of the large amount of speaking time we each had and the constant crisis updates, I had to be constantly involved, even when I wasn't speaking. I also think I was able to represent my position very well, which the Minister of Finance. Unlike the majority of ministers, I proposed several directives (actual actions our cabinet makes) that were solely financial matters, which at the same time related back to the topic at hand.
2) I did not have a partner at this committee. I think in crisis committees, it would be very difficult to have a partner because your stance on the issue is constantly changing as new updates or developments come. This would make it extremely difficult to have unified position during the entire committee.
3) The best in my committee was the Minister of Foreign Relations, a senior from Mira Costa. When it became obvious that some major action had to be taken, he was the first to write a directive about it. This made it seem as if he was the complete authority on all that our cabinet did. Not only was he a good speaker, but he was able to quickly create solutions that seemed well thought out.
4) I learned a lot from this committee. One thing that being in crisis made me realized is how much I slack off during normal committees. In crisis committees I'm forced to be constantly thinking of solutions and what is going to happen next, while in normal committees when someone is giving a speech I'm usually not paying much attention. I think being in crisis committees is a great way to get better overall.
5) One thing that was different was the committee. It was a crisis cabinet so we all held certain positions in the Colombian government and we had to respond to fake crises that occurred either in Venezuela or our own nation. Another thing that was different was that there were only seven delegates and all of them were either juniors or seniors. This, including a handful of really intense people, made this committee difficult but interesting at the same time.
n1. What went well for you at UCLA?
To be completely honest, not much went well this weekend, I mean to start off a certain delegate (I'm not going to say who) was really rude to me and my partner all weekend, then the second day our chairs stopped calling on us. But I guess, if anything went well, it was making new friends (The delegation of France, Alex and Sarah) and having a great partner. In the end, we had fun.
2. What did your partner do well (be positive!). If you did not have a partner, what were the benefits to not having a partner and/or what were the challenges you faced in your committee as a single delegate?
Mike was awesome, he held us together and had my back all weekend. It was cool to have my friend (who's practically like my brother) as my partner. He made this weekend worth it, and he really had our topic down too. He worked really hard this weekend.
3. Who did the best in your committee and what did they do to make them stand out?
It's really hard to say who did the best this weekend because most of the delegates in our committee worked really hard and it was generally equal. But in my opinion China (our best delegate) and Poland (they got an outstanding) didn't show the proper diplomacy throughout the conference. China yelled at Brazil, and Poland yelled at USA, both of whom came from our school.
4. What did you learn this weekend? How can you translate your experience at UCLA to make you a better delegate?
I learned a lot this weekend, like not to let one person bring you down, and to keep your head up and stay poitive, but overall, I learned to not be afraid to speak up just because you feel intimidated. I also learned that some people are a bit too competitive.
5. Did anything surprise you at this conference? If not...how was UCLA different from other conferences you have been to?
Not too many surprises, but it was different because I've only been to one other partner committee and that was a freshman conference last year. This was much more competitive, and a lot more productive I thoght, we always got a lot done during unmoderated caucuses, and we didn't focus on the speakers list very much. Not to mention the setting was very different, obviously.
1. UCLA was a lot less intense than I had expected. After the initial shock of the college classrooms, my partner and I did well. I felt like I knew a lot on the topic and got my ideas known, even though it seemed like people would steal our ideas.
2. My partner, Joohi, did a great job finding an efficient caucus group that actually allowed us to voice our solutions. We had an good system where we would alternate coming up with comments to the various speeches.
3. Our committee seemed fairly equal. The delegate that won was extremely tall, crazy hair, and had a deep voice that got everyones attention. I personally didn't believe they had any great ideas, just the ability to be heard and specific features that made the chairs remember them from the first day. I think their ability to run the caucuses stood out to the chairs.
4. Like Mr. Talman said, you have to get yourself remembered by the chairs. First impressions are extremely crucial so I should probably prepare more for the first speech I give in the future.
5. Nothing was really that surprising about the actual conference, but it was surprising how intelligent our chairs were. The biggest difference I felt was that you had to buy your own lunch, which in some ways was good and some ways rather hectic.
1. To be truthful, I don't think anything for me went well at the UCLA conference. I didn't get to make a lot of comments, but I at least got to make two speeches with my partner and speak a lot during caucus. Also, I got to eat lunch with my sister on Saturday and she gave me pointers for what to do next time at a conference.
2. My partner was really good at making comments and her speeches. However, I feel like we could have worked better together because we were fighting a lot of the time.
3. To be truthful, I think Saudi Arabia did the best. They both knew the topic and they spoke a lot. In addition, they were good at being diplomatic and I really thought they should have gotten best delegate.
4. I learned that I am not very good at partner committees. I feel like my partner and I were not on the same page most of the time and I was not very good at working with a partner. In addition, I think the UCLA conference made me a better delegate by becoming more diplomatic and speaking more during caucus.
5. Nothing really surprised me about the conference because my sister had warned me that it is a really competative conference and not very many people get awards. I thought that the UCLA conference was differenct because if people did not want to speak then the chairs would not say anything. Also, I thought it was the most competative conference I have ever been to.
1. To be truthful, I don't think anything for me went well at the UCLA conference. I didn't get to make a lot of comments, but I at least got to make two speeches with my partner and speak a lot during caucus. Also, I got to eat lunch with my sister on Saturday and she gave me pointers for what to do next time at a conference.
2. My partner was really good at making comments and her speeches. However, I feel like we could have worked better together because we were fighting a lot of the time.
3. To be truthful, I think Saudi Arabia did the best. They both knew the topic and they spoke a lot. In addition, they were good at being diplomatic and I really thought they should have gotten best delegate.
4. I learned that I am not very good at partner committees. I feel like my partner and I were not on the same page most of the time and I was not very good at working with a partner. In addition, I think the UCLA conference made me a better delegate by becoming more diplomatic and speaking more during caucus.
5. Nothing really surprised me about the conference because my sister had warned me that it is a really competative conference and not very many people get awards. I thought that the UCLA conference was differenct because if people did not want to speak then the chairs would not say anything. Also, I thought it was the most competative conference I have ever been to.
1. To be truthful, I don't think anything for me went well at the UCLA conference. I didn't get to make a lot of comments, but I at least got to make two speeches with my partner and speak a lot during caucus. Also, I got to eat lunch with my sister on Saturday and she gave me pointers for what to do next time at a conference.
2. My partner was really good at making comments and her speeches. However, I feel like we could have worked better together because we were fighting a lot of the time.
3. To be truthful, I think Saudi Arabia did the best. They both knew the topic and they spoke a lot. In addition, they were good at being diplomatic and I really thought they should have gotten best delegate.
4. I learned that I am not very good at partner committees. I feel like my partner and I were not on the same page most of the time and I was not very good at working with a partner. In addition, I think the UCLA conference made me a better delegate by becoming more diplomatic and speaking more during caucus.
5. Nothing really surprised me about the conference because my sister had warned me that it is a really competative conference and not very many people get awards. I thought that the UCLA conference was differenct because if people did not want to speak then the chairs would not say anything. Also, I thought it was the most competative conference I have ever been to.
1. What went well for you at UCLA?
I thought both me and my partner Shannon did really well in committee. We gave two speeches and a lot of comments. We both participated alot during caucus.
2. What did your partner do well (be positive!). If you did not have a partner, what were the benefits to not having a partner and/or what were the challenges you faced in your committee as a single delegate?
I thought Shannon did really well during caucuses and she was very diplomatic, which was something our chairs were really looking for. Also she spoke well and gave good comments.
3. Who did the best in your committee and what did they do to make them stand out?
I thought Bangledesh did really well because you could tell they really knew the topics. They gave good speeches and had numerous solutions.
4. What did you learn this weekend? How can you translate your experience at UCLA to make you a better delegate?
I learned to be confident and speak as much as possible. I can take this experience and do what I did at UCLA, and I will do well in future conferences.
5. Did anything surprise you at this conference? If not...how was UCLA different from other conferences you have been to?
I was surprised that the ice cream sandwiches were so delicious. I really enjoyed them.
oh this is sydney lara btw
One of the things that well for us at UCLA was that even though we were technically the Republic of Congo, we talked to the chair, and he let us be the Democratic Republic of Congo, so we didn’t have to change any of our speeches or policies or anything. My partner was Alina Carnihan, and she was really good at giving speeches. I can never make speeches without having at least a note card with stuff written on it, but she got up there once and made a moderated speech without even thinking about what she was going to say first, and she was really good. I thought China was definitely the best. They had all their speeches memorized, pretty much led the caucus, was always raising their placard to comment or make speeches, and always had something different to say. I learned that it’s really important to stay on your policy. Several people went off policy, like UK, France, and Croatia. And during formal caucus, they pretty much got ripped to shreds by everyone else. Something that surprised me was how many crises we had. I think I counted around 8. Something that was different was that we started world war three, which I’ve never done in any other conference.
1). I felt that a lot of things went well for my partner and I. We were able to get our points across, we made good speeches speeches and comments without using too many notes, and I summed up the courage to call out 2 delegations for being WAY off policy.
2). My partner, Elizabeth, was really prepared and was constantly taking notes to make comments. This paid off because we were accidentaly called on for three comments in a row. She also kept me in line throughout committee. However, I think from now on I'm going to stick with single delegate committees because I don't want to stress out about my partner not coming to committee or something like that.
3). The countries that did the best in my committee were the US and China. The US knew everyone's policies and were excellent at putting up roadblocks and coming up with good, viable solutions. They totally reminded me of Mr. Meyers at the roasts. The delegation from China was made up of two seniors from Huntington. They used no notes in thire speeches and could speak for ten minutes on different things without repeating a single idea. They both knew what they were doing and it showed. None of the delegates (except us, of course) were diplomatic for the entire period of committee, and I didn't think that it made sense that one of the countries who was off policy could get one of the two awards.
4). I learned that Security Council is the single best committee to be placed into if you want to learn anything. It is basically a crash course in "How to Dominate MUN." I also learned that it is OK to not be totally diplomatic in the way that if someone is off policy or they take your idea as their own, you should definitely call them out on it. I am getting a lot better at causuing and making comments (I even got an extended metaphor in one that was used throughout the rest of committee), and I am improving at speeches again. I think that Security Council was the hardest committee other than the crisis ones, and I'm defittely doing it again if I have the choice.
5). It suprised me that we didn't even get to our second topic because we had a huge crisis the whole last day of committee. The quality and depth of the crisis suprised me, too, because I was expecting something hastily thrown together, but it was well-thought-out and realistic. My chair also suprised me. He is an ROTC cadet, so I was really scared that he would be really strict and mean, but he was really nice, but still formal and knowledgeable on the topics and procedures. Some of the procedures also suprised me, because it was the first time we hadn't done formal caucus, and there were other such things, too. UCLA was the best run conference I've been to so far, and I hope that all the college conferences will continue to be as good as the ones I've been to so far.
1. What went well for you at UCLA? Not too much went very well. We did come up with a couple of good solutions, but often, we were not associated with them because we were a small country. Therefore, we did not really get any credit for our well thought out plans. I felt that I was maybe not as prepared as I could have been, but I was still able to learn a lot from other delegates and help formulate solutions.
2. What did your partner do well (be positive!). If you did not have a partner, what were the benefits to not having a partner and/or what were the challenges you faced in your committee as a single delegate? My partner got a pretty high score on the position paper and gave some dominant comments.
3. Who did the best in your committee and what did they do to make them stand out? The United Kingdom was far better than everyone else in the committee. They were able to identify many specific NGOs and organs of the United Nations that could become involved in the topic. It appeared as if the really researched the topic because they came up with specific solutions. They were also very polite and caused many other countries to support them.
4. What did you learn this weekend? How can you translate your experience at UCLA to make you a better delegate? I learned that at conferences, especially advanced ones, you have to really no your topic. It is impossible to win an award by just recommending the usual solution like “international cooperation” and “implementation of UN documents.” I also learned a lot about the global market and world economy as I was in the Economic and Social Council.
5. Did anything surprise you at this conference? If not...how was UCLA different from other conferences you have been to? Nothing really surprised me except the quality of the campus and Westwood. UCLA was different form other conferences because the delegates were very well informed about their topics and the chairs were very fair and unbiased. Also, there were so many different choices for food and we had a whole hour and a half to eat lunch.
1. What went well for you at UCLA?
Well the overall setup and organization of our committee was awsome. Also, Dane and I did really well in cacus and came up with good solutions.
2. What did your partner do well (be positive!). If you did not have a partner, what were the benefits to not having a partner and/or what were the challenges you faced in your committee as a single delegate?
Dane did excellent during cacus. Furthermore, Dane was very good at recruiting people to join our cacus group and help come up with solutions.
3. Who did the best in your committee and what did they do to make them stand out?
The UK did the best in my committee. The delegates representing the UK knew everything to the core including the topic, thier policy, and solutions. Also, they were had great leadership in regards to getting people to join them during cacus.
4. What did you learn this weekend? How can you translate your experience at UCLA to make you a better delegate?
I learned that you have to be a leader and not be passive during any point and time in committee. If you can persuade others to join you and esentially work for you in cacus than your on the right track.
5. Did anything surprise you at this conference? If not...how was UCLA different from other conferences you have been to?
What was surprising about this conference is the organiztion of it and the totally different room setup was amazing.
I feel that our speeches and comments went relatively well at UCLA. However, in our first speech we ran out of time and so I stumbled at the end.Also, the lunch went very well at UCLA. On Saturday, I had Chipotle and Sunday I had pizza. My partner made great comments and caucused really well. I feel we made a really good team in commitee. The United States were the best in my committee. They stood out by doing everything well. In their speeches, they were able to present good solutions and make their selves noticeable in the committee. When they made comments, they made very good points regarding other delegates’ solutions. During caucusing, they created resolutions that were different than the others. I learned this weekend that to do well you have to be the leader of your caucus and you have to have feasible solutions. After this conference, I will be better at caucusing and think of more solutions that are very effective. I will also be a better delegate in the aspects of speeches and comments. The level of competition really surprised me at the UCLA conference. Before coming to committee, I thought everyone would be really good at every aspect of mun. However, I found that I was almost at the same level as everyone else. The delegates that won were not significantly better than my partner and I. In addition, I was surprised that Bangladesh won considering how they were not very good speakers and sometimes would finish speeches in the middle of a sentence.
1. The delegates from the committee i was in were very diplomatic, there was no yelling, severe arguing, stealing of ideas and etc. The chairs new what they were doing and kept the committee fairly orderly.
2. Arte could lift the plackard up very quickly.
3. I believe the delegate from China was the best in our committee, he knew alot of alternative resolutions, and had several back-up plans. He also knew much of the other countries policies.
4. I learned that the chairs may often times overlook you, and that one should go into caucus with extreme vigour.
5. The orderliness of it all.
-Sean, Johnson
At UCLA, the best thing that went for me were the 8 concise speeches my partner and I were able to formulate with little time and deliver effectively.
2. My partner [Dana] was exceptional at making comments, in regard to relating them to our main solutions and pointing out weaknesses/differences in the other solutions proposed by different delegations. She was also very good at coming up with speeches on the spot, and even some analogies that our chairs forced us to come up with to making committee more "interesting".
3. The person who did the best job in our committee was the UK, who ended up receiving the gavel. I thought they were both diplomatic and essential in formulating the resolutions that were passsed in committee. Also, the male delegation of UK was exceptional at making relevant analogies to EU, when everyone was forced to do so by the chair.
4. I learnt that I should really try and research more about related organizations, which I thought my partner I had a lack of in committee. One of our solutions that we proposed got knocked down because there was a simliar body that we were unaware of. I also think I should try and speak more than once in moderated caucaus.
5. The most surpising thing about UCLA for me was the dissapointment I had in conference. I thought for the length of the conference, three topics should have been assigned to avoid the constant repitition in my committee. As for how UCLA differed from the rest of the conference I've attended, I felt there were an extraneous amount of moderated caucaus that the chair "smiled upon" frequently. I think the reason for this was to for him to get a better understanding of which delegations knew their topic thoroughly enough to formulate mini-speeches ann defend their solutions or working papers.
1. What went well for you at UCLA?
At UCLA, not much went right for us. We were near the bottom of the speakers list, and were rarely called upon. But, it wasn't all bad, as a country sitting near us wasn't picked on all day sunday.
2. What did your partner do well (be positive!). If you did not have a partner, what were the benefits to not having a partner and/or what were the challenges you faced in your committee as a single delegate?
Greg did very well as a partner, as while I was writing a speech he would be listening for comments, or vice versa. He also did fairly well in caucus which surprised me, as people had told me he wasn't that strong of a delegate.
3. Who did the best in your committee and what did they do to make them stand out?
The UK did the best in our committee, as he was very knowledgeable about the topics, and spoke in a strong voice, yet was still very diplomatic. He also had to balance having a much weaker partner, and he still gaveled.
4. What did you learn this weekend? How can you translate your experience at UCLA to make you a better delegate?
This weekend I realized that experience is key in MUN, and the more experience you have, the better you can manipulate your way to an award. Knowing that experience doesn't magically come to anyone, I tried to observe the more experinced delegates in their methods to try to learn from them.
5. Did anything surprise you at this conference? If not...how was UCLA different from other conferences you have been to?
This conference did not surprise me, as I expected to be overwhelmed by the juniors and seniors, but it was different in that there were people talking about the University itself, instead of just the conference.
Cindy and I had the chance to speak several times, and no one was really rude in committee. We were 3rd on the speakers' list in the 1st topic, and we received positive comments for our solutions. The conference overall ran smoothly. Cindy was better in our 2nd topic and I was better in the 1st, so we both had our strong points. UK did best in our committee because she organized and wrote the resolution, and both partners were clear in their policy and solutions and very considerate of other delegates. I can probably improve in caucus by passing notes during speeches to get a general idea of other country policies, and pay more attention to the relevant ideas of moderated caucus. The conference was different from other conferences because general and substantive debate were not distinguished, and wording of procedures were slightly different. Also, there were a lot of moderated caucuses, though none were allowed to exhaust the speakers list. The chairs seemed to also only write down the amount of participation in moderated caucus, speeches, etc., though they listened to the quality of speeches without writing down a score. Diplomacy was also a very large role, and that was a main reason why the UK received the gavel.
1.
The first day we had different ideas and stood out more. We controlled our caucus group for the most part. We were very prepared for our speeches, but were near the end on the list. Thus, our speech didn't sound as grand.
2.
She delivered comments well and caucused well. She also went up and spoke for our resolution and explained thoroughly.
3.
I thought UK did the best. They delivered speeches well together and controlled caucuses. They also had original ideas that no one heard of that made them special.
4.
I learned that people who deliver speeches with the most original ideas tend to stand out the most. I also learned that it is best to formulate a group in the first couple caucuses because most groups won't listen to your ideas if you wait too long. I will use the knowledge I gained at UCLA to make me a better delegate. I will find specific and original solutions beforehand. This will help me in caucus and stand out during my speeches.
5.
I was surprised that the chair lost like all of our placards so we had to make our own. I was also surprised that they were actually taking points because I thought it was all based on impression. However, they just took the highest scorers and judged from there. UCLA was also much better than Davis in my opinion. It was much more organized and quicker. Other conferences aren't as advanced. The people in our committee were all so good, I could not even distinguish who was better until the second day.
I feel that our speeches and comments went relatively well at UCLA. However, in our first speech we ran out of time and so I stumbled at the end. Also, the lunch went very well at UCLA. On Saturday, I had Chipotle and Sunday I had pizza. My partner made great comments and caucused really well. He was also able to create good solutions that we used in our resolution. I feel that we made a very great team together. The United States were the best in my committee. They stood out by doing everything well. In their speeches, they were able to present good solutions and make their selves noticeable in the committee. When they made comments, they made very good points regarding other delegates’ solutions. During caucusing, they created resolutions that were different than the others. I learned this weekend that to do well you have to be the leader of your caucus and you have to have feasible solutions. I also learned that it is better to make less speeches that are great rather than many speeches that are average. After this conference, I will be better at caucusing and think of more solutions that are very effective. I will also be a better delegate in the aspects of speeches and comments. The level of competition really surprised me at the UCLA conference. Before coming to committee, I thought everyone would be really good at every aspect of mun. However, I found that I was almost at the same level as everyone else. The delegates that won were not significantly better than my partner and I. In addition, I was surprised that Bangladesh won considering how they were not very good speakers and sometimes would finish speeches in the middle of a sentence. Overall, I thought the UCLA conference went well despite not winning an award.
1. At UCLA I really enjoyed the lunches. I guess the moderated cacuses went well too.
2. Shannon Fitzsimmons was really good at making speeches and comments.
3. I think Cuba did the best because they found unique solutions so their speeches and commments weren't boring.
4. This weekend I learned that sometimes chairs may like seem to be fair but you need to be patient. I will remember that for other conferences.
5. How much we had to walk uphill surprised me as well as getting an 18/20 on one of the position papers that we turned in. I can't wait until High Tech High.
1. What went well for you at UCLA?
I learned many new things and saw what it's like to be in a more advanced and competitive committee.
2. What did your partner do well (be positive!). If you did not have a partner, what were the benefits to not having a partner and/or what were the challenges you faced in your committee as a single delegate?
My partner spoke a lot and gave directions well. He also gave it his best throughout the whole conference.
3. Who did the best in your committee and what did they do to make them stand out?
I honestly did not see anybody standing out.
4. What did you learn this weekend? How can you translate your experience at UCLA to make you a better delegate?
I learned that in some cases, it does not matter how much you speak, but it is about the quality of what you say that counts. This will help me in the future
5. Did anything surprise you at this conference? If not...how was UCLA different from other conferences you have been to?
Yes, in previous conferences, the winners would be the people who spoke the most. In this one however, it was about who had the most qualitative speeches and comments in my opinion.
1. What went well for you at UCLA?
The UCLA conference was one to remember. I really felt that although I did not win an award, I still came out of that conference with a lot. It was a great experience for me and I feel that I'll get an award next conference.
2. What did your partner do well (be positive!)?
Danny was a great partner and one that I want to work with in the future. Danny and I kept each other extremely involved in committee and was excellent in speaking.
3. Who did the best in your committee and what did they do to make them stand out?
The United Kingdom did the best in my committee. They both did well delivering speeches and in caucus groups. They were also very diplomatic and had great solutions that stood out to the entire committee.
4. What did you learn this weekend? How can you translate your experience at UCLA to make you a better delegate?
I learned a great deal this weekend and it will help me in future conferences. One thing I learned us that when you have a partner, one of you should take control of the caucus group while the other one recruits sponsors and earns caucus points. It is also important to have original and unique but effective solutions.
5. Did anything surprise you at this conference? If not...how was UCLA different from other conferences you have been to?
I was not particularly surprised by anything. The conference was well organized and a little overwhelming due to the more experienced Juniors and Seniors. However, UCLA was different from most conferences in that it is on an amazing campus and had much more competition.
1. Not much wentt well for Faris and I at UCLA. We rose our plackerd the entire time and was called on a couple times. We started out being basically last on the speakers list, but tried our hardest and ended up not doing that bad. It was fun. haha.
2. Faris...Faris...Faris... hahaha. He was a great partner. As I was writing part of my speech he would take notes and attempt to make a comment. (Our chance of getting called on was very slim). He was fairly good in unmoderated caucus. And is a great partner to have overall. I would not mind being partners with Faris again, because we know how eachother work. And I believe we were a very succesful team.
3. After reviewing all of the delegates... the United Kingdom was by far the most dominate country in 4th SPD. He was always talking (but not yelling over anyone) and knew the policy of his country VERY well. He was a great speaker and very intelligent.
4. At UCLA I learned to be more dominate in unmoderated caucus. Because normally I just let people walk all over me in unmoderated caucus, but now I have learned to take control of the group and make it YOUR caucus group. Like when they ask what group your in... You can say "Oh thats MY group.."
5. Yes this confrence suprised me, because it was SOOOO unorganized. First of all, opening ceromonies were held while we were all standing up. Then we come to committee and three fourths of the people in 4th SPD don't even have their plackerds or credentials. It was baddd. Then at the begining of the second day, our chair "lost" almost every single countries plackerds (this is after they found them the previous day). So everyone is raising a plackerd that says there country on a piece of random paper that is highlighted with Sharpies and highlighters. To make them stand out and get picked on easier. The funny thing was... THEY DID GET PICKED ON MORE OFTEN. It was baddd. Me and Faris were blown away. haha...
What went well for me at UCLA was that I got to meet interesting people in committee and play street fighter 4 in the arcade they had on campus. My partner made virtually all of the comments and always seemed to have something to say about other people's speeches when I couldn't think of anything. The people representing Microsoft did the best by speaking a lot and having a presence all over the committee. At UCLA I reaffirmed my thought that I despise small committees and partner conferences. I can use this knowledge to try and avoid these types of committees so that I can do better int he future. What surprised me at UCLA was the weird structure of my committee. WEF is a lot different from anything else that I've ever done, but pretty entertaining nonetheless. Towards the end of the conference we had a "mixer" where we basically just talked about random crap and drank apple cider.
1. Well, since my committee only had 8 delegates, I was able to speak a lot and get my opinion and policy heard.
2. I did not have a partner as I was in the south american crisis committee #2. The biggest challenge I faced in the committee without a partner was that there were times when getting support for a certain idea, action or communique was difficult and it would have probably been easier had I had a partner to help me gain support.
3. In my opinion, the President and the Minister of Foreign Affairs knew the most, only because they were very assertive and wouldn't let others talk during caucus and had previous knowledge of crisis committees and the procedures. To my surprise, the people who won awards were the Minister of the Interior, who was constantly talking about her personal life and the "awesomeness" of her school, and the Vice President, who was constantly off policy and extremely undiplomatic.
4. From this weekend, I learned that at college conferences it is almost impossible to know who is going to win an award and that the chairs don't really care about who wins and the awards. To better myself, I believe that next time I need to be more noticeable, annoying and figure out what the chairs are looking for.
5. I was surprised by who won, as I didn't even think that they compared to me, the President or the Minister of Foreign Affairs. UCLA was only different in comparison to other conferences in that the chairs apparently don't realize how off policy some people are and that they don't really care about the committee, as the director was constantly on her laptop, laughing at whatever was on it.
1. What went well for you at UCLA?
At UCLA, many things went well. First, my partner Kristine and I were very prepared and were confident which made our performance at the conference better. In all of our speeches, we did not bring up any notes or papers, which we were nervous about it but it turned out to be amazing! We also made brochures that explained our solutions. I made a poster saying “Go Green” and we used it in our last speech and the chairs wanted to keep it. The food in Westwood Village was also amazing.
2. What did your partner do well (be positive!). If you did not have a partner, what were the benefits to not having a partner and/or what were the challenges you faced in your committee as a single delegate?
My partner Kristine was absolutely incredible!!! It was good because she is one of my best friends and we worked very well together while still enjoying ourselves. She was my emotional backbone for that weekend because I was running off no sleep from FV week and pretty much 4 cups of coffee, which probably was not the smartest idea.
3. Who did the best in your committee and what did they do to make them stand out?
Personally, I believe the Japan did the best in my committee. They both knew the topic inside and out but I caucused with one of the delegates and she would not let anyone talk! So I went to another group.
4. What did you learn this weekend? How can you translate your experience at UCLA to make you a better delegate?
This weekend I learned that I can make speeches without note cards as my security blanket, and my body cannot function after being awake for 46 hours. UCLA was a great conference because it challenged me. There were many great and advanced delegates, which made me work harder and grow as a MUNer.
5. Did anything surprise you at this conference? If not...how was UCLA different from other conferences you have been to?
The thing that surprised me the most was the committee I was in only consisted of 28 delegates. Kristine and I thought that there were going to be 50 or 60 so we made twice as many brochures.
1. I feel that my partner Katie and I were very prepared and practiced for this conference, which helped us out a lot. Also, we sat towards the front and raised our placard almost every time for comments, allowing us to be chosen frequently.
2. My partner Katie and I worked well together because throughout the entire conference we were both working hard and not wasting time. If I was writing our resolution, Katie was lobbying or taking notes on speeches and making comments, and vice versa. For this conference I felt that having a partner increased our confidence and showed us what our potential was as delegates.
3. I truly feel that the gavel winner, China, was the best in our committee. Their speaking skills were excellent and they didn’t rely on notes. Since we worked with them in our caucus group, I found that they were very nice, honest, and diplomatic delegates who deserved the gavel.
4. This weekend I learned to not be intimidated by a difficult committee. I felt that my last committee at Edison was very advanced, and I was extremely intimidated by it. However at this conference I was determined to make as many comments as I could. I also learned more about moderated caucuses and that it’s a good idea to motion for them so you can be the first speaker.
5. This conference surprised me because the chairs didn’t write down scores for every single comment and speech like they usually do. It was much more competitive than other conferences I have been to.
1. I think that this conference was by far the most interesting. I had some very interesting and funny chairs. As for what went well for me was the ability to adapt and suggest ideas that were very unique and interesting. We were one of the few countries that stayed true to our policies throughout the whole length committee. Everyone in the committee knew who Yemen was and what we stood for. Also we won the support of the USA early in the committee so we did have more influence than a small country like Yemen would have had alone.
2. My partner was very well informed so it was nice to be able to completely trust that he was doing and saying the right thing, in the past I have had partners who were off policy. I think that having a partner who was on the same page made everything we did just that much more effective.
3. I believe that USA was the best country in our committee because of their very unique ideas and their abilities to convince other countries to take a closer look at their own solutions. They preformed well in caucus and delivered speeches that were both relevant and humorous.
4. At UCLA I learned that as long as you stay on policy it doesn’t matter if you don’t have many other countries on your side, you only need 2 countries to create a resolution and share your ideas. In the future I won’t be concerned about pleasing other countries; I will commit myself to creating solutions that are both unique and a valid part of my policy.
5. UCLA surprised me in the overall quality of the conference. In my opinion it was one of the smoothest flowing conferences I have every attended. That in addition to the muffins and coffee available during the opening ceremonies created a conference that was overall very enjoyable.
A lot of things went well for me and my partner at UCLA. Me and Jenn were able to make a lot of comments and found good caucus groups that woud let us voice our opinions and let us go up during formal caucus. Jenn was a really good partner. She had many unique solutions and was ready to make good comments. Nobody really did the best in our committee. I thought mostly everyone who tried was equal in asking comments and speeches.I think China got gavel becase of the delegate’s ability to memorize all of his speeches and comments. They also had a very different policy so they stood out during caucusing which really helped them get the gavel. I learned this weekend that you really have to stand out to win an award. Me and Jenn made the same number of comments and speeches as many of the other delegates who won an award but unfortunetly the chair didn’t remember us. Next time, I will try to stand out more by memorizing my speeches and preparing handouts or visuals. UCLA was definetly not as intense as I thought it was going to be. Something that surprised me at UCLA was how well informed our chair was of MUN, and his willingness to give us advice. We spent 30 minutes the first day asking questions about UCLA and college life. I learned a lot about colege and MUN from this conference and I am reay glad I went.
1. What went well for you at UCLA?
At UCLA I was able to have good caucus groups that resulted in good resolution groups. I was capable of having good conversations with other countries.
2. What did your partner do well (be positive!). If you did not have a partner, what were the benefits to not having a partner and/or what were the challenges you faced in your committee as a single delegate?
My partner and I were good at communicating which countries would be good to form a resolution group with. We worked as a team during caucuses and split up on two different sides of the room. So, we were able to communicate with more countries.
3. Who did the best in your committee and what did they do to make them stand out?
I believe that China did the best in our committee, because both delegates representing China knew a lot of information on the topics and spoke with good eye contact. They also, had unique solutions that were well advocated during committee.
4. What did you learn this weekend? How can you translate your experience at UCLA to make you a better delegate?
During UCLA I learned that even though the chairs don't call on you, you can still speak in committee by motioning for different moderated caucuses. Also, you should take control of your resolution group and make sure your countries opinions are advocated.
5. Did anything surprise you at this conference? If not...how was UCLA different from other conferences you have been to?
I was surprised by how the chairs were kind of laid back, and how they were very easy to talk to. This conference was more intense than the other one's mainly because their was so many delegates.
1. I'm happy to say that i've improved much through the UCLA conference. My speeches, although not pre-written, included indepth and strong solutions and i felt that i had my audience's attention. This was first conference of sophmore year that I felt that i was completely invovled in the writing of my caucus group's resolution...i wrote a total of 8 operatives during the conference and i represented my represented my reslolution both times.
2. I believe my partner ABBY was phenomonal. I loved that we both had different strengths in MUN. She also always remained active in committee. For example, if i was writing operatives for our resolution, she would either be lobbying or making comments on other speeches. I also felt that she was incredibly knowledgable on our topics especially sustainable development.
3. I believed the UK was the best and deserved the gavel. As seniors, they showed their experience with their detailed solutions and quality comments.
4. I learned that it doesn't matter how many times you speak or comment; what matters is quality. My chair told us near the end that he was going to give awards based on the quality of our comments and not the points or scores he had taken. Thus, i'm a little disappointed because i think what costed me an award was maybe the quality of my comments- which i initially thought were credible :(
5. What suprised me was that on both days, they advertised about their university...i would think they have enough people already applying! :] but i found it helpful that they had their tour guides answer any questions we had about the registration process and ucla in general. I also loved the hour and 1/2 lunch! Just FYI, the cookie place (diddy reese? idk what its called) Mr. Tallman was talking about is amazing!!
1. me and leah were both really nervous that the conference would be very difficult which helped us because it made us prepare very hard. me and leah knew a lot on our topic, which allowed us to speak confidently on issues brought up and the questions other delegates asked us. we also were extremely excited that we won an outstanding, which made us feel as though our preparation was worth the time and effort.
2. Me and Leah were really good at being partners. If i was not ready to give a comment she would have one and visa versa. We both felt comfortable giving speeches together and also we able to caucus separately and stand out.
3. China got best delegate in our committee. our two pairs were very well matched but they seemed to stand out more. they were able to give good speeches without relying on any notes. for the first resolution we were in their caucus group and they were able to get their ideas across without talking over people. they deserved the best delegate because they were knowledgeable and fair delegates.
4.We learned that we should not be intimidated by larger conferences mainly consisting of juniors and seniors. I also learned that i work better with a partner because it makes me more confident.
5. I was surprised how well we did, and i was very proud of me ad Leah getting an award. especially leah cause shes AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hello Everyone, It is Alexandria! To start off I was extremely well researched on my topics, I had wonderful solutions to my topics, there were numerous countries with very similar policies to mine and I had a great seat in committee and was able to get called on a lot by the chairs. I also had the advantage of the topics being ordered in my favor. I did not have a partner in my committee, but I thought I did fine without one. What I enjoyed about not having a partner was the freedom to give as many speeches as I could and not having to rely on a partner to write their speeches in correspondence to mine or turn in a position paper to their chair or making a comment against our policy. (Although when I had Danie as a partner at the Santa Margarita Conference she was an outstanding partner.) In addition I really appreciated and benefited from the independence of not having a partner. One specific challenge I faced though, was while other delegates could have their partner go outside to work on resolutions I had to stay inside because I didn’t have a partner which I did not realize as an issue prior to the conference. In the same manner I thought I did a fantastic job in committee, however, I thought Croatia and Japan by far did the best in our committee because they got called on to speak countless times, gave great speeches as a team and had solid solutions that would work if put into action by all countries. I must also commend all my fellow Edison delegates in my committee. All of you did fantastic. Yay! Go Chargers! In the same manner I learned so much at this conference. First of all never opt to be a single delegate in a partner committee. In addition, I learned that if your in a big committee it is essential that you are first on the speakers list so that you make sure you’re heard, know specifically who you want to caucus with because it makes things so much easier and do your best. I learned perseverance is key and how I can improve my caucus skills by having solid, step-by-step solutions that everyone agrees on. Overall I learned many ways to improve myself as a delegate in every aspect from caucusing to making sure your clothes stand out and had a lot of fun at the UCLA conference. It was a more exciting, competitive and a completely new experience and I look forward to countless others in the future.
1) Well, i thought that lunch went very well both days because we had an hour and a half to go and pick our own lunch. Also, me and my partner had very good solutions that our caucus group liked.
2)My partner Rachel did very well in caucusing and was able to voice our ideas clearly. Also, she did well presenting our resolution for one of our topics.
3) The best delegates were very well researched and knew everything about the topic. In addition, they were called on a lot so they could give comments and speeches more often.
4) I learned that it is important to pick a good spot where the chairs can see you, especially when it is a large committee, like General Assembly.
5) I was not surprised by anything at UCLA. However, UCLA was different than other conferences because there was more people in my committee, a lot of them were seniors, and the delegates were more intense than usual.
Speeches, caucusing, and resolutions all went well for me. My partner was great at caucusing and resolution making. He was also very good at knowing all the policies of all countries. I thought Chad did the best, because they were the only country not off policy, though they didn't stand out. I learned that knowing a lot of facts can help you dominate all the other delegates. (especially statistics) This can help me in future conferences. What surprised me was the seats. They were extremely small and the rows were tight. The only thing really different was the microphone.
1. I knew the topics really well and had solutions no one else in the committee had. Also, i got a really good grade on my position paper. I learned I can speak off the top of my head when giving comments which helps portray that i know the topic better.
2. Karli and I made almost 1/4 of our position papers and we worked well together.
3. China was the best as they stayed on policy the entire tme and they spoke with confidence helping them attract other countries to work alongside them.
4. I need to learn how to give comments more efficiently by taking notes constantly. Also, to be more pushy in making sure I go up to speak for the resolutions because after me and karli wrote a lot of the position paper there were 8 countries in our group so we ended up not being about the talk about the resolution.
5. I was suprised at how me and karli worked really hard but our whole committee were fighting to be the best. This made it really hard to get recognized in committee.
1. I felt that I gave good speeches and comments, and held my own in some pretty huge caucuses.
2. Ally was awesome. She caucused really really well; and I noticed that she gives speeches as though she's explaining a concept to someone, which made people actually wake up and pay attention. She also understood the first topic well (unlike me!) and figured out most of our policy for that.
3. The UK was definitely the best--they established themselves as the best delegation without breaking a sweat. They knew just about everything on each topic and worked well as partners, each working on different tasks.
4. I learned that you can ask for speaking time outside of the speaker's list and be given it at the chair's discretion. You just have to seem to have something important/controversial to say, and the chair will entertain it.
5. I was surprised how much they talked about UCLA admissions & college life--it's not what I came to the conference for and it seemed unnecessary.
My partner, Monica Stainer, and I worked really well together and I felt that we were very prepared. We both understood the topics and came up with unique solutions. Also at this conference we didn’t use notes in any of our speeches. I was really proud that we were able to do this because we were the only delegates in our committee who did so. WE also came prepared with posters and brochures to make our speeches more interesting. The chairs liked our poster so much that they asked to keep it. Monica was an amazing partner!! Especially considering that she hadn’t slept more than 4 hours in the previous two days. I was very proud of her because she was still able to memorize all of our speeches and have a great attitude about everything. I think that Japan did the best, and they deserved to get the gavel. They knew their country’s policy inside and out, and they delivered very good speeches. They also lead all of their resolution groups and always had great solutions. I learned that I am able to make speeches without any notes. I had been so afraid to give speeches without notes in the past, but I took a risk at this conference and it paid off! I also learned that the more unique solutions you can come up with the better. At this conference, the chairs gave awards based on the quality not the quantity of speeches. So some of the delegates who got awards barely ever talked but when they did they gave excellent speeches.
I think that for the most part everything went well for my partner and me with the exception of the frequency that we were called on. I thought that we got our fair share of speaking time and we voiced our opinions during the unmoderated caucus. I also thought that we were able to contribute some of our ideas to the resolution groups that we were a part of. My partner did a very good job at making comments and doing speeches. I think that Britney was a very good partner even if we did not win an award. Additionally, I think that if we were partnered up again, I think we could win an award. I think that Japan was the best in our committee. They were very prepared and they had laminated plans that their country created, which kind of took me by surprise. I also think that they did well at speeches as well as caucusing because of their plans. I learned that it is really important not to raise your placard all the time because eventually they get used to you and their eyes will skip right over you, and they have an annoying ability to do that right when you have something good to say. I think that I need to be more vocal and not rely on reading from a piece of paper so much as making my speech up as I go along. Also, I need to not get so bitter about the chairs not necessarily being fair to you because I think they can sense it and they eventually end up not liking you at all, which does not help. I was surprised at the room I was in… I felt like I was in a courtroom or something with the walls all covered in wood and whatnot. There was also this one guy in our committee and I forget what country he was from, but he was really weird in a very creepy way. I just didn’t like to be anywhere near him. He sat in the back with like a mock eye patch on and whenever he caucused he would make these really radical statements that didn’t really relate to the subject. I was also surprised at the fact that we got to use a microphone because the room was so big. I was pretty intimidated by that fact and did not particularly enjoy using the microphone. Finally, I was surprised at how small my committee was because General Assembly is usually pretty massive, but not at this conference. UCLA also did not provide lunch which was fine with me because we got to go to lunch for an hour and a half. I just am so happy for bringing extra shoes for lunch! :)
I enjoyed the UCLA conference. My partner, Kristine, and I made very moving speeches. I also lead my caucus group and went up to explain the resolution. My partner helped by preparing material to speak about and lobbied our ideas and policies during caucus groups. I felt that there were many people who did very well in our committee and many people who refused to even make one speech, however, I do not believe that one person specifically stood out from the rest. I feel that the people who did well were leaders in their caucus groups and earned people's friendships, which allowed them to take the lead in the committee. I learned that by being positive in caucus groups and by speaking loudly and clearly, you can more easily win over your chairs. I have also learned that it can be beneficial to send notes to the delegates who do not ever speak and ask them to yield some of their speaking time to yourself. I was surprised that about 80% of the time in committee was dedicated to unmoderated caucus' and the several interruptions for information about the UCLA campus and admissions.
The thing that went well for me at UCLA was meeting new people in my committee. My partner Sara Koppes was extremely good at caucuses both moderated and unmoderated. She was well prepared and always on task. J China did the best in our committee and won best delegate. They knew their stuff without looking to any papers and knew how to win people over in caucus. I learned at this conference that I like MUN more than I thought I did and that I need to be more assertive in caucusing to get the other delegates respect. UCLA was different than other conferences I have gone to because it was held at a college, the chairs were more professional, and the other delegates were a lot older then me.
1. I thought the UCLA conference went really well (except for the fact that we didn't get an award). I worked really well with my partner and we were able to be the main writers and leaders of our caucus groups. We were third on the speaker's list for both topics and many people liked and remembered what we said in our speeches because we made up acronyms and plans that were easy to remember.
2. I had a lot of fun and worked very well with my partner Meghan. She was very helpful and asked a lot of questions during formal caucus. She also went outside and wrote the whole resolution while i was inside making comments.
3. There wasn't one specific delegate in committee who stood out above all the rest, but a few that I thought did well were Croatia, Japan, Pakistan, and Greece. They all spoke frequently and with confidence and took control of their caucus groups during unmoderated caucus, which got them noticed by the chairs.
4. At UCLA i noticed that standing out to the chairs is veryy important. It is best to get a seat right in the front middle so the chairs cans see you and call on you to speak a lot. Also it is important to be noticed during unmoderated caucus by questioning and discussing actively so that the chair can see that you are contributing.
5. I was surprised at how small my committee was. I was in General Assembly and I expected there to be a ton of countries, but there were only about thirty. Welll it was veryy different from any other conference I've been to since it was my first conference this year and my first two day conference. Having two days really changed the conference because there were a lot more discussions and unmoderated caucuses. It took sooo long on the first day to even find a resolution group because everyone kept switching and merging and leaving caucus groups and stuff. Overall, I thought the conference was actually almost kinda fun.........just a little on the long side
Some of the good things that went well at UCLA was that Alina and I managed to go third on the speaker's list on the first day. Some people who were near the bottom of it didn't get to speak so we were glad. Also, most other delegates were diplomatic and nice. The UK, who won best delegate, were also very diplomatic and not overly controlling or fighting to speak.
Alina did very good such as talking in caucus even if the other people were trying to talk over her.
The UK did the best in committee. They knew both topics very well so it allowed them to talk about their opinions on all solutions, they were also the caucus leaders, they were diplomatic while leading a caucus, and they also had their placard up at every chance possible to speak.
At UCLA I learned that comments for speeches should be about opinions on the speech and not putting in your own solutions.
I was surprised that it wasn't as scary as I had imagined. It was different because they talked to us for a long time about admissions and college life.
i was able to talk alot and i over all had a good time
well... he did pretty good. he was goog in caucuses but other than than that he didnt speak much
the people that did really well in our commitee were the people that ran every caucus group and the only reason y i didnt really do well is none of these people would let me talk in caucus
i learned i gota be more forceful in committee. people arent all nice like mrs. patch (sorry had to do it)
It suprised me how many edison people there were in my committee and that most of them were REALLY good. other than that i was expecting pretty much everything else
(I am really sorry I posted this so late; apparently I wasn't logged in when I tried to post on Monday, so it didn't actually post)
The UCLA conference conjured up mixed emotions for me. The conference itself was rather difficult, because it was sooooooooo huge! To be honest, it got really boring…The upperclassmen at this conference were rather scary, in comparison to upperclassmen at the previous two conferences. Also, my partner and I kept fighting for ridiculous reasons, so that made it pretty terrible. I’m surprisingly not as disappointed that we did not get an award, because I felt that we put up a pretty good fight anyways. I’m proud of how I did, that is to say. The BEST part was hanging out with Brianda and Abby on the bus rides, and during lunch. Which brings me to the point that lunchtime was AWESOME, because it was so long, and we got to go off campus to this amazing cookie store! I liked the free time. The. Absolute. Worst. Part. Was having to climb 3 flights of stairs to get to my conference room, and that was especially horrible with my medical condition…And somehow, their elevator was insane, and could “only go down”…however that would work… I also did not like the desks, because they were cramped, and they had these tiny, tiny fold-out tables that did not even have enough room for 1 binder…
My partner did a good job with keeping us organized. She also improved immensely in getting her voice heard in caucus groups the second day. I think we both pulled our weight, though we argued a lot…
Saudi Arabia did the best because both partners were very articulate, and they took charge in the caucus groups, and they got to speak for both resolution groups. They explored different caucus groups but seemed very unified in thought.
I learned that you should come up with unique solutions, but not necessarily just rambling off new NGOs. I learned that you should explore different caucus groups than your partner, and that college conferences are huge.
I was surprised at how huge the committee was, and I was also surprised that our chairs cared more about diplomacy than actually taking charge in the caucus groups. This conference was really different from all the others because it was huge, and quite frankly, somewhat boring.
I did a much better job during the caucuses at UCLA. My partner did well at making comments. Japan did the best in my committee because they were good speakers and used handouts to show everyone their plan. I learned that it is extremely important to be diplomatic and to make as many comments possible. What surprised me was that the chairs did not go around marking off country names during caucuses.
1. I got to play my Nintendo DS in the bus ride and at the Q & A session my chair held.
2. My partner did not help much; he was useful in getting our placard raised higher so it could be better ignored.
3. The only people that stood out were the select few that the Asst. Dir for some reason took a liking to and chose to do everything, while a few people got to do nearly nothing.
4. I learned not to antagonize whoever is picking people for comments just because they picked Poland twice and not Hungary once even though Hungary raised their placard about 3/4 of the time.
5. I was surprised that no one cared in the least about Hungary's contributions, which were pretty major considering Hungary had a strong alliance and trade agreement with South Korea and was not on particularly bad terms with North Korea, while everone else was. I thought we would at least get slight verification of our existance.
I know this is really late I thought I should post anyway.
1. What went well for you at UCLA?
UCLA was run really well for the most part but there were one edison delegate that were really annoying and rude. The second day the chairs called on us only one or two times and called on other people a lot more. I also made two lifelong friends (Alex and Sarah) at the conference.
2. What did your partner do well (be positive!). If you did not have a partner, what were the benefits to not having a partner and/or what were the challenges you faced in your committee as a single delegate?
My partner helped me not make stupid or irrational decisions, and it also gave me someone to talk to when I wasn't sure about something. Jessica also was able to make comments while I was working on our speech which helped a lot.
3. Who did the best in your committee and what did they do to make them stand out?
I thought that the people who won awards shouldn't have gotten awards because they did thing that were undiplomatic like China yelled at Brazil (although he probably deserved it) Altogether, though, there was nobody that really stood out unless they were annoying.
4. What did you learn this weekend? How can you translate your experience at UCLA to make you a better delegate?
I learned that to really stand out you have to come up with an idea that is really cool, because even though people in our committee tried different things nobody really stood out. I can use this so that I can think of a really good idea and use it in committee.
5. Did anything surprise you at this conference? If not...how was UCLA different from other conferences you have been to?
Nothing surprised me but it was really different because the chairs didn't seem like they cared they almost acted like they were there to babysit us.
Post a Comment