Speak at 5 Free Community Events

Proof required

Share a link to the event listing OR a photo of the event with you presenting OR a recording of the talk. Include: event name, date, audience size (approximate), and topic of the talk. Write one paragraph on why this audience and this topic were a match — what made you the right person to speak to them about this.

What gets checked

• The event was free for attendees — a paid conference does not qualify.
• The audience was voluntary — a mandatory school assembly or compulsory training does not qualify.
• Audience size was at least 10 people — a talk to 3 close colleagues is not a community speaking engagement.

Common mistakes

• Speaking at your own event rather than a third-party platform — organising your own event is covered by governance-teach-free-workshop; this outcome is about being invited to speak elsewhere.
• Choosing a topic outside your genuine expertise because you think it will be better received — authentic expertise in front of a real audience is the point.
• Counting a talk as complete before you have evidence of delivery (recording, photo, event listing with your name).

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Confirm the event was free for attendees — not a conference with a ticket fee, regardless of whether the speaker was paid.
• Ask: 'Did you organise this event yourself, or were you invited to speak at someone else's event?' — own-event speaking is weaker evidence of community standing.
• Check that the audience size was at least 10 and that attendance was voluntary.

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Proof required

For each of the 3 talks: event name, date, audience size, topic, and at least one piece of evidence (link to event listing, recording, photo, or organiser's written confirmation). Write 100 words total on how your delivery changed between your first talk and your third: name one specific change you made and why.

What gets checked

• Three distinct events — not three talks at the same event or to the same audience.
• All three talks free for attendees, all audiences voluntary.
• The 100-word reflection describes a specific, nameable change in delivery — 'I got more confident' is not specific; 'I stopped reading from my slides after talk 1 and started using them as prompts' is.

Common mistakes

• All three talks to the same community or social circle — community speaking as governance requires reaching beyond your existing network.
• No delivery reflection — three talks with no self-assessment suggests the goal was completion rather than development.
• Counting a talk at an event you organised as one of the three — this outcome is specifically about third-party platforms.

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Check that all three talks were at distinct events — if two were at the same venue on the same day, they likely count as one event.
• All three events should be free for attendees — ask for a link to the event listing for each to confirm.
• The delivery reflection must be specific — ask a follow-up question if the reflection is purely about confidence or nerves rather than technique.

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Proof required

For all 5 talks: compile a summary table with event name, date, audience size, topic, and evidence link for each. Share at least one recording or direct video of a full talk — not just a photo. Write 200 words on what changed about your relationship with public speaking over the 5 talks: name one assumption you held before talk 1 that was contradicted by what you experienced.

What gets checked

• All 5 talks documented with evidence — a summary table without evidence links or recordings is insufficient.
• At least 1 full recording is provided — not only photos.
• The 200-word reflection names a specific assumption that was contradicted — 'I assumed it would be harder than it was' is too vague; 'I assumed the audience would be critical but found that most people are rooting for you' is specific.

Common mistakes

• No recording provided — photos are supporting evidence, not sufficient on their own for the final milestone.
• Reflection that presents only growth and no contradiction — genuine development always involves at least one expectation that did not hold.
• Counting an event you organised as one of the 5 talks — all 5 should be third-party platforms.

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Require at least one full talk recording — confirm it is accessible (not a broken link or a private video with no access).
• Cross-reference the summary table against the M1 and M2 submissions — all earlier talks should appear and the dates/events should be consistent.
• The assumption-contradiction reflection is a strong credibility signal — someone who has genuinely spoken at 5 community events will be able to name something that surprised them. If the reflection is entirely positive and contains no surprise, probe with a follow-up.
• Check that none of the 5 events were events the submitter organised themselves — if so, note it but allow it if it represents a minority of the 5 (no more than 1 of 5).

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.