篇一：優秀演講稿的五種精彩開場白
馬上就要進入職場的你是進行演講，下面就對演講技巧進行綜合，相信會對你有所幫助的。
文章開頭最難寫，同樣道理，作演講開場白最不易把握，要想三言兩語抓住聽眾的心，並非易事。如果在演講的開始聽眾對你的話就不感興趣，注意力一旦被分散了，那後面再精彩的言論也將黯然失色。因此只有匠心獨運的開場白，以其新穎、奇趣、敏慧之美，才能給聽眾留下深刻印象，才能立即控制場上氣氛，在瞬間裡集中聽眾注意力，從而為接下來的演講內容順利地搭梯架橋。
奇論妙語 石破天驚
聽眾對平庸普通的論調都不屑一顧，置若罔聞；倘若發人未見，用別人意想不到的見解引出話題，造成“此言一出，舉座皆驚”的藝術效果，會立即震撼聽眾，使他們急不可耐地聽下去，這樣就能達到吸引聽眾的目的。
我記起了畢業歡送會上班主任給我們的致詞。他一開口就讓我們疑竇叢生——“我原來想祝福大家一帆風順，但仔細一想，這樣說不恰當。”這句話把我們弄得丈二和尚摸不著頭腦，大家屏聲靜氣地聽下去——“說人生一帆風順就如同祝某人萬壽無疆一樣，是一個美麗而又空洞的謊言。人生漫漫，必然會遇到許多艱難困苦，比如……”最後得出結論：“一帆風不順的人生才是真實的人生，在逆風險浪中拼搏的人生才是最輝煌的人生。祝大家奮力拼搏，在坎坷的征程中，用堅實有力的步伐走向美好的未來！”十多年過去了，班主任的話語猶在耳邊，給我留下了永難磨滅的印象。“一帆風順”是常見的吉祥祝語，而老師偏偏反彈琵琶，從另一角度悟出了人生哲理。第一句話無異於平地驚雷，又宛若異峰突起，怎能不震撼人心？
需要注意的是，運用這種方式應掌握分寸，弄不好會變為譁眾取寵，故作聳人之語。應結合聽眾心理、理解層次出奇制勝。再有，不能為了追求怪異而大發謬論、怪論，也不能生硬牽扯，胡亂昇華。否則，極易引起聽眾的反感和厭倦。須知，無論多麼新鮮的認識始終是建立在正確的主旨之上的。
自嘲開路 幽默搭橋
自嘲就是“自我開炮”，用在開場白裡，目的是用詼諧的語言巧妙地自我介紹，這樣會使聽眾倍感親切，無形中縮短了與聽眾間的距離。在第四次作代會上，蕭軍應邀上臺，第一句話就是：“我叫蕭軍，是一個出土文物。”這句話包含了多少複雜感情：有辛酸，有無奈，有自豪，有幸福。而以自嘲之語表達，形式異常簡潔，內蘊尤其豐富！胡適在一次演講時這樣開頭：“我今天不是來向諸君作報告的，我是來‘胡說’的，因為我姓胡。”話音剛落，聽眾大笑。這個開場白既巧妙地介紹了自己，又體現了演講者謙遜的修養，而且活躍了場上氣氛，溝通了演講者與聽眾的心理，一石三鳥，堪稱一絕。
1990年中央電視臺邀請臺灣影視藝術家凌峰先生參加春節聯歡晚會。當時，許多觀眾對他還很陌生，可是他說完那妙不可言的開場白後，一下子被觀眾認同並受到了熱烈歡迎。他說：“在下凌峰，我和文章不同，雖然我們都獲得過‘金鐘獎’和最佳男歌星稱號，但我以長得難看而出名……一般來說，女觀眾對我的印象不太好，她們認為我是人比黃花瘦，臉比煤炭黑。”
篇二：經典演講稿開場白
1 師德演講稿--愛與責任
世上有很多東西，給予他人的同時，自己往往是越來越少，而唯有一樣東西卻是越給越多。您也許會驚奇地問我：“那是什麼呢?”我將毫不遲疑的回答您：“那就是愛!”愛，不是索取，不是等價交換，愛是付出，是自我犧牲。只有在愛的基礎上，教師才會投入他的全部力量，才會把他的青春、智慧無怨無悔地獻給學生，獻給教育事業.
師愛，是教育力量的源泉，是教育成功的基礎，是教師的天職與責任。今年4月，我有幸在人民大會堂聆聽了方永剛先進事蹟報告會，感受到了這位“平民理論家”對學生的愛，對事業的愛。
2006年11月17日，結腸癌手術6小時後，方永剛從麻醉中醒來，第一句話問的是他的研究生：你的畢業論文準備得怎麼樣了?
隨後幾天，方永剛又讓妻子把自己的3個研究生叫到病房。沒有講臺、沒有黑板、沒有課桌，方永剛坐在病床上給學生們上課。即使不一會兒就臉色發白，汗珠成串往下掉，他也不肯停下來。
做完第二次化療，方永剛惦記著自己還有幾次課沒上完，要回去上課。系領導不同意，方永剛急了：“我肚子有問題，但腦子沒問題，嘴沒問題!如果離開了講臺，我可能真的會倒下。”說著說著他竟然哭了。在人生磨難面前，他沒有掉淚;在傷病痛苦面前，他沒有掉淚;在死神威脅面前，他也沒有掉淚;但因為上不了心愛的講臺，這個頂天立地的男子漢卻留下了兩行熱淚。他的淚水讓我們真正明白了什麼是教師的品德。
終於，經過再一、再二、再三的請求，2007年1月15日，在第二次和第三次化療的間隙，方永剛回到離開了兩個多月的教室。看到學生們，方永剛眼裡閃爍出欣慰和滿足，那眼神似乎是說：同學們，我終於又見到你們了!
這堂課，方永剛講的是《新世紀新階段我軍歷史使命》。
整整軍裝，開場白只有一句話：只要我還能站著，就要為大家講課，這是我的使命。
同學們強忍淚水，他們知道，此時此刻，他們的老師恐怕連站著都是一種抗爭，一種與生命的抗爭。
好像這只是一堂普通的政治課，是方永剛無數次授課中最普通的一堂課，依舊是鏗鏘有力的聲音，依舊是幽默風趣的語言，依舊是充滿理性的思辯，依舊是入情入理的分析，只是一條白毛巾被他頻繁地拿起又放下，手術後的引流管被他掖在了軍裝裡面??
學生們震驚了，這是一個癌症晚期的患者嗎?這是一個即將接受第三次化療的病人嗎?
兩個小時的大課結束了。任何華麗的樂章也比不過這樣一堂課更能觸動心靈，任何精彩的語言也會顯得蒼白無力，同學們用雷鳴般的'掌聲和充滿敬意的目光向方老師敬禮!
什麼是使命?共產黨員的使命是崇高的，軍人的使命是偉大的，教師的使命是神聖的，不用多說什麼，不用多做什麼，方永剛，一名共產黨員、軍人、教師，在癌症晚期的時候往講臺上一站，就是對使命的最好詮釋。
勤勤懇懇、默默無聞”這是老黃牛的精神;“採得百花成蜜後，為誰辛苦為誰甜”這是蜜蜂的精神;“燃燒自己，照亮別人”是蠟燭的精神。可以說每種產物的存在，都有一種精神支撐著它。教師的存在呢?支撐它的就應該是這種高尚的師德吧!
報告會上，我和同事們聽得很認真，記得很仔細，不時的被方永剛的事蹟感動得熱淚盈眶。走上三尺講臺，我們教書育人;走下三尺講臺，我們為人師表。師德，不是簡單的說教，而是一種精神體現，一種深厚的知識內涵和文化品味的體現。讓我們一起建設愛崗敬業、愛生如子的首醫家園，用我們的愛與責任撐起教育的藍天。
2 像珍惜愛情一樣珍惜你的現在
說起來很諷刺。當我最終定下來寫有關珍惜的講稿時，想上網搜幾個有關珍惜的名言警句，於是我開啟百度網頁，再搜尋欄裡輸入“珍惜”，空格，“名言警句”，然後摁了回車。一個讓我有些尷尬又哭笑不得的事情發生了。我看到，在蹦出來的十個詞條裡邊，有七八個在“珍惜”兩個字的後面，緊跟著的是“國小生演講稿”。看來，我打算要在大學課堂裡當作重點來講的東西是人家國小生早就知道的。
是啊，對於珍惜，或許在我們很小的時候就已經知道了，甚至已經懂得了它的涵義以及如何才能做到珍惜。然而，知道就等於自己都做到了嗎?事實並非如此，所以我最終還是選擇了這個看起來似乎有些幼稚的話題，因為有時候不是大
家不知道珍惜，而往往是在擁有的時候忘記了要珍惜。我想，或許現在我們都需要被“珍惜”這兩個字來提醒。
不知道大家還記不記得這樣一則新聞：一架飛外阿拉斯加的飛機因為機械故障，造成機毀人亡，墜入了太平洋。當時看到這則新聞的時候，讓我印象最深的是報道說，在那些遇難者中，有一對要去阿拉斯加度蜜月的新婚夫婦。我幾乎可以想象得到在飛機失事前，那對新婚夫婦臉上洋溢的喜悅和甜蜜。或許他們還在規劃著飛機著陸後，將去哪裡就餐，或許直接奔往早已定
好的酒店入住，再或許一起欣賞嚮往已久的極地風光。可是人的生命是那麼脆弱，他們甚至來不及好好地享受已經擁有的幸福。
那些無辜的人們一瞬間就喪失了生命，看著死難者家屬無助又痛苦的電視畫面，我的心情複雜極了。對於那對年輕的夫婦來說，不幸的，是小夫妻倆沒能來得及享受蜜月期間的快樂，而所幸的是，他們已經彼此找到了對方，並以對方為伴。最起碼他們在生命的最後一段時光中是幸福的，因為他們身邊有相愛的人陪伴，他們珍惜了自己的愛情。我甚至可以想象，在他們知道自己就要離開人世之前，浮現在他們臉上的是那早已把恐懼驅散的沒了蹤影的幸福笑容。
同學們，再想想我們吧，看到這些難道就沒有觸動?瑞士偉大的民-主主義教育家——裴斯太羅奇說過，今天的事沒有做，明天再早也是耽誤了。是啊，為什麼我們要等到失去或已無法挽回的時候才追悔莫及。這一刻的我們不會知道下一刻會有怎樣的變化，甚至不知道現在擁有的一切是否突然就會溜走，所以我們必須像珍惜愛情一樣珍惜現在。
篇三：英文演講稿開場白
Opening Statement
Mr. chairman, senator thurmond, members of the committee, my name is anita f. hill, and i am a professor of law at the university of oklahoma. i was born on a farm in okmulgee county, oklahoma, in 1956. i am the youngest of 13 children. i had my early education in okmulgee county. my father, albert hill, is a farmer in that area. my mother's name is irma hill. she is also a farmer and a housewife.
My childhood was one of a lot of hard work and not much money, but it was one of solid family affection, as represented by my parents. i was reared in a religious atmosphere in the baptist faith, and i have been a member of the antioch baptist church in tulsa, oklahoma, since 1983. it is a very warm part of my life at the present time.
For my undergraduate work, i went to oklahoma state university and graduated from there in 1977. i am attaching to this statement a copy of my resume for further details of my education.
I graduated from the university with academic honors and proceeded to the yale law school, where i received my jd degree in 1980. upon graduation from law school, i became a practicing lawyer with the washington, dc, firm of ward, hardraker, and ross.
In 1981, i was introduced to now judge thomas by a mutual friend. judge thomas told me that he was anticipating a political appointment, and he asked if i would be interested in working with him. he was, in fact, appointed as assistant secretary of education for civil rights. after he had taken that post, he asked if i would become his assistant, and i accepted that position.
In my early period there, i had two major projects. the first was an article i wrote for judge thomas' signature on the education of minority students. the second was the organization of a seminar on high-risk students which was abandoned because judge thomas transferred to the eeoc where he became the chairman of that office.
During this period at the department of education, my working relationship with judge thomas was positive. i had a good deal of responsibility and independence. i thought he respected my work and that he trusted my judgment. after approximately three months of working there, he asked me to go out socially with him.
What happened next and telling the world about it are the two most difficult things -- experiences of my life. it is only after a great deal of agonizing consideration and sleeplenumber -- a great number of sleeplenights tha(t i am able to talk of these unpleasant matters to anyone but my close friends.
I declined the invitation to go out socially with him and explained to him that i thought it would jeopardize what at the time i considered to be a very good working relationship. i had a normal social life with other men outside of the office. i believed then, as now, that having a social relationship with a person who was supervising my work would be ill-advised. i was very uncomfortable with the idea and told him so.
I thought that by saying no and explaining my reasons my employer would abandon his social suggestions. however, to my regret, in the following few weeks, he continued to ask me out on several occasions. he pressed me to justify my reasons for saying no to him. these incidents took place in his office or mine. they were in the form of private conversations which would not have been overheard by anyone else.
My working relationship became even more strained when judge thomas began to use work situations to discuse-x. on these occasions, he would call me into his office for reports on education issues and projects, or he might suggest that, because of the time pressures of his schedule, we go to lunch to a government cafeteria. after a brief discussion of work, he would turn the conversation to a discussion of se-xual matters.
His conversations were very vivid. he spoke about acts that he had seen in pornographic films involving such matters as women having se-x with animals and films showing group se-x or rape scenes. he talked about pornographic materials depicting individuals with large penises or large breasts involved in various se-x acts. on several occasions, thomas told me graphically of his own se-xual prowess.
Because i was extremely uncomfortable talking about se-x with him at all and particularly in such a graphic way, i told him that i did not want to talk about these subjects. i would also try to change the subject to education matters or to nonse-xual personal matters such as his background or his beliefs. my efforts to change the subject were rarely successful.
Throughout the period of these conversations, he also from time to time asked me for social engagements. my reaction to these conversations was to avoid them by eliminating opportunities for us to engage in extended conversations. this was difficult because at the time i was his only assistant at the office of education -- or of ice for civil rights.