Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 54 views

    Oral Presentations Scoring Rubric: Excellent (4) Good (3) Adequate (2) Weak

    Uploaded by

    Tari
    The document is a rubric for scoring oral presentations. It evaluates presentations on 7 criteria: response to assignment, analysis and discussion, organization, style/format, speaking skills, professionalism, and conclusions. For each criterion, it provides descriptors to define excellent, good, adequate, and weak performance and scoring on a scale of 1 to 4.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Oral Presentations Scoring Rubric: Excellent (4) Good (3) Adequate (2) Weak

    Uploaded by

    Tari
    54 views1 page
    The document is a rubric for scoring oral presentations. It evaluates presentations on 7 criteria: response to assignment, analysis and discussion, organization, style/format, speaking skills, professionalism, and conclusions. For each criterion, it provides descriptors to define excellent, good, adequate, and weak performance and scoring on a scale of 1 to 4.

    Original Description:

    Oral presentation

    Original Title

    Oral Presentation

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document is a rubric for scoring oral presentations. It evaluates presentations on 7 criteria: response to assignment, analysis and discussion, organization, style/format, speaking skills, professionalism, and conclusions. For each criterion, it provides descriptors to define excellent, good, adequate, and weak performance and scoring on a scale of 1 to 4.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    54 views1 page

    Oral Presentations Scoring Rubric: Excellent (4) Good (3) Adequate (2) Weak

    Uploaded by

    Tari
    The document is a rubric for scoring oral presentations. It evaluates presentations on 7 criteria: response to assignment, analysis and discussion, organization, style/format, speaking skills, professionalism, and conclusions. For each criterion, it provides descriptors to define excellent, good, adequate, and weak performance and scoring on a scale of 1 to 4.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    Oral Presentations Scoring Rubric

    RESPONSE TO ASSIGNMENT:
    Oral presentations are expected to
    completely address the topic and
    requirements set forth in the
    assignment, and are appropriate for the
    intended audience.
    ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION:
    Oral presentations are expected to
    provide an appropriate level of
    analysis, discussion and evaluation as
    required by the assignment.
    ORGANIZATION:
    Oral presentations are expected to be
    well-organized in overall structure,
    beginning with a clear statement of the
    problem and ending with a clear
    conclusion.
    STYLE/FORM AND FORMAT:
    Presentations are expected to be
    stylistically effective that is, to
    consist of visual aids with well-chosen
    words and graphics which complement
    the speaker, and consistent with the
    time limit of the presentation.
    SPEAKING SKILLS:
    Presenters are expected to use an
    effective speaking style which exhibits
    enthusiasm, generates interest in the
    audience, and communicates the
    intended information.
    PROFESSIONALISM:
    Presenters are expected to dress
    appropriately for the audience and act
    in a manner expected in a professional
    setting
    CONCLUSIONS:
    Presentations are expected to draw
    appropriate conclusions and
    recommendations based on its content

    Excellent (4)

    Good (3)

    Adequate (2)

    Weak (1)

    The presentation responds to the


    assignment and addresses the
    topic and all requirements, at an
    appropriate technical level for
    the intended audience

    The presentation responds to the


    assignment and addresses the
    topic, but has minor weaknesses
    with respect to some of the
    requirements and/or appropriate
    technical level
    Presented material is analyzed
    and evaluated and appropriate
    reasons, discussion of
    alternatives, explanations, and
    examples are given for most of
    the main points
    The presentation is generally
    well-structured, with only a few
    flaws in overall organization

    The presentation responds to the


    assignment and addresses the
    topic, but has significant
    weaknesses with respect to some
    of the requirements and/or
    appropriate technical level
    Presented material is analyzed
    and evaluated at a reasonable
    level but is not used effectively
    to support many of the main
    points

    The presentation does not


    respond to many of the
    requirements of the assignment,
    and/or is poorly tailored for the
    intended audience

    The presentation has a defined


    structure, but the organization is
    not optimal for supporting the
    presentations content

    The presentation is poorly


    structured; organizational flaws
    undermine its effectiveness and
    clarity

    The visual aids are informative


    and generally supportive of the
    presentation, but could be
    improved to more effectively
    complement the speakers
    content

    The visual aids are generally


    supportive of the presentation,
    but some of them are difficult to
    read, too busy, and/or not
    necessary for the intent of the
    talk

    Visual aids are not designed to


    effectively to convey the
    information intended by the
    speaker

    Speaker is prepared and familiar


    with the content of the visual
    aids, but may occasionally stray
    from topic and/or have other
    deficiencies in speaking style

    Speaker is reasonably prepared


    but tends to look at visual aids
    for prompting, and is not able to
    communicate all of the intended
    content

    Speaker is not prepared and has


    to read from visual aids or cue
    cards, does not use voice or
    body language effectively to
    engage audience in topic

    Speaker is appropriately
    dressed, generally acts
    professionally, but exhibits
    some minor lapses in decorum

    Speaker is reasonably dressed,


    but some lapses in decorum
    detract from the presentations
    impact

    Speaker is not dressed


    appropriately for the audience,
    does not present him/her self in
    a serious and professional
    manner

    The presentation has a


    conclusion, but some of the key
    points are not highlighted
    effectively

    The presentation has a brief


    conclusion but is not substantial
    in content

    The presentation seems to end


    abruptly without any summation
    for the audience

    Presented material is completely


    analyzed and evaluated,
    providing support for main
    points with reasons, discussion
    of alternatives, explanations, and
    examples as appropriate
    The presentation is wellstructured; its organization
    contributes to its purpose. The
    problem is clearly stated and
    technical content is well ordered
    for clarity
    The visual aids (e.g. PowerPoint
    slides) are informative, well
    designed, easy to read, and
    complement the speakers
    content. The number of slides is
    consistent with the time limit of
    the presentation
    Speaker is well prepared,
    establishes effective eye contact
    with the audience, speaks clearly
    and audibly, stays on topic and
    finishes the presentation on time
    Speaker is appropriately
    dressed, avoids distracting body
    language during presentation,
    comports him/her self
    professionally throughout the
    presentation
    Key points are clearly re-stated
    at the end of the talk so that the
    audience clearly understands the
    purpose of the technical work

    The depth of analysis and


    evaluation of the presented
    material is not sufficient, and
    discussion contains unnecessary
    or trivial material

    You might also like