Criterion

Standard

Responsiveness to Topic

Score / 20

20 – clearly addresses the topic and responds effectively to all aspects of the assignment;

18 – clearly address the topic, but may respond to some aspects of the assignment more effectively than others

16 – addresses the topic, but may slight some aspects of the topic

14 – indicates confusion about the topic or neglects important aspects of the assignment

12 – suggests an inability to comprehend the assignment or to respond meaningfully to the topic

Communication of Ideas

Score / 20

20 – explores the issues showing thorough comprehension of the text; goes beyond the obvious or class discussion

18 – shows some depth and complexity of thought

16 – may treat the topic simplistically or repetitively; doesn’t demonstrate sufficient comprehension of the text

14 – lacks focus, demonstrates confused or simplistic thinking, or fails to communicate ideas

12 – is unfocused, illogical, incoherent or disorganized

Organization

Score / 20

20 – is coherently organized (i.e. stays on target with the topic), with ideas supported by apt reasons

18 – is well organized and developed with appropriate reasons and examples

16 – is adequately organized and developed, generally supporting ideas with reasons and examples

14 – is poorly organized and/or undeveloped; lacks support from the text

12 – is undeveloped; provides little or no relevant support

Control of Mechanics, Sentence Structure, Grammar, Spelling

Score / 10

10 – is generally free from errors in mechanics, usage, and sentence structure

8 – may have a few errors in mechanics, usage, and sentence structure

6 – may have some errors, but generally demonstrates control of mechanics, usage, and sentence structure

4 – is marred by an accumulation of errors in mechanics, usage, and sentence structure

0 – has serious and persistent errors in word choice, mechanics, usage, and sentence structure

Paper Length and References

Score /10

10 – Paper meets length requirements (1000 – 1500) and includes at least 8 references

5 – Paper only meets either the length or number of references

0 – Paper does not meet length and less than 8 references

Paper Presentation

Score /20

See Criteria on Next Page

PRESENTATION GUIDELINES

Exemplary (5)

Satisfactory (3)

Unacceptable (0)

Score

Technical Knowledge

The presenter shows a deep knowledge of the subject material. They are able to answer all questions on the material and expand/explicate on details both in the presentation and outside of the material in the presentation.

The presenter knew the material well. They were able to answer most questions well, and showed a generally good knowledge of the topic being presented.

The presenter did not know the material being presented. They were unable to answer questions from the audience and seemed unclear of the technical content of their own materials.

Presentation Materials

The materials are clear and well designed. They present the information in a coherent and well thought out way.

The materials were generally clear and reasonably well designed. They presented the information fairly well, but could have been better at points.

The materials were hard to read and poorly organized. They distracted from the presentation, rather than adding to it.

Presentation Style

The presentation moved well. Transitions between topics were smooth and well thought out.

The presentation moved well, but some transitions were rough. The presenter had to refer to their notes occasionally to find their place in the presentation.

The presentation was choppy and inconsistent. The presenter constantly read from their notes and easily lost their place in the presentation.

Presenter Presence

The presenter made excellent eye contact and "owned" the audience. They commanded the attention of the audience at all times and were dynamic and engaging.

The presenter made eye contact with the audience and could be heard. They occasionally read from their materials or notes, rather than from memory. They made a few distracting body movements.

The presenter did not look at the audience and was difficult to hear. They made multiple distracting movements, or hid behind a podium. They did nothing to engage the audience in the presentation.

Total