- Username
- Password
forgot?

iRubric: Oral Research Project Defense Evaluation Rubric BAU

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
Oral Research Project Defense Evaluation Rubric BAU Oral Research Project Defense Evaluation Rubric BAU Research Proposal for Masters students Rubric Code: A24X587 By tuazongutierrez Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: Health Type: Project Grade Levels: Undergraduate, Graduate, Post Graduate

Oral Research Project Defense
	Not Acceptable/ No Credit 1 pts	Poor - Below Expectations 2 pts	Meets Minimal Expectations 3 pts	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations 4 pts	Exemplary, Excellent 5 pts
Project Content 60%
Title 2.5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Title is missing.	Poor - Below Expectations Contradicting terms used in title. Title is misleading, cannot be well comprehended.	Meets Minimal Expectations Some errors exist in the title but could easily be replaced. Title meets minimal requirements.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Title is well formatted, good and very clear.	Exemplary, Excellent Exemplary, Well formulated title at an expert level.
Abstract 2.5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Abstract is missing.	Poor - Below Expectations Abstract is confusing, several key components are missing.	Meets Minimal Expectations Abstract is not well-formulated.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Somewhat well- formulated Abstract. Clear introductory sentence(s) that guides the reader to the problem statement and the clinical/scientific significance.	Exemplary, Excellent Exemplary, Well formulated abstract. Includes all components needed for an ideal work. All formatted at an expert level.
Problem, Background & Significance 5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Lacks a proper statement of the problem. Background information is missing.	Poor - Below Expectations Evidence presented does not support the project or problem statement. Major portions of the background information is lacking; Cannot be sure how the intent of this project is going to make a difference.	Meets Minimal Expectations Fairly posed statement of the problem that is somewhat unique. Some important background information is missing; It has potentials for improving current practice, enhancing knowledge, or making a positive difference in the field.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Well posed statement of the problem that provides evidence but the evidence is not as strong as it could be. Background is somewhat clear and concise. The intent of the project alludes to improving current practice. Some current evidence presented to justify the significance and relevance of the topic.	Exemplary, Excellent Very clearly posed statement of the problem and supported with high quality (strong) evidence. Excellent background information given. Ample current evidence/statistics presented to support potentials to improve current practice; enhance knowledge and to make positive social change.
Project Goals/Aims & Objectives 5 % Objective of the Project	Not Acceptable/ No Credit The project goal is not stated. No clear objective stated.	Poor - Below Expectations The project goal is poorly stated and/or it can not be implemented within the time lines. Objective is listed but it is confusing.	Meets Minimal Expectations The project goal is incompletely stated and/or it may not be able to be implemented within the time lines. Objective is not very clear; The intent of the project needs minor review.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations The project goal is well stated and can be implemented within the time lines. Objectives are clear;	Exemplary, Excellent The project goal is exceptionally stated and can definitely be implemented within the time lines of the proposal. Clearly stated objective in an exemplary manner.
Hypothesis (es)/ R. Question (s) 2.5 % Hypothesis (es) / R. Question (s)	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Lacks hypothesis or Research Question.	Poor - Below Expectations Hypothesis(es)/ Research Question(es) confusing or untestable. Can't be connected with the literature. Not innovative.	Meets Minimal Expectations Hypothesis(es)/ Research Question(es) minor errors exist. Somewhat clearly stated and testable that may have some disconnect from a thorough review of the literature. Testing the hypothesis may not completely fill gaps in current knowledge and address the problem statement.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Clearly stated and testable that connect from a thorough review of the literature. Testing the hypothesis may fill gaps in current knowledge and address the problem statement.	Exemplary, Excellent Very clearly stated, testable, and logically derived from a thorough review of the literature. Testing the hypothesis should fill gaps in current knowledge and clearly address the problem statement.
Literature Review 5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Literature Review section is missing.	Poor - Below Expectations Selects & discusses relevant & current research on a few of the obvious aspects of the topic. Logical sequencing missing and repetitious style detracts reader. Insufficient information provided to support the research topic.	Meets Minimal Expectations Selects and discusses relevant and current research on a few of the obvious aspects of the topic. Logical sequencing missing. Surface level review.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Selects and discusses relevant and current research on most of the obvious aspects of of the research topic in a logical and interesting way. Sufficient in depth.	Exemplary, Excellent Selects and discusses relevant and current research on all obvious aspects of the research topic in a logical and interesting way. Review in in-depth and beyond the obvious.
Project Design 7.5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Design section is missing.	Poor - Below Expectations Design does not allow adequate test of hypotheses. Method is seriously flawed.	Meets Minimal Expectations Design is appropriate. Method is seriously flawed.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Design is appropriate. Method provides awkward, but doable implementation.	Exemplary, Excellent Design is appropriate. Method provides practical way to implement the design.
Methods 7.5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit No methods section is presented. No thought given to data collection; and how the data are essential to determining if the project successfully meets the objective.	Poor - Below Expectations Major details missing from the methods; Plan is not reasonable. There is a limited plan for the collection of data as your project is carried out. There is confusion as to how the data will be used to draw conclusions about the success of your project.	Meets Minimal Expectations Some details may be missing in the methods sections, but a sensible plan is presented. There is a plan for collecting and displaying data as the project is carried out. Data to be collected can serve a purpose important to the project.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Somewhat clear list of methods; There is a plan of action for collecting and displaying data as the project is carried out. It is clearly evident that the data to be collected serve a purpose important to the project.	Exemplary, Excellent Clear list of methods; Well described plan containing all essential information to showcase the steps planned for professionally carrying out the entire project.
Findings 2.5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Findings section is missing.	Poor - Below Expectations Report is incomplete and is not clear.	Meets Minimal Expectations Clarity of report needs improvement. All finding are stated. Minor errors in table and graph format.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Report is generally clear and complete. All finding are well stated in an appropriate way and in a good format.	Exemplary, Excellent Reported clearly and is complete. All findings are presented in a pleasant and exceptional format. graphs and tables are attracting and professionally presented.
Analysis 2.5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Data analysis section is missing or major improper or unacceptable methods used to analyse data.	Poor - Below Expectations Data is analyzed incorrectly.	Meets Minimal Expectations Data analysis has some errors or is incomplete.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Data analysis is clear and made correctly with minor errors.	Exemplary, Excellent Data analysis is very clear and made correctly with no errors.
Discussion 10 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Discussion section is missing or inappropriately misplaced under other title.	Poor - Below Expectations Missing discussion of some major results in terms of hypotheses, theory, practical implications, and future research. Discussion lacks logic.	Meets Minimal Expectations Some results are discussed in terms of hypotheses, theory, practical implications, and future research. Discussion often lacks logic.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Most results are discussed in terms of hypotheses, theory, practical implications, and future research. Discussion is usually logical.	Exemplary, Excellent Results are well discussed in terms of hypotheses, theory, practical implications, and future research. Discussion is logical all-through.
Conclusion/ Summary 5 % The last paragraph should be a thorough summary of the points made within the essay. The points should once again be tied back to the essay purpose. It should end with a clear purpose based on the essay type, such as a "end with a warning."	Not Acceptable/ No Credit No conclusion or summary is included.	Poor - Below Expectations Fails to include a statement that describes what the sustainability project is trying to accomplish.	Meets Minimal Expectations It is included but is unclear. Does not include a clear statement of what the sustainability project is trying to accomplish.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations It is included and is about 50% clear and/or comprehensive. Includes a clear statement of what the sustainability project is trying to accomplish, but isn't articulated well.	Exemplary, Excellent It is included and is 100% clear and comprehensive. Includes a clear and well articulated statement of what the sustainability project is trying to accomplish.
Recognizable Limitations 2.5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit No limitations, obstacles, or problems are listed.	Poor - Below Expectations There is at least one possible obstacle or limitation listed, but may not be described. There is not a valid plan as to how you might address this (these) if it (they) arises.	Meets Minimal Expectations Limitations or possible problems that may interfere with your project have been identified and described. There is a statement as to how you plan to address these issues if they arise so as not to derail your research/project.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Limitations or possible problems that may interfere with your project have been identified and described. There is a clear and valid statement as to how you plan to address these issues if they arise so as not to derail your research/project.	Exemplary, Excellent Excellent Limitations or possible problems that may interfere with your project have been identified and described. There is a clear and valid statement as to how you plan to address these issues if they arise so as not to derail your research/project.
Academic writing 25%
Formal - Structure - Organization 5 % format is followed precisely and APA 6th ed. guidelines format is smoothly utilized in all areas. Title page, headers, footers, and Works cited page, margins, font, and line spacing all correctly done.	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Paper does not convey clear, precise academic writing. Disjointed and incomprehensible thoughts and clauses. No organization. Paragraph transitions need improvement. APA Guidelines not followed.	Poor - Below Expectations Paper demonstrates poor academic writing skills. Poorly synthesizes material, makes inappropriate connections to other topics, Ideas are fragmented so that it is hard to understand text. Poor or weak ability to express thoughts. Material is poorly organized. Consistent following of the 6th ed. APA Guidelines is not observed. Major APA format issues (more than 5).	Meets Minimal Expectations Paper demonstrates acceptable academic writing skills. The student can synthesize material, make appropriate connections to other topics, Mostly clear, concise so that the content is understandable. Material is fairly well organized. Following the 6th ed. APA Guidelines is observed. APA format issues (3-5).	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Paper demonstrates good academic writing skills. Connections between relevant topics is evident. Content is easy to understand. Material is well organized. Consistent following of the 6th ed. APA. Minor APA format issues	Exemplary, Excellent Paper demonstrates solid academic writing skills. The student expertly: synthesizes material, makes several connections between relevant topics. Ideas are sequenced and logical so that the content is easy to understand. Clear, concise Material is exeptionally organized. Consistent with the 6th ed. APA Guidelines.
Grammar/Spelling 5 % All assignments are expected to meet minimum standards for proper English. This means that grammar, mechanics, punctuation, spelling and sentence structure should all be checked carefully by the student prior to submission. Spell check and grammar check are useful, but will not catch everything. Does the student use resources available to ensure grammatical and structural accuracy of the paper?	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Too much grammatical and spelling errors which makes paper below expected standard. No attention paid to detail.	Poor - Below Expectations Major grammatical and spelling errors, very limited attention paid to detail.	Meets Minimal Expectations Grammatical and spelling errors, not enough attention paid to details. Multiple errors, but they do not substantially distract from the content.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Writing mechanics, word usage, grammar and spelling contains few errors that mostly do not effect the paper's content.	Exemplary, Excellent Writing mechanics, word usage, grammar and spelling contain rare errors that do not effect the paper's content. Well organized and carefully edited.
Originality 5 % All assignments are expected to reflect original thoughts and interpretations of the information. Direct quotations should be kept to a minimum and used only when they enhance the message you are trying to convey. The topic posed is only part of the total. Does student find interesting angles from which to explore? All assignments are expected to reflect original thoughts and interpretations of the information.	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Existed evidence of intentional plagiarism. No original work is evident.	Poor - Below Expectations Much of the paper is copied from other sources, minimal original work is evident. Direct quotations exceed 20%. Fails to raise any important questions related to the topic assigned. Does not meet the criteria of the assignment.	Meets Minimal Expectations Most sources cited but there are problems with the APA citation requirements: with incorrect information given either in the sentence or in the parenthetical references. Direct quotations are between 10-15%. Raises questions related to the topic, but may not provide reader with adequate evidence for why these additional questions should be considered. The Reference page has constant errors in alphabetizing and/or formatting	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Direct quotations are between 5-10%. Raises important questions relevant to the assigned topic, and answers them with evidence from professional sources.	Exemplary, Excellent Less than 5% direct quotations and they are only used to raise important questions relevant to the assigned topic and clearly make a point.
Citation 5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit No sources used or cited.	Poor - Below Expectations Many errors in citation. Citations and the Reference page may not match up, where a cited work isn’t found on the Reference page or a work on the sources used or cited come from an unreliable source. Much of paper is copied from sources, no original work is evident.	Meets Minimal Expectations Use of professional sources without a thoughtful summary as to why the sources are relevant or how they enter into writer's discussion/critique.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations All sources cited and conform to APA citation requirements with minor errors. Reliability of professional sources. Use of source information within the paper is effective and necessary.	Exemplary, Excellent All sources cited and conform to APA citation requirements. Excellent reliability of professional sources. Use of source information within the paper is effective and necessary.
Referencing 2.5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit No references section is included.	Poor - Below Expectations Many errors in the Reference page. most of the references are from unreliable sources, such as Wikipedia Reference page is not cited.	Meets Minimal Expectations The references are not all from reliable sources. Few are peer reviewed.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations More than half of references all not peer reviewed, but are reputable and reliable sources. The Reference page, containing a minimum of 6 references, is alphabetized and formatted correctly, per APA, although there may be minor errors.	Exemplary, Excellent Follows APA format with the majority of references being peer reviewed journals. The Reference page is alphabetized and formatted correctly as per APA.
Length - Word count 2.5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit The length of the work is not sufficient that makes it not to the required level.	Poor - Below Expectations The length of the work exceed the guidelines by at least 25%.	Meets Minimal Expectations minor errors, about 10% more or less of the length as per guidelines.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Evidence of efforts made to meet quidelines	Exemplary, Excellent Exemplary, follow exact guidelines.
Oral Presentation (The presenter) 10%
Oral presentation 5 % Delivery, Fluency, Correctness Vocabulary, & Pronunciation	Not Acceptable/ No Credit No oral report presented.	Poor - Below Expectations -No interest in presentation. -Little evidence of fluency. -Inaccuracies in grammar throughout. -Errors interfere with comprehensibility and force interpretation by the listener. -Mispronunciations force the listener to interpret. -Vocabulary is inadequate for this level.	Meets Minimal Expectations Only mild enthusiasm, problems with comprehensibility, cannot be heard very well, not very interesting to audience Consistently uses simple structures, vocabulary, etc. Some signs of fluency, but hesitant performance and/or excessively simple language predominate. Minor errors with simple structures; Pronunciation is generally comprehensible, with few errors but do not interfere with communication. Vocabulary tends to be simple. Few inaccuracies.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Moderately enthusiastic, comprehensible, generally can be heard, and moderately interesting Communicates confidently using simple structures; Evidence of fluency outweighs moments of uncertainty or stumbling. Consistent accuracy with simple structures. Minor errors in grammar and usage. Vocabulary is generally appropriate, despite limitations.	Exemplary, Excellent -Enthusiastic, poised, comprehensible, can be heard by all, interesting to audience -Gets the idea across fully with little hesitation; goes beyond the minimum. -Communicates with ease overall. -Expression is as grammatically accurate as can be reasonably expected for this level. -Pronunciation is accurate throughout, with good rhythm and intonation for this level. -Knows and uses precise words for the situation.
Timelines 2.5 % Length of Presentation	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Project was not orally presented.	Poor - Below Expectations More than 50% of the presentation allotted time was not used.	Meets Minimal Expectations Entire presentation was exceeded 10 minutes of allotted time.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Entire presentation exceeded 5 minutes of allotted time.	Exemplary, Excellent Entire presentation was within the allotted time.
Accuracy and Understanding Content 2.5 % The student is able to demonstrate content (factual) knowledge and understanding of material addressed in question. The oral presentation includes all points listed in the assignment.	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Objectives are not identified. Key project concept and main not addressed.	Poor - Below Expectations Major objectives are not identified. Insufficient information. Not identifying some key concept. Most of the points in the Project Proposal were included in the oral report. Oral presentation does not reflect understanding of the content.	Meets Minimal Expectations Barely touching on the relevant content, poorly identifying and addressing a key concept or main idea, not substantiating points with relevant or accurate examples Only or tow of the points in the Project Proposal were missed in the oral report.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Correctly addressing the most critical content, identifying and addressing some of the key concepts or main ideas, substantiating some points with accurate examples Most of the points in the Project Proposal were included in the oral report.	Exemplary, Excellent All important objectives are identified. <BR> Exemplary understanding of the presented issue(s) by thoroughly and correctly (1) addressing the relevant content, (2)identifying and addressing the key concepts or main ideas, (3) substantiating points with several accurate examples All of the points in the Project Proposal were included in the oral report. It was well presented in a proficient manner.
Overall 5%
Scholarly Standards 2.5 %	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Not Acceptable, does not match a scholarly work.	Poor - Below Expectations Substantial inaccuracies in use of the references and understanding of the content. Elaboration of evidence is insufficient or not understandable to the reader. Does not follow in a logical format. Does not convey organized thoughts. Does not address most questions.	Meets Minimal Expectations Doesn't fully address other viewpoints and/or doesn't clarify own views. Writer's perspective is acceptable, but not easy to follow. Attempts to follow logical format, but wonders from one concept to another without clear flow or rational. Thoughts are not well organized. Does not address 3 or more of questions.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Writer's perspective is acceptable but not well sequentially formatted. Follow logical format. Good flow of paper that reflects writer's opinions supported by evidenced-based reports. Does not address 1 -2 of the questions.	Exemplary, Excellent Elaborates fully on clearly laying out a successful path in professional sources. Has defined the concepts, discussed, and uses clear and effective examples. Answers the questions: All opinions supported by clear evidences. Reflect a clear scholarly work.
Overall Impression 2.5 % Overall Impression about the Project	Not Acceptable/ No Credit Project is missing major components, Project proposal not complete.	Poor - Below Expectations Project description is there but is confusing; not quite sure what issue is being addressed; not quite sure what the project is designed to do. No clear evidence of its significance to cause a positive social change.	Meets Minimal Expectations Project is somewhat clearly described. The project ties directly to a current or relevant issue related to the topic, however there may be some confusion about the reasonableness of carrying out such a project.	Proficient, Exceeds Expectations Clearly described project; The project is directly tied to a current and relevant issue, gap, or flaw that exists in the field of knowledge surrounding the topic. The project makes sense and seems manageable and reasonable to carry out.	Exemplary, Excellent Excellent Solid evidence of its significance to cause a positive social change.

Keywords:

Social Sciences; Science

Subjects:

Types:

Project

Discuss this rubric